f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f 1
• When reviewing this study, it was easy to identify two strengths of the
document:
1. The use of tables to visually present information related to each
step of the analysis.
2. The relevance of articles related to the study and flow of discussion
section.
f f f f f f f f f f When looking for areas that could be improved upon, the main things
that jumped out were formatting issues that are easily fixed:
3. The author uses the words “Running head” in the running head of
the paper, which violates Section 2.8 of the 7th Edition APA
Publication Manual (American Psychological Association, 2020).
4. The first two tables used do not have bolded text, and all tables
lack table titles according to Section 7.8 of the 7th Edition APA
Publication Manual (American Psychological Association, 2020).
5. When discussing goodness of fit, the author references “Table 5
above”, but Table 5 is actually presented below this section of text.
It is probable the author meant to refer to Table 4.
f f f f f f f f f f Overall, the author did a good job using appropriate terms given the
predictive nature of the design.
In reviewing your study for a peer review, as per this week's assignments I found
some strengths as well as some errors that are easily fixed upon editing your
document. Please see below for some constructive notes on your study:
Strengths:
• Your study was well written with your sample size clearly stated, in
particular your study was concise and easy for anyone to understand,
despite their knowledge of statistics
• Your study report provided the use of tables as per required in the
assignment
Weaknesses:
• Although you refer to table 1 by stating "This table indicates that the total
number of participants involved in the study was 20, with no missing
information." there is no actual call out for the table
f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f 2
• There were a couple of errors in your table numbers. In your call out you
refer to table 5 and you labeled your table Table 6, The same mistake was
made with both the Regression table as well as the ANOVA table
• On the left top part of your paper, 'running head' can be deleted, and only
the summarized title of your paper should be placed here
I hope you find this review helpful as your progress further into your studies.
Your results section is well detailed and formatted with several tables and figures
that explained the results of your study, this is a great strength for you. An area of
improvement can be on the information provided on each table. I’m not sure if these
are notes or additional paragraphs as the formatting seems inconsistent (American
Psychological Association, 2020, p. 197-198). You nicely discussed the references
that support your findings which is a great strength, however, you did not discuss
the big picture. You mentioned that is important to the field yet did not expound on
the importance and what you’d like to see research expound to. Lastly, your “running
head” is formatted incorrectly. You need to remove the section that say running
head, and only add the first 50 characters of the title of your study (American
Psychological Association, 2020, p. 37).
References
American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American
Psychological Association 2020: The official guide to APA style (7th ed.). American
Psychological Association.
