Introduc

tion

Method

Result

First Time Through

Why do we care about this
area of research?
Do I understand the theory or
the studies that set up this
research? , If not what
reference do I need to read?
What are the hypotheses?
Why do the authors expect
their
hypotheses
to
be
supported?
If this study cures a weakness
in previous research, what
was wrong with previous
research?
If this study fills a gap in
previous research, what was
the gap?
How
were
participant
selected?
What was the age and gender
composition of the sample?
What population did the
sample represent? What was
done to the participants?
If there were manipulated
variables, how were those
variable manipulated?
What did participant do?
What was measured variable?
What was the design?
Do I understand how the
studys method allow the
researcher
to
test
the
hypothesis?

Second Time Through

Do
I
agree
with
their
argument?
Does the hypotheses really
follow from theory or previous
research?
If they had obtained different
result, what would they have
changed in their introduction?

Are there a reason to expect

that the researchers might
have
obtained
different
population of participants?
Were groups equivalent before
study began?
Were
there
enough
participants?
Was there a problem with
participant?
Was there a problem with
participant dropping out of the
study?
Are there any variables that
the researchers should have
controlled or manipulated?
If I had been a participant,
would I have taken the task
seriously?
Were
the
control
groups
adequate?
Would it have been better to
use a different measure?
How
were
participants Do the statistics directly test
responses turned into the the predictions made in the
scores used in the analyses?
introduction?
What are the average scores Do the statistical tests match
for the different groups?
up with the verbal description?

Discussi
on

Do the result support the That is, if the authors say the
hypothesis
Group 1 scored better than
Group 2, do they have an
analysis that directly compares
Group 1 against Group 2?
As the statistics appropriate?
Did they correctly report their
null (non-significant) result as
failing or reject the null
hypothesis?
Do they think the result What are other explanation for
matched their prediction?
the result?
How do they explain any The other explanation could
discrepancies?
come from (a) a problem with
What additional studies do their study that the authors
they recommend?
did not mention or from (b) a
theory or hypothesis that the
author did not mention. Are
there additional studies I
would recommend?
Did the authors make causeeffect statement on the basis
of correlational evidence?
Did
the
authors
state
something
that
was
not
supported by result? For
example, did they treat a nonsignificant result as significant
or talk about a comparison
that did not statistically test?