Generally Peer Reviewed and Abstracted Journal article could not be strongly
critisized untill and unless any wrong information has been reported . So here
generally criticism means future expansion or further scope of work .
Generally Peer Reviewed and Abstracted Journal article could not be strongly
critisized untill and unless any wrong information has been reported . So here
generally criticism means future expansion or further scope of work .
To me, if a paper underwent appropriate peer review in a reputable journal, the remaining viewpoints are of feedback from the readers and users. This is why publishing in a reputed journal is highly advisable.
By proving to the author of the paper you understand the subject more than him.
The first and important is,
Is the title of the article appropriate and clear?
We may write our view with proper points and evidences in mild way and language should be controlled, we should not insult or humiliate the author.
.
Since no man is infallible, criticism of published papers should be done to correct and not to insult or humiliate the authors as Tapas has said it. The arguments should be based on facts.
A new topic contains a problem The researcher tries to find the best solutions to this problem.
Criticism doesn't mean to be negative or somewhat constructive comments /reviews, it can be appreciation to the authors outstanding works.
Best.
What is a right way to criticize a published paper?
Possible right ways include:
Better to be constructive and build upon what is done in the paper. Important and interesting topic. Regards Abdellah LAMNII
If you have data to prove that the published paper has erroneous information, (i) you can publish your rebuttal as part of the "Letters to the Editor" in the same journal, OR (2) write an email directly to the author with you comments, concerns and questions.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Composition Studies
- Publisher