Your assignment is to critique a research article. In general, you will answer the questions:
Is the research article well written, containing all of the required components?
Does the author(s) support the hypotheses using appropriate research techniques?
Does the research contribute to nursing knowledge?
The rubric of how your grade on this paper is calculated will be uploaded as a separate
document. However,
this will give you a few guidelines as you go and get started.
First of all, the title of your critique should include some basic information:
1. Name(s) of the author(s)
2. Title of article
3. Title of journal, volume number, date, month and page numbers, doi number
The bulk of your critique should consist of your qualified opinion of the article.
Read the article you are to critique once to get an overview. Then read it again, critically. At this
point you may want to make some notes to yourself. You should likely print your article.
Your paper should be 5 – 7 pages. It is written in a scholarly format. Do not use the word “I”
or say “I think.” Your paper will read like a research article. The paper must follow the
guidelines of the American Psychological Association Manual, 6th or 7th edition. Your
presentation must be well reasoned and objective. Your paper must clearly articulate whether
or not you agree or disagree with the author and the findings.
The following are some questions you may want to address in your critique no matter what type
of article you are critiquing. (Use your discretion. These points don’t have to be discussed in this
order, and some may not be pertinent to your particular article.)
1. Is the title of the article appropriate and clear?
2. Is the abstract specific, representative of the article, and in the correct form?
3. Is the purpose of the article made clear in the introduction?
4. Do you find errors of fact and interpretation?
5. Is all of the discussion relevant?
6. Has the author cited the pertinent, and only the pertinent, literature? If the author has included
inconsequential references, or references that are not pertinent, suggest deleting them.
7. Have any ideas been overemphasized or underemphasized? Suggest specific revisions.
8. Should some sections of the manuscript be expanded, condensed or omitted?
9. Are the author’s statements clear? Challenge ambiguous statements. Suggest by examples how
clarity can be achieved, but do not merely substitute your style for the author’s.
10. What underlying assumptions does the author have?
11. Has the author been objective in his or her discussion of the topic?
Also:
1. Is the objective of the experiment or of the observations important for the field?
2. Are the experimental methods described adequately?
3. Are the study design and methods appropriate for the purposes of the study?
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|