Assignment 3: Research Critique Paper (20 Points)
For this assignment students will critique a quantitative OR a qualitative research article. Select one article from the list in Canvas Week 10, or may select a different study approved by the instructor for the critique assignment. Use the guidelines in the from the text and other resources from the course (Cathala & Moorley, 2018; Coughlan et al., 2007; Moorley & Cathala, 2019; Ryan et al., 2007) to set benchmarks to critique the research study. Cite the benchmark source for each area of the critique and describe how the study authors met or did not meet the benchmark criteria listed below. Use the appropriate criteria for the type of study: qualitative or quantitative
Assignment Criteria:
Develop a scholarly paper that addresses the following criteria:
1. Identify an area of clinical interest.
2. Locate a minimum of one peer-reviewed journal article (no older than 5 years) related to your clinical topic of interest. Do not use a meta-analysis or systematic review.
3. Critique the journal article, fully answering the questions in the table below.
4. The scholarly paper should be in narrative format, 4 to 5 pages excluding the title and reference page.
5. Include an introductory paragraph, purpose statement, and a conclusion.
6. Include level 1 and 2 headings to organize the paper.
7. Write the paper in third person, not first person (meaning do not use ‘we’ or ‘I’) and in a scholarly manner. To clarify: I, we, you, me, our may not be used. In addition, describing yourself as the researcher or the author should not be used.
8. Include a minimum of one professional peer-reviewed scholarly journal references to support the paper and a second benchmark peer reviewed source (may be textbook or other journal article) and be less than five (5) years old.
9. APA format is required (attention to spelling/grammar, a title page, a reference page, and in-text citations).
10. Submit the assignment to Turnitin prior to the final submission, review the originality report, and make any needed changes
11. Submit by the posted due date.
12. Format the critique paper using the IMRaD format with level 1 and level 2 headings as designated in the grid below:
Introduction to the paper with purpose statement
Quantitative Critique Guide
Level 1 Heading
Level 2 Headings
Content questions to address with quality benchmark citations
Introduction
Research Problems
What is the research problem?
Does the problem build a persuasive argument for the new study?
Is the problem statement easy to locate?
Research Questions and Hypotheses
What are the research questions and hypothesis?
Do the hypothesis state a predicted relationship between two or more variables?
Methods
Ethical Aspects of a Study
Was the study approved and monitored by an Institutional Review Board, Research Ethics Board or similar committee?
Were appropriate informed consent procedures used with all participants?
Research Design
Was the design experimental, quasi-experimental, or non-experimental?
Was the study longitudinal or cross-sectional? What are the threats to the studies internal validity?
Sampling
What type of sampling design was used?
Are possible sample biases or weaknesses identified?
Data Collection
What methods of data collection were utilized (Self-reports, Scales, Observation, and Rating Scales)? If self-report methods were used, did the researchers make good decisions about specific methods (in-person interviews, mailed questionnaires, etc.)?
If observational methods were used, did the report adequately describe what the observations entailed?
Results
Statistical Analysis
Identify the type of analyses undertaken to address each research question or test each hypothesis.
Were appropriate statistical methods used, given the level of measurement of the variables, number of groups being compared, and so on?
Results
How are important results presented?
Do the authors make causal or correlational inferences? Are the inferences justified based on the study design and the results?
Discussion
Findings
What limitations do the authors discuss? What other limitations that may affect internal validity do you find in the study?
Are the findings the authors present directly related to the results from the data in the study?
Clinical Practice
Did the researchers discuss the study’s implications for clinical practice or future research and if so, were the implications grounded in the study evidence, and in evidence from earlier research?
Summarize the overall quality of the critiqued paper according to the benchmark quality sources cited
Qualitative Critique Guide
Level 1 Heading
Level 2 Headings
Content questions to address with quality benchmark citations
Introduction
Research Problems and population of interest
What is the research problem?
Does the problem build a persuasive argument for the new study?
Is the problem statement easy to locate?
What is the population of interest?
Research Questions
What are the research questions?
Methods
Research Tradition
Was the research tradition for the study identified?
If none was identified, can one be inferred? Are the data sources, research methods and analytic approach congruent with the research tradition?
Was there evidence of reflexivity in the design?
Ethical Aspects of a Study
Were adequate steps taken to safeguard participant’s privacy?
How was confidentiality maintained?
Were vulnerable groups involved in research?
Data Collection
Given the research question and characteristics of study participants, did the researcher use the best method of capturing study phenomena (self-reports, interviews, groups or observation)?
If self-report methods, did the researcher make good decisions about the specific method used to solicit information (focus group interviews, individual interviews).
Were interviews tape recorded, annotated, and transcribed?
Data Analysis Approach
Identify the type of analyses undertaken to answer a research question. Were appropriate methods used and/or qualitative software for data assessment?
Results
Results/
Were the findings effectively summarized, with good use of experts?
Do the themes adequately capture the meaning of the data? Does it appear that the researcher satisfactorily conceptualized the themes or patterns in the data?
Discussion
Findings
Did the analysis yield an insightful, provocative, and meaningful picture of the phenomenon under investigation?
Clinical Practice
Did the researchers discuss the study’s implications for clinical practice or future research and if so, were the implications grounded in the study evidence, and in evidence from earlier research?
Summarize the overall quality of the critiqued paper according to the benchmark quality sources cited
Assignment: Research Critique Paper (20 points)
Assignment Criteria
7 points
5 points
3 points
0 points
All topics/criteria addressed and all questions fully answered.
All topics/criteria addressed and most questions fully answered.
All topics/criteria addressed, and most questions partially answered.
One or more topics/criteria not addressed or completely answered.
Quality/Accuracy of Information
7 points
5 points
3 points
0 points
Information clearly relates to the main topic/criteria. It includes several supporting details and/or examples.
Information clearly relates to the main topic/criteria. It provides supporting details and/or examples.
Information clearly relates to the main topic/criteria. A few details and/or examples are given.
Information has little or nothing to do with the main topic/criteria.
Organization
3 points
2 points
1 point
0 points
Information is very organized with well-constructed paragraphs and levels of heading.
Information organized with well-constructed paragraphs and levels of heading.
There is an attempt at organization but errors exist. No levels of heading.
The information or overall structure appears disorganized.
Sources
3 points
2 points
1 point
0 points
All references are from a relevant professional peer-reviewed scholarly journal, within a 5-year timeframe, or a classic/ historical source.
The majority of references are from a relevant professional peer-reviewed scholarly journal, within a 5-year timeframe or a classic/historical source.
Some references are from non-peer-reviewed scholarly sources or older than 5 years.
Majority of references are from non-peer-reviewed scholarly sources or older than 5 years.
Earned Points
Up to 10% of the assigned points (total points of assignment) can be deducted from the earned points for errors in APA style [title page, introduction, purpose statement, level heading, conclusion, references, citations, and format], spelling, and/or grammar.
Final Total
