While there are some emerging strands of theory that are unique to construction management or construction economics, most research in this area builds upon theoretical models developed elsewhere in the social sciences.
Regardless, there are some invariant questions that most reviewers would or at least should always consider, including: This is not just a case of explaining the concepts related to the particular construction industry phenomena under investigation, but, more importantly, to identify the methodological basis of the work.
In all likelihood, you Reviewing research papers see the paper again in the form of a revision! Different papers serve different purposes. This often requires doing some background reading, sometimes including some of the cited literature, about the theory presented in the manuscript.
The process is far from perfect, and the outcome of the process is neither validation nor condemnation of your work. I believe it improves the transparency of the review process, and it also helps me police the quality of my own assessments by making me personally accountable.
Parts of the paper may be difficult to understand. They are certainly not a pre-requisite for a good research paper. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 52 7 Then, throughout, if what I am reading is only partly comprehensible, I do not spend a lot of energy trying to make sense of it, but in my review I will relay the ambiguities to the author.
They should be stated in a way that makes them testable and the results, no matter what they are, interpretable. My reviews usually start out with a short summary and a highlight of the strengths of the manuscript before briefly listing the weaknesses that I believe should be addressed.
Third, I consider whether the results or the proposed methodology have some potential broader applicability or relevance, because in my opinion this is important. What is the theoretical basis of this work, i. Indeed, some leave it out altogether, perhaps assuming that it is self-evident or simply not realizing that although it is obvious to the author, a reader with no previous knowledge of the work only has the paper to go on.
The question about whether there should be hypotheses is, perhaps, a wrong question. Without such connections, we run the risk of consigning our research to an academic backwater. Similarly, the sensitivity of the methods must match the needs of the research question.
Instead, a young scientist may learn how to review a paper under the guidance of his or her mentor, through journal clubs, or simply through trial and error. Then I read the paper as a whole, thoroughly and from beginning to end, taking notes as I read. Conclusions that are overstated or out of sync with the findings will adversely impact my review and recommendations.
Does it realize a great contribution or idea?How to review a paper By Elisabeth Pain Sep. 22,PM As junior scientists develop their expertise and make names for themselves, they are increasingly likely to receive invitations to review research manuscripts.
A literature review can be a precursor to the introduction of a research paper, or it can be an entire paper in itself, acting as the first stage of large research projects and allowing the supervisor to ascertain that the student is on the correct path.
A literature review is a critical and in depth evaluation of previous research. It is a summary and synopsis of a particular area of research, allowing anybody reading the. View Reviewing Research Papers on mi-centre.com for free.
reasonable? If these are not hypotheses, is there adequate development of theory? (d) If there are hypotheses, are they stated in a way that makes them testable and the results, no matter what they are, interpretable?
If there are no hypotheses, are there clear indications as to the significance to. How to critically evaluate the quality of a research article? When considering a research idea, we are bound to rely on previous findings on the topic. Work done in the field constructs the foundation for our research and determines its course and value.
What is the difference between a research paper and a review paper? This is my first attempt at writing a scientific paper and I am thinking of writing a review article. I want to know what is the exact difference between a research paper and a review paper.Download