Why is it necessary to critique research literature? Justify your rationale.

BIO 550 Discussion Critique Research Literature

Why is it necessary to critique research literature? Justify your
rationale.

Discussion 2

What is the difference between summarizing and critiquing an
article? Present supportive details in your explanation.

The introduction should orientate the reader to the study by:
• giving a firm sense of what was done in the study
• introducing the question/problem
• developing the background of the study
• stating the purpose and rationale of the research.
Ask yourself:
• Is the research question/problem researchable?
• Is the problem important enough to justify the research?
• Is the background of the research relevant to the research question?
THE LITERATURE REVIEW
The literature review should give an overview of the available literature which frames or surrounds the
problem being researched. It should look at the similarities and differences between the literature, as well
as the strengths and limitations. It should illustrate how the current study fits into the existing framework of
research or how it fills a gap in the literature.
Ask yourself:
• Is the literature review broad, yet focused on the issue?
• Is there historical as well as contemporary material to put the area of study into a context?
• Is there convincing evidence to support assertions?
• Does it fairly represent opposing views?
• Does the literature review use a theoretical framework?
• Does it reveal gaps in the knowledge which this research will fill?
THE AIM:
The aim must be clearly stated, focused on one main idea and should convey the main purpose of the study.
Ask yourself: Do you have a clear idea of what the study tried to achieve?

Click here to ORDER an A++ paper from our Verified MASTERS and DOCTORATE WRITERS: BIO 550 Discussion Critique Research Literature

BIO 550 Discussion Critique Research Literature
BIO 550 Discussion Critique Research Literature

THE RESEARCH DESIGN:
This section should clearly state what the researcher did and how it was done, allowing the reader to
evaluate the methods used, the consistency, the reliability of the study, its validity and whether it could be
replicated. As a minimum, there should be a brief synopsis of the research approach taken. Once the research
method is established, the reader can critique the research design for methodological rigour.
The method section of the research design usually has subsections which describe the participants, the
materials and the procedure. The detail should be sufficient to clearly explain the research design, without
excessive detail, so that no questions remain.
• Participants or sample: The number of participants, their characteristics and the selection process
used should be described. Do the participants represent the research well? If any participants did
not complete the study, this should be explained. Details such as any payments made to participants
and details of major demographic information should be made evident, for example, geographical
location, gender, age, affiliation with any institutions, etc.
• Ethics clearance: The process of obtaining ethics clearance and how ethical standards were
maintained should be made clear.
Critiquing Research Articles_Nov 2020_V.1
CRITIQUING RESEARCH
ARTICLES
• Use of apparatus: If any apparatus were used, it should be briefly identified and described, and
its function in the research explained. If any apparatus were obtained or donated by a commercial
source, this must be stated.
• Procedure: Each step in the research procedure should be explained. This includes any instructions to
the participants, the formation of groups, and any experimental manipulations. Any control features
in the research design should be stated.
Ask yourself:
• Is there a clear rationale for the chosen research approach, methods and/or instruments used?
• Is the research method appropriate for the research question?
• Was the collection of data appropriate for the research question?
• Is there enough information concerning the participants?
• What were the ethical considerations for the research and the participants?
• Were the methods and/or instruments described in enough detail?
• Were any ambiguous terms used?
• Is the method deemed reliable and valid?
• Are any limitations of the study discussed?
DATA ANALYSIS (also known as the ‘Results and Findings’ section)
This section should contain a summary of the data collected and the main results and findings, in enough
detail so that the reader can understand how the conclusions that are drawn later in the article have been
reached. In qualitative research, illustrative samples of data are frequently used. In quantitative data,
individual scores or raw data are not discussed. All relevant data, including that which runs counter to the
hypothesis, should be discussed.
Tables and figures should be used for clear representation of data (In the discussion section, this data should
be discussed in text, not as data.). The reader should be made clear as to what the data provided means
and why it is important.
Ask yourself:
• Were the steps involved in the data analysis explained and the strategies justified?
• Was the data analysis rigorous enough to substantiate the claims?
• Were all data taken into account? If not, why not?
• Are the presented results relevant to the research question?
• Do the tables and graphs (if any) make the data analysis clearer?