Evaluating Research Articles Assignment

Evaluating Research Articles Assignment

Instructions/Descriptions

Evaluating Research Articles Assignment

[Order Now]

Guidelines for evaluating research articles

Phillip Rumrill∗, Shawn Fitzgerald and Megen Ware Kent State University, Department of Educational Foundations and Special Services Center for Disability Studies, 405 White Hall, P.O. Box 5190, Kent, OH 44242-0001, USA

The article describes the components and composition of journal articles that report empirical research findings in the field of rehabilitation. The authors delineate technical writing strategies and discuss the contents of research manuscripts, including the Title, Abstract, Introduction, Method, Results, Discussion, and References.

The article concludes with a scale that practitioners, manuscript reviewers, educators, and students can use in critically analyzing the content and scientific merits of published rehabilitation research.

Keywords: Evaluation, research articles, guidelines for critique

1. Introduction

The purpose of this article is to examine the components of a research article and provide guidelines for conducting critical analyses of published works. Distilled from the American Psychological Association’s [1] Publication Manual and related descriptions in several research design texts [4,8,9,12,15],

descriptions of how authors in rehabilitation and disability studies address each section of a research article are featured. The article concludes with a framework that rehabilitation educators, graduate students, practitioners, and other Work readers can use in critiquing re- search articles on the basis of their scientific merits and practical utility.

2. Anatomy of a research article

For nearly 50 years, the American Psychological Association has presented guidelines for authors to follow in composing manuscripts for publication in professional journals [1]. Most journals in disability studies and rehabilitation adhere to those style and formatting guidelines. In the paragraphs to follow, descriptions of each section of a standard research article are presented: Title, Abstract, Introduction, Method, Results, Discussion, and References.

2.1. Title

As with other kinds of literature, the title of a scientific or scholarly journal article is a very important feature. At the risk of contravening the age-old adage “You can’t judge a book by its cover,” Bellini and Rumrill [4] speculated that most articles in rehabilitation journals are either read or not read based upon the prospective reader’s perusal of the title.

Therefore, developing a clear, concise title that conveys the article’s key concepts, hypotheses, methods, and variables under study is critical for researchers wishing to share their findings with a large, professional audience.

A standard-length title for a journal article in the social sciences is 12–15 words, including a sub-title if appropriate. Because social science and medical indexing systems rely heavily on titles in their codification schemes to track and categorize journal articles by topic, providing a title that clearly delineates a general research domain or topic area is of utmost importance.

If the title is vague or ambiguous, chances are that the prospective reader will not continue to read through the document to establish where it might fit in terms of a specific research domain or topic area. Examples of clearly descriptive titles that can be found in the contemporary rehabilitation literature include:

“Rehabilitation Counselors’ Assessments of Applicants’ Functional Limitations as Predictors of Rehabilitation Services Provided” [3].

258 P. Rumrill et al. / Guidelines for evaluating research articles

“Employer Concerns About Hiring Persons with Psychiatric Disabilities: Results of the Employer Attitude Questionnaire” [6].

“Self-Perceived Reasons for Unemployment Cited by Persons with Spinal Cord Injury: Relationship to Gender, Race, Age, and Level of Injury” [13].

“Vocational Rehabilitation Counselors’ Attitudes Toward Self-Employment Outcomes” [18].

“Surveying the Employment Concerns of People with Multiple Sclerosis: A Participatory Action Re- search Approach” [20].

“Effect of Graduate Research Instruction on Perceived Research Anxiety, Research Utility, and Confidence in Research Skills” [21].

Before we move into descriptions of the content sections of a research article, we want to briefly address the concept of technical writing as it applies to the com- position of academic manuscripts. Journals adhering to the American Psychological Association’s [1] publication guidelines favor manuscripts that are written in direct, uncomplicated sentences.

Editors prefer that text be written in the “active voice”; whenever possible, sentences should begin with their subjects and follow with verbs and objects (e.g., “The researcher conducted an experiment” rather than “An experiment was con- ducted by the researcher”).

Technical writing is marked by the “less is more” maxim; extraneous phrases and clauses that add words to the sentence without enhancing the overall statement should be avoided (e.g., “In order to…”, “For purposes of. . .”, “As far as. . . is concerned. . .”). Another element of sound technical writing is the sparing use of adverbs (e.g., very, some- what, strikingly) and adjectives that do not serve to further define or specify the terms that they are modifying (e.g., interesting, important, good, noteworthy).

In addition to the American Psychological Association’s guidelines for technical writing, authors should consider these six criteria for effective composition provided by George Orwell (1946) in Politics and the English Language:

1. Never use a metaphor, simile, or other figure of speech which you are used to seeing in print.
2. Never use a long word where a short one will do. 3. If it is possible to cut a word out, always cut it

out. 4. Never use the passive (voice) where you can use

the active. 5. Never use a foreign phrase, a scientific word, or

jargon word if you can think of an everyday English equivalent.

6. Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous (p. 170).

Organization is also key in preparing an effectively composed journal manuscript, with multi-level headings serving to guide the flow of text and keep the reader on track.

For authoritative information regarding the style and formatting guidelines for submitting manuscripts to most journals in social science fields, readers should consult the American Psychological Association’s [1] Publication Manual. For information concerning the style and formatting requirements of Work and other journals published by IOS Press, see the Guidelines for Authors section included in the be- ginning of this edition.

[Order Now]

2.2. Abstract

Next to the title, the abstract is the most widely read section of a journal article. In an empirical article, the abstract should be a succinct, 100–150-word summary of the investigation’s key features, including purpose, objectives, research questions/hypotheses, sample, scientific procedures, independent and dependent variables, and salient results. Results of the study should be summarized in full in the abstract; authors should describe both significant and non-significant findings, not only those which upheld their hypotheses or expectations.

The abstract serves as an advance organizer for the article, and it should include every important premise, method, and result of the investigation. Like the Preface that commonly orients readers to full-length textbooks, the abstract provides a complete, albeit summary, preview of the article.

Some journals, including Work and the Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, ask authors to list key descriptors on the abstract page, which are then used for purposes of indexing. In most cases, the title is what determines whether a reader will read the abstract; the abstract determines whether the reader will read the body of the article.

Evaluating Research Articles Assignment

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!