This week we have been working on analyzing different journal articles and looking at consistencies and inconsistencies within the articles. We have been asked to be the author’s critical friend. I didn’t think it was appropriate to criticize these types of publications before. I thought that, because their were in peer-reviewed journals that they were the gospel. With this assignment, our instructor, Elizabeth Childs, provided us with the freedom to be critical, review the data, that methods, the conclusions, etc. and to form our own opinion on how relevant the information provided might be. I also thought that being in a peer reviewed journal meant that these articles were read by many people. That again is not true. In their blog, Biswas and Kichher (2015, April 9) suggest that many articles are never read and some maybe only 10 times. They also suggest that even though the article has been cited, it may not have been read all the way through. In completing this assignment I was surprised at how critical my reading was – I went in a bit bias I must admit to finding something wrong. I guess that isn’t always a bad thing. Blindly following isn’t a good way either.
So, to the authors I have criticized – I hope you will consider me a friend.
Biswas, A., & Kirchherr, J. (2015, April 9). Citations are not enough: Academic promotion panels must take into account a scholar’s presence in popular media. [Web log post].