American InterContinental University Evaluating Journal Articles Discussion Evaluating Journal Articles Scholarly and professional credibility are essenti

American InterContinental University Evaluating Journal Articles Discussion Evaluating Journal Articles

Scholarly and professional credibility are essential attributes that practitioners and scholars should uphold as they engage in research. An indicator of academic credibility is effective choice of sources. As a researcher, it is incumbent upon you to assess your sources, their references, assumptions, procedures, and conclusions reached. You want to have confidence in the studies’ findings and evaluate them for reliability, validity, and objectivity. Are resources properly cited? Are interpretations plausible? Can data and findings be authenticated? Are there clear sources of bias?

In this Discussion, you will compare two articles and evaluate their strengths and weaknesses as trustworthy academic studies.

To prepare for this Discussion:

Read the Bad article: Treatment of Flying Phobia: Comparative Efficacy of Two Behavioral Methods.
Read the Good article: Thirst for Knowledge: The Effects of Curiosity and Interest on Memory in Younger and Older Adults.
Review the Galvan text:
Chapter 5, “Analyzing Quantitative Research Literature” (pp. 45–55)
Chapter 6, “Analyzing Qualitative Research Literature” (pp. 57–62)
Review Chapter 9, “Dissertation Chapter 2: Literature Review” (pp. 89–91), in the Stadtlander text.
Review the web resource “Evaluating Resources: Resource Types.”
View the video WriteCast Episode #5: Five Strategies for Critical Reading. Scroll down the episode archives to find Episode 5 to play. The episodes are placed from most recent (top) to older recordings (lower down).

Post by Day 3 an evaluation of both the “good” and “bad” journal articles provided in the Learning Resources this week. Use pages 89–91 of the Stadtlander text as the basis for your evaluation. For each article, analyze the elements of the study that made it a good or bad article.

Required Resources

Note: To access this week’s required library resources, please click on the link to the Course Readings List, found in the Course Materials section of your Syllabus.

READINGS
Galvan, J. L. (2015). Writing literature reviews: A guide for students of the social and behavioral sciences (6th ed). Glendale, CA: Pyrczak.
Chapter 5, “Analyzing Quantitative Research Literature” (pp. 45–55)
Chapter 6, “Analyzing Qualitative Research Literature” (pp. 57–62)
Stadtlander, L. M. (2015). Finding your way to a Ph.D.: Advice from the dissertation mentor. CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.
Chapter 9, “Dissertation Chapter 2: Literature Review” (pp. 89–91)
Walden University Library. (2015a). Evaluating resources: Resource types. Retrieved from http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/library/evaluating
JOURNAL ARTICLES
BAD ARTICLE
Beauchamp, M., Greenfield, M. D., & Campobello, L. (1998). Treatment of flying phobia: Comparative efficacy of two behavioral methods. In Meltzoff, J. (Ed.), Critical thinking about research: Psychology and related fields. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Critical Thinking about Research: Psychology and Related Fields by Beauchamp, M., Greenfield, M. D., and Campobello, L. Copyright 1997 by American Psychological Association. Reprinted by permission of American Psychological Association via the Copyright Clearance Center.
GOOD ARTICLE
McGillivray, S., Murayama, K., & Castel, A. D. (2015). Thirst for knowledge: The effects of curiosity and interest on memory in younger and older adults. Psychology and Aging, 30(4), 835–843.
Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
MEDIA
Walden University Writing Center [WUWritingCenter]. (2014, January 15). WriteCast episode 5: Five strategies for critical reading [Video file]. Retrieved from http://academicguides.waldenu.edu/writingcenter/multimedia/podcast#s-lg-box-2814414