Critique of an Article-

QUESTIONS TO ASK WHILE READING A RESEARCH ARTICLE

INTRODUCTION - Why did they start?

Why is this research important? How well did the authors justify this in the review of literature? Did they summarize the existing literature relevant to the issue addressed?

What is the research question/s of interest (purpose/objectives) or hypothesis? Is the phrasing comprehensive, clear, specific?

Do the authors use well-defined, non-ambiguous terminology (avoiding jargon)?

METHODS - What did they do?

Did the authors provide sufficient detail for the replication of the study?

What's the study design? Are there any potential threats to the internal and external validity of the design?

Have the data collection procedures and instruments described? What is the dependent variable (DV)? Independent variables (IV)? Is the dependent variable (outcome measure) well defined and clearly measurable? Are the IVs (exposure or condition to be manipulated) well defined/clearly measurable?

Who is the sample population? Does this population place any limits on the generalizability of the results? Was the sampling procedure/subject selection described?

Sample size - How do the authors justify the number of subjects in the study? Are "drop outs" accounted for?

How was their sample assessed? Was the measure validated?

Does the study design have any control condition to rule out chance findings? Are there threats to the internal and/or external validity of the study?

Is the time frame adequate to answer the research question?

RESULTS - What did they find?

Were the number of subjects in each group or subgroup used in the analysis specified? Were the subject characteristics summarized?

Did the results reported relate to the specified objective/hypotheses?

Do the tables and figures "speak for themselves?" Are they useful and clear?

Are the tables adequately titled, labeled, and footnoted so they can be interpreted without reference to text?

DISCUSSION - What do the results mean?

Did authors discuss the results in relations to the objectives/hypotheses? Is there a clear distinction between the results of the hypothesis being tested and other, unexpected findings being discussed?

Were the results discussed in relation to those from similar studies? Discussed in relation to the theoretical background for this field of study?

Are the authors justified in the strength of the statements they make in the study? Did they offer alternative explanations for results?

How will these results add to this field of research? Were potential directions for future studies mentioned?

REFERENCES - Are they comprehensive and current?

MISCELLANEOUS

Did the article:
Define ambiguous terms?
Define acronyms the first time they appeared in text?
Provide references, citations for statement of facts?
Follow logical sequencing of facts?
Present information clearly and concisely?

REMEMBER

A ‘critique' does not mean a negative review. Comment on the strengths as well as the weaknesses. In critiquing articles, you should be critical but also creative. Think beyond what is presented and visualize what issues are not mentioned, what unknown or unmeasured variable(s) might have resulted in some other explanation for the outcome.

Not all of these questions apply to all of the articles, nor are these the only questions to ask about a study. These are just some ideas to get you started. These questions represent an approach to critically evaluating the research literature.