l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l l 1
The first strength noticed in your results and discussion sections was focusing on clearly
defining the language within your study. Defining religion and spirituality can be
extremely difficult, especially in a country that is increasingly multi-cultural with
numerous faiths. Over time, the meanings of religion and spirituality have evolved as
well. When conducting research over the topic, past studies has emphasized the need to
cover such terms as to not skew data and improve accuracy (Hackney & Sanders, 2003).
A second strength in your writings is recognizing the limitations. Identifying your
limitations is not only including integrity in your work but also notes your reflection and
thoughtfulness. Future researchers will be able to implement a plan of action to
eliminate some, if not all, of those limitations.
l l l l l l l l l l One area of improvement, if you will, is ensuring your factorable variables are
identified throughout the report (Jackson, 2016). And this ties in with the second
recommendation of choosing different graphs or not including both marriage and gender
visuals if they were not applied variables in your research; it can cause confusion (Using
Graphs, 2018). You stated the purpose of your research was to investigate the
connection between intrinsic spirituality and perceived stress and did not mention
gender or marital status. The third recommendation is to double check the spacing
requirements for tables and figures, according to the APA 7th ed.
l l l l l l l l l l I found your tone and use or words appropriate, as well as work cited. The selection
for analyzing the data appears efficient, as well.
References
Evaluation Briefs: Using Graphs and Charts to Illustrate Quantitative Data. Cdc.gov.
https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/evaluation/pdf/brief12.pdf?msclkid=598375dec372
11eca43bb49ca676e1c7
Hackney, C. H., & Sanders, G. S. (2003). Religiosity and Mental Health: A Meta-Analysis of
l l
l l l l l l l l l l Recent Studies. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 42(1), 43–56.
l l l l l l l l l l http://www.jstor.org/stable/1387984
Jackson, S.L. (2016) Research Methods and Statistics: A Critical Thinking Approach.
Cengage Learning
