step by step how to write an article review

PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
EDIT Edit this Article
EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
Browse Articles
Learn Something New
Quizzes Hot
This Or That Game New
Train Your Brain
Explore More
Support wikiHow
About wikiHow
Log in / Sign up
Education and Communications
Critical Reviews

How to Write an Article Review

Last Updated: September 8, 2023 Fact Checked

This article was co-authored by Jake Adams . Jake Adams is an academic tutor and the owner of Simplifi EDU, a Santa Monica, California based online tutoring business offering learning resources and online tutors for academic subjects K-College, SAT & ACT prep, and college admissions applications. With over 14 years of professional tutoring experience, Jake is dedicated to providing his clients the very best online tutoring experience and access to a network of excellent undergraduate and graduate-level tutors from top colleges all over the nation. Jake holds a BS in International Business and Marketing from Pepperdine University. There are 13 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 3,085,244 times.

An article review is both a summary and an evaluation of another writer's article. Teachers often assign article reviews to introduce students to the work of experts in the field. Experts also are often asked to review the work of other professionals. Understanding the main points and arguments of the article is essential for an accurate summation. Logical evaluation of the article's main theme, supporting arguments, and implications for further research is an important element of a review . Here are a few guidelines for writing an article review.

Education specialist Alexander Peterman recommends: "In the case of a review, your objective should be to reflect on the effectiveness of what has already been written, rather than writing to inform your audience about a subject."

Things You Should Know

Read the article very closely, and then take time to reflect on your evaluation. Consider whether the article effectively achieves what it set out to.
Write out a full article review by completing your intro, summary, evaluation, and conclusion. Don't forget to add a title, too!
Proofread your review for mistakes (like grammar and usage), while also cutting down on needless information. [1] X Research source

Preparing to Write Your Review

Step 1 Understand what an article review is.

Article reviews present more than just an opinion. You will engage with the text to create a response to the scholarly writer's ideas. You will respond to and use ideas, theories, and research from your studies. Your critique of the article will be based on proof and your own thoughtful reasoning.
An article review only responds to the author's research. It typically does not provide any new research. However, if you are correcting misleading or otherwise incorrect points, some new data may be presented.
An article review both summarizes and evaluates the article.

Step 2 Think about the organization of the review article.

Summarize the article. Focus on the important points, claims, and information.
Discuss the positive aspects of the article. Think about what the author does well, good points she makes, and insightful observations.
Identify contradictions, gaps, and inconsistencies in the text. Determine if there is enough data or research included to support the author's claims. Find any unanswered questions left in the article.

Make note of words or issues you don't understand and questions you have.
Look up terms or concepts you are unfamiliar with, so you can fully understand the article. Read about concepts in-depth to make sure you understand their full context.

Pay careful attention to the meaning of the article. Make sure you fully understand the article. The only way to write a good article review is to understand the article.

With either method, make an outline of the main points made in the article and the supporting research or arguments. It is strictly a restatement of the main points of the article and does not include your opinions.
After putting the article in your own words, decide which parts of the article you want to discuss in your review. You can focus on the theoretical approach, the content, the presentation or interpretation of evidence, or the style. You will always discuss the main issues of the article, but you can sometimes also focus on certain aspects. This comes in handy if you want to focus the review towards the content of a course.
Review the summary outline to eliminate unnecessary items. Erase or cross out the less important arguments or supplemental information. Your revised summary can serve as the basis for the summary you provide at the beginning of your review.

Step 6 Write an outline of your evaluation.

What does the article set out to do?
What is the theoretical framework or assumptions?
Are the central concepts clearly defined?
How adequate is the evidence?
How does the article fit into the literature and field?
Does it advance the knowledge of the subject?
How clear is the author's writing? Don't: include superficial opinions or your personal reaction. Do: pay attention to your biases, so you can overcome them.

Writing the Article Review

For example, in MLA , a citation may look like: Duvall, John N. "The (Super)Marketplace of Images: Television as Unmediated Mediation in DeLillo's White Noise ." Arizona Quarterly 50.3 (1994): 127-53. Print. [10] X Trustworthy Source Purdue Online Writing Lab Trusted resource for writing and citation guidelines Go to source

For example: The article, "Condom use will increase the spread of AIDS," was written by Anthony Zimmerman, a Catholic priest.

Your introduction should only be 10-25% of your review.
End the introduction with your thesis. Your thesis should address the above issues. For example: Although the author has some good points, his article is biased and contains some misinterpretation of data from others’ analysis of the effectiveness of the condom.

Use direct quotes from the author sparingly.
Review the summary you have written. Read over your summary many times to ensure that your words are an accurate description of the author's article.

Support your critique with evidence from the article or other texts.
The summary portion is very important for your critique. You must make the author's argument clear in the summary section for your evaluation to make sense.
Remember, this is not where you say if you liked the article or not. You are assessing the significance and relevance of the article.
Use a topic sentence and supportive arguments for each opinion. For example, you might address a particular strength in the first sentence of the opinion section, followed by several sentences elaborating on the significance of the point.

This should only be about 10% of your overall essay.
For example: This critical review has evaluated the article "Condom use will increase the spread of AIDS" by Anthony Zimmerman. The arguments in the article show the presence of bias, prejudice, argumentative writing without supporting details, and misinformation. These points weaken the author’s arguments and reduce his credibility.

Make sure you have identified and discussed the 3-4 key issues in the article.

Sample Article Reviews

step by step how to write an article review

Expert Q&A

↑ https://writing.wisc.edu/handbook/grammarpunct/proofreading/
↑ https://libguides.cmich.edu/writinghelp/articlereview
↑ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4548566/
↑ Jake Adams. Academic Tutor & Test Prep Specialist. Expert Interview. 24 July 2020.
↑ https://guides.library.queensu.ca/introduction-research/writing/critical
↑ https://www.iup.edu/writingcenter/writing-resources/organization-and-structure/creating-an-outline.html
↑ https://writing.umn.edu/sws/assets/pdf/quicktips/titles.pdf
↑ https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/mla_style/mla_formatting_and_style_guide/mla_works_cited_periodicals.html
↑ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4548565/
↑ https://writingcenter.uconn.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/593/2014/06/How_to_Summarize_a_Research_Article1.pdf
↑ https://www.uis.edu/learning-hub/writing-resources/handouts/learning-hub/how-to-review-a-journal-article
↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/editing-and-proofreading/

About This Article

If you have to write an article review, read through the original article closely, taking notes and highlighting important sections as you read. Next, rewrite the article in your own words, either in a long paragraph or as an outline. Open your article review by citing the article, then write an introduction which states the article’s thesis. Next, summarize the article, followed by your opinion about whether the article was clear, thorough, and useful. Finish with a paragraph that summarizes the main points of the article and your opinions. To learn more about what to include in your personal critique of the article, keep reading the article! Did this summary help you? Yes No

Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Prince Asiedu-Gyan

Apr 22, 2022

Did this article help you?

Sammy James

Sep 12, 2017

Juabin Matey

Aug 30, 2017

Oct 25, 2023

Vanita Meghrajani

Jul 21, 2016

Featured Articles

How to Block Cookies in Chrome, Safari, & More

Watch Articles

Terms of Use
Privacy Policy
Do Not Sell or Share My Info
Not Selling Info

Get all the best how-tos!

How to Write an Article Review: Template & Examples

An article review is an academic assignment that invites you to study a piece of academic research closely. Then, you should present its summary and critically evaluate it using the knowledge you’ve gained in class and during your independent study. If you get such a task at college or university, you shouldn’t confuse it with a response paper, which is a distinct assignment with other purposes (we’ll talk about it in detail below).

Our specialists will write a custom essay specially for you!

In this article, prepared by Custom-Writing experts, you’ll find:

the intricacies of article review writing;
the difference between an article review and similar assignments;
a step-by-step algorithm for review composition;
a couple of samples to guide you throughout the writing process.

So, if you wish to study our article review example and discover helpful writing tips, keep reading.

❓ What Is an Article Review?

✍️ Writing Steps

📑 Article Review Format

🔗 references.

An article review is an academic paper that summarizes and critically evaluates the information presented in your selected article.

This image shows what an article review is.

The first thing you should note when approaching the task of an article review is that not every article is suitable for this assignment. Let’s have a look at the variety of articles to understand what you can choose from.

Popular Vs. Scholarly Articles

In most cases, you’ll be required to review a scholarly, peer-reviewed article – one composed in compliance with rigorous academic standards. Yet, the Web is also full of popular articles that don’t present original scientific value and shouldn’t be selected for a review.

Just in 1 hour! We will write you a plagiarism-free paper in hardly more than 1 hour

Not sure how to distinguish these two types? Here is a comparative table to help you out.

Article Review vs. Response Paper

Now, let’s consider the difference between an article review and a response paper:

If you’re assigned to critique a scholarly article , you will need to compose an article review .
If your subject of analysis is a popular article , you can respond to it with a well-crafted response paper .

The reason for such distinctions is the quality and structure of these two article types. Peer-reviewed, scholarly articles have clear-cut quality criteria, allowing you to conduct and present a structured assessment of the assigned material. Popular magazines have loose or non-existent quality criteria and don’t offer an opportunity for structured evaluation. So, they are only fit for a subjective response, in which you can summarize your reactions and emotions related to the reading material.

All in all, you can structure your response assignments as outlined in the tips below.

✍️ How to Write an Article Review: Step by Step

Here is a tried and tested algorithm for article review writing from our experts. We’ll consider only the critical review variety of this academic assignment. So, let’s get down to the stages you need to cover to get a stellar review.

Receive a plagiarism-free paper tailored to your instructions. Cut 20% off your first order!

Read the Article

As with any reviews, reports, and critiques, you must first familiarize yourself with the assigned material. It’s impossible to review something you haven’t read, so set some time for close, careful reading of the article to identify:

Its topic.
Its type.
The author’s main points and message.
The arguments they use to prove their points.
The methodology they use to approach the subject.

In terms of research type , your article will usually belong to one of three types explained below.

Summarize the Article

Now that you’ve read the text and have a general impression of the content, it’s time to summarize it for your readers. Look into the article’s text closely to determine:

The thesis statement , or general message of the author.
Research question, purpose, and context of research.
Supporting points for the author’s assumptions and claims.
Major findings and supporting evidence.

As you study the article thoroughly, make notes on the margins or write these elements out on a sheet of paper. You can also apply a different technique: read the text section by section and formulate its gist in one phrase or sentence. Once you’re done, you’ll have a summary skeleton in front of you.

Evaluate the Article

The next step of review is content evaluation. Keep in mind that various research types will require a different set of review questions. Here is a complete list of evaluation points you can include.

Get an originally-written paper according to your instructions!

Write the Text

After completing the critical review stage, it’s time to compose your article review.

The format of this assignment is standard – you will have an introduction, a body, and a conclusion. The introduction should present your article and summarize its content. The body will contain a structured review according to all four dimensions covered in the previous section. The concluding part will typically recap all the main points you’ve identified during your assessment.

It is essential to note that an article review is, first of all, an academic assignment. Therefore, it should follow all rules and conventions of academic composition, such as:

No contractions . Don’t use short forms, such as “don’t,” “can’t,” “I’ll,” etc. in academic writing. You need to spell out all those words.
Formal language and style . Avoid conversational phrasing and words that you would naturally use in blog posts or informal communication. For example, don’t use words like “pretty,” “kind of,” and “like.”
Third-person narrative . Academic reviews should be written from the third-person point of view, avoiding statements like “I think,” “in my opinion,” and so on.
No conversational forms . You shouldn’t turn to your readers directly in the text by addressing them with the pronoun “you.” It’s vital to keep the narrative neutral and impersonal.
Proper abbreviation use . Consult the list of correct abbreviations , like “e.g.” or “i.e.,” for use in your academic writing. If you use informal abbreviations like “FYA” or “f.i.,” your professor will reduce the grade.
Complete sentences . Make sure your sentences contain the subject and the predicate; avoid shortened or sketch-form phrases suitable for a draft only.
No conjunctions at the beginning of a sentence . Remember the FANBOYS rule – don’t start a sentence with words like “and” or “but.” They often seem the right way to build a coherent narrative, but academic writing rules disfavor such usage.
No abbreviations or figures at the beginning of a sentence . Never start a sentence with a number — spell it out if you need to use it anyway. Besides, sentences should never begin with abbreviations like “e.g.”

Finally, a vital rule for an article review is properly formatting the citations. We’ll discuss the correct use of citation styles in the following section.

When composing an article review, keep these points in mind:

Start with a full reference to the reviewed article so the reader can locate it quickly.
Ensure correct formatting of in-text references.
Provide a complete list of used external sources on the last page of the review – your bibliographical entries .

You’ll need to understand the rules of your chosen citation style to meet all these requirements. Below, we’ll discuss the two most common referencing styles – APA and MLA.

Article Review in APA

When you need to compose an article review in the APA format , here is the general bibliographical entry format you should use for journal articles on your reference page:

Author’s last name, First initial. Middle initial. (Year of Publication). Name of the article. Name of the Journal, volume (number), pp. #-#. https://doi.org/xx.xxx/yyyy

Horigian, V. E., Schmidt, R. D., & Feaster, D. J. (2021). Loneliness, mental health, and substance use among US young adults during COVID-19. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 53 (1), pp. 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2020.1836435

Your in-text citations should follow the author-date format like this:

If you paraphrase the source and mention the author in the text: According to Horigian et al. (2021), young adults experienced increased levels of loneliness, depression, and anxiety during the pandemic.
If you paraphrase the source and don’t mention the author in the text: Young adults experienced increased levels of loneliness, depression, and anxiety during the pandemic (Horigian et al., 2021).
If you quote the source: As Horigian et al. (2021) point out, there were “elevated levels of loneliness, depression, anxiety, alcohol use, and drug use among young adults during COVID-19” (p. 6).

Note that your in-text citations should include “et al.,” as in the examples above, if your article has 3 or more authors. If you have one or two authors, your in-text citations would look like this:

One author: “According to Smith (2020), depression is…” or “Depression is … (Smith, 2020).”
Two authors: “According to Smith and Brown (2020), anxiety means…” or “Anxiety means (Smith & Brown, 2020).”

Finally, in case you have to review a book or a website article, here are the general formats for citing these source types on your APA reference list.

Article Review in MLA

If your assignment requires MLA-format referencing, here’s the general format you should use for citing journal articles on your Works Cited page:

Author’s last name, First name. “Title of an Article.” Title of the Journal , vol. #, no. #, year, pp. #-#.

Horigian, Viviana E., et al. “Loneliness, Mental Health, and Substance Use Among US Young Adults During COVID-19.” Journal of Psychoactive Drugs , vol. 53, no. 1, 2021, pp. 1-9.

In-text citations in the MLA format follow the author-page citation format and look like this:

According to Horigian et al., young adults experienced increased levels of loneliness, depression, and anxiety during the pandemic (6).
Young adults experienced increased levels of loneliness, depression, and anxiety during the pandemic (Horigian et al. 6).

Like in APA, the abbreviation “et al.” is only needed in MLA if your article has 3 or more authors.

If you need to cite a book or a website page, here are the general MLA formats for these types of sources.

✅ Article Review Template

Here is a handy, universal article review template to help you move on with any review assignment. We’ve tried to make it as generic as possible to guide you in the academic process.

📝 Article Review Examples

The theory is good, but practice is even better. Thus, we’ve created three brief examples to show you how to write an article review. You can study the full-text samples by following the links.

📃 Men, Women, & Money

This article review examines a famous piece, “Men, Women & Money – How the Sexes Differ with Their Finances,” published by Amy Livingston in 2020. The author of this article claims that men generally spend more money than women. She makes this conclusion from a close analysis of gender-specific expenditures across five main categories: food, clothing, cars, entertainment, and general spending patterns. Livingston also looks at men’s approach to saving to argue that counter to the common perception of women’s light-hearted attitude to money, men are those who spend more on average.

📃 When and Why Nationalism Beats Globalism

This is a review of Jonathan Heidt’s 2016 article titled “When and Why Nationalism Beats Globalism,” written as an advocacy of right-wing populism rising in many Western states. The author illustrates the case with the election of Donald Trump as the US President and the rise of right-wing rhetoric in many Western countries. These examples show how nationalist sentiment represents a reaction to global immigration and a failure of globalization.

📃 Sleep Deprivation

This is a review of the American Heart Association’s article titled “The Dangers of Sleep Deprivation.” It discusses how the national organization concerned with the American population’s cardiovascular health links the lack of high-quality sleep to far-reaching health consequences. The organization’s experts reveal how a consistent lack of sleep leads to Alzheimer’s disease development, obesity, type 2 diabetes, etc.

✏️ Article Review FAQ

A high-quality article review should summarize the assigned article’s content and offer data-backed reactions and evaluations of its quality in terms of the article’s purpose, methodology, and data used to argue the main points. It should be detailed, comprehensive, objective, and evidence-based.

The purpose of writing a review is to allow students to reflect on research quality and showcase their critical thinking and evaluation skills. Students should exhibit their mastery of close reading of research publications and their unbiased assessment.

The content of your article review will be the same in any format, with the only difference in the assignment’s formatting before submission. Ensure you have a separate title page made according to APA standards and cite sources using the parenthetical author-date referencing format.

You need to take a closer look at various dimensions of an assigned article to compose a valuable review. Study the author’s object of analysis, the purpose of their research, the chosen method, data, and findings. Evaluate all these dimensions critically to see whether the author has achieved the initial goals. Finally, offer improvement recommendations to add a critique aspect to your paper.

Scientific Article Review: Duke University
Book and Article Reviews: William & Mary, Writing Resources Center
Sample Format for Reviewing a Journal Article: Boonshoft School of Medicine
Research Paper Review – Structure and Format Guidelines: New Jersey Institute of Technology
Article Review: University of Waterloo
Article Review: University of South Australia
How to Write a Journal Article Review: University of Newcastle Library Guides
Writing Help: The Article Review: Central Michigan University Libraries
Write a Critical Review of a Scientific Journal Article: McLaughlin Library
Share to Facebook
Share to Twitter
Share to LinkedIn
Share to email

How to Write a Short Essay: Format & Examples

Short essays answer a specific question on the subject. They usually are anywhere between 250 words and 750 words long. A paper with less than 250 words isn’t considered a finished text, so it doesn’t fall under the category of a short essay. Essays of such format are required for...

Compare and Contrast Essay Outline: Template and Example

High school and college students often face challenges when crafting a compare-and-contrast essay. A well-written paper of this kind needs to be structured appropriately to earn you good grades. Knowing how to organize your ideas allows you to present your ideas in a coherent and logical manner This article by...

How to Write a Formal Essay: Format, Rules, & Example

If you’re a student, you’ve heard about a formal essay: a factual, research-based paper written in 3rd person. Most students have to produce dozens of them during their educational career.  Writing a formal essay may not be the easiest task. But fear not: our custom-writing team is here to guide...

How to Write a Narrative Essay Outline: Template & Examples

Narrative essays are unlike anything you wrote throughout your academic career. Instead of writing a formal paper, you need to tell a story. Familiar elements such as evidence and arguments are replaced with exposition and character development. The importance of writing an outline for an essay like this is hard...

How to Write a Precis: Definition, Guide, & Examples

A précis is a brief synopsis of a written piece. It is used to summarize and analyze a text’s main points. If you need to write a précis for a research paper or the AP Lang exam, you’ve come to the right place. In this comprehensive guide by Custom-Writing.org, you’ll...

How to Write a Synthesis Essay: Examples, Topics, & Outline

A synthesis essay requires you to work with multiple sources. You combine the information gathered from them to present a well-rounded argument on a topic. Are you looking for the ultimate guide on synthesis essay writing? You’ve come to the right place! In this guide by our custom writing team,...

How to Write a Catchy Hook: Examples & Techniques

Do you know how to make your essay stand out? One of the easiest ways is to start your introduction with a catchy hook. A hook is a phrase or a sentence that helps to grab the reader’s attention. After reading this article by Custom-Writing.org, you will be able to...

How to Write a Critical Thinking Essay: Examples & Outline

Critical thinking is the process of evaluating and analyzing information. People who use it in everyday life are open to different opinions. They rely on reason and logic when making conclusions about certain issues. A critical thinking essay shows how your thoughts change as you research your topic. This type...

How to Write a Process Analysis Essay: Examples & Outline

Process analysis is an explanation of how something works or happens. Want to know more? Read the following article prepared by our custom writing specialists and learn about: process analysis and its typesa process analysis outline tipsfree examples and other tips that might be helpful for your college assignment So,...

How to Write a Visual Analysis Essay: Examples & Template

A visual analysis essay is an academic paper type that history and art students often deal with. It consists of a detailed description of an image or object. It can also include an interpretation or an argument that is supported by visual evidence. In this article, our custom writing experts...

How to Write a Reflection Paper: Example & Tips

Want to know how to write a reflection paper for college or school? To do that, you need to connect your personal experiences with theoretical knowledge. Usually, students are asked to reflect on a documentary, a text, or their experience. Sometimes one needs to write a paper about a lesson...

How to Write a Character Analysis Essay: Examples & Outline

A character analysis is an examination of the personalities and actions of protagonists and antagonists that make up a story. It discusses their role in the story, evaluates their traits, and looks at their conflicts and experiences. You might need to write this assignment in school or college. Like any...

How to Write an Article Review That Stands Out

An article review is a critical assessment of another writer’s research paper or scholarly article. Such an activity aims to expand one’s knowledge by evaluating the original author’s research.

Of course, writing an article review could be tricky. But a few expert tips and tricks can get you on the right track. That’s what this interesting blog post is all about. So, ensure you read it till the end to make the most out of it.

Table of Contents

A Step-by-step Guide on How to Write an Article Review

Master the art of writing an article review with this step-by-step guide from professional paper help providers.

Step 1: Select the Right Article

The first step is to pick a suitable article for a review. Choose a scholarly source that’s connected to your area of study. You can look for pieces printed in trustworthy journals or by respected authors.

For Example:

For reviewing an article on climate change, consider selecting one from scientific journals like Nature or Science.

Step 2: Read and Understand the Article

It’s super important to read and understand the article before writing your review. Read the article a few times and jot down the notes as you go. Focus on the main arguments, major points, evidence, and how it’s structured.

Let’s say you’re looking at an article on how social media affects mental health. Ensure to take note of the following:

The number of people involved
How the data is analyzed
The Results

Step 3: Structure and Introduction

To start a solid review, start with an introduction that gives readers the background info they need. Must include the article’s title, the author, and where it was published. Also, write a summary of the main point or argument in the article.

“In the article ‘The Impact of Social Media on Mental Health by John Smith, published in the Journal of Psychology:

The author examines the correlation between excessive social media usage and adolescent mental health disorders.”

Step 4: Summarize the Article

In this part, you’ll need to quickly go over the main points and arguments from the article. Make it short but must cover the most important elements and the evidence that backs them up. Leave your opinions and analysis out of it for now.

For instance, you could write:

“The author discusses various studies highlighting the negative effects of excessive social media usage on mental health.

Smith’s research reveals a significant correlation between

Increased social media consumption and higher rates of anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem among teenagers.

The article also explores the underlying mechanisms, such as social comparison and cyberbullying. All are contributing to the adverse mental health outcomes.”

Step 5: Critically Analyze and Evaluate

Now that you’ve given a rundown of the article, it’s time to take a closer look. Think about what the author did well and what could have been done better.

Check out the proof they used and if it seems solid. Give a thorough assessment, and use examples from the text to support your thoughts.

For Example

“While the article presents compelling evidence linking social media usage to mental health issues , it is important to acknowledge some limitations in Smith’s study.

The sample size of the research was relatively small. It comprises only 100 participants, which may limit the generalizability of the findings.

Additionally, the study primarily focused on one specific age group, namely adolescents. This way, there’s room for further research on other demographic groups.”

Step 6: Express Your Perspective

Here’s your chance to give your two cents and show off your smarts. Put your spin on the article by pointing out the pros, cons, and other potential improvements. Remember to back up your thoughts with facts and sound arguments.

Continuing with the Previous Example

Despite the limitations, Smith’s research offers valuable insights into the complex relationship between social media and mental health.

Future studies could expand the sample size and include a more diverse range of age groups. It is better to understand the broader impact of social media on mental well-being.

Furthermore, exploring strategies for developing digital literacy programs could be potential avenues for future research.

Step 7: Conclusion and Final Thoughts

At the end of your article review, wrap it up with a brief and powerful conclusion. Give a summary of your main points and overall thoughts about the article.

Point out its importance to the field and the impact of the study. Finish off with a thought-provoking conclusion. Give the reader a sense of finality and emphasize the need for additional research or discussion.

For instance

“In conclusion, John Smith’s article provides valuable insights into the detrimental effects of excessive social media usage on adolescent mental health.

While the research has limitations, it serves as a starting point for further investigation in this rapidly evolving field.

By addressing the research gaps and implementing targeted interventions:

We can strive to promote a healthier relationship between social media and mental well-being in our digitally connected society.”

Step 8: Editing and Proofreading

Before submission, set aside some time for editing and proofreading.

Ensure everything makes sense and everything is correct. Check out how it reads and if your points come across clearly. Get feedback from other people to get a different point of view and make it even better.

Types of Article Reviews

In college, you might be asked to write different types of review articles, including:

Narrative Review

This type of review needs you to look into the author’s background and experiences. You have to go through the specialist’s theories and practices and compare them. For the success of a narrative review, ensure that your arguments are qualitative and make sense.

Evidence Review

For a solid evidence paper, you got to put in the work and study the topic. You’ll need to research the facts, analyze the author’s ideas, their effects, and more.

Systematic Review

This task involves reviewing a bunch of research papers and summarizing the existing knowledge about a certain subject. A systematic paper type uses an organized approach and expects you to answer questions linked to the research.

Tips for Writing a Great Article Review

Here are some expert tips you could use to write an exceptional article review:

1. Figure out the main points you want to cover and why they matter.

It will help you zero in on the key points.

2. Look for and assess pertinent sources, both from the past and present.

It will give you a better understanding of the article you’re looking at.

3. Come Up with a Catchy Title, Summarize Your Topic in an Abstract, and Select Keywords

It will help people read your review and get a good idea of what it’s about.

4. Write the main point of a review along with introducing the topic.

It should help readers get a better grasp of the topic.

Outline for Writing a Good Article Review

Here’s an outline to write an excellent article review.

Introduction

– Begin with a summary of the article

– Put in background knowledge of the topic

– State why you are writing the review

– Give an overview of the article’s main points

– Figure out why the author choose to write something

– Look at the article and consider what it does well and what it could have done better.

– Highlight the shortcomings in the article

– Restate why you are writing the review

– Sum up the main points in a few sentences

– Suggest what could be achieved in the future research

Review Article Example

Title: “The Power of Vulnerability: A Review of Brené Brown’s Daring Greatly”

Introduction:

In her revolutionary book “Daring Greatly,”

Brené Brown, a renowned researcher and storyteller. Delves into vulnerability and how it can positively impact our lives, both professionally and personally.

Brown’s work has gained lots of praise. Since it resonates with people looking to build real connections in a world that often feels isolated.

This article looks to recap the main ideas and concepts from “Daring Greatly.” Also explains why it is such a captivating and insightful read.

Summary of Key Ideas:

“Daring Greatly” is all about how the vulnerability isn’t a sign of being weak. but it’s actually what it takes to be brave, strong and live a full life.

Brene Brown examines how society and culture can make it hard to be vulnerable. And, how fear of being judged or shamed stops us from being our authentic selves.

The book puts a lot of emphasis on shame and how it affects us.

Brown explains that shame thrives when it’s kept hidden away and can only be cured by being open, understanding, and compassionate.

By admitting our weaknesses, we can create meaningful connections and a sense of community.

Brown looks into the connection between being open to vulnerability and unleashing creative leadership and innovation.

She uses her own experiences and research to support her viewpoint. The book also gives useful advice on how to include vulnerability in different parts of life. Such as relationships, parenting, and the workplace.

Strengths of the Book:

Brown’s book is remarkable for her ability to mix her own experiences with comprehensive research. Combining her stories and evidence makes the material engaging and easy to understand.

Plus, her writing style is so friendly that readers feel they’re being acknowledged and accepted.

There’s advice on how to be kind to yourself. Set your limits, and accept that things won’t always be perfect. It’s like a toolkit to help you build strength and make positive changes.

Final Verdict

This book is really helpful for everyone, no matter who you are. It can help you figure out how to grow in life, have better relationships, and become a better leader. Plus, since it applies to all kinds of people, everyone can get something out of it.

If you want to write a great article review, it’s important to pick the right article, understand and analyze it critically. Finally, express your thoughts on it clearly. Ensure to stay impartial, back up your points with evidence, and write clearly and coherently.

Still if you are having troubles writing an article review, don’t hesitate to count on the expertise of our writers .

Order Original Papers & Essays

Your First Custom Paper Sample is on Us!

Timely Deliveries

No Plagiarism & AI

100% Refund

Calculate Your Order Price

Related blogs.

Connections with Writers and support

Privacy and Confidentiality Guarantee

Average Quality Score

Article Review

Article Review Writing: A Complete Step-by-Step Guide with Examples

What is an Article Review?

An article review is a critical evaluation and analysis of a piece of writing, typically an academic or journalistic article.

It goes beyond summarizing the content; it involves an in-depth examination of the author's ideas, arguments, and methodologies.

The goal is to provide a well-rounded understanding of the article's strengths, weaknesses, and overall contribution to the field.

Tough Essay Due? Hire Tough Writers!

Types of Article Reviews

Article reviews come in various forms, each serving a distinct purpose in the realm of academic or professional discourse. Understanding these types is crucial for tailoring your approach.

Here are some common types of article reviews:

Journal Article Review

A journal article review involves a thorough evaluation of scholarly articles published in academic journals.

It requires summarizing the article's key points, methodology, and findings, emphasizing its contributions to the academic field.

Take a look at the following example to help you understand better.

Example of Journal Article Review

Research Article Review

A research article review focuses on scrutinizing articles with a primary emphasis on research.

This type of review involves evaluating the research design, methodology, results, and their broader implications.

Discussions on the interpretation of results, limitations, and the article's overall contributions are key.

Here is a sample for you to get an idea.

Example of Research Article Review

Science Article Review

A science article review specifically addresses articles within scientific disciplines. It includes summarizing scientific concepts, hypotheses, and experimental methods.

The type of review assesses the reliability of the experimental design, and evaluates the author's interpretation of findings.

Take a look at the following example.

Example of Science Article Review

Critical Review

A critical review involves a balanced critique of a given article. It encompasses providing a comprehensive summary, highlighting key points, and engaging in a critical analysis of strengths and weaknesses.

To get a clearer idea of a critical review, take a look at this example.

Critical Review Example

Article Review Format

When crafting an article review in either APA or MLA format, it's crucial to adhere to the specific guidelines for citing sources.

Below are the bibliographical entries for different types of sources in both APA and MLA styles:

How to Write an Article Review? 10 Easy Steps

Writing an effective article review involves a systematic approach. Follow this step-by-step process to ensure a comprehensive and well-structured analysis.

Step 1: Understand the Assignment

Before diving into the review, carefully read and understand the assignment guidelines.

Pay attention to specific requirements, such as word count, formatting style (APA, MLA), and the aspects your instructor wants you to focus on.

Step 2: Read the Article Thoroughly

Begin by thoroughly reading the article. Take notes on key points, arguments, and evidence presented by the author.

Understand the author's main thesis and the context in which the article was written.

Step 3: Create a Summary

Summarize the main points of the article. Highlight the author's key arguments and findings.

While writing the summary ensure that you capture the essential elements of the article to provide context for your analysis.

Step 4: Identify the Author's Thesis

In this step, pinpoint the author's main thesis or central argument. Understand the purpose of the article and how the author supports their position.

This will serve as a foundation for your critique.

Step 5: Evaluate the Author's Evidence and Methodology

Examine the evidence provided by the author to support their thesis. Assess the reliability and validity of the methodology used.

Consider the sources, data collection methods, and any potential biases.

Step 6: Analyze the Author's Writing Style

Evaluate the author's writing style and how effectively they communicate their ideas.

Consider the clarity of the language, the organization of the content, and the overall persuasiveness of the article.

Step 7: Consider the Article's Contribution

Reflect on the article's contribution to its field of study. Analyze how it fits into the existing literature, its significance, and any potential implications for future research or applications.

Step 8: Write the Introduction

Craft an introduction that includes the article's title, author, publication date, and a brief overview.

State the purpose of your review and your thesis—the main point you'll be analyzing in your review.

Step 9: Develop the Body of the Review

Organize your review by addressing specific aspects such as the author's thesis, methodology, writing style, and the article's contribution.

Use clear paragraphs to structure your analysis logically.

Step 10: Conclude with a Summary and Evaluation

Summarize your main points and restate your overall assessment of the article.

Offer insights into its strengths and weaknesses, and conclude with any recommendations for improvement or suggestions for further research.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That's our Job!

Article Review Outline

Creating a well-organized outline is an essential part of writing a coherent and insightful article review.

This outline given below will guide you through the key sections of your review, ensuring that your analysis is comprehensive and logically structured.

Refer to the following template to understand outlining the article review in detail.

Article Review Format Template

Article Review Examples

Examining article review examples can provide valuable insights into the structure, tone, and depth of analysis expected.

Below are sample article reviews, each illustrating a different approach and focus.

Example of Article Review

Sample of article review assignment pdf

Tips for Writing an Effective Article Review

Crafting an effective article review involves a combination of critical analysis, clarity, and structure.

Here are some valuable tips to guide you through the process:

Start with a Clear Introduction

Kick off your article review by introducing the article's main points and mentioning the publication date, which you can find on the re-title page. Outline the topics you'll cover in your review.

Concise Summary with Unanswered Questions

Provide a short summary of the article, emphasizing its main ideas. Highlight any lingering questions, known as "unanswered questions," that the article may have triggered. Use a basic article review template to help structure your thoughts.

Illustrate with Examples

Use examples from the article to illustrate your points. If there are tables or figures in the article, discuss them to make your review more concrete and easily understandable.

Organize Clearly with a Summary Section

Keep your review straightforward and well-organized. Begin with the start of the article, express your thoughts on what you liked or didn't like, and conclude with a summary section. This follows a basic plan for clarity.

Constructive Criticism

When providing criticism, be constructive. If there are elements you don't understand, frame them as "unanswered questions." This approach shows engagement and curiosity.

Smoothly Connect Your Ideas

Ensure your thoughts flow naturally throughout your review. Use simple words and sentences. If you have questions about the article, let them guide your review organically.

Revise and Check for Clarity

Before finishing, go through your review. Correct any mistakes and ensure it sounds clear. Check if you followed your plan, used simple words, and incorporated the keywords effectively. This makes your review better and more accessible for others.

In conclusion , writing an effective article review involves a thoughtful balance of summarizing key points, and addressing unanswered questions.

By following a simple and structured approach, you can create a review that not only analyzes the content but also adds value to the reader's understanding.

Remember to organize your thoughts logically, use clear language, and provide examples from the article to support your points.

Ready to elevate your article reviewing skills? Explore the valuable resources and expert assistance at MyPerfectWords.com.

Our team of experienced writers is here to help you with article reviews and other school tasks.

So why wait? Get our essay writing service today!

Write Essay Within 60 Seconds!

Dr. Barbara is a highly experienced writer and author who holds a Ph.D. degree in public health from an Ivy League school. She has worked in the medical field for many years, conducting extensive research on various health topics. Her writing has been featured in several top-tier publications.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That’s our Job!

Keep reading

How to Write an Article Review: Tips and Examples

Did you know that article reviews are not just academic exercises but also a valuable skill in today's information age? In a world inundated with content, being able to dissect and evaluate articles critically can help you separate the wheat from the chaff. Whether you're a student aiming to excel in your coursework or a professional looking to stay well-informed, mastering the art of writing article reviews is an invaluable skill.

Short Description

In this article, our research paper writing service experts will start by unraveling the concept of article reviews and discussing the various types. You'll also gain insights into the art of formatting your review effectively. To ensure you're well-prepared, we'll take you through the pre-writing process, offering tips on setting the stage for your review. But it doesn't stop there. You'll find a practical example of an article review to help you grasp the concepts in action. To complete your journey, we'll guide you through the post-writing process, equipping you with essential proofreading techniques to ensure your work shines with clarity and precision!

What Is an Article Review: Grasping the Concept

A review article is a type of professional paper writing that demands a high level of in-depth analysis and a well-structured presentation of arguments. It is a critical, constructive evaluation of literature in a particular field through summary, classification, analysis, and comparison.

If you write a scientific review, you have to use database searches to portray the research. Your primary goal is to summarize everything and present a clear understanding of the topic you've been working on.

Writing Involves:

Summarization, classification, analysis, critiques, and comparison.
The analysis, evaluation, and comparison require the use of theories, ideas, and research relevant to the subject area of the article.
It is also worth nothing if a review does not introduce new information, but instead presents a response to another writer's work.
Check out other samples to gain a better understanding of how to review the article.

Types of Review

When it comes to article reviews, there's more than one way to approach the task. Understanding the various types of reviews is like having a versatile toolkit at your disposal. In this section, we'll walk you through the different dimensions of review types, each offering a unique perspective and purpose. Whether you're dissecting a scholarly article, critiquing a piece of literature, or evaluating a product, you'll discover the diverse landscape of article reviews and how to navigate it effectively.

Journal Article Review

Just like other types of reviews, a journal article review assesses the merits and shortcomings of a published work. To illustrate, consider a review of an academic paper on climate change, where the writer meticulously analyzes and interprets the article's significance within the context of environmental science.

Research Article Review

Distinguished by its focus on research methodologies, a research article review scrutinizes the techniques used in a study and evaluates them in light of the subsequent analysis and critique. For instance, when reviewing a research article on the effects of a new drug, the reviewer would delve into the methods employed to gather data and assess their reliability.

Science Article Review

In the realm of scientific literature, a science article review encompasses a wide array of subjects. Scientific publications often provide extensive background information, which can be instrumental in conducting a comprehensive analysis. For example, when reviewing an article about the latest breakthroughs in genetics, the reviewer may draw upon the background knowledge provided to facilitate a more in-depth evaluation of the publication.

Need a Hand From Professionals?

Address to Our Writers and Get Assistance in Any Questions!

Formatting an Article Review

The format of the article should always adhere to the citation style required by your professor. If you're not sure, seek clarification on the preferred format and ask him to clarify several other pointers to complete the formatting of an article review adequately.

How Many Publications Should You Review?

In what format should you cite your articles (MLA, APA, ASA, Chicago, etc.)?
What length should your review be?
Should you include a summary, critique, or personal opinion in your assignment?
Do you need to call attention to a theme or central idea within the articles?
Does your instructor require background information?

When you know the answers to these questions, you may start writing your assignment. Below are examples of MLA and APA formats, as those are the two most common citation styles.

Using the APA Format

Articles appear most commonly in academic journals, newspapers, and websites. If you write an article review in the APA format, you will need to write bibliographical entries for the sources you use:

Web : Author [last name], A.A [first and middle initial]. (Year, Month, Date of Publication). Title. Retrieved from {link}
Journal : Author [last name], A.A [first and middle initial]. (Publication Year). Publication Title. Periodical Title, Volume(Issue), pp.-pp.
Newspaper : Author [last name], A.A [first and middle initial]. (Year, Month, Date of Publication). Publication Title. Magazine Title, pp. xx-xx.

Using MLA Format

Web : Last, First Middle Initial. “Publication Title.” Website Title. Website Publisher, Date Month Year Published. Web. Date Month Year Accessed.
Newspaper : Last, First M. “Publication Title.” Newspaper Title [City] Date, Month, Year Published: Page(s). Print.
Journal : Last, First M. “Publication Title.” Journal Title Series Volume. Issue (Year Published): Page(s). Database Name. Web. Date Month Year Accessed.

Enhance your writing effortlessly with EssayPro.com , where you can order an article review or any other writing task. Our team of expert writers specializes in various fields, ensuring your work is not just summarized, but deeply analyzed and professionally presented. Ideal for students and professionals alike, EssayPro offers top-notch writing assistance tailored to your needs. Elevate your writing today with our skilled team at your article review writing service !

The Pre-Writing Process

Facing this task for the first time can really get confusing and can leave you unsure of where to begin. To create a top-notch article review, start with a few preparatory steps. Here are the two main stages from our dissertation services to get you started:

Step 1: Define the right organization for your review. Knowing the future setup of your paper will help you define how you should read the article. Here are the steps to follow:

Summarize the article — seek out the main points, ideas, claims, and general information presented in the article.
Define the positive points — identify the strong aspects, ideas, and insightful observations the author has made.
Find the gaps —- determine whether or not the author has any contradictions, gaps, or inconsistencies in the article and evaluate whether or not he or she used a sufficient amount of arguments and information to support his or her ideas.
Identify unanswered questions — finally, identify if there are any questions left unanswered after reading the piece.

Step 2: Move on and review the article. Here is a small and simple guide to help you do it right:

Start off by looking at and assessing the title of the piece, its abstract, introductory part, headings and subheadings, opening sentences in its paragraphs, and its conclusion.
First, read only the beginning and the ending of the piece (introduction and conclusion). These are the parts where authors include all of their key arguments and points. Therefore, if you start with reading these parts, it will give you a good sense of the author's main points.
Finally, read the article fully.

These three steps make up most of the prewriting process. After you are done with them, you can move on to writing your own review—and we are going to guide you through the writing process as well.

Outline and Template

As you progress with reading your article, organize your thoughts into coherent sections in an outline. As you read, jot down important facts, contributions, or contradictions. Identify the shortcomings and strengths of your publication. Begin to map your outline accordingly.

If your professor does not want a summary section or a personal critique section, then you must alleviate those parts from your writing. Much like other assignments, an article review must contain an introduction, a body, and a conclusion. Thus, you might consider dividing your outline according to these sections as well as subheadings within the body. If you find yourself troubled with the pre-writing and the brainstorming process for this assignment, seek out a sample outline.

Your custom essay must contain these constituent parts:

Pre-Title Page - Before diving into your review, start with essential details: article type, publication title, and author names with affiliations (position, department, institution, location, and email). Include corresponding author info if needed.
Running Head - In APA format, use a concise title (under 40 characters) to ensure consistent formatting.
Summary Page - Optional but useful. Summarize the article in 800 words, covering background, purpose, results, and methodology, avoiding verbatim text or references.
Title Page - Include the full title, a 250-word abstract, and 4-6 keywords for discoverability.
Introduction - Set the stage with an engaging overview of the article.
Body - Organize your analysis with headings and subheadings.
Works Cited/References - Properly cite all sources used in your review.
Optional Suggested Reading Page - If permitted, suggest further readings for in-depth exploration.
Tables and Figure Legends (if instructed by the professor) - Include visuals when requested by your professor for clarity.

Example of an Article Review

You might wonder why we've dedicated a section of this article to discuss an article review sample. Not everyone may realize it, but examining multiple well-constructed examples of review articles is a crucial step in the writing process. In the following section, our essay writing service experts will explain why.

Looking through relevant article review examples can be beneficial for you in the following ways:

To get you introduced to the key works of experts in your field.
To help you identify the key people engaged in a particular field of science.
To help you define what significant discoveries and advances were made in your field.
To help you unveil the major gaps within the existing knowledge of your field—which contributes to finding fresh solutions.
To help you find solid references and arguments for your own review.
To help you generate some ideas about any further field of research.
To help you gain a better understanding of the area and become an expert in this specific field.
To get a clear idea of how to write a good review.

View Our Writer’s Sample Before Crafting Your Own!

Why Have There Been No Great Female Artists?

Steps for Writing an Article Review

Here is a guide with critique paper format on how to write a review paper:

Step 1: Write the Title

First of all, you need to write a title that reflects the main focus of your work. Respectively, the title can be either interrogative, descriptive, or declarative.

Step 2: Cite the Article

Next, create a proper citation for the reviewed article and input it following the title. At this step, the most important thing to keep in mind is the style of citation specified by your instructor in the requirements for the paper. For example, an article citation in the MLA style should look as follows:

Author's last and first name. "The title of the article." Journal's title and issue(publication date): page(s). Print

Abraham John. "The World of Dreams." Virginia Quarterly 60.2(1991): 125-67. Print.

Step 3: Article Identification

After your citation, you need to include the identification of your reviewed article:

Title of the article
Title of the journal
Year of publication

All of this information should be included in the first paragraph of your paper.

The report "Poverty increases school drop-outs" was written by Brian Faith – a Health officer – in 2000.

Step 4: Introduction

Your organization in an assignment like this is of the utmost importance. Before embarking on your writing process, you should outline your assignment or use an article review template to organize your thoughts coherently.

If you are wondering how to start an article review, begin with an introduction that mentions the article and your thesis for the review.
Follow up with a summary of the main points of the article.
Highlight the positive aspects and facts presented in the publication.
Critique the publication by identifying gaps, contradictions, disparities in the text, and unanswered questions.

Step 5: Summarize the Article

Make a summary of the article by revisiting what the author has written about. Note any relevant facts and findings from the article. Include the author's conclusions in this section.

Step 6: Critique It

Present the strengths and weaknesses you have found in the publication. Highlight the knowledge that the author has contributed to the field. Also, write about any gaps and/or contradictions you have found in the article. Take a standpoint of either supporting or not supporting the author's assertions, but back up your arguments with facts and relevant theories that are pertinent to that area of knowledge. Rubrics and templates can also be used to evaluate and grade the person who wrote the article.

Step 7: Craft a Conclusion

In this section, revisit the critical points of your piece, your findings in the article, and your critique. Also, write about the accuracy, validity, and relevance of the results of the article review. Present a way forward for future research in the field of study. Before submitting your article, keep these pointers in mind:

As you read the article, highlight the key points. This will help you pinpoint the article's main argument and the evidence that they used to support that argument.
While you write your review, use evidence from your sources to make a point. This is best done using direct quotations.
Select quotes and supporting evidence adequately and use direct quotations sparingly. Take time to analyze the article adequately.
Every time you reference a publication or use a direct quotation, use a parenthetical citation to avoid accidentally plagiarizing your article.
Re-read your piece a day after you finish writing it. This will help you to spot grammar mistakes and to notice any flaws in your organization.
Use a spell-checker and get a second opinion on your paper.

The Post-Writing Process: Proofread Your Work

Finally, when all of the parts of your article review are set and ready, you have one last thing to take care of — proofreading. Although students often neglect this step, proofreading is a vital part of the writing process and will help you polish your paper to ensure that there are no mistakes or inconsistencies.

To proofread your paper properly, start by reading it fully and checking the following points:

Punctuation
Other mistakes

Afterward, take a moment to check for any unnecessary information in your paper and, if found, consider removing it to streamline your content. Finally, double-check that you've covered at least 3-4 key points in your discussion.

And remember, if you ever need help with proofreading, rewriting your essay, or even want to buy essay , our friendly team is always here to assist you.

Need an Article REVIEW WRITTEN?

Just send us the requirements to your paper and watch one of our writers crafting an original paper for you.

How to Write a Policy Analysis Paper Step-by-Step

How to Write an Article Review: Tips, Outline, Format

Have you been assigned an article review paper, but you are unsure where to start, or what is a review article at all? There is no need to worry, as EssayService has put together a top guide for you! Find out all about an article review to master your assignment.

What is an Article Review?

In simple terms, an article review essay is like a summary and evaluation of another professional or expert's work. It may also be referred to as a literature review that includes an outline of the most recent research on the subject, or a critical review that focuses on a specific article with smaller scope. Article review can be used for many reasons; for example, a teacher or lecturer may wish to introduce their students to a new subject by reviewing a professional's piece. You can also learn about the most important works of specialists in your industry by looking at relevant article review examples.

Also, a newspaper article review example could be a journalist writing a critique about another competitor's published work.

In comparison, a book review article example could be critiqued by a fellow author or even a student in the chosen field.

Depending on the critique criteria and the work being reviewed, there could also be certain points asked for addition which should be checked and noted by the lecturer or supervisor. Otherwise, follow the article review guidelines from our write my essay service to complete the assignment in no time.

Key points when writing an article review:

Use the article review template from our paper writing service to get through the assignment as fast as possible so you will not waste any time.

How to Start an Article Review?

Firstly read the work being reviewed as much as possible and look up key phrases and words that are not understood.
Discuss the work with other professionals or colleagues to collect more opinions and get a more balanced impression.
Highlight important sections or sentences and refer this to your knowledge in the topic, do you agree or disagree and what does this contribute to the field?
Then re-write the key arguments and findings into your own words this will help gain better understanding into the paper. This can be just written as an outline also and will help decide which points are wanted to discuss later.

If you feel you do not have enough time to create a critique worthy of your time, then come to EssayService and order a custom Article review online.

You can order essay independent of type, for example:

nursing essay;
law essay writing;
history essays.

The best way to write an effective essay would be to draw up a plan or outline of what needs to be covered and use it for guidance throughout the critique.

Article Review Formatting

There is no one-fits-all article format you can follow in your review. In fact, the formatting is dictated by the citation style specified by your professor in the task requirements. Thus, be sure to clarify the preferred style before you jump straight to writing to handle the given assignment right.

APA Format Article Review

Writing an APA style article review, you will most likely use articles from journals, websites, and newspapers. For each source, you will have to create properly formatted bibliographical entries.

Here is how to write an article review APA:

Journal: Author’s last name, First and middle initial. (Year of Publication). Publication Title. Periodical Title, Volume(Issue), pp.-pp.
Website: Last name, initials. (Date of Publication). Title. Retrieved from {link}
Newspaper: Last name, initials. (Date of Publication). Title. Magazine Title, pp. xx-xx.

MLA Format Article Review

Tips for citing sources in an article review MLA format:

Journal: Last name, First name Middle initial. “Title.” Journal Title Series Volume. Issue (Year of Publication): Page(s). Database Name. Web. Date Accessed.
Website: Last, First M. “Title.” Website Title. Publisher, Date Published. Web. Date Accessed.
Newspaper: Last, First M. “Title.” Newspaper Title [City] Date of Publication: Page(s). Print.

Article Review Outline

Planning out an outline for your paper will help writing and to put it together so therefore saving you time in the long run.

Some questions to help with the outline of a critique:

What does the article set out to do or prove?
Are the main ideas clear and defined?
How substantial is the evidence?
Where does the article fit in its specific field?
Does it provide new knowledge on the topic?
What are the central theories and assumptions?
Is the writer conclusive at getting their point across?

Here is a typical article review format to follow:

Use our article review template to get through the assignment as fast as possible so you will not waste any time.

Article Review Title

Firstly start with creating a title for your critique, this should be something to do with the focus of the work that is being reviewed. An approach could be to make it descriptive or also in a more creative way think of something that intrigues the reader. After the title, this is a good place to correctly cite the paper being critiqued and include the important details for example, the author, title of publication, any page references. The style in which the citation is written will depend on which is best for this type of work being reviewed.

Article Review Introduction

The introduction should be a brief glimpse into what the author was writing about and any other details the audience will find interesting. Maybe some background details on the piece that is not already known or something that contributes to the review itself. It is a good idea to start by introducing the work at the start of the paragraph and then include a ' hook '. Include the writer's thesis if there is one and put it at the end but include your own thesis towards the critique near the beginning of this section.

Article Review Body

When constructing the summary section, write down the important points and findings in the piece in your own words. Include how the claims are supported and backed up with evidence but use direct quotes as sparing as possible. Do not put in any information known to professionals in the field or topic, but detail any conclusions the work came to. Make sure the paper is not just copied word for word and is actually summarized by yourself; this will also help the review stage.

To make an accurate critique, break down the work and express opinions on whether it achieves its goals and how useful it is in explaining the topics for an article review. Decide if the paper contributes to its field and is important and credible to the given field. Back up all the claims with evidence from the summary or another source. If using another text, remember to cite it correctly in the bibliography section. Look at how strong the points are and do they contribute to the argument. Try to identify any biases the writer might have and use this to make a fair critique. This part is only for opinions of the piece's significance, not including whether you liked it. Furthermore, the different types of audiences that would benefit from the paper can be mentioned in this section.

Article Review Conclusion

In the conclusion section of the critique, there should only be one or two paragraphs in which a summary of key points and opinions in the piece are included. Also, summarize the paper's significance to its field and how accurate the work is. Depending on the type of critique or work evaluated, it is also possible to include comments on future research or the topic to be discussed further.

If other sources have been used, construct a bibliography section and correctly cite all works utilized in the critique.

The APA format is very common in an article review and stands for American Psychology Association. This will include a 'references list' at the end of the critique and in-text citations, mentioning the author's last name, page number, and publication date.

There are also MLA and Chicago formats for citations with slight differences in a name, like using a 'works cited' page for MLA. More can be found in this guide on the subtle differences between the types of citation methods under the heading 'Creating a bibliography.'

Article Review Example

Article review writing tips.

If you are interested in best scholarships for high school seniors , the following tips will be handy while writing your essay or article:

Allow enough time to complete the research and writing of the critique. The number one problem with creating a critique is running out of time to make it the best it can be. This can be avoided by effective planning and keeping on time with the deadlines you set out.
Collect twice more research than you think is needed to write a review. This will help when coming to the writing stage as not all the information collected will be used in the final draft.
Write in a style that is compatible with the work being critiqued. This will be better for whoever requested the critique and also will make paper easier to construct.
A summary and evaluation must be written. Do not leave out either part as one complements the other and is vital to create a critique worth reading.
Be clear and explain well every statement made about the piece . Everything that is unknown to professionals in the field should be explained and all comments should be easy to follow for the reader.
Do not just describe the work, analyze and interpret it. The critique should be in depth and give the audience some detailed interpretations of the work in a professional way.
Give an assessment of the quality in the writing and of what standard it is. Evaluate every aspect in the paper so that the audience can see where it fits into the rest of the related works. Give opinions based on fact and do not leave any comments without reason as this will not count for anything.

How to Write an Article Review?

Writing a review article is not that hard if you know what steps to take. Below is a step-by-step guide on how to write a review example quickly and easily.

Before You Start

Before you start writing your review essay, there are a few pre-writing steps to take. The pre-writing process should consist of the following steps:

Pick the subject of your review (if it wasn’t specified by your professor);
Read the article fully multiple times;
Summarize the main ideas, points, and claims made in the article;
Define the positive (strong) aspects;
Identify the gaps or inconsistencies;
Find the questions that remained unanswered.

All these steps are needed to help you define the direction for your review article and find the main ideas you’d like to cover in it.

After you review articles and define the key ideas, gaps, and other details, map out your future paper by creating a detailed outline.

Here are the core elements that must be included:

Pre-title page;
Corresponding author details (optional);
Running head (only for the APA style);
Summary page (optional);
Title page;
Introduction;
References/Works Cited;
Suggested Reading page (optional);
Tables and Figure Legends (if required by the professor).

This step is vital to organize your thoughts and ensure a proper structure of your work. Thus, be sure not to skip this step.

When you have an outline, students can move on to the writing stage by formulating compelling titles for their article reviews. Titles should be declarative, interrogative, or descriptive to reflect the core focus of the paper.

Article Citation

After the title should follow a proper citation of the piece you are going to review. Write a citation according to the required style, and feel free to check out a well-written article review example to see how it should look like.

Article Identification

Start the first paragraph of your review with concise and clear article identification that specifies its title, author, name of the resource (e.g., journal, web, etc.), and the year of publication.

Following the identification, write a short introductory paragraph. It should be to the point and state a clear thesis for your review.

Summary and Critique

In the main body of your article review, you should first make a detailed but not too extensive summary of the article you reviewed, its main ideas, statements, and findings. In this part, you should also reflect on the conclusion made by the author of the original article.

After a general summary should follow an objective critique. In this part of your paper, you have to state and analyze the main strengths and weaknesses of the article. Also, you need to point out any gaps or unanswered questions that are still there. And clarify your stance on the author’s assertions.

Lastly, you need to craft a compelling conclusion that recaps the key points of your review and gives the final, logical evaluation of the piece that was reviewed.

After this, proofread your work and submit it.

No Time Left For Your Due Assignment

Now we hope you understand how to write a review of an article. However, we know that writing a great article review requires a lot of time to properly research the work. To save your precious time, visit EssayService, where our team of top essay writers will help you. The team can even provide you with the best article review topics! You can learn more at the college essay writing service page where we have free guides with all the essay writing tips and tricks!

Frequently asked questions

She was flawless! first time using a website like this, I've ordered article review and i totally adored it! grammar punctuation, content - everything was on point

This writer is my go to, because whenever I need someone who I can trust my task to - I hire Joy. She wrote almost every paper for me for the last 2 years

Term paper done up to a highest standard, no revisions, perfect communication. 10s across the board!!!!!!!

I send him instructions and that's it. my paper was done 10 hours later, no stupid questions, he nailed it.

Sometimes I wonder if Michael is secretly a professor because he literally knows everything. HE DID SO WELL THAT MY PROF SHOWED MY PAPER AS AN EXAMPLE. unbelievable, many thanks

New Posts to Your Inbox!

Stay in touch

How to Write an Article Review

a scholarly article, scientific paper, political article, book report, research paper, or any publication your teacher or professor assigns. It requires an in-depth understanding of the subject matter as well as the ability to critique someone else work.

What Is an Article Review

An article review asks the writer to evaluate another person’s work - understand it, analyze it, present it concisely, and question the conclusions drawn by the author. They are often used by teachers to introduce students to experts’ work in the field and to test their critical thinking skills.

This assignment isn’t like a typical essay. It answers how to review an article, but it doesn’t follow the classic 5 paragraph style of formal essay writing - there are other steps you have to follow. This makes writing one a new challenge for students, but don’t worry, this article will cover everything you need to know about how to write article review.

Article Review Types

There are several different types of article reviews, most of which you don’t have to worry about because they are either very specialized or are meant for professionals. Some examples of these are scoping review, systematic review, umbrella review, meta-analyses, and more complicated sounding names. Here, we’ll talk about the types of article reviews students usually have to deal with.

Narrative Article Review

A summation and analysis of a particular publication. It focuses on critiquing the biases of the author as well as logical inconsistencies. These can be book reports, film critiques, story critiques, etc.

Systematic Article Review

Using multiple sources to summarize information about a specific topic. This is a more complex type of article review that uses systematic methods to evaluate available research. These tend to be more technical in nature and are used often in the sciences and quantitative humanities.

Evidence Article Review

Focuses on analyzing the evidence and the findings based on that evidence. Whereas a systematic review’s primary focus isn’t the evidence, it is for this type of review.

Journal Article Review

An analysis of any type of publication focusing on the article’s opinion and subject matter. It answers how important the article is as well as analyzing the article itself.

Research Article Review

A subset of a journal article review that analyzes literary publications. It summarizes the presented research and evaluates the conclusions the original author draws.

Science Article Review

A subset of journal article reviews that analyzes scientific journals. As such, it focuses on the research methodology used and the conclusions based on the evidence.

Struggling with your Article Review Homework?

Get your assignments done by real pros. Save your precious time and boost your marks with ease.

Article Review Format

Following instructions is absolutely critical to getting a good grade. An article review has a very particular format that must be followed. Read an article review example to get a sense of what it’s like and take a look at the Template and Outline section further down for a step by step guide on how to structure your paper.

One key thing to note is the citation style. Your professor or teacher will specify which citation style to use between MLA and APA. While both styles require in-text parenthetical citations, how to write an article review APA or MLA differ slightly in style.

APA Article Review Citation

APA stands for American Psychological Association and is generally used for social studies. If you need to write an APA format article review, these are the structures.

Journal: Author’s last name, Author’s first initial. Author’s middle initial. (Year, Month Date Published). Article title. Journal Name, Volume (Issue), page number(s).

Newspaper Print: Author, A. (Year, Month Date of Publication). Article title. Newspaper Title, pp. Xx-xx.

Newspaper Online: Author, A. (Year, Month Date of Publication). Article title. Newspaper Title, Retrieved from newspaper homepage URL

Website: Author’s last name, Initial(s). (Year, Month Day of publication). Title of work. Website. https://URL

Follow this citation article review examples to write a perfect apa style article review.

MLA Article Review Citation

MLA stands for Modern Language Association and is generally used for arts and humanities subjects. For the MLA format , these are the structures.

Journal: Last, First M. “Publication Title.” Journal Title Series Volume. Issue (Year Published): Page(s). Database Name. Web. Date Month Year Accessed.

Newspaper Print: Author's Last Name, First Name. "Title of Article: Subtitle if Any." Name of Newspaper, Date of Publication, p. Page Number.

Newspaper Online: Author's Last Name, First Name. "Title of Article: Subtitle if Any." Title of Website, Date of Publication, URL. Accessed Day Month Year site was visited.

Website: Author's Last Name, First Name. Title of Website, Name of Organization Affiliated with the Website, Date of copyright or date last modified/updated, URL. Accessed Day Month Year site was visited.

The Planning Stage

What’s the structure going to be.

Knowing the different sections of a review article before reading the original article will help you process information in a useful way. Read an example of an article review to give you an idea of what to expect. There are 3 main parts to keep in mind.

Summarize the article by identifying the most important points of information and the main claims made by the author
Talk about what the author gets right. An analysis of the positive elements of the author’s opinions, research, and conclusions
Discuss what the author could have done better. Think about shaky conclusions, inconsistent research, and unanswered questions.

Your first read

Do a quick read of the article. Start by reading the title, abstract, introduction, headings, the first few lines of every paragraph, and the conclusion. This should give you an idea of what the article will be about. Then read the article taking note of terms or concepts you don’t understand. After your first quick read, research the concepts that you aren’t familiar with to make sure to get a better understanding on your next read-through.

Your second read

Now read the article slowly and deliberately, highlighting important information and taking notes. Connect information with knowledge you already have on the subject. Think about what new information is being presented in the article and how it differs or supports what you already know. Read the article as many times as you need to so that you understand it perfectly. It’s impossible to write a good review if you don’t understand the article itself!

Collecting information

Write the article again in your own words. This will help you identify the main points, arguments, and conclusions of the article and deepen your understanding. Don’t worry about editing, this is just for yourself.

Creating an outline

Now that you’ve dissected the article and noted down the main points and arguments, you’re well prepared to work on your review outline. Creating an outline helps plan your essay and cuts down on a lot of writing and reviewing time.

Did you like our inspiring Article Review Writing Guide?

For more help, tap into our pool of professional writers and get expert essay editing services!

Article Review Template & Outline

Use the outline as a guide to help plan and write your review. An article review, though a unique form of writing, still follows the traditional introduction, body, and conclusion format of essays, but has several specific sections that must be included as well. Fit these into your body paragraphs.

Pre-Title Page - This section states the basics. What type of article it is, the title of the article, contributing authors, and the authors’ credentials.

Optional Corresponding Author Details - Specific details of the authors including phone numbers, email addresses, etc.

Running Head - The title of your paper shortened to 40 characters or less (only required for APA format).

Summary Page - Some teachers ask for a summary page. It’s an 800 word or less summary that gives background information, explains the purpose of the review and summarizes the results. Don’t copy pieces of text from the article or the review itself, keep the language simple, and there’s no need to use references.

Title Page - This page can be thought of as the official start of your paper. You need to include the full title, a 250 word abstract, and a few keywords.

Introduction - The beginning of your review including a thesis statement.

Body Paragraphs - Include headings and subheadings to lay out your analysis clearly.

Works Cited/References - Differs in style based on MLA or APA format. Get clarification from your teacher if it isn’t clear.

Optional Suggested Reading List - If required by the professor.

Tables and Figure Legends - If required by the type of article or professor.

Article Review Writing: Step by Step

Step 1: title selection.

Spend some time crafting an interesting and representative title. A good title is both catchy as well as informative. It often helps to start with a tentative title and modify it as you write your paper. Your title should guide you as you write your paper, but it should also be reflective of the main purpose of the review.

Step 2: Article Citation

You need to properly cite the reviewed article. The most important thing is to make sure you are citing it in either APA or MLA format, whichever one is required by your teacher.

Step 3: Brief Article Description

After citing the article, start your first paragraph by stating the title of the article, the author, the name of the journal, and the year of publication.

Step 4: Introduction

Once you’ve identified the article, give a brief description of the main points of the article. Carefully analyze the article to identify and highlight the author’s thesis. Understanding the thesis of the main article is crucial to writing a good review, so make sure you include any sub thesis. End the introduction with your own thesis, this could include accepting and expanding on the original author’s main points, or proposing reasons why the author’s conclusions were flawed.

Step 5: Article Summary

The first body paragraph should summarize the main points of the original article including the author’s arguments and takeaways. Don’t hold yourself to just 3 body paragraphs unless specifically told so by your teacher. Explore a different main point in each paragraph and explain the author’s perspective on the issues. Make sure you review the summary paragraphs so that they accurately reflect the content of the original article and the views of the author.

Step 6: Analysis

Start with a general assessment of the clarity and usefulness of the article. Analyze each point of your summary and express your opinions on what the author did well or badly. Critiquing the article is the most important element of an article review, so devote a majority of your time and effort to this section. Analyze the main points of the article and determine if the author did a good job of backing their claims with logic and fact. Finally decide if you agree with the author’s conclusions and provide supporting evidence to substantiate your claims.

Step 7: Conclusion

Summarize the main points and lessons of the original article and then state your main critiques of the article. Specify why you believe the author made specific mistakes, and how the key takeaways should be different. If possible pose a question about further research or analysis on the topic.

The Post-Writing Process: Revision

Finishing your first draft isn’t the end of the process! If you spent enough time during the prewriting stage and made a good outline you will have to spend much less time during revision.

Checklist for revision

Do a quick read-through of the entire paper
Make sure it flows logically from one section to another
Make sure sentences are clear
Make sure each paragraph only talks about one main point
Get rid of unnecessary information
Check your summary to make sure it represents the original paper accurately
Check your critique to make sure it is fair and backed up by evidence
Check the grammar
Check the punctuation
Check for typos
Check your citations

Tips for Writing an Article Review

An article review is a unique form of academic writing that has a well-defined structure and specific requirements. Follow these tips to make writing one easier.

Make sure you understand the overall structure and format
On the first read through of the article focus on the big picture impressions
Do research on terms and concepts you aren’t familiar with
On the second read through, note down key points
Spend time preparing a thorough outline
Come up with several title ideas and choose amongst the best
Confirm which citation style you need to use between APA and MLA
Follow the standard introduction paragraph style but include specific requirements
This is a formal academic paper so keep the tone and style formal as well
The main body consists of a summary, and then a critique of the original article
Conclude the review by summarizing your main critiques of the article

An article review tests your formal writing skills, critical thinking, ability to summarize and synthesize information, and evaluative powers. Learning how to craft a critical review of an article isn’t just helpful in academics. The skills you learn and the format will be useful when evaluating anything in your life, whether it be a movie, game review, or social media content.

This comprehensive article provides all the necessary information on how to write a review of an article, but it's clear that the process isn't straightforward. Studyfy boasts a vast team of experts who have assisted numerous students with their homework. If you need assistance, don't hesitate to reach out to them via email for services such as proofreading, essay editing, or expert advice. Whether you require a biology essay writing service , want to write essays for money online , need a custom research paper , or are looking to pay for an essay , Studyfy is here to help!

Featured Posts

How to write a scholarship essay.

How to Write a Movie Review

How‌ ‌to‌ ‌Write‌ ‌an‌ ‌Argumentative‌ ‌Essay

How to Write a Cause and Effect Essay

How to Write an Expository Essay

How to Write an Analytical Essay

The Portable Mentor pp 163–173 Cite as

How to Write an Effective Journal Article Review

Dennis Drotar PhD 2 ,
Yelena P. Wu PhD 3 &
Jennifer M. Rohan MA 4
First Online: 01 January 2012

5592 Accesses

2 Citations

The experience of reviewing manuscripts for scientific journals is an important one in professional development. Reviewing articles gives trainees familiarity with the peer review process in ways that facilitate their writing. For example, reviewing manuscripts can help students and early career psychologists understand what reviewers and editors look for in a peer-reviewed article and ways to critique and enhance a manuscript based on peer review. Experiences in review can facilitate early career faculty with early entry into and experience being a reviewer for a professional journal. The experience of journal reviews also gives students a broader connection to the field of science in areas of their primary professional interest. At the same time reviewing articles for scientific journals poses a number of difficult challenges (see Hyman, 1995; Drotar, 2000a, 2009a, 2009b, 2009c, 2009d, 2010, 2011; Lovejoy, Revenson, & France, 2011). The purpose of this chapter is to provide an introduction to the review process and give step by step guidance in conducting reviews for scientific journals. Interested readers might wish to read Lovejoy et al.’s (2011) primer for manuscript review, which contains annotated examples of reviews and an editor’s decision letter.

Journal Review Article
Manuscript Review
Primary Professional Interest
Faculty Early Career
Conclusion Let

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Buying options

Available as PDF
Read on any device
Instant download
Own it forever
Available as EPUB and PDF
Compact, lightweight edition
Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Google Scholar

American Psychological Association Science Student Council. (2007). A graduate students’ guide to involvement in the peer review process. Retrieved July 15, 2011, from http://www.apa.org/research/publishing/

APA Publications and Communications Working Group on Journal Article Reporting Standards. (2008). Reporting standards for research in psychology. Why do we need them? What do they need to be? American Psychologist, 63 , 839–851.

Article Google Scholar

Cumming, G., & Finch, S. (2008). Putting research in context: Understanding confidence intervals from one or more studies. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 34 (9), 903–916.

PubMed Google Scholar

Drotar, D. (2000a). Reviewing and editing manuscripts for scientific journals. In D. Drotar (Ed.), Handbook of research methods in clinical child and pediatric psychology (pp. 409–425). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.

Chapter Google Scholar

Drotar, D. (2000b). Training professional psychologists to write and publish. The utility of a writer’s workshop seminar. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 31 , 453–457.

Drotar, D. (2009a). Editorial: How to write effective reviews for the Journal of Pediatric Psychology . Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 34 , 113–117.

Article PubMed Google Scholar

Drotar, D. (2009b). Editorial: Thoughts in improving the quality of manuscripts submitted to the Journal of Pediatric Psychology: How to write a convincing introduction. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 34 , 1–3.

Drotar, D. (2009c). Editorial: How to report methods in the Journal of Pediatric Psychology . Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 34 , 227–230.

Drotar, D. (2009d). How to write an effective results and discussion section for the Journal of Pediatric Psychology . Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 34 , 339–343.

Drotar, D. (2010). Editorial: Guidance for submission and review of multiple publications derived from the same study. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 35 , 225–230.

Drotar, D. (2011). Editorial: How to write more effective, user friendly reviews for the Journal of Pediatric Psychology . Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 36 , 1–3.

Durlak, J. A. (2009). How to select, calculate, and interpret effect sizes. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 34 , 917–928.

Fiske, D. W., & Fogg, L. (1990). But the reviewers are making different criticisms of my paper: Diversity and uniqueness in reviewer comments. American Psychologist, 40 , 591–598.

Holmbeck, G. N., & Devine, K. A. (2009). Editorial: An author’s checklist for measure development and validation manuscripts. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 34 (7), 691–696.

Hyman, R. (1995). How to critique a published article. Psychological Bulletin, 118 , 178–182.

Journal of Pediatric Psychology mentoring policy & suggestions for conducting mentored reviews (2009). Retrieved July 15, 2011, from http://www.oxfordjournals.org/our_journals/jpepsy/for_authors/msprep_submission.html

Lovejoy, T. I., Revenson, T. A., & France, C. R. (2011). Reviewing manuscripts for peer-review journals: A primer for novice and seasoned reviewers. Annals of Behavioral Medicine, 42 , 1–13.

Palermo, T. M. (2010). Editorial: Exploring ethical issues in peer review for the Journal of Pediatric Psychology. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 35 (3), 221–224.

Routh, D. K. (1995). Confessions of an editor, including mistakes I have made. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 24 , 236–241.

Sternberg, R. J. (Ed.). (2006). Reviewing scientific works in psychology . Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Stinson, J. N., McGrath, P. J., & Yamada, J. T. (2003). Clinical trials in the Journal of Pediatric Psychology : Applying the CONSORT statement. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 28 , 159–167.

Weller, A. C. (2001). Editorial peer review: Its strengths and weaknesses . Medford, NY: Information Today, Inc.

Wu, Y. P., Nassau, J. H., & Drotar, D. (2011). Mentoring reviewers: The Journal of Pediatric Psychology experience. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 36 , 258–264.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Division of Behavioral Medicine and Clinical Psychology, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, MLC 7039, 3333 Burnet Avenue, Cincinnati, OH, 45229-3039, USA

Dennis Drotar PhD

Division of Behavioral Medicine and Clinical Psychology, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, 45229-3039, USA

Yelena P. Wu PhD

Division of Behavioral Medicine and Clinical Psychology, Department of Psychology, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, OH, 45229-3039, USA

Jennifer M. Rohan MA

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dennis Drotar PhD .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

, Department of Psychology, University of North Carolina at Chapel H, Davie Hall, Campus Box 3270, Chapel Hill, 27599-3270, North Carolina, USA

Mitchell J. Prinstein

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this chapter

Cite this chapter.

Drotar, D., Wu, Y.P., Rohan, J.M. (2013). How to Write an Effective Journal Article Review. In: Prinstein, M. (eds) The Portable Mentor. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3994-3_11

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-3994-3_11

Published : 25 July 2012

Publisher Name : Springer, New York, NY

Print ISBN : 978-1-4614-3993-6

Online ISBN : 978-1-4614-3994-3

eBook Packages : Behavioral Science Behavioral Science and Psychology (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Find a journal
Track your research

How to Write an Article Review: Examples and Tips

In today's information-rich world, mastering the skill of discerning valuable insights from the overwhelming noise is a game-changer. Whether you're a student striving for success or a professional aiming to stay sharp, knowing how to critique an article is your key.

Our custom article review service explains the intricacies of writing an article review, categorizes different types and shares insights into impactful formatting. It's not just theory – we'll guide you step by step, from pre-writing to a tangible review article example, and refine your abilities with essential proofreading tips.

What Is an Article Review

An article review is more than a mere summary; it is a thoughtful analysis and critique that goes beyond the surface of the title. It's an intellectual exercise that challenges you to engage deeply with the author's ideas, question their methodology, and evaluate the significance of their findings.

Consider it as a journey through the landscape of someone else's thoughts. It's not just about where the writer takes you; it's about the path they choose, the landmarks they highlight, and the potential detours they overlook. An effective examination is a conversation with the author, a dialogue where you appreciate their insights, challenge assumptions, and perhaps even find alternative routes through the intellectual terrain they've explored.

As you start to understand how to review the article, encourage thought by asking questions.

What assumptions underlie the author's arguments?
Are there alternative perspectives that could enrich the discussion?
How does the author's methodology shape their conclusions, and are there potential biases to consider?
How does the title contribute to the clarity and coherence of the author's arguments?
In what ways does the title influence the reader's perception of the author's

At EssayHub, our book review writing service experts believe an article review is an opportunity not just to absorb information but to actively engage with it, to question, to ponder, and to contribute your own insights to the scholarly conversation.

Types of Review

When tackling article reviews, there isn't a one-size-fits-all approach; it's a task that allows for versatile strategies. Think of understanding the different types of reviews as having a multifaceted toolkit ready for use. In this part, we'll guide you through the varied types of a review article, each showing a unique viewpoint and serving a specific purpose. Whether you're analyzing a scholarly piece on your own or asking someone to 'write an article review for me,' you'll get valuable insights.

Journal Article Review

A journal article review involves critically evaluating and analyzing scholarly pieces published in an academic journal. It requires a thorough understanding of the author's research, methodology, results, and conclusions. The reviewer assesses the journal's contributions to the field, its theoretical framework, and the validity of the research methods employed. The goal is to provide a comprehensive summary and critique that highlights both the strengths and limitations of the piece.

Research Article Review

A research article review focuses on the evaluation of a scientific or academic research paper. This type of examination involves examining the research question, experimental design, data collection methods, statistical analysis, and the interpretation of findings. The reviewer assesses the reliability and validity of the research, considers the implications of the study, and offers insights into its potential impact on the broader academic community.

Science Article Review

A science article review encompasses a critical analysis of a piece in the field of science, covering disciplines such as physics, chemistry, biology, or any other scientific domain. This review type involves assessing the clarity of scientific concepts presented, the validity of experimental procedures, and the significance of the study's findings. According to our literature review writing service , reviewers may also consider the article's potential contributions to advancing scientific knowledge and its relevance to current scientific debates or issues.

Article Review Format

Ensuring the proper formatting of an article examination is crucial, and it should consistently align with the citation style specified by your instructor. If you're uncertain, don't hesitate to ask us - write my article review for me, along with additional guidelines to effectively structure your piece.

Meanwhile, here are some questions to consider:

What citation style (MLA, APA, ASA, Chicago, etc.) should you employ?
What is the recommended length for your article review?
Should your assignment encompass a summary, critique, or include personal opinions?
Is it necessary to highlight a theme or central idea from the articles?
Does your instructor expect background information to be incorporated?

APA Format Article Review

An APA review sticks to the rules of the American Psychological Association. When unsure how to write an article review in APA format, remember that it carefully cites the article, using a title page, intro, summary, critique, conclusion, and references. Citations follow the author-date format, focusing on being clear and objective. The review digs into the article's methods, results, and overall impact.

When you write an article review in APA, your in-text citation might read: (Anderson & Ramirez, 2019)

The corresponding entry in the reference list would be: Anderson, L., & Ramirez, C. (2019). Unveiling the Dynamics of Urban Green Spaces. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 25(3), 112-128.

MLA Format Article Review

For an MLA writing review, it follows the Modern Language Association's style. It's important to know how sources are cited in the text and in the Works Cited page. The structure usually has an intro, summary, critique, and conclusion. MLA citations often have the author's last name and page number in brackets in the text. This review might highlight the document's literary or humanities aspects, such as style, language, and cultural context.

In an MLA format publication, the citation within the text could look like: (Anderson and Ramirez 112)

The Works Cited entry for this publication: Anderson, Laura, and Carlos Ramirez. 'Exploring the Impact of Urban Green Spaces on Well-being.' Journal of Environmental Psychology, vol. 25, no. 3, 2019, pp. 112-128.

Review Article Outline

As you read your writing piece, organize your thoughts into sections in an outline. Note down key facts, contributions, and any contradictions. Identify strengths and weaknesses, and start mapping your outline.

If your professor doesn't want a summary or personal critique, skip those parts. Like other assignments, your examination needs an introduction, body, and conclusion. Consider dividing your outline accordingly, with subheadings in the body. If you need help starting, find a sample outline.

Your article assessment should have the following:

Pre-Title Page: Essential details like publication type, publication title, author names with affiliations, and corresponding author info.
Running Head (APA format): A concise title for consistent formatting.
Summary Page (optional but useful): Summarize the document in 800 words, covering background, purpose, results, and methodology.
Title Page: Full title, a 250-word abstract, and 4-6 keywords for discoverability.
Introduction: Engage your reader with an overview.
Body: Organize your analysis with headings and subheadings.
Works Cited/References: Properly cite all sources.
Optional Suggested Reading Page: If allowed, suggest further readings.
Tables and Figure Legends (if instructed): Include visuals when requested for clarity.

Writing an Article Review in 7 Steps

Now, let's move on to understanding how to write a review paper covering everything from creating the title to summarizing key points. This step-by-step guide breaks it down into seven simple steps, making the entire process more manageable.

Step 1: Create the Title

The very first question you might have is how to start an article review. It's crucial to develop a title that not only captures the essence of the publication but also reflects your perspective. For instance, consider the title: ' Decoding Data: A Critical Exploration of Privacy Concerns in Online Health Platforms. ' This title not only introduces the main theme but also hints at the critical evaluation that will unfold in the writing. It sets the tone for your analysis and sparks interest from the outset.

Step 2: Reference the Article

In the second step, it's essential to ensure accurate citation by providing specific details. Take a look at this example:

Author: Rodriguez, M., & Chen, L.
Title: 'Privacy Matters: Analyzing the Impact of Health Apps on User Data'
Publication Date: 2023
Source: Journal of Digital Ethics, 8(2), 87-105.

By including these details, you not only acknowledge the authors and the publication but also provide your readers with the necessary information to locate and verify the article. This step lays the foundation for a credible and well-referenced examination.

Step 3: Article Identification

Identify key elements of the publication, such as the writer's main argument, methodology, and key findings. Pinpoint any theoretical frameworks or models used in the title.

For example: The writing by Garcia and Kim examines the correlation between social media usage and mental health outcomes among adolescents. The authors employ a longitudinal study approach, utilizing surveys and interviews to gather data.

Step 4: Make an Introduction

In your introduction, provide a brief overview of the title's subject and purpose. Capture the reader's attention and clearly state your thesis or main point related to the title. For instance, you might start your article review template like this.

In the digital age, the impact of social media on mental health has become a topic of increasing concern. Garcia and Kim's recent study delves into this issue, aiming to uncover the nuanced relationship between social media engagement and the psychological well-being of adolescents. This writing piece critically analyzes the methodology, findings, and implications of their research.

Step 5: Summarize the Article

Summarize the main points of your assessment, highlighting key arguments, evidence, and results. Offer a concise overview without adding personal opinions.

Example: Garcia and Kim's study reveals a significant positive association between increased social media use and heightened levels of anxiety and depression among the adolescent population. The longitudinal study tracked participants over a two-year period, employing both quantitative and qualitative measures to assess mental health outcomes.

Step 6: Provide Critique

Critically assess the strengths and weaknesses of the writing. Well, how to critique an article , you might wonder. Discuss aspects such as methodology, data interpretation, and potential biases.

Example: While the study offers valuable insights, the reliance on self-reported data may introduce response bias. Additionally, the research predominantly focuses on mainstream social media platforms, potentially overlooking the impact of emerging platforms. Despite these limitations, the study's comprehensive approach contributes to the ongoing discourse surrounding the intersection of social media and mental health.

Step 7: Conclude

In the conclusion, summarize your overall assessment of the article and restate your main points. Offer insights into the broader implications of the research and suggest areas for future exploration.

For example: To conclude, Garcia and Kim's study sheds light on the complex relationship between social media use and adolescent mental health. Despite certain methodological limitations, the research underscores the need for continued investigation in this field. As we navigate the digital landscape, understanding these dynamics becomes crucial for devising effective interventions and support systems for the well-being of our youth.

Example of an Article Review

Why are we taking the time to discuss article review examples in this article? It might not be immediately apparent, but exploring a well-crafted article review sample is a vital step in the writing process for the following reasons:

Introduction to Key Works: Helps you to familiarize yourself with the important works of experts in your field.
Identification of Key Figures: You can recognize key figures contributing to a specific scientific field.
Understanding Field Advancements: Helps you define significant discoveries and advances made in your area of study.
Identification of Knowledge Gaps: You can uncover major gaps in existing knowledge, contributing to the formulation of fresh solutions.
Reference and Argumentation Resources: You discover solid references and arguments that can enhance your own writing.
Idea Generation: Helps you generate ideas for potential future research directions.
Becoming an Expert: Assists in gaining a deeper understanding of the subject area, moving towards expertise.
Writing Guidance: You acquire a clear idea of how to craft a well-structured review.

Can Anyone Write an Article Review for Me?

Is writing a review article worth it, how to write an apa format article review, how do you write an article review from the beginning, what is the proper article review format.

Plagiarism Report
Unlimited Revisions
24/7 Support

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

Knowledge Base

Methodology

How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates

Published on January 2, 2023 by Shona McCombes . Revised on September 11, 2023.

What is a literature review? A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources on a specific topic. It provides an overview of current knowledge, allowing you to identify relevant theories, methods, and gaps in the existing research that you can later apply to your paper, thesis, or dissertation topic .

There are five key steps to writing a literature review:

Search for relevant literature
Evaluate sources
Identify themes, debates, and gaps
Outline the structure
Write your literature review

A good literature review doesn’t just summarize sources—it analyzes, synthesizes , and critically evaluates to give a clear picture of the state of knowledge on the subject.

Instantly correct all language mistakes in your text

Upload your document to correct all your mistakes in minutes

What is the purpose of a literature review, examples of literature reviews, step 1 – search for relevant literature, step 2 – evaluate and select sources, step 3 – identify themes, debates, and gaps, step 4 – outline your literature review’s structure, step 5 – write your literature review, free lecture slides, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions, introduction.

Quick Run-through
Step 1 & 2

When you write a thesis , dissertation , or research paper , you will likely have to conduct a literature review to situate your research within existing knowledge. The literature review gives you a chance to:

Demonstrate your familiarity with the topic and its scholarly context
Develop a theoretical framework and methodology for your research
Position your work in relation to other researchers and theorists
Show how your research addresses a gap or contributes to a debate
Evaluate the current state of research and demonstrate your knowledge of the scholarly debates around your topic.

Writing literature reviews is a particularly important skill if you want to apply for graduate school or pursue a career in research. We’ve written a step-by-step guide that you can follow below.

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

Writing literature reviews can be quite challenging! A good starting point could be to look at some examples, depending on what kind of literature review you’d like to write.

Example literature review #1: “Why Do People Migrate? A Review of the Theoretical Literature” ( Theoretical literature review about the development of economic migration theory from the 1950s to today.)
Example literature review #2: “Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines” ( Methodological literature review about interdisciplinary knowledge acquisition and production.)
Example literature review #3: “The Use of Technology in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Thematic literature review about the effects of technology on language acquisition.)
Example literature review #4: “Learners’ Listening Comprehension Difficulties in English Language Learning: A Literature Review” ( Chronological literature review about how the concept of listening skills has changed over time.)

You can also check out our templates with literature review examples and sample outlines at the links below.

Download Word doc Download Google doc

Before you begin searching for literature, you need a clearly defined topic .

If you are writing the literature review section of a dissertation or research paper, you will search for literature related to your research problem and questions .

Make a list of keywords

Start by creating a list of keywords related to your research question. Include each of the key concepts or variables you’re interested in, and list any synonyms and related terms. You can add to this list as you discover new keywords in the process of your literature search.

Social media, Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, Snapchat, TikTok
Body image, self-perception, self-esteem, mental health
Generation Z, teenagers, adolescents, youth

Search for relevant sources

Use your keywords to begin searching for sources. Some useful databases to search for journals and articles include:

Your university’s library catalogue
Google Scholar
Project Muse (humanities and social sciences)
Medline (life sciences and biomedicine)
EconLit (economics)
Inspec (physics, engineering and computer science)

You can also use boolean operators to help narrow down your search.

Make sure to read the abstract to find out whether an article is relevant to your question. When you find a useful book or article, you can check the bibliography to find other relevant sources.

You likely won’t be able to read absolutely everything that has been written on your topic, so it will be necessary to evaluate which sources are most relevant to your research question.

For each publication, ask yourself:

What question or problem is the author addressing?
What are the key concepts and how are they defined?
What are the key theories, models, and methods?
Does the research use established frameworks or take an innovative approach?
What are the results and conclusions of the study?
How does the publication relate to other literature in the field? Does it confirm, add to, or challenge established knowledge?
What are the strengths and weaknesses of the research?

Make sure the sources you use are credible , and make sure you read any landmark studies and major theories in your field of research.

You can use our template to summarize and evaluate sources you’re thinking about using. Click on either button below to download.

Take notes and cite your sources

As you read, you should also begin the writing process. Take notes that you can later incorporate into the text of your literature review.

It is important to keep track of your sources with citations to avoid plagiarism . It can be helpful to make an annotated bibliography , where you compile full citation information and write a paragraph of summary and analysis for each source. This helps you remember what you read and saves time later in the process.

The only proofreading tool specialized in correcting academic writing - try for free!

The academic proofreading tool has been trained on 1000s of academic texts and by native English editors. Making it the most accurate and reliable proofreading tool for students.

Try for free

To begin organizing your literature review’s argument and structure, be sure you understand the connections and relationships between the sources you’ve read. Based on your reading and notes, you can look for:

Trends and patterns (in theory, method or results): do certain approaches become more or less popular over time?
Themes: what questions or concepts recur across the literature?
Debates, conflicts and contradictions: where do sources disagree?
Pivotal publications: are there any influential theories or studies that changed the direction of the field?
Gaps: what is missing from the literature? Are there weaknesses that need to be addressed?

This step will help you work out the structure of your literature review and (if applicable) show how your own research will contribute to existing knowledge.

Most research has focused on young women.
There is an increasing interest in the visual aspects of social media.
But there is still a lack of robust research on highly visual platforms like Instagram and Snapchat—this is a gap that you could address in your own research.

There are various approaches to organizing the body of a literature review. Depending on the length of your literature review, you can combine several of these strategies (for example, your overall structure might be thematic, but each theme is discussed chronologically).

Chronological

The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time. However, if you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order.

Try to analyze patterns, turning points and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred.

If you have found some recurring central themes, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic.

For example, if you are reviewing literature about inequalities in migrant health outcomes, key themes might include healthcare policy, language barriers, cultural attitudes, legal status, and economic access.

Methodological

If you draw your sources from different disciplines or fields that use a variety of research methods , you might want to compare the results and conclusions that emerge from different approaches. For example:

Look at what results have emerged in qualitative versus quantitative research
Discuss how the topic has been approached by empirical versus theoretical scholarship
Divide the literature into sociological, historical, and cultural sources

Theoretical

A literature review is often the foundation for a theoretical framework . You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts.

You might argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach, or combine various theoretical concepts to create a framework for your research.

Like any other academic text , your literature review should have an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion . What you include in each depends on the objective of your literature review.

The introduction should clearly establish the focus and purpose of the literature review.

Depending on the length of your literature review, you might want to divide the body into subsections. You can use a subheading for each theme, time period, or methodological approach.

As you write, you can follow these tips:

Summarize and synthesize: give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
Analyze and interpret: don’t just paraphrase other researchers — add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
Critically evaluate: mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
Write in well-structured paragraphs: use transition words and topic sentences to draw connections, comparisons and contrasts

In the conclusion, you should summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance.

When you’ve finished writing and revising your literature review, don’t forget to proofread thoroughly before submitting. Not a language expert? Check out Scribbr’s professional proofreading services !

This article has been adapted into lecture slides that you can use to teach your students about writing a literature review.

Scribbr slides are free to use, customize, and distribute for educational purposes.

Open Google Slides Download PowerPoint

If you want to know more about the research process , methodology , research bias , or statistics , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples.

Sampling methods
Simple random sampling
Stratified sampling
Cluster sampling
Likert scales
Reproducibility

Statistics

Null hypothesis
Statistical power
Probability distribution
Effect size
Poisson distribution

Research bias

Optimism bias
Cognitive bias
Implicit bias
Hawthorne effect
Anchoring bias
Explicit bias

A literature review is a survey of scholarly sources (such as books, journal articles, and theses) related to a specific topic or research question .

It is often written as part of a thesis, dissertation , or research paper , in order to situate your work in relation to existing knowledge.

There are several reasons to conduct a literature review at the beginning of a research project:

To familiarize yourself with the current state of knowledge on your topic
To ensure that you’re not just repeating what others have already done
To identify gaps in knowledge and unresolved problems that your research can address
To develop your theoretical framework and methodology
To provide an overview of the key findings and debates on the topic

Writing the literature review shows your reader how your work relates to existing research and what new insights it will contribute.

The literature review usually comes near the beginning of your thesis or dissertation . After the introduction , it grounds your research in a scholarly field and leads directly to your theoretical framework or methodology .

A literature review is a survey of credible sources on a topic, often used in dissertations , theses, and research papers . Literature reviews give an overview of knowledge on a subject, helping you identify relevant theories and methods, as well as gaps in existing research. Literature reviews are set up similarly to other academic texts , with an introduction , a main body, and a conclusion .

An annotated bibliography is a list of source references that has a short description (called an annotation ) for each of the sources. It is often assigned as part of the research process for a paper .

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator.

McCombes, S. (2023, September 11). How to Write a Literature Review | Guide, Examples, & Templates. Scribbr. Retrieved April 1, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/dissertation/literature-review/

Is this article helpful?

Shona McCombes

Other students also liked, what is a theoretical framework | guide to organizing, what is a research methodology | steps & tips, how to write a research proposal | examples & templates, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..".

I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes”

Custom Essay, Term Paper & Research paper writing services

testimonials

Toll Free: +1 (888) 354-4744

Email: [email protected]

Writing custom essays & research papers since 2008

How to write an article review.

In this short guide, we will take a step-by-step approach to teach you how to write an article review. We will explain the differences between an article review for a variety of subjects and let you know where you can find a great example of an article review on the web. We will begin by first answering the question many students have about this kind of assignment.

What is An Article Review?

An article review summarizes and evaluates another person’s article. It’s an assignment that is usually given to introduce students to written works done by experts in a specific field. A critical review of journal article can be done in just about any discipline, but we can’t go in-depth for each. So we will stay focused on the ones you are most likely to have to work in and then break down the steps you need to take for writing a review article that truly impresses.

Some of the most common types are:

The Science Article Review
The APA Article Review
The Law Review Article
The Journal Article Review

Each of these has a slightly different approach and style from one another and especially from book review writing. It’s a good idea to get your hands on an article review sample in the related field you must complete your assignment in. You can find excellent published pieces in academic journals at your school library. Or you can turn to a professional writing service to get a custom-written piece sent to you that you can use as an article review template.

What is a Peer Review Article?

Before we move on to the “how to write article review” portion of this guide, we will briefly discuss another type of review article you might come upon at some point: The peer-review article. This type of article is one that is written by a researcher or scholar and then is reviewed by experts in the field before publication. So that means the piece that you see in the journal has already been reviewed and critiqued by others. It also means that it has gone through different versions or drafts. Perhaps one of the best ways to learn how to write a critical review of a journal article is to have a look at how others review experts’ work before they reach publication.

How to Review an Article

The first thing you need to do before writing your review is fully understanding all that you have to do conduct an unbiased evaluation of the published work.

The first thing you need to know about how to review a research article is evaluating its organization. Your review will mirror the author’s structure and format. Focus on the most important elements, including main points, supporting evidence, and claims. It’s a good idea to break up the article into parts to better identify all of the essential elements that need to be addressed.

This type of assignment requires exceptional close reading. If you have gained access to an article review example you will see that the reviewer has been careful to address all of the original article’s main points and supporting evidence. Take what you get from the article and apply it to what you already know about the topic. Do this at least twice to ensure that you cover all of the most important information.

This should be done as a straightforward freewriting session. Just take the main points of the original article and attempt to rewrite in in your own words. This will let you identify the places where you are not in total agreement with what the author has presented. Your writing should be focused on all of the main arguments, main research points, and claims that the author makes.

How to Write a Review Article

The following 5 step-by-step process is all you need to know about how to start an article review. It’s a great idea to start with a couple of practice reviews so that you can become comfortable with this kind of assignment’s main elements.

The best way to adhere to the appropriate article review format is to create an outline before you start the process of writing. Review each of the summary points you made and compare them with the original article. Write down all instances of effective writing as well as any new contributions made to the field. Identify all of the article’s strengths and weaknesses and start to organize the main points with your critique in a clear and concise outline.

Take the original article, outline, and rewrite from the prior steps and start writing a rough draft covering all the main points, arguments, and findings. Since this is a draft you don’t need to worry about getting words right. Don’t stop to make corrections or grammar. Just get the draft down on the page as quickly as possible. Write the introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion and then set the draft aside.

The main part of how to write a review of an article is writing your critique. Refer to your outline and summary to draft several paragraphs evaluating the effectiveness of the writer’s arguments. You should address whether the article was useful, thorough, and clear in explaining the subject. The critique will form the body paragraphs, so each paragraph should address a single sub-topic. In each paragraph, decide whether or not you agree with the writer backed up with sufficient support.

The introduction and conclusion should be written after you’ve written the main portion (critique body paragraphs) of the review. Your intro will identify the article, mention its central themes, and arguments made by the author. Your conclusion will summarize the main points of the article in addition to your critique of them. Each of these paragraphs should be no more than 10% to 15% of your review.

Despite everything you’ve learned about how to write an article review, you need to ensure you adhere to the fundamentals of good essay writing. This means that you should set your review aside for a few days before you start your revisions. If you have the time you should set it aside for more time before you start editing and proofreading your work. Writing a great academic review will earn you a high grade and you will be under greater scrutiny since you are critiquing someone else’s ideas, structure, and writing, so be sure to put in the extra work.

There is a lot you need to know about how to write a article review. That’s where we can step in to help. We are a group of highly-qualified academic writers that know everything there is about every kind of assignment. You may not feel you are a strong writer or you may not have the time to write the review article on your own. Whatever the reason may be, we’re available to jump in and help craft a research article review that is guaranteed to earn you a high score.

Search Menu
Advance Articles
Editor's Choice
CME Reviews
Best of 2021 collection
Abbreviated Breast MRI Virtual Collection
Contrast-enhanced Mammography Collection
Author Guidelines
Submission Site
Open Access
Self-Archiving Policy
Accepted Papers Resource Guide
About Journal of Breast Imaging
About the Society of Breast Imaging
Guidelines for Reviewers
Resources for Reviewers and Authors
Editorial Board
Advertising Disclaimer
Advertising and Corporate Services
Journals on Oxford Academic
Books on Oxford Academic

< Previous

A Step-by-Step Guide to Writing a Scientific Review Article

Article contents
Figures & tables
Supplementary Data

Manisha Bahl, A Step-by-Step Guide to Writing a Scientific Review Article, Journal of Breast Imaging , Volume 5, Issue 4, July/August 2023, Pages 480–485, https://doi.org/10.1093/jbi/wbad028

Permissions Icon Permissions

Scientific review articles are comprehensive, focused reviews of the scientific literature written by subject matter experts. The task of writing a scientific review article can seem overwhelming; however, it can be managed by using an organized approach and devoting sufficient time to the process. The process involves selecting a topic about which the authors are knowledgeable and enthusiastic, conducting a literature search and critical analysis of the literature, and writing the article, which is composed of an abstract, introduction, body, and conclusion, with accompanying tables and figures. This article, which focuses on the narrative or traditional literature review, is intended to serve as a guide with practical steps for new writers. Tips for success are also discussed, including selecting a focused topic, maintaining objectivity and balance while writing, avoiding tedious data presentation in a laundry list format, moving from descriptions of the literature to critical analysis, avoiding simplistic conclusions, and budgeting time for the overall process.

narrative discourse

Email alerts

Citing articles via.

Recommend to your Librarian
Journals Career Network

Affiliations

Online ISSN 2631-6129
Print ISSN 2631-6110
Copyright © 2024 Society of Breast Imaging
About Oxford Academic
Publish journals with us
University press partners
What we publish
New features
Open access
Institutional account management
Rights and permissions
Get help with access
Accessibility
Advertising
Media enquiries
Oxford University Press
Oxford Languages
University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
Cookie settings
Cookie policy
Privacy policy
Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Services Paper editing services Paper proofreading Business papers Philosophy papers Write my paper Term papers for sale Term paper help Academic term papers Buy research papers College writing services Paper writing help Student papers Original term papers Research paper help Nursing papers for sale Psychology papers Economics papers Medical papers Blog

How to Write an Article Review?

Writing an article review entails assessing and summarizing an article by somebody else. But, what is an article review? Well, this type of work can be defined as logical evaluation of the article’s central theme, supporting arguments, and suggestions for further research. Knowing how to review an article is very important because:

It enables a person to spot and correct vague terms in an article.
It enables a person to clarify questions
It enables a person to see the perspectives and views of other people without personal biases
It enables an individual to improve their grammar and conscious writing skills
It encourages a person to perform better in the next article because the review provides valuable criticism or suggestions.

How to Write an Article Review in 9 Steps

Writing an article review is a process with several steps. Mastering these steps means you can review article by any writer and in any field. These skills will also come in handy if you’ll need to analyze research sources. Here are the major steps to follow when writing a review article:

Start your article review from preparation

Start by preparing to write the review. Preparation should entail organizing your workplace and making sure that you have all the resources required to review an article. This may include getting an article review sample or an article review template. Such materials can help you when it comes to organizing thoughts and getting ready for the task ahead.

Learn how to write a review of an article

Once you have materials like a sample and a template, start learning how to write an article review. This entails understanding what you are required to do when completing this task. You can find many resources online with information on how to write a review article. Take your time to learn more about the article review format and the writing process. But i f you have poor writing skills, you can hire our experts to write your paper online .

Essentially, this task requires you to summarize the main arguments, ideas, findings, and positions of the article. You also need to critique the material’s contributions and their overall effectiveness.

Your approach should depend on the kind of article you’re required to review. For instance, when learning how to review a research article, you will realize that you should not include new research. You just need to summarize and evaluate the article.

Read the article

You can’t review an article if you don’t know what it is all about. Therefore, start by reading the article carefully. This will enable you to know whether you need to write a science article review, a journal article review, or a law review article.

Once you’ve read the article, try to put it in your words. Additionally, come up with an evaluation outline. This will enable you to highlight the major points and other issues that should be featured in your review.

Research article review organization

You need to organize your review properly to make it easier for your audience to read. How you organize your review may depend on the instructions provided by the educator or professor. For instance, you may be required to write an APA article review. In that case, find out what the requirements of this writing style are.

Nevertheless, an ideal way to organize this write-up is to summarize the main claims, points, and information of an article and then discuss all positive aspects. Positive aspects can include the good insights, observations, and points of the author.

Once you have done that, identify contradictions, gaps, and inconsistencies in the work. Additionally, say whether the author has enough data or research to support their claims. Focus on finding unanswered questions in the work under review.

Start writing the review

By this time, you’ve known how to write a article review. If not, check out an article review example online to know what you’re expected to produce. Here’s how to write article review introduction:

Write a title – This can be declarative, interrogative, or descriptive depending on your focus.
Cite the focus article – Use the right style to cite the article after your review’s title.
Identify the article – You can compose article identification by stating the article title, author, journal, and publication year.

This should appear in the first paragraph. As such, you need to know how to start an article review. The review introduction should include the article’s central themes, the author’s arguments, and claims. It is not an easy task to write a paper like that. The best way to get a high grade with little effort is to ask about online paper writing help from our expert writers.

Summarize the article

This is the section where you summarize the main arguments, findings, and points of the article using your words. Additionally, show your readers how the work supports the author’s claims. Here, you need to include several paragraphs and cite specific examples, background information, or statistics.

Every paragraph should include or expound on the main point. You can include direct quotes from the article author. For purposes of accuracy, read the summary a couple of time and correct mistakes.

Write a critique

You need to know how to write a critical review of a journal article to excel in this section. Here, tell your audience how well the article author has addressed their topic. Also, include your opinion about how useful or thorough the subject explanation is. Show the importance and contributions of the article under review in the field.

Discuss the central points and arguments of the article. Additionally, explain whether the points used by the author supported their argument. Show whether the author exhibited any biases. Additionally, tell your readers whether you concur with the article author. If you do, give reasons to support them and if you don’t, give reasons for disagreeing with them. What’s more, tell the readers about the audience that will benefit from the article you are reviewing.

Writing a critical review of journal article requires some research or knowledge of the industry. That’s because you need a basis for critiquing the work of another person. As such, take your time to read the article and compare it with the existing literature. You can even quote other experts in the industry to enhance the credibility of your critique.

Conclude your review

The conclusion of your review can be one or a few paragraphs depending on the size or length of the reviewed work. However, it should include a summary of the main points. Also, tell readers about the accuracy, significance, and clarity of the article that you have reviewed. If relevant, comment on the article’s implications. You can also say something about further research on the topic. It’s crucial to note that your review conclusion section should be 10% of the entire work. Therefore, be as brief as possible when writing this section.

Proofread your review

You may have written an exemplary review but few grammatical errors can ruin your grade. Therefore, reread the review carefully checking for grammatical errors and mechanics. Correct any mistake in your review and remove unnecessary information.

Writing a review should be easy if you follow these steps. However, it’s important to know what is peer review article if that’s what your instructor wants you to write. Essentially, know what exactly you’re required to write before you start. Additionally, get a good example of an article review to guide you. You can get one from your faculty or our academic writers. What’s more, use online resources to get tips and guidelines for writing a good review.

Otherwise, ask our professional writers to help you with your papers. You just need to write “Please, do my assignment for me now!” and we will write your paper soon.

10 Best Tips On How To Write An Article Review

Are you stressed because you don’t know How To Write An Article Review? Don’t panic! Practice helps you out in article review writing . As a student, we understand it is a challenging task. But it is a great way to improve your reading, analytical, writing, and scientific skills. So let’s start!

Before getting straight to reviewing an article, you should have some knowledge of what an article review is. So, an article review is a study of writing when you compile and access someone else’s article.

It involves a sensible evaluation of the theme of an article i.e. when you evaluate another persona’s article then there should be some point of reviewing the article.

A review can be a critical review or it can be a literature review i.e. you may or may not agree with the point the writer has made in his/her article.

A critical analysis is a comprehensive type of text dealing with a particular article or book in detail.

Sure, you can archive that dynamic content on How To Write An Article Review.

What Is An Article Review?

Table of Contents

An article review is a critical analysis of an academic article or research paper. It is written by experts in a particular field. The goal of an article review is to evaluate the quality, relevance, and significance of the article to the field and to provide a summary of its key points and arguments.

Moreover, article reviews are typically written by scholars, researchers, or students as a way to stay up-to-date with the latest developments in their field. It is used to assess the quality of published research critically. They are often published in academic journals or other educational publications.

The structure of an article review varies depending on the requirements of the assignment or the publication. However, most article reviews include an introduction that provides context for the article being reviewed, a summary of the article’s main points and arguments, a critical evaluation of the article’s strengths and weaknesses, and a conclusion that synthesizes the reviewer’s overall assessment of the article.

5 Types of article review

An article review is an evaluation and summary of someone else’s work, and it has a particular format and some guidelines to write, which you have to follow to review an article. Here, in this blog, we will provide you a complete guide on how to write an article review.

Reviewing an article is essential

Because it helps the readers to understand the indefinite terms.
Reviewing the article clarifies so many questions.
As the review provides suggestion or analysis of the article to the author and that assists or helps the author to execute the work in a better way next time.

How To Write An Article Review: The pre-writing process

For reviewing an article in an excellent way, one should first prepare and then write the review.

And the formation of a review includes the following steps for How To Write A Good Article Review that you should follow: –

Step 1: – Understanding what the article review is

You should never underestimate the viewers as the viewers of the review already has information and knowledge on the topic and is not the general audience.

So first of all, you need to summarize all the main ideas of the article, the thoughts and all.

And you should also critique the participation of the matter and effectiveness of the field. The review of the article responds to the research of the authors and it does not include new analysis. The review assesses and summarizes the article.

Step 2: – Identify the organization of the review article

Before you even start to read the article you will review, you should know how your articles review will be set up and how does it work.

This will help you understand how to read the article. so that, you can get the maximum information out of it and write an effective review.

You should summarize the article and you should concentrate on the major points and information.

You should discuss the positive viewpoints of the article and think about what the author does well.

Identify all the contradictions and gaps in the text. You should also check if the author has done enough research on the topic he has written. And find if there are any questions left which are not being answered in the article.

Step 3: – Preview the article

Start by looking at the tile of the article, abstract and introduction and the headings of each paragraph of the article and the conclusion which the author has concluded.

Read the first few paragraphs just to get the idea of what the author wants to say and the article’s main point.

These steps should help you get the brief idea of the article and you will surely get the bigger picture of what is going on in the article and what the author wants to say. And by doing this you will get the look of the overall argument.

As soon as you start getting the idea of what is going on in the article, start making notes of it and start writing the questions you have in mind. Try to look for the terms and concepts you are unknown with so that you can read about those concepts and get some knowledge about it before writing the review.

Step 4: – Read the article carefully

Read the article very carefully just to make sure that you didn’t left any point the author wants to highlight.

Give it a few readings and the make notes of the essential sections. Just to highlight the main points and details.

Compare what you have read with to your actual understanding of the topic.

Pay careful attention to the meaning of the article. Make sure that you understand the article completely because half knowledge is the worst thing and by understanding the article completely you can write a good review.

Step 5: – Write the article in your own words.

After reading the article and writing the important points you should write the article again but in your own words and keep it in mind that you write the entire essential points accurately and in a logical manner. So, that it becomes easier for us to get any sort of info from the article by doing this. And then you should review the summary to discard useless items if any.

Step 6: – Write an outline of your evaluation.

After, reading and writing the article in your own words, review each and every detail in the article to discover.

Whether the author was correct and clear or not.

Write down all the instances of a productive script. And the articles that you feel, needs improvement with.

Create a record of strengths and weaknesses. The strength of the article can be a clear summation of any particular issue.

And the list of weaknesses that may any kind of weakness like it is not providing any new information on the topic or any information that you feel like that they are contradicting the facts.

And then, think about a few questions to help you critique and interconnect with the article: –

Here are some questions that you can think of to critique and engage with the article:-

What is the point of the article?
What is the theoretical structure and assumptions?
Does the author define the concepts clearly?
How satisfactory is the evidence?
Is there transparency in the author’s writing?
Transparency is the author’s writing?
Does it advance the knowledge of the subject or it’s just the knowledge we can find anywhere?

Format of How To Write An Article Review: you must follow

1. Title page 2. Title ( Article name) 3. Your name 4. Date 5. Abstract: It must include around 200 to 30o words. It involves a review question summary, the study reviewed, and the study’s conclusions.

6. Introduction: It involves what the article contains. Also, it gives hints to the reader about the article and involves the background information to help the reader understand the article sections.

7. Body: It involves the main points in detail.

8. Conclusion: It sums up all the main points of your article review and states the article’s purpose.

9. Citation: You have to use a standardized reference system such as MLA, APA style , etc.

10. Format applications: Articles are commonly written in newspapers, websites, and academic journals.

Steps For How To Write An Article Review – Step-by-Step Guide

Now the answer to your question about How To Write An Article Review is here. Follow the steps while writing an article review-

step 1: – Come up with a unique title for the review.

The title you are thinking of giving to the review should consider the center of your review. You should choose between a declarative title, a descriptive title or interrogative title whichever suits the best according to your article needs.

step 2: – Cite the article.

Under the title of the article, Place a complete reference of the article in the proper form and manner. And then move to the next line to begin your article. And don’t skip a line between the citation and sentence.

step 3: – Identify the article

After the title and summoning the article you should start your review by relating to the title you have chosen for your review and author of the article and the title of the publication. And the year in the article was published should be written in the first paragraph.

steps 4: – Write the introduction of the review

The introduction of the article review should have the identifying sentence. It should also mention the fundamental theme of the article and the main aspect of the article and the thoughts and the claims by the author.

You also need to pronounce the author’s opinion.

Sometimes, there are multiple viewpoints in the thesis and the thesis may not the clearly stated than in that case, you may have to determine the thesis yourself and should write it by your own understanding and your own point of view.

step 5: – Summarizing the article

Now you have to start summarizing the main details, thoughts, and conclusions of the article in your words, pointing to your summary for assistance.

Then show how the article supports its claims and conclusions. Make sure that you don’t forget to add the conclusions of the article. Moreover, This may be done in some paragraphs, and its length will depend on the conditions established by your publisher.

step 6: – Write the critique

Now, you have to use all your article study and you have to write how thoroughly the author addressed the topic, by using your judgment.

And you should also write your opinion on how precise and useful the explanation of the subject you found in the article.

Write if you agree with the writer’s point or not.

If yes, then provide the reasons why you support the writer and if not then give the reason behind your judgment.

And then indicate the type of audience that can get benefit from reading the article.

Quick Links

A Definitive Guide On How To Write A Literature Review Outline
Best Of The Best Ways On How To Write A Critical Review By Experts

step 7: – Write what you have concluded from the article review.

After compiling all the main points in a paragraph. Write your own opinion about accuracy and clarity and the significance of the article in that paragraph. You can also mention if that implication is connected or not.

The conclusion should always only be at max 10% of the overall essay.

Step 8:- Proofread the work you have done: The post-writing process

To ensure that there is no mistake in the review you have written, you should always check on grammar and mechanics and check if there should not be any mistake.

Remove all sort of unnecessary information. And just for the sake of a good review you should identify and discuss 3-4 critical issues in the article.

Conclusion (How To Write An Article Review)

We all know writing a compelling and well-formatted article review is a difficult task, but now from the above discussion, we hope you get the answer to your question about How To Write An Article Review. It needs you to find the article from reliable sources, read it completely, analyze the information. So, follow the above steps carefully to write an impressive article review.

If you need any Article Review Help you can contact to Call Tutors . For more information, stay tuned with our blogs!

What are the five qualities of a good article?

The following is a brief description of five qualities of good writing: focus, development, unity, coherence, and correctness.

What makes a successful article?

An effective article is an article that achieves its goal. Now, that goal can be anything: To entertain, inform, or persuade someone to act.

What makes an article high quality?

High-quality content means writing about things your audience will find useful in a clear, understandable way.

Top 19 Tips & Tricks On How To Improve Grades?

Do you want to improve your grades? If yes, then don’t worry! In this blog, I have provided 19 tips…

How To Study For Final Exam – 12 Proven Tips You Must Know

How To Study For Final Exam? Studying for the final exam is very important for academic success because they test…

Popular request:

How To Write Article Review Like Professional

May 3, 2022

Do you have an article review assignment, and it is proving challenging? Writing an article review is never easy for many scholars and students because it demands top-notch analytical and writing skills, but this guide will help you turn the tables.

An article review task requires students and scholars to evaluate the works of other experts in their fields of study to determine originality, clarity, and contribution to the respective discipline. This post is a detailed guide to writing an A-rated article review.

This post will help you learn what an article review is, the different categories, and a step-by-step guide for writing the review. Finally, you will get expert tips and an article review sample to further hone your skills.

Do not get content with poor or standard quality papers; here is how to do an article review like a pro!

What is an article review, writing an article review: the main types of formats, article review outline for top grades, how to write a review of an article, special tips for writing a great article review outline, article review example.

This piece of writing assesses and summarizes another person’s article or work. The process involves understanding the primary theme of the article/post under consideration, supporting arguments, and possible implications for further studies. Here is a breakdown of what the process entails:

Analysis, classification, summarization, comparison, and critique of the article being reviewed. Assessing the use of key ideas, theories, and studies that are relevant to the subject of the article/post under review. Note that writing a review does not introduce new ideas. Instead, you only respond to another writer’s work.

Before we can look at how to write a journal article review, it is important to appreciate they fall into several categories, which include:

Journal Review This is a common type of article review and is used to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the selected publication. In a journal review, you need to do a deep analysis and interpretation that captures the value of the publication. If there are gaps in the article, you must highlight them too.
Research Article Review This type of review differs from a journal review in that it focuses more on the research methods that are employed in the publication under consideration. In addition, the research methods are compared with those from other related studies.
Scientific Article Review Science article reviews only focus on publications in scientific disciplines, from medicine to engineering. This type of article captures a detailed background of the targeted publication to help readers get a better understanding of the topic.

To write a great article review, it is important to start by developing an outline. Like other types of assignments, your article review should have a clearly defined introduction, body, and conclusion. In some cases, your university professors or teachers provide outlines to be used, but many are the times when you have to work out everything. Here is a sample of the best outlines that you can count on for A-rated reviews:

The Pre-Title Page : This part captures important details of the paper, such as the type of the article under review, publication title, and authors. Make sure also to include the author’s affiliations, such as their institution, position, country, and email ID.
Corresponding Author Details (optional): These details include things such as the address, name, phone number, fax number, and email.
Running Head : If you are preparing the article review in APA format, your title page should also have a running head. This is the title of the paper but shortened to about 40-50 characters.
Summary Page (Optional): This mainly depends on whether your lecturer wants it. If he/she does not want students to include it, avoid it. When writing this summary, limit the section to 800 words long and follow these four expert tips:

Provide relevant background. Tell readers why the work was done. Summarize the results. Explain the method used in the publication.

Title Page : This page should be restricted to about 250 words. Make sure that it has the most important keywords (about 4-6).
Introduction : Introduce your article by providing some highlights about what the reader should expect. Remember that you are not adding new information but only focusing on what the publication is about.
Body : Like a standard essay, this is where the bulk of the review goes. Make sure it is broken down into sections to make it easy for readers to get it right.
Conclusion : Use this section to wrap the main points that you brought out in the review paper.
References : Once you are through with the article review, include all the resources you used.

The process of writing a review article is pretty similar to a literature review. First, you must go through the publication several times to note the main arguments, counterarguments and gaps (if any) and then follow a pre-drawn outline to write the review. Here is a step-by-step guide on how to write a journal article review like a pro:

Step One : Put Down the Title The first step when writing an article review is to prepare a title that reflects your focus. So, do you want a declarative, descriptive, or interrogative title?
Step Two : Correctly Cite the Article The next step is correct citations for the publication under review. Keep in mind the article review format recommended by your teacher. Take the example of an article review following the MLA formatting guide. In such a case, the citation should take the format shown below:The name of the author. “Article Title.” Journal Title and Issue. Pages. Print.

Article title. Author. Journal Title. Year of Publication.

Make sure to put this information in the first paragraph of the review paper. Check out the demonstration of how to put it below:

Start by drawing a thesis for your review. Prepare a summary of the main points or arguments. Capture the positive aspects and facts in the publication under review. Critique the publication by checking major contradictions, gaps, and disparities. You might also want to check the key questions that go unanswered.

Step Five : Write Down the Summary of the PublicationYou can do this by revising what the publication’s author wrote about. Remember to capture crucial facts and findings that were brought out by the publication’s author. Also, include the conclusions drawn by the author.
Step Six : Critique the Publication/ Post under ReviewWhat strengths and weaknesses did you find in the publication? Present them at this point. Go ahead and highlight how the author has contributed to the discipline of interest. Also, write about the contradictions and gaps you find in the article.It is also important to take a standpoint on the assertions. Are you supporting or not supporting the main argument of the author? However, you need to ensure that your stand is supported by facts and appropriate theories. You might also want to use rubrics to assess the author.
Step Seven : Write Down the ConclusionThis is the last part of the article review, and it requires you to revisit the main points captured in your review paper. So, what were your findings? Here you need to write about the validity, accuracy, and relevance of the results presented in the publication. This is also the moment to point out the future for the topic and area of study.

The process can seem too long and exhausting to me. However, there’s no need to worry. You can hire professional writing services and get perfect result witj no efforts.

Now that you know how to write a good article review, are there ways that you can improve it? Here are some expert tips to consider:

Take your time to understand and analyze the publication of interest.
Make sure to target the main points for your review paper. Try to be as accurate as possible.
Use evidence from other sources and bring them out with direct quotes.
Always use the parenthetical citation for referencing. When offering advice on writing review article reviews, experts emphasize citations to help students avoid accidental plagiarism.
Reread your paper after a few hours or days to spot grammar, flow, and organization issues and fix them.
Consider reading several article reviews done by experts to hone your skills in preparing high-quality papers.
Always stick to your lecturer’s guidelines and recommendations.

Why are we going this deep to demonstrate how to prepare a high-quality article review? The answer is that preparing a college or university article review has been a huge challenge for many students. To help you craft even better article reviews, here is one of the best samples:

In the Forbes article, “Three Reasons why Amazon’s Cash Flow is No Comfort” (Trainer, 2014), the author dissects the financial reporting of the online retail giant, Amazon.com. According to the author, the negative or low earnings report, roughly $75 billion annually is not an accurate account of Amazon’s actual financial picture. While many of the Amazon “bulls” argue that viewing the earnings of the company does not provide the appropriate view of its financial position, Amazon’s CEO, Jeff Bezos’ position is that his focus for the company is in having a high free cash flow, rather than a focus on earnings per share. Yet, according to the author, while on the surface it appears that Amazon generates more cash flow than earnings per share, that in fact is a falsehood or imagery due to the way in which Amazon is reporting its financial situation. This articles looks delves into three factors of Amazon’s financial outlook: depreciation, stock-based compensation, and capital lease. It is these three factors, which show that Amazon’s reported operating cash flow is inflated. Amazon recorded $3.3 billion in depreciation, technically a non-cash expense, but in actuality cost $3.4 billion for the cost of purchases of property and equipment. The $1.1 billion stock based compensation gets added back into the operating cash flow, means that this is also a business cost. Within Amazon’s operating cash flows are the build-to-suit leases which totaled $2.7 billion. These costs can be deferred making it appear that Amazon’s cash flow is positive, at least in the long term. Another factor which argues against Amazon’s false front are the operating leases which are included in the financial footnotes, not included on the balance sheet. According to the author, Amazon is using loopholes in order to paint a better picture of its financial position. According to the author, Amazon has lost its position as a profitable online powerhouse. Trainer provides an analysis of Amazon’s invested capital turns since 2003 to show that despite the reports, after a seven year growth between 2003 and a peak in 2009, capital returns show a decline to nearly 2003 levels; revenue on the other hand has actually shown steady increases since 2003. How can invested capital turns peak and decline, despite steady revenue increases? According to the author it is due to efficiency, or lack thereof. Additionally, Amazon has quadrupled its advertising budget since 2009, showing that while revenue is increasing, so are expenses, resulting in the negative cash flow analysis. The article is very critical on how Amazon is reporting its financial health. With hundreds of people to employ and pay, will a negative report help the company maintain its current success or have the negative effect of shaking consumer and investor influence? The price of Amazon shares allows the company to keep its position is the marketplace, and pay stock options, even if the cost of those payouts is rolled back into the operating expenses and possibly decreases the cash flow. Yet keeping stock investors happy, keeps the doors open. The author is critical on the way in which Amazon is reporting its use of capital leases. Yet it is options such as these that keep businesses on the cutting edge and able to expand to meet demand. Its it wrong for Amazon to invest in other types of property ownership or use so that expenses are directly taken from the bottom line, or is this a way of doing business? The author is suggesting that Amazon is not being transparent in its operating of business. In the wake of dozens of companies coming under scrutiny to be more transparent and accurate in their reporting, the assessment of Amazon’s reporting structure is a natural response in keeping businesses accountable. Creative accounting allows companies to project an outward positive financial picture, when in reality business is nowhere near the money-making machine it is perceived to be. Is creative accounting an option for businesses to position it positively in order to stay in business? Is it wrong for a company to position itself more positively in order to stay in business? What will happen to Amazon if in fact all expenditures are reported and pit against the revenues? Articles such as this show the public that companies are making themselves look good in order to stay in business. When companies are not being transparent, it is necessary that professionals who understand accounting procedures to examine profit/loss statements and make those companies accountable. These research inquiries force companies to do what they should be doing. In contrast, it is also necessary for investors to do their due diligence and check on the accuracy of articles like this. Just as this author found data showing that Amazon’s cash flow is not what is being reported, there will be others who may find that Amazon’s financial picture and projections are just as Amazon is reporting. The actual picture may be different depending on who is looking. There is always an analyst who will argue that a company is not doing its due diligence just as there are companies who will report inflated financial results to remain in business and pay investors. Not only is transparency vital, but so is objectivity to ensure that the larger picture is the true focus of research in the financial pictures of companies.

Seek Writing Assistance with Your Article Review

After reading through this step-by-step guide, are you ready to get started with your article review? If you are still finding it challenging or not confident, the best way out is to get assistance from our research helpers . These are expert writers who understand the process of article review writing well and are willing to help and guarantee you top grades. It is like getting your school teachers to do the assignments.

Our experts are also fast, and they can get the job done even with a tight deadline. If your professors issued the article review assignment very close to the deadline or you forgot about the task and now want to get it done in a couple of hours, our online custom writing service will be very helpful.

Our writers are very responsible, and services are affordable. Visit us today to place your order or talk to our friendly support staff for all your article reviews or other assignment needs.

Take a break from writing.

Top academic experts are here for you.

How To Write An Autobiography Guideline And Useful Advice
182 Best Classification Essay Topics To Learn And Write About
How To Manage Stress In College: Top Practical Tips
How To Write A Narrative Essay: Definition, Tips, And A Step-by-Step Guide
Great Problem Solution Essay Topics
Creating Best Stanford Roommate Essay
Costco Essay – Best Writing Guide
How To Quote A Dialogue
Wonderful Expository Essay Topics
Research Paper Topics For 2020
Interesting Persuasive Essay Topics

AFS Programs

A Simple Step-by-Step Guide: How to Write an Article Review

Writing an article review can be a daunting task, especially if you are new to it. However, with the right guidance and a clear structure in mind, you can easily navigate through the whole process. In this article, we will take a step-by-step approach to help you write an effective and insightful article review.

First, it is crucial to thoroughly read and understand the given article. Take your time to go through the entire piece, paying attention to every detail. Make sure to take notes as you go along, jotting down any important points or ideas that catch your attention.

Next, you need to organize your thoughts and outline the key points you wish to include in your review. This way, you can ensure that your review is well-structured and provides a comprehensive overview of the article’s main arguments.

Throughout your review, it is important to maintain an analytical and critical mindset. While it may be tempting to simply summarize the article, try to go beyond that and provide your own insights and opinions. Look for any gaps or inconsistencies in the author’s argument, and point them out in a respectful manner.

Once you have finished writing the main sections of your review, it’s time to proofread and edit your work. Go through the entire review, checking for any spelling or grammatical errors. Ensure that your review follows the APA format, including in-text citations and a properly formatted reference list.

Understanding the Purpose of an Article Review

One of the major purposes of an article review is to provide readers with a comprehensive understanding of the subject matter. By examining the article and its content in detail, you can gain a deeper understanding of the topic and the research conducted by the authors.

Why is Understanding the Purpose Important?

Understanding the purpose of an article review is crucial because it helps you approach the task appropriately. Without a clear understanding of why you are writing the review, you may neglect important aspects or focus on irrelevant information.

Moreover, by understanding the purpose of an article review, you can avoid common mistakes and don’ts. For example, you will know that it is not about summarizing the article, but rather critically analyzing the data and arguments presented by the authors.

The Major Stages in Writing an Article Review

When writing an article review, it is important to follow a specific structure and apply appropriate techniques. The first stage is to gather relevant resources and conduct a thorough survey of the article. This will give you a better understanding of the article’s content and main arguments.

The second stage involves evaluating the article. Here, you need to examine the strength of the arguments, the validity of the research methods used, and the overall impact of the article. This evaluation should be done in a systematic and logical manner, focusing on both the positive and negative aspects.

Once you have evaluated the article, you can then move on to writing the review. The review should highlight the major findings and key points discussed in the article, while also providing your own analysis and interpretation.

The Right Format for an Article Review

When writing an article review, it is important to follow the guidelines set by the journal or publication. Each journal may have specific requirements and formats for article reviews. Therefore, it is crucial to carefully read and understand these guidelines before starting your review.

Regardless of the format, it is important to edit and proofread your review carefully. Editors are likely to notice any errors or inconsistencies, so ensure that your review is free from any grammatical or spelling mistakes.

Analyzing the Article

1. Read the Article

2. Check the Structure

3. Evaluate the Content

Evaluate the content of the article to determine if it meets the requirements of a professional and academic piece. Assess whether the article uses appropriate and relevant sources or citations to support the claims and arguments. Check if the information presented is accurate, reliable, and up-to-date.

4. Reflect on the Article’s Purpose

Consider the purpose of the article. Is it clearly stated and does the article effectively fulfill its intended purpose? Evaluate whether the article provides a new perspective or contributes to the existing body of knowledge on the subject. Assess whether the article effectively uses evidence and reasoning to support its claims.

5. Identify the Strengths and Weaknesses

Make a list of the strengths and weaknesses of the article. Identify what the article does well and what could be improved. Consider the quality of the writing, whether the arguments are convincing, and whether the evidence provided is sufficient and credible. Also, pay attention to any biases or limitations in the article.

6. Consider the Target Audience

Consider the target audience of the article. Evaluate whether the language and tone are appropriate for the intended readers. Assess whether the article provides enough background information for non-experts to understand the subject matter. Also, consider whether the article could benefit from additional explanations or examples.

7. Peer Review and Proofreading

By following this analysis checklist, you can better evaluate the article and make recommendations for improvement, if needed. Keep in mind that different journals or databases may have specific guidelines or requirements for article reviews, so it is important to check those as well before submitting your review.

Organizing Your Thoughts

Firstly, you should start by attentively reading the article multiple times. Take note of any key points, arguments made, and evidence provided. This initial reading will help you grasp the full context of the article and form a clear understanding of what the author is trying to convey.

Once you have read through the article, it is recommended to create an outline. This will serve as a template or a roadmap for your review, allowing you to structure your thoughts in a logical manner. You can identify the main points you want to discuss and the supporting examples or evidence you want to include.

When organizing your thoughts, it is crucial to avoid jumping from one idea to another without any clear transition. Ensure that your review flows smoothly and that each point is well-connected to the previous one. This will make it easier for the reader to follow your argument.

Remember to proofread your work before publishing. Proofreading helps to identify any spelling or grammatical errors that may have been overlooked during the writing process. A well-proofread and error-free review will contribute to a more professional presentation of your ideas.

By organizing your thoughts in a clear and structured manner, you can create a robust and well-written article review. This will not only do justice to the article you are reviewing but will also provide a valuable resource for others who may be interested in the topic.

Writing the Review

Firstly, reflect on the article.

Before you begin, take a moment to reflect on the main points and key ideas presented in the article. Consider what the writer is trying to convey and how well they have supported their claims. This will help you form a better understanding of the article as a whole.

Create an Overview

Start by providing a brief overview of the article. State the title, author, journal, and publication date. Give a summary of the main topic and the purpose of the article.

Identify the Main Points

Next, identify the main points and arguments presented in the article. Highlight the key findings and any significant data or evidence that the writer has used to support their claims. Take notes on anything that stands out to you or that you find particularly important or interesting.

Observe the Structure and Writing Techniques

Look at the structure and organization of the article. Is it well-structured and easy to follow, or is it confusing and disjointed? Consider the writing techniques used by the author – how effectively do they convey their message? Are there any gaps or flaws in the data or arguments presented?

Appropriately Criticize the Article

Although it is important to offer criticism where necessary, be sure to do so constructively and respectfully. Provide specific examples or evidence to support your criticisms. Avoid personal attacks or overly negative language. Remember, your goal is to analyze and evaluate the article, not to attack the writer.

Recommendations and Suggestions

Offer recommendations for improvement. Suggest how the article could be strengthened or expanded upon. Provide suggestions for further research or areas that the author could explore in more detail. Remember to be constructive and offer helpful suggestions rather than just pointing out flaws.

Cite and Reference Properly

Throughout your review, be sure to cite and reference any outside sources or materials that you use. This includes any quotes or paraphrased information from the article itself. Use appropriate formatting and follow the guidelines for referencing in your field.

Proofread and Edit

Before submitting your review, thoroughly proofread and edit your work. Check for any spelling or grammatical errors. Ensure that your review is well-structured and flows logically. Make sure it is easy to read and understand.

By following these steps, you can write a thorough and well-organized review of an article. Remember to consider the writer’s perspective, provide constructive criticism, and offer helpful recommendations. With practice, your review-writing skills will improve, and you will be able to provide insightful and valuable feedback to others in your field.

Proofreading and Editing

Do double-check your own assumptions and biases before starting the review.
Do organize your thoughts and ideas clearly and logically.
Do critically assess the strengths and weaknesses of the article.
Do ask yourself if the arguments are supported with substantial evidence.
Do reflect on the main points and implications communicated in the article.
Do consider how the reviewed article connects with your own knowledge and experience in the field.
Do make recommendations for improvements or further research.
Do use guidelines provided by the journal or editor, if available.
Do ensure that your review is thorough and thoughtful.
Don’t rush through the review – take your time to carefully consider each aspect of the article.
Don’t make any assumptions or claims that are not based on the data presented in the article.
Don’t go off-topic or include irrelevant information in your review.
Don’t provide a summary of the article without critically analyzing its strengths and weaknesses.
Don’t be overly harsh or negative in your criticisms – provide constructive feedback.

By following these guidelines, you can ensure that your article review is publishable and does justice to the work of the author. Proofreading and editing are crucial steps in the review process, as they help to ensure that your review is clear, organized, and effectively communicates your thoughts and recommendations.

What is the purpose of writing an article review?

The purpose of writing an article review is to identify the main ideas and arguments presented in the article, evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of those arguments, and provide a critical analysis of the article’s content.

How do I choose an article to review?

You can choose an article to review by considering your areas of interest or expertise, searching academic databases or online journals, and selecting an article that is relevant to your field of study or research.

What should be included in the introduction of an article review?

The introduction of an article review should provide a brief summary of the article’s content, mention the author’s name and the title of the article, and clearly state your thesis or main argument regarding the article.

How do I evaluate the arguments presented in the article?

To evaluate the arguments presented in the article, you should consider the evidence and examples provided by the author, assess the logical reasoning and coherence of the arguments, and determine whether the author’s claims are supported by reliable sources or research.

Is it necessary to include personal opinions in an article review?

While personal opinions can be included in an article review, it is important to back them up with evidence and examples from the article itself. The focus of an article review should be on providing a critical analysis of the article’s content rather than expressing personal opinions.

What is an article review?

An article review is a critical evaluation of a scientific article that summarizes and critically analyzes the main points, arguments, and findings of the article.

By Alex Koliada, PhD

Alex Koliada, PhD, is a well-known doctor. He is famous for studying aging, genetics, and other medical conditions. He works at the Institute of Food Biotechnology and Genomics. His scientific research has been published in the most reputable international magazines. Alex holds a BA in English and Comparative Literature from the University of Southern California , and a TEFL certification from The Boston Language Institute.

Page Content

Overview of the review report format, the first read-through, first read considerations, spotting potential major flaws, concluding the first reading, rejection after the first reading, before starting the second read-through, doing the second read-through, the second read-through: section by section guidance, how to structure your report, on presentation and style, criticisms & confidential comments to editors, the recommendation, when recommending rejection, additional resources, step by step guide to reviewing a manuscript.

When you receive an invitation to peer review, you should be sent a copy of the paper's abstract to help you decide whether you wish to do the review. Try to respond to invitations promptly - it will prevent delays. It is also important at this stage to declare any potential Conflict of Interest.

The structure of the review report varies between journals. Some follow an informal structure, while others have a more formal approach.

" Number your comments!!! " (Jonathon Halbesleben, former Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Informal Structure

Many journals don't provide criteria for reviews beyond asking for your 'analysis of merits'. In this case, you may wish to familiarize yourself with examples of other reviews done for the journal, which the editor should be able to provide or, as you gain experience, rely on your own evolving style.

Formal Structure

Other journals require a more formal approach. Sometimes they will ask you to address specific questions in your review via a questionnaire. Or they might want you to rate the manuscript on various attributes using a scorecard. Often you can't see these until you log in to submit your review. So when you agree to the work, it's worth checking for any journal-specific guidelines and requirements. If there are formal guidelines, let them direct the structure of your review.

In Both Cases

Whether specifically required by the reporting format or not, you should expect to compile comments to authors and possibly confidential ones to editors only.

Following the invitation to review, when you'll have received the article abstract, you should already understand the aims, key data and conclusions of the manuscript. If you don't, make a note now that you need to feedback on how to improve those sections.

The first read-through is a skim-read. It will help you form an initial impression of the paper and get a sense of whether your eventual recommendation will be to accept or reject the paper.

Keep a pen and paper handy when skim-reading.

Try to bear in mind the following questions - they'll help you form your overall impression:

What is the main question addressed by the research? Is it relevant and interesting?
How original is the topic? What does it add to the subject area compared with other published material?
Is the paper well written? Is the text clear and easy to read?
Are the conclusions consistent with the evidence and arguments presented? Do they address the main question posed?
If the author is disagreeing significantly with the current academic consensus, do they have a substantial case? If not, what would be required to make their case credible?
If the paper includes tables or figures, what do they add to the paper? Do they aid understanding or are they superfluous?

While you should read the whole paper, making the right choice of what to read first can save time by flagging major problems early on.

Editors say, " Specific recommendations for remedying flaws are VERY welcome ."

Examples of possibly major flaws include:

Drawing a conclusion that is contradicted by the author's own statistical or qualitative evidence
The use of a discredited method
Ignoring a process that is known to have a strong influence on the area under study

If experimental design features prominently in the paper, first check that the methodology is sound - if not, this is likely to be a major flaw.

You might examine:

The sampling in analytical papers
The sufficient use of control experiments
The precision of process data
The regularity of sampling in time-dependent studies
The validity of questions, the use of a detailed methodology and the data analysis being done systematically (in qualitative research)
That qualitative research extends beyond the author's opinions, with sufficient descriptive elements and appropriate quotes from interviews or focus groups

Major Flaws in Information

If methodology is less of an issue, it's often a good idea to look at the data tables, figures or images first. Especially in science research, it's all about the information gathered. If there are critical flaws in this, it's very likely the manuscript will need to be rejected. Such issues include:

Insufficient data
Unclear data tables
Contradictory data that either are not self-consistent or disagree with the conclusions
Confirmatory data that adds little, if anything, to current understanding - unless strong arguments for such repetition are made

If you find a major problem, note your reasoning and clear supporting evidence (including citations).

After the initial read and using your notes, including those of any major flaws you found, draft the first two paragraphs of your review - the first summarizing the research question addressed and the second the contribution of the work. If the journal has a prescribed reporting format, this draft will still help you compose your thoughts.

The First Paragraph

This should state the main question addressed by the research and summarize the goals, approaches, and conclusions of the paper. It should:

Help the editor properly contextualize the research and add weight to your judgement
Show the author what key messages are conveyed to the reader, so they can be sure they are achieving what they set out to do
Focus on successful aspects of the paper so the author gets a sense of what they've done well

The Second Paragraph

This should provide a conceptual overview of the contribution of the research. So consider:

Is the paper's premise interesting and important?
Are the methods used appropriate?
Do the data support the conclusions?

After drafting these two paragraphs, you should be in a position to decide whether this manuscript is seriously flawed and should be rejected (see the next section). Or whether it is publishable in principle and merits a detailed, careful read through.

Even if you are coming to the opinion that an article has serious flaws, make sure you read the whole paper. This is very important because you may find some really positive aspects that can be communicated to the author. This could help them with future submissions.

A full read-through will also make sure that any initial concerns are indeed correct and fair. After all, you need the context of the whole paper before deciding to reject. If you still intend to recommend rejection, see the section "When recommending rejection."

Once the paper has passed your first read and you've decided the article is publishable in principle, one purpose of the second, detailed read-through is to help prepare the manuscript for publication. You may still decide to recommend rejection following a second reading.

" Offer clear suggestions for how the authors can address the concerns raised. In other words, if you're going to raise a problem, provide a solution ." (Jonathon Halbesleben, Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Preparation

To save time and simplify the review:

Don't rely solely upon inserting comments on the manuscript document - make separate notes
Try to group similar concerns or praise together
If using a review program to note directly onto the manuscript, still try grouping the concerns and praise in separate notes - it helps later
Note line numbers of text upon which your notes are based - this helps you find items again and also aids those reading your review

Now that you have completed your preparations, you're ready to spend an hour or so reading carefully through the manuscript.

As you're reading through the manuscript for a second time, you'll need to keep in mind the argument's construction, the clarity of the language and content.

With regard to the argument’s construction, you should identify:

Any places where the meaning is unclear or ambiguous
Any factual errors
Any invalid arguments

You may also wish to consider:

Does the title properly reflect the subject of the paper?
Does the abstract provide an accessible summary of the paper?
Do the keywords accurately reflect the content?
Is the paper an appropriate length?
Are the key messages short, accurate and clear?

Not every submission is well written. Part of your role is to make sure that the text’s meaning is clear.

Editors say, " If a manuscript has many English language and editing issues, please do not try and fix it. If it is too bad, note that in your review and it should be up to the authors to have the manuscript edited ."

If the article is difficult to understand, you should have rejected it already. However, if the language is poor but you understand the core message, see if you can suggest improvements to fix the problem:

Are there certain aspects that could be communicated better, such as parts of the discussion?
Should the authors consider resubmitting to the same journal after language improvements?
Would you consider looking at the paper again once these issues are dealt with?

On Grammar and Punctuation

Your primary role is judging the research content. Don't spend time polishing grammar or spelling. Editors will make sure that the text is at a high standard before publication. However, if you spot grammatical errors that affect clarity of meaning, then it's important to highlight these. Expect to suggest such amendments - it's rare for a manuscript to pass review with no corrections.

A 2010 study of nursing journals found that 79% of recommendations by reviewers were influenced by grammar and writing style (Shattel, et al., 2010).

1. The Introduction

A well-written introduction:

Sets out the argument
Summarizes recent research related to the topic
Highlights gaps in current understanding or conflicts in current knowledge
Establishes the originality of the research aims by demonstrating the need for investigations in the topic area
Gives a clear idea of the target readership, why the research was carried out and the novelty and topicality of the manuscript

Originality and Topicality

Originality and topicality can only be established in the light of recent authoritative research. For example, it's impossible to argue that there is a conflict in current understanding by referencing articles that are 10 years old.

Authors may make the case that a topic hasn't been investigated in several years and that new research is required. This point is only valid if researchers can point to recent developments in data gathering techniques or to research in indirectly related fields that suggest the topic needs revisiting. Clearly, authors can only do this by referencing recent literature. Obviously, where older research is seminal or where aspects of the methodology rely upon it, then it is perfectly appropriate for authors to cite some older papers.

Editors say, "Is the report providing new information; is it novel or just confirmatory of well-known outcomes ?"

It's common for the introduction to end by stating the research aims. By this point you should already have a good impression of them - if the explicit aims come as a surprise, then the introduction needs improvement.

2. Materials and Methods

Academic research should be replicable, repeatable and robust - and follow best practice.

Replicable Research

This makes sufficient use of:

Control experiments
Repeated analyses
Repeated experiments

These are used to make sure observed trends are not due to chance and that the same experiment could be repeated by other researchers - and result in the same outcome. Statistical analyses will not be sound if methods are not replicable. Where research is not replicable, the paper should be recommended for rejection.

Repeatable Methods

These give enough detail so that other researchers are able to carry out the same research. For example, equipment used or sampling methods should all be described in detail so that others could follow the same steps. Where methods are not detailed enough, it's usual to ask for the methods section to be revised.

Robust Research

This has enough data points to make sure the data are reliable. If there are insufficient data, it might be appropriate to recommend revision. You should also consider whether there is any in-built bias not nullified by the control experiments.

Best Practice

During these checks you should keep in mind best practice:

Standard guidelines were followed (e.g. the CONSORT Statement for reporting randomized trials)
The health and safety of all participants in the study was not compromised
Ethical standards were maintained

If the research fails to reach relevant best practice standards, it's usual to recommend rejection. What's more, you don't then need to read any further.

3. Results and Discussion

This section should tell a coherent story - What happened? What was discovered or confirmed?

Certain patterns of good reporting need to be followed by the author:

They should start by describing in simple terms what the data show
They should make reference to statistical analyses, such as significance or goodness of fit
Once described, they should evaluate the trends observed and explain the significance of the results to wider understanding. This can only be done by referencing published research
The outcome should be a critical analysis of the data collected

Discussion should always, at some point, gather all the information together into a single whole. Authors should describe and discuss the overall story formed. If there are gaps or inconsistencies in the story, they should address these and suggest ways future research might confirm the findings or take the research forward.

4. Conclusions

This section is usually no more than a few paragraphs and may be presented as part of the results and discussion, or in a separate section. The conclusions should reflect upon the aims - whether they were achieved or not - and, just like the aims, should not be surprising. If the conclusions are not evidence-based, it's appropriate to ask for them to be re-written.

5. Information Gathered: Images, Graphs and Data Tables

If you find yourself looking at a piece of information from which you cannot discern a story, then you should ask for improvements in presentation. This could be an issue with titles, labels, statistical notation or image quality.

Where information is clear, you should check that:

The results seem plausible, in case there is an error in data gathering
The trends you can see support the paper's discussion and conclusions
There are sufficient data. For example, in studies carried out over time are there sufficient data points to support the trends described by the author?

You should also check whether images have been edited or manipulated to emphasize the story they tell. This may be appropriate but only if authors report on how the image has been edited (e.g. by highlighting certain parts of an image). Where you feel that an image has been edited or manipulated without explanation, you should highlight this in a confidential comment to the editor in your report.

6. List of References

You will need to check referencing for accuracy, adequacy and balance.

Where a cited article is central to the author's argument, you should check the accuracy and format of the reference - and bear in mind different subject areas may use citations differently. Otherwise, it's the editor’s role to exhaustively check the reference section for accuracy and format.

You should consider if the referencing is adequate:

Are important parts of the argument poorly supported?
Are there published studies that show similar or dissimilar trends that should be discussed?
If a manuscript only uses half the citations typical in its field, this may be an indicator that referencing should be improved - but don't be guided solely by quantity
References should be relevant, recent and readily retrievable

Check for a well-balanced list of references that is:

Helpful to the reader
Fair to competing authors
Not over-reliant on self-citation
Gives due recognition to the initial discoveries and related work that led to the work under assessment

You should be able to evaluate whether the article meets the criteria for balanced referencing without looking up every reference.

7. Plagiarism

By now you will have a deep understanding of the paper's content - and you may have some concerns about plagiarism.

Identified Concern

If you find - or already knew of - a very similar paper, this may be because the author overlooked it in their own literature search. Or it may be because it is very recent or published in a journal slightly outside their usual field.

You may feel you can advise the author how to emphasize the novel aspects of their own study, so as to better differentiate it from similar research. If so, you may ask the author to discuss their aims and results, or modify their conclusions, in light of the similar article. Of course, the research similarities may be so great that they render the work unoriginal and you have no choice but to recommend rejection.

"It's very helpful when a reviewer can point out recent similar publications on the same topic by other groups, or that the authors have already published some data elsewhere ." (Editor feedback)

Suspected Concern

If you suspect plagiarism, including self-plagiarism, but cannot recall or locate exactly what is being plagiarized, notify the editor of your suspicion and ask for guidance.

Most editors have access to software that can check for plagiarism.

Editors are not out to police every paper, but when plagiarism is discovered during peer review it can be properly addressed ahead of publication. If plagiarism is discovered only after publication, the consequences are worse for both authors and readers, because a retraction may be necessary.

For detailed guidelines see COPE's Ethical guidelines for reviewers and Wiley's Best Practice Guidelines on Publishing Ethics .

8. Search Engine Optimization (SEO)

After the detailed read-through, you will be in a position to advise whether the title, abstract and key words are optimized for search purposes. In order to be effective, good SEO terms will reflect the aims of the research.

A clear title and abstract will improve the paper's search engine rankings and will influence whether the user finds and then decides to navigate to the main article. The title should contain the relevant SEO terms early on. This has a major effect on the impact of a paper, since it helps it appear in search results. A poor abstract can then lose the reader's interest and undo the benefit of an effective title - whilst the paper's abstract may appear in search results, the potential reader may go no further.

So ask yourself, while the abstract may have seemed adequate during earlier checks, does it:

Do justice to the manuscript in this context?
Highlight important findings sufficiently?
Present the most interesting data?

Editors say, " Does the Abstract highlight the important findings of the study ?"

If there is a formal report format, remember to follow it. This will often comprise a range of questions followed by comment sections. Try to answer all the questions. They are there because the editor felt that they are important. If you're following an informal report format you could structure your report in three sections: summary, major issues, minor issues.

Give positive feedback first. Authors are more likely to read your review if you do so. But don't overdo it if you will be recommending rejection
Briefly summarize what the paper is about and what the findings are
Try to put the findings of the paper into the context of the existing literature and current knowledge
Indicate the significance of the work and if it is novel or mainly confirmatory
Indicate the work's strengths, its quality and completeness
State any major flaws or weaknesses and note any special considerations. For example, if previously held theories are being overlooked

Major Issues

Are there any major flaws? State what they are and what the severity of their impact is on the paper
Has similar work already been published without the authors acknowledging this?
Are the authors presenting findings that challenge current thinking? Is the evidence they present strong enough to prove their case? Have they cited all the relevant work that would contradict their thinking and addressed it appropriately?
If major revisions are required, try to indicate clearly what they are
Are there any major presentational problems? Are figures & tables, language and manuscript structure all clear enough for you to accurately assess the work?
Are there any ethical issues? If you are unsure it may be better to disclose these in the confidential comments section

Minor Issues

Are there places where meaning is ambiguous? How can this be corrected?
Are the correct references cited? If not, which should be cited instead/also? Are citations excessive, limited, or biased?
Are there any factual, numerical or unit errors? If so, what are they?
Are all tables and figures appropriate, sufficient, and correctly labelled? If not, say which are not

Your review should ultimately help the author improve their article. So be polite, honest and clear. You should also try to be objective and constructive, not subjective and destructive.

You should also:

Write clearly and so you can be understood by people whose first language is not English
Avoid complex or unusual words, especially ones that would even confuse native speakers
Number your points and refer to page and line numbers in the manuscript when making specific comments
If you have been asked to only comment on specific parts or aspects of the manuscript, you should indicate clearly which these are
Treat the author's work the way you would like your own to be treated

Most journals give reviewers the option to provide some confidential comments to editors. Often this is where editors will want reviewers to state their recommendation - see the next section - but otherwise this area is best reserved for communicating malpractice such as suspected plagiarism, fraud, unattributed work, unethical procedures, duplicate publication, bias or other conflicts of interest.

However, this doesn't give reviewers permission to 'backstab' the author. Authors can't see this feedback and are unable to give their side of the story unless the editor asks them to. So in the spirit of fairness, write comments to editors as though authors might read them too.

Reviewers should check the preferences of individual journals as to where they want review decisions to be stated. In particular, bear in mind that some journals will not want the recommendation included in any comments to authors, as this can cause editors difficulty later - see Section 11 for more advice about working with editors.

You will normally be asked to indicate your recommendation (e.g. accept, reject, revise and resubmit, etc.) from a fixed-choice list and then to enter your comments into a separate text box.

Recommending Acceptance

If you're recommending acceptance, give details outlining why, and if there are any areas that could be improved. Don't just give a short, cursory remark such as 'great, accept'. See Improving the Manuscript

Recommending Revision

Where improvements are needed, a recommendation for major or minor revision is typical. You may also choose to state whether you opt in or out of the post-revision review too. If recommending revision, state specific changes you feel need to be made. The author can then reply to each point in turn.

Some journals offer the option to recommend rejection with the possibility of resubmission – this is most relevant where substantial, major revision is necessary.

What can reviewers do to help? " Be clear in their comments to the author (or editor) which points are absolutely critical if the paper is given an opportunity for revisio n." (Jonathon Halbesleben, Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Recommending Rejection

If recommending rejection or major revision, state this clearly in your review (and see the next section, 'When recommending rejection').

Where manuscripts have serious flaws you should not spend any time polishing the review you've drafted or give detailed advice on presentation.

Editors say, " If a reviewer suggests a rejection, but her/his comments are not detailed or helpful, it does not help the editor in making a decision ."

In your recommendations for the author, you should:

Give constructive feedback describing ways that they could improve the research
Keep the focus on the research and not the author. This is an extremely important part of your job as a reviewer
Avoid making critical confidential comments to the editor while being polite and encouraging to the author - the latter may not understand why their manuscript has been rejected. Also, they won't get feedback on how to improve their research and it could trigger an appeal

Remember to give constructive criticism even if recommending rejection. This helps developing researchers improve their work and explains to the editor why you felt the manuscript should not be published.

" When the comments seem really positive, but the recommendation is rejection…it puts the editor in a tough position of having to reject a paper when the comments make it sound like a great paper ." (Jonathon Halbesleben, Editor of Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology)

Visit our Wiley Author Learning and Training Channel for expert advice on peer review.

Watch the video, Ethical considerations of Peer Review

A Step-by-Step Guide to Writing a Stellar Literature Review (with Help from AI)

Aren’t all of us mini versions of Sherlock Holmes when browsing data and archives for a research piece? As we go through the process, a comprehensive literature review is an essential toolkit to make your research shine.

A literature review consists of scholarly sources that validate the content. Its primary objective is to offer a concise summary of the research and to let you explore relevant theories and methodologies. Through this review, you can identify gaps in the existing research and bridge them with your contribution.

The real challenge is how to write an excellent literature review. Let’s learn.

What is the purpose of a literature review?

A literature review is an introduction to your research. It helps you put your perspective to the table, along with a summary of the theme.

What does my literature review communicate?

Explanation of your research: how the information was collected, the research method, the justification of the chosen data sources, and an overview of the data analysis.
Framework: the journey from where the concept began and how it is presented.
Connects the previous and current research:

It presents the broader scope of your research by connecting it to the existing data and debates and underlining how your content fits the prevailing studies.

In an era of information overload, a literature review must be well-structured.

Let’s learn all about the structure and style of a literature review that’ll help you strengthen your research.

Literature review– structure and style

Begin with a question and end it with the solution– the key to structuring a literature review. It resembles an essay’s format, with the first paragraph introducing the readers to the topic and the following explaining the research in-depth.

The conclusion reiterates the question and summarizes the overall insights of your research. There’s no word count restriction. —it depends on the type of research. For example, a dissertation demands lengthy work, whereas a short paper needs a few pages.

In a literature review, maintaining high quality is vital, with a focus on academic writing style. Informal language should be avoided in favor of a more formal tone.

The content avoids contractions, clearly differentiating between previous and current research through the use of past and present tense. Wordtune assists in establishing a formal tone, enhancing your work with pertinent suggestions. This AI-powered tool ensures your writing remains genuine, lucid, and engaging.

The option of refining the tonality offers multiple possibilities for rephrasing a single sentence. Thus, pick the best and keep writing.

Get Wordtune for free > Get Wordtune for free >

Your friendly step-by-step guide to writing a literary review (with help from AI)

Do you find it challenging to begin the literature review? Don’t worry! We’re here to get you started with our step-by-step guide.

1. Narrow down the research scope

Simply begin with the question: What am I answering through my research?

Whether it’s cooking or painting, the real challenge is the prep-up for it rather than performing the task. Once you’re done, it smoothly progresses. Similarly, for your literature review, prepare the groundwork by narrowing down the research scope.

Browse and scoop out relevant data inclining well with your research. While you can’t cover every aspect of your research, pick a topic that isn’t too narrow nor too broad to keep your literature review well-balanced.

2. Hunt relevant literature

The next question: Does this data align with the issue I’m trying to address?

As you review sources of information, hunt out the best ones. Determine which findings help in offering a focused insight on your topic. The best way to pick primary sources is to opt for the ones featured in reliable publications. You can also choose secondary sources from other researchers from a reasonable time frame and a relevant background.

For example, if your research focuses on the Historical Architecture of 18th-century Europe, the first-hand accounts and surveys from the past would hold more weight than the new-age publications.

3. Observe the themes and patterns in sources

Next comes: What is the core viewpoint in most of the research? Has it stayed constant over time, or have the authors differed in their points of view?

Ensure to scoop out the essential aspects of what each source represents. Once you have collected all this information, combine it and add your interpretations at the end. This process is known as synthesis.

Synthesize ideas by combining arguments, findings and forming your new version.

4. Generate an outline

The next question: How can I organize my review effectively? When navigating multiple data sources, you must have noticed a structure throughout the research. Develop an outline to make the process easier. An outline is a skeletal format of the review, helping you connect the information more strategically.

Here are the three different ways to organize an outline– Chronologically, Thematically, or by Methodology.You can develop the outline chronologically, starting from the older sources and leading to the latest pieces. Another way of organizing is to thematically divide the sections and discuss each under the designated sub-heading.

You can even organize it per the research methods used by the respective authors. The choice of outline depends on the subject. For example, in the case of a science paper, you can divide the information into sections like introduction, types of equipment, method, procedure, findings, etc. In contrast, it’s best to present it in divisions based on timelines like Ancient, Middle Ages, Industrial revolutions, etc., for a history paper.

If you’re confused about how to structure the data, work with Wordtune.

With the Generate with AI feature, you can mention your research topic and let Wordtune curate a comprehensive outline for your study.

Having a precise prompt is the key to getting the best results.

5. Start filling!

Your next question must be: Am I ready to compose all the parts of the literature review?

Once you’re ready with the basic outline and relevant sources, start filling in the data. Go for an introductory paragraph first to ensure your readers understand the topic and how you will present it. Ensure you clearly explain the section in the first sentence.

However, if beginning from the first paragraph seems intimidating, don’t worry! Add the main body content to the sub-headings, then jump to the introduction.

Add headings wherever possible to make it more straightforward and guide your readers logically through different sources. Lastly, conclude your study by presenting a key takeaway and summarizing your findings. To make your task easier, work with Wordtune. It helps align your content with the desired tone and refine the structure.

6. Give attention to detail and edit

The last question: Am I satisfied with the language and content written in the literature review? Is it easy to understand?

Once you’re done writing the first draft of a literature review, it’s time to refine it. Take time between writing and reading the draft to ensure a fresh perspective. It makes it easier to spot errors when you disconnect from the content for some time. Start by looking at the document from a bird's eye to ensure the formatting and structure are in order.

After reviewing the content format, you must thoroughly check your work for grammar, spelling, and punctuation. One of the best approaches to editing and proofreading is to use Wordtune . It helps simplify complex sentences, enhance the content quality, and gain prowess over the tonality.

The dos and don’ts of writing a literature review

Writing a stellar literature review requires following a few dos and don'ts. Just like Sherlock Holmes would never overlook a hint, you must pay attention to every minute detail while writing a perfect narrative. To help you write, below are some dos and don'ts to remember.

Composing a literature review demands a holistic research summary, each part exhibiting your understanding and approach. As you write the content, make sure to cover the following points:

Keep a historical background of the field of research. Highlight the relevant relation between the old studies and your new research.
Discuss the core issue, question, and debate of your topic.
Theories lay the foundation of research. While you’re writing a literature review, make sure to add relevant concepts and ideas to support your statements.
Another critical thing to keep in mind is to define complex terminologies. It helps the readers understand the content with better clarity.

Examples of comprehensive literature reviews

Aren’t good examples the best way to understand a subject? Let’s look into a few examples of literature reviews and analyze what makes them well-written.

1. Critical Thinking and Transferability: A Review of the Literature (Gwendolyn Reece)

An overview of scholarly sources is included in the literature review, which explores critical thinking in American education. The introduction stating the subject’s importance makes it a winning literature review. Following the introduction is a well-defined purpose that highlights the importance of research.

As one keeps reading, there is more clarity on the pros and cons of the research. By dividing information into parts with relevant subheadings, the author breaks a lengthy literature review into manageable chunks, defining the overall structure.

Along with other studies and presented perspectives, the author also expresses her opinion. It is presented with minimal usage of ‘I,’ keeping it person-poised yet general. Toward the conclusion, the author again offers an overview of the study. A summary is further strengthened by presenting suggestions for future research as well.

2. The Use of Technology in English Language Learning: A Literature Review

This literature review is thematically organized on how technology affects language acquisition. The study begins with an introduction to the topic with well-cited sources. It presents the views of different studies to help readers get a sense of different perspectives. After giving these perspectives, the author offers a personalized opinion.

One of the critical aspects that makes this a good literature review is a dedicated paragraph for definitions. It helps readers proceed further with a clear understanding of the crucial terminologies. There’s a comparison of the modern and previous studies and approaches to give an overall picture of the research.

Once the main body is composed, the author integrates recommendations for action-based tips. Thus, the literature review isn’t just summarizing the sources but offering actions relevant to the topics. Finally, the concluding paragraph has a brief overview with key takeaways.

Wordtune: your writing buddy!

A literature review demands the right balance of language and clarity. You must refine the content to achieve a formal tone and clear structure. Do you know what will help you the most? Wordtune !.

The real-time grammar checker leaves no scope for errors and lets you retain precision in writing. This writing companion is all you need for stress-free working and comprehensive literature review development.

Let the narrative begin

A literary review isn't just about summarizing sources; it's about seamlessly bringing your perspective to the table. Always remember to set a narrative for added interest and a brilliant composition. With structure and style being the pillars of a stellar literature review, work with Wordtune to ensure zero compromises on the quality.

Share This Article:

The Official Wordtune Guide

An Expert Guide to Writing Effective Compound Sentences (+ Examples)

How I Turned Clutter into Cash: 10 Proven Instagram Copywriting Hacks

Looking for fresh content, thank you your submission has been received.

South Park: Snow Day! Review

Dull, toothless, and a big step in the wrong direction for south park games..

Like being trapped indoors without power during an actual blizzard, playing South Park: Snow Day! had me frigidly wishing I could be anywhere else. A direct follow-up to the storyline of two excellent turn-based RPGs and a decent mobile spin-off , this cooperative 3D hack-and-slash admirably tries a lot of new things – but it throws the baby out with the bathwater in the process, leaving us with a monotonous, slipshod mess. The controls are awkward and clumsy, the weapons and abilities are limp and uninteresting, and even with only five levels that can be completed in as many hours, it still feels like it drags on for far too long. Worse than that though: all the humor and shocking moments for which South Park and its recent games are known is utterly missing in action, leaving little to recommend about this hollow, repetitious dud. I don’t know what we did to deserve going from a masterful Obsidian RPG that aptly captured South Park’s attitude to this, but boy does the fall hurt.

South Park: Snow Day! is a perplexingly boring third-person multiplayer game, where you and up to three of your unluckiest friends smack and blast your way through waves of samey first graders. Aside from some mildly interesting card-based leveling mechanics and an amusing one-liner here and there (like when Jimbo takes a well-deserved jab at NFTs) there are remarkably few glimmers of potential in this misadventure. But the vast majority of your time will be spent trudging through five levels of repetitive and tedious hack-and-slash combat that feels like it’s straight out of 2008 and never gets more interesting.

South Park: Snow Day! Gameplay Screenshots

Even more disappointing is that it never once made me gasp or guffaw at an outrageous situation. South Park: The Stick of Truth saw us spelunking in Mr. Slave’s large intestine, dodging genitalia in the world’s most messed up rendition of Honey, I Shrunk the Kids, and questing in the two-dimensional and entirely accurately represented “country” of Canada. It was filled with hilarious moments that made me question how in the heck Ubisoft avoided an Adults Only rating from the ESRB. The same was largely true in the followup from Ubisoft’s internal studio, The Fractured But Whole . Snow Day returns to the Stick of Truth’s make-believe fantasy setting, but here you just occasionally fart every once in a while in lieu of actual jokes. Sure, there are some very minor moments that made me smile, like the final boss fight being a surprisingly timely reference to Dune, but those moments are so few and far between that they only ever served to get my hopes up before dashing them all over again. This is perhaps the most toothless South Park adventure ever created, which often feels like it’s directed towards actual children rather than the revolting reprobates, like me, who came here specifically to be shocked and disgusted.

The story is straightforward and one-note, as you and the South Park gang decide to continue your fantasy adventures during a snow day, and you proceed to fight against them and their hordes of minions in battle one at a time. The whole thing lasts about five hours and very little of note happens along the way – there are no big surprises, zero horrifying gross-out moments, and even the characters you know and love behave in a bizarrely tame fashion compared to how you’d expect after all these years. The wholly unhinged Randy makes a few appearances where he’s hoarding toilet paper, but never flies off the rails or delivers any memorable one-liners; even Cartman, whose entire personality is being the biggest monster imaginable, is mostly well-behaved the whole way through, despite briefly doing a stint as the bad guy himself. That appallingly flat writing makes an already bad game not even worth pushing through for a few laughs, and that’s an extremely hard pill to swallow as a decades-long South Park fan.

Should the next South Park game be turn-based or real-time combat?

After setting the bar so low it was difficult to imagine, but the untidy, soulless combat that accounts for the vast majority of playtime is Snow Day’s biggest miss. You select one of three melee weapons (twin daggers, a sword and shield, or a battle ax) and one of three ranged weapons (a bow and arrow, a wizard’s staff, or a wand) to bring into battle, allowing for precious few options for how to play. Not that it matters, really, because thanks to the floaty and imprecise controls, none of these options feel good to begin with. Each of the ranged weapons does damage from afar, requiring a cooldown or charge time that’s so long it’s almost always not worth the trouble, while all three of the melee weapons are at least more reliable for damage, but don’t lock on to enemies, have awful hit detection, and when you do connect it feels a bit like dueling someone with a helium balloon.

The only other major tools in your arsenal are the two equally underwhelming powers you get to equip, selected from eight total options, which include stuff like a healing totem that regenerates nearby allies’ HP for a short amount of time, or a deployable turret that fires snowballs at passersby. These are at least more interesting than any of the base weapon options, but since they’re recharged by doing damage and scoring kills with your other weapons, definitely don’t solve the problems with combat.

What's Your Game of The Year 2024 So Far?

Pick a winner.

One of Snow Day’s only good ideas are upgradeable cards that you collect as you fight through levels. These grant passive benefits and allow you to cultivate a build throughout each stage, then disappear once that level is over, adding a minor roguelike element to the adventure. You might find interesting cards that augment your healing totem, enabling it to do things like revive downed teammates, allow you to do more damage to enemies near it, or increase its area of effect. Or you can chase riskier cards, like one that turns your otherwise weak wand attack into a high-DPS flame-spewing hose that lights you on fire too as a tradeoff. While combat never stops being a sloppy, disappointing slog, collecting cards to augment your playstyle, then strategically leveling them up to make those abilities more powerful, injects a modicum of variety into it.

The issue is that Snow Day isn’t a roguelike in any other way. You don’t have to start the entire campaign over when you die (you just start at the beginning of that level), and even on the hardest difficulty, none of the levels are so challenging that you won’t probably beat them on the first try. So there’s not a ton of pressure to create a really solid build since there’s little to optimize for. And even if you do manage to assemble a deck of cards you like, each level ends after an hour or less, at which point you lose them all just as soon as the build starts coming together and go back to zero. I would love to see a better game try this idea, because here it’s implemented in a way that only barely improves an overwhelmingly bad time.

Another example of a poorly thought-out card mechanic is the single random Bullshit Card you get at the beginning of each level that lets you activate a more powerful ability a limited number of times. These might let you call down a rain of fiery meteors for straight DPS or recover your health and make you invisible for a short period of time to escape danger, but none of them are all that interesting and they only have a minor impact on gameplay since you can usually only cast them two or three times per level. What’s worse, though, is that enemies get Bullshit Cards too, and they do things like replace the enemy’s normal weapons with high-damage laser swords, or give the bad guys protective bubble shields that make them significantly more beefy. In most cases, these cards serve only to significantly draw out the length of combat (including pausing gameplay whenever the enemy uses one to watch the animation play out) which is already pretty unbearable to begin with.

TieGuyTravis' Funniest Games List

This is especially true in the revolting horde mode (available as free DLC) in which you’re subjected to waves of enemies in an arena. This format really dials up all the worst parts of Snow Day and cuts out any hope of stumbling upon jokes or story along the way. In these nightmare scenarios, the enemies are given a whole bunch of Bullshit Cards and use them every couple of seconds, which constantly pauses the battle for the announcer to shout “bullshit” at you. It’s super cool and didn’t at all make me want to be buried alive.

Thanks to recent successes, we know exactly what a great South Park game looks like, and South Park: Snow Day! couldn’t be farther from it. I’m a huge fan of throwing out the rulebook to try something completely fresh, especially in this age of samey sequels and forever live-service games that increasingly play it safe, but this bold attempt at a new direction misses the mark so drastically I’m aghast at just how sideways things went. Whether it’s due to the thoroughly unenjoyable combat or the uncharacteristicly toothless and unfunny story, I can’t recommend anyone waste their time on this cooperative lost cause – even my fellow die-hard South Park fans.

More Reviews by Travis Northup

Ign recommends.

Helldivers 2 Players Liberate Malevelon Creek in Hours to Redeem One of Their Biggest Major Order Failures

Two men in suits talk in front of flags.

The amazing story of the man who created the latest narco-state in the Americas, and how the United States helped him every step of the way − until now

Interim Director of the Frederick S. Pardee Center for the Study of the Longer-Range Future, Boston University

Disclosure statement

I am a member of the Party for Democracy in Chile and and affiliated with the Foro de Political Exterior, a Chilean foreign policy think tank.

Boston University provides funding as a founding partner of The Conversation US.

View all partners

When Juan Orlando Hernández was convicted by a federal jury in Manhattan in early March 2024, it marked a spectacular fall from grace: from being courted in the U.S. as a friendly head of state to facing the rest of his life behind bars, convicted of cocaine importation and weapons offenses.

“Juan Orlando Hernández abused his position as President of Honduras to operate the country as a narco-state where violent drug traffickers were allowed with virtual impunity,” said U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland following the jury conviction. Anne Milgram , administrator of the Drug Enforcement Administration, added: “When the leader of Honduras and the leader of the Sinaloa Cartel work hand-in-hand to send deadly drugs into the United States, both deserve to be accountable.”

The conviction was a victory for the Justice Department and the DEA. During Hernández’s two terms in office, from 2014 to 2022, he and his acolytes transported more than 400 tons of cocaine into the United States, according to U.S. prosecutors . The former head of state now faces a mandatory sentence of up to 40 years in prison; sentencing is scheduled for June 26.

But there’s more to this story.

As I explore in the book “ 21st Century Democracy Promotion in the Americas: Standing Up for the Polity ,” written in collaboration with the Open University’s Britta Weiffen , Honduras is a tragic example of what happens when a country becomes a narco-state. While its people suffer the consequences – the World Bank reports that about half the country currently lives under poverty – its leaders grow rich through the drugs trade.

Furthermore, the way Hernández came to power and maintained that position for so long could provide “Exhibit A” in any indictment of U.S. policy toward Central America – and Latin America more generally – over the past few decades.

Growing ties with cartels

Up to Hernández’s arrest in Tegucigalpa , the Honduran capital, and extradition to the United States in January 2022, his biggest enabler had been none other than the U.S. government itself.

Presidents Barack Obama , Donald Trump and Joe Biden all backed Hernández and allowed him to inflict enormous harm to Honduras and to the United States in the process.

How so? To answer this question, some background is needed.

On June 28, 2009, a classic military coup took place in Honduras. In the wee hours of the morning, while still in his pajamas, President Manuel “Mel” Zelaya was unceremoniously escorted by armed soldiers from his home and flown to a neighboring country . The coup leaders alleged that, by calling for a referendum on reforming the Honduran Constitution, the government was moving toward removing the one-term presidential term limit enshrined in the country’s charter and opening the door to authoritarianism.

Initially, then-President Barack Obama protested the coup and took measures against those responsible – the right-wing opponents of Zelaya.

But the administration eventually relented and allowed the coup leaders to prevail , largely due to pressure from Republicans, who saw Zelaya as being too close to Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez , whose leftist agenda was deemed by the GOP as a threat to U.S. interests.

The coup-makers simply ran the clock against the upcoming election date and installed their own candidate in the presidency, Porfirio Lobo of the National party , whose son Fabio was also later convicted of cocaine trafficking.

Washington looks the other way

Lobo laid the foundations of Honduras as the new century’s first narco-state , allowing drug cartels to infiltrate the highest echelons of government and the security apparatus as cocaine trade became an increasingly central plank of the country’s economy.

All the while, the U.S. pumped tens of millions of dollars into building up Honduras’ police and military , despite widespread allegations of being engaged in corruption, complicit in the drugs trade and engaged in human rights abuses .

The dollars continued to flow when Lobo was succeeded in 2013 by his buddy and fellow National party member, Juan Orlando Hernández.

In 2017, Hernández – an ardent supporter of the 2009 coup – ran for a second term after the Supreme Court of Honduras pronounced this to be perfectly legal .

Many Hondurans believe Hernández stole the November 2017 elections . The vote count was suspended in the middle of the night as Hernández was running behind, and when the polls opened in the morning, he miraculously emerged as a winner .

Despite widespread allegations of election fraud, the U.S. quickly recognized the result, congratulating Hernández on his win .

Emboldened by his success, Hernández continued to build up Honduras as the new century’s first narco-state of the Americas.

In 2018, the president’s brother, Juan Antonio “Tony” Hernández, a former member of the Honduran Parliament, was arrested in the United States for his association with the Cartel de Sinaloa, the Mexican drug cartel. This entity valued his services so much that they named a particular strain of cocaine after him , stamping the bags as “TH.” Tony Hernández was convicted on four charges in 2019, sentenced to 30 years in prison, and has been in U.S. federal prison ever since.

President Hernández denied any association with the cartel, but the evidence pointed to the contrary. As reported in The Economist , in a New York City trial, one accused drug trafficker alleged that Hernández took bribes for “helping cocaine reach the United States.” Another witness testified that the president had taken two bribes in 2013, before being elected; a former cartel leader testified that the president had been paid $250,000 to protect him from being arrested.

‘Complicit or gullible’

Given Hernández’s history in Honduras, the repeated claims of U.S. government officials that they simply didn’t know of his crimes ring hollow.

Honduras became a narco-state, in part, because U.S. policymakers looked the other way as it did so. They embraced Hernández because he was ideologically more palatable and subservient to Washington’s wishes compared with his rival, Zelaya. But as the trial verdict in Manhattan makes clear, it was a decision with disastrous consequences.

As one State Department official put it, “Today’s verdict makes all of us who collaborated with (Hernández) look either complicit or gullible .”

The latter may be the more charitable assessment. But the truth is more uncomfortable.

Foreign policy
Latin America
Drug trafficking
Drug Crimes
Obama administration
Trump administration
Sinaloa cartel
Biden administration
US Justice Department
Narcotrafficking

Biocloud Project Manager - Australian Biocommons

Director, Defence and Security

Opportunities with the new CIEHF

School of Social Sciences – Public Policy and International Relations opportunities

Deputy Editor - Technology

- Google Chrome

Intended for healthcare professionals

Access provided by Google Indexer
My email alerts
BMA member login
Username * Password * Forgot your log in details? Need to activate BMA Member Log In Log in via OpenAthens Log in via your institution

Search form

Advanced search
Search responses
Search blogs
News & Views
Scotland moves a step...

Scotland moves a step closer to legalising assisted dying

Related content
Peer review
Adrian O’Dowd

A step towards potentially legalising assisted dying in Scotland has taken place with the formal introduction of a bill to the Scottish parliament on 27 March.

If the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill 1 is passed it will represent the first time that dying people in the UK can legally choose assisted dying if they meet eligibility criteria.

The bill has prompted criticism from some parts of the medical profession, disability and human rights groups, and some religious groups, with concerns that a change in the law would put pressure on vulnerable people to end their lives for fear of being a financial, emotional, or care burden on others.

The private members’ bill, drafted by Liberal Democrat MSP for Orkney Islands Liam McArthur, will now be subject to committee scrutiny ahead of a stage one vote in the Scottish parliament. Debate on the bill is expected to happen in the autumn.

If approved, the bill would mean assisted dying would only be available to terminally ill, mentally competent adults who have been resident in Scotland for at least 12 months and are registered with a Scottish medical practice.

The bill will set out the safeguards required to be in place for someone requesting an assisted death, including assessment by two independent medical practitioners, stringent capacity checks, and a minimum 14 day period of reflection following their initial request.

McArthur said, “We can and must do better. For many years, polling has consistently shown overwhelming support for assisted dying. I believe we are now seeing the necessary political support, across all parties, to deliver this long overdue reform. The provisions I am proposing would be robustly safeguarded to ensure the process works as intended.”

The development came as campaigning group Dignity in Dying released details of a poll of 4132 adults in Scotland carried out between February and March 2024 which showed that almost four in five (78%) people said they would support such a law.

Sarah Wootton, chief executive of Dignity in Dying, said, “This bill marks an important milestone towards terminally ill people in Scotland having choice at the end of their lives.

“It is a historic day for Scotland and for those who have campaigned tirelessly for a safer, more compassionate law. It’s time for a full, fair, and free debate on assisted dying across the UK.”

Care Not Killing, an umbrella group of organisations that oppose a change in the law, said that there had been extensive opposition following the launch of the proposed legislation and that criticism had come from a broad cross-section of society.

Its chief executive Gordon Macdonald said, “As we have seen with the issue of covid-19 in care homes, it is far too easy for politicians, NHS managers, or other bureaucrats operating under workload or resourcing pressures to write people off and make subjective value judgements about the quality of life of those who are elderly or disabled.

“Rather than legalising assisted suicide we should be investing more resources to ensure everyone who needs it in Scotland can access proper palliative care.”

Last week, assisted dying proposals were lodged in Jersey and are set to be debated in May, followed by draft legislation that will be further debated by the end of 2025. In October last year, an assisted dying bill passed second reading in the Isle of Man and is now progressing through various stages of scrutiny and debate.

In February, the parliamentary health and social care committee published a report 2 which said that the Westminster government should consider how to respond to another jurisdiction in the UK or the Crown Dependencies that legislates to allow assisted dying or assisted suicide, and how that would impact other parts of the UK.

The BMA ended its official opposition to a change in the law on assisted dying in favour of neutrality in 2021 and in 2019 the Royal College of Physicians dropped its longstanding opposition to assisted dying in favour of neutrality.

↵ Scottish Parliament. Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill. www.parliament.scot/bills-and-laws/bills/assisted-dying-for-terminally-ill-adults-scotland-bill

Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun to step down at end of year amid plane-maker's woes

Management shakeup caps weeks of turmoil after door blowout on 737 max.

A bald man in a suit, his mouth open mid-sentence and one hand on his chest, surrounded by reporters with microphones and recorders.

Social Sharing

Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun will step down from the embattled plane-maker at the end of the year as part of a broader management shuffle, capping a tumultuous five-plus years that have shaken faith in one of the U.S.'s most-storied manufacturers.

In a letter to employees announcing his departure, Calhoun wrote that the company is focused on returning Boeing "to stability after the extraordinary challenges of the past five years, with safety and quality at the forefront of everything that we do."

Stan Deal, president and CEO of Boeing's commercial airplanes unit, will retire from the company immediately with Stephanie Pope, the company's chief operating officer, now leading the division. Board chair Larry Kellner has also told the company he doesn't plan to stand for re-election in May.

Did Boeing learn from past mistakes? Mid-air blowout has again put company on defensive
Boeing needs 'heightened level of oversight,' says top U.S. aviation regulator

Boeing has come under intense pressure since early January, when a panel blew off a brand-new Alaska Airlines 737 Max. Investigators say bolts that help keep the panel in place were missing after repair work at the Boeing factory.

The Federal Aviation Administration has stepped up its scrutiny of the company, including putting a limit on production of 737s, its marquee aircraft. The agency recently ordered an audit of assembly lines at a Boeing factory near Seattle, where the company builds planes such as the Alaska Airlines 737 Max.

Fallout from the Jan. 5 blowout has raised scrutiny of Boeing to its highest level since a pair of 737 Max jets crashed, killing hundreds of people in Indonesia and Ethiopia in 2018 and 2019, respectively.

Investors unsure shakeup will fix safety issues

Some investors expressed concern that the management shake-up would not be enough to address long-standing safety issues that were the reason for Calhoun's ascendance to CEO in the first place in 2020.

"We've long thought that the issues at Boeing have been seated in cultural challenges," said Cameron Dawson, chief investment officer at Newedge Wealth.

Meanwhile, other analysts viewed the shakeup as a positive for shareholders in anticipation of a new CEO from outside the company's existing management.

Boeing Airlines' "culture of quality and manufacturing has been called into question over recent issues, and a new, outside perspective on operations could be encouraging for investors," wrote Stephen Strackhouse of RBC Capital Markets.

When reached for comment, a spokesperson for Boeing directed CBC News to Calhoun's letter and a company news release.

A Boeing plane is shown taxiing on a runway.

Boeing under intense pressure

The management shuffle was inevitable given the harm done to Boeing's reputation as a jewel in the crown of the U.S. and its economy, said Ian Lee, an associate professor at Carleton University's Sprott School of Business.

"The CEO's job of any company is to create value, not destroy value. And in allowing these problems to fester and get worse, they were destroying value," Lee told CBC News.

"The share price of Boeing is down very dramatically. Customers are unbelievably angry. And that's why the situation was completely unsustainable and it was inevitable."

5 years after 737 Max crashes, is Boeing any safer?

Boeing has been under intense pressure from the CEOs of various airlines, who have been outspoken in their frustration with Boeing's manufacturing problems, which have slowed deliveries of planes that the carriers were counting on.

The company's main rival, Airbus, clinched orders for 65 jets from two of Boeing's key Asian customers recently, in what some saw as a sign of executives' concerns about Boeing.

Southwest Airlines recently said it was re-evaluating its financial expectations for this year because of related delays in the delivery of planes.

"When you have the buyers — the biggest and most important buyers, including Southwest — going to the board and saying, you have a problem, and you're not solving it, and you've got to fix it right now, then, Houston, we have a problem," Lee said.

Discussions to bring former supplier back in-house

Calhoun acknowledged that Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 was a "watershed" moment for Boeing.

"We must continue to respond to this accident with humility and complete transparency. We also must inculcate a total commitment to safety and quality at every level of our company," he said.

The company's most significant effort to improve quality has been the opening of discussions about bringing Spirit AeroSystems, which builds fuselages for the Max and parts for that and other Boeing planes, back into the company.

Mistakes made at Spirit, which Boeing spun off nearly 20 years ago, have compounded the company's problems. Bringing this key supplier back in-house would, in theory, give Boeing more control over the quality of manufacturing key airplane components.

Calhoun indicated that the decision to leave the company was his.

The board has elected Steve Mollenkopf to succeed Kellner as independent board chair. In this role, Mollenkopf will lead the board's process of choosing Boeing's next CEO.

With files from CBC's Jenna Benchetrit and Reuters

step by step how to write an article review

IMAGES

VIDEO

COMMENTS

How to Write an Article Review

Things You Should Know

Preparing to Write Your Review

Writing the Article Review

Sample Article Reviews

Expert Q&A

You Might Also Like

About This Article

Reader Success Stories

Did this article help you?

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

How to Write an Article Review: Template & Examples

❓ What Is an Article Review?

📑 Article Review Format

Popular Vs. Scholarly Articles

Article Review vs. Response Paper

✍️ How to Write an Article Review: Step by Step

Read the Article

Summarize the Article

Evaluate the Article

Write the Text

Article Review in APA

Article Review in MLA

✅ Article Review Template

📝 Article Review Examples

📃 Men, Women, & Money

📃 When and Why Nationalism Beats Globalism

📃 Sleep Deprivation

✏️ Article Review FAQ

How to Write an Article Review That Stands Out

A Step-by-step Guide on How to Write an Article Review

Step 1: Select the Right Article

Step 2: Read and Understand the Article

Step 3: Structure and Introduction

Step 4: Summarize the Article

Step 5: Critically Analyze and Evaluate

Step 6: Express Your Perspective

Step 7: Conclusion and Final Thoughts

Step 8: Editing and Proofreading

Types of Article Reviews

Narrative Review

Evidence Review

Systematic Review

Tips for Writing a Great Article Review

Outline for Writing a Good Article Review

Review Article Example

Calculate Your Order Price

Article Review Writing: A Complete Step-by-Step Guide with Examples

What is an Article Review?

Types of Article Reviews

Journal Article Review

Research Article Review

Science Article Review

Critical Review

Article Review Format

How to Write an Article Review? 10 Easy Steps

Step 1: Understand the Assignment

Step 2: Read the Article Thoroughly

Step 3: Create a Summary

Step 4: Identify the Author's Thesis

Step 5: Evaluate the Author's Evidence and Methodology

Step 6: Analyze the Author's Writing Style

Step 7: Consider the Article's Contribution

Step 8: Write the Introduction

Step 9: Develop the Body of the Review

Step 10: Conclude with a Summary and Evaluation

Article Review Outline

Article Review Examples

Tips for Writing an Effective Article Review

Keep reading

How to Write an Article Review: Tips and Examples

Short Description

What Is an Article Review: Grasping the Concept

Types of Review

Journal Article Review

Research Article Review

Science Article Review

Need a Hand From Professionals?