what are the components of 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
• Train Your Brain
• Explore More
• Support wikiHow
• About wikiHow
• Log in / Sign up
• Education and Communications
• Critical Reviews

How to Write an Article Review (With Examples)

Last Updated: April 24, 2024 Fact Checked

Preparing to Write Your Review

Writing the article review, sample article reviews, expert q&a.

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 12 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 3,101,309 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."

Article Review 101

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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.

• 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. [9] 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.

You Might Also Like

• ↑ 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

Vanita Meghrajani

Jul 21, 2016

Nov 27, 2018

Featured Articles

Trending Articles

Watch Articles

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

Don’t miss out! Sign up for

wikiHow’s newsletter

• 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

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

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

The Tech Edvocate

• Advertisement
• Home Page Five (No Sidebar)
• Home Page Four
• Home Page Three
• Home Page Two
• Icons [No Sidebar]
• Left Sidbear Page
• Lynch Educational Consulting
• My Speaking Page
• Newsletter Sign Up Confirmation
• Newsletter Unsubscription
• Page Example
• Privacy Policy
• Protected Content
• Request a Product Review
• Shortcodes Examples
• Terms and Conditions
• The Edvocate
• The Tech Edvocate Product Guide
• Write For Us
• Dr. Lynch’s Personal Website
• The Edvocate Podcast
• Assistive Technology
• Child Development Tech
• Early Childhood & K-12 EdTech
• EdTech Futures
• EdTech News
• EdTech Policy & Reform
• EdTech Startups & Businesses
• Higher Education EdTech
• Online Learning & eLearning
• Parent & Family Tech
• Personalized Learning
• Product Reviews
• Tech Edvocate Awards
• School Ratings

Reasons You Should Study Geography: Everything You Need to Know

The vtoman jump 1800 portable power station: the best of the best, key roles of a school superintendent: everything you need to know, why learners cheat: everything you need to know, top issues in education: everything you need to know, duties of a school principal: everything you need to know, private vs. public education: everything you need to know, choosing the perfect college: everything you need to know, common college freshmen fears: how to overcome them, how to fix it when brightness is not changing on windows 10, how to write an article review (with sample reviews)  .

An article review is a critical evaluation of a scholarly or scientific piece, which aims to summarize its main ideas, assess its contributions, and provide constructive feedback. A well-written review not only benefits the author of the article under scrutiny but also serves as a valuable resource for fellow researchers and scholars. Follow these steps to create an effective and informative article review:

1. Understand the purpose: Before diving into the article, it is important to understand the intent of writing a review. This helps in focusing your thoughts, directing your analysis, and ensuring your review adds value to the academic community.

2. Read the article thoroughly: Carefully read the article multiple times to get a complete understanding of its content, arguments, and conclusions. As you read, take notes on key points, supporting evidence, and any areas that require further exploration or clarification.

3. Summarize the main ideas: In your review’s introduction, briefly outline the primary themes and arguments presented by the author(s). Keep it concise but sufficiently informative so that readers can quickly grasp the essence of the article.

4. Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses: In subsequent paragraphs, assess the strengths and limitations of the article based on factors such as methodology, quality of evidence presented, coherence of arguments, and alignment with existing literature in the field. Be fair and objective while providing your critique.

5. Discuss any implications: Deliberate on how this particular piece contributes to or challenges existing knowledge in its discipline. You may also discuss potential improvements for future research or explore real-world applications stemming from this study.

6. Provide recommendations: Finally, offer suggestions for both the author(s) and readers regarding how they can further build on this work or apply its findings in practice.

7. Proofread and revise: Once your initial draft is complete, go through it carefully for clarity, accuracy, and coherence. Revise as necessary, ensuring your review is both informative and engaging for readers.

Sample Review:

A Critical Review of “The Effects of Social Media on Mental Health”

Introduction:

“The Effects of Social Media on Mental Health” is a timely article which investigates the relationship between social media usage and psychological well-being. The authors present compelling evidence to support their argument that excessive use of social media can result in decreased self-esteem, increased anxiety, and a negative impact on interpersonal relationships.

Strengths and weaknesses:

One of the strengths of this article lies in its well-structured methodology utilizing a variety of sources, including quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews. This approach provides a comprehensive view of the topic, allowing for a more nuanced understanding of the effects of social media on mental health. However, it would have been beneficial if the authors included a larger sample size to increase the reliability of their conclusions. Additionally, exploring how different platforms may influence mental health differently could have added depth to the analysis.

Implications:

The findings in this article contribute significantly to ongoing debates surrounding the psychological implications of social media use. It highlights the potential dangers that excessive engagement with online platforms may pose to one’s mental well-being and encourages further research into interventions that could mitigate these risks. The study also offers an opportunity for educators and policy-makers to take note and develop strategies to foster healthier online behavior.

Recommendations:

Future researchers should consider investigating how specific social media platforms impact mental health outcomes, as this could lead to more targeted interventions. For practitioners, implementing educational programs aimed at promoting healthy online habits may be beneficial in mitigating the potential negative consequences associated with excessive social media use.

Conclusion:

Overall, “The Effects of Social Media on Mental Health” is an important and informative piece that raises awareness about a pressing issue in today’s digital age. Given its minor limitations, it provides valuable

3 Ways to Make a Mini Greenhouse ...

3 ways to teach yourself to play ....

Matthew Lynch

Related articles more from author.

4 Ways to Graduate Cum Laude

3 Ways to Calculate the Volume of a Square Pyramid

 4 Ways to Tie a Sarong

3 Ways to Clean Rugs With Vinegar  

How to Get Unicorns on Howrse: 4 Steps

4 Ways to Keep a Text Conversation Going

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.

What Is A Review Article?

How to write an article review, how to write an article review in apa format, related articles.

Get Started

Take the first step and invest in your future.

Online Programs

Offering flexibility & convenience in 51 online degrees & programs.

Prairie Stars

Featuring 15 intercollegiate NCAA Div II athletic teams.

Find your Fit

UIS has over 85 student and 10 greek life organizations, and many volunteer opportunities.

Arts & Culture

Celebrating the arts to create rich cultural experiences on campus.

Give Like a Star

Your generosity helps fuel fundraising for scholarships, programs and new initiatives.

Bragging Rights

UIS was listed No. 1 in Illinois and No. 3 in the Midwest in 2023 rankings.

• Quick links Applicants & Students Important Apps & Links Alumni Faculty and Staff Community Admissions How to Apply Cost & Aid Tuition Calculator Registrar Orientation Visit Campus Academics Register for Class Programs of Study Online Degrees & Programs Graduate Education International Student Services Study Away Student Support Bookstore UIS Life Dining Diversity & Inclusion Get Involved Health & Wellness COVID-19 United in Safety Residence Life Student Life Programs UIS Connection Important Apps UIS Mobile App Advise U Canvas myUIS i-card Balance Pay My Bill - UIS Bursar Self-Service Email Resources Bookstore Box Information Technology Services Library Orbit Policies Webtools Get Connected Area Information Calendar Campus Recreation Departments & Programs (A-Z) Parking UIS Newsroom The Observer Connect & Get Involved Update your Info Alumni Events Alumni Networks & Groups Volunteer Opportunities Alumni Board News & Publications Featured Alumni Alumni News UIS Alumni Magazine Resources Order your Transcripts Give Back Alumni Programs Career Development Services & Support Accessibility Services Campus Services Campus Police Facilities & Services Registrar Faculty & Staff Resources Website Project Request Web Services Training & Tools Academic Impressions Career Connect CSA Reporting Cybersecurity Training Faculty Research FERPA Training Website Login Campus Resources Newsroom Campus Calendar Campus Maps i-Card Human Resources Public Relations Webtools Arts & Events UIS Performing Arts Center Visual Arts Gallery Event Calendar Sangamon Experience Center for Lincoln Studies ECCE Speaker Series Community Engagement Center for State Policy and Leadership Illinois Innocence Project Innovate Springfield Central IL Nonprofit Resource Center NPR Illinois Community Resources Child Protection Training Academy Office of Electronic Media University Archives/IRAD Institute for Illinois Public Finance

Request Info

How to Review a Journal Article

• Request Info Request info for....     Undergraduate/Graduate     Online     Study Away     Continuing & Professional Education     International Student Services     General Inquiries

For many kinds of assignments, like a  literature review , you may be asked to offer a critique or review of a journal article. This is an opportunity for you as a scholar to offer your  qualified opinion  and  evaluation  of how another scholar has composed their article, argument, and research. That means you will be expected to go beyond a simple  summary  of the article and evaluate it on a deeper level. As a college student, this might sound intimidating. However, as you engage with the research process, you are becoming immersed in a particular topic, and your insights about the way that topic is presented are valuable and can contribute to the overall conversation surrounding your topic.

IMPORTANT NOTE!!

Some disciplines, like Criminal Justice, may only want you to summarize the article without including your opinion or evaluation. If your assignment is to summarize the article only, please see our literature review handout.

Before getting started on the critique, it is important to review the article thoroughly and critically. To do this, we recommend take notes,  annotating , and reading the article several times before critiquing. As you read, be sure to note important items like the thesis, purpose, research questions, hypotheses, methods, evidence, key findings, major conclusions, tone, and publication information. Depending on your writing context, some of these items may not be applicable.

Questions to Consider

To evaluate a source, consider some of the following questions. They are broken down into different categories, but answering these questions will help you consider what areas to examine. With each category, we recommend identifying the strengths and weaknesses in each since that is a critical part of evaluation.

Evaluating Purpose and Argument

• How well is the purpose made clear in the introduction through background/context and thesis?
• How well does the abstract represent and summarize the article’s major points and argument?
• How well does the objective of the experiment or of the observation fill a need for the field?
• How well is the argument/purpose articulated and discussed throughout the body of the text?
• How well does the discussion maintain cohesion?

Evaluating the Presentation/Organization of Information

• How appropriate and clear is the title of the article?
• Where could the author have benefited from expanding, condensing, or omitting ideas?
• How clear are the author’s statements? Challenge ambiguous statements.
• What underlying assumptions does the author have, and how does this affect the credibility or clarity of their article?
• How objective is the author in his or her discussion of the topic?
• How well does the organization fit the article’s purpose and articulate key goals?

Evaluating Methods

• How appropriate are the study design and methods for the purposes of the study?
• How detailed are the methods being described? Is the author leaving out important steps or considerations?
• Have the procedures been presented in enough detail to enable the reader to duplicate them?

Evaluating Data

• Scan and spot-check calculations. Are the statistical methods appropriate?
• Do you find any content repeated or duplicated?
• How many errors of fact and interpretation does the author include? (You can check on this by looking up the references the author cites).
• What pertinent literature has the author cited, and have they used this literature appropriately?

Following, we have an example of a summary and an evaluation of a research article. Note that in most literature review contexts, the summary and evaluation would be much shorter. This extended example shows the different ways a student can critique and write about an article.

Chik, A. (2012). Digital gameplay for autonomous foreign language learning: Gamers’ and language teachers’ perspectives. In H. Reinders (ed.),  Digital games in language learning and teaching  (pp. 95-114). Eastbourne, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Be sure to include the full citation either in a reference page or near your evaluation if writing an  annotated bibliography .

In Chik’s article “Digital Gameplay for Autonomous Foreign Language Learning: Gamers’ and Teachers’ Perspectives”, she explores the ways in which “digital gamers manage gaming and gaming-related activities to assume autonomy in their foreign language learning,” (96) which is presented in contrast to how teachers view the “pedagogical potential” of gaming. The research was described as an “umbrella project” consisting of two parts. The first part examined 34 language teachers’ perspectives who had limited experience with gaming (only five stated they played games regularly) (99). Their data was recorded through a survey, class discussion, and a seven-day gaming trial done by six teachers who recorded their reflections through personal blog posts. The second part explored undergraduate gaming habits of ten Hong Kong students who were regular gamers. Their habits were recorded through language learning histories, videotaped gaming sessions, blog entries of gaming practices, group discussion sessions, stimulated recall sessions on gaming videos, interviews with other gamers, and posts from online discussion forums. The research shows that while students recognize the educational potential of games and have seen benefits of it in their lives, the instructors overall do not see the positive impacts of gaming on foreign language learning.

The summary includes the article’s purpose, methods, results, discussion, and citations when necessary.

This article did a good job representing the undergraduate gamers’ voices through extended quotes and stories. Particularly for the data collection of the undergraduate gamers, there were many opportunities for an in-depth examination of their gaming practices and histories. However, the representation of the teachers in this study was very uneven when compared to the students. Not only were teachers labeled as numbers while the students picked out their own pseudonyms, but also when viewing the data collection, the undergraduate students were more closely examined in comparison to the teachers in the study. While the students have fifteen extended quotes describing their experiences in their research section, the teachers only have two of these instances in their section, which shows just how imbalanced the study is when presenting instructor voices.

Some research methods, like the recorded gaming sessions, were only used with students whereas teachers were only asked to blog about their gaming experiences. This creates a richer narrative for the students while also failing to give instructors the chance to have more nuanced perspectives. This lack of nuance also stems from the emphasis of the non-gamer teachers over the gamer teachers. The non-gamer teachers’ perspectives provide a stark contrast to the undergraduate gamer experiences and fits neatly with the narrative of teachers not valuing gaming as an educational tool. However, the study mentioned five teachers that were regular gamers whose perspectives are left to a short section at the end of the presentation of the teachers’ results. This was an opportunity to give the teacher group a more complex story, and the opportunity was entirely missed.

Additionally, the context of this study was not entirely clear. The instructors were recruited through a master’s level course, but the content of the course and the institution’s background is not discussed. Understanding this context helps us understand the course’s purpose(s) and how those purposes may have influenced the ways in which these teachers interpreted and saw games. It was also unclear how Chik was connected to this masters’ class and to the students. Why these particular teachers and students were recruited was not explicitly defined and also has the potential to skew results in a particular direction.

Overall, I was inclined to agree with the idea that students can benefit from language acquisition through gaming while instructors may not see the instructional value, but I believe the way the research was conducted and portrayed in this article made it very difficult to support Chik’s specific findings.

Some professors like you to begin an evaluation with something positive but isn’t always necessary.

The evaluation is clearly organized and uses transitional phrases when moving to a new topic.

This evaluation includes a summative statement that gives the overall impression of the article at the end, but this can also be placed at the beginning of the evaluation.

This evaluation mainly discusses the representation of data and methods. However, other areas, like organization, are open to critique.

Write a Critical Review

Introduction, how can i improve my critical review, ask us: chat, email, visit or call.

Video: How to Integrate Critical Voice into Your Literature Review

Video: Note-taking and Writing Tips to Avoid Plagiarism

More help: Writing

• Book Writing Appointments Get help on your writing assignments.
• To introduce the source, its main ideas, key details, and its place within the field
• To present your assessment of the quality of the source

In general, the introduction of your critical review should include

• Author(s) name
• Title of the source 
• What is the author's central purpose?
• What methods or theoretical frameworks were used to accomplish this purpose?
• What topic areas, chapters, sections, or key points did the author use to structure the source?
• What were the results or findings of the study?
• How were the results or findings interpreted? How were they related to the original problem (author's view of evidence rather than objective findings)?
• Who conducted the research? What were/are their interests?
• Why did they do this research?
• Was this research pertinent only within the author’s field, or did it have broader (even global) relevance?
• On what prior research was this source-based? What gap is the author attempting to address?
• How important was the research question posed by the researcher?
• Your overall opinion of the quality of the source. Think of this like a thesis or main argument.
• Present your evaluation of the source, providing evidence from the text (or other sources) to support your assessment.

In general, the body of your critical review should include

• Is the material organized logically and with appropriate headings?
• Are there stylistic problems in logical, clarity or language?
• Were the author(s) able to answer the question (test the hypothesis) raised
• What was the objective of the study?
• Does all the information lead coherently to the purpose of the study?
• Are the methods valid for studying the problem or gap?
• Could the study be duplicated from the information provided?
• Is the experimental design logical and reliable?
• How are the data organized? Is it logical and interpretable?
• Do the results reveal what the researcher intended?
• Do the authors present a logical interpretation of the results?
• Have the limitations of the research been addressed?
• Does the study consider other key studies in the field or other research possibilities or directions?
• How was the significance of the work described?
• Follow the structure of the journal article (e.g. Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion) - highlighting the strengths and weaknesses in each section
• Present the weaknesses of the article, and then the strengths of the article (or vice versa).
• Group your ideas according to different research themes presented in the source
• Group the strengths and weaknesses of the article into the following areas: originality, reliability, validity, relevance, and presentation

Purpose: 

• To summarize the strengths and weaknesses of the article as a whole
• To assert the article’s practical and theoretical significance

In general, the conclusion of your critical review should include

• A restatement of your overall opinion
• A summary of the key strengths and weaknesses of the research that support your overall opinion of the source
• Did the research reported in this source result in the formation of new questions, theories or hypotheses by the authors or other researchers?
• Have other researchers subsequently supported or refuted the observations or interpretations of these authors?
• Did the research provide new factual information, a new understanding of a phenomenon in the field, a new research technique?
• Did the research produce any practical applications? 
• What are the social, political, technological, or medical implications of this research?
• How do you evaluate the significance of the research? 
• Find out what style guide you are required to follow (e.g., APA, MLA, Chicago) and follow the guidelines to create a reference list (may be called a bibliography or works cited).
• Be sure to include citations in the text when you refer to the source itself or external sources. 
• Check out our Cite Your Sources Guide for more information. 
• Read assignment instructions carefully and refer to them throughout the writing process.
• Make an outline of your main sections before you write.
• If your professor does not assign a topic or source, you must choose one yourself. Select a source that interests you and is written clearly so you can understand it.
• << Previous: Start Here
• Last Updated: Apr 25, 2024 1:53 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.uoguelph.ca/CriticalReview

Suggest an edit to this guide

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

How to Write Critical Reviews

When you are asked to write a critical review of a book or article, you will need to identify, summarize, and evaluate the ideas and information the author has presented. In other words, you will be examining another person’s thoughts on a topic from your point of view.

Your stand must go beyond your “gut reaction” to the work and be based on your knowledge (readings, lecture, experience) of the topic as well as on factors such as criteria stated in your assignment or discussed by you and your instructor.

Make your stand clear at the beginning of your review, in your evaluations of specific parts, and in your concluding commentary.

Remember that your goal should be to make a few key points about the book or article, not to discuss everything the author writes.

Understanding the Assignment

To write a good critical review, you will have to engage in the mental processes of analyzing (taking apart) the work–deciding what its major components are and determining how these parts (i.e., paragraphs, sections, or chapters) contribute to the work as a whole.

Analyzing the work will help you focus on how and why the author makes certain points and prevent you from merely summarizing what the author says. Assuming the role of an analytical reader will also help you to determine whether or not the author fulfills the stated purpose of the book or article and enhances your understanding or knowledge of a particular topic.

Be sure to read your assignment thoroughly before you read the article or book. Your instructor may have included specific guidelines for you to follow. Keeping these guidelines in mind as you read the article or book can really help you write your paper!

Also, note where the work connects with what you’ve studied in the course. You can make the most efficient use of your reading and notetaking time if you are an active reader; that is, keep relevant questions in mind and jot down page numbers as well as your responses to ideas that appear to be significant as you read.

Please note: The length of your introduction and overview, the number of points you choose to review, and the length of your conclusion should be proportionate to the page limit stated in your assignment and should reflect the complexity of the material being reviewed as well as the expectations of your reader.

Write the introduction

Below are a few guidelines to help you write the introduction to your critical review.

Introduce your review appropriately

Begin your review with an introduction appropriate to your assignment.

If your assignment asks you to review only one book and not to use outside sources, your introduction will focus on identifying the author, the title, the main topic or issue presented in the book, and the author’s purpose in writing the book.

If your assignment asks you to review the book as it relates to issues or themes discussed in the course, or to review two or more books on the same topic, your introduction must also encompass those expectations.

Explain relationships

For example, before you can review two books on a topic, you must explain to your reader in your introduction how they are related to one another.

Within this shared context (or under this “umbrella”) you can then review comparable aspects of both books, pointing out where the authors agree and differ.

In other words, the more complicated your assignment is, the more your introduction must accomplish.

Finally, the introduction to a book review is always the place for you to establish your position as the reviewer (your thesis about the author’s thesis).

As you write, consider the following questions:

• Is the book a memoir, a treatise, a collection of facts, an extended argument, etc.? Is the article a documentary, a write-up of primary research, a position paper, etc.?
• Who is the author? What does the preface or foreword tell you about the author’s purpose, background, and credentials? What is the author’s approach to the topic (as a journalist? a historian? a researcher?)?
• What is the main topic or problem addressed? How does the work relate to a discipline, to a profession, to a particular audience, or to other works on the topic?
• What is your critical evaluation of the work (your thesis)? Why have you taken that position? What criteria are you basing your position on?

Provide an overview

In your introduction, you will also want to provide an overview. An overview supplies your reader with certain general information not appropriate for including in the introduction but necessary to understanding the body of the review.

Generally, an overview describes your book’s division into chapters, sections, or points of discussion. An overview may also include background information about the topic, about your stand, or about the criteria you will use for evaluation.

The overview and the introduction work together to provide a comprehensive beginning for (a “springboard” into) your review.

• What are the author’s basic premises? What issues are raised, or what themes emerge? What situation (i.e., racism on college campuses) provides a basis for the author’s assertions?
• How informed is my reader? What background information is relevant to the entire book and should be placed here rather than in a body paragraph?

Write the body

The body is the center of your paper, where you draw out your main arguments. Below are some guidelines to help you write it.

Organize using a logical plan

Organize the body of your review according to a logical plan. Here are two options:

• First, summarize, in a series of paragraphs, those major points from the book that you plan to discuss; incorporating each major point into a topic sentence for a paragraph is an effective organizational strategy. Second, discuss and evaluate these points in a following group of paragraphs. (There are two dangers lurking in this pattern–you may allot too many paragraphs to summary and too few to evaluation, or you may re-summarize too many points from the book in your evaluation section.)
• Alternatively, you can summarize and evaluate the major points you have chosen from the book in a point-by-point schema. That means you will discuss and evaluate point one within the same paragraph (or in several if the point is significant and warrants extended discussion) before you summarize and evaluate point two, point three, etc., moving in a logical sequence from point to point to point. Here again, it is effective to use the topic sentence of each paragraph to identify the point from the book that you plan to summarize or evaluate.

Questions to keep in mind as you write

With either organizational pattern, consider the following questions:

• What are the author’s most important points? How do these relate to one another? (Make relationships clear by using transitions: “In contrast,” an equally strong argument,” “moreover,” “a final conclusion,” etc.).
• What types of evidence or information does the author present to support his or her points? Is this evidence convincing, controversial, factual, one-sided, etc.? (Consider the use of primary historical material, case studies, narratives, recent scientific findings, statistics.)
• Where does the author do a good job of conveying factual material as well as personal perspective? Where does the author fail to do so? If solutions to a problem are offered, are they believable, misguided, or promising?
• Which parts of the work (particular arguments, descriptions, chapters, etc.) are most effective and which parts are least effective? Why?
• Where (if at all) does the author convey personal prejudice, support illogical relationships, or present evidence out of its appropriate context?

Keep your opinions distinct and cite your sources

Remember, as you discuss the author’s major points, be sure to distinguish consistently between the author’s opinions and your own.

Keep the summary portions of your discussion concise, remembering that your task as a reviewer is to re-see the author’s work, not to re-tell it.

And, importantly, if you refer to ideas from other books and articles or from lecture and course materials, always document your sources, or else you might wander into the realm of plagiarism.

Include only that material which has relevance for your review and use direct quotations sparingly. The Writing Center has other handouts to help you paraphrase text and introduce quotations.

Write the conclusion

You will want to use the conclusion to state your overall critical evaluation.

You have already discussed the major points the author makes, examined how the author supports arguments, and evaluated the quality or effectiveness of specific aspects of the book or article.

Now you must make an evaluation of the work as a whole, determining such things as whether or not the author achieves the stated or implied purpose and if the work makes a significant contribution to an existing body of knowledge.

Consider the following questions:

• Is the work appropriately subjective or objective according to the author’s purpose?
• How well does the work maintain its stated or implied focus? Does the author present extraneous material? Does the author exclude or ignore relevant information?
• How well has the author achieved the overall purpose of the book or article? What contribution does the work make to an existing body of knowledge or to a specific group of readers? Can you justify the use of this work in a particular course?
• What is the most important final comment you wish to make about the book or article? Do you have any suggestions for the direction of future research in the area? What has reading this work done for you or demonstrated to you?

Academic and Professional Writing

This is an accordion element with a series of buttons that open and close related content panels.

Analysis Papers

Reading Poetry

A Short Guide to Close Reading for Literary Analysis

Using Literary Quotations

Play Reviews

Writing a Rhetorical Précis to Analyze Nonfiction Texts

Incorporating Interview Data

Grant Proposals

Planning and Writing a Grant Proposal: The Basics

Additional Resources for Grants and Proposal Writing

Job Materials and Application Essays

Writing Personal Statements for Ph.D. Programs

• Before you begin: useful tips for writing your essay
• Guided brainstorming exercises
• Get more help with your essay
• Frequently Asked Questions

Resume Writing Tips

CV Writing Tips

Cover Letters

Business Letters

Proposals and Dissertations

Resources for Proposal Writers

Resources for Dissertators

Research Papers

Planning and Writing Research Papers

Quoting and Paraphrasing

Writing Annotated Bibliographies

Creating Poster Presentations

Writing an Abstract for Your Research Paper

Thank-You Notes

Advice for Students Writing Thank-You Notes to Donors

Reading for a Review

Critical Reviews

Writing a Review of Literature

Scientific Reports

Scientific Report Format

Sample Lab Assignment

Writing for the Web

Writing an Effective Blog Post

Writing for Social Media: A Guide for Academics

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Literature Review

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

A literature review is a document or section of a document that collects key sources on a topic and discusses those sources in conversation with each other (also called synthesis ). The lit review is an important genre in many disciplines, not just literature (i.e., the study of works of literature such as novels and plays). When we say “literature review” or refer to “the literature,” we are talking about the research ( scholarship ) in a given field. You will often see the terms “the research,” “the scholarship,” and “the literature” used mostly interchangeably.

Where, when, and why would I write a lit review?

There are a number of different situations where you might write a literature review, each with slightly different expectations; different disciplines, too, have field-specific expectations for what a literature review is and does. For instance, in the humanities, authors might include more overt argumentation and interpretation of source material in their literature reviews, whereas in the sciences, authors are more likely to report study designs and results in their literature reviews; these differences reflect these disciplines’ purposes and conventions in scholarship. You should always look at examples from your own discipline and talk to professors or mentors in your field to be sure you understand your discipline’s conventions, for literature reviews as well as for any other genre.

A literature review can be a part of a research paper or scholarly article, usually falling after the introduction and before the research methods sections. In these cases, the lit review just needs to cover scholarship that is important to the issue you are writing about; sometimes it will also cover key sources that informed your research methodology.

Lit reviews can also be standalone pieces, either as assignments in a class or as publications. In a class, a lit review may be assigned to help students familiarize themselves with a topic and with scholarship in their field, get an idea of the other researchers working on the topic they’re interested in, find gaps in existing research in order to propose new projects, and/or develop a theoretical framework and methodology for later research. As a publication, a lit review usually is meant to help make other scholars’ lives easier by collecting and summarizing, synthesizing, and analyzing existing research on a topic. This can be especially helpful for students or scholars getting into a new research area, or for directing an entire community of scholars toward questions that have not yet been answered.

What are the parts of a lit review?

Most lit reviews use a basic introduction-body-conclusion structure; if your lit review is part of a larger paper, the introduction and conclusion pieces may be just a few sentences while you focus most of your attention on the body. If your lit review is a standalone piece, the introduction and conclusion take up more space and give you a place to discuss your goals, research methods, and conclusions separately from where you discuss the literature itself.

Introduction:

• An introductory paragraph that explains what your working topic and thesis is
• A forecast of key topics or texts that will appear in the review
• Potentially, a description of how you found sources and how you analyzed them for inclusion and discussion in the review (more often found in published, standalone literature reviews than in lit review sections in an article or research paper)
• 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 sentence to draw connections, comparisons, and contrasts.

Conclusion:

• Summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance
• Connect it back to your primary research question

How should I organize my lit review?

Lit reviews can take many different organizational patterns depending on what you are trying to accomplish with the review. Here are some examples:

• Chronological : The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time, which helps familiarize the audience with the topic (for instance if you are introducing something that is not commonly known in your field). If you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order. Try to analyze the patterns, turning points, and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred (as mentioned previously, this may not be appropriate in your discipline — check with a teacher or mentor if you’re unsure).
• Thematic : If you have found some recurring central themes that you will continue working with throughout your piece, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic. For example, if you are reviewing literature about women and religion, key themes can include the role of women in churches and the religious attitude towards women.
• Qualitative versus quantitative research
• Empirical versus theoretical scholarship
• Divide the research by sociological, historical, or cultural sources
• Theoretical : In many humanities articles, the literature review is the foundation for the theoretical framework. You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts. You can argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach or combine various theorical concepts to create a framework for your research.

What are some strategies or tips I can use while writing my lit review?

Any lit review is only as good as the research it discusses; make sure your sources are well-chosen and your research is thorough. Don’t be afraid to do more research if you discover a new thread as you’re writing. More info on the research process is available in our "Conducting Research" resources .

As you’re doing your research, create an annotated bibliography ( see our page on the this type of document ). Much of the information used in an annotated bibliography can be used also in a literature review, so you’ll be not only partially drafting your lit review as you research, but also developing your sense of the larger conversation going on among scholars, professionals, and any other stakeholders in your topic.

Usually you will need to synthesize research rather than just summarizing it. This means drawing connections between sources to create a picture of the scholarly conversation on a topic over time. Many student writers struggle to synthesize because they feel they don’t have anything to add to the scholars they are citing; here are some strategies to help you:

• It often helps to remember that the point of these kinds of syntheses is to show your readers how you understand your research, to help them read the rest of your paper.
• Writing teachers often say synthesis is like hosting a dinner party: imagine all your sources are together in a room, discussing your topic. What are they saying to each other?
• Look at the in-text citations in each paragraph. Are you citing just one source for each paragraph? This usually indicates summary only. When you have multiple sources cited in a paragraph, you are more likely to be synthesizing them (not always, but often
• Read more about synthesis here.

The most interesting literature reviews are often written as arguments (again, as mentioned at the beginning of the page, this is discipline-specific and doesn’t work for all situations). Often, the literature review is where you can establish your research as filling a particular gap or as relevant in a particular way. You have some chance to do this in your introduction in an article, but the literature review section gives a more extended opportunity to establish the conversation in the way you would like your readers to see it. You can choose the intellectual lineage you would like to be part of and whose definitions matter most to your thinking (mostly humanities-specific, but this goes for sciences as well). In addressing these points, you argue for your place in the conversation, which tends to make the lit review more compelling than a simple reporting of other sources.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

The Research Proposal

83 Components of the Literature Review

Krathwohl (2005) suggests and describes a variety of components to include in a research proposal.  The following sections present these components in a suggested template for you to follow in the preparation of your research proposal.

Introduction

The introduction sets the tone for what follows in your research proposal – treat it as the initial pitch of your idea.  After reading the introduction your reader should:

• Understand what it is you want to do;
• Have a sense of your passion for the topic;
• Be excited about the study´s possible outcomes.

As you begin writing your research proposal it is helpful to think of the introduction as a narrative of what it is you want to do, written in one to three paragraphs.  Within those one to three paragraphs, it is important to briefly answer the following questions:

• What is the central research problem?
• How is the topic of your research proposal related to the problem?
• What methods will you utilize to analyze the research problem?
• Why is it important to undertake this research? What is the significance of your proposed research?  Why are the outcomes of your proposed research important, and to whom or to what are they important?

Note : You may be asked by your instructor to include an abstract with your research proposal.  In such cases, an abstract should provide an overview of what it is you plan to study, your main research question, a brief explanation of your methods to answer the research question, and your expected findings. All of this information must be carefully crafted in 150 to 250 words.  A word of advice is to save the writing of your abstract until the very end of your research proposal preparation.  If you are asked to provide an abstract, you should include 5-7 key words that are of most relevance to your study. List these in order of relevance.

Background and significance

The purpose of this section is to explain the context of your proposal and to describe, in detail, why it is important to undertake this research. Assume that the person or people who will read your research proposal know nothing or very little about the research problem.  While you do not need to include all knowledge you have learned about your topic in this section, it is important to ensure that you include the most relevant material that will help to explain the goals of your research.

While there are no hard and fast rules, you should attempt to address some or all of the following key points:

• State the research problem and provide a more thorough explanation about the purpose of the study than what you stated in the introduction.
• Present the rationale for the proposed research study. Clearly indicate why this research is worth doing.  Answer the “so what?” question.
• Describe the major issues or problems to be addressed by your research. Do not forget to explain how and in what ways your proposed research builds upon previous related research.
• Explain how you plan to go about conducting your research.
• Clearly identify the key or most relevant sources of research you intend to use and explain how they will contribute to your analysis of the topic.
• Set the boundaries of your proposed research, in order to provide a clear focus. Where appropriate, state not only what you will study, but what will be excluded from your study.
• Provide clear definitions of key concepts and terms. As key concepts and terms often have numerous definitions, make sure you state which definition you will be utilizing in your research.

Literature Review

This is the most time-consuming aspect in the preparation of your research proposal and it is a key component of the research proposal. As described in Chapter 5 , the literature review provides the background to your study and demonstrates the significance of the proposed research. Specifically, it is a review and synthesis of prior research that is related to the problem you are setting forth to investigate.  Essentially, your goal in the literature review is to place your research study within the larger whole of what has been studied in the past, while demonstrating to your reader that your work is original, innovative, and adds to the larger whole.

As the literature review is information dense, it is essential that this section be intelligently structured to enable your reader to grasp the key arguments underpinning your study. However, this can be easier to state and harder to do, simply due to the fact there is usually a plethora of related research to sift through. Consequently, a good strategy for writing the literature review is to break the literature into conceptual categories or themes, rather than attempting to describe various groups of literature you reviewed.  Chapter V, “ The Literature Review ,” describes a variety of methods to help you organize the themes.

Here are some suggestions on how to approach the writing of your literature review:

• Think about what questions other researchers have asked, what methods they used, what they found, and what they recommended based upon their findings.
• Do not be afraid to challenge previous related research findings and/or conclusions.
• Assess what you believe to be missing from previous research and explain how your research fills in this gap and/or extends previous research

It is important to note that a significant challenge related to undertaking a literature review is knowing when to stop.  As such, it is important to know how to know when you have uncovered the key conceptual categories underlying your research topic.  Generally, when you start to see repetition in the conclusions or recommendations, you can have confidence that you have covered all of the significant conceptual categories in your literature review.  However, it is also important to acknowledge that researchers often find themselves returning to the literature as they collect and analyze their data.  For example, an unexpected finding may develop as one collects and/or analyzes the data and it is important to take the time to step back and review the literature again, to ensure that no other researchers have found a similar finding.  This may include looking to research outside your field.

This situation occurred with one of the authors of this textbook´s research related to community resilience.  During the interviews, the researchers heard many participants discuss individual resilience factors and how they believed these individual factors helped make the community more resilient, overall.  Sheppard and Williams (2016) had not discovered these individual factors in their original literature review on community and environmental resilience. However, when they returned to the literature to search for individual resilience factors, they discovered a small body of literature in the child and youth psychology field. Consequently, Sheppard and Williams had to go back and add a new section to their literature review on individual resilience factors. Interestingly, their research appeared to be the first research to link individual resilience factors with community resilience factors.

Research design and methods

The objective of this section of the research proposal is to convince the reader that your overall research design and methods of analysis will enable you to solve the research problem you have identified and also enable you to accurately and effectively interpret the results of your research. Consequently, it is critical that the research design and methods section is well-written, clear, and logically organized.  This demonstrates to your reader that you know what you are going to do and how you are going to do it.  Overall, you want to leave your reader feeling confident that you have what it takes to get this research study completed in a timely fashion.

Essentially, this section of the research proposal should be clearly tied to the specific objectives of your study; however, it is also important to draw upon and include examples from the literature review that relate to your design and intended methods.  In other words, you must clearly demonstrate how your study utilizes and builds upon past studies, as it relates to the research design and intended methods.  For example, what methods have been used by other researchers in similar studies?

While it is important to consider the methods that other researchers have employed, it is equally important, if not more so, to consider what methods have not been employed but could be.  Remember, the methods section is not simply a list of tasks to be undertaken. It is also an argument as to why and how the tasks you have outlined will help you investigate the research problem and answer your research question(s).

Tips for writing the research design and methods section:

• Specify the methodological approaches you intend to employ to obtain information and the techniques you will use to analyze the data.
• Specify the research operations you will undertake and he way you will interpret the results of those operations in relation to the research problem.
• Go beyond stating what you hope to achieve through the methods you have chosen. State how you will actually do the methods (i.e. coding interview text, running regression analysis, etc.).
• Anticipate and acknowledge any potential barriers you may encounter when undertaking your research and describe how you will address these barriers.
• Explain where you believe you will find challenges related to data collection, including access to participants and information.

Preliminary suppositions and implications

The purpose of this section is to argue how and in what ways you anticipate that your research will refine, revise, or extend existing knowledge in the area of your study. Depending upon the aims and objectives of your study, you should also discuss how your anticipated findings may impact future research.  For example, is it possible that your research may lead to a new policy, new theoretical understanding, or a new method for analyzing data?  How might your study influence future studies?  What might your study mean for future practitioners working in the field?  Who or what may benefit from your study?  How might your study contribute to social, economic, environmental issues?  While it is important to think about and discuss possibilities such as these, it is equally important to be realistic in stating your anticipated findings.  In other words, you do not want to delve into idle speculation.  Rather, the purpose here is to reflect upon gaps in the current body of literature and to describe how and in what ways you anticipate your research will begin to fill in some or all of those gaps.

The conclusion reiterates the importance and significance of your research proposal and it provides a brief summary of the entire proposed study.  Essentially, this section should only be one or two paragraphs in length. Here is a potential outline for your conclusion:

• Discuss why the study should be done. Specifically discuss how you expect your study will advance existing knowledge and how your study is unique.
• Explain the specific purpose of the study and the research questions that the study will answer.
• Explain why the research design and methods chosen for this study are appropriate, and why other design and methods were not chosen.
• State the potential implications you expect to emerge from your proposed study,
• Provide a sense of how your study fits within the broader scholarship currently in existence related to the research problem.

As with any scholarly research paper, you must cite the sources you used in composing your research proposal.  In a research proposal, this can take two forms: a reference list or a bibliography.  A reference list does what the name suggests, it lists the literature you referenced in the body of your research proposal.  All references in the reference list, must appear in the body of the research proposal.  Remember, it is not acceptable to say “as cited in …”  As a researcher you must always go to the original source and check it for yourself.  Many errors are made in referencing, even by top researchers, and so it is important not to perpetuate an error made by someone else. While this can be time consuming, it is the proper way to undertake a literature review.

In contrast, a bibliography , is a list of everything you used or cited in your research proposal, with additional citations to any key sources relevant to understanding the research problem.  In other words, sources cited in your bibliography may not necessarily appear in the body of your research proposal.  Make sure you check with your instructor to see which of the two you are expected to produce.

Overall, your list of citations should be a testament to the fact that you have done a sufficient level of preliminary research to ensure that your project will complement, but not duplicate, previous research efforts. For social sciences, the reference list or bibliography should be prepared in American Psychological Association (APA) referencing format. Usually, the reference list (or bibliography) is not included in the word count of the research proposal. Again, make sure you check with your instructor to confirm.

An Introduction to Research Methods in Sociology Copyright © 2019 by Valerie A. Sheppard is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Communication Research Strategies

• Comm Research Strategies
• The research process
• Defining your topic and crafting your research question
• Identifying search terms from your question
• Broaden or narrow your search
• Research methods
• Find background information
• Find journalism data and polls
• Find journal articles
• Find books and ebooks
• Find U.S. news articles
• Find international news articles
• Interlibrary loan
• How to distinguish between types of journal articles
• Components of a scholarly article, and things to consider when reading one
• Critically evaluating articles & other resources
• Literature reviews (opens a new guide) This link opens in a new window
• Annotated bibliographies
• Writing tools
• Citing sources (opens a new guide) This link opens in a new window
• Associated Press Style Manual
• Understanding & Avoiding Plagiarism (opens a new guide) This link opens in a new window

Contact me for research assistance

Components of a scholarly article

• Experimentation
• Results, analysis, & discussion
• Limitations
• Conclusion(s)

“What is this article about?”

Abstract : Most articles start with a paragraph called the “abstract”, which very briefly summarizes the whole article.

Introduction : This section introduces the research question under consideration in the article, and discusses what the article contributes to existing knowledge within the field.

Modified from the Department of Sociology, SUNY Brockport: https://www.brockport.edu/academics/sociology/journal.html

“What do we already know about this topic and what is left to discover?”

Literature review : the authors will review the existing research and theory on the topic, either as part of the introduction, or after the introduction under its own subtitle. The review of literature is meant to discuss previous work on the topic, point out what questions remain, and relate the research presented in the rest of the article to the existing literature.

“How did the author do the research?  Why this way and not this other way?”

Methodology : There is always some discussion of the methods used by the authors to conduct the study being reported.  If these is any sort of control group being used as part of the methodology, it will be described here.

"What specifically did the authors do?"

Experimentation : A description of the experimentation in which the authors engaged.  This section will report any data produced by the experiment, be it numerical data, qualitative response data, etc.  Data comes in many different forms.

“What did the authors find?  What did their findings reveal or say in response to their research question?”

Results, analysis, & discussion : A section or multiple sections will be devoted to analyzing the experiment that was conducted, as well as its results.  These sections then discuss the results, and what the analysis of these results revealed.

"What limitations does this research have, and how might they affect the conclusions that may be drawn from this research?"

Limitations: A description of any limitations of the experimentation in which the authors engaged, and how these limitations may affect the conclusions that may be drawn from this experimentation.

“What does it all mean and why is it important?”

Discussion and Conclusion : Articles typically end by discussing what the results mean and how the study contributes to existing knowledge. Answers to research questions are addressed in this section, as is whether any hypotheses were supported or not. The conclusion typically places the research in a larger context and discusses where future research on the topic may be headed.

Things to consider when reading a scholarly article / Shortcuts to reading journal articles

• Things to consider when reading a scholarly article
• Shortcuts to reading journal articles

Owen Lin. (2012, May 23). Deep Thoughts. Retrieved from https://www.flickr.com/photos/owen-pics/8406656015/. Used under the Creative Commons License.

• Know your research question or argument.  Though your question/argument may change or evolve as you delve deeper into the research process, you will want to have a solid idea of your research focus.  
• You don't have to read the entire article in order.  Start with the abstract which will give you a general summary of the article. If the abstract seems relevant then move to the conclusion or discussion section of the article to gain a better understanding of the article's main claims. At this point if the article does not seem relevant or useful then discard it. However, if the article does seem useful then spend as much time as necessary reading the article.  
• Read critically.  What is the author's argument? You will need to use your judgment when evaluating each source of information. Further research may be necessary if you find the author to be biased or you do not believe the validity of their argument.  
• Read the reference section.  Reading the references or works cited may lead you to other useful resources. You might also get a better understanding of the major players in the area you are researching.  
• Take notes.  How you do this is up to you. Make sure you keep your research question and argument in mind so you can be more efficient when taking notes. Created by Rachel Arteaga, for CSU Chico: http://libguides.csuchico.edu/c.php?g=462359&p=3163509

• Read the abstract first : Titles don’t always give much information. The abstract should give you just enough information to let you know the basics of the article. From this you will know whether you should read on or look elsewhere for your project. Some journals print a list of keywords pertaining to the article as well. These are further clues about the article.  
• Read the introduction and discussion/conclusion next : These sections will give you the main argument of the article, which should be helpful in determining its relevance to you and your project. You’ll also get a glimpse of the findings of the research being reported.  
• Read about the methods next : If what you’ve read so far interests you, get a sense of how the research was done. Is it a qualitative or quantitative project? What data are the study based on?  
• Read the Analysis and results next : If you decide that you are committed to this article, you should read in more detail about this research.

Created by the Department of Sociology, SUNY Brockport: https://www.brockport.edu/academics/sociology/journal.html

What makes information peer-reviewed vs. scholarly vs. non-scholarly? Which type of source should I use?

• What makes information peer-reviewed vs. scholarly vs. non-scholarly?
• Which type of source should I use?

There is a nuanced distinction between peer-review and scholarship, which typically doesn't matter when evaluating sources for possible citation in your own work.  Peer-review is a process through which editors of a journal have other experts in the field evaluate articles submitted to the journal for possible publication.  Different journals have different ways of defining an expert in the field.  Scholarly works, by contrast have an editorial process, but this process does not involve expert peer-reviewers.  Rather, one or more editors, who are themselves often highly decorated scholars in a field, evaluate submissions for possible publication.  This editorial process can be more economically driven than a peer-review process, with a greater emphasis on marketing and selling the published material, but as a general rule this distinction is trivial with regard to evaluating information for possible citation in your own work.

What is perhaps a more salient way of thinking about the peer-review / scholarship distinction is to recognize that while peer-reviewed information is typically highly authoritative, and is generally considered "good" information, the absence of a peer-review process doesn't automatically make information "bad."  More specifically, the only thing the absence of a peer-review process means is that information published in this manner is not peer-reviewed.  Nothing more.  Information that falls into this category is sometimes referred to as "non-scholarly" information -- but again, that doesn't mean this information is somehow necessarily problematic.

Where does that leave you in terms of deciding what type of information to use in producing your own work?  That is a highly individual decision that you must make.  The Which type of source should I use?  tab in this box offers further guidance on answering this question, though it is important to be aware that many WSU instructors will only consider peer-reviewed sources to be acceptable in the coursework you turn in .  You can ask your instructor for his or her thoughts on the types of sources s/he will accept in student work.

Image:  Martin Grater. (2017, Nov. 1). Deep Thought. Retrieved from https://www.flickr.com/photos/152721954@N05/24304490568/. Used under the Creative Commons License.

Your topic and research question or thesis statement will guide you on which resources are best.  Sources can be defined as primary, secondary and tertiary levels away from an event or original idea. Researchers may want to start with tertiary or secondary source for background information. Learning more about a topic will help most researchers make better use of primary sources.

While articles from scholarly journals are often the most prominent of the sources you will consider incorporating into your coursework, they are not the only sources available to you.  Which sources are most appropriate to your research is a direct consequence of they type of research question you decide to address.  In other words, while most university-level papers will require you to reference scholarly sources, not all will.  A student in an English course writing a paper analyzing Bob Dylan's lyrics, for example, may find an interview with Dylan published in Rolling Stone magazine a useful source to cite alongside other scholarly works of literary criticism.

The WSU University Libraries' What Sources Should I Use? handout, as well as the other sub-tabs under the  Evaluating information  section of this guide (which is indeed the section you are currently viewing) offer further guidance on understanding and identifying scholarly resources, and comparing them against different criteria to evaluate if they will be of value to your research.  How many non-scholarly works (if any) you are at liberty to cite alongside scholarly ones is often a question to ask of your professor.  Some may not want you to cite any, whereas others may be ok with some non-scholarly works cited alongside scholarly ones.

Image:  Brett Woods. (2006, Jan. 6). Deep Thoughts. Retrieved from https://www.flickr.com/photos/brettanicus/87653641/. Used under the Creative Commons License.

• << Previous: How to distinguish between types of journal articles
• Next: Critically evaluating articles & other resources >>
• Last Updated: Mar 27, 2024 2:38 PM
• URL: https://libraries.wichita.edu/comm-research-strategies

• UNC Libraries
• HSL Subject Research
• Structure of Scholarly Articles and Peer Review
• Structure of a Biomedical Research Article

Structure of Scholarly Articles and Peer Review: Structure of a Biomedical Research Article

Created by health science librarians.

Title, Authors, Sources of Support and Acknowledgments

Structured abstract, introduction, results and discussion, international committee of medical journal editors (icmje).

• Compare Types of Journals
• Peer Review

Medical research articles tend to be structured in similar ways. This standard structure helps assure that research is reported with the information readers need to critically appraise the research process and results.

This guide to the structure of a biomedical research article was informed by the description of standard manuscript sections found in the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Recommendations chapter on Manuscript Preparation: Preparing for Submission .

If you are writing an article for submisson to a particular journal be sure to obtain that journal's instructions for authors for specific guidelines.

Example Article: Lyons EJ, Tate DF, Ward DS, Wang X. Energy intake and expenditure during sedentary screen time and motion-controlled video gaming. Am J Clin Nutr. 2012 Aug;96(2):234-9. doi: 10.3945/ajcn.111.028423. Epub 2012 Jul 3. PubMed PMID: 22760571; PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3396440. (Free full text available)

Article title:  Should provide a succinct description of the purpose of the article using words that will help it be accurately retrieved by search engines. 

Author information:  Includes the author names and the institution(s) where each author was affiliated at the time the research was conducted. Full contact information is provided for the corresponding author. 

Source(s) of support: Specific information about grant funding or source of equipment, drugs, etc. obtained to support the research. 

Acknowledgments:  This section may found at the end of the article and is used to name people who contributed to the paper, but not fully enough to be named as an author. It may also include more information about the authors' specific roles.

The structure of quantitative research articles is derived from the scientifc process and includes sections covering introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRaD). The actual labels for the various parts may vary between journals.

Abstract:  A structured abstract reports a summary of each of the IMRaD sections. Enough information should be included to provide the purpose of the research; an outline of methods used; results with data; and conclusions that highlight the findings. 

The introduction provides background information about what is known from previous related research, citing the relevant studies, and points out the gap in previous research that is being addressed by the new study. Often, many of the references cited in a paper are in the introduction. The purpose of the research should be clearly stated in this section.

The sample paper's introduction links television watching to increased energy intake and obesity, notes that several studies have shown a similar link with video gaming, and states no study was identified that compared television and video gaming. Eighteen of the thirty-one references used in the paper are cited in the introduction. The final paragraph of the introduction has two sentences that clearly state the purpose and the hypothesized expected outcome of the study.

The methods section clearly explains how the study was conducted. The ICMJE recommends that this section include information about how participants were selected, detailed demographics about who the participants were, and explanations of why any particular populations were included or excluded from the study. The details of how the study was conducted should be described with enough detail that the study could be replicated. Selected statistical methods should be reported in enough detail that readers can evaluate their appropriateness to the data being gathered.

The sample paper’s methods section includes subsections covering:  recruitment; procedures used for each study subgroup (TV, VG, motion-controlled VG); what snacks and beverages were used and how they were made available; how energy intake and energy expenditure were measured; how the data was analyzed and the specific statistical analysis and secondary analysis that was used.

The results section reports the data gathered and the statistical analysis of the data. Tables and / or graphs are often used to clearly and compactly present the data.

The results section of the sample paper  has two subsections and two tables. One subsection and related table shows the analysis of participant characteristics, The other subsection and table covers the analysis of energy intake, expenditure, and surplus.

In order to critically appraise the quality of the study you need to be able to understand the statistical analysis of the data. Two articles that help with this task are:

• Greenhalgh Trisha.  How to read a paper: Statistics for the non-statistician. I: Different types of data need different statistical tests  BMJ 1997; 315:364
• Greenhalgh Trisha.  How to read a paper: Statistics for the non-statistician. II: “Significant” relations and their pitfalls  BMJ 1997; 315:422

Another aid to critically reading a paper is to see if it has been included and evaluated in a systematic review. Try searching for the article you are reading in Google Scholar and seeing if the cited references include a systematic review. The sample paper was critically reviewed in:

• Marsh S, Ni Mhurchu C, Maddison R. The non-advertising effects of screen-based sedentary activities on acute eating behaviours in children, adolescents, and young adults. A systematic review. Appetite. 2013 Dec;71:259-73. doi: 10.1016/j.appet.2013.08.017. Epub 2013 Aug 31. PubMed Abstract . Full-text for UNC-CH .

The  discussion section  clearly states the primary findings of the study, poses explanations for the findings and any conclusions that can be drawn from them. It may also include the author’s assessment of limitations in the research as conducted and suggestions for further research that is needed.

The structure of biomedical research articles has been standardized across different journals at least in part due to the work of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors. This group first published the  Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals  in 1978.

The  Recommendations for the Conduct, Reporting, Editing, and Publication of Scholarly work in Medical Journals  (2013) is the most recent update of ICMJE's work. 

• Next: Compare Types of Journals >>
• Last Updated: Aug 14, 2023 12:15 PM
• URL: https://guides.lib.unc.edu/scholarly-articles

Search & Find

• E-Research by Discipline
• More Search & Find

Places & Spaces

• Places to Study
• Book a Study Room
• Printers, Scanners, & Computers
• More Places & Spaces
• Borrowing & Circulation
• Request a Title for Purchase
• Schedule Instruction Session
• More Services

Support & Guides

• Course Reserves
• Research Guides
• Citing & Writing
• More Support & Guides
• Mission Statement
• Diversity Statement
• Staff Directory
• Job Opportunities
• Give to the Libraries
• News & Exhibits
• Reckoning Initiative
• More About Us

• Search This Site
• Privacy Policy
• Accessibility
• Give Us Your Feedback
• 208 Raleigh Street CB #3916
• Chapel Hill, NC 27515-8890
• 919-962-1053

Module 4: Strategic Reading

The Structure of an Academic Article

Generally speaking, there is a common flow to scholarly articles. While not a template per se, you can be assured that the following components will be present in most articles. Learning to identify each component is a key step in the strategic reading process, and will help you save time as you screen articles for relevance. Check out the interactive example below that describes each section.

Click on the purple question marks to learn more about each component of an academic article.

Structure of an Academic Article by Emma Seston. Licenced under Creative Commons CC BY-NC 4.0 .

Key Takeaways

Learning to identify each component is a key step in the strategic reading process, and will help you save time as you screen articles for relevance.

Advanced Research Skills: Conducting Literature and Systematic Reviews Copyright © 2021 by Kelly Dermody; Cecile Farnum; Daniel Jakubek; Jo-Anne Petropoulos; Jane Schmidt; and Reece Steinberg is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• Accessories
• Entertainment
• PCs & Components
• Wi-Fi & Networks
• Newsletters
• Digital Magazine – Subscribe
• Digital Magazine – Info
• Smart Answers
• Best laptops
• Best antivirus
• Best monitors
• Laptop deals
• Desktop PC deals

When you purchase through links in our articles, we may earn a small commission. This doesn't affect our editorial independence .

Dell hack: Personal info of 49 million customers allegedly breached

If you’ve purchased anything from Dell in the past seven years, it’s likely that the Dark Web now knows as well.

Dell is confirming a data breach that reportedly covers “49 million customer records,” according to Bleeping Computer . While Dell is confirming that a breach occurred, the scope of the breach hasn’t been confirmed. A hacker on the Dark Web is reportedly claiming that the breach involves the 49 million records, with information that dates back seven years ago to 2017.

What Dell is telling people, according to the report, is that name, address, and hardware, service, and order information was leaked. If you’ve purchased anything from Dell, or engaged with customer support for a service or warranty request, that information is likely available to whoever wants to buy the information.

So far, Dell is not saying that any financial information was breached, including credit cards or payment information, or even your telephone number or email address.

That’s good, but as Bleeping Computer points out, it does leave you potentially vulnerable to a physical attack — i.e. someone sending a letter and using your Dell service history as “proof” that the contact is legitimate. Such a followup could include asking for financial information, however, or some other attack that tries to extract personal information.

In a followup, Bleeping Computer reported that the hacker obtained the data via an unsecured API, attached to a partner portal. The hacker revealed that the majority of records were attached to monitors and Dell Inspiron computers.

Right now, Dell doesn’t believe that there is “significant risk,” and they’re probably right if the initial scope of the breach is accurate. If you have purchased a Dell PC or peripheral, though, keep an eye open for suspicious activity.

Updated at 3:27 PM with additional detail from Bleeping Computer.

Author: Mark Hachman , Senior Editor

As PCWorld's senior editor, Mark focuses on Microsoft news and chip technology, among other beats. He has formerly written for PCMag, BYTE, Slashdot, eWEEK, and ReadWrite.

Recent stories by Mark Hachman:

• Apple claims its M4 chip’s AI will obliterate PCs. Nah, not really
• Microsoft’s newest Windows update breaks VPNs, and there’s no fix
• You can finally use passkeys to log into your Microsoft account

Corrosion in solar cells: challenges and solutions for enhanced performance and durability

• Research Article
• Published: 30 June 2023

Cite this article

• Lina M. Shaker 1 , 2 ,
• Ahmed Alamiery   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-1033-4904 2 , 3 ,
• Wan Nor Roslam Wan Isahak 2 &
• Waleed Khalid Al-Azzawi 4  

455 Accesses

Explore all metrics

Corrosion is a critical issue that can significantly impact the performance and lifespan of solar cells, affecting their efficiency and reliability. Understanding the complex relationship between corrosion and solar cell technologies is essential for developing effective strategies to mitigate corrosion-related challenges. In this review article, we provide a comprehensive overview of the various corrosion mechanisms that affect solar cells, including moisture-induced corrosion, galvanic corrosion, and corrosion in harsh environments. We discuss the adverse effects of corrosion on the materials commonly used in solar cells, such as silicon, metals, and transparent conductive oxides. Furthermore, we explore the strategies and technologies employed to prevent and control corrosion in solar cells, including the use of protective coatings, encapsulation techniques, and corrosion-resistant materials. Additionally, we discuss the characterization methods and accelerated testing approaches utilized to evaluate the corrosion resistance of solar cell components. This review aims to enhance our understanding of the corrosion issues faced by solar cells and to provide insights into the development of corrosion-resistant materials and robust protective measures for improved solar cell performance and durability.

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

Access this article

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Dye-Sensitized Solar Cells: Fundamentals and Current Status

Hydrogen in energy and information sciences

High-Entropy Strategy for Electrochemical Energy Storage Materials

Data availability statement.

All data will be available when request from the authors.

Z. Khalili, M. Sheikholeslami, Investigation of innovative cooling system for photovoltaic solar unit in existence of thermoelectric layer utilizing hybrid nanomaterial and Y-shaped fins. Sustain. Cities Soc. 93 , 104543 (2023)

Article   Google Scholar  

V. K. Domakonda, S. Farooq, S. Chinthamreddy, R. Puviarasi, M. Sudhakar, S. Boopathi, Sustainable Developments of Hybrid Floating Solar Power Plants: Photovoltaic System, in Human Agro-Energy Optimization for Business and Industry, IGI Global, pp. 148–167(2023).

Z. Ishrat, A. K. Gupta, S. Nayak, A comprehensive review of MPPT techniques based on ML applicable for maximum power in solar power systems, J. Renew. Energy Environ. (2023)

J. Tang, H. Ni, R.L. Peng, N. Wang, L. Zuo, A review on energy conversion using hybrid photovoltaic and thermoelectric systems. J. Power Sources 562 , 232785 (2023)

C. Raja, M. Ramachandran, S. Chinnasami, An analysis on solar photovoltaic technology using IBM SPSS statistics. J. Electron. Autom. Eng. 2 , 1–1 (2023)

Google Scholar  

M. Benchrifa, M. Elouardi, G. Fattah, J. Mabrouki, R. Tadili, Identification, simulation and modeling of the main power losses of a photovoltaic installation and use of the internet of things to minimize system losses, in Advanced Technology for Smart Environment and Energy , Cham: Springer International Publishing, pp. 49–60 (2023).

W. Liu, Key technologies for photovoltaic power generation. Highlights in Sci. Eng. Technol. 43 , 74–83 (2023)

J. Zhuang, J. Wang, F. Yan, Review on chemical stability of lead halide perovskite solar cells. Nano-Micro Lett. 15 (1), 84 (2023)

Article   ADS   Google Scholar  

T. Rahman, A.A. Mansur, M.S. Hossain Lipu, M.S. Rahman, R.H. Ashique, M.A. Houran et al., Investigation of degradation of solar photovoltaics: a review of aging factors, impacts, and future directions toward sustainable energy management. Energies 16 (9), 3706 (2023)

H. Zhou, L. Liang, Z. Guo, R. Fan, Anti-corrosion strategy to improve the stability of perovskite solar cells. Nanoscale 15 (1), 84 (2023)

A. C. Santa, M. A. Gómez, J. G. Castaño, J. A. Tamayo, L. M. Baena, Atmospheric deterioration of ceramic building materials and future trends in the field: a review, Heliyon, vol. 0, no. 0, p. e109 (2023)

M. R. A. Bhuiyan, S. Sikder, R. Hosen, M. S. Uddin, M. M. Haque, H. Mamur, Influence of different layers on enhancing the Pv performance of Al/Zno/Znmno/Cigsse/Cu2o/Ni solar cells, Zno/Znmno/Cigsse/Cu2o/Ni Solar Cells. (2023). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4452569

C. Cui et al., Strategies to break the trade-off between infrared transparency and conductivity" Progress Mater Sci, vol. 101112 (2023)

S. Palei, G. Murali, C.H. Kim, I. In, S.Y. Lee, S.J. Park, A review on interface engineering of MXenes for Perovskite solar cells. Nano-Micro Letters 15 (1), 1–39 (2023)

M. Hosseinnezhad, Z. Ranjbar, A review on flexible dye-sensitized solar cells as new sustainable energy resources. Pigm. Resin Technol. 52 (3), 310–320 (2023)

I.J. Park, H.K. An, Y. Chang, J.Y. Kim, Interfacial modification in perovskite-based tandem solar cells. Nano Converg. 10 (1), 1–13 (2023)

M. Massoud, G. Vega, A. Subburaj, J. Partheepan, Review on recycling energy resources and sustainability, Heliyon, p. e127 (2023)

J. Luo et al., Improved carrier management via a multifunctional modifier for high‐quality low‐bandgap Sn–Pb perovskites and efficient all‐perovskite tandem solar cells, Adv. Mater., p. 2300352, (2023)

N. Kyranaki et al., Damp-heat induced degradation in photovoltaic modules manufactured with passivated emitter and rear contact solar cells. Prog. Photovolt. Res. Appl. 30 (9), 1061–1071 (2022)

F. Ni, P. Xiao, C. Zhang, T. Chen, Hygroscopic polymer gels toward atmospheric moisture exploitations for energy management and freshwater generation. Matter 5 (9), 2624–2658 (2022)

R. Barreira-Pinto, R. Carneiro, M. Miranda, R.M. Guedes, Polymer-matrix composites: characterising the impact of environmental factors on their lifetime. Materials 16 (11), 3913 (2023)

P.M. Sommeling, J. Liu, J.M. Kroon, Corrosion effects in bifacial crystalline silicon PV modules; interactions between metallization and encapsulation. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 256 , 112321 (2023)

O.K. Segbefia, N. Akhtar, T.O. Sætre, Defects and fault modes of field-aged photovoltaic modules in the Nordics. Energy Rep. 9 , 3104–3119 (2023)

R. Meena, M. Kumar, R. Gupta, Reliability and degradation analysis of crystalline silicon photovoltaic module, Solar Energy Adv. Chall., p. 125 (2023)

C. Sen et al., The role of Na+ contamination in humidity-induced degradation in silicon HJT cells, in 2023 IEEE 49th Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (PVSC), pp. 666–669 (2023).

L. Ocaña et al., Characterization of a new low temperature encapsulation method with ethylene-vinyl acetate under UV irradiation for perovskite solar cells. Appl. Sci. 12 (10), 5228 (2022)

Y. Li et al., Artificial graphite paper as a corrosion-resistant current collector for long-life lithium metal batteries. Adv. Funct. Mater. 33 (19), 2214523 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.202214523

T. Kollo, Predicting atmospheric galvanic corrosion of aluminum using accelerated laboratory electrochemical experiments [Doctoral dissertation], University of Alaska Anchorage (2022).

C. Smith, "evaluation of fastening strategies for reducing galvanic corrosion damage in aluminum structures containing dissimilar metals" [Doctoral dissertation], University of Hawai'i at Manoa (2022)

N. Singh et al., Progress in bioactive surface coatings on biodegradable Mg alloys: a critical review towards clinical translation. Bioactive Mater 19 , 717–757 (2023)

J. Luo et al., Robust corrosion performance of cold sprayed aluminide coating in ternary molten carbonate salt for concentrated solar power plants. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 237 , 111573 (2022)

D. Merino-Millan et al., Alternative low-power plasma-sprayed inconel 625 coatings for thermal solar receivers: effects of high temperature exposure on adhesion and solar absorptivity. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 245 , 111839 (2022)

B. Nomeir et al., Recent progress on transparent and self-cleaning surfaces by superhydrophobic coatings deposition to optimize the cleaning process of solar panels. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 257 , 112347 (2023)

J. Zhou et al., Passivating contacts for high-efficiency silicon-based solar cells: from single-junction to tandem architecture. Nano Energy 92 , 106712 (2022)

G. Murugadoss et al., Cost-effective carbon black-graphite composite with solid-state based CuSCN electrode for dye-sensitized solar cells. Fuel 348 , 128527 (2023)

F. Kabir et al., Instability of dye-sensitized solar cells using natural dyes and approaches to improving stability–an overview. Sustain. Energy Technol. Assess. 52 , 102196 (2022)

X. Li et al., Potential‐free sodium‐induced degradation of silicon heterojunction solar cells, Progress Photovolt. Res. Appl. (2023)

N. Iqbal, Improving the performance and durability of metal contacts in crystalline silicon solar cells using advanced characterization. Electronic Theses and Dissertations, 2020. 1474 (2022). https://stars.library.ucf.edu/etd2020/1474

M.W. Akram et al., Failures of photo. Appl. Energy 313 , 118822 (2022)

Y. Abou Jieb, E. Hossain, Fabrication of Solar Cell, Photovoltaic Systems: Fundamentals and Applications, pp 23–55 (2022)

R. Bender et al., Corrosion challenges towards a sustainable society. Mater. Corros. 73 (11), 1730–1751 (2022)

Y. Xu et al., Recent progress of electrode materials for flexible perovskite solar cells. Nano-Micro Lett. 14 (1), 117 (2022)

V.H. Nguyen et al., Advances in flexible metallic transparent electrodes. Small 18 (19), 2106006 (2022)

S.K. Maurya et al., Recent progress in transparent conductive materials for photovoltaics. Energies 15 (22), 8698 (2022)

A.S. Rasal et al., Stability of quantum dot-sensitized solar cells: A review and prospects. Nano Energy 94 , 106854 (2022)

T.J. Pan et al., Anti-corrosion performance of the conductive bilayer CrC/CrN coated 304SS bipolar plate in acidic environment. Corros. Sci. 206 , 110495 (2022)

S. Ma et al., Development of encapsulation strategies towards the commercialization of perovskite solar cells. Energy Environ. Sci. 15 (1), 13–55 (2022)

Y. Zhang et al., Graphene-like two-dimensional nanosheets-based anticorrosive coatings: a review, J. Mater. Sci. Technol. (2022)

N. Yurrita et al., Composite material incorporating protective coatings for photovoltaic cell encapsulation. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 245 , 111879 (2022)

L. Xiang et al., Progress on the stability and encapsulation techniques of perovskite solar cells, Org. Electron., pp. 106515 (2022)

N. Yurrita, J. Aizpurua, W. Cambarau, G. Imbuluzqueta, J. Hernández, F. Cano, O. Zubillaga, Composite material incorporating protective coatings for photovoltaic cell encapsulation. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 245 , 111879 (2022)

L. Xiang, Y. Gao, F., Cao, D. Li, Q. Liu, H. Liu, S. & Li, Progress on the stability and encapsulation techniques of perovskite solar cells. Org. Electron., 106515 (2022)

R. V. Roper, The effect of impurities and geometry on the corrosion and thermodynamic behavior of molten salts (Doctoral dissertation, University of Idaho) (2022)

N. H. Faisal et al., Application of thermal spray coatings in electrolysers for hydrogen production: advances, challenges, and opportunities, ChemNanoMat, pp. e202200384 (2022)

B. Gupta et al., Recent advances in materials design using atomic layer deposition for energy applications. Adv. Func. Mater. 32 (3), 2109105 (2022)

Article   MathSciNet   Google Scholar  

A. Mortazavi et al., High-temperature corrosion of a nickel-based alloy in a molten chloride environment–the effect of thermal and chemical purifications. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 236 , 111542 (2022)

R. O. Medupin et al., Sustainable approach for corrosion control in mild steel using plant-based inhibitors: a review. Mater. Today Sustain. pp. 100373 (2023)

G. Ren et al., Overcoming perovskite corrosion and de-doping through chemical binding of halogen bonds toward efficient and stable perovskite solar cells. Nano-Micro Lett. 14 (1), 175 (2022)

K. Bawane et al., Visualizing time-dependent microstructural and chemical evolution during molten salt corrosion of Ni-20Cr model alloy using correlative quasi in situ TEM and in situ synchrotron X-ray nano-tomography. Corros. Sci. 195 , 109962 (2022)

L. Ma et al., Comparative review of different influence factors on molten salt corrosion characteristics for thermal energy storage. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 235 , 111485 (2022)

Y. Yin et al., Role of headspace environment for phase change carbonates on the corrosion of stainless steel 316L: High temperature thermal storage cycling in concentrated solar power plants. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 251 , 112170 (2023)

Q. Gao et al., High-temperature corrosion behavior of austenitic stainless steel in quaternary nitrate molten salt nanofluids for concentrated solar power. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 245 , 111851 (2022)

W.N.S.W. Shamsuddin et al., Environmentally robust Ag–Cu based low-E coatings. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 248 , 112033 (2022)

Dilibban. V. R. R., N. Nandakumar, T. Sekar, "Analysis of thermal energy storing and self-cleaning coating for solar panel by using titanium dioxide, melamine formaldehyde."

P. Rodič et al., Superhydrophobic aluminium surface to enhance corrosion resistance and obtain self-cleaning and anti-icing ability. Molecules 27 (3), 1099 (2022)

B.M. Suyitno et al., The assessment of reflector material durability for concentrated solar power based on environment exposure and accelerated aging test. Eastern-Eur. J. Enterprise Technol. 6 (12), 120 (2022)

X. Wang et al., A review of end-of-life crystalline silicon solar photovoltaic panel recycling technology. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 248 , 111976 (2022)

I. Høiaas et al., Inspection and condition monitoring of large-scale photovoltaic power plants: A review of imaging technologies. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 161 , 112353 (2022)

C. Ballif et al., Status and perspectives of crystalline silicon photovoltaics in research and industry. Nat. Rev. Mater. 7 (8), 597–616 (2022)

A. Tarancón et al., 2022 roadmap on 3D printing for energy. J. Phys. Energy 4 (1), 011501 (2022)

J. Kettle et al., Review of technology specific degradation in crystalline silicon, cadmium telluride, copper indium gallium selenide, dye sensitised, organic and perovskite solar cells in photovoltaic modules: Understanding how reliability improvements in mature technologies can enhance emerging technologies. Prog. Photovoltaics Res. Appl. 30 (12), 1365–1392 (2022)

H. Zhou et al., "Anti-corrosion Strategy to improve the stability of perovskite solar cells," Nanoscale.

C.P. Li et al., Stability improvement of inverted organic solar cells with thin organic protective layer. Org. Electron. 108 , 106602 (2022)

H. Yuan et al., A study of Al2O3/MgO composite films deposited by FCVA for thin-film encapsulation. Materials 16 (5), 1955 (2023)

H. Yuan et al., A novel and efficient technology of depositing Al2O3 film for OLEDs thin film encapsulation. Vacuum 196 , 110741 (2022)

I. W. Ma et al., A concise review on corrosion inhibitors: types, mechanisms and electrochemical evaluation studies, J. Coat. Technol. Res., pp. 1–28 (2022)

S. Junaedi, A.A.H. Kadhum, A. Al-Amiery, A.B. Mohamad, M.S. Takriff, Synthesis and characterization of novel corrosion inhibitor derived from oleic acid: 2-Amino-5- Oleyl 1,3,4-Thiadiazol (AOT). Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. 7 , 3543–3554 (2012)

H.S. Aljibori, A.H. Alwazir, S. Abdulhadi, W.K. Al-Azzawi, A.A.H. Kadhum, L.M. Shaker, A.A. Al-Amiery, HSh. Majdi, The use of a Schiff base derivative to inhibit mild steel corrosion in 1 M HCl solution: a comparison of practical and theoretical findings. Int. J. Corros. Scale Inhib. 11 (4), 1435–1455 (2022)

W.K. Al-Azzawi, S.M. Salih, A.F. Hamood, R.K. Al-Azzawi, M.H. Kzar, H.N. Jawoosh, L.M. Shakier, A. Al-Amiery, A.A.H. Kadhum, W.N.R.W. Isahak, M.S. Takriff, Adsorption and theoretical investigations of a Schiff base for corrosion inhibition of mild steel in an acidic environment. Int. J. Corros. Scale Inhib. 11 (3), 1063–1082 (2022)

D.M. Jamil, A. Al-Okbi, M. Hanon, K.S. Rida, A. Alkaim, A. Al-Amiery, A. Kadhum, A.A.H. Kadhum, Carbethoxythiazole corrosion inhibitor: as an experimentally model and DFT theory. J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 13 , 3952–3959 (2018)

A. Alobaidy, A. Kadhum, S. Al-Baghdadi, A. Al-Amiery, A. Kadhum, E. Yousif, A.B. Mohamad, Eco-friendly corrosion inhibitor: experimental studies on the corrosion inhibition performance of creatinine for mild steel in HCl complemented with quantum chemical calculations. Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. 10 , 3961–3972 (2015)

S. Al-Bghdadi, M. Hanoon, J. Odah, L. Shaker, A. Al-Amiery, A.A. Benzylidene as Efficient Corrosion Inhibition of Mild Steel in Acidic Solution. Proceedings, 41, 27 (2019).

B.S. Mahdi, H.S.S. Aljibori, M.K. Abbass, W.K. Al-Azzawi, A.H. Kadhum, M.M. Hanoon, W.N.R.W. Isahak, A.A. Al-Amiery, HSh. Majdi, Gravimetric analysis and quantum chemical assessment of 4-aminoantipyrine derivatives as corrosion inhibitors. Int. J. Corros. Scale Inhib. 11 (3), 1191–1213 (2022)

A.A. Alamiery, Study of corrosion behavior of N´-(2-(2-oxomethylpyrrol-1-yl) ethyl) piperidine for mild steel in the acid environment. Biointerface Res. Appl. Chem. 12 , 3638–3646 (2022)

A. Alamiery, A. Mohamad, A. Kadhum, M. Takriff, Comparative data on corrosion protection of mild steel in HCl using two new thiazoles. Data Brief 40 , 107838 (2022)

A.M. Mustafa, F.F. Sayyid, N. Betti, L.M. Shaker, M.M. Hanoon, A.A. Alamiery, A.A.H. Kadhum, M.S. Takriff, Inhibition of mild steel corrosion in hydrochloric acid environment by 1-amino-2-mercapto-5-(4-(pyrrol-1-yl)phenyl)-1,3,4-triazole. S. Afr. J. Chem. Eng. 39 , 42–51 (2022)

A.A. Alamiery, Investigations on corrosion inhibitory effect of newly quinoline derivative on mild steel in HCl solution complemented with antibacterial studies. Biointerface Rese. Appl. Chem. 12 , 1561–1568 (2022)

I.A. Alkadir Aziz, I.A. Annon, M.H. Abdulkareem, M.M. Hanoon, M.H. Alkaabi, L.M. Shaker, A.A. Alamiery, W.N.R. Wan Isahak, M.S. Takriff, Insights into corrosion inhibition behavior of a 5-mercapto-1, 2, 4-triazole derivative for mild steel in hydrochloric acid solution: experimental and DFT studies. Lubricants 9 , 122 (2021)

A. Alamiery, Short report of mild steel corrosion in 0.5 M H2SO4 by 4-ethyl-1-(4-oxo4-phenylbutanoyl)thiosemicarbazide. Tribologi 30 , 90–99 (2021)

A.A. Alamiery, W.N.R.W. Isahak, M.S. Takriff, Inhibition of mild steel corrosion by 4-benzyl-1-(4-oxo-4-phenylbutanoyl)thiosemicarbazide: gravimetrical, adsorption and theoretical studies. Lubricants 9 , 93 (2021)

M.A. Dawood, Z.M.K. Alasady, M.S. Abdulazeez, D.S. Ahmed, G.M. Sulaiman, A.A.H. Kadhum, L.M. Shaker, A.A. Alamiery, The corrosion inhibition effect of a pyridine derivative for low carbon steel in 1 M HCl medium: complemented with antibacterial studies. Int. J. Corros. Scale Inhib. 10 , 1766–1782 (2021)

A. Alamiery, Corrosion inhibition effect of 2-N-phenylamino-5-(3-phenyl-3-oxo-1- propyl)-1,3,4-oxadiazole on mild steel in 1 M hydrochloric acid medium: Insight from gravimetric and DFT investigations. Mater. Sci. Energy Technol. 4 , 398–406 (2021)

A. Alamiery, Anticorrosion effect of thiosemicarbazide derivative on mild steel in 1 M hydrochloric acid and 0.5 M sulfuric Acid: Gravimetrical and theoretical studies. Mater. Sci. Energy Technol. 4 , 263–273 (2021)

A. Alamiery, W.N.R.W. Isahak, H. Aljibori, H. Al-Asadi, A. Kadhum, Effect of the structure, immersion time and temperature on the corrosion inhibition of 4-pyrrol-1-yln-(2,5-dimethyl-pyrrol-1-yl)benzoylamine in 1.0 m HCl solution. Int. J. Corros. Scale Inhib. 10 , 700–713 (2021)

A. Alamiery, E. Mahmoudi, T. Allami, Corrosion inhibition of low-carbon steel in hydrochloric acid environment using a Schiff base derived from pyrrole: gravimetric and computational studies. Int. J. Corros. Scale Inhib. 10 , 749–765 (2021)

A.J.M. Eltmimi, A. Alamiery, A.J. Allami, R.M. Yusop, A.H. Kadhum, T. Allami, Inhibitive effects of a novel efficient Schiff base on mild steel in hydrochloric acid environment. Int. J. Corros. Scale Inhib. 10 , 634–648 (2021)

A. Alamiery, L.M. Shaker, T. Allami, A.H. Kadhum, M.S. Takriff, A study of acidic corrosion behavior of furan-derived Schiff base for mild steel in hydrochloric acid environment: experimental, and surface investigation. Mater. Today: Proc. 44 , 2337–2341 (2021)

S. Al-Baghdadi, A. Al-Amiery, T. Gaaz, A. Kadhum, Terephthalohydrazide and isophthalo-hydrazide as new corrosion inhibitors for mild steel in hydrochloric acid: experimental and theoretical approaches. Koroze Ochr. Mater. 65 , 12–22 (2021)

M.M. Hanoon, A.M. Resen, L.M. Shaker, A. Kadhum, A. Al-Amiery, Corrosion investigation of mild steel in aqueous hydrochloric acid environment using n- (Naphthalen-1yl)-1-(4-pyridinyl)methanimine complemented with antibacterial studies. Biointerface Res Appl. Chem. 11 , 9735–9743 (2021)

S. Al-Baghdadi, T.S. Gaaz, A. Al-Adili, A. Al-Amiery, M. Takriff, Experimental studies on corrosion inhibition performance of acetylthiophene thiosemicarbazone for mild steel in HCl complemented with DFT investigation. Int. J. Low-Carbon Technol. 16 , 181–188 (2021)

A. Al-Amiery, Anti-corrosion performance of 2-isonicotinoyl-nphenylhydrazinecarbothioamide for mild steel hydrochloric acid solution: Insights from experimental measurements and quantum chemical calculations. Surf. Rev. Lett. 28 , 2050058 (2021)

M.S. Abdulazeez, Z.S. Abdullahe, M.A. Dawood, Z.K. Handel, R.I. Mahmood, S. Osamah, A.H. Kadhum, L.M. Shaker, A.A. Al-Amiery, Corrosion inhibition of low carbon steel in HCl medium using a thiadiazole derivative: weight loss, DFT studies and antibacterial studies. Int. J. Corros. Scale Inhib. 10 , 1812–1828 (2021)

A. Mustafa, F. Sayyid, N. Betti, M. Hanoon, A. Al-Amiery, A. Kadhum, M. Takriff, Inhibition Evaluation of 5-(4-(1H-pyrrol-1-yl)phenyl)-2-mercapto-1,3,4-oxadiazole for the corrosion of mild steel in an acid environment: thermodynamic and DFT aspects. Tribologia 38 , 39–47 (2021)

Y.M. Abdulsahib, A.J.M. Eltmimi, S.A. Alhabeeb, M.M. Hanoon, A.A. Al-Amiery, T. Allami, A.A.H. Kadhum, Experimental and theoretical investigations on the inhibition efficiency of N-(2,4-dihydroxytolueneylidene)-4-methylpyridin-2-amine for the corrosion of mild steel in hydrochloric acid. Int. J. Corros. Scale Inhib. 10 , 885–899 (2021)

A.K. Khudhair, A.M. Mustafa, M.M. Hanoon, A. Al-Amiery, L.M. Shaker, T. Gazz, A.B. Mohamad, A.H. Kadhum, M.S. Takriff, Experimental and theoretical investigation on the corrosion inhibitor potential of N-MEH for mild steel in HCl. Prog. Color Color. Coat. 15 , 111–122 (2022)

D.S. Zinad, R.D. Salim, N. Betti, L.M. Shaker, A.A. AL-Amiery, Comparative Investigations of the Corrosion Inhibition Efficiency of a 1-phenyl- 2-(1- phenylethylidene)hydrazine and its analog against mild steel corrosion in hydrochloric acid solution. Prog. Color Color. Coat. 15 , 53–63 (2022)

R.D. Salim, N. Betti, M. Hanoon, A.A. Al-Amiery, 2-(2,4-Dimethoxybenzylidene)- N-Phenylhydrazinecarbothioamide as an Efficient Corrosion Inhibitor for Mild Steel in Acidic Environment, Prog. Color. Color. Coat. 15 , 45–52 (2021)

A.A. Al-Amiery, L.M. Shaker, A.H. Kadhum, M.S. Takriff, Exploration of furan derivative for application as corrosion inhibitor for mild steel in hydrochloric acid solution: Effect of immersion time and temperature on efficiency. Mater. Today: Proc. 42 , 2968–2973 (2021)

A.M. Resen, M.M. Hanoon, W.K. Alani, A. Kadhim, A.A. Mohammed, T.S. Gaaz, A.A.H. Kadhum, A.A. Al-Amiery, M.S. Takriff, Exploration of 8-piperazine-1- ylmethylumbelliferone for application as a corrosion inhibitor for mild steel in hydrochloric acid solution. Int. J. Corros. Scale Inhib. 10 , 368–387 (2021)

M.M. Hanoon, A.M. Resen, A.A. Al-Amiery, A.A.H. Kadhum and M.S. Takriff, Theoretical and Experimental Studies on the Corrosion Inhibition Potentials of 2-((6- Methyl-2-Ketoquinolin-3-yl)Methylene) Hydrazinecarbothioamide for Mild Steel in 1 M HCl, Prog. Color, Color. Coat., 15, 21–33 (2021).

F.G. Hashim, T.A. Salman, S.B. Al-Baghdadi, T. Gaaz, A.A. Al-Amiery, Inhibition effect of hydrazine-derived coumarin on a mild steel surface in hydrochloric acid. Tribologia 37 , 45–53 (2020)

A.M. Resen, M. Hanoon, R.D. Salim, A.A. Al-Amiery, L.M. Shaker, A.A.H. Kadhum, Gravimetrical, theoretical, and surface morphological investigations of corrosion inhibition effect of 4-(benzoimidazole-2-yl) pyridine on mild steel in hydrochloric acid. Koroze Ochr. Mater. 64 , 122–130 (2020)

A.Z. Salman, Q.A. Jawad, K.S. Ridah, L.M. Shaker, A.A. Al-Amiery, Selected BISthiadiazole: synthesis and corrosion inhibition studies on mild steel in HCL environment. Surf. Rev. Lett. 27 , 2050014 (2020)

S. Junaedi, A. Al-Amiery, A. Kadihum, A. Kadhum, A. Mohamad, Inhibitioneffects of a synthesized novel 4-aminoantipyrine derivative on the corrosion of mild steel in hydrochloric acid solution together with quantum chemicalstudies. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 14 , 11915–11928 (2013)

A. Alamiery, W.N.R.W. Isahak, H.S.S. Aljibori, H.A. Al- Asadi, A.A.H. Kadhum, Effect of the structure, immersion time and temperature on the corrosion inhibition of 4- pyrrol-1-yl-n-(2,5-dimethyl-pyrrol-1-yl)benzoylamine in 1.0 M HCL solution. Int. J. Corros. Scale Inhib. 10 , 700–713 (2021)

S. Al-Baghdadi, F. Hashim, A. Salam, T. Abed, T. Gaaz, A. Al-Amiery, A.H. Kadhum, K. Reda, W. Ahmed, Synthesis and corrosion inhibition application of NATN on mild steel surface in acidic media complemented with DFT studies. Results Phys. 8 , 1178–1184 (2018)

W.K. Al-Azzawi, A.J. Al-Adily, F.F. Sayyid, R.K. Al-Azzawi, M.H. Kzar, H.N. Jawoosh, A.A. Al-Amiery, A.A.H. Kadhum, W.N.R.W. Isahak, M.S. Takriff, Evaluation of corrosion inhibition characteristics of an N-propionanilide derivative for mild steel in 1 M HCl: gravimetrical and computational studies. Int. J. Corros. Scale Inhib. 11 (3), 1100–1114 (2022)

A.A. Al-Amiery, W.N. RoslamWanIsahak, W.K. Al-Azzawi, Corrosion inhibitors: natural and synthetic organic inhibitors. Lubricants 11 (4), 174 (2023)

N. Betti, A.A. Al-Amiery, W.K. Al-Azzawi, W.N.R. Wan Isahak, Corrosion inhibition properties of schiff base derivative against mild steel in HCl environment complemented with DFT investigations. Sci. Rep. 13 (1), 8979 (2023)

A. Al-Amiery, W. N. R. Wan Isahak, W. K. Al-Azzawi, ODHI: a promising isatin-based corrosion inhibitor for mild steel in hydrochloric acid, J. Mol. Struct., vol. 135829 (2023)

A.A. Al-Amiery, N. Betti, W.N.R. Wan Isahak, W.K. Al-Azzawi, W.M.N. Wan Nik, Exploring the effectiveness of isatin-schiff base as an environmentally friendly corrosion inhibitor for mild steel in hydrochloric acid. Lubricants 11 (5), 211 (2023)

A. Kadhim et al., Palmitic acid-based amide as a corrosion inhibitor for mild steel in 1M HCl. Heliyon 9 (4), e14657 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e14657

H.S. Aljibori et al., Corrosion inhibition effects of concentration of 2-oxo-3-hydrazonoindoline in acidic solution, exposure period, and temperature. Int. J. Corros. Scale Inhib. 12 (2), 438–457 (2023)

A. Al-Amiery, Schiff's base performance in preventing corrosion on mild steel in acidic conditions, Prog. Color, Colorants Coat. (2023).

A. Al-Amiery, Investigation of the corrosion inhibition properties of 4-cyclohexyl-3-thiosemicarbazide on mild steel in 1 M HCl solution, Prog. Color, Colorants Coat. (2023)

S. Hussein et al., Antibacterial corrosion inhibitor for the protection of mild steel in 1 M HCl solution. Prog. Color, Colorants Coat. 16 (1), 59–70 (2023)

K.M. Raheef et al., Gravimetric and density functional theory investigations on 4-amioantipyrin schiff base as an inhibitor for mild steel in HCl solution. Prog. Color Colorants Coat. 16 (3), 255–269 (2023)

K. Neha, S. K. Singh, S. Kumar. Effect of degradations and their possible outcomes in PV cells. Renew. Energy Syst. Model. Optim. Appl. pp. 469–515 (2022)

S.H. Reddy, F.D. Giacomo, A.D. Carlo, Low-temperature-processed stable perovskite solar cells and modules: a comprehensive review. Adv. Energy Mater. 12 (13), 2103534 (2022)

M. Agarwal, K. Varahramyan, S. Shrestha. Copper indium gallium selenium (CIGS) nanoparticles-based thin film solar cells (2022)

S. Voswinckel, T. Mikolajick, V. Wesselak, Influence of the active leakage current pathway on the potential induced degradation of CIGS thin film solar modules. Sol. Energy 197 , 455–461 (2020)

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia and University of Technology/Iraq for providing the facilities for this work.

This research was funded by Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, grant number GUP-2020–012 “Malaysia”.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Training and Research Office, Research Energy Department, Ministry of Electricity, Baghdad, Iraq

Lina M. Shaker

Department of Chemical and Process Engineering, Faculty of Engineering and Built Environment, University Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), P.O. Box 43000, Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia

Lina M. Shaker, Ahmed Alamiery & Wan Nor Roslam Wan Isahak

Energy and Renewable Energies Technology Center, University of Technology, Baghdad, 10001, Iraq

Ahmed Alamiery

Al-Farahidi University, Baghdad, Iraq

Waleed Khalid Al-Azzawi

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

AAA contributed to Conceptualization, Writing—original draft preparation and Methodoloygy. LMS contributed to Formal analysis, Data curation and Validation. AAA and WKAA contributed to Investigation, writing—review and editing and Resources. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Ahmed Alamiery or Wan Nor Roslam Wan Isahak .

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Shaker, L.M., Alamiery, A., Isahak, W.N.R.W. et al. Corrosion in solar cells: challenges and solutions for enhanced performance and durability. J Opt (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12596-023-01277-9

Download citation

Received : 06 June 2023

Accepted : 15 June 2023

Published : 30 June 2023

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s12596-023-01277-9

Share this article

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

• Solar cells
• Performance
• Protective coatings
• Characterization
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

REVIEW article

This article is part of the research topic.

Model Organisms for Cilia Research

Chlamydomonas as a model system to study cilia and flagella using genetics, biochemistry, and microscopy Provisionally Accepted

• 1 University of California, San Francisco, United States

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

The unicellular green alga, Chlamydomonas reinhardtii, has played a central role in discovering much of what is currently known about the composition, assembly, and function of cilia and flagella. Chlamydomonas combines excellent genetics, such as the ability to grow cells as haploids or diploids and to perform tetrad analysis, with an unparalleled ability to detach and isolate flagella in a single step without cell lysis. The combination of genetics and biochemistry that is possible in Chlamydomonas has allowed many of the key components of the cilium to be identified by looking for proteins that are missing in a defined mutant. Few if any other model organisms allow such a seamless combination of genetic and biochemical approaches. Other major advantages of Chlamydomonas compared to other systems include the ability to induce flagella to regenerate in a highly synchronous manner, allowing the kinetics of flagellar growth to be measured, and the ability of Chlamydomonas flagella to adhere to glass coverslips allowing Intraflagellar Transport to be easily imaged inside the flagella of living cells, with quantitative precision and single-molecule resolution. These advantages continue to work in favor of Chlamydomonas as a model system going forward, and are now augmented by extensive genomic resources, a knockout strain collection, and efficient CRISPR gene editing. While Chlamydomonas has obvious limitations for studying ciliary functions related to animal development or organ physiology, when it comes to studying the fundamental biology of cilia and flagella, Chlamydomonas in simply unmatched in terms of speed, efficiency, cost, and the variety of approaches that can be brought to bear on a question.

Keywords: Ciliogenesis, intraflagellar transport, Flagellar length control, Axoneme, motility

Received: 05 Apr 2024; Accepted: 13 May 2024.

Copyright: © 2024 Marshall. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Prof. Wallace Marshall, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco, United States

People also looked at