| Article Review Questions
The questions below are designed to guide your reading of an
entire research article.
1. What is the basic research question, or problem? Try to state it in just one
sentence. (Chapter 2) top
2. Is the purpose of the study explanatory, evaluative, exploratory, or
descriptive? Did the study have more than one purpose? (Chapter 1) top
3. What prior literature was reviewed? Was it relevant to the research problem?
To the theoretical framework? Does the literature review appear to be
adequate? Are you aware of (or can you locate) any important studies that
have been omitted? (Chapter 2, 3) top
4. Was a theoretical framework presented? What was it? Did it seem appropriate
for the research question addressed? Can you think of a different theoretical
perspective that might have been used? (Chapters 2, 3) top
5. How well did the study live up to the guidelines for science?
Do you need additional information in any areas to evaluate the
study? To replicate it? (Chapter 2) top
6. Did the study seem consistent with current ethical standards?
Were any trade-offs made between different ethical guidelines? Was
an appropriate balance struck between adherence to ethical standards
and use of the most rigorous scientific practices? (Chapter 3) top
7. Were any hypotheses stated? Were these hypotheses justified
adequately in terms of the theoretical framework? In terms of prior
research? (Chapter 3) top
8. What were the independent and dependent variables in the hypothesis(es)?
Did these variables reflect the theoretical concepts as intended?
What direction of association was hypothesized? Were any other variables
identified as potentially important? (Chapter 3) top
9. What were the major concepts in the research? How, and how clearly, were they defined? Were
some concepts treated as unidimensional that you think might best be thought
of as multidimensional? (Chapter 4) top
10. Did the instruments used, the measures of the variables, seem valid and
reliable? How did the authors attempt to establish this? Could any more have
been done in the study to establish measurement validity? (Chapter 4) top
11. Was a sample or the entire population of elements used in the study? What
type of sample was selected? Was a probability sampling method used? Did the
authors think the sample was generally representative of the population from
which it was drawn? Do you? How would you evaluate the likely
generalizability of the findings to other populations? (Chapter 5) top
12. Was the response rate or participation rate reported? Does it appear likely
that those who did not respond or participate were markedly different from
those who did participate? Why or why not? Did the author(s) adequately
discuss this issue? (Chapters 5, 8) top
13. What were the units of analysis? Were they appropriate for the research
question? If some groups were the units of analysis, were any statements made
at any point that are open to the ecological fallacy? If individuals were the
units of analysis, were any statements made at any point that suggest
reductionist reasoning? (Chapter 6) top
14. Was the study design cross-sectional or longitudinal, or did it use both
types of data? If the design was longitudinal, what type of longitudinal
design was it? Could the longitudinal design have been improved in any way,
as by collecting panel data rather than trend data, or by decreasing the
dropout rate in a panel design? If cross--sectional data were used, could the
research question have been addressed more effectively with longitudinal
data? (Chapter 6) top
15. Were any causal assertions made or implied in the hypotheses or in subsequent
discussion? What approach was used to demonstrate the existence of causal
effects? Were all five issues in establishing causal relationships addressed?
What, if any, variables were controlled in the analysis to reduce the risk of
spurious relationships? Should any other variables have been measured and
controlled? How satisfied are you with the internal validity of the
conclusions? (Chapter 6) top
16. Was an experimental, survey, participant observation, or some
other research design used? How well was this design suited to the
research question posed and the specific hypotheses tested, if any?
Why do you suppose the author(s) chose this particular design? How
was the design modified in response to research constraints? How
was it modified in order to take advantage of research opportunities?
(Chapters 7-9) top
17. Was this an evaluation research project? If so, which type
of evaluation was it? Which design alternatives did it use? (Chapter
11) top
18. Was a historical comparative design used? Which type was it?
Were problems due to using historical and/or cross-national data
addressed? (Chapter 12) top
19. Did the analysis rely on secondary data? Did the author(s)
take into account the limitations due to use of secondary data?
Did they provide an adequate description of the strengths and weaknesses
of the original study? (Chapter 13) top
20. Summarize the findings. How clearly were statistical and/or
qualitative data presented and discussed? Were the results substantively
important? (Chapters 10, 14) top
21. Did the author(s) adequately represent the findings in the
discussion and/or conclusions sections? Were conclusions well grounded
in the findings? Are any other interpretations possible? (Chapter
15) top
22. Compare the study to others addressing the same research question.
Did the study yield additional insights? In what ways was the study
design more or less adequate than the design of previous research?
(Chapter 15) top
23. What additional research questions and hypotheses are suggested
by the study's results? What light did the study shed on the theoretical
framework used? On social policy questions? (Chapter 2, 3, 15) top |