Hey /sci, What is the optimal format for a review of an article?
This is a blue board which means that it's for everybody (Safe For Work content only). If you see any adult content, please report it.
Please support this website by donating Bitcoins to 16mKtbZiwW52BLkibtCr8jUg2KVUMTxVQ5
Thread replies: 3
Thread images: 1
2017-09-15 11:01:30 Post No. 9170703
Post No. 9170703
What is the optimal format for a review of an article? I'm used to using the basic structure of:
but that doesn't obviously doesn't fit here.
I realize this is almost homework tier but I just can't seem to figure this out and it's triggering my autism hard. Any help is appreciated.
>but that doesn't obviously doesn't fit here.
I cannot parse that one, sorry.
Anyways, some discussion of previous work is usually in order, especially if you intend to make comparative analysis.
>a review of an article
What do you mean by this exactly?
- A review, as in, an independent assessment that is meant to advise an editor of the quality of a submitted manuscript?
- An article that synthesizes a body of literature into a coherent framework?
- A commentary on a single published article?
The structure differs for all of these.
Thread posts: 3
Thread images: 1
If a post contains copyrighted or illegal content, please click on that post's [Report] button and fill out a post removal request
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows an archive of their content. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.