Please see the article. And write a CRR.
(double-spaced; 12 pt. TNR; 1-inch margins) will be enforced (this is great practice for learning to write succinctly and staying “on point”). Put things into your own words—direct quotes should rarely be used; when used, they should be kept brief (two lines at most). Formal citations are not necessary. If referencing the CRR article itself, simply putting the page number in parentheses is fine; if referencing something other than the CRR article, simply putting the author’s name and a page number (or hyperlink) in parentheses will suffice.
Tips: *In any research article, there is a lot of information—but not all information is equally important. Stay focused on the key elements (listed below); don’t get distracted by the less important details. Also, to aid understanding of an article, it is often helpful to read the abstract (if applicable), introduction, and conclusion before reading through the theory, methods and results.
Remember: the CRR is NOT merely a summary of the article, nor is it simply “your opinion” of the article. As a general rule, well under 50% (and preferably under 25%) of the article should be summarization—the rest should be thoughtful, careful analysis and critique (and, remember, critique doesn’t necessarily mean “criticism”—highlighting why particular methodological choices were good is also important to do).
Where applicable, students should attempt to speak to the following items (asterisks (*) indicate especially important items):
1) What is the author’s research question(s)?
2) What is the outcome, or dependent (Y), variable the author is interested in? What is the main independent variable (X) the author identifies (or is interested in)? Are there multiple independent variables the author is concerned with?
For both X and Y, briefly discuss how the author has defined and/or measured/operationalized these variables. How well does the operationalized variable actually measure the conceptual variable of interest?
Especiallyifthereisqualitative“coding”ofdata,doeachofthecodesmakesenseintermsofwhat they mean, how they were determined, and how much evidence exists for each of them?
3) What is the population the author is interested in learning something about? That is, what do you see as being the broader group or category that the author is trying to reveal something about?
4) Does the author specify a hypothesis (or hypotheses)? If so, what is it, and does the author attempt to test it?
a. Verygenerallyspeaking,brieflydescribethebasictheoryunderlyingthehypothesis(orhypotheses).
5) *Describe the data and sample the author looks at. How was the sample obtained? Are there any potential problems with the sample (e.g., in terms of its generalizability to the population of interest), or how it was obtained? If so, be specific: how might these issues potentially have affected the results of the study? How might the results have looked if a more representative sample been obtained? Why?
1
6) *Describetheoverallresearchdesign(includingspecificresearchmethodsemployedandhowthedata were analyzed) that the author uses to investigate the research question. In other words, how, specifically, is it that the author is able to determine whether evidence exists in support of, or against, the hypothesis? What, specifically, is the author looking to see? Is there a particular comparison being made?
a. *Whataresomestrengths/weaknesseswiththisauthor’schoiceofresearchmethod?Howwelldoes the method test, or provide support for, the hypothesis that was specified? (Be specific, referencing previous readings we’ve had (if applicable))
i. Tip: How well does this design clear K&W’s “Four Causal Hurdles” (especially hurdles 3 and 4)?
7) Briefly discuss the key results of the author’s analysis.What does the author find?
Is “cherry-picking” a potential concern at all (either in picking the sample, or in picking results)?
A common criticism in CRRs is that something could “distort” or “influence” the results. Be
specific—how and in what sense, exactly, might this distort/influence the key findings of the study?
ParticularlyforthequantitativeCRR,trytoidentifyatleastoneortwonumericalfiguresinatable that the author is particularly concerned with. How does the author interpret what that number is
telling us?
8) What does the author conclude from these results? Are the results consistent with the hypothesis (hypotheses)? How well do the results of the study support the author’s main argument and conclusions?
*Setting aside your own beliefs and biases,is there a plausible alternative explanation for the main finding (that is, an explanation other than the one the author is arguing)? Why or why not? (Tip: think about K&W’s “Four Causal Hurdles” again, and how well this study does in clearing the hurdles.)
*In addition,what are some limitations(e.g.,researchdesign,methodsemployed,sample,etc.)ofthe study? In other words, although the results may be correct, what are some important things we still might want to know regarding this particular research question? Moreover, do the limitations of the study weaken your confidence in the key results/conclusions in any way? If so, be specific. If not, why not?
What might be a good extension of this study? In other words, if these results/conclusions are correct, what might be some possible implications/predictions you’d be interested in exploring yourself?
