Overview
-include the articles in the paper/analysis
-include the authors main points
-divide the paper in to sections (introduction-discussion) briefly summarizing each section in own words Or that of primary research authors
INTRODUCTION
Start your critique with sentences giving the following information:
- Authors’ last names and the article title
- Authors’ hypothesis or a statement recognizing the goal of the research
SUMMARY
Put into words the authors’ purpose and main points/evidence cited that are the backdrop for the current research.
REVIEW & EVALUATE
To seriously review the piece, ask the questions:
- What's the research question? Is there evidence in the literature to support asking it? Is it sufficiently different from that earlier work?
- What are the methodological approaches?
- Is the use of methods relevant?
- What do they observe? How do they interpret these findings?
- Do you agree with this interpretation? Is it in line with the work cited?
- Is there other evidence that would support a counter-argument?
- Are the article and the evidence still valid or are they outdated, leading to an invalid conclusion?
- What limitations do the authors recognize? What others do you recognize?
CONCLUSION
- Re-state the authors’ purpose and whether you agree with their analysis / their suggestion that their findings support this intent.
- Back up your decisions by expressing your reasons.
- Propose experiments that you feel need to get conducted to move the field forward
articles:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/h...
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/neurosc...
http://www.antoniocasella.eu/archipsy/Morris_Izenb...
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28910551/