Journal article critique
Usefulness of title of article
The title was sufficiently clear for average reader to understand the further content of the article.
Usefulness of Abstract
The authors used one well-developed, coherent, unified and concise paragraph understandable to a wide audience. The objectives and focus of the article were clearly stated and agreed with the title. The authors introduced the methods of accomplishing the task in general, without any specifications. The abstract was written in accordance with “Descriptive abstract qualities” (Driscoll, 2013), but the information provided in it didn’t follow the organization of the report itself. Also, the authors didn’t use the keywords to ease the web search of the article on electronic information systems.
Usefulness of the Introduction
Overall, introductory part was clear and cohesive. In the first introductory paragraph the authors used too many logos and ethos appeals disguised into anecdotal evidence, trying to motivate the reader. But in reality they exaggerated the importance of the issue. Also in this paragraph the authors could not establish general context and importance of the topic. Place the authors I would avoid many questions in introductory part and strengthen the significance of topic with undeniable facts. The authors emphasized the general approach taken and significance of specific results. But the phrase “In this paper we show that...” would be more appreciated and understood by the reader, while decoding the purpose of the research. Beside this, in the last part of introduction, the authors included the phrase: “Irrespective of the work setting, place, people, industry and culture, some golden rules remain intact.”, which awakes the interest in reader’s mind for further reading. . The authors did not give a reader a roadmap for the rest of the paper. Place the author I would have finished my introductory part with: "The remainder of this paper is structured as follows..."
Usefulness of Research
The title was sufficiently clear for average reader to understand the further content of the article.
Usefulness of Abstract
The authors used one well-developed, coherent, unified and concise paragraph understandable to a wide audience. The objectives and focus of the article were clearly stated and agreed with the title. The authors introduced the methods of accomplishing the task in general, without any specifications. The abstract was written in accordance with “Descriptive abstract qualities” (Driscoll, 2013), but the information provided in it didn’t follow the organization of the report itself. Also, the authors didn’t use the keywords to ease the web search of the article on electronic information systems.
Usefulness of the Introduction
Overall, introductory part was clear and cohesive. In the first introductory paragraph the authors used too many logos and ethos appeals disguised into anecdotal evidence, trying to motivate the reader. But in reality they exaggerated the importance of the issue. Also in this paragraph the authors could not establish general context and importance of the topic. Place the authors I would avoid many questions in introductory part and strengthen the significance of topic with undeniable facts. The authors emphasized the general approach taken and significance of specific results. But the phrase “In this paper we show that...” would be more appreciated and understood by the reader, while decoding the purpose of the research. Beside this, in the last part of introduction, the authors included the phrase: “Irrespective of the work setting, place, people, industry and culture, some golden rules remain intact.”, which awakes the interest in reader’s mind for further reading. . The authors did not give a reader a roadmap for the rest of the paper. Place the author I would have finished my introductory part with: "The remainder of this paper is structured as follows..."
Usefulness of Research
References: Giles, H. (1974). CAT. Santa Barbara: University of California. Ried, H. D. (Arkanzas). How to write a report in APA style. The journal of educational research , 116-127.