Critical Review Paper
A critique is the process of critically evaluating a research report. As the reviewer you are looking at the research report for scientific merit, application to practice and theory. The critique identifies the central problem as well as the specific questions. In this assignment you are identifying strengths as well as weaknesses of the research study. A critique is an appraisal of the study. The following questions are provided as a guide for the critique. As you read through the research study, refer to the question for clarity. The paper is NOT a list of answers to the questions, rather a summary of responses. It should be presented in precise APA format.
The article you will critique is labeled “Article for Discussion for Critiquing the Elements of Research.pdf” and is provided.
This assignment should be between 4-5 pages, including the title and reference page.
Critiquing the Elements of Research
1. Writing style
Is the report well written – concise, grammatically correct, avoid the use of jargon? Is it well laid out and organized?
2. Report title
Is the title clear, accurate and unambiguous?
3. Abstract
Does the abstract offer a clear overview of the study including the research problem, sample, methodology, finding and recommendations?
4. Purpose/research/problem
Is the purpose of the study/research problem clearly identified?
5. Logical Consistency
Does the research report follow the steps of the research process in a logical manner?
Do these steps naturally flow and are the links clear?
6. Theoretical Framework
Has a conceptual or theoretical framework been identified?
Is the framework adequately described?
Is the framework appropriate?
7. Literature review
Is the review logically organized?
Does it offer a balanced critical analysis of the literature?
Is the majority of the literature of recent origin?
Is it mainly from primary sources and of an empirical nature?
9. Aims/objectives/ research question/ hypotheses
Have alms and objectives, a research question or hypothesis been identified?
If so are they clearly stated?
Do they reflect the information presented in the literature review?
Are the findings linked back to the literature review?
If a hypothesis was identified was it supported?
10. Sample
Has the target population been clearly identified?
How were the sample selected?
Was it a probability or non-probability sample?
Is the sample of adequate size?
Are the inclusion/exclusion criteria dearly identified?
11. Ethical considerations
Were the participants fully informed about the nature of the research?
Was the autonomy/ confidentiality of the participants guaranteed?
Were the participants protected from harm?
Was ethical permission granted for the study?
12. Operational definitions
Are all the terms, theories and concepts mentioned in the study dearly defined?
13. Methodology
Is the research design clearly identified?
Has the data-gathering instrument been described?
Is the instrument appropriate?
How was it developed?
Were reliability and validity testing undertaken and the results discussed?
Was a pilot study undertaken?
14. Data Analysis / results
What type of data and statistical analysis was undertaken?
Was it appropriate?
How many of the sample participated?
Significance of the findings?
15. Discussion
Were the strengths and limitations of the study including generalizability discussed?
Was a recommendation for further research made?
16. References
Were all the books, journals and other media alluded to in the study accurately referenced?
