Academic articles are expected to be objective and minimize self-mention. However, in recent years, authors have increasingly called themselves participants in scientific endeavors. A corpus-based study on personal pronouns in academic English texts revealed that the use of I and we can help writers emphasize their scientific achievements. Two classes of pronouns, exclusive and inclusive, have been identified. Exclusive we in academic writing refers only to the writer and other persons involved in the work, while inclusive we refers to the writer(s) and readers together. Using exclusive we is an attempt to exert authority and power, whereas inclusive we is preferred when engaging readers. Despite the substantial work on the pragmatic functions of subject pronouns in other languages, such as Vassileva (Int J Appl Linguist 8(2):163–190, 1998), Ivanič (Writing and identity: the discoursal construction of identity in academic writing. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 1998), Kuo (Engl Specif Purp 18(2):121–138, 1999), Hyland (Writ Commun 18(4):549–574, 2001a, Engl Specif Purp 20:207–226, 2001b), Harwood (Appl Linguis 26(3):343–375, 2005a, J Pragmat 37:1207–1231, 2005b), and Walková (Engl Specif Purp 53:60–73, 2019), there is a research gap regarding Persian pronouns in academic contexts. This study aims to shed light on this topic. To begin, following Becher’s (1989) taxonomy, research articles (RAs) were selected from three hard and three soft disciplines. The corpus consists of RAs published in Persian peer-reviewed journals covering mathematics, biology, physics, literature, linguistics, and sociology. A total of 240 articles were extracted, including 20 single-authored and 20 multi-authored articles from each field. The occurrences of subject Person pronouns mæn (I), mā (we), and subject verbal endings such as -æm (I), -im (we) were identified and counted. Terms like nevisænde (writer), mohæghegh (researcher), referring to writers, were also considered. The study revealed that Iranian writers commonly use the person ending -im in verbs, such as midānim (we know), to acknowledge themselves as the article writers. Additionally, the plural pronoun mā (we) was preferred to the singular pronoun mæn (I) due to its lower visibility and author responsibility. The research also found a high variation of self-mention both between and within disciplines. For instance, inclusive we was more common in the fields of mathematics and sociology, while the exclusive we was more prevalent in other disciplines.