Decision-making related article. Article Critique.

This will consist of a written article summary/critique (with a minimum [maximum] 3 [4] singlespaced pages using type-12 font and 1-inch margins throughout). The scope of the written review must include
the following:
i. Complete journal reference information. Note: this should be part of the cover page, and thus does
not count as part of the 4 pages of the summary/critique.
Page 6 of 15
ii. A clear summary of the research problem, rationale (i.e., why is this worthy of study?), and
objectives.
iii. A summary of the conceptual development of the paper (the development of theory) and of the
corresponding research hypotheses/propositions and/or theoretical model.
iv. A synopsis of research methodology employed, and analytical approaches.
v. A rundown and interpretation of the major findings, and conclusions (including the main theoretical
and practical implications).
vi. A thorough critique of the conceptual (e.g., key contributions) and methodological (e.g., anything
new/interesting, major flaws and/or shortcomings) aspects of the research. Students must include
their own ideas here.
vii. Some very specific recommendations for future research under the theme of the research topic.
Students must include their own ideas here.
As a general guideline, the length of the written assignment should be about 60-70% summary
(points i. through v.), and 30-40% critique (points vi. and vii.). Students may choose to integrate
both summary and critique components, or write them sequentially (that is, keep them in separate
sections). Please ensure that your work is entirely original: avoid plagiarism. Paraphrase (put into
your own words), use proper citation methods (where applicable), and rely on your own thoughts.
Papers may be checked for originality using turnitin.com
The critique part of the assignments might include some of the following points (this list
is not exhaustive):
 How important is this research (timeliness, relevance, applicability, scope)?
 How convincing is/are the argument(s) presented (that is, the main theory being advanced by the
author[s]?
 Does the review of the existing literature appear adequate; are key terms/concepts/models
adequately explained?
 How clearly are the hypotheses stated? Are they stated in a way in which the findings will lead
to acceptance or rejection of the hypotheses or are the hypotheses ambiguously phrased?
 Are there any biases in the methodology (scope, experimental manipulations, survey, sample
subjects, etc.)? To what extent could these methodological weaknesses compromise the findings
of the study (and if so, did the author[s] disclose these limitations in the article)? Some examples
of weaknesses are as follows:
 An experiment with unbalanced groups (which may account for differences observed, beyond
the experimental manipulation).
 A poorly-worded questionnaire. Unreasonable questions or prone to biased answers?
 A study comparing different ethnic/cultural groups, without taking into account differences in
the interpretation of questionnaire items.
 A contrived experimental situation that is unrealistic, and therefore, lacking external validity.
 Attempting to generalize findings from student samples to the broader population, etc.
 Evaluation of the adequacy of the evidence presented to support the author(s)’ claims? In other
words, how reasonable are the conclusions based on the theory and associated findings (this
usually appears in the “Discussion” part of the paper)? If you disagree with some of the conclusions,
point out these problems or suggest alterative explanations.
 Clarity and logic of the author(s)’ reasoning, style of writing? Are there any contradictions in
reasoning, or areas of ambiguity, that appear in the article?
 Anything else relevant, your subjective evaluation (What did you like/dislike about the paper? What
linkages may exist between the theories and variables discussed in this paper and in other papers?)