Page Requirements and Formatting
Your research critique must be 2-3 pages double-spaced. Your critique should be typed in a Microsoft Word format (either .doc or .docx), and you should use Times New Roman font and a font size of 12. The margins should be set at 1 inch, and there should be no additional spacing between paragraphs. An additional cover page with your name and the date should be included. You may format your title page using the APA specifications for an empirical paper or a student title page. Note that the cover page does not count as part of the 2-3-page requirement. You should also have a reference page that meets the standards for APA style, and the reference page does not count as part of the 2-3-page requirement. Your final critique should not contain spelling, grammar, or punctuation errors and must consist of complete sentences. Please proofread your final critique carefully.
Content Requirements
Your critique should address the following main points:
1. A brief summary of the article. This is your summary of the article, not the abstract for the article or a summary from another source.
2. A description of at least one clear strength, or something the authors did well, and one clear weakness, or something that could be improved, in the introduction. For this section, you should determine whether the authors provide support for the primary hypotheses in the paper. You should also consider whether the authors provide a focused explanation for their hypotheses, whether the hypotheses are reasonable, and if the authors describe implications or applications for the study.
3. A description of at least one clear strength, or something the authors did well, and one clear weakness, or something that could be improved, in the method section. This section should include a critique of the sample characteristics and recruitment, the procedures/design for the study, and the measures/materials used. For example, does the sample seem representative of the population of interest? Did the authors operationalize the variables of interest appropriately? Do the measures/materials fit the operational definitions of the variables of interest?
4. A description of at least one clear strength, or something the authors did well, and one clear weakness, or something that could be improved, in the results section. You should consider both the descriptive and inferential statistics presented, as well as the use of figures and tables. This section can focus on the presentation of data and whether the analyses seem to fit the hypotheses, as well as whether the analyses were appropriate for the study.
5. A description of at least one clear strength, or something the authors did well, and one clear weakness, or something that could be improved, in the discussion. The authors interpretation of their results should be assessed in this section. Specifically, do the authors interpretations seem reasonable given the methods and results in the study? In addition, you should discuss the limitations of the study that the authors include in the discussion, if any are included.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]