Summary of the Article: 1 12 page minimum, – 14 points)
An article critique should briefly summarize, in your own words, the article research question and how it was addressed in the article. Below are some things to include in your summary.
* The same title used on the title page should be at the top of the page on the first actual line of the paper, centered, and bold.
* For this paper, add the word Summary below the title, and have it flush left. Then write your summary of the article below that
* The summary itself will include the following: (Note if the article involved more than one experiment, you can either choose to focus on one of the studies specifically or summarize the general design for all of the studies)
1. Type of study (Was it experimental or correlational? How do you know?)
2. Variables (What were the independent and dependent variables? Be specific with these. Define the terms independent and dependent variable and make sure to identify how they are operationally defined in the article)
3. Method (Was there a random sample of participants? Was there random assignment to groups? What did the participants do in the study?). How was data collected (online, in person, archival data, etc.) 4. Summary of findings (What were their findings?)
Critique of the study: 1 12 pages minimum – 16 points)
* This portion of the article critique assignment focuses on your own thoughts about the content of the article (i.e. your own ideas in your own words). For this section, please use the word Critique below the last sentence in your summary, and have the word Critique flush left.
* This section is a bit harder, but there are a number of ways to demonstrate critical thinking in your writing. Address at least four of the following elements. You can address more than four, but four is the minimum.
* 1). In your opinion, how valid and reliable is the study? Why? (make sure to define what reliable and valid mean, and apply these definitions to the study you are critiquing. Merely mentioning that it is valid and reliable is not enough you have to apply those terms to the article)
* 2). Did the study authors correctly interpret their findings, or are there any alternative interpretations you can think of?
* 3). Did the authors of the study employ appropriate ethical safeguards?
* 4). Briefly describe a follow-up study you might design that builds on the findings of the study you read how the research presented in the article relates to research, articles or material covered in other sections of the course
* 5). Describe whether you feel the results presented in the article are weaker or stronger than the authors claim (and why); or discuss alternative interpretations of the results (i.e. something not mentioned by the authors) and/or what research might provide a test between the proposed and alternate interpretations
* 6). Mention additional implications of the findings not mentioned in the article (either theoretical or practical/applied)
* 7). Identify specific problems in the theory, discussion or empirical research presented in the article and how these problems could be corrected. If the problems you discuss are methodological in nature, then they must be issues that are substantial enough to affect the interpretations of the findings or arguments presented in the article. Furthermore, for methodological problems, you must justify not only why something is problematic but also how it could be resolved and why your proposed solution would be preferable.
8). Describe how/why the method used in the article is either better or worse for addressing a particular issue than other methods
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]