- Queen's University Library
- Research Guides
Introduction to Research: Humanities and Social Sciences
- Critical Reviews
- Choosing Your Research Topic
- Finding Background Information
- Choosing Relevant Keywords
- Connecting Keywords
- Citation Searching
- Articles (General)
- Scholarly Articles
- Films & Videos
- Scholarly vs. Popular Sources
- Scholarly vs. Non-Scholarly Periodicals
- Web Resources
- Annotated Bibliography
- Reflective Writing
- Citing Sources
- Off Campus?
Writing Critical Reviews
What is a Critical Review of a Journal Article?
A critical review of a journal article evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of an article's ideas and content. It provides description, analysis and interpretation that allow readers to assess the article's value.
Before You Read the Article
- What does the title lead you to expect about the article?
- Study any sub-headings to understand how the author organized the content.
- Read the abstract for a summary of the author's arguments.
- Study the list of references to determine what research contributed to the author's arguments. Are the references recent? Do they represent important work in the field?
- If possible, read about the author to learn what authority he or she has to write about the subject.
- Consult Web of Science to see if other writers have cited the author's work. (Please see 'How to use E-Indexes'.) Has the author made an important contribution to the field of study?
Reading the Article: Points to Consider
Read the article carefully. Record your impressions and note sections suitable for quoting.
- Who is the intended audience?
- What is the author's purpose? To survey and summarize research on a topic? To present an argument that builds on past research? To refute another writer's argument?
- Does the author define important terms?
- Is the information in the article fact or opinion? (Facts can be verified, while opinions arise from interpretations of facts.) Does the information seem well-researched or is it unsupported?
- What are the author's central arguments or conclusions? Are they clearly stated? Are they supported by evidence and analysis?
- If the article reports on an experiment or study, does the author clearly outline methodology and the expected result?
- Is the article lacking information or argumentation that you expected to find?
- Is the article organized logically and easy to follow?
- Does the writer's style suit the intended audience? Is the style stilted or unnecessarily complicated?
- Is the author's language objective or charged with emotion and bias?
- If illustrations or charts are used, are they effective in presenting information?
Prepare an Outline
Read over your notes. Choose a statement that expresses the central purpose or thesis of your review. When thinking of a thesis, consider the author's intentions and whether or not you think those intentions were successfully realized. Eliminate all notes that do not relate to your thesis. Organize your remaining points into separate groups such as points about structure, style, or argument. Devise a logical sequence for presenting these ideas. Remember that all of your ideas must support your central thesis.
Write the First Draft
The review should begin with a complete citation of the article. For example:
Platt, Kevin M.F. "History and Despotism, or: Hayden White vs. Ivan the Terrible and Peter the Great." Rethinking History 3:3 (1999) : 247-269.
NOTE: Use the same bibliographic citation format as you would for any bibliography, works cited or reference list. It will follow a standard documentation style such as MLA or APA.
Be sure to ask your instructor which citation style to use. For frequently used style guides consult Queen's University Library's Citing Sources guide.
The first paragraph may contain:
- a statement of your thesis
- the author's purpose in writing the article
- comments on how the article relates to other work on the same subject
- information about the author's reputation or authority in the field
The body of the review should:
- state your arguments in support of your thesis
- follow the logical development of ideas that you mapped out in your outline
- include quotations from the article which illustrate your main ideas
The concluding paragraph may:
- summarize your review
- restate your thesis
Revise the First Draft
Ideally, you should leave your first draft for a day or two before revising. This allows you to gain a more objective perspective on your ideas. Check for the following when revising:
- grammar and punctuation errors
- organization, logical development and solid support of your thesis
- errors in quotations or in references
You may make major revisions in the organization or content of your review during the revision process. Revising can even lead to a radical change in your central thesis.
NOTE: Prepared by University of Toronto Mississauga Library, Hazel McCallion Academic Learning Centre.
- << Previous: Writing Resources
- Next: Annotated Bibliography >>
Additional Resources
Writing a Critical Review (Allyson Skene, The Writing Centre, U of Toronto at Scarborough)
The Book Review or Article Critique (Margaret Procter, Writing Support, University of Toronto)
Critical Reviews of Journal Articles (Herbert Coutts, University of Alberta)
Writing a Critical Review (The Writing Centre, Queen's University)
- Last Updated: Aug 29, 2023 12:23 PM
- Subjects: Multidisciplinary
The Tech Edvocate
- Advertisement
- Home Page Five (No Sidebar)
- Home Page Four
- Home Page Three
- Home Page Two
- Icons [No Sidebar]
- Left Sidbear Page
- Lynch Educational Consulting
- My Speaking Page
- Newsletter Sign Up Confirmation
- Newsletter Unsubscription
- Page Example
- Privacy Policy
- Protected Content
- Request a Product Review
- Shortcodes Examples
- Terms and Conditions
- The Edvocate
- The Tech Edvocate Product Guide
- Write For Us
- Dr. Lynch’s Personal Website
- The Edvocate Podcast
- Assistive Technology
- Child Development Tech
- Early Childhood & K-12 EdTech
- EdTech Futures
- EdTech News
- EdTech Policy & Reform
- EdTech Startups & Businesses
- Higher Education EdTech
- Online Learning & eLearning
- Parent & Family Tech
- Personalized Learning
- Product Reviews
- Tech Edvocate Awards
- School Ratings
Transitioning From Undergraduate to Grad Learner: Everything You Need to Know
College textbooks costs: everything you need to know, what is an ahk file, keeping yourself safe in college: everything you need to know, myths about online high schools: everything you need to know, reasons you should study geography: everything you need to know, the vtoman jump 1800 portable power station: the best of the best, key roles of a school superintendent: everything you need to know, is earning a degree online worthwhile and beneficial, why learners cheat: everything you need to know, how to write an article review (with sample reviews) .
An article review is a critical evaluation of a scholarly or scientific piece, which aims to summarize its main ideas, assess its contributions, and provide constructive feedback. A well-written review not only benefits the author of the article under scrutiny but also serves as a valuable resource for fellow researchers and scholars. Follow these steps to create an effective and informative article review:
1. Understand the purpose: Before diving into the article, it is important to understand the intent of writing a review. This helps in focusing your thoughts, directing your analysis, and ensuring your review adds value to the academic community.
2. Read the article thoroughly: Carefully read the article multiple times to get a complete understanding of its content, arguments, and conclusions. As you read, take notes on key points, supporting evidence, and any areas that require further exploration or clarification.
3. Summarize the main ideas: In your review’s introduction, briefly outline the primary themes and arguments presented by the author(s). Keep it concise but sufficiently informative so that readers can quickly grasp the essence of the article.
4. Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses: In subsequent paragraphs, assess the strengths and limitations of the article based on factors such as methodology, quality of evidence presented, coherence of arguments, and alignment with existing literature in the field. Be fair and objective while providing your critique.
5. Discuss any implications: Deliberate on how this particular piece contributes to or challenges existing knowledge in its discipline. You may also discuss potential improvements for future research or explore real-world applications stemming from this study.
6. Provide recommendations: Finally, offer suggestions for both the author(s) and readers regarding how they can further build on this work or apply its findings in practice.
7. Proofread and revise: Once your initial draft is complete, go through it carefully for clarity, accuracy, and coherence. Revise as necessary, ensuring your review is both informative and engaging for readers.
Sample Review:
A Critical Review of “The Effects of Social Media on Mental Health”
Introduction:
“The Effects of Social Media on Mental Health” is a timely article which investigates the relationship between social media usage and psychological well-being. The authors present compelling evidence to support their argument that excessive use of social media can result in decreased self-esteem, increased anxiety, and a negative impact on interpersonal relationships.
Strengths and weaknesses:
One of the strengths of this article lies in its well-structured methodology utilizing a variety of sources, including quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews. This approach provides a comprehensive view of the topic, allowing for a more nuanced understanding of the effects of social media on mental health. However, it would have been beneficial if the authors included a larger sample size to increase the reliability of their conclusions. Additionally, exploring how different platforms may influence mental health differently could have added depth to the analysis.
Implications:
The findings in this article contribute significantly to ongoing debates surrounding the psychological implications of social media use. It highlights the potential dangers that excessive engagement with online platforms may pose to one’s mental well-being and encourages further research into interventions that could mitigate these risks. The study also offers an opportunity for educators and policy-makers to take note and develop strategies to foster healthier online behavior.
Recommendations:
Future researchers should consider investigating how specific social media platforms impact mental health outcomes, as this could lead to more targeted interventions. For practitioners, implementing educational programs aimed at promoting healthy online habits may be beneficial in mitigating the potential negative consequences associated with excessive social media use.
Conclusion:
Overall, “The Effects of Social Media on Mental Health” is an important and informative piece that raises awareness about a pressing issue in today’s digital age. Given its minor limitations, it provides valuable
3 Ways to Make a Mini Greenhouse ...
3 ways to teach yourself to play ....
Matthew Lynch
Related articles more from author.
3 Ways to Open Winmail.dat Files
How to Braze Aluminum: 9 Steps
3 Simple Ways to Reduce Chlorine in an Aquarium
How to Take a Navy Shower: 8 Steps
How to Become a Muslim: 14 Steps
How to Drive a Bulldozer
Write a Critical Review of a Scientific Journal Article
- Analyzing the Text
Approach 1: Situate your review in context
Approach 2: organize your critique according to the structure of the article, ask us: chat, email, visit or call.
Get assistance
The library offers a range of helpful services. All of our appointments are free of charge and confidential.
- Book an appointment
If your instructor is concerned that the article be clearly situated within the social and intellectual research context, then you might present it in the following way:
Introduction
In the introduction, cite the journal article in full and then provide the background to this piece of research, establishing its place within the field. Use the answers to the questions in the “Establish the research context” section to develop this section.
Follow the structure of the journal article. Evaluate each section of the article — Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion — highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each section. Use the answers to the questions in the section entitled “Evaluate the research” to develop this section.
In this section, sum up the strengths and weaknesses of the research as a whole. Establish its practical and theoretical significance. Use the answers to questions from the above section entitled “Establish the significance of the research” to develop this section.
Another common way to structure a journal article critique is the following:
In the introduction, cite the journal article in full and provide a summary of the journal article. Use the answers to the questions in the section entitled “Identify how and why the research was carried out” to develop the summary.
Follow the structure of the journal article. Evaluate each section of the article – Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion – highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of each section. Use the answers to the questions in the section entitled “Evaluate the research” to develop the summary.
In this section, sum up the strengths and weaknesses of the research as a whole. Establish its practical and theoretical significance. Use the answers to questions in the section entitled “Establish the significance of the research” to develop this section.
Kuyper, B.J. (1991). Bringing up scientists in the art of critiquing research. Bioscience 41(4), 248-250. Wood, J.M. (2003). Research Lab Guide. MICR*3260 Microbial Adaptation and Development Web Site. Retrieved July 31, 2006, from http://www.uoguelph.ca/mcb/teaching/micr3260/research_lab/guide.shtml
- << Previous: Analyzing the Text
- Last Updated: Jan 11, 2024 12:42 PM
- URL: https://guides.lib.uoguelph.ca/WriteCriticalReview
Suggest an edit to this guide
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Ev en better you might. consider doing an argument map (see Chapter 9, Critical thinking). Step 5: Put the article aside and think about what you have read. Good critical review. writing requires ...
The critical review can be of a book, a chapter, or a journal article. Writing the critical review usually requires you to read the selected text in detail and to also read other related texts so that you can present a fair and reasonable evaluation of the selected text. What is meant by critical?
A critical review is similar, as it is based on a close and detailed reading and evaluation of a text or comparison of multiple texts on the same topic. The type of texts you may be asked to review could include books, articles, reports, websites, or films. 1. Purpose 2. Structure 3. Writing style 4. Example 1. Purpose
appraisal, critical analysis) is a detailed commentary on and critical evaluation of a text. You might carry out a critical review as a stand-alone exercise, or as part of your research and preparation for writing a literature review. The following guidelines are designed to help you critically evaluate a research article. What is meant by ...
A critical review is an assessment of an original research article. Writing a critical review of a journal article can help you improve your research skills. By assessing the work of others, you develop skills as a critical reader and become familiar with the types of evaluation criteria that will be applied to research in your field.
Remember that simply disagreeing with the material is not considered to be a critical assessment of the material. For example, stating that the sample size is insufficient is not a critical assessment. Describing why the sample size is insufficient for the claims being made in the study would be a critical assessment.
to understand the critical commentary that follows. The summary should be . objective and should not include any personal interpretation or discussion. In a research based article, summarise each section of the article. The purpose of the critique is to express your judgments and comments about the writing you are reviewing.
A critical review is a description and evaluation of a source, usually a journal article or book. It moves beyond a summary to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the source and to comment on the quality of the source as a whole. Do not be confused by the term "critical": it does not mean that you only look at the negative aspects of ...
What is a Critical Review of a Journal Article? A critical review of a journal article evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of an article's ideas and content. It provides description, analysis and interpretation that allow readers to assess the article's value. ... The review should begin with a complete citation of the article. For example ...
Example. Following, we have an example of a summary and an evaluation of a research article. Note that in most literature review contexts, the summary and evaluation would be much shorter. This extended example shows the different ways a student can critique and write about an article. Citation. Chik, A. (2012).
Article Review Definition of Genre Summaries and critiques are two ways to write a review of a scientific journal article. Both types of writing ask you first to read and understand an article from the primary literature about your topic. The summary involves briefly but accurately stating the key points of the article for a reader who has
2. Read the article thoroughly: Carefully read the article multiple times to get a complete understanding of its content, arguments, and conclusions. As you read, take notes on key points, supporting evidence, and any areas that require further exploration or clarification. 3. Summarize the main ideas: In your review's introduction, briefly ...
To write a good critical review, you will have to engage in the mental processes of analyzing (taking apart) the work-deciding what its major components are and determining how these parts (i.e., paragraphs, sections, or chapters) contribute to the work as a whole. Analyzing the work will help you focus on how and why the author makes certain ...
Here is a sample extract from a critical review of an article. In this brochure only the introduction and conclusion are included. We thank Suwandi Tijia for allowing us to use his critical review in this resource. Title Introduction Introduces the author and topic area. Presents the aim/purpose of the article Key findings Reviewer's ...
Start your review by referring to the title and author of the article, the title of the journal, and the year of publication in the first paragraph. For example: The article, "Condom use will increase the spread of AIDS," was written by Anthony Zimmerman, a Catholic priest. 4. Write the introduction.
Summarising and paraphrasing are essential skills for academic writing and in particular, the critical review. To summarise means to reduce a text to its main points and its most important ideas. The length of your summary for a critical review should only be about one quarter to one third of the whole critical review. The best way to summarise.
Purpose of a critical review. The critical review is a writing task that asks you to summarise and evaluate a text. The critical review can be of a book, a chapter, or a journal article. Writing the critical review usually requires you to read the selected text in detail and to read other related texts so you can present a fair and reasonable ...
Another common way to structure a journal article critique is the following: Introduction. In the introduction, cite the journal article in full and provide a summary of the journal article. Use the answers to the questions in the section entitled "Identify how and why the research was carried out" to develop the summary. Body
Manisha Bahl, A Step-by-Step Guide to Writing a Scientific Review Article, Journal of Breast Imaging, Volume 5, Issue 4, July/August 2023, Pages 480-485, ... conducting a literature search and critical analysis of the literature, and writing the article, which is composed of an abstract, introduction, body, and conclusion, with accompanying ...
Basically, the conclusion section of a review article should provide a summary of key findings from the main body of the manuscript. In this section, the author needs to revisit the critical points of the paper as well as highlight the accuracy, validity, and relevance of the inferences drawn in the article review.
A critical review is an academic appraisal of an article that offers both a summary and critical comment. They are useful in evaluating the relevance of a source to your academic needs. ... Journal of Community Engagement and Scholarship, 3(2), ... and to improve their scores on the ACT Writing Sample Assessment (WSA) exam. ...
many examples of work written by those who have written on this subject in the past. Pesch cites people like Locke, Montesquieu, and Machiavelli. These are good, well-‐known examples. and authors and I think it adds a great deal credibility to the piece as a whole.
A critical review evaluates the strengths and weaknesses of an item's ideas and content. It provides description, analysis and interpretation that assess the item's value. It's an exercise that can be carried out on many different types of writing, but is most often carried out on a report, a book or a journal article.
Find information on symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, data, research, and free resources.