In humanities, arts and social sciences, authors often given preference to evaluation of their paper. They write research papers theoretically without giving proper attention to the technical writing styles. For-example, currently I'm reviewing a paper in which there is a section of literature review. The author is neither reviewing the literature chronologically, nor thematically. It seems order less. It is neither systematic nor well written. In this way, it seems that this paper is suffering due to the the carelessness of the authors towards the technical aspects. Further, there are no discourse markers. What do you think about the quality of a research paper about the target field.
If you are an editor or reviewer or the expert researcher so kindly share your opinions regarding my question.
Thanks,
Sabah Zaib
Sabah,
An archaeological, ethnological, or historical research paper should follow a well-structured outline from initial statement to conclusion. This should be a point by point discussion in chronological or process order. Summary and conclusions should adhere to the same order. Style can vary, but generally it is expected that technical papers use a concise scientific prose, while more leisurely papers contain a looser professional style of writing.
Any researcher should attend a course in technical and professional writing, which will benefit them throughout their lives.
Sabah,
An archaeological, ethnological, or historical research paper should follow a well-structured outline from initial statement to conclusion. This should be a point by point discussion in chronological or process order. Summary and conclusions should adhere to the same order. Style can vary, but generally it is expected that technical papers use a concise scientific prose, while more leisurely papers contain a looser professional style of writing.
Any researcher should attend a course in technical and professional writing, which will benefit them throughout their lives.
Sadly there are a lot of rubbish papers out there. @Sabah, you should only use the best papers as your models. There is no need to cite rubbish papers, or even admit that they exist.
The literature review should really be critically presented in showing where the gaps are to be filled and how the current study would help to fill that gap. It is also helpful in informing the methodology used for the current study. If the author is unable to at least show these elements then the paper should be sent back for much improvement.
Many thanks,
Debra
The theoretical framework strengthens the study in the following ways:
--An explicit statement of theoretical assumptions permits the reader to evaluate them critically.
--The theoretical framework connects the researcher to existing knowledge. Guided by a relevant theory, you are given a basis for your hypotheses and choice of research methods.
--Articulating the theoretical assumptions of a research study forces you to address questions of why and how. It permits you to intellectually transition from simply describing a phenomenon you have observed to generalizing about various aspects of that phenomenon.
--Having a theory helps you identify the limits to those generalizations. A theoretical framework specifies which key variables influence a phenomenon of interest and highlights the need to examine how those key variables might differ and under what circumstances.
By virtue of its application nature, good theory in the social sciences is of value precisely because it fulfills one primary purpose: to explain the meaning, nature, and challenges associated with a phenomenon, often experienced but unexplained in the world in which we live, so that we may use that knowledge and understanding to act in more informed and effective ways.
http://libguides.usc.edu/writingguide/theoreticalframework
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Methodology
- Research Methodology
- Research Papers