We are always here to help you with your assignments when you are tied-up with something else. KingEssays reviews: 4. If you want to learn how to critique an article, you should first have a clear understanding of what this assignment is about. Generally, it is an objective analysis of any piece of work not depending on its genre , which includes your personal thoughts on the subject.
To help identify essential gaps in research to find solutions. They are used in current debates for references They are good for generating ideas about next field of research They also help the learner to become an expert in a particular area of study.
How to write a good article review? For an excellent article review, one should first prepare then write the review. Preparation includes the following steps: Step 1: Understanding what the article review is. You should be aware that the audience of the review has knowledge on the subject matter and is not just a general audience. You need to summarize the main ideas of the article, arguments, positions, and findings. Also, critique the contributions of the material and overall effectiveness of the field.
Note that, The review only responds to the research of the author and does not involve new research. It evaluates and summarizes the article. Step 2: Identify the organization of the review. You need to know the setup of your article review to understand how to read the article. Following these steps will help you in writing a useful review: Summarize the article.
This may be appropriate but only if authors report on how the image has been edited e. Where you feel that an image has been edited or manipulated without explanation, you should highlight this in a confidential comment to the editor in your report.
List of References You will need to check referencing for accuracy, adequacy and balance. Accuracy Where a cited article is central to the author's argument, you should check the accuracy and format of the reference - and bear in mind different subject areas may use citations differently.
Adequacy You should consider if the referencing is adequate: Are important parts of the argument poorly supported? Are there published studies that show similar or dissimilar trends that should be discussed? If a manuscript only uses half the citations typical in its field, this may be an indicator that referencing should be improved - but don't be guided solely by quantity References should be relevant, recent and readily retrievable Balance Check for a well-balanced list of references that is: Helpful to the reader Fair to competing authors Not over-reliant on self-citation Gives due recognition to the initial discoveries and related work that led to the work under assessment You should be able to evaluate whether the article meets the criteria for balanced referencing without looking up every reference.
Plagiarism By now you will have a deep understanding of the paper's content - and you may have some concerns about plagiarism. Identified Concern If you find - or already knew of - a very similar paper, this may be because the author overlooked it in their own literature search. Or it may be because it is very recent or published in a journal slightly outside their usual field.
You may feel you can advise the author how to emphasize the novel aspects of their own study, so as to better differentiate it from similar research. If so, you may ask the author to discuss their aims and results, or modify their conclusions, in light of the similar article. Of course, the research similarities may be so great that they render the work unoriginal and you have no choice but to recommend rejection.
Most editors have access to software that can check for plagiarism. Editors are not out to police every paper, but when plagiarism is discovered during peer review it can be properly addressed ahead of publication. If plagiarism is discovered only after publication, the consequences are worse for both authors and readers, because a retraction may be necessary.
Search Engine Optimization SEO After the detailed read-through, you will be in a position to advise whether the title, abstract and key words are optimized for search purposes. In order to be effective, good SEO terms will reflect the aims of the research. A clear title and abstract will improve the paper's search engine rankings and will influence whether the user finds and then decides to navigate to the main article.
The title should contain the relevant SEO terms early on. This has a major effect on the impact of a paper, since it helps it appear in search results. A poor abstract can then lose the reader's interest and undo the benefit of an effective title - whilst the paper's abstract may appear in search results, the potential reader may go no further. So ask yourself, while the abstract may have seemed adequate during earlier checks, does it: Do justice to the manuscript in this context?
Highlight important findings sufficiently? Present the most interesting data? Editors say, "Does the Abstract highlight the important findings of the study?
Point out the similarities the article shares with what you have read on the topic before, as well as the differences. If you come across a section that you do not fully understand, you should not leave it like this. You can only write a solid article review if you have made sure that you understand everything there is to understand in and about the article.
Step 5. Retell the article to yourself It is best to do it in written form, such as an outline or a piece of free writing. Basically, you just put the information you have just read in your own words. This should include the author's claim, the conducted research, and the argument s. You need to be careful and accurate not to miss any important details. This text is only for your use, so it does not need any editing or proofreading, but it needs to be clear so that you could return to it at any time and not spend time remembering what exactly you meant by this or that.
If you choose to write an outline, it is better not to include your opinions here. Instead, you should better stick to the main points of the article.
Having retold the gist of the article, take your time and decide which parts are worth discussing in the review. While you always have to discuss the main issues, it is also worth to concentrate certain aspects such as the content, the interpretation of facts, the theoretical basis, the style of narration, etc.
Sometimes, your tutor will specify on what you should focus. Re-read your summary to cross out the items that can be omitted. This can be repeated information or something not critical to your cause. Step 6. Outline your review Look at your summary to see if the author was clear about each of them.
Then put together the lists of strong points and drawbacks and summarize them. For example, a strong point may be the introduction of new information, and a drawback may be the lack of accuracy in representing the existing knowledge on the topic. Add these outcomes to your study and back them up with evidence from the text of the article.
Answering these questions should facilitate your outline writing: What was the goal of the article? What theories does the author dwell upon? Is the author clear with definitions? Is the supportive evidence relevant? What is the place of the article in its field of knowledge?
Materials and Methods Academic research should be replicable, repeatable and robust - and follow best practice. Clearly outline the order in which every sub-topic will be discussed to give the reader background information needed to understand the sections in the article.
Reviewers should check the preferences of individual journals as to where they want review decisions to be stated. Summarizes recent research related to the topic Highlights gaps in current understanding or conflicts in current knowledge Establishes the originality of the research aims by demonstrating the need for investigations in the topic area Gives a clear idea of the target readership, why the research was carried out and the novelty and topicality of the manuscript Originality and Topicality Originality and topicality can only be established in the light of recent authoritative research. Pass your judgment as to whether the given facts are sufficient for supporting the author's main argument. So be polite, honest and clear.
Make sure that you use specific references and examples.
Step 2: Identify the organization of the review. A poor abstract can then lose the reader's interest and undo the benefit of an effective title - whilst the paper's abstract may appear in search results, the potential reader may go no further.
The title should contain the relevant SEO terms early on.
If you follow all the recommendations, you will easily complete an outstanding article critique without any efforts!