critique a research paper sample

How to Write an Article Critique Step-by-Step

Table of contents

• 1 What is an Article Critique Writing?
• 2 How to Critique an Article: The Main Steps
• 3 Article Critique Outline
• 4 Article Critique Formatting
• 5 How to Write a Journal Article Critique
• 6 How to Write a Research Article Critique
• 7 Research Methods in Article Critique Writing
• 8 Tips for writing an Article Critique

Do you know how to critique an article? If not, don’t worry – this guide will walk you through the writing process step-by-step. First, we’ll discuss what a research article critique is and its importance. Then, we’ll outline the key points to consider when critiquing a scientific article. Finally, we’ll provide a step-by-step guide on how to write an article critique including introduction, body and summary. Read more to get the main idea of crafting a critique paper.

What is an Article Critique Writing?

An article critique is a formal analysis and evaluation of a piece of writing. It is often written in response to a particular text but can also be a response to a book, a movie, or any other form of writing. There are many different types of review articles . Before writing an article critique, you should have an idea about each of them.

To start writing a good critique, you must first read the article thoroughly and examine and make sure you understand the article’s purpose. Then, you should outline the article’s key points and discuss how well they are presented. Next, you should offer your comments and opinions on the article, discussing whether you agree or disagree with the author’s points and subject. Finally, concluding your critique with a brief summary of your thoughts on the article would be best. Ensure that the general audience understands your perspective on the piece.

How to Critique an Article: The Main Steps

If you are wondering “what is included in an article critique,” the answer is:

An article critique typically includes the following:

• A brief summary of the article .
• A critical evaluation of the article’s strengths and weaknesses.
• A conclusion.

When critiquing an article, it is essential to critically read the piece and consider the author’s purpose and research strategies that the author chose. Next, provide a brief summary of the text, highlighting the author’s main points and ideas. Critique an article using formal language and relevant literature in the body paragraphs. Finally, describe the thesis statement, main idea, and author’s interpretations in your language using specific examples from the article. It is also vital to discuss the statistical methods used and whether they are appropriate for the research question. Make notes of the points you think need to be discussed, and also do a literature review from where the author ground their research. Offer your perspective on the article and whether it is well-written. Finally, provide background information on the topic if necessary.

When you are reading an article, it is vital to take notes and critique the text to understand it fully and to be able to use the information in it. Here are the main steps for critiquing an article:

• Read the piece thoroughly, taking notes as you go. Ensure you understand the main points and the author’s argument.
• Take a look at the author’s perspective. Is it powerful? Does it back up the author’s point of view?
• Carefully examine the article’s tone. Is it biased? Are you being persuaded by the author in any way?
• Look at the structure. Is it well organized? Does it make sense?
• Consider the writing style. Is it clear? Is it well-written?
• Evaluate the sources the author uses. Are they credible?
• Think about your own opinion. With what do you concur or disagree? Why?

Article Critique Outline

When assigned an article critique, your instructor asks you to read and analyze it and provide feedback. A specific format is typically followed when writing an article critique.

An article critique usually has three sections: an introduction, a body, and a conclusion.

• The introduction of your article critique should have a summary and key points.
• The critique’s main body should thoroughly evaluate the piece, highlighting its strengths and weaknesses, and state your ideas and opinions with supporting evidence.
• The conclusion should restate your research and describe your opinion.

You should provide your analysis rather than simply agreeing or disagreeing with the author. When writing an article review , it is essential to be objective and critical. Describe your perspective on the subject and create an article review summary. Be sure to use proper grammar, spelling, and punctuation, write it in the third person, and cite your sources.

Article Critique Formatting

When writing an article critique, you should follow a few formatting guidelines. The importance of using a proper format is to make your review clear and easy to read.

Make sure to use double spacing throughout your critique. It will make it easy to understand and read for your instructor.

Indent each new paragraph. It will help to separate your critique into different sections visually.

Use headings to organize your critique. Your introduction, body, and conclusion should stand out. It will make it easy for your instructor to follow your thoughts.

Use standard fonts, such as Times New Roman or Arial. It will make your critique easy to read.

Use 12-point font size. It will ensure that your critique is easy to read.

How to Write a Journal Article Critique

When critiquing a journal article, there are a few key points to keep in mind:

• Good critiques should be objective, meaning that the author’s ideas and arguments should be evaluated without personal bias.
• Critiques should be critical, meaning that all aspects of the article should be examined, including the author’s introduction, main ideas, and discussion.
• Critiques should be informative, providing the reader with a clear understanding of the article’s strengths and weaknesses.

When critiquing a research article, evaluating the author’s argument and the evidence they present is important. The author should state their thesis or the main point in the introductory paragraph. You should explain the article’s main ideas and evaluate the evidence critically. In the discussion section, the author should explain the implications of their findings and suggest future research.

It is also essential to keep a critical eye when reading scientific articles. In order to be credible, the scientific article must be based on evidence and previous literature. The author’s argument should be well-supported by data and logical reasoning.

How to Write a Research Article Critique

When you are assigned a research article, the first thing you need to do is read the piece carefully. Make sure you understand the subject matter and the author’s chosen approach. Next, you need to assess the importance of the author’s work. What are the key findings, and how do they contribute to the field of research?

Finally, you need to provide a critical point-by-point analysis of the article. This should include discussing the research questions, the main findings, and the overall impression of the scientific piece. In conclusion, you should state whether the text is good or bad. Read more to get an idea about curating a research article critique. But if you are not confident, you can ask “ write my papers ” and hire a professional to craft a critique paper for you. Explore your options online and get high-quality work quickly.

However, test yourself and use the following tips to write a research article critique that is clear, concise, and properly formatted.

• Take notes while you read the text in its entirety. Right down each point you agree and disagree with.
• Write a thesis statement that concisely and clearly outlines the main points.
• Write a paragraph that introduces the article and provides context for the critique.
• Write a paragraph for each of the following points, summarizing the main points and providing your own analysis:
• The purpose of the study
• The research question or questions
• The methods used
• The outcomes
• The conclusions were drawn by the author(s)
• Mention the strengths and weaknesses of the piece in a separate paragraph.
• Write a conclusion that summarizes your thoughts about the article.
• Free unlimited checks
• All common file formats
• Accurate results
• Intuitive interface

Research Methods in Article Critique Writing

When writing an article critique, it is important to use research methods to support your arguments. There are a variety of research methods that you can use, and each has its strengths and weaknesses. In this text, we will discuss four of the most common research methods used in article critique writing: quantitative research, qualitative research, systematic reviews, and meta-analysis.

Quantitative research is a research method that uses numbers and statistics to analyze data. This type of research is used to test hypotheses or measure a treatment’s effects. Quantitative research is normally considered more reliable than qualitative research because it considers a large amount of information. But, it might be difficult to find enough data to complete it properly.

Qualitative research is a research method that uses words and interviews to analyze data. This type of research is used to understand people’s thoughts and feelings. Qualitative research is usually more reliable than quantitative research because it is less likely to be biased. Though it is more expensive and tedious.

Systematic reviews are a type of research that uses a set of rules to search for and analyze studies on a particular topic. Some think that systematic reviews are more reliable than other research methods because they use a rigorous process to find and analyze studies. However, they can be pricy and long to carry out.

Meta-analysis is a type of research that combines several studies’ results to understand a treatment’s overall effect better. Meta-analysis is generally considered one of the most reliable type of research because it uses data from several approved studies. Conversely, it involves a long and costly process.

Are you still struggling to understand the critique of an article concept? You can contact an online review writing service to get help from skilled writers. You can get custom, and unique article reviews easily.

Tips for writing an Article Critique

It’s crucial to keep in mind that you’re not just sharing your opinion of the content when you write an article critique. Instead, you are providing a critical analysis, looking at its strengths and weaknesses. In order to write a compelling critique, you should follow these tips: Take note carefully of the essential elements as you read it.

• Make sure that you understand the thesis statement.
• Write down your thoughts, including strengths and weaknesses.
• Use evidence from to support your points.
• Create a clear and concise critique, making sure to avoid giving your opinion.

It is important to be clear and concise when creating an article critique. You should avoid giving your opinion and instead focus on providing a critical analysis. You should also use evidence from the article to support your points.

Readers also enjoyed

WHY WAIT? PLACE AN ORDER RIGHT NOW!

Just fill out the form, press the button, and have no worries!

We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy.

• Writing well

How to write a critique

• Starting well
• How to write an annotated bibliography
• How to write a case study response
• How to write an empirical article
• How to write an essay
• How to write a literature review
• How to write a reflective task
• How to write a report
• Finishing well

Before you start writing, it is important to have a thorough understanding of the work that will be critiqued.

• Study the work under discussion.
• Make notes on key parts of the work.
• Develop an understanding of the main argument or purpose being expressed in the work.
• Consider how the work relates to a broader issue or context.

Example template

There are a variety of ways to structure a critique. You should always check your unit materials or Canvas site for guidance from your lecturer. The following template, which showcases the main features of a critique, is provided as one example.

Introduction

Typically, the introduction is short (less than 10% of the word length) and you should:

• name the work being reviewed as well as the date it was created and the name of the author/creator
• describe the main argument or purpose of the work
• explain the context in which the work was created - this could include the social or political context, the place of the work in a creative or academic tradition, or the relationship between the work and the creator’s life experience
• have a concluding sentence that signposts what your evaluation of the work will be - for instance, it may indicate whether it is a positive, negative, or mixed evaluation.

Briefly summarise the main points and objectively describe how the creator portrays these by using techniques, styles, media, characters or symbols. This summary should not be the focus of the critique and is usually shorter than the critical evaluation.

Critical evaluation

This section should give a systematic and detailed assessment of the different elements of the work, evaluating how well the creator was able to achieve the purpose through these. For example: you would assess the plot structure, characterisation and setting of a novel; an assessment of a painting would look at composition, brush strokes, colour and light; a critique of a research project would look at subject selection, design of the experiment, analysis of data and conclusions.

A critical evaluation does not simply highlight negative impressions. It should deconstruct the work and identify both strengths and weaknesses. It should examine the work and evaluate its success, in light of its purpose.

Examples of key critical questions that could help your assessment include:

• Who is the creator? Is the work presented objectively or subjectively?
• What are the aims of the work? Were the aims achieved?
• What techniques, styles, media were used in the work? Are they effective in portraying the purpose?
• What assumptions underlie the work? Do they affect its validity?
• What types of evidence or persuasion are used? Has evidence been interpreted fairly?
• How is the work structured? Does it favour a particular interpretation or point of view? Is it effective?
• Does the work enhance understanding of key ideas or theories? Does the work engage (or fail to engage) with key concepts or other works in its discipline?

This evaluation is written in formal academic style and logically presented. Group and order your ideas into paragraphs. Start with the broad impressions first and then move into the details of the technical elements. For shorter critiques, you may discuss the strengths of the works, and then the weaknesses. In longer critiques, you may wish to discuss the positive and negative of each key critical question in individual paragraphs.

To support the evaluation, provide evidence from the work itself, such as a quote or example, and you should also cite evidence from related sources. Explain how this evidence supports your evaluation of the work.

This is usually a very brief paragraph, which includes:

• a statement indicating the overall evaluation of the work
• a summary of the key reasons, identified during the critical evaluation, why this evaluation was formed
• in some circumstances, recommendations for improvement on the work may be appropriate.

Reference list

Include all resources cited in your critique. Check with your lecturer/tutor for which referencing style to use.

• Mentioned the name of the work, the date of its creation and the name of the creator?
• Accurately summarised the work being critiqued?
• Mainly focused on the critical evaluation of the work?
• Systematically outlined an evaluation of each element of the work to achieve the overall purpose?
• Used evidence, from the work itself as well as other sources, to back and illustrate my assessment of elements of the work?
• Formed an overall evaluation of the work, based on critical reading?
• Used a well structured introduction, body and conclusion?
• Used correct grammar, spelling and punctuation; clear presentation; and appropriate referencing style?

Further information

• University of New South Wales: Writing a Critical Review
• University of Toronto: The Book Review or Article Critique

Global links and information

• Referencing and using sources
• Background and development
• Changes to QUT cite|write
• Need more help?
• Current students
• Current staff
• TEQSA Provider ID: PRV12079 (Australian University)
• CRICOS No. 00213J
• ABN 83 791 724 622
• Last modified: 28-May-2024
• Accessibility
• Right to Information
• Feedback and suggestions

Acknowledgement of Traditional Owners

QUT acknowledges the Traditional Owners of the lands where QUT now stands.

• All eBooks & Audiobooks
• Academic eBook Collection
• Home Grown eBook Collection
• Off-Campus Access
• Literature Resource Center
• Opposing Viewpoints
• ProQuest Central
• Course Guides
• Citing Sources
• Library Research
• Websites by Topic
• Book-a-Librarian
• Research Tutorials
• Use the Catalog
• Use Databases
• Use Films on Demand
• Use Home Grown eBooks
• Use NC LIVE
• Evaluating Sources
• Primary vs. Secondary
• Scholarly vs. Popular
• Make an Appointment
• Writing Tools
• Annotated Bibliographies
• Summaries, Reviews & Critiques
• Writing Center

Service Alert

Article Summaries, Reviews & Critiques

• Writing an article SUMMARY
• Writing an article REVIEW

Writing an article CRITIQUE

• Citing Sources This link opens in a new window
• About RCC Library

Text: 336-308-8801

Email: [email protected]

Call: 336-633-0204

Schedule: Book-a-Librarian

Like us on Facebook

Links on this guide may go to external web sites not connected with Randolph Community College. Their inclusion is not an endorsement by Randolph Community College and the College is not responsible for the accuracy of their content or the security of their site.

A critique asks you to evaluate an article and the author’s argument. You will need to look critically at what the author is claiming, evaluate the research methods, and look for possible problems with, or applications of, the researcher’s claims.

Introduction

Give an overview of the author’s main points and how the author supports those points. Explain what the author found and describe the process they used to arrive at this conclusion.

Body Paragraphs

Interpret the information from the article:

• Does the author review previous studies? Is current and relevant research used?
• What type of research was used – empirical studies, anecdotal material, or personal observations?
• Was the sample too small to generalize from?
• Was the participant group lacking in diversity (race, gender, age, education, socioeconomic status, etc.)
• For instance, volunteers gathered at a health food store might have different attitudes about nutrition than the population at large.
• How useful does this work seem to you? How does the author suggest the findings could be applied and how do you believe they could be applied?
• How could the study have been improved in your opinion?
• Does the author appear to have any biases (related to gender, race, class, or politics)?
• Is the writing clear and easy to follow? Does the author’s tone add to or detract from the article?
• How useful are the visuals (such as tables, charts, maps, photographs) included, if any? How do they help to illustrate the argument? Are they confusing or hard to read?
• What further research might be conducted on this subject?

Try to synthesize the pieces of your critique to emphasize your own main points about the author’s work, relating the researcher’s work to your own knowledge or to topics being discussed in your course.

From the Center for Academic Excellence (opens in a new window), University of Saint Joseph Connecticut

Additional Resources

All links open in a new window.

Writing an Article Critique (from The University of Arizona Global Campus Writing Center)

How to Critique an Article (from Essaypro.com)

How to Write an Article Critique (from EliteEditing.com.au)

• << Previous: Writing an article REVIEW
• Next: Citing Sources >>
• Last Updated: Mar 15, 2024 9:32 AM
• URL: https://libguides.randolph.edu/summaries

Verify originality of an essay

Get ideas for your paper

Cite sources with ease

How to Critique an Article Right and Easy

Updated 25 Jul 2024

When an average person thinks about how to critique an article, they usually believe that the purpose is to find all the wrong points and be as critical as possible. Our guide helps to demystify the majority of questions related to the article critique. These basic rules, explanations, and an example can help you learn along. Even if you receive cryptic instructions from your college professor, our article critique guide will make things clearer as you continue!

What is an Article Critique?

In simple terms, an article critique is a type of essay writing where an author should provide sufficient, unbiased, critical evaluation of the article in question. Of course, it will involve at least a brief summary of the contents and information about the author's background (if it is necessary). Yet, it does not have to turn into a listing of the contents! Knowing how to summarize and critique an article means helping your audience see all the key points of the article along with the author's ideas, objectives, or major intentions. The main purpose of every article critique is to reveal the strengths and the weaknesses of the article by keeping the tone neutral in terms of personal considerations. Since it has to be written in formal language with a precise structure, one should follow the general academic pattern where analysis has the beginning or introduction, the body parts, and a strong conclusion that sums things up.

The trick is to read it more than once and describe how it makes you feel through the lens of academic objectives and the general academic value. Speaking of the purpose, composing an article critique, you have to describe the main ideas of the author. Provide a brief description of why it is important in your specific context. Next, remember to mention all the interesting aspects that help to reveal the value of the article. Finally, talk about the author's intention and vision regarding the subject. The final part of the article critique must offer a summary of the main purpose. Learning how to write a critique of an article, remember that your conclusion is the important part where you can let the audience know whether you agree or disagree with the author. It is the place to provide supporting thoughts and references either from the article or another academic source. Need a dissertation service ? Try us.

How to Write an Article Critique Step-by-Step?

The writing process of the article critique is simpler than it seems. It is only necessary to know where to start and how to align your critique when you are dealing with complex academic writing. Therefore, follow these simple four steps as you learn how to do an article critique:

• Take Enough Time to Read The Article.  Such an approach is necessary to understand every idea described in your reading material. It may be challenging at times to understand it. Check it again or read it aloud to see if it makes more sense. When in doubt, you can consult similar sources or articles that further explain the subject. Consider the readability and clarity of the article as you criticize it.
• Take Notes.  When the article feels clear to you and you understand (more or less!) what it is about, it is high time to read it again in a bit different way and take notes to help yourself move along. For example, if you encounter something interesting or an argument that moves you, you should consider it as something that is worth being discussed. You can either quote the part or use it as argumentation to prove your point.
• Turn Your Notes Into Outline.  Your notes are there for a reason. You can implement them into your structure and use your points as the topic sentences as you discuss the important parts. As you let your article critique evolve, provide opinions or leave comments to help your audience understand things clearer.
• Your Opinion Comes Here.  This is where you should summarize your thoughts and explain whether you like the article or if it has too many weak and unclear parts. Of course, your ideas should be supported with a piece of clear evidence.

Remember that if you have used any other reference or consulted external information beyond the article in question, always mention it on your Bibliography / References page. Every part of your article critique should be written in a proper way and sometimes qualified dissertation help online is just what you need to keep all your worries aside.

Save your time! We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Learn About Article Critique Format & Structure

Unless it is specified otherwise, your article critique should follow this template:

• Outline.  This is what your introduction should look like since you have to provide background information about the article and explain the author's main points without turning it into a summary. Approach things from the critical point of view.
• Thesis Statement.  Your thesis statement should explain the value of the article or methodology if you are dealing with a research article critique.
• Article's Purpose.  This part is your body paragraphs part where you have to brainstorm the author's ideas and crash-test them against the common knowledge. See what is good, what is insufficient, and what parts are the most important for achieving a certain purpose set by the author.
• Additional References.  If you are dealing with a research article, it may be necessary to consult relevant external research papers to prove the importance and methodology of the article before you explain your opinion.
• Conclusion/Summary With Your Opinion.  The conclusion part of the article critique is usually the most challenging. It is where you have to explain your opinion. The trick is just saying how the article has made you feel, how it has helped you, or what flaws you have found,  always providing relevant evidence.

Without a doubt, you may have to provide a different structure, yet following the structure above is the perfect balance where you express both your findings, opinion, and the general variables. Remember that your article critique must cover not only the negative points that you encounter but the positive discoveries as well.

How to Write an Article Critique: Journal vs Research Article

The major difference between writing a research article critique and dealing with the general journal article is the approach that you have to take. As a rule, research articles represent empirical or primary sources. It means your critique style must consider the introduction provided by the author, the methods that have been used, the samples and surveys, the results of the certain research, and the discussion of the outcomes that have been achieved.

Now dealing with the general review articles that mostly represent secondary sources with an already included synthesis of certain information, you should work with the topic and its importance for the general audience. In other words, the purpose is always different. You should provide more of a summary than the analytical research work. Coming back to the research article critique,try to study the problem and see if the author makes some statement. Then, focus on review of the relevant literature, and hypothesis or research questions set by the author.

Remember to review the Bibliographical information if it is provided and explain whether it poses importance for the review and if all the information mentioned in the article has been properly referenced. Remember you should also provide references for your quotes and references in your article critique in relevant writing style (APA, MLA, or Chicago) to avoid possible plagiarism issues.

The Article Critique Example

As an example of the article, let us take " Contribution of Psychoacoustics and Neuroaudiology in Revealing Correlation of Mental Disorders With Central Auditory Processing Disorders " that has been presented in 2003 by V. Iliadou and S. Lakovides. Below is the short passage, an article critique sample that will help you get an idea of how it’s done:

The article represents interesting and innovative research in the field of Psychoacoustics by focusing not only on the aspects of Neuroaudiology but also dealing with the electrical activity of the auditory pathways. The authors have dealt with the challenges of Central Auditory Processing Disorders, meaning that the article relates to the field of Psychiatry. This particular MEDLINE research has been conducted by turning to over 564 papers to establish the methodology and sufficient samples to maintain the importance of psychoacoustic elements through the lens of neurological or mental disorders. What makes this research special is the use of various tests and experiments that have been done with the help of auditory simulation methods. All the sources provided are properly referenced and offer sufficient background regarding the reasons why particular scientific aspects have been highlighted. The authors provide a unique balance between psychoacoustic and electrophysiologic tests based on the type of lesion chosen. It must be noted that the various types of mental disorders have been taken into consideration to provide well-weighted research. The article meets its purpose of providing varied research based on the works of skilled experts in Psychiatry, Neurology, Neuropsychology, and Pediatric Psychology among other sciences. The value of the article also lies in the importance of addressing numerous learning challenges like dyslexia, ADHD, and autism differently because the auditory aspect is explored at greater depth. Although the educational factor is mentioned briefly as the article is more evidence-based, it leaves enough space for relevant scientific research.

As you can see, the purpose is to explain and show why the article is important and what exactly makes it special. Try offering related evidence from the critique article either with the quotes or by paraphrasing. 

Affordable & Reliable Writing an Article Critique Help

If the concept of article critique still seems too confusing to you or you would like to get your critique assignment checked in terms of clarity, style, or plagiarism, the help is out there. Regardless if you need to learn how to write an article review or struggle with critique writing, we know how to make things easier. Turn to our writers who are ready to help you 24/7. Keep your challenges resolved, meet the deadlines and avoid plagiarism. Just place your order with EduBirdie and let our professionals deal with even the most complex article critique or any other college task.

Was this helpful?

Thanks for your feedback, related blog posts, how to write a movie review for college.

If you wish to know how to write a movie review, then you are on the right page. A movie review forms part of essays college students writes. While...

Learn how to write an annotated bibliography to achieve the best grades!

Writing an annotated bibliography is one of academic work's most challenging yet essential parts. This helpful EduBirdie guide will tell you all ab...

How to write a survey paper: structure and tips for effective writing

All students dream of an easier way to learn a subject. Writing a survey paper example can effectively synthesize and consolidate information, help...

Join our 150K of happy users

• Get original papers written according to your instructions
• Save time for what matters most

Writing a Critique Paper: Seven Easy Steps

Were you assigned or asked by your professor to write a critique paper? It’s easy to write one. Just follow the following four steps in writing a critique paper and three steps in presenting it, then you’re ready to go.

One of the students’ requirements I specified in the course module is a critique paper. Just so everyone benefits from the guide I prepared for that class, I share it here.

To standardize the format they use in writing a critique paper, I came up with the following steps to make their submissions worthwhile.

Table of Contents

Step-by-step procedure in writing a critique paper.

I quickly wrote this simple guide on writing a critique paper to help you evaluate any composition you want to write about. It could be a book, a scientific article, a gray paper, or whatever your professor assigns. I integrated the essence of the approach in this article.

The critique paper essentially comprises two major parts, namely the:

1) Procedure in Writing a Critique Paper, and the

First, you will need to know the procedure that will guide you in evaluating a paper. Second, the format of the critique paper refers to how you present it so that it becomes logical and scholarly in tone.

The Four Steps in Writing a Critique Paper

Here are the four steps in writing a critique paper:

To write a good critique paper, it pays to adhere to a smooth flow of thought in your evaluation of the piece. You will need to introduce the topic, analyze, interpret, then conclude it.

Introduce the Discussion Topic

Introduce the topic of the critique paper. To capture the author’s idea, you may apply the  5Ws and 1H approach  in writing your technical report.

That means, when you write your critique paper, you should be able to answer the Why , When , Where , What , Who , and How questions. Using this approach prevents missing out on the essential details. If you can write a critique paper that adheres to this approach, that would be excellent.

Here’s a simplified example to illustrate the technique:

The news article by John Doe was a narrative about a bank robbery. Accordingly, a masked man  (Who)  robbed a bank  (What)  the other day  (When)  next to a police station  (Where) . He did so in broad daylight  (How) . He used a bicycle to escape from the scene of the crime  (How) . In his haste, he bumped into a post. His mask fell off; thus, everyone saw his face, allowing witnesses to describe him. As a result, he had difficulty escaping the police, who eventually retrieved his loot and put him in jail because of his wrongdoing  (Why) .

Hence, you give details about the topic, in this case, a bank robbery. Briefly describe what you want to tell your audience. State the overall purpose of writing the piece and its intention.

Analyze means to break down the abstract ideas presented into manageable bits.

What are the main points of the composition? How was it structured? Did the view expressed by the author allow you, as the reader, to understand?

If you want to split a log, what would you do? Do you use an ax, a chainsaw, or perhaps a knife? The last one is out of the question. It’s inappropriate.

Now, you are ready to interpret the article, book, or any composition once the requisites of analysis are in place.

Visualize the event in your mind and interpret the behavior of actors in the bank robbery incident. You have several actors in that bank heist: the robber, the police, and the witnesses of the crime.

Imagine, his mode of escape is a bicycle. What got into him? Maybe he did not plan the robbery at all. Besides, there was no mention that the robber used a gun in the heist.

If we examine the police’s response, they were relatively quick. Right after the robber escaped the crime scene, they appeared to remedy the situation. The robber did not put up a fight.

If we look at the witnesses’ behavior, we can discern that perhaps they willingly informed the police of the bank robber’s details. They were not afraid. And that’s because the robber appears to be unarmed. But there was no specific mention of it.

Assess or Evaluate

Finally, judge whether the article was a worthwhile account after all. Did it meet expectations? Was it able to convey the information most efficiently? Or are there loopholes or flaws that should have been mentioned?

Format of Presenting the Critique Paper

The logical format in writing a critique paper comprises at least three sections: the introduction, the body, and the conclusion. This approach is systematic and achieves a good flow that readers can follow.

Introduction

In any scientific article, there is always a thesis that guides the write-up. A thesis is a statement that expresses what the author believes in and tries to test in his study. The investigation or research converges (ideally) to this central theme as the author’s argument.

If you need more information about this, please refer to my previous post titled “ How to Write a Thesis .”

How is the introduction of a critique paper structured? It follows the general guidelines of writing from a broad perspective to more specific concerns or details. See how it’s written here:  Writing a Thesis Introduction: from General to Specific .

This section is similar to the results and discussion portion of a scientific paper. It describes the outcome of your analysis and interpretation.

Besides, who wants to adopt the perspective of an author who has not even got hold of a mobile phone if your paper is about  using mobile phones to facilitate learning during the pandemic caused by COVID-19 ? Find a more recent one that will help you understand the situation.

Objectively examine the major points presented by the author by giving details about the work. How does the author present or express the idea or concept? Is he (or she) convincing the way he/she presents his/her paper’s thesis?

Therefore, always find evidence to support your position. Explain why you agree or disagree with the author. Point out the discrepancies or strengths of the paper.

If you have read up to this point, then thank you for reading my musings. I hope that helped you clarify the steps in writing a critique paper. A well-written critique paper depends on your writing style.

Read More : How to Write an Article with AI: A Guide to Using AI for Article Creation and Refinement

Final Tip : Find a paper that is easy for you to understand. In that way, you can clearly express your thoughts. Write a critique paper that rocks!

Related Reading

Ragins, B. R., & Sundstrom, E. (1989). Gender and power in organizations: A longitudinal perspective. Psychological bulletin , 105 (1), 51.

Related Posts

How to write the results and discussion: 9 tips, hybrid learning vs online classes: 37 key points to ponder, researcher’s euphoria: discovering something new, about the author, patrick regoniel.

Dr. Regoniel, a hobbyist writer, served as consultant to various environmental research and development projects covering issues and concerns on climate change, coral reef resources and management, economic valuation of environmental and natural resources, mining, and waste management and pollution. He has extensive experience on applied statistics, systems modelling and analysis, an avid practitioner of LaTeX, and a multidisciplinary web developer. He leverages pioneering AI-powered content creation tools to produce unique and comprehensive articles in this website.

SimplyEducate.Me Privacy Policy

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• Can Med Educ J
• v.12(3); 2021 Jun

Writing, reading, and critiquing reviews

Écrire, lire et revue critique, douglas archibald.

1 University of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada;

Maria Athina Martimianakis

2 University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Why reviews matter

What do all authors of the CMEJ have in common? For that matter what do all health professions education scholars have in common? We all engage with literature. When you have an idea or question the first thing you do is find out what has been published on the topic of interest. Literature reviews are foundational to any study. They describe what is known about given topic and lead us to identify a knowledge gap to study. All reviews require authors to be able accurately summarize, synthesize, interpret and even critique the research literature. 1 , 2 In fact, for this editorial we have had to review the literature on reviews . Knowledge and evidence are expanding in our field of health professions education at an ever increasing rate and so to help keep pace, well written reviews are essential. Though reviews may be difficult to write, they will always be read. In this editorial we survey the various forms review articles can take. As well we want to provide authors and reviewers at CMEJ with some guidance and resources to be able write and/or review a review article.

What are the types of reviews conducted in Health Professions Education?

Health professions education attracts scholars from across disciplines and professions. For this reason, there are numerous ways to conduct reviews and it is important to familiarize oneself with these different forms to be able to effectively situate your work and write a compelling rationale for choosing your review methodology. 1 , 2 To do this, authors must contend with an ever-increasing lexicon of review type articles. In 2009 Grant and colleagues conducted a typology of reviews to aid readers makes sense of the different review types, listing fourteen different ways of conducting reviews, not all of which are mutually exclusive. 3 Interestingly, in their typology they did not include narrative reviews which are often used by authors in health professions education. In Table 1 , we offer a short description of three common types of review articles submitted to CMEJ.

Three common types of review articles submitted to CMEJ

More recently, authors such as Greenhalgh 4 have drawn attention to the perceived hierarchy of systematic reviews over scoping and narrative reviews. Like Greenhalgh, 4 we argue that systematic reviews are not to be seen as the gold standard of all reviews. Instead, it is important to align the method of review to what the authors hope to achieve, and pursue the review rigorously, according to the tenets of the chosen review type. Sometimes it is helpful to read part of the literature on your topic before deciding on a methodology for organizing and assessing its usefulness. Importantly, whether you are conducting a review or reading reviews, appreciating the differences between different types of reviews can also help you weigh the author’s interpretation of their findings.

In the next section we summarize some general tips for conducting successful reviews.

How to write and review a review article

In 2016 David Cook wrote an editorial for Medical Education on tips for a great review article. 13 These tips are excellent suggestions for all types of articles you are considering to submit to the CMEJ. First, start with a clear question: focused or more general depending on the type of review you are conducting. Systematic reviews tend to address very focused questions often summarizing the evidence of your topic. Other types of reviews tend to have broader questions and are more exploratory in nature.

Following your question, choose an approach and plan your methods to match your question…just like you would for a research study. Fortunately, there are guidelines for many types of reviews. As Cook points out the most important consideration is to be sure that the methods you follow lead to a defensible answer to your review question. To help you prepare for a defensible answer there are many guides available. For systematic reviews consult PRISMA guidelines ; 13 for scoping reviews PRISMA-ScR ; 14 and SANRA 15 for narrative reviews. It is also important to explain to readers why you have chosen to conduct a review. You may be introducing a new way for addressing an old problem, drawing links across literatures, filling in gaps in our knowledge about a phenomenon or educational practice. Cook refers to this as setting the stage. Linking back to the literature is important. In systematic reviews for example, you must be clear in explaining how your review builds on existing literature and previous reviews. This is your opportunity to be critical. What are the gaps and limitations of previous reviews? So, how will your systematic review resolve the shortcomings of previous work? In other types of reviews, such as narrative reviews, its less about filling a specific knowledge gap, and more about generating new research topic areas, exposing blind spots in our thinking, or making creative new links across issues. Whatever, type of review paper you are working on, the next steps are ones that can be applied to any scholarly writing. Be clear and offer insight. What is your main message? A review is more than just listing studies or referencing literature on your topic. Lead your readers to a convincing message. Provide commentary and interpretation for the studies in your review that will help you to inform your conclusions. For systematic reviews, Cook’s final tip is most likely the most important– report completely. You need to explain all your methods and report enough detail that readers can verify the main findings of each study you review. The most common reasons CMEJ reviewers recommend to decline a review article is because authors do not follow these last tips. In these instances authors do not provide the readers with enough detail to substantiate their interpretations or the message is not clear. Our recommendation for writing a great review is to ensure you have followed the previous tips and to have colleagues read over your paper to ensure you have provided a clear, detailed description and interpretation.

Finally, we leave you with some resources to guide your review writing. 3 , 7 , 8 , 10 , 11 , 16 , 17 We look forward to seeing your future work. One thing is certain, a better appreciation of what different reviews provide to the field will contribute to more purposeful exploration of the literature and better manuscript writing in general.

In this issue we present many interesting and worthwhile papers, two of which are, in fact, reviews.

Major Contributions

A chance for reform: the environmental impact of travel for general surgery residency interviews by Fung et al. 18 estimated the CO 2 emissions associated with traveling for residency position interviews. Due to the high emissions levels (mean 1.82 tonnes per applicant), they called for the consideration of alternative options such as videoconference interviews.

Understanding community family medicine preceptors’ involvement in educational scholarship: perceptions, influencing factors and promising areas for action by Ward and team 19 identified barriers, enablers, and opportunities to grow educational scholarship at community-based teaching sites. They discovered a growing interest in educational scholarship among community-based family medicine preceptors and hope the identification of successful processes will be beneficial for other community-based Family Medicine preceptors.

Exploring the global impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical education: an international cross-sectional study of medical learners by Allison Brown and team 20 studied the impact of COVID-19 on medical learners around the world. There were different concerns depending on the levels of training, such as residents’ concerns with career timeline compared to trainees’ concerns with the quality of learning. Overall, the learners negatively perceived the disruption at all levels and geographic regions.

The impact of local health professions education grants: is it worth the investment? by Susan Humphrey-Murto and co-authors 21 considered factors that lead to the publication of studies supported by local medical education grants. They identified several factors associated with publication success, including previous oral or poster presentations. They hope their results will be valuable for Canadian centres with local grant programs.

Exploring the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on medical learner wellness: a needs assessment for the development of learner wellness interventions by Stephana Cherak and team 22 studied learner-wellness in various training environments disrupted by the pandemic. They reported a negative impact on learner wellness at all stages of training. Their results can benefit the development of future wellness interventions.

Program directors’ reflections on national policy change in medical education: insights on decision-making, accreditation, and the CanMEDS framework by Dore, Bogie, et al. 23 invited program directors to reflect on the introduction of the CanMEDS framework into Canadian postgraduate medical education programs. Their survey revealed that while program directors (PDs) recognized the necessity of the accreditation process, they did not feel they had a voice when the change occurred. The authors concluded that collaborations with PDs would lead to more successful outcomes.

Experiential learning, collaboration and reflection: key ingredients in longitudinal faculty development by Laura Farrell and team 24 stressed several elements for effective longitudinal faculty development (LFD) initiatives. They found that participants benefited from a supportive and collaborative environment while trying to learn a new skill or concept.

Brief Reports

The effect of COVID-19 on medical students’ education and wellbeing: a cross-sectional survey by Stephanie Thibaudeau and team 25 assessed the impact of COVID-19 on medical students. They reported an overall perceived negative impact, including increased depressive symptoms, increased anxiety, and reduced quality of education.

In Do PGY-1 residents in Emergency Medicine have enough experiences in resuscitations and other clinical procedures to meet the requirements of a Competence by Design curriculum? Meshkat and co-authors 26 recorded the number of adult medical resuscitations and clinical procedures completed by PGY1 Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians in Emergency Medicine residents to compare them to the Competence by Design requirements. Their study underscored the importance of monitoring collection against pre-set targets. They concluded that residency program curricula should be regularly reviewed to allow for adequate clinical experiences.

Rehearsal simulation for antenatal consults by Anita Cheng and team 27 studied whether rehearsal simulation for antenatal consults helped residents prepare for difficult conversations with parents expecting complications with their baby before birth. They found that while rehearsal simulation improved residents’ confidence and communication techniques, it did not prepare them for unexpected parent responses.

Review Papers and Meta-Analyses

Peer support programs in the fields of medicine and nursing: a systematic search and narrative review by Haykal and co-authors 28 described and evaluated peer support programs in the medical field published in the literature. They found numerous diverse programs and concluded that including a variety of delivery methods to meet the needs of all participants is a key aspect for future peer-support initiatives.

Towards competency-based medical education in addictions psychiatry: a systematic review by Bahji et al. 6 identified addiction interventions to build competency for psychiatry residents and fellows. They found that current psychiatry entrustable professional activities need to be better identified and evaluated to ensure sustained competence in addictions.

Six ways to get a grip on leveraging the expertise of Instructional Design and Technology professionals by Chen and Kleinheksel 29 provided ways to improve technology implementation by clarifying the role that Instructional Design and Technology professionals can play in technology initiatives and technology-enhanced learning. They concluded that a strong collaboration is to the benefit of both the learners and their future patients.

In his article, Seven ways to get a grip on running a successful promotions process, 30 Simon Field provided guidelines for maximizing opportunities for successful promotion experiences. His seven tips included creating a rubric for both self-assessment of likeliness of success and adjudication by the committee.

Six ways to get a grip on your first health education leadership role by Stasiuk and Scott 31 provided tips for considering a health education leadership position. They advised readers to be intentional and methodical in accepting or rejecting positions.

Re-examining the value proposition for Competency-Based Medical Education by Dagnone and team 32 described the excitement and controversy surrounding the implementation of competency-based medical education (CBME) by Canadian postgraduate training programs. They proposed observing which elements of CBME had a positive impact on various outcomes.

You Should Try This

In their work, Interprofessional culinary education workshops at the University of Saskatchewan, Lieffers et al. 33 described the implementation of interprofessional culinary education workshops that were designed to provide health professions students with an experiential and cooperative learning experience while learning about important topics in nutrition. They reported an enthusiastic response and cooperation among students from different health professional programs.

In their article, Physiotherapist-led musculoskeletal education: an innovative approach to teach medical students musculoskeletal assessment techniques, Boulila and team 34 described the implementation of physiotherapist-led workshops, whether the workshops increased medical students’ musculoskeletal knowledge, and if they increased confidence in assessment techniques.

Instagram as a virtual art display for medical students by Karly Pippitt and team 35 used social media as a platform for showcasing artwork done by first-year medical students. They described this shift to online learning due to COVID-19. Using Instagram was cost-saving and widely accessible. They intend to continue with both online and in-person displays in the future.

Adapting clinical skills volunteer patient recruitment and retention during COVID-19 by Nazerali-Maitland et al. 36 proposed a SLIM-COVID framework as a solution to the problem of dwindling volunteer patients due to COVID-19. Their framework is intended to provide actionable solutions to recruit and engage volunteers in a challenging environment.

In Quick Response codes for virtual learner evaluation of teaching and attendance monitoring, Roxana Mo and co-authors 37 used Quick Response (QR) codes to monitor attendance and obtain evaluations for virtual teaching sessions. They found QR codes valuable for quick and simple feedback that could be used for many educational applications.

In Creation and implementation of the Ottawa Handbook of Emergency Medicine Kaitlin Endres and team 38 described the creation of a handbook they made as an academic resource for medical students as they shift to clerkship. It includes relevant content encountered in Emergency Medicine. While they intended it for medical students, they also see its value for nurses, paramedics, and other medical professionals.

Commentary and Opinions

The alarming situation of medical student mental health by D’Eon and team 39 appealed to medical education leaders to respond to the high numbers of mental health concerns among medical students. They urged leaders to address the underlying problems, such as the excessive demands of the curriculum.

In the shadows: medical student clinical observerships and career exploration in the face of COVID-19 by Law and co-authors 40 offered potential solutions to replace in-person shadowing that has been disrupted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. They hope the alternatives such as virtual shadowing will close the gap in learning caused by the pandemic.

Letters to the Editor

Canadian Federation of Medical Students' response to “ The alarming situation of medical student mental health” King et al. 41 on behalf of the Canadian Federation of Medical Students (CFMS) responded to the commentary by D’Eon and team 39 on medical students' mental health. King called upon the medical education community to join the CFMS in its commitment to improving medical student wellbeing.

Re: “Development of a medical education podcast in obstetrics and gynecology” 42 was written by Kirubarajan in response to the article by Development of a medical education podcast in obstetrics and gynecology by Black and team. 43 Kirubarajan applauded the development of the podcast to meet a need in medical education, and suggested potential future topics such as interventions to prevent learner burnout.

Response to “First year medical student experiences with a clinical skills seminar emphasizing sexual and gender minority population complexity” by Kumar and Hassan 44 acknowledged the previously published article by Biro et al. 45 that explored limitations in medical training for the LGBTQ2S community. However, Kumar and Hassen advocated for further progress and reform for medical training to address the health requirements for sexual and gender minorities.

In her letter, Journey to the unknown: road closed!, 46 Rosemary Pawliuk responded to the article, Journey into the unknown: considering the international medical graduate perspective on the road to Canadian residency during the COVID-19 pandemic, by Gutman et al. 47 Pawliuk agreed that international medical students (IMGs) do not have adequate formal representation when it comes to residency training decisions. Therefore, Pawliuk challenged health organizations to make changes to give a voice in decision-making to the organizations representing IMGs.

In Connections, 48 Sara Guzman created a digital painting to portray her approach to learning. Her image of a hand touching a neuron showed her desire to physically see and touch an active neuron in order to further understand the brain and its connections.

You are using an outdated browser

Unfortunately Ausmed.com does not support your browser. Please upgrade your browser to continue.

How to Critique a Research Article

Published: 01 October 2023

Let's briefly examine some basic pointers on how to perform a literature review.

If you've managed to get your hands on peer-reviewed articles, then you may wonder why it is necessary for you to perform your own article critique. Surely the article will be of good quality if it has made it through the peer-review process?

Unfortunately, this is not always the case.

Publication bias can occur when editors only accept manuscripts that have a bearing on the direction of their own research, or reject manuscripts with negative findings. Additionally,  not all peer reviewers have expert knowledge on certain subject matters , which can introduce bias and sometimes a conflict of interest.

Performing your own critical analysis of an article allows you to consider its value to you and to your workplace.

Critical evaluation is defined as a systematic way of considering the truthfulness of a piece of research, its results and how relevant and applicable they are.

How to Critique

It can be a little overwhelming trying to critique an article when you're not sure where to start. Considering the article under the following headings may be of some use:

Title of Study/Research

You may be a better judge of this after reading the article, but the title should succinctly reflect the content of the work, stimulating readers' interest.

Three to six keywords that encapsulate the main topics of the research will have been drawn from the body of the article.

Introduction

This should include:

• Evidence of a literature review that is relevant and recent, critically appraising other works rather than merely describing them
• Background information on the study to orientate the reader to the problem
• Hypothesis or aims of the study
• Rationale for the study that justifies its need, i.e. to explore an un-investigated gap in the literature.

Materials and Methods

Similar to a recipe, the description of materials and methods will allow others to replicate the study elsewhere if needed. It should both contain and justify the exact specifications of selection criteria, sample size, response rate and any statistics used. This will demonstrate how the study is capable of achieving its aims. Things to consider in this section are:

• What sort of sampling technique and size was used?
• What proportion of the eligible sample participated? (e.g. '553 responded to a survey sent to 750 medical technologists'
• Were all eligible groups sampled? (e.g. was the survey sent only in English?)
• What were the strengths and weaknesses of the study?
• Were there threats to the reliability and validity of the study, and were these controlled for?
• Were there any obvious biases?
• If a trial was undertaken, was it randomised, case-controlled, blinded or double-blinded?

Results should be statistically analysed and presented in a way that an average reader of the journal will understand. Graphs and tables should be clear and promote clarity of the text. Consider whether:

• There were any major omissions in the results, which could indicate bias
• Percentages have been used to disguise small sample sizes
• The data generated is consistent with the data collected.

Negative results are just as relevant as research that produces positive results (but, as mentioned previously, may be omitted in publication due to editorial bias).

This should show insight into the meaning and significance of the research findings. It should not introduce any new material but should address how the aims of the study have been met. The discussion should use previous research work and theoretical concepts as the context in which the new study can be interpreted. Any limitations of the study, including bias, should be clearly presented. You will need to evaluate whether the author has clearly interpreted the results of the study, or whether the results could be interpreted another way.

Conclusions

These should be clearly stated and will only be valid if the study was reliable, valid and used a representative sample size. There may also be recommendations for further research.

These should be relevant to the study, be up-to-date, and should provide a comprehensive list of citations within the text.

Final Thoughts

Undertaking a critique of a research article may seem challenging at first, but will help you to evaluate whether the article has relevance to your own practice and workplace. Reading a single article can act as a springboard into researching the topic more widely, and aids in ensuring your nursing practice remains current and is supported by existing literature.

• Marshall, G 2005, ‘Critiquing a Research Article’, Radiography , vol. 11, no. 1, viewed 2 October 2023, https://www.radiographyonline.com/article/S1078-8174(04)00119-1/fulltext

Sarah Vogel View profile

Help and feedback, publications.

Ausmed Education is a Trusted Information Partner of Healthdirect Australia. Verify here .

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings
• My Bibliography
• Collections
• Citation manager

Save citation to file

Email citation, add to collections.

• Create a new collection
• Add to an existing collection

Add to My Bibliography

Your saved search, create a file for external citation management software, your rss feed.

• Search in PubMed
• Search in NLM Catalog
• Add to Search

Making sense of research: A guide for critiquing a paper

Affiliation.

• 1 School of Nursing, Griffith University, Meadowbrook, Queensland.
• PMID: 16114192
• DOI: 10.5172/conu.14.1.38

Learning how to critique research articles is one of the fundamental skills of scholarship in any discipline. The range, quantity and quality of publications available today via print, electronic and Internet databases means it has become essential to equip students and practitioners with the prerequisites to judge the integrity and usefulness of published research. Finding, understanding and critiquing quality articles can be a difficult process. This article sets out some helpful indicators to assist the novice to make sense of research.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

• A guide to critiquing a research paper on clinical supervision: enhancing skills for practice. Fothergill A, Lipp A. Fothergill A, et al. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2014;21(9):834-40. doi: 10.1111/jpm.12161. Epub 2014 May 13. J Psychiatr Ment Health Nurs. 2014. PMID: 24818837
• Critiquing research. Preston J. Preston J. Nurs Stand. 2015 Dec 2;30(14):61-2. doi: 10.7748/ns.30.14.61.s47. Nurs Stand. 2015. PMID: 26639295
• A guide to critiquing a research paper. Methodological appraisal of a paper on nurses in abortion care. Lipp A, Fothergill A. Lipp A, et al. Nurse Educ Today. 2015 Mar;35(3):e14-7. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2014.12.010. Epub 2015 Jan 24. Nurse Educ Today. 2015. PMID: 25638278 Review.
• Engaging nurses in research utilization. Wintersgill W, Wheeler EC. Wintersgill W, et al. J Nurses Staff Dev. 2012 Sep-Oct;28(5):E1-5. doi: 10.1097/NND.0b013e31826a008c. J Nurses Staff Dev. 2012. PMID: 22992644
• Step-by-step guide to critiquing research. Part 2: Qualitative research. Ryan F, Coughlan M, Cronin P. Ryan F, et al. Br J Nurs. 2007 Jun 28-Jul 11;16(12):738-44. doi: 10.12968/bjon.2007.16.12.23726. Br J Nurs. 2007. PMID: 17851363 Review.

Publication types

• Search in MeSH

LinkOut - more resources

Full text sources.

• Taylor & Francis

• Citation Manager

NCBI Literature Resources

MeSH PMC Bookshelf Disclaimer

The PubMed wordmark and PubMed logo are registered trademarks of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Unauthorized use of these marks is strictly prohibited.

A guide for critique of research articles

Following is the list of criteria to evaluate (critique) a research article. Please note that you should first summarize the paper and then evaluate different parts of it.

Most of the evaluation section should be devoted to evaluation of internal validity of the conclusions. Please add at the end a section entitled ''changes in the design/procedures if I want to replicate this study." Attach a copy of the original article to your paper.

Click here to see a an example (this is how you start) of a research critique.

Click here to see the original article.

The following list is a guide for you to organize your evaluation. It is recommended to organize your evaluation in this order. This is a long list of questions. You don’t have to address all questions. However, you should address highlighted questions . Some questions may not be relevant to your article.

Introduction

1.     Is there a statement of the problem?

2.     Is the problem “researchable”? That is, can it be investigated through the collection and analysis of data?

3.     Is background information on the problem presented?

4.     Is the educational significance of the problem discussed?

5.     Does the problem statement indicate the variables of interest and the specific relationship between those variables which are investigated? When necessary, are variables directly or operationally defined?

Review of Related Literature

1.     Is the review comprehensive?

2.     Are all cited references relevant to the problem under investigation?

3.     Are most of the sources primary, i.e., are there only a few or no secondary sources?

4.     Have the references been critically analyzed and the results of various studies compared and contrasted, i.e., is the review more than a series of abstracts or annotations?

5.     Does the review conclude with a brief summary of the literature and its implications for the problem investigated?

6.     Do the implications discussed form an empirical or theoretical rationale for the hypotheses which follow?

1.     Are specific questions to be answered listed or specific hypotheses to be tested stated?

2.     Does each hypothesis state an expected relationship or difference?

3.     If necessary, are variables directly or operationally defined?

4.     Is each hypothesis testable?

Method          Subjects

1.     Are the size and major characteristics of the population studied described?

2.     If a sample was selected, is the method of selecting the sample clearly described?

3.      Is the method of sample selection described one that is likely to result in a representative, unbiased sample?

4.     Did the researcher avoid the use of volunteers?

5.     Are the size and major characteristics of the sample described?

6.     Does the sample size meet the suggested guideline for minimum sample size appropriate for the method of research represented?      

Instruments

1.     Is the rationale given for the selection of the instruments (or measurements) used?

2.     Is each instrument described in terms of purpose and content?

3.     Are the instruments appropriate for measuring the intended variables?

4.     Is evidence presented that indicates that each instrument is appropriate for the sample under study?

5.     Is instrument validity discussed and coefficients given if appropriate?

6.     Is reliability discussed in terms of type and size of reliability coefficients?

7.     If appropriate, are subtest reliabilities given?

8.     If an instrument was developed specifically for the study, are the procedures involved in its development and validation described?

9.     If an instrument was developed specifically for the study, are administration, scoring or tabulating, and interpretation procedures fully described?

Design and Procedure

1.     Is the design appropriate for answering the questions or testing the hypotheses of the   study?

2.     Are the procedures described in sufficient detail to permit them to be replicated by another researcher?

3.     If a pilot study was conducted, are its execution and results described as well as its impact on the subsequent study?

4.     Are the control procedures described?

5.     Did the researcher discuss or account for any potentially confounding variables that he or she was unable to control for?

1.     Are appropriate descriptive or inferential statistics presented?

2.     Was the probability level, α, at which the results of the tests of significance were evaluated,

       specified in advance of the data analyses?

3.     If parametric tests were used, is there evidence that the researcher avoided violating the

       required assumptions for parametric tests?

4.     Are the tests of significance described appropriate, given the hypotheses and design of the

       study?

5.     Was every hypothesis tested?

6.     Are the tests of significance interpreted using the appropriate degrees of freedom?

7.     Are the results clearly presented?

8.     Are the tables and figures (if any) well organized and easy to understand?

9.     Are the data in each table and figure described in the text?

Discussion (Conclusions and Recommendation)

1.     Is each result discussed in terms of the original hypothesis to which it relates?

2.     Is each result discussed in terms of its agreement or disagreement with previous results

        obtained by other researchers in other studies?

3.     Are generalizations consistent with the results?

4.     Are the possible effects of uncontrolled variables on the results discussed?

5.     Are theoretical and practical implications of the findings discussed?

6.     Are recommendations for future action made?

7.     Are the suggestions for future action based on practical significance or on statistical

       significance only, i.e., has the author avoided confusing practical and statistical

       significance?

8.     Are recommendations for future research made?

Additional general questions to be answered in your critique.

1. What is (are) the research question(s) (or hypothesis)?

2. Describe the sample used in this study.

3. Describe the reliability and validity of all the instruments used.

4. What type of research is this?  Explain.

5. How was the data analyzed?

6. What is (are) the major finding(s)?

COMMUNICATION IN THE BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES Department of Biology

LITERATURE REVIEW PAPER

WHAT IS A REVIEW PAPER?

CHOOSING A TOPIC

RESEARCHING A TOPIC

HOW TO WRITE THE PAPER    

The purpose of a review paper is to succinctly review recent progress in a particular topic. Overall, the paper summarizes the current state of knowledge of the topic. It creates an understanding of the topic for the reader by discussing the findings presented in recent research papers .

A review paper is not a "term paper" or book report . It is not merely a report on some references you found. Instead, a review paper synthesizes the results from several primary literature papers to produce a coherent argument about a topic or focused description of a field.

Examples of scientific reviews can be found in:

                Current Opinion in Cell Biology

                Current Opinion in Genetics & Development

                Annual Review of Plant Physiology and Plant Molecular Biology

                Annual Review of Physiology

                Trends in Ecology & Evolution

You should read articles from one or more of these sources to get examples of how your paper should be organized.

Scientists commonly use reviews to communicate with each other and the general public. There are a wide variety of review styles from ones aimed at a general audience (e.g., Scientific American ) to those directed at biologists within a particular subdiscipline (e.g., Annual Review of Physiology ).

A key aspect of a review paper is that it provides the evidence for a particular point of view in a field. Thus, a large focus of your paper should be a description of the data that support or refute that point of view. In addition, you should inform the reader of the experimental techniques that were used to generate the data.

The emphasis of a review paper is interpreting the primary literature on the subject.  You need to read several original research articles on the same topic and make your own conclusions about the meanings of those papers.

Click here for advice on choosing a topic.  

Click here for advice on doing research on your topic.  

HOW TO WRITE THE PAPER

Overview of the Paper: Your paper should consist of four general sections:

Review articles contain neither a materials and methods section nor an abstract.

Organizing the Paper: Use topic headings. Do not use a topic heading that reads, "Body of the paper." Instead the topic headings should refer to the actual concepts or ideas covered in that section.

Example  

What Goes into Each Section:

Home  

Critique Paper

Ai generator.

A critique paper is an analytical essay focusing on evaluating and interpreting a piece of work, such as an article, book , film, or painting. The aim is to assess the work’s strengths and weaknesses, often comparing it to relevant standards or other works in the field. The writer should provide a balanced analysis, supporting their observations with evidence, to inform readers about the work’s value and significance.

Critique Paper Free PDF Bundle

What is a critique paper.

A critique paper is an analytical evaluation of a work, focusing on its strengths and weaknesses. It requires critical thinking to assess and discuss the work’s effectiveness and provide recommendations for improvement, often backed by evidence.

Types of Critique Paper

Critique papers can vary widely in focus and approach, depending on the subject and purpose. Here are some common types:

• Literature Critique : Evaluates books, articles, and other written materials, focusing on theme , style, and contribution to the field.
• Art Critique : Analyzes artworks in terms of technique, style, symbolism, and emotional impact.
• Film Critique : Examines films, discussing elements like narrative, directing, acting, and cinematography.
• Performance Critique : Reviews live performances such as plays, concerts, or dance shows, commenting on the performance, direction, and production values.
• Research Article Critique : Assesses scientific studies or academic research, focusing on methodology, data analysis, and the validity of conclusions.
• Business Critique : Looks at business practices, products , or company strategies to evaluate effectiveness and suggest improvements.

Purpose of Critique Paper

A critique paper serves several important academic and intellectual purposes, contributing to both the writer’s understanding and the broader scholarly community’s discussion on a subject. Here are the primary purposes of a critique paper:

• Analytical Thinking: Writing a critique paper encourages deep analytical thinking. It requires the writer to not only summarize the content of a work—be it a book, article, film, or art piece—but also to analyze its components critically. This process involves assessing the strengths and weaknesses of the work, understanding its structure, and evaluating its impact.
• Critical Engagement: A critique paper fosters engagement with ideas and arguments presented by others. Through critique, a writer interacts with the work’s themes, methodologies, and conclusions, providing a personal interpretation and positioning it within a larger scholarly context .
• Developing Arguments: One of the main goals of a critique paper is to develop and articulate a coherent and reasoned argument. The writer must present a clear thesis or main argument about the work being critiqued and support this thesis with evidence, logical reasoning, and systematic analysis.
• Enhancing Understanding: Writing a critique helps in deepening the writer’s understanding of the subject matter. By analyzing different aspects of a work and connecting them to broader themes and knowledge, the writer gains a more comprehensive insight into the topic.
• Scholarly Contribution: Critique papers contribute to academic discourse by adding to the diversity of interpretations and perspectives on a particular work or topic. This can influence how a work is understood in academic and professional fields, potentially leading to new insights and developments.
• Improving Writing and Research Skills: The process of writing a critique paper enhances a writer’s research and writing skills. It involves gathering information, synthesizing insights, formulating arguments, and composing a structured document—all essential skills in academic and professional settings.
• Preparation for Professional Activities: Especially in fields like literature, art , and film studies, critique papers prepare students and professionals to engage in critiques and discussions, which are common professional activities. This preparation can be crucial for career in academia, criticism, journalism, and beyond.

Critique Paper Format

A critique paper generally follows a structured format to ensure a thorough evaluation and clear presentation of thoughts. Here’s an outline of the typical format along with an example for a research article critique:

1. Introduction

• Background : Provide context for the work being critiqued.
• Thesis Statement : Present your main argument or overall impression of the work.
• Overview of the Work : Briefly describe the main points of the work.

In this critique, I evaluate the article “The Impact of Daily Exercise on Wellbeing” by Dr. Jane Smith, published in the 2020 edition of Health & Lifestyle. The article claims that daily exercise significantly improves mental health. This critique assesses the validity of Dr. Smith’s research methods and findings.

• Key Points : Summarize the main arguments, findings, or artistic elements of the work.

Dr. Smith’s article outlines a study conducted over 12 months involving 300 participants, exploring the effects of various exercise routines on mental health indicators such as stress, happiness, and overall life satisfaction.

3. Critique

• Methodology Evaluation : Analyze the methods used to determine their adequacy and fairness.
• Evidence Review : Discuss the evidence presented and whether it supports the claims.
• Bias and Limitations : Point out any biases or limitations within the work.

While Dr. Smith’s methodology of tracking participant wellbeing through self-reported surveys is insightful, the reliance on self-reporting can introduce bias and affect the reliability of the data. Furthermore, the study lacks a control group, which is crucial for comparing the effects observed.

4. Conclusion

• Summary of Critique : Recap your main points of critique.
• Final Assessment : Provide your final thoughts on the work’s overall validity and effectiveness.
• Recommendations : Suggest ways to improve or further areas for research.

In conclusion, although Dr. Smith’s findings provide valuable insights into the positive effects of daily exercise on mental health, the study’s methodologies could be strengthened by incorporating a control group and using more objective data collection methods. Future research should address these limitations to build on Dr. Smith’s work.

5. References

• Citation of the Work : Include all necessary citation information according to the academic style required.

Smith, J. (2020). The Impact of Daily Exercise on Wellbeing. Health & Lifestyle Journal, 15(4), 234-248.

Examples of Critique Paper

Here are the Examples of critique papers provide structured analyses and evaluations of various works, including books, films, and artworks. They illustrate how to critically assess themes, techniques, and overall impact.

Critique of a Novel

Critique of a film, critique of a scientific research article.

Critique Paper Examples for Students

Providing students with examples of critique papers can help them understand how to effectively analyze and evaluate different types of work, such as literature, films, research articles, and more. Here are three examples of critique paper topics, each tailored to a specific subject, that could be useful for students learning to write critiques:

• Critique of a Literary Work
• Critique of a Scientific Research Article: “Effects of Plastic Pollution on Marine Life”
• Critique of a Film: “Inception” Directed by Christopher Nolan

Critique Paper Examples for Short Story

Creating a critique for a short story involves analyzing elements such as plot, characters, setting, themes, and the author’s writing style. Here are three examples of critique papers for short stories that can help students learn to evaluate and interpret literature effectively:

• Critique of “The Lottery” by Shirley Jackson
• Critique of “Harrison Bergeron” by Kurt Vonnegut
• Critique of “The Yellow Wallpaper” by Charlotte Perkins Gilman

Feminist Critique Paper Examples

Feminist critique papers provide insightful analyses on literature, media, or cultural practices through the lens of feminist theory, highlighting issues of gender equality, representation, and the experiences of women. Here are three examples of feminist critique paper topics, each tailored to examine different subjects with a focus on feminist perspectives:

• Feminist Critique of “Pride and Prejudice” by Jane Austen
• Feminist Analysis of “Mad Men”: A Look at Gender Roles in 1960s America
• Gender and Power in “Game of Thrones”: A Feminist Perspective

Art Critique Paper Examples

Art critique paper examples offer structured evaluations of various artworks, including paintings, sculptures, and photographs. These examples analyze themes, techniques, and emotional impact, providing insights into the artist’s intentions and the work’s significance. They serve as guides for understanding and articulating critical perspectives on art.

• Critique of “Starry Night” by Vincent van Gogh
• Critique of “The Thinker” by Auguste Rodin
• Critique of “Migrant Mother” by Dorothea Lange

Critique Paper Examples for Books

Critique paper examples for books provide detailed analyses and evaluations of various literary works, including novels, non-fiction, and classics. They examine themes, character development, writing style, and overall impact, offering insights into the strengths and weaknesses of each book. These examples guide readers in developing their own critical perspectives.

• Critique of “To Kill a Mockingbird” by Harper Lee
• Critique of “Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind” by Yuval Noah Harari
• Critique of “Pride and Prejudice” by Jane Austen

Critique Paper Examples for Novel

Critique paper examples for novels offer in-depth analyses and evaluations of fictional works across genres. They explore themes, character development, plot structure, and writing style. These examples help readers understand the novel’s strengths and weaknesses, providing a framework for developing thoughtful, balanced critiques of literary fiction.

• Critique of “1984” by George Orwell
• Critique of “The Great Gatsby” by F. Scott Fitzgerald
• Critique of “Beloved” by Toni Morrison

Characteristics of Critique Paper

A critique paper is a detailed analysis and evaluation of a work, such as a book, article, film, or painting. It goes beyond merely summarizing the work by also providing a critical discussion regarding the quality and impact of the work. Here are some essential characteristics of a well-crafted critique paper:

• Analytical Focus: A critique paper primarily analyzes and evaluates the subject matter rather than just summarizing it. It discusses what the work does, how it does it, and how effectively the purpose of the work is achieved.
• Evidence-Based: Critiques are not just based on opinion; they are supported by evidence from the work itself. This might include quotations, examples, and detailed observations that back up the critique’s claims and conclusions.
• Balanced Argumentation: While it’s important to discuss what you perceive as the weaknesses of the work, a good critique also acknowledges its strengths. This balanced view helps to avoid bias and gives the paper credibility.
• Clear Structure: Like any formal piece of writing, a critique paper should be well-organized. It typically includes an introduction that states the work being critiqued and the main points of the critique, a body that discusses each point in detail, and a conclusion that summarizes the critique and may suggest broader implications or future directions.
• Critical Perspective: The critique should offer a distinct perspective that reflects critical thinking. It should engage with the work’s themes, techniques, and impact, providing a deeper understanding or new insights that go beyond the surface.
• Contextual Awareness: A critique considers the work in its broader context. This might include the historical, cultural, or academic context of the work, discussing how these elements influence the creation and reception of the work.
• Objective Tone: While personal responses can be included in a critique, the tone should remain objective and professional. The critique should focus on the work itself and its merits or faults, rather than on the author or creator as an individual.
• Thesis Statement: A strong critique paper features a clear thesis statement that guides the analysis. This statement typically outlines the main argument or viewpoint of the critique and sets the tone for the discussion.
• Engaging Writing: Effective critiques not only provide insights but are also engaging to read. They use persuasive language to make their points and maintain the reader’s interest throughout the paper.
• Reflective Insight: Beyond evaluating the work, a critique often reflects on its significance within a larger context or discipline. It may discuss how the work contributes to ongoing debates, trends, or theories within the field.

How to Write Critique Paper

Writing a critique paper involves a systematic analysis of a work (like an article, book, film, or painting), focusing on evaluating its various components and expressing your point of view. Here’s a structured guide on how to write a high-quality critique paper that’s SEO-friendly and well-suited for readability:

Understand the Assignment

Before you start writing, make sure you fully understand the requirements of your critique. Know whether you need to provide a general analysis or focus on a specific aspect of the work

Read or View the Work

Engage with the work thoroughly. If it’s a book or an article, read it multiple times. For films or exhibitions, consider multiple viewings. Take notes on key points, themes, and elements that stand out.

Develop a Thesis Statement

Your thesis is the central argument of your critique. It should state your main point clearly and concisely, expressing your overall opinion of the work. For instance, “John Doe’s ‘Modern Society’ effectively argues its point about social media addiction through compelling data and relatable personal stories, though it sometimes lacks sufficient counterarguments.”

Write an Introduction

Start with an engaging introduction that provides essential information about the work (title, author, type of work, and publication date) and ends with your thesis statement. This section sets the stage for your critique.

Summarize the Work

Briefly summarize the main points of the work to provide context for your analysis. Keep this part factual and neutral, covering key points that are relevant to your critique without going into excessive detail.

Critically Analyze the Work

In the body paragraphs, discuss your analysis of the work, supporting your thesis with evidence. Break down your critique into organized sections, such as: Content Evaluation: Analyze the accuracy, depth, and relevance of the information presented. Structure: Evaluate the organization and clarity of the work. Style: Consider the author’s writing style, use of language, and the appropriateness for the intended audience. Impact: Discuss the effectiveness and impact of the work on its audience.

Use Effective Transitions

Smooth transitions between paragraphs help guide the reader and improve the flow of your essay. Use transitional words and phrases to connect ideas.

Conclude Your Critique

Summarize your points briefly and restate your thesis in a new way in the conclusion. You might also discuss the broader implications of the work or suggest areas for further research or consideration.

Revise and Edit

Ensure your critique is clear and concise. Check for grammar and spelling errors, and make sure your arguments are logically structured. Compliance with SEO standards such as using familiar words, maintaining appropriate sentence length, and avoiding passive voice will enhance the readability and effectiveness of your critique.

Cite Your Sources

If you’ve used additional sources to support your critique or to understand the work, make sure to cite them appropriately to avoid plagiarism.

What is a critique paper?

A critique paper analyzes and evaluates the quality and significance of a work, such as an article, book, film, or painting.

How do I start a critique paper?

Begin with an engaging introduction that includes the work’s basic information and your thesis statement expressing your main evaluation.

What should be included in the body of a critique paper?

The body should include your detailed analysis, supported by evidence from the work, covering content, structure, style, and impact.

How do I conclude a critique paper?

Summarize the main points, restate your thesis in a new light, and possibly suggest areas for further research or implications.

How long should a critique paper be?

The length varies based on assignment requirements but typically ranges from 500 to 2000 words.

Do I need a thesis statement for a critique paper?

Yes, a clear thesis statement is crucial as it guides your analysis and states your overarching opinion of the work.

Can I include personal opinions in a critique paper?

Yes, personal opinions are valid as long as they are supported by evidence and reasoned analysis.

How do I cite sources in a critique paper?

Use the citation style specified by your instructor, typically APA, MLA, or Chicago, to cite all referenced materials.

What is the difference between a critique and a summary?

A critique offers a detailed evaluation and analysis, whereas a summary only provides a concise recap of the work’s main points.

How can I make my critique paper stand out?

Offer unique insights, engage deeply with the text, and provide a balanced evaluation that includes both strengths and weaknesses.

Text prompt

• Instructive
• Professional

10 Examples of Public speaking

20 Examples of Gas lighting

We apologize for any inconvenience as we update our site to a new look.

• Walden University
• Faculty Portal

Writing: Sample Paper Reviews

• Paper Reviews
• Sample Paper Reviews
• Previous Page: Paper Reviews

Sample Paper Reviews: Overview

Wondering what to expect from your paper review appointment? Below are the types of assignments we review, along with sample feedback. Feedback will vary among writing instructional specialists but will consist of some of these:

• Explanations of errors
• Links to resources
• Questions or reactions from a reader’s perspective
• Recommended next steps
• Revision strategies
• Highlighted patterns
• Models of effective writing
• Video clips to watch

The  appointment form in myPASS  is the best place to tell us your goals and about areas you are struggling with in your writing. Be as specific as possible to get targeted help within the 30-minute timeframe.

Discussion Posts

• Sample Review of a Discussion Post (PDF) This document contains an excerpt of a discussion post with sample feedback. Please click on the file to view.

Undergraduate Papers

• Sample Review of an Undergraduate Paper--1000 Level (PDF) This document contains excerpts of a 1000 level undergraduate paper with sample feedback. Please click on the file to view.
• Sample Review of an Undergraduate Paper--3000 Level (PDF) This document contains excerpts of a 3000 level undergraduate paper with sample feedback. Please click on the file to view.

Graduate Papers

• Sample Review of a Graduate Paper (PDF) This document contains excerpt of a graduate-student paper with sample feedback. Please click on the file to view.

Major Assessments

• Sample Review of a Major Assessment (PDF) This document contains an excerpt of a student's major assessment with sample feedback. Please click on the file to view.

Revisions of Previously Submitted Material

• Sample Review of a Revision (PDF) This document contains an excerpt of a student's revised draft with sample feedback. Please click on the file to view.

Graded Papers

• Sample Review of a Graded Paper (PDF) This document contains an excerpt of a student's graded paper with sample feedback. Please click on the file to view.

Recommended APA Style Reference List Entry for This Page

Walden University Writing Center. (n.d.) Paper reviews: Sample paper reviews . https://academicguides.waldenu.edu/academic-skills/paper-reviews/sample-paper-reviews

• Office of Student Disability Services

Walden Resources

Departments.

• Academic Residencies
• Academic Skills
• Career Planning and Development
• Customer Care Team
• Field Experience
• Military Services
• Student Success Advising
• Writing Skills

Centers and Offices

• Center for Social Change
• Office of Academic Support and Instructional Services
• Office of Degree Acceleration
• Office of Research and Doctoral Services
• Office of Student Affairs

Student Resources

• Doctoral Writing Assessment
• Form & Style Review
• Quick Answers
• ScholarWorks
• SKIL Courses and Workshops
• Walden Bookstore
• Walden Catalog & Student Handbook
• Student Safety/Title IX
• Legal & Consumer Information
• Website Terms and Conditions
• Cookie Policy
• Accessibility
• Accreditation
• State Authorization
• Net Price Calculator
• Contact Walden

Walden University is a member of Adtalem Global Education, Inc. www.adtalem.com Walden University is certified to operate by SCHEV © 2024 Walden University LLC. All rights reserved.

Title Page Setup

A title page is required for all APA Style papers. There are both student and professional versions of the title page. Students should use the student version of the title page unless their instructor or institution has requested they use the professional version. APA provides a student title page guide (PDF, 199KB) to assist students in creating their title pages.

Student title page

The student title page includes the paper title, author names (the byline), author affiliation, course number and name for which the paper is being submitted, instructor name, assignment due date, and page number, as shown in this example.

Title page setup is covered in the seventh edition APA Style manuals in the Publication Manual Section 2.3 and the Concise Guide Section 1.6

Related handouts

• Student Title Page Guide (PDF, 263KB)
• Student Paper Setup Guide (PDF, 3MB)

Student papers do not include a running head unless requested by the instructor or institution.

Follow the guidelines described next to format each element of the student title page.

Professional title page

The professional title page includes the paper title, author names (the byline), author affiliation(s), author note, running head, and page number, as shown in the following example.

Follow the guidelines described next to format each element of the professional title page.

• Library of Congress
• Research Guides
• Science & Technology

Technical Reports & Standards Collection Guide

Introduction.

• Technical Reports Collections
• Standards Collection
• American Documentation Institute (ADI)
• Office of Scientific Research and Development (OSRD) Collection
• Synthetic Rubber Project
• Technical Translations (TT) Series
• Locating Technical Reports and Standards
• Research Assistance and Reproductions
• Online Resources and Databases
• Using the Library of Congress
• Jennifer Harbster, Head, Science Section, Researcher Engagement & General Collections Division
• Sean Bryant, Reference Librarian, Researcher Engagement & General Collections Division
• Ashley Fielder,  Librarian for Medicine and Life Science. Science Section, Researcher Engagement & General Collections
• Created:  September 22, 2023

Last Updated: May 7, 2024

Science & Technical Reports : Ask a Librarian

Have a question? Need assistance? Use our online form to ask a librarian for help.

Get connected to the Library’s large and diverse collections related to science, technology, and business through our Inside Adams Blog. This blog also features upcoming events and collection displays, classes and orientations, new research guides, and more.

The Library of Congress is completing a project to update and modernize Library reading room websites. As a part of the process, “The Technical Reports and Standards Collection” is in the process of being updated and migrated to this new platform. The process has not yet been completed and the guide remains subject to change.

Researchers with questions about the collection are encouraged to contact a science or business librarian using the Ask-a-Librarian: Science and Technical Reports or Ask a Librarian: Business online form, by phone, at (202) 707-5639, or in person, at the reference desk, in the Science and Business Reading Room, on the fifth floor of the Library's John Adams Building.

Technical Reports

Technical reports are designed to quickly alert researchers to recent findings and developments in scientific and technical research. These reports are issued for a variety of purposes:

• to communicate results or describe progress of a research project
• to convey background information on an emerging or critical research topic
• to provide lists of instructions or procedures for current practices
• to determine the feasibility of a technology and recommend if research should be continued (and how to evaluate any further progress made)
• to detail technical specifications (materials, functions, features, operation, market potential, etc.)

Technical reports first appeared in the early part of the 20th century. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) published a series of professional papers beginning in 1902, and the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA) issued its first report in 1915. But, the format gained importance during World War II, emerged in the postwar era, and remains, to this day, a major tool for reporting progress in science and technology, as well as in education, business, and social sciences research. The names given to series of these publications vary, but are often such generic terms as "technical reports," "working papers," "research memoranda," "internal notes," "occasional papers," "discussion papers" or "gray (or grey) literature." In the physical and natural sciences, "technical report" seems to be the preferred designation. For reports dealing with business, education, and the social sciences, on the other hand, the terms "working paper," "occasional paper," and "memorandum" are often the designations of choice. Other, more specific types of technical reports include "preprints" and "reprints." Preprints generally are versions of papers issued by researchers before their final papers are published by commercial publishers. Preprints allow researchers to communicate their findings quickly, but usually have not been peer reviewed. Reprints are typically released to heighten awareness of the research being conducted in a particular field or at a single institution. The term, "technical report" encompasses all of these designations.

Since many of these publications are intended to provide just a temporary snapshot of current research in a particular field or topic, they may contain the some of following distinctions:

• Rapid communication of new research results
• Dissemination to a targeted audience.
• Detailed methodologies, in order to facilitate review of research results by others
• No peer review, though there is often another selection process for publication (grant, contract, or institutional affiliation)
• Not published by typical commercial publishers (instead reports are issued or sponsored by government agencies, professional associations, societies, councils, foundations, laboratories, universities, etc.)
• Corporate authorship, where present, is typically emphasized

Unfortunately, uncertain availability, limited print runs, and decentralized distribution patterns with little bibliographic information are also often characteristics of this literature.

The Federal Government issues many different types of technical reports. An overview of some of these can be found in a May 2001 GAO report, " Information Management: Dissemination of Technical Reports ." Government issued or sponsored reports contain an additional characteristic - they may be subject to distribution restrictions linked to their classification status. Although references to classified reports may be found in technical reports literature, the security status or limited distribution of reports may make them unavailable to the general public and to the Library as well, as the Library holds only titles in the public domain. Those interested in locating such materials can consult the U.S. Department of Justice's Freedom of Information Act  site for guidance in obtaining these reports.

To enable them to be identified and located, technical reports are assigned report codes by agencies or organizations involved in their production or distribution. These codes may be referred to as "accession numbers," "agency report series numbers," "contract numbers," "grant numbers" or by other names, and include dates and individual report numbers. Typically, reports are assigned multiple codes and these codes help to identify the sponsoring agency, the organization performing the research or the organization disseminating the report.  Most technical reports held by the Library of Congress are not cataloged, and, for these reports, one or more report codes is required for Library staff to check the collections for a report or to locate and retrieve it. For more information about the current Standard Technical Report Number format (STRN) see ANSI/NISO Z39.23- 1997 (S2015) Standard Technical Reports Number Format and Creation . 

Standards are specifications which define products, methods, processes or practices, and are known to have existed as early as 7000 B.C., when cylindrical stones were used as units of weight in Egypt. According to  Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular A-119 , as revised in 2016, the term "standard" or "technical standard" refers to:

• common and repeated use of rules, conditions, guidelines or characteristics for products or related processes and production methods, and related management systems practices;
• the definition of terms; classification of components; delineation of procedures; specification of dimensions, materials, performance, designs, or operations; measurement of quality and quantity in describing materials, processes, products, systems, services, or practices; test methods and sampling procedures; or descriptions of fit and measurements of size or strength; and
• terminology, symbols, packaging, marking or labeling requirements as they apply to a product, process, or production method.

Technical standards are not "professional standards of personal conduct; or institutional codes of ethics." (p. 15).

Standards are typically generated by governments or by professional associations and organizations interested in or affected by the subject matter of particular standards. For example, U.S. government standards mandated by the  Fair Packaging & Labeling Act (FPLA)  have standardized the labeling required for packaging in which consumer commodities is sold. Standards set the basis for determining consistent and acceptable minimum levels of reliability and safety, and are adhered to either voluntarily or as mandated by law. For a more complete overview, see the NIST report  " The ABC's of Standards Activities " by Maureen A. Breitenberg (2009).

The Library of Congress standards collection includes military and other federal standards, industry standards, and a few older international standards from Russia, China, and South Africa. Material from the collection is available in various formats, including digital, print, and microform materials. The majority of the Library's standards collection held in the Science Section's Technical Reports and Standards Collection. The collection remains largely uncatalogued, and as a result, most items from this collection are not discoverable in the Library's online catalog. Inquires on Library holdings can be sent to the Science Section using the Science and Technical Reports Ask-a-Librarian form . Some standards, however, are housed in the Library's general collections and discoverable by searching the  online catalog -- the ASTM standards are one example. Other standards are in custody of appropriate specialized research centers, such as the Law Library , which maintains  OSHA standards and some building codes.

About the Science Section

Part of the  Science & Business Reading Room  at the Library of Congress, the Science Section is the starting point for conducting research at the Library of Congress in the subject areas of science, medicine and engineering. Here, reference specialists in specific subject areas of science and engineering  assist patrons in formulating search strategies and gaining access to the information and materials contained in the Library's rich collections of science, medicine, and engineering materials.

• Next: Technical Reports Collections >>
• Last Updated: Jul 3, 2024 11:51 AM
• URL: https://guides.loc.gov/technical-reports

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader.

All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess .

Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications.

Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers.

Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal.

Original Submission Date Received: .

• Active Journals
• Find a Journal
• Proceedings Series
• For Authors
• For Reviewers
• For Editors
• For Librarians
• For Publishers
• For Societies
• For Conference Organizers
• Open Access Policy
• Institutional Open Access Program
• Special Issues Guidelines
• Editorial Process
• Research and Publication Ethics
• Article Processing Charges
• Testimonials
• Preprints.org
• SciProfiles
• Encyclopedia

Article Menu

• Subscribe SciFeed
• Recommended Articles
• Author Biographies
• Google Scholar
• on Google Scholar
• Table of Contents

Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website.

Please let us know what you think of our products and services.

Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI.

JSmol Viewer

A bibliometric review of innovations in sustainable tourism research: current trends and future research agenda.

1. Introduction

2. theoretical background, 3. materials and methods, 4.1. contribution and citation trends of countries, 4.2. contribution of the institutions, 4.3. contributions of the authors, 4.4. prolific journals and publishers, 4.5. most common keywords, 4.6. citation analysis, 5. discussion.

• Inter-country collaboration. Forming a research cluster encompassing several countries not only extends the boundaries of the research to the international (or global) level but also enables generating higher-quality research and obtaining more reliable and widely applicable results.
• Leading institution. Considering inter-institutional (or inter-country) collaboration, authors are encouraged to evaluate the familiarity of the institution among scholarly society. Partnering with a well-known institution may lead to wider dissemination of the research results as the name of the institution can attract researchers’ interest in the publication [ 18 ].
• Journal choice. It is acknowledged that the multidisciplinary or more general areas representing journals may reach wider audiences considering that domain-related journals are crucial for the smoother development of the field of knowledge. Therefore, publishing in tourism-related journals should be considered regarding the further perspectives of acknowledgment by scholarship and the researcher’s reputation. The number of citations of tourism research in non-tourism disciplines is very small compared to the tens of thousands of internal citations within tourism research [ 92 ].
• Topic choice. Two extremes can be envisioned in this regard. On the one extreme, exceptionally tourism-focused research can be chosen. However, such a choice is extremely conceptual and hardly performable. Therefore, the collaboration and adoption of know-how from other disciplines can be chosen. The academic discourse surrounding tourism’s interdisciplinary approach has long piqued the interest of the scholarly community [ 93 ].

6. Conclusions

Author contributions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, acknowledgments, conflicts of interest.

• Dimitrijević, M.S. Technological Progress in the Function of Productivity and Sustainability of Agriculture: The Case of Innovative Countries and the Republic of Serbia. J. Agric. Food Res. 2023 , 14 , 100856. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sharma, G.; Dahlstrand, Å.L. Innovations, Informality, and the Global South: A Thematic Analysis of Past Research and Future Directions. Technol. Soc. 2023 , 75 , 102359. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Al-Sulaiti, A.; Madhoun, I.T.; Abdella, G.M.; Al-Yafei, H.; Hamouda, A.M. Innovation Ecosystems in Hydrocarbon-Based Economies: Opportunities and Challenges. Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 14194. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dodds, R. Introduction: Innovations in Sustainable Tourism. Téoros 2012 , 31 , 55–58. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• El Archi, Y.; Benbba, B.; Kabil, M.; Dávid, L.D. Digital Technologies for Sustainable Tourism Destinations: State of the Art and Research Agenda. Adm. Sci. 2023 , 13 , 184. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, Y.; Liu, Y.; Solangi, Y.A. Analysis of Factors and Strategies for the Implementation of Sustainable Tourism in a Green Economic Structure in China. J. Clean. Prod. 2024 , 434 , 140011. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Grigaliūnaitė, V.; Pažėraitė, A.; Račkauskas, M. Save Myself or Others? The Influence of Attitude toward FMCG Products from Recycled Material on the Intention to Buy Them: Hidden Motives and the Role of Income. Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 11528. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• De Bruyn, C.; Ben Said, F.; Meyer, N.; Soliman, M. Research in Tourism Sustainability: A Comprehensive Bibliometric Analysis from 1990 to 2022. Heliyon 2023 , 9 , e18874. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hjalager, A.-M. Innovation Patterns in Sustainable Tourism. Tour. Manag. 1997 , 18 , 35–41. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tsekouropoulos, G.; Gkouna, O.; Theocharis, D.; Gounas, A. Innovative Sustainable Tourism Development and Entrepreneurship through Sports Events. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 4379. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tuzunkan, D. The Relationship between Innovation and Tourism: The Case of Smart Tourism. Int. J. Appl. Eng. Res. 2017 , 12 , 14861–14867. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gretzel, U.; Sigala, M.; Xiang, Z.; Koo, C. Smart Tourism: Foundations and Developments. Electron Mark. 2015 , 25 , 179–188. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Williams, A.M.; Rodriguez, I.; Makkonen, T. Innovation and Smart Destinations: Critical Insights. Ann. Tour. Res. 2020 , 83 , 102930. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ivars-Baidal, J.A.; Vera-Rebollo, J.F.; Perles-Ribes, J.; Femenia-Serra, F.; Celdrán-Bernabeu, M.A. Sustainable Tourism Indicators: What’s New within the Smart City/Destination Approach? J. Sustain. Tour. 2023 , 31 , 1556–1582. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Edwards, D.; Martinac, I.; Miller, G. Research Agenda for Innovation in Sustainable Tourism. Tour. Hosp. Res. 2008 , 8 , 56–61. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chen, C. Science Mapping: A Systematic Review of the Literature. J. Data Inf. Sci. 2017 , 2 , 1–40. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Abdi Khalife, M.; Dunay, A.; Illés, C.B. Bibliometric Analysis of Articles on Project Management Research. Period. Polytech. Soc. Man. Sci. 2020 , 29 , 70–83. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pilelienė, L.; Jucevičius, G. A Decade of Innovation Ecosystem Development: Bibliometric Review of Scopus Database. Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 16386. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Antolini, F.; Terraglia, I.; Cesarini, S. Integrating Multiple Data Sources to Measure Sustainable Tourism in Italian Regions. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 2024 , 95 , 101959. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vargáné Csobán, K. The Assessment of Sustainable Tourism. Acta Agrar. Debr. 2005 , 16 , 414–421. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pan, S.-Y.; Gao, M.; Kim, H.; Shah, K.J.; Pei, S.-L.; Chiang, P.-C. Advances and Challenges in Sustainable Tourism toward a Green Economy. Sci. Total Environ. 2018 , 635 , 452–469. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bayrak, G.Ö. Sustainable Tourism. In Encyclopedia of Corporate Social Responsibility ; Idowu, S.O., Capaldi, N., Zu, L., Gupta, A.D., Eds.; Springer Berlin Heidelberg: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013; pp. 2483–2489. ISBN 978-3-642-28035-1. [ Google Scholar ]
• Torres-Delgado, A.; Saarinen, J. Using Indicators to Assess Sustainable Tourism Development: A Review. Tour. Geogr. 2014 , 16 , 31–47. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kilipiris, F.; Zardava, S. Developing Sustainable Tourism in a Changing Environment: Issues for the Tourism Enterprises (Travel Agencies and Hospitality Enterprises). Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012 , 44 , 44–52. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Seraphin, H.; Korstanje, M.; Gowreesunkar, V. Diaspora and Ambidextrous Management of Tourism in Post-Colonial, Post-Conflict and Post-Disaster Destinations. J. Tour. Cult. Chang. 2020 , 18 , 113–132. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hall, C.M. Constructing Sustainable Tourism Development: The 2030 Agenda and the Managerial Ecology of Sustainable Tourism. J. Sustain. Tour. 2019 , 27 , 1044–1060. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gössling, S. Global Environmental Consequences of Tourism. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2002 , 12 , 283–302. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Peeters, P.; Çakmak, E.; Guiver, J. Current Issues in Tourism: Mitigating Climate Change in Sustainable Tourism Research. Tour. Manag. 2024 , 100 , 104820. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Fu, M.; Huang, S.; Ahmed, S. Assessing the Impact of Green Finance on Sustainable Tourism Development in China. Heliyon 2024 , 10 , e31099. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Rehman, S.U.; Khan, S.N.; Antohi, V.M.; Bashir, S.; Fareed, M.; Fortea, C.; Cristian, N.P. Open Innovation Big Data Analytics and Its Influence on Sustainable Tourism Development: A Multi-Dimensional Assessment of Economic, Policy, and Behavioral Factors. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2024 , 10 , 100254. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hussain, S.; Ahonen, V.; Karasu, T.; Leviäkangas, P. Sustainability of Smart Rural Mobility and Tourism: A Key Performance Indicators-Based Approach. Technol. Soc. 2023 , 74 , 102287. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vo Thanh, T.; Seraphin, H.; Okumus, F.; Koseoglu, M.A. Organizational Ambidexterity in Tourism Research: A Systematic Review. Tour. Anal. 2020 , 25 , 137–152. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wilkerson, B.; Trellevik, L.-K.L. Sustainability-Oriented Innovation: Improving Problem Definition through Combined Design Thinking and Systems Mapping Approaches. Think. Ski. Creat. 2021 , 42 , 100932. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shafiee, S.; Rajabzadeh Ghatari, A.; Hasanzadeh, A.; Jahanyan, S. Developing a Model for Sustainable Smart Tourism Destinations: A Systematic Review. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2019 , 31 , 287–300. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Singh, S.; Aggarwal, Y. In Search of a Consensus Definition of Innovation: A Qualitative Synthesis of 208 Definitions Using Grounded Theory Approach. Innov. Eur. J. Soc. Sci. Res. 2022 , 35 , 177–195. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sardak, S.; Dzhyndzhoian, V.; Samoilenko, A. Global Innovations in Tourism. Innov. Mark. 2016 , 12 , 45–50. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Buckley, R. Sustainable Tourism: Research and Reality. Ann. Tour. Res. 2012 , 39 , 528–546. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Séraphin, H.; Butcher, J. Tourism Management in the Caribbean: The Case of Haiti. Caribb. Q. 2018 , 64 , 254–283. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Séraphin, H.; Smith, S.M.; Scott, P.; Stokes, P. Destination Management through Organisational Ambidexterity: Conceptualising Haitian Enclaves. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2018 , 9 , 389–392. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Buhalis, D.; Harwood, T.; Bogicevic, V.; Viglia, G.; Beldona, S.; Hofacker, C. Technological Disruptions in Services: Lessons from Tourism and Hospitality. JOSM 2019 , 30 , 484–506. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sustacha, I.; Baños-Pino, J.F.; Del Valle, E. The Role of Technology in Enhancing the Tourism Experience in Smart Destinations: A Meta-Analysis. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2023 , 30 , 100817. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lee, S.M.; Trimi, S. Innovation for Creating a Smart Future. J. Innov. Knowl. 2018 , 3 , 1–8. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alsharif, A.H.; Salleh, N.Z.M.; Al-Zahrani, S.A.; Khraiwish, A. Consumer Behaviour to Be Considered in Advertising: A Systematic Analysis and Future Agenda. Behav. Sci. 2022 , 12 , 472. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alsharif, A.H.; Salleh, N.Z.M.; Abdullah, M.; Khraiwish, A.; Ashaari, A. Neuromarketing Tools Used in the Marketing Mix: A Systematic Literature and Future Research Agenda. SAGE Open 2023 , 13 , 215824402311565. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shukla, A.K.; Muhuri, P.K.; Abraham, A. A Bibliometric Analysis and Cutting-Edge Overview on Fuzzy Techniques in Big Data. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 2020 , 92 , 103625. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Moher, D.; Shamseer, L.; Clarke, M.; Ghersi, D.; Liberati, A.; Petticrew, M.; Shekelle, P.; Stewart, L.A. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Protocols (PRISMA-P) 2015 Statement. Syst. Rev. 2015 , 4 , 1. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Page, M.J.; McKenzie, J.E.; Bossuyt, P.M.; Boutron, I.; Hoffmann, T.C.; Mulrow, C.D.; Shamseer, L.; Tetzlaff, J.M.; Akl, E.A.; Brennan, S.E.; et al. The PRISMA 2020 Statement: An Updated Guideline for Reporting Systematic Reviews. BMJ 2021 , 372 , n71. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alsharif, A.; Md. Salleh, N.Z.; Pilelienė, L. A Comprehensive Bibliometric Analysis of fNIRS and fMRI Technology in Neuromarketing. Sci. Ann. Econ. Bus. 2023 , 70 , 459–472. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Moustakas, L. A Bibliometric Analysis of Research on Social Cohesion from 1994–2020. Publications 2022 , 10 , 5. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Khan, M.; Woo, M.; Nam, K.; Chathoth, P. Smart City and Smart Tourism: A Case of Dubai. Sustainability 2017 , 9 , 2279. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kumpulainen, M.; Seppänen, M. Combining Web of Science and Scopus Datasets in Citation-Based Literature Study. Scientometrics 2022 , 127 , 5613–5631. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• De Granda-Orive, J.I.; Alonso-Arroyo, A.; Roig-Vázquez, F. Which Data Base Should We Use for Our Literature Analysis? Web of Science versus SCOPUS. Arch. De Bronconeumol. 2011 , 47 , 213. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Eysenbach, G. Citation Advantage of Open Access Articles. PLoS Biol. 2006 , 4 , e157. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Dorta-González, P.; Dorta-González, M.I. Citation Differences across Research Funding and Access Modalities. J. Acad. Librariansh. 2023 , 49 , 102734. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• McAllister, J.; Torres, J. Discovering Open Access Trends in Engineering: A Bibliometric Analysis of Open Access Publications at a Large Research University. Sci. Technol. Libr. 2023 , 42 , 50–67. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Alsharif, A.H.; Mohd Isa, S. Revolutionizing Consumer Insights: The Impact of fMRI in Neuromarketing Research. Futur Bus J 2024 , 10 , 79. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hjalager, A.-M. Tourism and the Environment: The Innovation Connection. J. Sustain. Tour. 1996 , 4 , 201–218. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lawton, L.J.; Weaver, D.B. Normative and Innovative Sustainable Resource Management at Birding Festivals. Tour. Manag. 2010 , 31 , 527–536. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chao, R.-F. Development of Slow Tourism Challenge and Operation Architecture: A Case Study on Green Island, Taiwan. Acta Oeconomica 2015 , 65 , 351–367. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nair, V.; Hussain, K.; Lo, M.C.; Ragavan, N.A. Benchmarking Innovations and New Practices in Rural Tourism Development: How Do We Develop a More Sustainable and Responsible Rural Tourism in Asia? WW Hosp. Tour. Themes 2015 , 7 , 530–534. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Grančay, M. COVID-19 and Central European Tourism: The Competitiveness of Slovak Tourist Guides. CEBR 2020 , 9 , 81–98. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bhaskara, G.I.; Filimonau, V.; Wijaya, N.M.S.; Suryasih, I.A. Innovation and Creativity in a Time of Crisis: A Perspective of Small Tourism Enterprises from an Emerging Destination. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2023 , 46 , 101093. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Andrés, A. Author Production. In Measuring Academic Research ; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2009; pp. 23–30. ISBN 978-1-84334-528-2. [ Google Scholar ]
• Della Corte, V.; Del Gaudio, G.; Sepe, F.; Sciarelli, F. Sustainable Tourism in the Open Innovation Realm: A Bibliometric Analysis. Sustainability 2019 , 11 , 6114. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Chau, K.Y.; Lin, C.-H.; Tufail, B.; Tran, T.K.; Van, L.; Nguyen, T.T.H. Impact of Eco-Innovation and Sustainable Tourism Growth on the Environmental Degradation: The Case of China. Econ. Res. Ekon. Istraživanja 2023 , 36 , 2150258. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Xu, F.; Nash, N.; Whitmarsh, L. Big Data or Small Data? A Methodological Review of Sustainable Tourism. J. Sustain. Tour. 2020 , 28 , 144–163. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cardoso, C. The Contribution of Tourism towards a More Sustainable and Inclusive Society: Key Guiding Principles in Times of Crisis. WHATT 2020 , 12 , 679–689. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Garcia, D.A.; Cumo, F.; Sforzini, V.; Albo, A. Eco Friendly Service Buildings and Facilities for Sustainable Tourism and Environmental Awareness in Protected Areas ; WIT Press: A Coruna, Spain, 2012; pp. 323–330. [ Google Scholar ]
• Candia, S.; Pirlone, F.; Spadaro, I. Integrating the Carrying Capacity Methodology into Tourism Strategic Plans: A Sustainable Approach to Tourism. IJSDP 2020 , 15 , 393–401. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Szromek, A.R. The Sustainable Business Model of Spa Tourism Enterprise—Results of Research Carried Out in Poland. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2021 , 7 , 73. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• González-Reverté, F.; Gomis-López, J.M.; Díaz-Luque, P. Reset or Temporary Break? Attitudinal Change, Risk Perception and Future Travel Intention in Tourists Experiencing the COVID-19 Pandemic. JTF 2022 . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Santosa, H.; Yudono, A.; Adhitama, M.S. The Digital Management System of the Tangible Culture Heritage for Enhancing Historic Building Governance in Malang, Indonesia. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2021 , 738 , 012056. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Florido, C.; Jacob, M.; Payeras, M. How to Carry out the Transition towards a More Circular Tourist Activity in the Hotel Sector. The Role of Innovation. Adm. Sci. 2019 , 9 , 47. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Weaver, D. Creative Periphery Syndrome? Opportunities for Sustainable Tourism Innovation in Timor-Leste, an Early Stage Destination. Tour. Recreat. Res. 2018 , 43 , 118–128. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Idris, I.; Adi, K.R.; Firmansyah, R.; Nadhianty, A.; Mobaroq, M.H.; Putri, P.G.; Pratama, A.S.; Wahono, E.R. Developing smart tourism using virtual reality as a tourism promotion strategy in indonesia. GTG 2021 , 35 , 332–337. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ito, J.Y.; Silveira, F.F.; Munhoz, I.P.; Akkari, A.C.S. International Publication Trends in Lean Agile Management Research: A Bibliometric Analysis. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2023 , 219 , 666–673. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sharma, G.D.; Thomas, A.; Paul, J. Reviving Tourism Industry Post-COVID-19: A Resilience-Based Framework. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2021 , 37 , 100786. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Hall, J.; Matos, S.; Sheehan, L.; Silvestre, B. Entrepreneurship and Innovation at the Base of the Pyramid: A Recipe for Inclusive Growth or Social Exclusion? J Manag. Stud. 2012 , 49 , 785–812. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• He, P.; He, Y.; Xu, F. Evolutionary Analysis of Sustainable Tourism. Ann. Tour. Res. 2018 , 69 , 76–89. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Coghlan, A. Facilitating Reef Tourism Management through an Innovative Importance-Performance Analysis Method. Tour. Manag. 2012 , 33 , 767–775. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Van, N.T.T.; Vrana, V.; Duy, N.T.; Minh, D.X.H.; Dzung, P.T.; Mondal, S.R.; Das, S. The Role of Human–Machine Interactive Devices for Post-COVID-19 Innovative Sustainable Tourism in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 9523. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Garau, C. Perspectives on Cultural and Sustainable Rural Tourism in a Smart Region: The Case Study of Marmilla in Sardinia (Italy). Sustainability 2015 , 7 , 6412–6434. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Aman, J.; Abbas, J.; Mahmood, S.; Nurunnabi, M.; Bano, S. The Influence of Islamic Religiosity on the Perceived Socio-Cultural Impact of Sustainable Tourism Development in Pakistan: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach. Sustainability 2019 , 11 , 3039. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Elmo, G.C.; Arcese, G.; Valeri, M.; Poponi, S.; Pacchera, F. Sustainability in Tourism as an Innovation Driver: An Analysis of Family Business Reality. Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 6149. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, Z.; Wang, D.; Abbas, J.; Hassan, S.; Mubeen, R. Tourists’ Health Risk Threats Amid COVID-19 Era: Role of Technology Innovation, Transformation, and Recovery Implications for Sustainable Tourism. Front. Psychol. 2022 , 12 , 769175. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Nitti, M.; Pilloni, V.; Giusto, D.; Popescu, V. IoT Architecture for a Sustainable Tourism Application in a Smart City Environment. Mob. Inf. Syst. 2017 , 2017 , 1–9. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Coles, T.; Dinan, C.; Warren, N. Energy Practices among Small- and Medium-Sized Tourism Enterprises: A Case of Misdirected Effort? J. Clean. Prod. 2016 , 111 , 399–408. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Karagiannis, D.; Metaxas, T. Sustainable Wine Tourism Development: Case Studies from the Greek Region of Peloponnese. Sustainability 2020 , 12 , 5223. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bornmann, L.; Daniel, H. What Do Citation Counts Measure? A Review of Studies on Citing Behavior. J. Doc. 2008 , 64 , 45–80. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Devkota, N.; Kmeco, Ľ.; Thapa, S.; Houška, P.; Poudel, U.R. Tourists’ Perception of Travel Risk and Management in Destination amid COVID-19 Pandemic: Empirical Evidence from Nepal. J. Tour. Serv. 2022 , 25 , 90–119. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pilelienė, L.; Alsharif, A.H.; Bader Alharbi, I. Scientometric analysis of scientific literature on neuromarketing tools in advertising. BJES 2022 , 8 , 1–12. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wardle, C.; Buckley, R. Tourism Citations in Other Disciplines. Ann. Tour. Res. 2014 , 46 , 166–168. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cardoso, L.; Araujo, A.; Silva, R.; Almeida, G.G.F.D.; Campos, F.; Santos, L.L. Demystifying Neurotourism: An Interdisciplinary Approach and Research Agenda. EJTR 2023 , 36 , 3618. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jafari, J.; McCabe, S. Emergence: Annals and the Evolving Research and Publishing Landscape in Tourism. Ann. Tour. Res. 2024 , 104 , 103720. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nowacki, M.; Nurkowska, M. Crisis Management in Restaurants: The Case of Polish Restaurants during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 14631. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Simpson, J.J.; Schuler Scott, A. Enemy of My Enemy Is My Friend: War Volunteer Tourism. Ann. Tour. Res. 2023 , 101 , 103612. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dolnicar, S.; McCabe, S. Solidarity Tourism How Can Tourism Help the Ukraine and Other War-Torn Countries? Ann. Tour. Res. 2022 , 94 , 103386. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gong, Y.; Schroeder, A. A Systematic Literature Review of Data Privacy and Security Research on Smart Tourism. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2022 , 44 , 101019. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Ladkin, A.; Mooney, S.; Solnet, D.; Baum, T.; Robinson, R.; Yan, H. A Review of Research into Tourism Work and Employment: Launching the Annals of Tourism Research Curated Collection on Tourism Work and Employment. Ann. Tour. Res. 2023 , 100 , 103554. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Saito, H.; Ruhanen, L. Power in Tourism Stakeholder Collaborations: Power Types and Power Holders. J. Hosp. Tour. Manag. 2017 , 31 , 189–196. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nowacki, M.; Kowalczyk-Anioł, J. Experiencing Islands: Is Sustainability Reported in Tourists’ Online Reviews? J. Ecotour. 2023 , 22 , 59–79. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pilelienė, L.; Grigaliūnaitė, V. Elaboration of holistic tourist satisfaction index model for Lithuania. BJES 2019 , 5 , 17. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Almeida, G.G.F.D.; Cardoso, L. Discussions between Place Branding and Territorial Brand in Regional Development—A Classification Model Proposal for a Territorial Brand. Sustainability 2022 , 14 , 6669. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Almeida, G.G.F.D.; Almeida, P.; Cardoso, L.; Lima Santos, L. Uses and Functions of the Territorial Brand over Time: Interdisciplinary Cultural-Historical Mapping. Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 6448. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Séraphin, H.; Chaney, D. A Research Agenda for the Sustainability of the Tourism Industry: A Childism Perspective on Overtourism. J. Clean. Prod. 2023 , 414 , 137556. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Seraphin, H.; Sheeran, P.; Pilato, M. Over-Tourism and the Fall of Venice as a Destination. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2018 , 9 , 374–376. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dias, F.T.P.; Góis, S.M.R.; Gomes, G.N.D.C.O. Tourism Monitoring as a Strategic Tool for Tourism Management: The Perceptions of Entrepreneurs from Centro de Portugal. Adm. Sci. 2023 , 13 , 205. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Beal, L.; Séraphin, H.; Modica, G.; Pilato, M.; Platania, M. Analysing the Mediating Effect of Heritage Between Locals and Visitors: An Exploratory Study Using Mission Patrimoine as a Case Study. Sustainability 2019 , 11 , 3015. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Nowacki, M.; Niezgoda, A. What Experiences Do Tourists Seek in National Parks? Analysis of TripAdvisor Reviews. EiS 2023 , 84 , 341–359. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bauer, I. Response to ‘Tourism Citations in Other Disciplines’. Ann. Tour. Res. 2015 , 53 , 99–100. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dresler, E. Multiplicity of Moral Emotions in Educational Dark Tourism. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2023 , 46 , 101094. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Batyk, I.M.; Žukovskis, J.; Pilelienė, L. Determinants of Cross-Border Food Purchases on the European Union Market: Research Results from the Lithuanian–Polish Border. Sustainability 2023 , 15 , 10288. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pilelienė, L.; Batyk, I.M.; Žukovskis, J. Cross-Border Shopping on the European Union Fast-Moving Consumer Goods Market: Determinants of Lithuanian Shoppers’ Behavior in Poland. Sustainability 2023 , 16 , 102. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Michalko, G.; Ratz, T. Typically Female Features in Hungarian Shopping Tourism. Mijracijske I Enticke Teme 2006 , 22 , 79–93. [ Google Scholar ]
• Moradi, E.; Ehsani, M.; Saffari, M.; Norouzi Seyed Hosseini, R. Developing an Integrated Model for the Competitiveness of Sports Tourism Destinations. J. Destin. Mark. Manag. 2022 , 26 , 100743. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Castro, D.; Kim, S.; Assaker, G. An Empirical Examination of the Antecedents of Residents’ Support for Future Film Tourism Development. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2023 , 45 , 101067. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Polat, N. Technical Innovations in Cruise Tourism and Results of Sustainability. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2015 , 195 , 438–445. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Łapko, A.; Hącia, E.; Strulak-Wójcikiewicz, R.; Çınar, K.; Panai, E.; Lučić, L. Eco-Friendly Tourism Decision Making during COVID-19—Sailing Tourism Example. Sustainability 2021 , 14 , 134. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Liu, J.; An, K.; Jang, S. Threshold Effect and Mechanism of Tourism Industrial Agglomeration on Green Innovation Efficiency: Evidence from Coastal Urban Agglomerations in China. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2023 , 246 , 106908. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Luongo, S.; Sepe, F.; Del Gaudio, G. Regional Innovation Systems in Tourism: The Role of Collaboration and Competition. J. Open Innov. Technol. Mark. Complex. 2023 , 9 , 100148. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Salgado-Criado, J.; Mataix-Aldeanueva, C.; Nardini, S.; López-Pablos, C.; Balestrini, M.; Rosales-Torres, C.S. How Should We Govern Digital Innovation? A Venture Capital Perspective. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2024 , 200 , 123198. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zhang, S.; Liu, W.; Han, W.; Xie, J.; Sun, M. Influence Mechanism of Tourists’ Impulsive Behavior in E-Sports Tourism: Mediating Role of Arousal. Tour. Manag. Perspect. 2022 , 44 , 101032. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Balsalobre-Lorente, D.; Abbas, J.; He, C.; Pilař, L.; Shah, S.A.R. Tourism, Urbanization and Natural Resources Rents Matter for Environmental Sustainability: The Leading Role of AI and ICT on Sustainable Development Goals in the Digital Era. Resour. Policy 2023 , 82 , 103445. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mihalache, M.; Mihalache, O.R. Organizational Ambidexterity and Sustained Performance in the Tourism Industry. Ann. Tour. Res. 2016 , 56 , 142–144. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Goo, J.; Huang, C.D.; Yoo, C.W.; Koo, C. Smart Tourism Technologies’ Ambidexterity: Balancing Tourist’s Worries and Novelty Seeking for Travel Satisfaction. Inf Syst Front 2022 , 24 , 2139–2158. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Alsharif, A.H.; Md Salleh, N.Z.; Pilelienė, L.; Al-Zahrani, S.A. Exploring the Tourism, Neuro-Tourism, and Hospitality Nexus: A Comprehensive Bibliometric Analysis. JoTS 2023 , 14 , 197–221. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Song, H.; Van Der Veen, R.; Li, G.; Chen, J.L. The Hong Kong Tourist Satisfaction Index. Ann. Tour. Res. 2012 , 39 , 459–479. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Pilelienė, L.; Grigaliūnaitė, V.; Bogoyavlenska, Y. A Bibliometric Review of Innovations in Sustainable Tourism Research: Current Trends and Future Research Agenda. Sustainability 2024 , 16 , 7124. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167124

Pilelienė L, Grigaliūnaitė V, Bogoyavlenska Y. A Bibliometric Review of Innovations in Sustainable Tourism Research: Current Trends and Future Research Agenda. Sustainability . 2024; 16(16):7124. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167124

Pilelienė, Lina, Viktorija Grigaliūnaitė, and Yuliya Bogoyavlenska. 2024. "A Bibliometric Review of Innovations in Sustainable Tourism Research: Current Trends and Future Research Agenda" Sustainability 16, no. 16: 7124. https://doi.org/10.3390/su16167124

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals

• SUGGESTED TOPICS
• The Magazine
• Newsletters
• Managing Yourself
• Managing Teams
• Work-life Balance
• The Big Idea
• Data & Visuals
• Reading Lists
• Case Selections
• HBR Learning
• Topic Feeds
• Account Settings
• Email Preferences

Where Data-Driven Decision-Making Can Go Wrong

• Michael Luca
• Amy C. Edmondson

When considering internal data or the results of a study, often business leaders either take the evidence presented as gospel or dismiss it altogether. Both approaches are misguided. What leaders need to do instead is conduct rigorous discussions that assess any findings and whether they apply to the situation in question.

Such conversations should explore the internal validity of any analysis (whether it accurately answers the question) as well as its external validity (the extent to which results can be generalized from one context to another). To avoid missteps, you need to separate causation from correlation and control for confounding factors. You should examine the sample size and setting of the research and the period over which it was conducted. You must ensure that you’re measuring an outcome that really matters instead of one that is simply easy to measure. And you need to look for—or undertake—other research that might confirm or contradict the evidence.

By employing a systematic approach to the collection and interpretation of information, you can more effectively reap the benefits of the ever-increasing mountain of external and internal data and make better decisions.

Five pitfalls to avoid

Idea in Brief

The problem.

When managers are presented with internal data or an external study, all too often they either automatically accept its accuracy and relevance to their business or dismiss it out of hand.

Why It Happens

Leaders mistakenly conflate causation with correlation, underestimate the importance of sample size, focus on the wrong outcomes, misjudge generalizability, or overweight a specific result.

The Right Approach

Leaders should ask probing questions about the evidence in a rigorous discussion about its usefulness. They should create a psychologically safe environment so that participants will feel comfortable offering diverse points of view.

Let’s say you’re leading a meeting about the hourly pay of your company’s warehouse employees. For several years it has automatically been increased by small amounts to keep up with inflation. Citing a study of a large company that found that higher pay improved productivity so much that it boosted profits, someone on your team advocates for a different approach: a substantial raise of $2 an hour for all workers in the warehouse. What would you do?

• Michael Luca is a professor of business administration and the director of the Technology and Society Initiative at Johns Hopkins University, Carey Business School.
• Amy C. Edmondson is the Novartis Professor of Leadership and Management at Harvard Business School. Her latest book is Right Kind of Wrong: The Science of Failing Well (Atria Books, 2023).

Partner Center

• Today's news
• Reviews and deals
• Climate change
• 2024 election
• Newsletters
• Fall allergies
• Health news
• Mental health
• Sexual health
• Family health
• So mini ways
• Unapologetically
• Buying guides

Entertainment

• How to Watch
• My watchlist
• Stock market
• Biden economy
• Personal finance
• Stocks: most active
• Stocks: gainers
• Stocks: losers
• Trending tickers
• World indices
• US Treasury bonds
• Top mutual funds
• Highest open interest
• Highest implied volatility
• Currency converter
• Basic materials
• Communication services
• Consumer cyclical
• Consumer defensive
• Financial services
• Industrials
• Real estate
• Mutual funds
• Credit cards
• Balance transfer cards
• Cash back cards
• Rewards cards
• Travel cards
• Online checking
• High-yield savings
• Money market
• Home equity loan
• Personal loans
• Student loans
• Options pit
• Fantasy football
• Pro Pick 'Em
• College Pick 'Em
• Fantasy baseball
• Fantasy hockey
• Fantasy basketball
• Download the app
• Daily fantasy
• Scores and schedules
• GameChannel
• World Baseball Classic
• Premier League
• CONCACAF League
• Champions League
• Motorsports
• Horse racing

New on Yahoo

• Privacy Dashboard

Reliant's paper-scouring AI takes on science's data drudgery

AI models have proven capable of many things, but what tasks do we actually want them doing? Preferably drudgery — and there's plenty of that in research and academia. Reliant hopes to specialize in the kind of time-consuming data extraction work that's currently a specialty of tired grad students and interns.

"The best thing you can do with AI is improve the human experience: reduce menial labor and let people do the things that are important to them," said CEO Karl Moritz Hermann. In the research world, where he and co-founders Marc Bellemare and Richard Schlegel have worked for years, literature review is one of the most common examples of this "menial labor."

Every paper cites previous and related work, but finding these sources in the sea of science is not easy. And some, like systematic reviews, cite or use data from thousands.

For one study , Hermann recalled, "The authors had to look at 3,500 scientific publications, and a lot of them ended up not being relevant. It's a ton of time spent extracting a tiny amount of useful information — this felt like something that really ought to be automated by AI."

They knew that modern language models could do it: One experiment put ChatGPT on the task and found that it was able to extract data with an 11% error rate. Like many things LLMs can do, it's impressive but nothing like what people actually need.

"That's just not good enough," said Hermann. "For these knowledge tasks, menial as they may be, it's very important that you don't make mistakes."

Reliant's core product, Tabular, is based on an LLM in part (Llama 3.1), but augmented with other proprietary techniques, is considerably more effective. On the multi-thousand-study extraction above, they said it did the same task with zero errors.

What that means is you dump a thousand documents in, say you want this, that, and the other data out of them, and Reliant pores through them and finds that information — whether it's perfectly labeled and structured or (far more likely) it isn't. Then it pops all that data and any analyses you wanted done into a nice UI so you can dive down into individual cases.

"Our users need to be able to work with all the data all at once, and we're building features to allow them to edit the data that's there, or go from the data to the literature; we see our role as helping the users find where to spend their attention," Hermann said.

This tailored and effective application of AI — not as splashy as a digital friend but almost certainly much more viable — could accelerate science across a number of highly technical domains. Investors have taken note, funding an $11.3 million seed round; Tola Capital and Inovia Capital led the round, with angel Mike Volpi participating.

Like any application of AI, Reliant's tech is very compute-intensive, which is why the company has bought its own hardware rather than renting it a la carte from one of the big providers. Going in-house with hardware offers both risk and reward: You have to make these expensive machines pay for themselves, but you get the chance to crack open the problem space with dedicated compute.

"One thing that we've found is it's very challenging to give a good answer if you have limited time to give that answer," Hermann explained — for instance, if a scientist asks the system to perform a novel extraction or analysis task on a hundred papers. It can be done quickly, or well, but not both — unless they predict what users might ask and figure out the answer, or something like it, ahead of time.

"The thing is, a lot of people have the same questions, so we can find the answers before they ask, as a starting point," said Bellemare, the startup's chief science officer. "We can distill 100 pages of text into something else, that may not be exactly what you want, but it's easier for us to work with."

Think about it this way: If you were going to extract the meaning from a thousand novels, would you wait until someone asked for the characters' names to go through and grab them? Or would you just do that work ahead of time (along with things like locations, dates, relationships, etc.) knowing the data would likely be wanted? Certainly the latter — if you had the compute to spare.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QR56kMZ9ezI

This pre-extraction also gives the models time to resolve the inevitable ambiguities and assumptions found in different scientific domains. When one metric "indicates" another, it may not mean the same thing in pharmaceuticals as it does in pathology or clinical trials. Not only that, but language models tend to give different outputs depending on how they're asked certain questions. So Reliant's job has been to turn ambiguity into certainty — "and this is something you can only do if you're willing to invest in a particular science or domain," Hermann noted.

As a company, Reliant's first focus is on establishing that the tech can pay for itself before attempting anything more ambitious. "In order to make interesting progress, you have to have a big vision but you also need to start with something concrete," said Hermann. "From a startup survival point of view, we focus on for-profit companies, because they give us money to pay for our GPUs. We're not selling this at a loss to customers."

One might expect the firm to feel the heat from companies like OpenAI and Anthropic, which are pouring money into handling more structured tasks like database management and coding, or from implementation partners like Cohere and Scale. But Bellemare was optimistic: "We're building this on a groundswell — any improvement in our tech stack is great for us. The LLM is one of maybe eight large machine learning models in there — the others are fully proprietary to us, made from scratch on data propriety to us."

The transformation of the biotech and research industry into an AI-driven one is certainly only beginning and may be fairly patchwork for years to come. But Reliant seems to have found a strong footing to start from.

"If you want the 95% solution, and you just apologize profusely to one of your customers once in a while, great," said Hermann. "We're for where precision and recall really matter, and where mistakes really matter. And frankly, that's enough; we're happy to leave the rest to others."

(This story originally had Hermann's name incorrect — my own error, I have changed it throughout.)