The Art of Critique By Asim Majid Khan

1. The Art of Critique By Asim Majid Khan

2. The Definition of Critique… • A critical review or commentary, especially one dealing with works of art or literature. • A critical discussion of a specified topic. • The act of criticizing, especially adversely. • A critical comment or judgment. • The practice of analyzing, classifying, interpreting, or evaluating literary or other artistic works. • A critical article or essay; a critique. • The investigation of the origin and history of literary documents; textual criticism.

3. Different types of papers • Primary literature • Secondary literature • Tertiary literature

4. Primary Literature • Research Papers • Case Studies • Conference Proceedings • Dissertations

5. Primary Literature • Research papers • Original data • First published record of the findings of an experiment of series of experiments • Peer reviewed • Normally a group of authors

6. Primary Literature • Case studies • Medical/veterinary/psychology literature • Normally peer reviewed • Report the circumstances of a particular case • i.e. an unusual repair technique for a ruptured achilles tendon

7. Primary Literature • Conference proceedings • Vary in length and quality! • Sometimes reviewed, sometimes not • Often preliminary data • Will often appear later in research paper form

8. Primary Literature • Dissertations • Undergraduate research (BSc, MSc, BEng or MEng) • Graduate research (MSc, MPhil, PhD) • University published • BSc all dissertation that achieve mark of 50% or above in library • MPhil & PhD theses are examined and corrected

9. Secondary Literature • Review articles • Information about primary sources • Compilation or synthesis of ideas and data • Should be reasonably objective (although often aren’t) • Usually peer reviewed

10. Tertiary Literature • Textbooks – present science theory rather than contributing to it

11. Research Paper Structure • Abstract • Introduction • Materials and Methods • Results • Discussion • References

12. Abstract • Advertisement for the paper • Summary of paper • Reason for performing the study • Hypothesis • Important results • Implications of the findings

13. Introduction • Background to the study • Brief overview of the current state of the field • Citing other people’s work “The function of tendons can be classified into two categories: tensile force transmission, and storage of elastic strain energy during locomotion (Ker et al., 1988, 2000; Shadwick, 1990; Pollock and Shadwick, 1994).” (Maganaris and Paul, 2002)

14. Introduction • Background to the study • Brief overview of the current state of the field • Citing other people’s work • How the authors arrived at their research question • Why this is the most important question in the world! • HYPOTHESIS • Simple • Easily answered

15. Materials and Methods • Clear concise description of what they did • Often includes figure of experimental setup if appropriate • Subjects • Data collection – what they were measuring and how • Analysis • Statistics • Methods should be clear enough to repeat the experiment and give the same results

16. Results • What they found • Visual representation of the data • Graphs • Tables • Good figure legends • Description of their results - no discussion of the implications

17. Discussion • Interpretation of the results • How they relate to previous research • Implication and/or applications of the findings • How supplement A might improve endurance • How knowledge of the forces at the knee during a cutting manoeuvre might be used to reduce injury risk • Future directions for research

18. References • Expansion of the citations in the text • Record of the authors, title and journal where the papers were published • Critically important to avoid plagiarism – must include the sources of all information that is other people’s intellectual property • Two citation methods • Harvard System • Numeric System • Individual journals will request specific methods

19. References • Harvard System • Cite references in the text by giving author’s surname(s) and year of publication. “The function of tendons can be classified into two categories: tensile force transmission, and storage of elastic strain energy during locomotion (Ker et al., 1988, 2000; Shadwick, 1990; Pollock and Shadwick, 1994).”

20. References • Harvard System • Cite references in the text by giving author’s surname(s) and year of publication. “The function of tendons can be classified into two categories: tensile force transmission, and storage of elastic strain energy during locomotion (Ker et al., 1988, 2000; Shadwick, 1990; Pollock and Shadwick, 1994).” (Maganaris and Paul, 2002) • Reference list – alphabetical order Ker, R.F., Alexander, R.McN. and Bennet, M.B. 1988. Why are mammalian tendons so thick? Journal of Zoology, London216, 309-324 • Don’t use capitals for authors’ names as in library guide to referencing

21. References • Numeric System • Each citation is given a number in parentheses. These are numbered according to where they appear in the text. First reference is (1), second reference is (2) etc • “However, excess tendon elongation leads to a partial or complete tendon rupture (4), and the Achilles tendon is one of the most frequently injured tendons in the human body (5)” (Muraoka et al., 2005)

22. Reference list – listed in numerical order based on number you have given each citation in the text. 4. Butler, D.L., Grood, E.S., Noyes, F.R.and Zernicke, R.F. 1978. Biomechanics of ligaments and tendons. Exerc. Sport Sci. Rev. 6, 125-181

23. References • Library Guide to Referencing http://www.bath.ac.uk/library/guides/references.html

24. What is a literature review? • Critical look at existing research relevant to your question in order to • Identify the problem • Develop a hypothesis • Develop a method • It is NOT just a summary of a series of research papers • You must evaluate the research papers and show the relationships between different work

25. What is a literature review? • Approach it with the following questions • What do we already know in the area concerned? • What are the key concepts? • What are the existing theories? • What are the inconsistencies? • What evidence is lacking, inconclusive, contradictory or too limited? • What views need to be tested further?

26. Selecting a topic • Real World vs Theoretical • Research at your school or another institution • Controversial issues • Relevant to your sport • Review papers • Interesting!!!

27. Writing Style • Spelling, grammar and punctuation matter! • Use spell check • Ask someone to read your paper for you before handing it in • Fonts and Symbols • Do not use stylised fonts • Many of the symbols needed for scientific information can be found in insert-symbol • Normal text (° ± Δ ½) • Mathematical operators (Ω √ ≤ ∑)

28. Writing Style • Abbreviations and Acronyms • Keep to a minimum • Only use if full expression is excessively long or abbreviation is in common use • Define the first time it is used • Use SI (Systeme Internationale) Units • km, m, cm, mm, µm • kg, g, mg, µg • L, ml • d, h, min, s, ms • °C • mol • ms-1 or m/s

29. Writing Style • Tables • Insert-Table in word • Units in column and row headings • Use a realistic number of significant figures • Include a legend which describes the table

30. Figures • Create figure in powerpoint of graphics software • Insert-picture from file • Create graphs in Excel or other graph drawing package • Paste into word • For this review paste figures into appropriate place in the text. For publication figures should be separate

31. Writing Style • Use of Words • Be economical – don’t waffle • Be precise – don’t generalise, be specific if you can • Don’t use however more than once in a paragraph • changing the direction of an argument twice in one paragraph can confuse the reader • Don’t use however too often • Thesaurus for synonyms • Keep technical terms to a minimum • Avoid colloquialisms such as steer clear of

32. Writing Style • Use of Words • Don’t use long complicated sentences • Beware of tenses • When describing experiments and reporting results use past tense • When discussing implications use present tense • Beware of singular and plural terms • Datum – data • Medium – media • Phenomenon – phenomena

33. Writing Style • Flow of Ideas • Focus your thoughts by writing a plan/outline first • The first sentence of a paragraph usually sets the topic for the paragraph • Check that you don’t contradict yourself • Aim for simplicity!

34. READ YOUR WORK BEFORE YOU HAND IT IN!!!Preferably ask someone else to read it too!

35. HOW TO CRITIQUE A JOURNAL ARTICLE First of all, for any type of journal article your critique should include some basic information: 1. Name(s) of the author(s) 2. Title of article 3. Title of journal, volume number, date, month and page numbers 4. Statement of the problem or issue discussed 5. The author’s purpose, approach or methods, hypothesis, and major conclusions.

36. The bulk of your critique, however, should consist of your qualified opinion of the article. Read the article you are to critique once to get an overview. Then read it again, critically. • The following are some questions you may want to address in your critique no matter what type of article you are critiquing. (Use your discretion. These points don’t have to be discussed in this order, and some may not be pertinent to your particular article.)

37. 1. Is the abstract specific, representative of the article, and in the correct form? 2 Is the purpose of the article made clear in the introduction? .3 Do you find errors of fact and interpretation? (This is a good one! You won’t believe how often authors misinterpret or misrepresent the work of others. You can check on this by looking up for yourself the references the author cites.) 4. Is all of the discussion relevant?

38. 5. Has the author cited the pertinent, and only the pertinent, literature? If the author has included inconsequential references, or references that are not pertinent, suggest deleting them. 6. Have any ideas been overemphasized or underemphasized? Suggest specific revisions. 7. Should some sections of the manuscript be expanded, condensed or omitted?

39. 8. Are the author’s statements clear? Challenge ambiguous statements. Suggest by examples how clarity can be achieved, but do not merely substitute your style for the author’s. 9. What underlying assumptions does the author have? 10. Has the author been objective in his or her discussion of the topic?

40. In addition, here are some questions that are more specific to empirical/research articles. (Again, use your discretion.) 1. Is the objective of the experiment or of the observations important for the field? 2. Are the experimental methods described adequately? 3. Are the study design and methods appropriate for the purposes of the study?

41. 4. Have the procedures been presented in enough detail to enable a reader to duplicate them? (Another good one! You’d be surprised at the respectable researchers who cut corners in their writing on this point.) 5. Scan and spot-check calculations. Are the statistical methods appropriate?

42. 6. Do you find any content repeated or duplicated? A common fault is repetition in the text of data in tables or figures. Suggest that tabular data be interpreted of summarized, nor merely repeated, in the text.

43. A word about your style: let your presentation be well-reasoned and objective. If you passionately disagree (or agree) with the author, let your passion inspire you to new heights of thorough research and reasoned argument.

44. Helpful Hints for Writing A Critique • Read the entire article, trying to identify the writer’s main point. Underline any unfamiliar words as you read, but do not stop to look them up until you have finished reading. • Look up the unfamiliar words, and then carefully and slowly read the article again. This time look for the ideas the author uses to support the main point. • Summarize the article in your own words, using just one or two sentences

45. Check out the author’s credentials and the reliability of the sources. Is this a reliable author? • Can he or she be considered an authority on the subject? Are the sources upon which the article is based clearly and accurately indicated?

46. Read the article one more time to analyze how the author has supported his or her ideas. • Are there examples, facts, or opinions? • What is the author’s bias? Are opposing arguments addressed competently?

47. Are you convinced or unconvinced about the author’s main point? • Why? Will you incorporate the information you read into your life or do you reject it? Why? (You may agree with some points and disagree with others.)

48. Now that you have thoroughly read and analyzed the work, you are ready to plan how you will WRITE about it..

49. The Difference between Critique and Criticism About Critique Critique looks at structure Critique finds what's working Critique asks for clarification About Criticism • Criticism finds fault • Criticism looks for what's lacking • Criticism condemns what it doesn't understand

50. Critique's voice is kind, honest, and objective Critique is positive (even about what isn't working) Critique is concrete and specific Critique insists on laughter, too Critique addresses only what is on the page • Criticism is spoken with a cruel wit and sarcastic tongue • Criticism is negative • Criticism is vague and general • Criticism has no sense of humor • Criticism looks for flaws in the writer as well as the writing