Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

Embed
What would you like to do?
THE FORMULA FOR REVIEWING PAPERS by Robert Hurley

“THE FORMULA FOR REVIEWING PAPERS” Developed by Robert Hurley, PhD. Professor Emeritus, Medical College of Virginia, Virginia Commonwealth University

INTRODUCTION

  • What is the issue addressed in the paper?
  • Why is the issue worth addressing?
  • What is in the paper (i.e. a preview of what is to come)?

PROBLEM STATEMENT

  • What is the question to be answered?
  • Is it important? Why and to whom?
  • What will this study contribute to the current body of knowledge?

BACKGROUND/PREVIOUS LITERATURE

  • What do we already know already about the question?
  • What are the gaps in prior literature?
  • What are some of the limitations of previous work done in this area?

THEORETICAL/CONCEPTUAL MODEL

  • What kind of conceptual model is being used to examine this issue (what is the “argument”)?
  • Is this model anchored in a broader theoretical framework?
  • Why is this model appropriate and/or superior to others that might be used?
  • What features/facets/relationships of the model (theory) apply to this issue?
  • What specifically does the adopted model predict or suggest about the question at hand?
  • Given the question of interest, the literature review, and the conceptual model, what hypotheses are going to be tested?

METHODS AND DATA

  • How are the hypotheses being tested in the study?
  • What is the study population and is a subset (sample) or the universe?
  • What features or units are examined and do these features have variability?
  • How are the units measured?
  • Where do values of the measures (i.e. data) come from?
  • How were the data gathered?
  • How were variables created from the data?
  • Has the conceptual model been expressed in terms of your variables?
  • How were data analyzed to test explicitly the proposed hypotheses?

FINDINGS OR RESULTS

  • What do the data indicate?
  • Are the data presented clearly and logically?
  • What are the measures of central tendency and variability in the data?
  • Is the data presentation consistent with the questions examined in the study?
  • What are the results of the analyzes undertaken to conduct tests of the hypotheses?
  • Is the reader able to draw his/her own conclusions based on presentation of results?

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

  • Are the findings specially related back to the hypotheses?
  • What are the results of the individual hypothesis tests?
  • Are the author’s interpretations of results plausible?
  • Are the findings summarized and linked to the earlier literature to indicate how the body of knowledge has been advanced?
  • What are the principal limitations of the findings and the study as a whole?
  • How might some of the limitations be overcome?
  • What are policy and/or management implications of findings?
  • Do the findings indicate that the theoretical or conceptual model was or was not appropriate?
  • What should be examined next to continue to advance the body of knowledge in this area?

CONCLUSION

  • Briefly, what has been done and learned in this study.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.