The flowing discussion preview describes my opinions from my readings. When preparing a critical review the writer needs to be a proclaimed expert writer and not a novice. Critical reviews stated in topic 16 DQ 1 is an unproven statement based on based on the principles that is required of a critical review.
To prepare for a critical review one must asses the quality of each research articles that will be citied. The first area that requires assessment is sampling. Sampling is used quite often more often which limits the generalizability of the results. The second area of questionability is in the measurement also referred to as instrumentation meaning almost all measurements are flawed to some extent.
The third area relates to issues with validity meaning citing’s are not credible which applies directly to experimental which are often flawed by having inappropriate control conditions. Fortunately, researches have no choice but to mention all of these conditions which support my argument that Topic 16 DQ 1 cannot make a definite statement based on the conditions I just discussed.
Daryl very interesting post. When we get to writing out own research and have to take information from articles we can’t just assume the their perfect articles. We have to consider that it has flaws and look for them in order to make our research the best it could be. Once we found them and have decided to cite that article we also have to mention its possible flaws. We have be 100 percent clear about what we cite and why we cite it.