How narrowly is the research problem defined? In your opinion, is it too narrow or too broad? Explain.

How narrowly is the research problem defined? In your opinion, is it too narrow or too broad? Explain.

2. Does the researcher describe related theories?
3. Was the research setting artificial (e.g., a laboratory setting)? If yes, do you think that the gain in the control of extraneous variables offset the potential loss of information that would be obtained in a study in a more real-life setting? Explain.
4. Are there any obvious flaws or weaknesses in the researcher’s methods or measurement or observation? Explain.
5. Was the analysis statistical or non-statistical? Was the description of the results easy to understand? What type of study was can it be classified as?
6. Are definition of the key terms provided? Was the description of the results easy to understand? Explain.
7. Were the descriptions of procedures and methods sufficiently detailed? Were any important details missing? Explain.
8. Does the report lack information on matters that are potentially important for evaluating it?
9. Do the researchers include a discussion of the limitations of their study?
10. Does the researcher imply that his or her research proves something? Do you believe that it proves something? Explain.

Article Q

uestions

1.

How narrowly is the

research

problem defined?

I

n

your opinion, is it too narrow or too

broad? Explain.

2.

Does the

researcher

describe related theories?

3.

W

as the

research

setting artificial (

e.g., a l

aboratory

setting)?

If yes, do you think that the

gain in the

control

of extraneous variables

offset

the potential loss of information that

would be obtained in a study in a more real

–

life setting? Explain.

4.

Are there any

o

bvious

flaws or

weaknesses

in the

researcher’s

methods or measurement

or observation? Explain.

5.

W

as

the analysis statistical or non

–

statistical

? Was the description of the results easy to

understand?

What type of study was can it be classified as?

6.

Are definition of the key terms provided?

W

as

the description

of the results easy to

understand?

Explain

.

7.

W

ere

the descriptions of procedures and

methods

sufficiently

detailed?

W

ere

any

important

details missing?

Explain

.

8.

Does the report lack information on matters that

are potentially

important

for

evaluating

it?

9.

Do the

researchers

include a discussion of the limitations of

their

study?

10.

Does the

researcher

imply that his or her

research

proves something? Do you believ

e that

it proves something? Explain.

Article Questions

1. How narrowly is the research problem defined? In your opinion, is it too narrow or too

broad? Explain.

2. Does the researcher describe related theories?
3. Was the research setting artificial (e.g., a laboratory setting)? If yes, do you think that the

gain in the control of extraneous variables offset the potential loss of information that

would be obtained in a study in a more real-life setting? Explain.

4. Are there any obvious flaws or weaknesses in the researcher’s methods or measurement

or observation? Explain.

5. Was the analysis statistical or non-statistical? Was the description of the results easy to

understand? What type of study was can it be classified as?

6. Are definition of the key terms provided? Was the description of the results easy to

understand? Explain.

7. Were the descriptions of procedures and methods sufficiently detailed? Were any

important details missing? Explain.

8. Does the report lack information on matters that are potentially important for evaluating

it?

9. Do the researchers include a discussion of the limitations of their study?
10. Does the researcher imply that his or her research proves something? Do you believe that

it proves something? Explain.