FORMAT FOR THE CRITIQUE OF JOURNAL ARTICLES – Psychology 205

1. Reference Information in APA Format

2. Problem: A summary(three sentences or less) of what was

previously known about the problem.

3. Subjects: Who were they and how were they selected?

4. Procedure: Briefly describe the important aspects of the

research. What were the major independent and dependent

variables? How were data recorded and for how long? Was this

a field study or a laboratory study? What was the nature of

the research strategy? Was it an experiment, a correlational

study, or something else?

5. Flaws: Did you see any major methodological or ethical flaws in

the study?

6. Results & Conclusions: Summarize the results and conclusions of

the study (4 sentences or less).

A sample critique:

Sally Knoxstudent, Psych 205, Spring, 2009.

Baer, S.T., and Panda, L.L.(2004). Ursal defecation. Journal of

Animal Behavior, 88,13-36.

Problem: While it was widely believed that bears prefer to perform most normal bodily functions in wooded areas, no empirical data had yet been gathered to test this hypothesis.

Subjects: The subjects in this study were 42 North American Black bears captured via tranquilizer gun in the state of Maine.

Procedure: This was a field study in which captured bears were tagged and released. The radio collar that was attached to the bear contained a sensing device that emitted a signal whenever the bear defecated. The location of the bear was automatically recorded by a microcomputer that monitored the radio signal transmitted from the radio collar. An experimenter later determined whether the location was a wooded or non-wooded area. Observations were recorded for a period of 21 days, and the number of ursal defecation episodes occurring in wooded vs. non-wooded areas were compared.

Methodological/Ethical Flaws: Almost all of the bears were captured and released in wooded areas, increasing the likelihood of the bears depositing feces in the woods. There were no apparent ethical problems.

Results and Conclusions: Given a choice of a woods vs. non-woods condition, the bears in this study preferred to shit in the woods. Methodological shortcomings in this preliminary study require that the effect be replicated under more controlled conditions in future research.