Article Review

For this assignment it is required that you acquire a research article from a peer reviewed journal and critique the contents of the article. Use the five general guidelines from the text book in your review and analysis of the article (listed below). In typing up the review please do not simply go through each of the questions listed below and give a response. It should read similar to a book review. You may find that in the article you are reviewing not every question will apply and you do not need to answer every question listed but do be as comprehensive as possible in your review. Remember the focus is on strengths and weaknesses of the article. The following reference is the first article you should review.

A Comparison of CBT and EMDR for Sexually-abused Iranian Girls. Jaberghaderi, Nasrin; Greenwald, Ricky; Rubin, Allen; Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy, Vol 11(5), Sep-Oct 2004. pp. 358-368. [Original Journal Article]

I. Preliminary Analysis of an Article 1. What are the author’s credentials and institutional affiliation? 2. Has the author’s work been cited by others? 3. Is the publication current or dated? 4. Is the work published by a publisher of professional books or journals? 5. Is the work peer reviewed? 6. Is the source a scholarly journal?
II. The Introduction 7. Has relevant research been adequately reviewed? 8. Are assertions supported with the appropriate citations? 9. Are the purposes of the study clearly stated? 10. Are the hypotheses clearly stated, and do they flow logically from the information in the introduction?
III. The Method Section 11. Was the nature of the subject sample specified? 12. Does the design of the study allow an adequate test of the hypotheses? 13. Are there any methodological flaws that might affect the validity of the results? 14. Is sufficient detail presented to allow one to replicate the study?

IV. The Results Section 15. Did the statistically significant effects support or refute the hypotheses? 16. Are the differences reported large or small? 17. Were the appropriate statistics used? 18. Do the tables, figures, and text match?
V. The Discussion Section 19. Do the conclusions presented match the results reported? 20. If the author speculates about implications of results, does he or she stray too far from the results reported? 21. How well do the results mesh with existing theory and empirical data? 22. Does the author point the way to directions for future research?

Do not do this: The authors were credentialed and employed at Harvard. The author was cited by others. The publication date was January 2003. It was published in a professional journal (Journal of Psychology) and was peer reviewed.

It appears that the author did his research in reviewing other articles. He gave several citations and the purpose of the study was clear.
Their description of their subjects wasn’t very good…

Do this: The article A Self-Disclosure Inventory for Adolescents was authored by Professor Lloyd West (University of Calgary) and Assistant Professor Harvey W. Zingle (University of Alberta). A quick review of the Psych-Info Database indicated that both authors have published several articles related to adolescent development and the formation of interpersonal relationships. This particular article was published in Psychological Reports a professional peer reviewed journal.

The purpose of the study was to describe the development of a self-disclosure inventory designed for the use of adolescents. This was clearly stated in the abstract as well as in the first paragraph of the article. Following a brief but clear introduction to the key variables of interest within their study, the authors provided a review of the pertinent literature. The literature review provided by the authors was comprehensive and included a concise summary of the most pertinent research related to each of the variables included in their study. They also identified and noted variables in their study that were lacking in research base. The literature review provided a rationale for the author’s hypotheses that…

The description of the subjects used in their study was lacking in specificity. They failed to describe the subjects in terms of religiosity and ethnic background. It may be that these variables would have changed the results of their study. They noted that the sample consisted of 50 females and 26 males. This ratio is inadequate in making comparisons between the two genders...