Familiarizing yourself with format and style guidelines is especially important if you haven’t published with that journal in the past. For example, a journal might require you to recommend an article for publication, meet a certain word count, or provide revisions that the authors should make. If you’re reviewing a journal article for a school assignment, familiarize yourself the guidelines your instructor provided.
While giving the article a closer read, gauge whether and how well the article resolves its central problem. Ask yourself, “Is this investigation important, and does it uniquely contribute to its field?” At this stage, note any terminological inconsistencies, organizational problems, typos, and formatting issues.
How well does the abstract summarize the article, the problem it addresses, its techniques, results, and significance? For example, you might find that an abstract describes a pharmaceutical study’s topic and skips to results without discussing the experiment’s methods with much detail. Does the introduction map out the article’s structure? Does it clearly lay out the groundwork? A good introduction gives you a clear idea of what to expect in the coming sections. It might state the problem and hypothesis, briefly describe the investigation’s methods, then state whether the experiment proved or disproved the hypothesis.
If necessary, spend some time perusing copies of the article’s sources so you can better understand the topic’s existing literature. A good literature review will say something like, “Smith and Jones, in their authoritative 2015 study, demonstrated that adult men and women responded favorably to the treatment. However, no research on the topic has examined the technique’s effects and safety in children and adolescents, which is what we sought to explore in our current work. "
For example, you might observe that subjects in medical study didn’t accurately represent a diverse population.
For example, you might find that tables list too much undigested data that the authors don’t adequately summarize within the text.
For example, if you’re reviewing an art history article, decide whether it analyzes an artwork reasonably or simply leaps to conclusions. A reasonable analysis might argue, “The artist was a member of Rembrandt’s workshop, which is evident in the painting’s dramatic light and sensual texture. ”
Is the language clear and unambiguous, or does excessive jargon interfere with its ability to make an argument? Are there places that are too wordy? Can any ideas be stated in a simpler way? Are grammar, punctuation, and terminology correct?
Your thesis and evidence should be constructive and thoughtful. Point out both strengths and weaknesses, and propose alternative solutions instead of focusing only on weaknesses. A good, constructive thesis would be, “The article demonstrates that the drug works better than a placebo in specific demographics, but future research that includes a more diverse subject sampling is necessary. ”
The introduction summarizes the article and states your thesis. The body provides specific examples from the text that support your thesis. The conclusion summarizes your review, restates your thesis, and offers suggestion for future research.
Make sure your writing is clear, concise, and logical. If you mention that an article is too verbose, your own writing shouldn’t be full of unnecessarily complicated terms and sentences. If possible, have someone familiar with the topic read your draft and offer feedback.
