Format for Critiquing a Journal Article Step 1: Introduction Discuss briefly the Name(s) of the author(s) Title of article Title of journal, volume number, date, month and page numbers Statement of the problem or issue discussed The author’s purpose, approach or methods, hypothesis, and major conclusions. Talk about the title of the journal article. How does the title relate to the aims and objective of the study? How does the title relate to the statement of problem or research questions? Identify the target audience, and determine if the choice of words in the journal article is suitable for the target audience. Identify the aims and objective of the study and discuss whether it is sufficient enough to add to the body of knowledge already available on the subject matter or if it is a waste of time (to answer this, look out for new concepts in the study you have never come across). Check if the author has made vain repetitions or wasted time trying to explain terms that the target audience should know. Look out for errors in the representation of facts Step 2 Literature Review Identify if the author plainly stated a subheading as “Literature Review” or Reviewed some literature related to the study in a section titled “Background of the study”. How does the cited works in the background of study or literature review add to the author’s knowledge on the study? This can be answered by looking at how well the cited works answered the aims and objectives of study How many literatures did the author review and are they suitable for the nature of the subject matter? Identify the years where in these studies reviewed where published and determine how suitable the years are to the present study. (Studies of more than ten years ago are unsuitable). Step 3 Methodology The methodology section will be broken into three types: A. Sample Size How many samples did the author use for the study and what is the suitability of sample size to the aims and objectives of the study? B. Sample Collection Identify how the author has eliminated the problem of bias in the study. In other words, identify if the author has used a random sampling technique in collecting samples. Do a little research on the author’s random sampling technique and point out its strengths and weaknesses. Use this information to support your argument. C. Statistical Method and Tools What method of statistics (descriptive and inferential) has the author used for the study? Identify the method used, do a little research on it and find out the strengths and weaknesses of the method, use this information to support your argument. Identify another statistical methods that can be better. What statistical tools (ANOVA, Chi test, regression blah blah blah) did the author use to analyze his data? Identify the strength and weaknesses of the tool used and state if another tool would have been more appropriate for the study. Step 4 Result How did the author publish the results of the study, what methods has been used such as pie chart, histogram, etc etc, identify the strength and weaknesses and state if another tool would be appropriate? Step 5 Discussion Did the author state the limitations of the study or tried to ignore them? Did the author state how the study will add to the body of knowledge on the subject matter or is the study just a waste of time. Step 6 Ethical Consideration How has the author addressed the ethical issues that may arise from the study? If live human subjects were used, did the author use informed consent forms or letters to get the consent of the subjects before carrying out the study. Step 7 Referencing How many articles did the study reference? State if the number is okay or not with reasons. What citation and reference style has the author used? State if it is appropriate or not with reasons. What article years has the author cited? (Less than 10 years ago are inappropriate). Dr. H
