Critic’s Name
End-text citation of article critiqued:
Van Royen, K., Vandebosch, H., &Poels, K. (2015). Severe Sexual Harassment on Social Networking Sites: Belgian Adolescents’ Views. Journal of Children and Media, 9(4), 472-491.
Summary Table
Component of evaluation Max score Score Overall assessment of component
Part A: Evaluating the Front Matter in a Research Report 12 10 High Quality
Part B: Evaluating the Statement of the Problem in a Research Report 21 11 Adequately quality
Part C: Evaluating the Literature Review in a Research Report 21 11 Adequate quality
Part D: Evaluating a Purpose in a Research Report 21 12 Adequate quality
Part E1: Evaluating the Research Design in a Quantitative Research Report 9 6 Adequate quality
Part F1: Evaluating the Participants and Data Collection in a Quantitative Research Report 24 17 Adequate quality
Part G1: Evaluating the Data Analysis and Results in a Quantitative Research Report 21 12 Adequate quality
Part E2: Evaluating the Research Design in a Qualitative Report 12 12 High quality
Part F2: Evaluating the Participants and Data Collection in a Qualitative Report 21 19 High quality
Part G2: Evaluating the Data Analysis and Findings in a Qualitative Report 21 10 Low quality
Part H: Evaluating the Conclusion and Back Matter in a Research Report 21 19 High quality
Maximum possible score / total score given
And Overall assessment
1 Quantitative OR
2 Qualitative
150
129 139
Summary evaluation and justification
The overall score achieved shows that the text has adequate quality.
Part A: Evaluating the Front Matter in a Research Report
Quality Criteria Quality Rating Your Evidence and/or Reasoning
0 = Poor 1 = Fair 2 = Good 3 = Excellent
The Key Elements
1. The study’s authors and journal are reputable.
3 Van Royen, K. Who is the main author of the journal holds a master degree in Strategic communication and in Health education and promotion. More so, she conducts research on adolescents, social media and online sexual harassment. Furthermore, her associate author, Vandebosch, H., holds a degree in Communications Studies and a PhD in Social Science.Vandebosch’s current area of expertise is research that focuses on cyberbullying. Poels, K., too is a master’s degree holder and her area of research is digital games and social media. The three authors are associate professors in university of Antwerp, Belgium.
2. The title reflects the content and focus of the study.
2 The title,” Sexual Harassment on Social Networking Sites: Belgian Adolescents’ Views”, is comprehensive and reflective of the study content;
• It focuses on the sexual harassment that the youth faces only on social networking sites.
• The study is also mainly based on the views of the Belgian Adolescents.
3. The abstract concisely but accurately summarizes the aim, methodology and main findings of the report.
2 The abstract gives a good and precise summary of the main objective of the study that is to examine the sexual harassment faced by the adolescents. The findings of the report also are presented vividly though in a summary, such that the reader can easily tell what to expect of the study. Main finding that is summarized in the abstract is that sexual harassment been presented majorly by use of insulting words and pictures. The methodology though is too concise, it does not provide clear summary of what is presented in the text.
General Evaluation
4. The front matter accurately reflects the content of the report and allows an evaluation of relevance.
3 The essentials of the front matters are capturing and tends to draw attention of the interested person. They have been presented in a concise and relevant manner.
Overall Quality Part A
0 – 6 = Low quality
7 – 9 = Adequate quality
10 – 12 = High quality
Total Part A
Score =10
My Overall Assessment of Part A =
High quality.
Part B: Evaluating the Statement of the Problem in a Research Report
Quality Criteria Quality Rating Your Evidence and/or Reasoning
0 = Poor 1 = Fair 2 = Good 3 = Excellent
The Key Elements
1. The topic is interesting.
2 The topic based on the first paragraph is very captivating. It introduces the reader by justifying the connection between the problem faced and the group affected. The adolescent stage is perceived as a critical stage in terms of sexual development, also the same group is majorly exposed to the internet which acts as their primary source of information. The topic however, only focuses on the youngsters as it has no impact to the grownups who have graduated from the adolescent stage.
2. There is a meaningful problem.
2 Sexual harassment is a big problem, it leads to coercion and stress to the young people. Sexual harassment is presented in many forms, it include, gender harassment, inappropriate sexual attention and coercion. Though the problem is escalating among the young people, it does not really affect the grown one, therefore it does not become meaningful to them.
3. The importance of the problem is justified.
2 Throughout the text the importance of the problem has been justified by several citation;
• Several sources acknowledges the impacts related to sexual harassment, most common impact being emotional and behavioral.
• Some of the citations also provide strategies of preventing this problem, which involves creation of awareness.
Although the problem justification has been supported by most of the sources cited, practically, the results and findings does not emphasize on the importance of the problem but rather solution to the problem.
4. There are deficiencies in the knowledge about the problem.
1 Sexual harassment on social networking sites is known to be a common problem among the adolescent. What has not been documented or rather researched on in this topic include;
• The intensity of the severity caused by sexual harassment on social networking.
• Secondly, the main factors that has escalated the problem have not been fully researched on, and thus a deficiencies in the knowledge of the problem actually exist.
5. There are audiences who can benefit from the missing knowledge.
2 Knowledge of severity and causes of severity of sexual harassment on social media will actually be beneficial to both the affected group and the interventionist.
General Evaluation
6. The passage clearly argues that the study is warranted.
1 The passage emphasizes on the problems and the fact that the cases are escalating.
7. The passage is well written.
1 There is a flow of ideas on how the text is presented, right from capturing topic, through identification of problem, findings, solutions and lastly conclusions. However these steps lack a clear and concise transition from one level to another.
Overall Quality Part B
0 – 10 = Low quality
11 – 16 = Adequate quality
17 – 21 = High quality
Total Part B
Score =11
My Overall Assessment of Part B =
Adequately quality.
Part C: Evaluating the Literature Review in a Research Report
Quality Criteria Quality Rating Your Evidence and/or Reasoning
0 = Poor 1 = Fair 2 = Good 3 = Excellent
The Key Elements
1. The review includes the relevant literature.
2 The review contains relevant literature;
• Most of the literature used supports the topic of the study by providing information on sexual harassment among the young.
• The literature used also bring a clear connection between the adolescent and the internet.
• It also has part of theories supporting the sexual harassment on social network and the sensitizing concepts.
• The provided literature has also ways of detection, prevention and mitigation of cyber related harassments.
However, some of the literature does not bring out a clear connection between the adolescent and social networking harassment;
• For instance some literature examines the effect of sexual harassment that are based on social settings like schools and not on social network.
• Some of the literature also omits the most crucial part of the review and rather focuses away from the topic of interest.
2. The review examines sources that are recent and of high quality.
2 The research review is sufficient for the study, approximately more than 50 sources have been used.
The sources have been distributed throughout the text, though not evenly.
The introduction and the close to the end of the text is crowded with the sources, leaving the middle section with close to no citation.
The source quality is quite high as most of the sources are recent, dating between 4 to 6 years ago, however, some sources are dated early and late 1990’s.
The studies that were done in the early times does not really reflect the current situation the adolescent face.
3. The literature review is appropriately documented.
2 The in-text citing is correct and appropriate. The format of the end references is also in correct order.
4. The literature is thoughtfully synthesized.
1 Some sections of the review provides excellent connection between the topic of discussion and the support evidence from the literature.
Weakness witnessed in the review is failure to create a proper transition from problem to the study purpose, it thus does not allow proper interpretation.
5. The literature is critically examined.
1 There is a fair critical analysis that is presented in the review. The sources provided are used to support the findings and the speculated information. Evidently, the author, decided to use the sources in order to spice the study rather than use the sources to critically examine the problem of study.
General Evaluation
6. The study has a strong foundation in the literature.
1 Based on a few relevant and current sources, the study can be categorized as having a fairly strong foundation in the literature.
7. The use of the literature fits the study’s overall research approach.
2
Overall Quality Part C
0 – 10 = Low quality
11 – 16 = Adequate quality
17 – 21 = High quality
Total Part C
Score =11
My Overall Assessment of Part C =
Adequate quality
Part D: Evaluating a Purpose in a Research Report
Quality Criteria Quality Rating Your Evidence and/or Reasoning
0 = Poor 1 = Fair 2 = Good 3 = Excellent