The journal article for you to critique is the following.
Thøgersen, J., Jørgensen, A. K., & Sandager, S. (2012). Consumer decision making regarding a âgreenâ
everyday product. Psychology & Marketing, 29 (4), 187197.
THE TEMPLATE FOR JOURNAL ARTICLE CRITIQUE HAVE TO BE LIKE THIS:
1. Introduction
Typically, the introduction is short (less than 10% of the word length) and you should:
Name the work being reviewed as well as the date it was created and the name of the author/creator.
Describe the main argument or purpose of the work.
Explain the context in which the work was created. This could include the social or political context, the
place of the work in a creative or academic tradition, or the relationship between the work and the creatorâs
life experience.
Have a concluding sentence that signposts what your evaluation of the work will be. For instance, it may
indicate whether it is a positive, negative, or mixed evaluation.
2. Summary
Briefly summarise the main points and objectively describe how the creator portrays these by using
techniques, styles, media, characters or symbols. This summary should not be the focus of the critique and
is usually shorter than the critical evaluation.
3. Critical evaluation
This section should give a systematic and detailed assessment of the different elements of the work,
evaluating how well the creator was able to achieve the purpose through these. For example: you would
assess the plot structure, characterisation and setting of a novel; an assessment of a painting would look at
composition, brush strokes, colour and light; a critique of a research project would look at subject selection,
design of the experiment, analysis of data and conclusions.
A critical evaluation does not simply highlight negative impressions. It should deconstruct the work and
identify both strengths and weaknesses. It should examine the work and evaluate its success, in light of its
purpose.
Examples of key critical questions that could help your assessment include:
Who is the creator? Is the work presented objectively or subjectively?
What are the aims of the work? Were the aims achieved?
What techniques, styles, media were used in the work? Are they effective in portraying the purpose?
What assumptions underlie the work? Do they affect its validity?
What types of evidence or persuasion are used? Has evidence been interpreted fairly?
How is the work structured? Does it favour a particular interpretation or point of view? Is it effective?
Does the work enhance understanding of key ideas or theories? Does the work engage (or fail to engage)
with key concepts or other works in its discipline?
This evaluation is written in formal academic style and logically presented. Group and order your ideas into
paragraphs. Start with the broad impressions first and then move into the details of the technical elements.
For shorter critiques, you may discuss the strengths of the works, and then the weaknesses. In longer
critiques, you may wish to discuss the positive and negative of each key critical question in individual
paragraphs.
To support the evaluation, provide evidence from the work itself, such as a quote or example, and you
should also cite evidence from related sources. Explain how this evidence supports your evaluation of the
work.
4. Conclusion
This is usually a very brief paragraph, which includes:
A statement indicating the overall evaluation of the work
A summary of the key reasons, identified during the critical evaluation, why this evaluation was formed.
In some circumstances, recommendations for improvement on the work may be appropriate.
5. Reference list
Include all resources cited in your critique. Check with your lecturer/tutor for which referencing style to
use.
Files
Attached:
