Some sections of a journal paper tend to contain more transitions than others, and some tend to have different types of transitions from others. The Introduction section tends to contain many transitions, typically from the Emphasis, Comparison, Contrast, Introducing an Alternative, and Providing Additional Detail categories in the table above. This is because the literature review part of the Introduction section generally gathers evidence to form an argument or lead to a hypothesis. In this context, transitions are important for guiding the reader through a connected series of ideas and findings to lead them to the understanding and the question that motivated the study.
Like the Introduction, The Discussion section usually contains many transitions, which would tend to be from the same categories, as well as the Concluding and Summarizing categories. This is because the Discussion section tends to draw all the evidence together, summarize it, and present conclusions. The Conclusion section, if present, may contain one or two transitions, typically from the Concluding and Summarizing categories.
The Methods section may include many Temporal transitions, if it includes a description of a complex method comprising many steps to be taken in a particular sequence. In contrast, if it describes short, simple methods, or methods in which the order of the steps is unimportant, it may not contain many transitions at all.
The Results section usually contains the fewest transitions of all the sections. This is because it should contain only the results, and no discussion thereof. There is therefore often no argument formation or summing up of evidence in the Results section, and the sequence of events is also not usually relevant for the results. If the Results and Discussion sections are combined, however, then there would be many transitions, as described above for the Discussion section.
The Abstract is likely to contain few transitions, and these would be concentrated towards the beginning and the end of the Abstract. This is because there are usually strict word limits for Abstracts, and authors are forced to be as brief as possible. There is not much room to form arguments or to draw the evidence together at the end; usually only one or two sentences for each of these purposes. The methods are not usually described in detail, so the sequence of steps is not often mentioned, and the results are typically outlined in almost point-form text.