Background

During my studies and my work in higher education, I have read and reviewed numerous research papers. In addition, I have, of course, been subject to and participated in the peer-review process, including as the co-editor for a set of conference proceedings. Some of the research papers I have reviewed have been outstanding and insightful, others have been mediocre and some have been downright awful. Some of these papers have inspired my own work, either through new ideas or simply because I didn’t agree with their interpretations or conclusions.

In working with these research papers, I would often annotate them, write small critiques as notes in my reference management software (JabRef, Mendeley or EndNote) and later try to put these critiques together into a research article or thesis chapter. Many of these critiques, however, end up unused for a published article either because of restrictions on the article’s length or because the planned article is shelved while other research/teaching work goes on.

Reviewed Research Papers:

The following reference list, sorted by first author surname, will give you an idea of some of the articles I have reviewed. Clicking the link in the article’s title will take you to a page with my critique. Where possible, a link to the publisher’s source page is provided at the end of the review, along with citations.

Updated to new website design

•  Carver, R. P. (1993). The Case Against Statistical Significance Testing, Revisited. The Journal of Experimental Education, 61(4), 287-292.
•  Cohen, J. (1994). The Earth Is Round (p < .05). American Psychologist, 49(12), 997-1003.
•  Ryan, T., & Xenos, S. (2011). Who uses Facebook? An investigation into the relationship between the Big Five, shyness, narcissism, loneliness, and Facebook usage. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(5), 1658-1664.

Not yet available under new website design

•  Balluerka, N., Gómez, J., & Hidalgo, D. (2005). The Controversy over Null Hypothesis Significance Testing Revisited. Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 1(2), 55-70.
•  Berkson, J. (1942). Tests of Significance Considered as Evidence. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 37(219), 325–335.
•  Brandstätter, E. (1999). Confidence Intervals as an Alternative to Significance Testing. Methods of Psychological Research, 4(2), 33–46.
•  Breslow, N. E. (1999). Discussion: Statistical Thinking in Practice. International Statistical Review / Revue Internationale de Statistique, 67(3), 252–255.
•  Cohen, J. (1995). The Earth Is Round (p < .05): Rejoinder. American Psychologist, 50(12), 1103.
•  Cortina, J. M., & Dunlap, W. P. (1997). On the Logic and Purpose of Significance Testing. Psychological Methods, 2(2), 161–172.
•  Falk, R., & Greenbaum, C. W. (1995). Significance Tests Die Hard: The Amazing Persistence of a Probabilistic Misconception. Theory & Psychology, 5(1), 75-98.
•  Falk, R. (1998). In Criticism of the Null Hypothesis Statistical Test. American Psychologist, 53(7), 798–799.
•  Fidler, F., & Loftus, G. R. (2009). Why Figures with Error Bars Should Replace p Values: Some Conceptual Arguments and Empirical Demonstrations. Zeitschrift Für Psychologie/Journal of Psychology, 217(1), 27–37.
•  Finch, S., Cumming, G., & Thomason, N. (2001). Reporting of Statistical Inference in the "Journal of Applied Psychology": Little Evidence of Reform. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 61(2), 181–210.
•  Finch, S., Thomason, N., & Cumming, G. (2002). Past and Future American Psychological Association Guidelines for Statistical Practice. Theory & Psychology, 12(6), 825–853.
•  Frick, R. W. (1996). The Appropriate Use of Null Hypothesis Testing. Psychological Methods, 1(4), 379–390.
•  Gill, J. (1999). The Insignificance of Null Hypothesis Significance Testing. Political Research Quarterly, 52(3), 647–674.

 

Last updated: 2 November 2024