Generally speaking, when reading the method section you should ask yourself:
♦ What research techniques are used by the author(s)?
Reading this section should provide you with a better idea of what was actually done in the research as well as a clue into the thinking of the researcher.
• Is the method employed a valid test of the predictions or hypotheses?
There is rarely (if ever) a single way of testing a prediction or hypothesis. The researcher will have made a choice between a number of possible research designs/sets of materials/procedures/sample groups, etc. You need to consider whether the choices made by the researcher will allow them to make valid claims about their the predictions or hypotheses.
• Has the researcher overlooked any possible confounds or extraneous variables which could affect interpretations of the findings?
No piece of research is ‘perfect’, and there are usually limits as to how much ‘control’ can be achieved over the research environment. However, some researchers attempt to achieve more control in their research designs than others do. You need to consider whether sufficient control has been achieved.
• How do the methods employed compare with the methods used in other investigations of the same topic/phenomenon?
As researchers usually seek to make comparisons between their study and earlier studies, you need to consider whether or not the method employed allows the researcher to make valid comparisons between studies, and how much you feel they are entitled to generalize their findings.
The Results
This section is very important because it provides numerical evidence that supports or refutes the hypotheses being studied. When reading the results section you should ask yourself:
• How do the results relate to the predictions/hypotheses set out in the introduction (i.e., are they supported or not)?
What differences did the authors find that support or refute the project hypotheses?
• Are the results reported and analyzed in an unbiased manner?
The manner in which data are reported and analyzed could dramatically affect interpretation. For example, different types or formats of graphs can emphasize or de-emphasize the sizes of effects, and different inferential tests can yield different results.
The Discussion
The discussion should summarize the main findings in (relatively) plain English How do the authors interpret the findings? That is, what do they say the findings tell us about their research question? Do we now know’ something new? Arc there new questions raised? Do the authors discuss implications of their findings for theory, or for the “real world”? When reading the discussion section you should ask yourself:
• Have the appropriate interpretations of the results been made?
• Are there ways of interpreting the results that haven’t been considered?
• Has the researcher presented an unbiased evaluation of the study/method employed?
• Is the researcher justified in making any theoretical claims that are made on the basis of the study’s findings? Were the hypotheses supported or rejected?
• What are the implications of those findings (what do they tell us about theory, research, or real life concerns)?
• What suggestions are being made about future research into this topic/phenomenon or what does the researcher consider to be ‘the way forward’?
