Lecturers in a college of education argued on which article has the higher points between the empirical and the review article. Some think it is better to engage in empirical writing rather than the review article. These people viewed that any journal publication that is empirical has more academic weight than the review article. Another group was of the opinion that the two have equal academic weight as regards contribution to knowledge.
Both can very useful. There is a need for new theories (difficult, but some people are good at that) as well as the practical aspects of existing theories (a theory without applications is rather useless).
Hi,
It is recommended to practice writing both types of papers since each has its contribution to science.The empirical paper shows the investigative ability of the author, and the review article summarizes the past writings on an issue. Although one may think that the empirical paper has more weight, there are, usually, more citations to review papers than to empirical ones.
Both are equally important as they complement each other.
Both are important for advancing knowledge and academics are expected to write both.
Hi,
Empirical paper shows originality, and should be academically superior to a review paper that examines previous published material. Nevertheless, if measured by citations count, the review paper receives more citations than an empirical paper. I think that academically the two types are judged as equals.
For stat, it will depend on the journal's impact where an article is published. Be it empirical or review article. However, empirical article is usually more original.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Journal Articles