Be careful not to get too bogged down by your summary. Use Evidence A literature review section is, in this sense, just like any other academic research paper. Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to Paper. . A methodological scope will influence either the types of documents in the review or the way in which these documents are discussed. Second, I ponder how well the work that was conducted actually addresses the central question posed in the paper. However, due to the nonrandom nature of the sample, the results would not generalizable beyond the 162 participants in the study.
At times, there is a tendency for people to become derailed and find them merely making summary points of articles without challenging and analyzing them. Second, I pay attention to the results and whether they have been compared with other similar published studies. The goal of reviewing is different. I've known too many junior scientists who have been burned from signing their reviews early on in their careers. Then I scrutinize it section by section, noting if there are any missing links in the story and if certain points are under- or overrepresented. Are the methods suitable to investigate the research question and test the hypotheses? The bibliography or reference section of sources you've already read are also excellent entry points into your own research. Are the reported analyses appropriate? The fatal injury rate in the warehousing industry is higher than the national average for all industries, and taking necessary considerations for storage equipment and warehouse design will help to minimize workplace hazards while also creating an efficient warehouse.
The Literature Review: A Step-by-Step Guide for Students. Most of the time is spent closely reading the paper and taking notes. I also think it is our duty as researchers to write good reviews. Generally, it is an objective analysis of any piece of work not depending on its genre , which includes your personal thoughts on the subject. A well-done integrative review meets the same standards as primary research in regard to clarity, rigor, and replication. I should also have a good idea of the hypothesis and context within the first few pages, and it matters whether the hypothesis makes sense or is interesting.
Is there an angle the authors have overlooked? In addition, bringing coaches together to a common setting could have reduced location threat. Summarize the Text In the introduction of your critique paper, you must also summarize the text that you are critiquing. It may have Methods and Results sections, particularly if you have taken a systemmatic and quantitative approach to your review, or it may be a more narrative review, divided into sections that help you tell the story and elucidate the topic. As a rule of thumb, I roughly devote 20% of my reviewing time to a first, overall-impression browsing of the paper; 40% to a second reading that includes writing up suggestions and comments; 30% to a third reading that includes checking the compliance of the authors to the journal guidelines and the proper use of subject-typical jargon; and 10% to the last goof-proof browsing of my review. Make sure each source provides something unique to your critique.
The socioeconomics and population of the school itself could play a factor. The body of literature includes all studies that address related or identical hypotheses or research problems. Conclusions that are overstated or out of sync with the findings will adversely impact my review and recommendations. I'm critiquing the work, not the authors. While the study has merit, the methods need to be re-evaluated. If I find the paper especially interesting and even if I am going to recommend rejection , I tend to give a more detailed review because I want to encourage the authors to develop the paper or, maybe, to do a new paper along the lines suggested in the review. Systematic Approaches to a Successful Literature Review.
Basically, I am looking to see if the research question is well motivated; if the data are sound; if the analyses are technically correct; and, most importantly, if the findings support the claims made in the paper. For example, if a study of apples reveals that they have seeds, this would not be a significant finding. As a range of institutions and organizations around the world the essential role of peer review in upholding the quality of published research this week, Science Careers shares collected insights and advice about how to review papers from researchers across the spectrum. Historical Review Few things rest in isolation from historical precedent. Conclusion Nursing as an evidence-based profession requires nurses at both pre- and post-registration levels to be able to understand, synthesise and critique research, this being a fundamental part of many nursing curricula. Does the Paper Realize a Great Idea? New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.
This will demonstrate how the study is capable of achieving its aims. One litmus test I use to ensure that a negative aspect of a paper does not condemn it is to ask myself whether the problem 1 affects the main conclusion or contribution of the paper; and 2 can be fixed easily in a revision. If there are things I struggle with, I will suggest that the authors revise parts of their paper to make it more solid or broadly accessible. With regard to coaching level, 25 0. Using a copy of the manuscript that I first marked up with any questions that I had, I write a brief summary of what the paper is about and what I feel about its solidity. With these simple steps, you will have unraveled the puzzle of how to write a critique for an article. It is true that if the author twists the data to fit their agenda, the article may be biased.
If the conclusion involves comparison to previous work, is the comparison performed in a controlled manner, using an equivalent or at least fair experimental setup? I would not want to review for a journal that does not offer an unbiased review process. If I feel there is some good material in the paper but it needs a lot of work, I will write a pretty long and specific review pointing out what the authors need to do. Note any biases related to race, ethnicity, gender, class, or politics. Well-utilized storage equipment is conducive to creating a safer work environment and reducing workplace injuries for the 145,000 warehouse workers in America. Try to address the type of paper it is is it a survey paper, for example? Forcefully express your defensible points of agreement and disagreement. Work out how you will structure the paper, what key points you want to highlight, and what the story is that you will be telling through your review.