• PRO Courses Guides New Tech Help Pro Expert Videos About wikiHow Pro Upgrade Sign In
  • EDIT Edit this Article
  • EXPLORE Tech Help Pro About Us Random Article Quizzes Request a New Article Community Dashboard This Or That Game Popular Categories Arts and Entertainment Artwork Books Movies Computers and Electronics Computers Phone Skills Technology Hacks Health Men's Health Mental Health Women's Health Relationships Dating Love Relationship Issues Hobbies and Crafts Crafts Drawing Games Education & Communication Communication Skills Personal Development Studying Personal Care and Style Fashion Hair Care Personal Hygiene Youth Personal Care School Stuff Dating All Categories Arts and Entertainment Finance and Business Home and Garden Relationship Quizzes Cars & Other Vehicles Food and Entertaining Personal Care and Style Sports and Fitness Computers and Electronics Health Pets and Animals Travel Education & Communication Hobbies and Crafts Philosophy and Religion Work World Family Life Holidays and Traditions Relationships Youth
  • Browse Articles
  • Learn Something New
  • Quizzes Hot
  • This Or That Game New
  • Train Your Brain
  • Explore More
  • Support wikiHow
  • About wikiHow
  • Log in / Sign up
  • Education and Communications
  • Critical Reviews

How to Write an Article Review

Last Updated: September 8, 2023 Fact Checked

This article was co-authored by Jake Adams . Jake Adams is an academic tutor and the owner of Simplifi EDU, a Santa Monica, California based online tutoring business offering learning resources and online tutors for academic subjects K-College, SAT & ACT prep, and college admissions applications. With over 14 years of professional tutoring experience, Jake is dedicated to providing his clients the very best online tutoring experience and access to a network of excellent undergraduate and graduate-level tutors from top colleges all over the nation. Jake holds a BS in International Business and Marketing from Pepperdine University. There are 13 references cited in this article, which can be found at the bottom of the page. This article has been fact-checked, ensuring the accuracy of any cited facts and confirming the authority of its sources. This article has been viewed 3,067,737 times.

An article review is both a summary and an evaluation of another writer's article. Teachers often assign article reviews to introduce students to the work of experts in the field. Experts also are often asked to review the work of other professionals. Understanding the main points and arguments of the article is essential for an accurate summation. Logical evaluation of the article's main theme, supporting arguments, and implications for further research is an important element of a review . Here are a few guidelines for writing an article review.

Education specialist Alexander Peterman recommends: "In the case of a review, your objective should be to reflect on the effectiveness of what has already been written, rather than writing to inform your audience about a subject."

Things You Should Know

  • Read the article very closely, and then take time to reflect on your evaluation. Consider whether the article effectively achieves what it set out to.
  • Write out a full article review by completing your intro, summary, evaluation, and conclusion. Don't forget to add a title, too!
  • Proofread your review for mistakes (like grammar and usage), while also cutting down on needless information. [1] X Research source

Preparing to Write Your Review

Step 1 Understand what an article review is.

  • Article reviews present more than just an opinion. You will engage with the text to create a response to the scholarly writer's ideas. You will respond to and use ideas, theories, and research from your studies. Your critique of the article will be based on proof and your own thoughtful reasoning.
  • An article review only responds to the author's research. It typically does not provide any new research. However, if you are correcting misleading or otherwise incorrect points, some new data may be presented.
  • An article review both summarizes and evaluates the article.

Step 2 Think about the organization of the review article.

  • Summarize the article. Focus on the important points, claims, and information.
  • Discuss the positive aspects of the article. Think about what the author does well, good points she makes, and insightful observations.
  • Identify contradictions, gaps, and inconsistencies in the text. Determine if there is enough data or research included to support the author's claims. Find any unanswered questions left in the article.

Step 3 Preview the article.

  • Make note of words or issues you don't understand and questions you have.
  • Look up terms or concepts you are unfamiliar with, so you can fully understand the article. Read about concepts in-depth to make sure you understand their full context.

Step 4 Read the article closely.

  • Pay careful attention to the meaning of the article. Make sure you fully understand the article. The only way to write a good article review is to understand the article.

Step 5 Put the article into your words.

  • With either method, make an outline of the main points made in the article and the supporting research or arguments. It is strictly a restatement of the main points of the article and does not include your opinions.
  • After putting the article in your own words, decide which parts of the article you want to discuss in your review. You can focus on the theoretical approach, the content, the presentation or interpretation of evidence, or the style. You will always discuss the main issues of the article, but you can sometimes also focus on certain aspects. This comes in handy if you want to focus the review towards the content of a course.
  • Review the summary outline to eliminate unnecessary items. Erase or cross out the less important arguments or supplemental information. Your revised summary can serve as the basis for the summary you provide at the beginning of your review.

Step 6 Write an outline of your evaluation.

  • What does the article set out to do?
  • What is the theoretical framework or assumptions?
  • Are the central concepts clearly defined?
  • How adequate is the evidence?
  • How does the article fit into the literature and field?
  • Does it advance the knowledge of the subject?
  • How clear is the author's writing? Don't: include superficial opinions or your personal reaction. Do: pay attention to your biases, so you can overcome them.

Writing the Article Review

Step 1 Come up with...

  • For example, in MLA , a citation may look like: Duvall, John N. "The (Super)Marketplace of Images: Television as Unmediated Mediation in DeLillo's White Noise ." Arizona Quarterly 50.3 (1994): 127-53. Print. [10] X Trustworthy Source Purdue Online Writing Lab Trusted resource for writing and citation guidelines Go to source

Step 3 Identify the article.

  • For example: The article, "Condom use will increase the spread of AIDS," was written by Anthony Zimmerman, a Catholic priest.

Step 4 Write the introduction....

  • Your introduction should only be 10-25% of your review.
  • End the introduction with your thesis. Your thesis should address the above issues. For example: Although the author has some good points, his article is biased and contains some misinterpretation of data from others’ analysis of the effectiveness of the condom.

Step 5 Summarize the article.

  • Use direct quotes from the author sparingly.
  • Review the summary you have written. Read over your summary many times to ensure that your words are an accurate description of the author's article.

Step 6 Write your critique.

  • Support your critique with evidence from the article or other texts.
  • The summary portion is very important for your critique. You must make the author's argument clear in the summary section for your evaluation to make sense.
  • Remember, this is not where you say if you liked the article or not. You are assessing the significance and relevance of the article.
  • Use a topic sentence and supportive arguments for each opinion. For example, you might address a particular strength in the first sentence of the opinion section, followed by several sentences elaborating on the significance of the point.

Step 7 Conclude the article review.

  • This should only be about 10% of your overall essay.
  • For example: This critical review has evaluated the article "Condom use will increase the spread of AIDS" by Anthony Zimmerman. The arguments in the article show the presence of bias, prejudice, argumentative writing without supporting details, and misinformation. These points weaken the author’s arguments and reduce his credibility.

Step 8 Proofread.

  • Make sure you have identified and discussed the 3-4 key issues in the article.

Sample Article Reviews

how to write a business article review

Expert Q&A

Jake Adams

You Might Also Like

Write Articles

  • ↑ https://writing.wisc.edu/handbook/grammarpunct/proofreading/
  • ↑ https://libguides.cmich.edu/writinghelp/articlereview
  • ↑ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4548566/
  • ↑ Jake Adams. Academic Tutor & Test Prep Specialist. Expert Interview. 24 July 2020.
  • ↑ https://guides.library.queensu.ca/introduction-research/writing/critical
  • ↑ https://www.iup.edu/writingcenter/writing-resources/organization-and-structure/creating-an-outline.html
  • ↑ https://writing.umn.edu/sws/assets/pdf/quicktips/titles.pdf
  • ↑ https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/research_and_citation/mla_style/mla_formatting_and_style_guide/mla_works_cited_periodicals.html
  • ↑ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4548565/
  • ↑ https://writingcenter.uconn.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/593/2014/06/How_to_Summarize_a_Research_Article1.pdf
  • ↑ https://www.uis.edu/learning-hub/writing-resources/handouts/learning-hub/how-to-review-a-journal-article
  • ↑ https://writingcenter.unc.edu/tips-and-tools/editing-and-proofreading/

About This Article

Jake Adams

If you have to write an article review, read through the original article closely, taking notes and highlighting important sections as you read. Next, rewrite the article in your own words, either in a long paragraph or as an outline. Open your article review by citing the article, then write an introduction which states the article’s thesis. Next, summarize the article, followed by your opinion about whether the article was clear, thorough, and useful. Finish with a paragraph that summarizes the main points of the article and your opinions. To learn more about what to include in your personal critique of the article, keep reading the article! Did this summary help you? Yes No

  • Send fan mail to authors

Reader Success Stories

Prince Asiedu-Gyan

Prince Asiedu-Gyan

Apr 22, 2022

Did this article help you?

how to write a business article review

Sammy James

Sep 12, 2017

Juabin Matey

Juabin Matey

Aug 30, 2017

Kristi N.

Oct 25, 2023

Vanita Meghrajani

Vanita Meghrajani

Jul 21, 2016

Am I a Narcissist or an Empath Quiz

Featured Articles

Start a Text Conversation with a Girl

Trending Articles

How to Take the Perfect Thirst Trap

Watch Articles

Wrap a Round Gift

  • Terms of Use
  • Privacy Policy
  • Do Not Sell or Share My Info
  • Not Selling Info

wikiHow Tech Help Pro:

Level up your tech skills and stay ahead of the curve

How to Write an Article Review: Template & Examples

An article review is an academic assignment that invites you to study a piece of academic research closely. Then, you should present its summary and critically evaluate it using the knowledge you’ve gained in class and during your independent study. If you get such a task at college or university, you shouldn’t confuse it with a response paper, which is a distinct assignment with other purposes (we’ll talk about it in detail below).

Our specialists will write a custom essay specially for you!

In this article, prepared by Custom-Writing experts, you’ll find: 

  • the intricacies of article review writing;
  • the difference between an article review and similar assignments;
  • a step-by-step algorithm for review composition;
  • a couple of samples to guide you throughout the writing process.

So, if you wish to study our article review example and discover helpful writing tips, keep reading.

❓ What Is an Article Review?

  • ✍️ Writing Steps

📑 Article Review Format

🔗 references.

An article review is an academic paper that summarizes and critically evaluates the information presented in your selected article. 

This image shows what an article review is.

The first thing you should note when approaching the task of an article review is that not every article is suitable for this assignment. Let’s have a look at the variety of articles to understand what you can choose from.

Popular Vs. Scholarly Articles

In most cases, you’ll be required to review a scholarly, peer-reviewed article – one composed in compliance with rigorous academic standards. Yet, the Web is also full of popular articles that don’t present original scientific value and shouldn’t be selected for a review.  

Just in 1 hour! We will write you a plagiarism-free paper in hardly more than 1 hour

Not sure how to distinguish these two types? Here is a comparative table to help you out.

Article Review vs. Response Paper

Now, let’s consider the difference between an article review and a response paper:

  • If you’re assigned to critique a scholarly article , you will need to compose an article review .  
  • If your subject of analysis is a popular article , you can respond to it with a well-crafted response paper .  

The reason for such distinctions is the quality and structure of these two article types. Peer-reviewed, scholarly articles have clear-cut quality criteria, allowing you to conduct and present a structured assessment of the assigned material. Popular magazines have loose or non-existent quality criteria and don’t offer an opportunity for structured evaluation. So, they are only fit for a subjective response, in which you can summarize your reactions and emotions related to the reading material.  

All in all, you can structure your response assignments as outlined in the tips below.

✍️ How to Write an Article Review: Step by Step

Here is a tried and tested algorithm for article review writing from our experts. We’ll consider only the critical review variety of this academic assignment. So, let’s get down to the stages you need to cover to get a stellar review.  

Receive a plagiarism-free paper tailored to your instructions. Cut 20% off your first order!

Read the Article

As with any reviews, reports, and critiques, you must first familiarize yourself with the assigned material. It’s impossible to review something you haven’t read, so set some time for close, careful reading of the article to identify:

  • Its topic.  
  • Its type.  
  • The author’s main points and message. 
  • The arguments they use to prove their points. 
  • The methodology they use to approach the subject. 

In terms of research type , your article will usually belong to one of three types explained below. 

Summarize the Article

Now that you’ve read the text and have a general impression of the content, it’s time to summarize it for your readers. Look into the article’s text closely to determine:

  • The thesis statement , or general message of the author.  
  • Research question, purpose, and context of research.  
  • Supporting points for the author’s assumptions and claims.  
  • Major findings and supporting evidence.  

As you study the article thoroughly, make notes on the margins or write these elements out on a sheet of paper. You can also apply a different technique: read the text section by section and formulate its gist in one phrase or sentence. Once you’re done, you’ll have a summary skeleton in front of you.

Evaluate the Article

The next step of review is content evaluation. Keep in mind that various research types will require a different set of review questions. Here is a complete list of evaluation points you can include.

Get an originally-written paper according to your instructions!

Write the Text

After completing the critical review stage, it’s time to compose your article review.

The format of this assignment is standard – you will have an introduction, a body, and a conclusion. The introduction should present your article and summarize its content. The body will contain a structured review according to all four dimensions covered in the previous section. The concluding part will typically recap all the main points you’ve identified during your assessment.  

It is essential to note that an article review is, first of all, an academic assignment. Therefore, it should follow all rules and conventions of academic composition, such as:

  • No contractions . Don’t use short forms, such as “don’t,” “can’t,” “I’ll,” etc. in academic writing. You need to spell out all those words.  
  • Formal language and style . Avoid conversational phrasing and words that you would naturally use in blog posts or informal communication. For example, don’t use words like “pretty,” “kind of,” and “like.”  
  • Third-person narrative . Academic reviews should be written from the third-person point of view, avoiding statements like “I think,” “in my opinion,” and so on.  
  • No conversational forms . You shouldn’t turn to your readers directly in the text by addressing them with the pronoun “you.” It’s vital to keep the narrative neutral and impersonal.  
  • Proper abbreviation use . Consult the list of correct abbreviations , like “e.g.” or “i.e.,” for use in your academic writing. If you use informal abbreviations like “FYA” or “f.i.,” your professor will reduce the grade.  
  • Complete sentences . Make sure your sentences contain the subject and the predicate; avoid shortened or sketch-form phrases suitable for a draft only.  
  • No conjunctions at the beginning of a sentence . Remember the FANBOYS rule – don’t start a sentence with words like “and” or “but.” They often seem the right way to build a coherent narrative, but academic writing rules disfavor such usage.  
  • No abbreviations or figures at the beginning of a sentence . Never start a sentence with a number — spell it out if you need to use it anyway. Besides, sentences should never begin with abbreviations like “e.g.”  

Finally, a vital rule for an article review is properly formatting the citations. We’ll discuss the correct use of citation styles in the following section.

When composing an article review, keep these points in mind:

  • Start with a full reference to the reviewed article so the reader can locate it quickly.  
  • Ensure correct formatting of in-text references.  
  • Provide a complete list of used external sources on the last page of the review – your bibliographical entries .  

You’ll need to understand the rules of your chosen citation style to meet all these requirements. Below, we’ll discuss the two most common referencing styles – APA and MLA.

Article Review in APA

When you need to compose an article review in the APA format , here is the general bibliographical entry format you should use for journal articles on your reference page:  

  • Author’s last name, First initial. Middle initial. (Year of Publication). Name of the article. Name of the Journal, volume (number), pp. #-#. https://doi.org/xx.xxx/yyyy

Horigian, V. E., Schmidt, R. D., & Feaster, D. J. (2021). Loneliness, mental health, and substance use among US young adults during COVID-19. Journal of Psychoactive Drugs, 53 (1), pp. 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1080/02791072.2020.1836435

Your in-text citations should follow the author-date format like this:

  • If you paraphrase the source and mention the author in the text: According to Horigian et al. (2021), young adults experienced increased levels of loneliness, depression, and anxiety during the pandemic. 
  • If you paraphrase the source and don’t mention the author in the text: Young adults experienced increased levels of loneliness, depression, and anxiety during the pandemic (Horigian et al., 2021). 
  • If you quote the source: As Horigian et al. (2021) point out, there were “elevated levels of loneliness, depression, anxiety, alcohol use, and drug use among young adults during COVID-19” (p. 6). 

Note that your in-text citations should include “et al.,” as in the examples above, if your article has 3 or more authors. If you have one or two authors, your in-text citations would look like this:

  • One author: “According to Smith (2020), depression is…” or “Depression is … (Smith, 2020).”
  • Two authors: “According to Smith and Brown (2020), anxiety means…” or “Anxiety means (Smith & Brown, 2020).”

Finally, in case you have to review a book or a website article, here are the general formats for citing these source types on your APA reference list.

Article Review in MLA

If your assignment requires MLA-format referencing, here’s the general format you should use for citing journal articles on your Works Cited page: 

  • Author’s last name, First name. “Title of an Article.” Title of the Journal , vol. #, no. #, year, pp. #-#. 

Horigian, Viviana E., et al. “Loneliness, Mental Health, and Substance Use Among US Young Adults During COVID-19.” Journal of Psychoactive Drugs , vol. 53, no. 1, 2021, pp. 1-9.

In-text citations in the MLA format follow the author-page citation format and look like this:

  • According to Horigian et al., young adults experienced increased levels of loneliness, depression, and anxiety during the pandemic (6).
  • Young adults experienced increased levels of loneliness, depression, and anxiety during the pandemic (Horigian et al. 6).

Like in APA, the abbreviation “et al.” is only needed in MLA if your article has 3 or more authors.

If you need to cite a book or a website page, here are the general MLA formats for these types of sources.

✅ Article Review Template

Here is a handy, universal article review template to help you move on with any review assignment. We’ve tried to make it as generic as possible to guide you in the academic process.

📝 Article Review Examples

The theory is good, but practice is even better. Thus, we’ve created three brief examples to show you how to write an article review. You can study the full-text samples by following the links.

📃 Men, Women, & Money   

This article review examines a famous piece, “Men, Women & Money – How the Sexes Differ with Their Finances,” published by Amy Livingston in 2020. The author of this article claims that men generally spend more money than women. She makes this conclusion from a close analysis of gender-specific expenditures across five main categories: food, clothing, cars, entertainment, and general spending patterns. Livingston also looks at men’s approach to saving to argue that counter to the common perception of women’s light-hearted attitude to money, men are those who spend more on average.  

📃 When and Why Nationalism Beats Globalism   

This is a review of Jonathan Heidt’s 2016 article titled “When and Why Nationalism Beats Globalism,” written as an advocacy of right-wing populism rising in many Western states. The author illustrates the case with the election of Donald Trump as the US President and the rise of right-wing rhetoric in many Western countries. These examples show how nationalist sentiment represents a reaction to global immigration and a failure of globalization.  

📃 Sleep Deprivation   

This is a review of the American Heart Association’s article titled “The Dangers of Sleep Deprivation.” It discusses how the national organization concerned with the American population’s cardiovascular health links the lack of high-quality sleep to far-reaching health consequences. The organization’s experts reveal how a consistent lack of sleep leads to Alzheimer’s disease development, obesity, type 2 diabetes, etc.  

✏️ Article Review FAQ

A high-quality article review should summarize the assigned article’s content and offer data-backed reactions and evaluations of its quality in terms of the article’s purpose, methodology, and data used to argue the main points. It should be detailed, comprehensive, objective, and evidence-based.

The purpose of writing a review is to allow students to reflect on research quality and showcase their critical thinking and evaluation skills. Students should exhibit their mastery of close reading of research publications and their unbiased assessment.

The content of your article review will be the same in any format, with the only difference in the assignment’s formatting before submission. Ensure you have a separate title page made according to APA standards and cite sources using the parenthetical author-date referencing format.

You need to take a closer look at various dimensions of an assigned article to compose a valuable review. Study the author’s object of analysis, the purpose of their research, the chosen method, data, and findings. Evaluate all these dimensions critically to see whether the author has achieved the initial goals. Finally, offer improvement recommendations to add a critique aspect to your paper.

  • Scientific Article Review: Duke University  
  • Book and Article Reviews: William & Mary, Writing Resources Center  
  • Sample Format for Reviewing a Journal Article: Boonshoft School of Medicine  
  • Research Paper Review – Structure and Format Guidelines: New Jersey Institute of Technology  
  • Article Review: University of Waterloo  
  • Article Review: University of South Australia  
  • How to Write a Journal Article Review: University of Newcastle Library Guides  
  • Writing Help: The Article Review: Central Michigan University Libraries  
  • Write a Critical Review of a Scientific Journal Article: McLaughlin Library  
  • Share to Facebook
  • Share to Twitter
  • Share to LinkedIn
  • Share to email

Recommended for You

Compare and Contrast Essay Outline: Template and Example

Compare and Contrast Essay Outline: Template and Example

High school and college students often face challenges when crafting a compare-and-contrast essay. A well-written paper of this kind needs to be structured appropriately to earn you good grades. Knowing how to organize your ideas allows you to present your ideas in a coherent and logical manner This article by...

How to Write a Formal Essay: Format, Rules, & Example

How to Write a Formal Essay: Format, Rules, & Example

If you’re a student, you’ve heard about a formal essay: a factual, research-based paper written in 3rd person. Most students have to produce dozens of them during their educational career.  Writing a formal essay may not be the easiest task. But fear not: our custom-writing team is here to guide...

How to Write a Narrative Essay Outline: Template & Examples

How to Write a Narrative Essay Outline: Template & Examples

Narrative essays are unlike anything you wrote throughout your academic career. Instead of writing a formal paper, you need to tell a story. Familiar elements such as evidence and arguments are replaced with exposition and character development. The importance of writing an outline for an essay like this is hard...

How to Write a Precis: Definition, Guide, & Examples

How to Write a Precis: Definition, Guide, & Examples

A précis is a brief synopsis of a written piece. It is used to summarize and analyze a text’s main points. If you need to write a précis for a research paper or the AP Lang exam, you’ve come to the right place. In this comprehensive guide by Custom-Writing.org, you’ll...

How to Write a Synthesis Essay: Examples, Topics, & Outline

How to Write a Synthesis Essay: Examples, Topics, & Outline

A synthesis essay requires you to work with multiple sources. You combine the information gathered from them to present a well-rounded argument on a topic. Are you looking for the ultimate guide on synthesis essay writing? You’ve come to the right place! In this guide by our custom writing team,...

How to Write a Catchy Hook: Examples & Techniques

How to Write a Catchy Hook: Examples & Techniques

Do you know how to make your essay stand out? One of the easiest ways is to start your introduction with a catchy hook. A hook is a phrase or a sentence that helps to grab the reader’s attention. After reading this article by Custom-Writing.org, you will be able to...

how to write a business article review

How to Write an Article Review: Tips and Examples

how to write a business article review

Did you know that article reviews are not just academic exercises but also a valuable skill in today's information age? In a world inundated with content, being able to dissect and evaluate articles critically can help you separate the wheat from the chaff. Whether you're a student aiming to excel in your coursework or a professional looking to stay well-informed, mastering the art of writing article reviews is an invaluable skill.

Short Description

In this article, our research paper writing service experts will start by unraveling the concept of article reviews and discussing the various types. You'll also gain insights into the art of formatting your review effectively. To ensure you're well-prepared, we'll take you through the pre-writing process, offering tips on setting the stage for your review. But it doesn't stop there. You'll find a practical example of an article review to help you grasp the concepts in action. To complete your journey, we'll guide you through the post-writing process, equipping you with essential proofreading techniques to ensure your work shines with clarity and precision!

What Is an Article Review: Grasping the Concept 

A review article is a type of professional paper writing that demands a high level of in-depth analysis and a well-structured presentation of arguments. It is a critical, constructive evaluation of literature in a particular field through summary, classification, analysis, and comparison.

If you write a scientific review, you have to use database searches to portray the research. Your primary goal is to summarize everything and present a clear understanding of the topic you've been working on.

Writing Involves:

  • Summarization, classification, analysis, critiques, and comparison.
  • The analysis, evaluation, and comparison require the use of theories, ideas, and research relevant to the subject area of the article.
  • It is also worth nothing if a review does not introduce new information, but instead presents a response to another writer's work.
  • Check out other samples to gain a better understanding of how to review the article.

Types of Review

When it comes to article reviews, there's more than one way to approach the task. Understanding the various types of reviews is like having a versatile toolkit at your disposal. In this section, we'll walk you through the different dimensions of review types, each offering a unique perspective and purpose. Whether you're dissecting a scholarly article, critiquing a piece of literature, or evaluating a product, you'll discover the diverse landscape of article reviews and how to navigate it effectively.

types of article review

Journal Article Review

Just like other types of reviews, a journal article review assesses the merits and shortcomings of a published work. To illustrate, consider a review of an academic paper on climate change, where the writer meticulously analyzes and interprets the article's significance within the context of environmental science.

Research Article Review

Distinguished by its focus on research methodologies, a research article review scrutinizes the techniques used in a study and evaluates them in light of the subsequent analysis and critique. For instance, when reviewing a research article on the effects of a new drug, the reviewer would delve into the methods employed to gather data and assess their reliability.

Science Article Review

In the realm of scientific literature, a science article review encompasses a wide array of subjects. Scientific publications often provide extensive background information, which can be instrumental in conducting a comprehensive analysis. For example, when reviewing an article about the latest breakthroughs in genetics, the reviewer may draw upon the background knowledge provided to facilitate a more in-depth evaluation of the publication.

Need a Hand From Professionals?

Address to Our Writers and Get Assistance in Any Questions!

Formatting an Article Review

The format of the article should always adhere to the citation style required by your professor. If you're not sure, seek clarification on the preferred format and ask him to clarify several other pointers to complete the formatting of an article review adequately.

How Many Publications Should You Review?

  • In what format should you cite your articles (MLA, APA, ASA, Chicago, etc.)?
  • What length should your review be?
  • Should you include a summary, critique, or personal opinion in your assignment?
  • Do you need to call attention to a theme or central idea within the articles?
  • Does your instructor require background information?

When you know the answers to these questions, you may start writing your assignment. Below are examples of MLA and APA formats, as those are the two most common citation styles.

Using the APA Format

Articles appear most commonly in academic journals, newspapers, and websites. If you write an article review in the APA format, you will need to write bibliographical entries for the sources you use:

  • Web : Author [last name], A.A [first and middle initial]. (Year, Month, Date of Publication). Title. Retrieved from {link}
  • Journal : Author [last name], A.A [first and middle initial]. (Publication Year). Publication Title. Periodical Title, Volume(Issue), pp.-pp.
  • Newspaper : Author [last name], A.A [first and middle initial]. (Year, Month, Date of Publication). Publication Title. Magazine Title, pp. xx-xx.

Using MLA Format

  • Web : Last, First Middle Initial. “Publication Title.” Website Title. Website Publisher, Date Month Year Published. Web. Date Month Year Accessed.
  • Newspaper : Last, First M. “Publication Title.” Newspaper Title [City] Date, Month, Year Published: Page(s). Print.
  • Journal : Last, First M. “Publication Title.” Journal Title Series Volume. Issue (Year Published): Page(s). Database Name. Web. Date Month Year Accessed.

Enhance your writing effortlessly with EssayPro.com , where you can order an article review or any other writing task. Our team of expert writers specializes in various fields, ensuring your work is not just summarized, but deeply analyzed and professionally presented. Ideal for students and professionals alike, EssayPro offers top-notch writing assistance tailored to your needs. Elevate your writing today with our skilled team at your article review writing service !

order review

The Pre-Writing Process

Facing this task for the first time can really get confusing and can leave you unsure of where to begin. To create a top-notch article review, start with a few preparatory steps. Here are the two main stages from our dissertation services to get you started:

Step 1: Define the right organization for your review. Knowing the future setup of your paper will help you define how you should read the article. Here are the steps to follow:

  • Summarize the article — seek out the main points, ideas, claims, and general information presented in the article.
  • Define the positive points — identify the strong aspects, ideas, and insightful observations the author has made.
  • Find the gaps —- determine whether or not the author has any contradictions, gaps, or inconsistencies in the article and evaluate whether or not he or she used a sufficient amount of arguments and information to support his or her ideas.
  • Identify unanswered questions — finally, identify if there are any questions left unanswered after reading the piece.

Step 2: Move on and review the article. Here is a small and simple guide to help you do it right:

  • Start off by looking at and assessing the title of the piece, its abstract, introductory part, headings and subheadings, opening sentences in its paragraphs, and its conclusion.
  • First, read only the beginning and the ending of the piece (introduction and conclusion). These are the parts where authors include all of their key arguments and points. Therefore, if you start with reading these parts, it will give you a good sense of the author's main points.
  • Finally, read the article fully.

These three steps make up most of the prewriting process. After you are done with them, you can move on to writing your own review—and we are going to guide you through the writing process as well.

Outline and Template

As you progress with reading your article, organize your thoughts into coherent sections in an outline. As you read, jot down important facts, contributions, or contradictions. Identify the shortcomings and strengths of your publication. Begin to map your outline accordingly.

If your professor does not want a summary section or a personal critique section, then you must alleviate those parts from your writing. Much like other assignments, an article review must contain an introduction, a body, and a conclusion. Thus, you might consider dividing your outline according to these sections as well as subheadings within the body. If you find yourself troubled with the pre-writing and the brainstorming process for this assignment, seek out a sample outline.

Your custom essay must contain these constituent parts:

  • Pre-Title Page - Before diving into your review, start with essential details: article type, publication title, and author names with affiliations (position, department, institution, location, and email). Include corresponding author info if needed.
  • Running Head - In APA format, use a concise title (under 40 characters) to ensure consistent formatting.
  • Summary Page - Optional but useful. Summarize the article in 800 words, covering background, purpose, results, and methodology, avoiding verbatim text or references.
  • Title Page - Include the full title, a 250-word abstract, and 4-6 keywords for discoverability.
  • Introduction - Set the stage with an engaging overview of the article.
  • Body - Organize your analysis with headings and subheadings.
  • Works Cited/References - Properly cite all sources used in your review.
  • Optional Suggested Reading Page - If permitted, suggest further readings for in-depth exploration.
  • Tables and Figure Legends (if instructed by the professor) - Include visuals when requested by your professor for clarity.

Example of an Article Review

You might wonder why we've dedicated a section of this article to discuss an article review sample. Not everyone may realize it, but examining multiple well-constructed examples of review articles is a crucial step in the writing process. In the following section, our essay writing service experts will explain why.

Looking through relevant article review examples can be beneficial for you in the following ways:

  • To get you introduced to the key works of experts in your field.
  • To help you identify the key people engaged in a particular field of science.
  • To help you define what significant discoveries and advances were made in your field.
  • To help you unveil the major gaps within the existing knowledge of your field—which contributes to finding fresh solutions.
  • To help you find solid references and arguments for your own review.
  • To help you generate some ideas about any further field of research.
  • To help you gain a better understanding of the area and become an expert in this specific field.
  • To get a clear idea of how to write a good review.

View Our Writer’s Sample Before Crafting Your Own!

Why Have There Been No Great Female Artists?

Steps for Writing an Article Review

Here is a guide with critique paper format on how to write a review paper:

steps for article review

Step 1: Write the Title

First of all, you need to write a title that reflects the main focus of your work. Respectively, the title can be either interrogative, descriptive, or declarative.

Step 2: Cite the Article

Next, create a proper citation for the reviewed article and input it following the title. At this step, the most important thing to keep in mind is the style of citation specified by your instructor in the requirements for the paper. For example, an article citation in the MLA style should look as follows:

Author's last and first name. "The title of the article." Journal's title and issue(publication date): page(s). Print

Abraham John. "The World of Dreams." Virginia Quarterly 60.2(1991): 125-67. Print.

Step 3: Article Identification

After your citation, you need to include the identification of your reviewed article:

  • Title of the article
  • Title of the journal
  • Year of publication

All of this information should be included in the first paragraph of your paper.

The report "Poverty increases school drop-outs" was written by Brian Faith – a Health officer – in 2000.

Step 4: Introduction

Your organization in an assignment like this is of the utmost importance. Before embarking on your writing process, you should outline your assignment or use an article review template to organize your thoughts coherently.

  • If you are wondering how to start an article review, begin with an introduction that mentions the article and your thesis for the review.
  • Follow up with a summary of the main points of the article.
  • Highlight the positive aspects and facts presented in the publication.
  • Critique the publication by identifying gaps, contradictions, disparities in the text, and unanswered questions.

Step 5: Summarize the Article

Make a summary of the article by revisiting what the author has written about. Note any relevant facts and findings from the article. Include the author's conclusions in this section.

Step 6: Critique It

Present the strengths and weaknesses you have found in the publication. Highlight the knowledge that the author has contributed to the field. Also, write about any gaps and/or contradictions you have found in the article. Take a standpoint of either supporting or not supporting the author's assertions, but back up your arguments with facts and relevant theories that are pertinent to that area of knowledge. Rubrics and templates can also be used to evaluate and grade the person who wrote the article.

Step 7: Craft a Conclusion

In this section, revisit the critical points of your piece, your findings in the article, and your critique. Also, write about the accuracy, validity, and relevance of the results of the article review. Present a way forward for future research in the field of study. Before submitting your article, keep these pointers in mind:

  • As you read the article, highlight the key points. This will help you pinpoint the article's main argument and the evidence that they used to support that argument.
  • While you write your review, use evidence from your sources to make a point. This is best done using direct quotations.
  • Select quotes and supporting evidence adequately and use direct quotations sparingly. Take time to analyze the article adequately.
  • Every time you reference a publication or use a direct quotation, use a parenthetical citation to avoid accidentally plagiarizing your article.
  • Re-read your piece a day after you finish writing it. This will help you to spot grammar mistakes and to notice any flaws in your organization.
  • Use a spell-checker and get a second opinion on your paper.

The Post-Writing Process: Proofread Your Work

Finally, when all of the parts of your article review are set and ready, you have one last thing to take care of — proofreading. Although students often neglect this step, proofreading is a vital part of the writing process and will help you polish your paper to ensure that there are no mistakes or inconsistencies.

To proofread your paper properly, start by reading it fully and checking the following points:

  • Punctuation
  • Other mistakes

Afterward, take a moment to check for any unnecessary information in your paper and, if found, consider removing it to streamline your content. Finally, double-check that you've covered at least 3-4 key points in your discussion.

And remember, if you ever need help with proofreading, rewriting your essay, or even want to buy essay , our friendly team is always here to assist you.

Need an Article REVIEW WRITTEN?

Just send us the requirements to your paper and watch one of our writers crafting an original paper for you.

Related Articles

Satire Essay

Article Review

Barbara P

Article Review Writing: A Complete Step-by-Step Guide with Examples

Published on: Feb 17, 2020

Last updated on: Nov 24, 2023

Article Review

People also read

Get Better at Math: Solving Math Problems Quick and Easy

Learn How to Write an Editorial on Any Topic

Best Tips on How to Avoid Plagiarism

How to Write a Movie Review - Guide & Examples

A Complete Guide on How to Write a Summary for Students

Write Opinion Essay Like a Pro: A Detailed Guide

Evaluation Essay - Definition, Examples, and Writing Tips

How to Write a Thematic Statement - Tips & Examples

How to Write a Bio - Quick Tips, Structure & Examples

How to Write a Synopsis – A Simple Format & Guide

How to Write a Comparative Essay – A Complete Guide

Visual Analysis Essay - A Writing Guide with Format & Sample

List of Common Social Issues Around the World

Writing Character Analysis - Outline, Steps, and Examples

11 Common Types of Plagiarism Explained Through Examples

A Detailed Guide on How to Write a Poem Step by Step

Detailed Guide on Appendix Writing: With Tips and Examples

Share this article

Struggling to write a review that people actually want to read? Feeling lost in the details and wondering how to make your analysis stand out?

You're not alone!

Many writers find it tough to navigate the world of article reviews, not sure where to start or how to make their reviews really grab attention.

No worries! 

In this blog, we're going to guide you through the process of writing an article review that stands out. We'll also share tips, and examples to make this process easier for you.

Let’s get started.

On This Page On This Page -->

What is an Article Review?

An article review is a critical evaluation and analysis of a piece of writing, typically an academic or journalistic article. 

It goes beyond summarizing the content; it involves an in-depth examination of the author's ideas, arguments, and methodologies. 

The goal is to provide a well-rounded understanding of the article's strengths, weaknesses, and overall contribution to the field.

Order Essay

Tough Essay Due? Hire Tough Writers!

Types of Article Reviews

Article reviews come in various forms, each serving a distinct purpose in the realm of academic or professional discourse. Understanding these types is crucial for tailoring your approach. 

Here are some common types of article reviews:

Journal Article Review

A journal article review involves a thorough evaluation of scholarly articles published in academic journals. 

It requires summarizing the article's key points, methodology, and findings, emphasizing its contributions to the academic field. 

Take a look at the following example to help you understand better.

Example of Journal Article Review

Research Article Review

A research article review focuses on scrutinizing articles with a primary emphasis on research.

This type of review involves evaluating the research design, methodology, results, and their broader implications. 

Discussions on the interpretation of results, limitations, and the article's overall contributions are key. 

Here is a sample for you to get an idea.

Example of Research Article Review

Science Article Review

A science article review specifically addresses articles within scientific disciplines. It includes summarizing scientific concepts, hypotheses, and experimental methods.

The type of review assesses the reliability of the experimental design, and evaluates the author's interpretation of findings. 

Take a look at the following example.

Example of Science Article Review

Critical Review

A critical review involves a balanced critique of a given article. It encompasses providing a comprehensive summary, highlighting key points, and engaging in a critical analysis of strengths and weaknesses. 

To get a clearer idea of a critical review, take a look at this example.

Critical Review Example

Article Review Format

When crafting an article review in either APA or MLA format, it's crucial to adhere to the specific guidelines for citing sources. 

Below are the bibliographical entries for different types of sources in both APA and MLA styles:

How to Write an Article Review? 10 Easy Steps

Writing an effective article review involves a systematic approach. Follow this step-by-step process to ensure a comprehensive and well-structured analysis.

Step 1: Understand the Assignment

Before diving into the review, carefully read and understand the assignment guidelines. 

Pay attention to specific requirements, such as word count, formatting style (APA, MLA), and the aspects your instructor wants you to focus on.

Step 2: Read the Article Thoroughly

Begin by thoroughly reading the article. Take notes on key points, arguments, and evidence presented by the author. 

Understand the author's main thesis and the context in which the article was written.

Step 3: Create a Summary

Summarize the main points of the article. Highlight the author's key arguments and findings. 

While writing the summary ensure that you capture the essential elements of the article to provide context for your analysis.

Step 4: Identify the Author's Thesis

In this step, pinpoint the author's main thesis or central argument. Understand the purpose of the article and how the author supports their position. 

This will serve as a foundation for your critique.

Step 5: Evaluate the Author's Evidence and Methodology

Examine the evidence provided by the author to support their thesis. Assess the reliability and validity of the methodology used. 

Consider the sources, data collection methods, and any potential biases.

Step 6: Analyze the Author's Writing Style

Evaluate the author's writing style and how effectively they communicate their ideas. 

Consider the clarity of the language, the organization of the content, and the overall persuasiveness of the article.

Step 7: Consider the Article's Contribution

Reflect on the article's contribution to its field of study. Analyze how it fits into the existing literature, its significance, and any potential implications for future research or applications.

Step 8: Write the Introduction

Craft an introduction that includes the article's title, author, publication date, and a brief overview. 

State the purpose of your review and your thesis—the main point you'll be analyzing in your review.

Step 9: Develop the Body of the Review

Organize your review by addressing specific aspects such as the author's thesis, methodology, writing style, and the article's contribution. 

Use clear paragraphs to structure your analysis logically.

Step 10: Conclude with a Summary and Evaluation

Summarize your main points and restate your overall assessment of the article. 

Offer insights into its strengths and weaknesses, and conclude with any recommendations for improvement or suggestions for further research.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That's our Job!

Article Review Outline

Creating a well-organized outline is an essential part of writing a coherent and insightful article review.

This outline given below will guide you through the key sections of your review, ensuring that your analysis is comprehensive and logically structured.

Refer to the following template to understand outlining the article review in detail.

Article Review Format Template

Article Review Examples

Examining article review examples can provide valuable insights into the structure, tone, and depth of analysis expected. 

Below are sample article reviews, each illustrating a different approach and focus.

Example of Article Review

Law Article Review

Sample of article review assignment pdf

Tips for Writing an Effective Article Review

Crafting an effective article review involves a combination of critical analysis, clarity, and structure. 

Here are some valuable tips to guide you through the process:

  • Start with a Clear Introduction

Kick off your article review by introducing the article's main points and mentioning the publication date, which you can find on the re-title page. Outline the topics you'll cover in your review.

  • Concise Summary with Unanswered Questions

Provide a short summary of the article, emphasizing its main ideas. Highlight any lingering questions, known as "unanswered questions," that the article may have triggered. Use a basic article review template to help structure your thoughts.

  • Illustrate with Examples

Use examples from the article to illustrate your points. If there are tables or figures in the article, discuss them to make your review more concrete and easily understandable.

  • Organize Clearly with a Summary Section

Keep your review straightforward and well-organized. Begin with the start of the article, express your thoughts on what you liked or didn't like, and conclude with a summary section. This follows a basic plan for clarity.

  • Constructive Criticism

When providing criticism, be constructive. If there are elements you don't understand, frame them as "unanswered questions." This approach shows engagement and curiosity.

  • Smoothly Connect Your Ideas

Ensure your thoughts flow naturally throughout your review. Use simple words and sentences. If you have questions about the article, let them guide your review organically.

  • Revise and Check for Clarity

Before finishing, go through your review. Correct any mistakes and ensure it sounds clear. Check if you followed your plan, used simple words, and incorporated the keywords effectively. This makes your review better and more accessible for others.

In conclusion , writing an effective article review involves a thoughtful balance of summarizing key points, and addressing unanswered questions. 

By following a simple and structured approach, you can create a review that not only analyzes the content but also adds value to the reader's understanding.

Remember to organize your thoughts logically, use clear language, and provide examples from the article to support your points. 

Ready to elevate your article reviewing skills? Explore the valuable resources and expert assistance at MyPerfectWords.com. 

Our team of experienced writers is here to help you with article reviews and other school tasks. 

So why wait? Get our essay writing service today!

Barbara P (Literature, Marketing)

Dr. Barbara is a highly experienced writer and author who holds a Ph.D. degree in public health from an Ivy League school. She has worked in the medical field for many years, conducting extensive research on various health topics. Her writing has been featured in several top-tier publications.

Paper Due? Why Suffer? That’s our Job!

Get Help

Keep reading

Article Review

We value your privacy

We use cookies to improve your experience and give you personalized content. Do you agree to our cookie policy?

Website Data Collection

We use data collected by cookies and JavaScript libraries.

Are you sure you want to cancel?

Your preferences have not been saved.

Cart

  • SUGGESTED TOPICS
  • The Magazine
  • Newsletters
  • Managing Yourself
  • Managing Teams
  • Work-life Balance
  • The Big Idea
  • Data & Visuals
  • Reading Lists
  • Case Selections
  • HBR Learning
  • Topic Feeds
  • Account Settings
  • Email Preferences

How to Improve Your Business Writing

  • Carolyn O’Hara

how to write a business article review

Cut the fat.

NOV14_20_writing

  • Carolyn O’Hara is a writer and editor based in New York City. She’s worked at The Week, PBS NewsHour, and Foreign Policy. carolynohara1

Partner Center

How to Write Critical Reviews

When you are asked to write a critical review of a book or article, you will need to identify, summarize, and evaluate the ideas and information the author has presented. In other words, you will be examining another person’s thoughts on a topic from your point of view.

Your stand must go beyond your “gut reaction” to the work and be based on your knowledge (readings, lecture, experience) of the topic as well as on factors such as criteria stated in your assignment or discussed by you and your instructor.

Make your stand clear at the beginning of your review, in your evaluations of specific parts, and in your concluding commentary.

Remember that your goal should be to make a few key points about the book or article, not to discuss everything the author writes.

Understanding the Assignment

To write a good critical review, you will have to engage in the mental processes of analyzing (taking apart) the work–deciding what its major components are and determining how these parts (i.e., paragraphs, sections, or chapters) contribute to the work as a whole.

Analyzing the work will help you focus on how and why the author makes certain points and prevent you from merely summarizing what the author says. Assuming the role of an analytical reader will also help you to determine whether or not the author fulfills the stated purpose of the book or article and enhances your understanding or knowledge of a particular topic.

Be sure to read your assignment thoroughly before you read the article or book. Your instructor may have included specific guidelines for you to follow. Keeping these guidelines in mind as you read the article or book can really help you write your paper!

Also, note where the work connects with what you’ve studied in the course. You can make the most efficient use of your reading and notetaking time if you are an active reader; that is, keep relevant questions in mind and jot down page numbers as well as your responses to ideas that appear to be significant as you read.

Please note: The length of your introduction and overview, the number of points you choose to review, and the length of your conclusion should be proportionate to the page limit stated in your assignment and should reflect the complexity of the material being reviewed as well as the expectations of your reader.

Write the introduction

Below are a few guidelines to help you write the introduction to your critical review.

Introduce your review appropriately

Begin your review with an introduction appropriate to your assignment.

If your assignment asks you to review only one book and not to use outside sources, your introduction will focus on identifying the author, the title, the main topic or issue presented in the book, and the author’s purpose in writing the book.

If your assignment asks you to review the book as it relates to issues or themes discussed in the course, or to review two or more books on the same topic, your introduction must also encompass those expectations.

Explain relationships

For example, before you can review two books on a topic, you must explain to your reader in your introduction how they are related to one another.

Within this shared context (or under this “umbrella”) you can then review comparable aspects of both books, pointing out where the authors agree and differ.

In other words, the more complicated your assignment is, the more your introduction must accomplish.

Finally, the introduction to a book review is always the place for you to establish your position as the reviewer (your thesis about the author’s thesis).

As you write, consider the following questions:

  • Is the book a memoir, a treatise, a collection of facts, an extended argument, etc.? Is the article a documentary, a write-up of primary research, a position paper, etc.?
  • Who is the author? What does the preface or foreword tell you about the author’s purpose, background, and credentials? What is the author’s approach to the topic (as a journalist? a historian? a researcher?)?
  • What is the main topic or problem addressed? How does the work relate to a discipline, to a profession, to a particular audience, or to other works on the topic?
  • What is your critical evaluation of the work (your thesis)? Why have you taken that position? What criteria are you basing your position on?

Provide an overview

In your introduction, you will also want to provide an overview. An overview supplies your reader with certain general information not appropriate for including in the introduction but necessary to understanding the body of the review.

Generally, an overview describes your book’s division into chapters, sections, or points of discussion. An overview may also include background information about the topic, about your stand, or about the criteria you will use for evaluation.

The overview and the introduction work together to provide a comprehensive beginning for (a “springboard” into) your review.

  • What are the author’s basic premises? What issues are raised, or what themes emerge? What situation (i.e., racism on college campuses) provides a basis for the author’s assertions?
  • How informed is my reader? What background information is relevant to the entire book and should be placed here rather than in a body paragraph?

Write the body

The body is the center of your paper, where you draw out your main arguments. Below are some guidelines to help you write it.

Organize using a logical plan

Organize the body of your review according to a logical plan. Here are two options:

  • First, summarize, in a series of paragraphs, those major points from the book that you plan to discuss; incorporating each major point into a topic sentence for a paragraph is an effective organizational strategy. Second, discuss and evaluate these points in a following group of paragraphs. (There are two dangers lurking in this pattern–you may allot too many paragraphs to summary and too few to evaluation, or you may re-summarize too many points from the book in your evaluation section.)
  • Alternatively, you can summarize and evaluate the major points you have chosen from the book in a point-by-point schema. That means you will discuss and evaluate point one within the same paragraph (or in several if the point is significant and warrants extended discussion) before you summarize and evaluate point two, point three, etc., moving in a logical sequence from point to point to point. Here again, it is effective to use the topic sentence of each paragraph to identify the point from the book that you plan to summarize or evaluate.

Questions to keep in mind as you write

With either organizational pattern, consider the following questions:

  • What are the author’s most important points? How do these relate to one another? (Make relationships clear by using transitions: “In contrast,” an equally strong argument,” “moreover,” “a final conclusion,” etc.).
  • What types of evidence or information does the author present to support his or her points? Is this evidence convincing, controversial, factual, one-sided, etc.? (Consider the use of primary historical material, case studies, narratives, recent scientific findings, statistics.)
  • Where does the author do a good job of conveying factual material as well as personal perspective? Where does the author fail to do so? If solutions to a problem are offered, are they believable, misguided, or promising?
  • Which parts of the work (particular arguments, descriptions, chapters, etc.) are most effective and which parts are least effective? Why?
  • Where (if at all) does the author convey personal prejudice, support illogical relationships, or present evidence out of its appropriate context?

Keep your opinions distinct and cite your sources

Remember, as you discuss the author’s major points, be sure to distinguish consistently between the author’s opinions and your own.

Keep the summary portions of your discussion concise, remembering that your task as a reviewer is to re-see the author’s work, not to re-tell it.

And, importantly, if you refer to ideas from other books and articles or from lecture and course materials, always document your sources, or else you might wander into the realm of plagiarism.

Include only that material which has relevance for your review and use direct quotations sparingly. The Writing Center has other handouts to help you paraphrase text and introduce quotations.

Write the conclusion

You will want to use the conclusion to state your overall critical evaluation.

You have already discussed the major points the author makes, examined how the author supports arguments, and evaluated the quality or effectiveness of specific aspects of the book or article.

Now you must make an evaluation of the work as a whole, determining such things as whether or not the author achieves the stated or implied purpose and if the work makes a significant contribution to an existing body of knowledge.

Consider the following questions:

  • Is the work appropriately subjective or objective according to the author’s purpose?
  • How well does the work maintain its stated or implied focus? Does the author present extraneous material? Does the author exclude or ignore relevant information?
  • How well has the author achieved the overall purpose of the book or article? What contribution does the work make to an existing body of knowledge or to a specific group of readers? Can you justify the use of this work in a particular course?
  • What is the most important final comment you wish to make about the book or article? Do you have any suggestions for the direction of future research in the area? What has reading this work done for you or demonstrated to you?

how to write a business article review

Academic and Professional Writing

This is an accordion element with a series of buttons that open and close related content panels.

Analysis Papers

Reading Poetry

A Short Guide to Close Reading for Literary Analysis

Using Literary Quotations

Play Reviews

Writing a Rhetorical Précis to Analyze Nonfiction Texts

Incorporating Interview Data

Grant Proposals

Planning and Writing a Grant Proposal: The Basics

Additional Resources for Grants and Proposal Writing

Job Materials and Application Essays

Writing Personal Statements for Ph.D. Programs

  • Before you begin: useful tips for writing your essay
  • Guided brainstorming exercises
  • Get more help with your essay
  • Frequently Asked Questions

Resume Writing Tips

CV Writing Tips

Cover Letters

Business Letters

Proposals and Dissertations

Resources for Proposal Writers

Resources for Dissertators

Research Papers

Planning and Writing Research Papers

Quoting and Paraphrasing

Writing Annotated Bibliographies

Creating Poster Presentations

Writing an Abstract for Your Research Paper

Thank-You Notes

Advice for Students Writing Thank-You Notes to Donors

Reading for a Review

Critical Reviews

Writing a Review of Literature

Scientific Reports

Scientific Report Format

Sample Lab Assignment

Writing for the Web

Writing an Effective Blog Post

Writing for Social Media: A Guide for Academics

When you choose to publish with PLOS, your research makes an impact. Make your work accessible to all, without restrictions, and accelerate scientific discovery with options like preprints and published peer review that make your work more Open.

  • PLOS Biology
  • PLOS Climate
  • PLOS Complex Systems
  • PLOS Computational Biology
  • PLOS Digital Health
  • PLOS Genetics
  • PLOS Global Public Health
  • PLOS Medicine
  • PLOS Mental Health
  • PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
  • PLOS Pathogens
  • PLOS Sustainability and Transformation
  • PLOS Collections

How to Write a Peer Review

how to write a business article review

When you write a peer review for a manuscript, what should you include in your comments? What should you leave out? And how should the review be formatted?

This guide provides quick tips for writing and organizing your reviewer report.

Review Outline

Use an outline for your reviewer report so it’s easy for the editors and author to follow. This will also help you keep your comments organized.

Think about structuring your review like an inverted pyramid. Put the most important information at the top, followed by details and examples in the center, and any additional points at the very bottom.

how to write a business article review

Here’s how your outline might look:

1. Summary of the research and your overall impression

In your own words, summarize what the manuscript claims to report. This shows the editor how you interpreted the manuscript and will highlight any major differences in perspective between you and the other reviewers. Give an overview of the manuscript’s strengths and weaknesses. Think about this as your “take-home” message for the editors. End this section with your recommended course of action.

2. Discussion of specific areas for improvement

It’s helpful to divide this section into two parts: one for major issues and one for minor issues. Within each section, you can talk about the biggest issues first or go systematically figure-by-figure or claim-by-claim. Number each item so that your points are easy to follow (this will also make it easier for the authors to respond to each point). Refer to specific lines, pages, sections, or figure and table numbers so the authors (and editors) know exactly what you’re talking about.

Major vs. minor issues

What’s the difference between a major and minor issue? Major issues should consist of the essential points the authors need to address before the manuscript can proceed. Make sure you focus on what is  fundamental for the current study . In other words, it’s not helpful to recommend additional work that would be considered the “next step” in the study. Minor issues are still important but typically will not affect the overall conclusions of the manuscript. Here are some examples of what would might go in the “minor” category:

  • Missing references (but depending on what is missing, this could also be a major issue)
  • Technical clarifications (e.g., the authors should clarify how a reagent works)
  • Data presentation (e.g., the authors should present p-values differently)
  • Typos, spelling, grammar, and phrasing issues

3. Any other points

Confidential comments for the editors.

Some journals have a space for reviewers to enter confidential comments about the manuscript. Use this space to mention concerns about the submission that you’d want the editors to consider before sharing your feedback with the authors, such as concerns about ethical guidelines or language quality. Any serious issues should be raised directly and immediately with the journal as well.

This section is also where you will disclose any potentially competing interests, and mention whether you’re willing to look at a revised version of the manuscript.

Do not use this space to critique the manuscript, since comments entered here will not be passed along to the authors.  If you’re not sure what should go in the confidential comments, read the reviewer instructions or check with the journal first before submitting your review. If you are reviewing for a journal that does not offer a space for confidential comments, consider writing to the editorial office directly with your concerns.

Get this outline in a template

Giving Feedback

Giving feedback is hard. Giving effective feedback can be even more challenging. Remember that your ultimate goal is to discuss what the authors would need to do in order to qualify for publication. The point is not to nitpick every piece of the manuscript. Your focus should be on providing constructive and critical feedback that the authors can use to improve their study.

If you’ve ever had your own work reviewed, you already know that it’s not always easy to receive feedback. Follow the golden rule: Write the type of review you’d want to receive if you were the author. Even if you decide not to identify yourself in the review, you should write comments that you would be comfortable signing your name to.

In your comments, use phrases like “ the authors’ discussion of X” instead of “ your discussion of X .” This will depersonalize the feedback and keep the focus on the manuscript instead of the authors.

General guidelines for effective feedback

how to write a business article review

  • Justify your recommendation with concrete evidence and specific examples.
  • Be specific so the authors know what they need to do to improve.
  • Be thorough. This might be the only time you read the manuscript.
  • Be professional and respectful. The authors will be reading these comments too.
  • Remember to say what you liked about the manuscript!

how to write a business article review

Don’t

  • Recommend additional experiments or  unnecessary elements that are out of scope for the study or for the journal criteria.
  • Tell the authors exactly how to revise their manuscript—you don’t need to do their work for them.
  • Use the review to promote your own research or hypotheses.
  • Focus on typos and grammar. If the manuscript needs significant editing for language and writing quality, just mention this in your comments.
  • Submit your review without proofreading it and checking everything one more time.

Before and After: Sample Reviewer Comments

Keeping in mind the guidelines above, how do you put your thoughts into words? Here are some sample “before” and “after” reviewer comments

✗ Before

“The authors appear to have no idea what they are talking about. I don’t think they have read any of the literature on this topic.”

✓ After

“The study fails to address how the findings relate to previous research in this area. The authors should rewrite their Introduction and Discussion to reference the related literature, especially recently published work such as Darwin et al.”

“The writing is so bad, it is practically unreadable. I could barely bring myself to finish it.”

“While the study appears to be sound, the language is unclear, making it difficult to follow. I advise the authors work with a writing coach or copyeditor to improve the flow and readability of the text.”

“It’s obvious that this type of experiment should have been included. I have no idea why the authors didn’t use it. This is a big mistake.”

“The authors are off to a good start, however, this study requires additional experiments, particularly [type of experiment]. Alternatively, the authors should include more information that clarifies and justifies their choice of methods.”

Suggested Language for Tricky Situations

You might find yourself in a situation where you’re not sure how to explain the problem or provide feedback in a constructive and respectful way. Here is some suggested language for common issues you might experience.

What you think : The manuscript is fatally flawed. What you could say: “The study does not appear to be sound” or “the authors have missed something crucial”.

What you think : You don’t completely understand the manuscript. What you could say : “The authors should clarify the following sections to avoid confusion…”

What you think : The technical details don’t make sense. What you could say : “The technical details should be expanded and clarified to ensure that readers understand exactly what the researchers studied.”

What you think: The writing is terrible. What you could say : “The authors should revise the language to improve readability.”

What you think : The authors have over-interpreted the findings. What you could say : “The authors aim to demonstrate [XYZ], however, the data does not fully support this conclusion. Specifically…”

What does a good review look like?

Check out the peer review examples at F1000 Research to see how other reviewers write up their reports and give constructive feedback to authors.

Time to Submit the Review!

Be sure you turn in your report on time. Need an extension? Tell the journal so that they know what to expect. If you need a lot of extra time, the journal might need to contact other reviewers or notify the author about the delay.

Tip: Building a relationship with an editor

You’ll be more likely to be asked to review again if you provide high-quality feedback and if you turn in the review on time. Especially if it’s your first review for a journal, it’s important to show that you are reliable. Prove yourself once and you’ll get asked to review again!

  • Getting started as a reviewer
  • Responding to an invitation
  • Reading a manuscript
  • Writing a peer review

The contents of the Peer Review Center are also available as a live, interactive training session, complete with slides, talking points, and activities. …

The contents of the Writing Center are also available as a live, interactive training session, complete with slides, talking points, and activities. …

There’s a lot to consider when deciding where to submit your work. Learn how to choose a journal that will help your study reach its audience, while reflecting your values as a researcher…

An editor’s guide to writing a review article

Thumbnail

Lindsey Drayton

Thumbnail

Matt Pavlovich

About this video

Writing a compelling review article is about more than picking an interesting topic and gathering the latest references. It’s an opportunity to share your views on the most recent trends in the area, discuss which hypotheses seem best supported or which technologies seem most promising, and even chart a course for how the field could develop in the future.

Matt Pavlovich and Lindsey Drayton, editors in the Trends reviews journals group with Cell Press, will give their editorial perspective on what they’re looking for in a review. This webinar will cover how to both conceptualize and write a review, how to distinguish your review by making a strong statement, and why writing a review is worth your time. It will also dispel some common myths about review articles—including that reviews must always originate from an editor’s invitation—and give advice for how to propose a review to an editor.

You will come away with a stronger understanding of how to plan and structure a review article, specific writing tips for writing the article itself, why writing a review is a good use of your time and what distinguishes an adequate review from an excellent one.

About the presenters

Thumbnail

Editor, Trends in Cognitive Sciences

Lindsey Drayton is the editor of Trends in Cognitive Sciences, Cell Press’s home for reviews in cognitive psychology and cognitive neuroscience. She earned her BA in Psychology from Duke University and her PhD in Psychology from Yale University. At Yale, she studied the evolution and ontology of human social cognition using a variety of model primate species. She joined Cell Press in 2017. 

Thumbnail

Editor, Trends in Biotechnology

Matt Pavlovich is the editor of Trends in Biotechnology, Cell Press’s home for reviews in applied biology. He earned his BS in chemical engineering from the Georgia Institute of Technology and his PhD in chemical engineering from the University of California at Berkeley, where his thesis project focused on the biological effects of air plasmas. He studied analytical chemistry as a postdoctoral researcher at Northeastern University, then joined Cell Press at the start of 2016.

Case Reports

How to write case reports

Systematic reviews

Systematic reviews 101

How to write and review a methods article

How to write and review a methods article

How to design effective figures for review articles

How to design effective figures for review articles

Why write a book?

Why write a book?

How to write (and how not to write) a scientific review article

Cell Mentor

Home

Get Started

Take the first step and invest in your future.

colonnade and university hall

Online Programs

Offering flexibility & convenience in 51 online degrees & programs.

student at laptop

Prairie Stars

Featuring 15 intercollegiate NCAA Div II athletic teams.

campus in spring

Find your Fit

UIS has over 85 student and 10 greek life organizations, and many volunteer opportunities.

campus in spring

Arts & Culture

Celebrating the arts to create rich cultural experiences on campus.

campus in spring

Give Like a Star

Your generosity helps fuel fundraising for scholarships, programs and new initiatives.

alumni at gala

Bragging Rights

UIS was listed No. 1 in Illinois and No. 3 in the Midwest in 2023 rankings.

lincoln statue fall

  • Quick links Applicants & Students Important Apps & Links Alumni Faculty and Staff Community Admissions How to Apply Cost & Aid Tuition Calculator Registrar Orientation Visit Campus Academics Register for Class Programs of Study Online Degrees & Programs Graduate Education International Student Services Study Away Student Support Bookstore UIS Life Dining Diversity & Inclusion Get Involved Health & Wellness COVID-19 United in Safety Residence Life Student Life Programs UIS Connection Important Apps UIS Mobile App Advise U Canvas myUIS i-card Balance Pay My Bill - UIS Bursar Self-Service Email Resources Bookstore Box Information Technology Services Library Orbit Policies Webtools Get Connected Area Information Calendar Campus Recreation Departments & Programs (A-Z) Parking UIS Newsroom Connect & Get Involved Update your Info Alumni Events Alumni Networks & Groups Volunteer Opportunities Alumni Board News & Publications Featured Alumni Alumni News UIS Alumni Magazine Resources Order your Transcripts Give Back Alumni Programs Career Development Services & Support Accessibility Services Campus Services Campus Police Facilities & Services Registrar Faculty & Staff Resources Website Project Request Web Services Training & Tools Academic Impressions Career Connect CSA Reporting Cybersecurity Training Faculty Research FERPA Training Website Login Campus Resources Newsroom Campus Calendar Campus Maps i-Card Human Resources Public Relations Webtools Arts & Events UIS Performing Arts Center Visual Arts Gallery Event Calendar Sangamon Experience Center for Lincoln Studies ECCE Speaker Series Community Engagement Center for State Policy and Leadership Illinois Innocence Project Innovate Springfield Central IL Nonprofit Resource Center NPR Illinois Community Resources Child Protection Training Academy Office of Electronic Media University Archives/IRAD Institute for Illinois Public Finance

Request Info

Home

How to Review a Journal Article

rainbow over colonnade

  • Request Info Request info for....     Undergraduate/Graduate     Online     Study Away     Continuing & Professional Education     International Student Services     General Inquiries

For many kinds of assignments, like a  literature review , you may be asked to offer a critique or review of a journal article. This is an opportunity for you as a scholar to offer your  qualified opinion  and  evaluation  of how another scholar has composed their article, argument, and research. That means you will be expected to go beyond a simple  summary  of the article and evaluate it on a deeper level. As a college student, this might sound intimidating. However, as you engage with the research process, you are becoming immersed in a particular topic, and your insights about the way that topic is presented are valuable and can contribute to the overall conversation surrounding your topic.

IMPORTANT NOTE!!

Some disciplines, like Criminal Justice, may only want you to summarize the article without including your opinion or evaluation. If your assignment is to summarize the article only, please see our literature review handout.

Before getting started on the critique, it is important to review the article thoroughly and critically. To do this, we recommend take notes,  annotating , and reading the article several times before critiquing. As you read, be sure to note important items like the thesis, purpose, research questions, hypotheses, methods, evidence, key findings, major conclusions, tone, and publication information. Depending on your writing context, some of these items may not be applicable.

Questions to Consider

To evaluate a source, consider some of the following questions. They are broken down into different categories, but answering these questions will help you consider what areas to examine. With each category, we recommend identifying the strengths and weaknesses in each since that is a critical part of evaluation.

Evaluating Purpose and Argument

  • How well is the purpose made clear in the introduction through background/context and thesis?
  • How well does the abstract represent and summarize the article’s major points and argument?
  • How well does the objective of the experiment or of the observation fill a need for the field?
  • How well is the argument/purpose articulated and discussed throughout the body of the text?
  • How well does the discussion maintain cohesion?

Evaluating the Presentation/Organization of Information

  • How appropriate and clear is the title of the article?
  • Where could the author have benefited from expanding, condensing, or omitting ideas?
  • How clear are the author’s statements? Challenge ambiguous statements.
  • What underlying assumptions does the author have, and how does this affect the credibility or clarity of their article?
  • How objective is the author in his or her discussion of the topic?
  • How well does the organization fit the article’s purpose and articulate key goals?

Evaluating Methods

  • How appropriate are the study design and methods for the purposes of the study?
  • How detailed are the methods being described? Is the author leaving out important steps or considerations?
  • Have the procedures been presented in enough detail to enable the reader to duplicate them?

Evaluating Data

  • Scan and spot-check calculations. Are the statistical methods appropriate?
  • Do you find any content repeated or duplicated?
  • How many errors of fact and interpretation does the author include? (You can check on this by looking up the references the author cites).
  • What pertinent literature has the author cited, and have they used this literature appropriately?

Following, we have an example of a summary and an evaluation of a research article. Note that in most literature review contexts, the summary and evaluation would be much shorter. This extended example shows the different ways a student can critique and write about an article.

Chik, A. (2012). Digital gameplay for autonomous foreign language learning: Gamers’ and language teachers’ perspectives. In H. Reinders (ed.),  Digital games in language learning and teaching  (pp. 95-114). Eastbourne, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.

Be sure to include the full citation either in a reference page or near your evaluation if writing an  annotated bibliography .

In Chik’s article “Digital Gameplay for Autonomous Foreign Language Learning: Gamers’ and Teachers’ Perspectives”, she explores the ways in which “digital gamers manage gaming and gaming-related activities to assume autonomy in their foreign language learning,” (96) which is presented in contrast to how teachers view the “pedagogical potential” of gaming. The research was described as an “umbrella project” consisting of two parts. The first part examined 34 language teachers’ perspectives who had limited experience with gaming (only five stated they played games regularly) (99). Their data was recorded through a survey, class discussion, and a seven-day gaming trial done by six teachers who recorded their reflections through personal blog posts. The second part explored undergraduate gaming habits of ten Hong Kong students who were regular gamers. Their habits were recorded through language learning histories, videotaped gaming sessions, blog entries of gaming practices, group discussion sessions, stimulated recall sessions on gaming videos, interviews with other gamers, and posts from online discussion forums. The research shows that while students recognize the educational potential of games and have seen benefits of it in their lives, the instructors overall do not see the positive impacts of gaming on foreign language learning.

The summary includes the article’s purpose, methods, results, discussion, and citations when necessary.

This article did a good job representing the undergraduate gamers’ voices through extended quotes and stories. Particularly for the data collection of the undergraduate gamers, there were many opportunities for an in-depth examination of their gaming practices and histories. However, the representation of the teachers in this study was very uneven when compared to the students. Not only were teachers labeled as numbers while the students picked out their own pseudonyms, but also when viewing the data collection, the undergraduate students were more closely examined in comparison to the teachers in the study. While the students have fifteen extended quotes describing their experiences in their research section, the teachers only have two of these instances in their section, which shows just how imbalanced the study is when presenting instructor voices.

Some research methods, like the recorded gaming sessions, were only used with students whereas teachers were only asked to blog about their gaming experiences. This creates a richer narrative for the students while also failing to give instructors the chance to have more nuanced perspectives. This lack of nuance also stems from the emphasis of the non-gamer teachers over the gamer teachers. The non-gamer teachers’ perspectives provide a stark contrast to the undergraduate gamer experiences and fits neatly with the narrative of teachers not valuing gaming as an educational tool. However, the study mentioned five teachers that were regular gamers whose perspectives are left to a short section at the end of the presentation of the teachers’ results. This was an opportunity to give the teacher group a more complex story, and the opportunity was entirely missed.

Additionally, the context of this study was not entirely clear. The instructors were recruited through a master’s level course, but the content of the course and the institution’s background is not discussed. Understanding this context helps us understand the course’s purpose(s) and how those purposes may have influenced the ways in which these teachers interpreted and saw games. It was also unclear how Chik was connected to this masters’ class and to the students. Why these particular teachers and students were recruited was not explicitly defined and also has the potential to skew results in a particular direction.

Overall, I was inclined to agree with the idea that students can benefit from language acquisition through gaming while instructors may not see the instructional value, but I believe the way the research was conducted and portrayed in this article made it very difficult to support Chik’s specific findings.

Some professors like you to begin an evaluation with something positive but isn’t always necessary.

The evaluation is clearly organized and uses transitional phrases when moving to a new topic.

This evaluation includes a summative statement that gives the overall impression of the article at the end, but this can also be placed at the beginning of the evaluation.

This evaluation mainly discusses the representation of data and methods. However, other areas, like organization, are open to critique.

article review

How to Write an Article Review: Tips, Outline, Format

how to write a business article review

Have you been assigned an article review paper, but you are unsure where to start, or what is a review article at all? There is no need to worry, as EssayService has put together a top guide for you! Find out all about an article review to master your assignment.

What is an Article Review?

In simple terms, an article review essay is like a summary and evaluation of another professional or expert's work. It may also be referred to as a literature review that includes an outline of the most recent research on the subject, or a critical review that focuses on a specific article with smaller scope. Article review can be used for many reasons; for example, a teacher or lecturer may wish to introduce their students to a new subject by reviewing a professional's piece. You can also learn about the most important works of specialists in your industry by looking at relevant article review examples.

Also, a newspaper article review example could be a journalist writing a critique about another competitor's published work.

In comparison, a book review article example could be critiqued by a fellow author or even a student in the chosen field.

Depending on the critique criteria and the work being reviewed, there could also be certain points asked for addition which should be checked and noted by the lecturer or supervisor. Otherwise, follow the article review guidelines from our write my essay service to complete the assignment in no time.

Key points when writing an article review:

Use the article review template from our paper writing service to get through the assignment as fast as possible so you will not waste any time.

review

How to Start an Article Review?

  • Firstly read the work being reviewed as much as possible and look up key phrases and words that are not understood.
  • Discuss the work with other professionals or colleagues to collect more opinions and get a more balanced impression.
  • Highlight important sections or sentences and refer this to your knowledge in the topic, do you agree or disagree and what does this contribute to the field?
  • Then re-write the key arguments and findings into your own words this will help gain better understanding into the paper. This can be just written as an outline also and will help decide which points are wanted to discuss later.

If you feel you do not have enough time to create a critique worthy of your time, then come to EssayService and order a custom Article review online.

You can order essay independent of type, for example:

  • nursing essay;
  • law essay writing;
  • history essays.

The best way to write an effective essay would be to draw up a plan or outline of what needs to be covered and use it for guidance throughout the critique.

how to write a business article review

Article Review Formatting

There is no one-fits-all article format you can follow in your review. In fact, the formatting is dictated by the citation style specified by your professor in the task requirements. Thus, be sure to clarify the preferred style before you jump straight to writing to handle the given assignment right.

APA Format Article Review

Writing an APA style article review, you will most likely use articles from journals, websites, and newspapers. For each source, you will have to create properly formatted bibliographical entries.

Here is how to write an article review APA:

  • Journal: Author’s last name, First and middle initial. (Year of Publication). Publication Title. Periodical Title, Volume(Issue), pp.-pp.
  • Website: Last name, initials. (Date of Publication). Title. Retrieved from {link}
  • Newspaper: Last name, initials. (Date of Publication). Title. Magazine Title, pp. xx-xx.

MLA Format Article Review

Tips for citing sources in an article review MLA format:

  • Journal: Last name, First name Middle initial. “Title.” Journal Title Series Volume. Issue (Year of Publication): Page(s). Database Name. Web. Date Accessed.
  • Website: Last, First M. “Title.” Website Title. Publisher, Date Published. Web. Date Accessed.
  • Newspaper: Last, First M. “Title.” Newspaper Title [City] Date of Publication: Page(s). Print.

Article Review Outline

Planning out an outline for your paper will help writing and to put it together so therefore saving you time in the long run.

Some questions to help with the outline of a critique:

  • What does the article set out to do or prove?
  • Are the main ideas clear and defined?
  • How substantial is the evidence?
  • Where does the article fit in its specific field?
  • Does it provide new knowledge on the topic?
  • What are the central theories and assumptions?
  • Is the writer conclusive at getting their point across?

Here is a typical article review format to follow:

review structure

Use our article review template to get through the assignment as fast as possible so you will not waste any time.

Article Review Title

Firstly start with creating a title for your critique, this should be something to do with the focus of the work that is being reviewed. An approach could be to make it descriptive or also in a more creative way think of something that intrigues the reader. After the title, this is a good place to correctly cite the paper being critiqued and include the important details for example, the author, title of publication, any page references. The style in which the citation is written will depend on which is best for this type of work being reviewed.

Article Review Introduction

The introduction should be a brief glimpse into what the author was writing about and any other details the audience will find interesting. Maybe some background details on the piece that is not already known or something that contributes to the review itself. It is a good idea to start by introducing the work at the start of the paragraph and then include a ' hook '. Include the writer's thesis if there is one and put it at the end but include your own thesis towards the critique near the beginning of this section.

Article Review Body

When constructing the summary section, write down the important points and findings in the piece in your own words. Include how the claims are supported and backed up with evidence but use direct quotes as sparing as possible. Do not put in any information known to professionals in the field or topic, but detail any conclusions the work came to. Make sure the paper is not just copied word for word and is actually summarized by yourself; this will also help the review stage.

To make an accurate critique, break down the work and express opinions on whether it achieves its goals and how useful it is in explaining the topics for an article review. Decide if the paper contributes to its field and is important and credible to the given field. Back up all the claims with evidence from the summary or another source. If using another text, remember to cite it correctly in the bibliography section. Look at how strong the points are and do they contribute to the argument. Try to identify any biases the writer might have and use this to make a fair critique. This part is only for opinions of the piece's significance, not including whether you liked it. Furthermore, the different types of audiences that would benefit from the paper can be mentioned in this section.

Article Review Conclusion

In the conclusion section of the critique, there should only be one or two paragraphs in which a summary of key points and opinions in the piece are included. Also, summarize the paper's significance to its field and how accurate the work is. Depending on the type of critique or work evaluated, it is also possible to include comments on future research or the topic to be discussed further.

If other sources have been used, construct a bibliography section and correctly cite all works utilized in the critique. 

The APA format is very common in an article review and stands for American Psychology Association. This will include a 'references list' at the end of the critique and in-text citations, mentioning the author's last name, page number, and publication date.

There are also MLA and Chicago formats for citations with slight differences in a name, like using a 'works cited' page for MLA. More can be found in this guide on the subtle differences between the types of citation methods under the heading 'Creating a bibliography.'

Article Review Example

Article review writing tips.

If you are interested in best scholarships for high school seniors , the following tips will be handy while writing your essay or article:

  • Allow enough time to complete the research and writing of the critique. The number one problem with creating a critique is running out of time to make it the best it can be. This can be avoided by effective planning and keeping on time with the deadlines you set out.
  • Collect twice more research than you think is needed to write a review. This will help when coming to the writing stage as not all the information collected will be used in the final draft.
  • Write in a style that is compatible with the work being critiqued. This will be better for whoever requested the critique and also will make paper easier to construct.
  • A summary and evaluation must be written. Do not leave out either part as one complements the other and is vital to create a critique worth reading.
  • Be clear and explain well every statement made about the piece . Everything that is unknown to professionals in the field should be explained and all comments should be easy to follow for the reader.
  • Do not just describe the work, analyze and interpret it. The critique should be in depth and give the audience some detailed interpretations of the work in a professional way.
  • Give an assessment of the quality in the writing and of what standard it is. Evaluate every aspect in the paper so that the audience can see where it fits into the rest of the related works. Give opinions based on fact and do not leave any comments without reason as this will not count for anything.

How to Write an Article Review?

Writing a review article is not that hard if you know what steps to take. Below is a step-by-step guide on how to write a review example quickly and easily.

  • Before You Start

Before you start writing your review essay, there are a few pre-writing steps to take. The pre-writing process should consist of the following steps:

  • Pick the subject of your review (if it wasn’t specified by your professor);
  • Read the article fully multiple times;
  • Summarize the main ideas, points, and claims made in the article;
  • Define the positive (strong) aspects;
  • Identify the gaps or inconsistencies;
  • Find the questions that remained unanswered.

All these steps are needed to help you define the direction for your review article and find the main ideas you’d like to cover in it.

After you review articles and define the key ideas, gaps, and other details, map out your future paper by creating a detailed outline.

Here are the core elements that must be included:

  • Pre-title page;
  • Corresponding author details (optional);
  • Running head (only for the APA style);
  • Summary page (optional);
  • Title page;
  • Introduction;
  • References/Works Cited;
  • Suggested Reading page (optional);
  • Tables and Figure Legends (if required by the professor).

This step is vital to organize your thoughts and ensure a proper structure of your work. Thus, be sure not to skip this step.

When you have an outline, students can move on to the writing stage by formulating compelling titles for their article reviews. Titles should be declarative, interrogative, or descriptive to reflect the core focus of the paper.

  • Article Citation

After the title should follow a proper citation of the piece you are going to review. Write a citation according to the required style, and feel free to check out a well-written article review example to see how it should look like.

  • Article Identification

Start the first paragraph of your review with concise and clear article identification that specifies its title, author, name of the resource (e.g., journal, web, etc.), and the year of publication.

Following the identification, write a short introductory paragraph. It should be to the point and state a clear thesis for your review.

  • Summary and Critique

In the main body of your article review, you should first make a detailed but not too extensive summary of the article you reviewed, its main ideas, statements, and findings. In this part, you should also reflect on the conclusion made by the author of the original article.

After a general summary should follow an objective critique. In this part of your paper, you have to state and analyze the main strengths and weaknesses of the article. Also, you need to point out any gaps or unanswered questions that are still there. And clarify your stance on the author’s assertions.

Lastly, you need to craft a compelling conclusion that recaps the key points of your review and gives the final, logical evaluation of the piece that was reviewed.

After this, proofread your work and submit it.

No Time Left For Your Due Assignment

Now we hope you understand how to write a review of an article. However, we know that writing a great article review requires a lot of time to properly research the work. To save your precious time, visit EssayService, where our team of top essay writers will help you. The team can even provide you with the best article review topics! You can learn more at the college essay writing service page where we have free guides with all the essay writing tips and tricks!

Frequently asked questions

She was flawless! first time using a website like this, I've ordered article review and i totally adored it! grammar punctuation, content - everything was on point

This writer is my go to, because whenever I need someone who I can trust my task to - I hire Joy. She wrote almost every paper for me for the last 2 years

Term paper done up to a highest standard, no revisions, perfect communication. 10s across the board!!!!!!!

I send him instructions and that's it. my paper was done 10 hours later, no stupid questions, he nailed it.

Sometimes I wonder if Michael is secretly a professor because he literally knows everything. HE DID SO WELL THAT MY PROF SHOWED MY PAPER AS AN EXAMPLE. unbelievable, many thanks

You Might Also Like

Film Analysis Example: A Complete Guide to Ace Your Task

New Posts to Your Inbox!

Stay in touch

From the Editors: How to write a high-quality review

  • Published: 09 July 2013
  • Volume 44 , pages 547–553, ( 2013 )

Cite this article

  • Paula Caligiuri 1 &
  • David C Thomas  

14k Accesses

16 Citations

7 Altmetric

Explore all metrics

The peer review process is widely used by academic journals, including the Journal of International Business Studies ( JIBS ), to evaluate the quality of manuscript submissions relative to the journals’ scholarly goals. Our overview suggests that the best reviews also facilitate the introduction of new and important ideas to the field. Content analysis of 156 past JIBS reviews found that the best reviews (highly rated reviews written by reviewers who won the JIBS best reviewer award in 2011 and 2012) shared many key features, including a focus on the overall contribution (potential impact) of the manuscript, a positive tone and specific suggestions for improvement. We also surveyed current JIBS action editors and found that, despite the importance of high-quality reviews for the advancement of the field, few recalled being formally trained or mentored on how to write them. To better understand the features of a good review, the editors rated the various features of the peer reviews on helpfulness, and they also rated how often these features are present in the reviews they receive. Based on the survey of action editors and the content analysis of previous reviews, this editorial offers detailed guidance for current and future reviewers on how to write helpful, developmental and possibly even award-winning peer reviews.

Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.

INTRODUCTION

The peer review process is a cornerstone for maintaining the standards of leading scholarly journals such as the Journal of International Business Studies ( JIBS ). We acknowledge the many criticisms of the process (e.g., Bedeian, 2004 ; Suls & Martin, 2009 ; Tsang & Frey, 2007 ) but agree with Miller (2006 : 425), who noted that “although this system of peer review is well accepted, it is far from perfect. Many would characterize it just as Winston Churchill characterized democracy – ‘it is the worst possible system except for all others.’ ” While perhaps not ideal, peer review is a good system and one that can be improved through the quality of the reviews written. It is in this spirit that we investigated the characteristics of the best JIBS reviews in order to offer specific guidance on how to write high-quality reviews.

JIBS is similar to other scholarly journals in its reliance on reviewer anonymity, in our case through a double-blind peer review process. The procedure at JIBS is to place into the review process the submitted manuscripts that meet the “minimum JIBS norms for fit, quality, and contribution to IB” ( JIBS Statement of Editorial Policy) ( http://www.palgrave-journals.com/jibs/jibs_statement.html ). Specifically, all manuscripts are read by the Reviewing Editor (RE), who forwards each paper to either the Editor-in-Chief (EIC) or Deputy Editor (DE), depending on the topic area. This central editorial team (RE, EIC and DE) evaluates whether or not a manuscript is well developed enough to be sent out for review, and in particular whether it lies within the scope of the journal, which covers the domain of the international business field as set out in our Statement of Editorial Policy, as well as assessing a checklist against minimum standards. Based on this initial evaluation, the EIC or DE either desk rejects the manuscript or assigns it to one of the Area Editors (or in some cases a Consulting Editor) as the action editor. Note that JIBS has a policy of desk reject and resubmit that allows authors to resubmit previously desk rejected manuscripts if they have been substantially revised according to the editor's recommendations. The initial review process is concerned not just with the screening of manuscripts for their fit and suitability for the journal, but more importantly it has the objective of assessing what might be the likely impact of a paper on the field as a whole, from the perspective of international business scholarship in general. A key aim we have for the journal review process is that it should combine constructive suggestions for revision to take account of subject and topic-specific concerns on a particular study from the viewpoint of specialists in the relevant research area, along with the objective of developing articles that have the capacity to attract interest and attention among international business scholars more widely.

Action editors review the manuscript and can either desk reject the manuscript or send it out for review. Thus, before a manuscript is seen by reviewers it has already been reviewed by three JIBS editors as to whether or not it meets the minimum standards at the journal, and for an overview of where its potential contribution to the field might lie, with the goal that the nature of this contribution will emerge more clearly through the review process. The number of reviewers that are typical in the contributing disciplines to JIBS varies. At JIBS , two or three reviewers are selected by the action editor based on the reviewers’ expertise on the submitted manuscript's topic and method and are then sent the manuscript (which has been removed of author identifying information). JIBS asks reviewers to rate the manuscript as to its overall contribution, theory development, literature review, methods (if applicable), integration and style of presentation, and to suggest to the action editor if the manuscript should be accepted, rejected or invited to revise and resubmit. We also ask that reviewers provide detailed comments to authors, and we give reviewers the opportunity to make confidential comments to the action editor, which are not shared with authors. When the reviews are received, the action editors use this information as guidance and advice in reaching their editorial decision. When the action editors receive reviews, they also rate them as to quality on a 1–5 scale according to the following:

5 – Outstanding review (exceptionally high quality): This is reserved for cases where the review is of such high quality that the individual should be a candidate for JIBS Best Reviewer Award.
4 – Very good review: This review is insightful and truly developmental.
3 – Good review (average review): This review is critical but fair, constructive and reasonably comprehensive.
2 – Acceptable (but below average) review: This review is sketchy and below average.
1 – Poor review: This review reserved for cases where the review is of such low quality that the individual should no longer be used as a JIBS reviewer.

These scores, in part, comprise the data for determining the annual JIBS best reviewer awards. For this study, we used these scores to create a database of the best-rated and not so highly rated reviews over the past 2 years. An analysis of these reviews along with a survey of JIBS Editors provided the data for this editorial. With it we hope to provide guidance for current and future reviewers on how to write helpful, developmental and possibly even award-winning peer reviews.

THE FEATURES OF THE MOST HELPFUL REVIEWS: A SURVEY OF EDITORS

To better understand the features of the most helpful reviews, we surveyed the current JIBS action editors (EIC, DE, Consulting Editors, RE, Special Issue Editors and Area Editors), asking them to provide ratings on the helpfulness of 20 features of peer reviews. These features, listed in Appendix A , were adapted from the JIBS guidelines for peer reviews ( http://www.palgrave-journals.com/jibs/reviewer_guidelines.html ). Seventeen action editors responded.

The action editors surveyed were asked to rate each feature's helpfulness or usefulness to them as an editor. The scale ranged from 1=useless/very unimportant to 5=critical/extremely important. With the exception of one feature (The review corrects grammatical and typographical mistakes) all of the features of peer reviews were considered “helpful,” receiving scores around 4. The most helpful features – those with an average score over 4 – include:

The reviewer discloses any potential conflict of interest (usefulness mean=4.53).

The review makes plausible suggestions for improving the manuscript (usefulness mean=4.47).

The review offers advice on how problems in the manuscript could be addressed (usefulness mean=4.41).

The reviewer declines if he or she is feels unqualified to judge (usefulness mean=4.35).

The review indicates strengths (as well as weaknesses) of the manuscript (usefulness mean=4.35).

The review provides comments on the manuscript's overall contribution to the field (usefulness mean=4.24).

The review suggests alternate ways to analyze the data (usefulness mean=4.00).

Next, the action editors were asked to rate the frequency with which they observed each feature in the peer reviews they have received as editors. This scale ranged from 1=very rarely see this in reviews to 5=always see this in reviews. Across the key features, the editors report that these features “occasionally” appear in the reviews, scoring them around 3. The mean frequency scores for these most helpful features are as follows:

The review indicates strengths (as well as weaknesses) of the manuscript (frequency mean=3.44).

The review makes plausible suggestions for improving the manuscript (frequency mean=3.38).

The review provides comments on the manuscript's overall contribution to the field (frequency mean=3.37).

The review offers advice on how problems in the manuscript could be addressed (frequency mean=3.37).

The reviewer declines if he or she is feels unqualified to judge (frequency mean=3.08).

The reviewer discloses any potential conflict of interest (frequency mean=2.44).

The review suggests alternate ways to analyze the data (frequency mean=2.94).

The most helpful features were echoed in the final, open-ended question asking the action editors, “What is the most important thing a review should contain in order to be helpful to you in making an editorial decision?” Some editors listed more than one feature for a total of 30 comments. Many of the comments (11 out of 30) focused on describing the potential contribution or added value of the paper. Sample responses around this theme included:

An assessment of the contribution to the field and theory … how important are the ideas?Assess the significance of the manuscript to the literatureAn assessment of the potential contribution to the field

This indicates to us that editors are at least as concerned with introducing innovative concepts to the field as they are with quality control.

Consistent with the importance of evaluating the potential impact of the article, a number of comments (6 out of 30) focused on offering constructive and specific suggestions for improvement on theory and analyses. Sample responses around this theme included:

Information about directions for improving the manuscriptA sense of what can be done to improve the paper and what cannot be doneMake constructive suggestions for improving the manuscript

Offering ways of improving the manuscript was also reflected by the editors whose comments (7 out of 30) mentioned that it was helpful for the reviewers to point out the strengths/appropriateness and weaknesses/inappropriateness of particular analytic strategies or theoretical arguments. Sample responses around this theme included:

Identify and articulate the main strengths and weaknesses of a manuscript, both in the conceptual part and empirical partIdentification of the key shortcomingsIdentify fatal errors in research design/methods

In summary, the open-ended comments echoed the results of the survey, which focused on the importance of peer reviews identifying and helping to bring to the surface the most important contribution of the manuscript as opposed to simply erecting barriers that authors must overcome in order to see their work published. That is, while quality control is important, it is not the overriding factor that editors are looking for in a review.

THE FEATURES OF THE BEST PEER REVIEWS: A CONTENT ANALYSIS

As a complementary means of assessing the characteristics of high-quality reviews, we content analyzed the comments to authors sections of reviews received from July 2010 through June 2012 that met two criteria: (1) had quality ratings of either 4 or 5 and (2) were written by 1 of the 17 individuals who won the JIBS best reviewer award in 2011 and 2012 (10 awarded each year, 3 people won both years). Based on these criteria the JIBS Managing Editor removed identifying information and extracted the 78 reviews in this category, which comprised the best reviews received during this period. From the same 2-year time period, a random sample of 78 reviews was extracted that had quality ratings of either 1 or 2. Identifying information was removed and these reviews were included in the content analysis.

The two sets of reviews were analyzed with the aid of content analysis software (NVivo). Key terms used in coding were derived from the review of features in the Appendix , in particular a gap analysis of the delivered vs provided responses of editors, and from an exploratory word frequency analysis of the reviews. Once themes were established, segments of text ranging from a few words to several sentences were categorized as fitting the theme. The basic differences in the two sets of reviews and the main themes that emerged are the following:

The best reviews were longer. Best reviews were 1403 words on average, compared with 438 words in the less effective reviews. It is not length per se that is the important aspect here, but that longer reviewers were indicative of more complete and in-depth coverage of issues. Shorter reviews often covered as many points but in a fairly cryptic manner with little explanation. The longer reviews also tended to include full citations for the authors to consider referencing rather than offering a passing suggestion about other references (without specifics).

The best reviews did not make an obvious recommendation in the comments to authors (e.g., paper should be rejected). None of the best reviews did this, compared with 6.5% of the less effective reviews. Reviewers are provided an opportunity to make a recommendation as to the disposition of the manuscript in the evaluation form and in their confidential comments to the action editor. More often than not, reviewers do not agree on the appropriate outcome of the editorial process, and making this opinion known in comments to authors is not helpful.

The best reviews gave complete references to sources cited 17.9% of the time. The less effective reviews did this 6.5% of the time. This is just good form and indicates the kind of collegial and conversational style that is prevalent in the best reviews as discussed ahead.

The best reviews focused on the contribution or potential contribution 85% of the time. The less effective reviews did this 49% of the time. Again, this aspect of the review is most important to review quality. The best examples of this were very clear and concise statements of how the manuscript could potentially influence the field and what the reviewer found interesting or unique about the potential contribution. It is important to note that this focus was evident even in reviews where the reviewer was recommending that the manuscript be rejected.

The best reviews used a numbered or indexed format 89% of the time. The less effective reviews did this 38% of the time. Obviously, editors like this, because it makes it easier to refer to specific comments in the reviews. And it allows authors to be systematic in responses to reviewer comments.

The best reviews used a more positive tone 55% of the time and a more neutral tone 43% of the time. They used a negative tone only 2% of the time. The less effective reviews used a more positive tone 45% of the time and a more neutral tone 31% of the time. They used a negative tone 24% of the time. Some of the less effective reviews were inconsistent in tone at times (e.g., positive at outset and overly negative comments at the end). Perhaps the best way to describe the tone of the best reviews is collegial. That is, they read like a discussion between colleagues who respect each other as opposed to a restaurant review where the critic did not like the meal.

From the perspective of decisions, the opinions of the better reviews tended to align more closely with the editors’ opinions. The editors agreed with the best reviews 89% of the time and 49% with the less effective reviews. This alignment is possibly the result of the fact that the better reviewers had taken the time to become more familiar with JIBS Statement of Editorial Policy. Certainly every reviewer should be very familiar with the journal's policies before conducting a review. It does not appear that the quality of the reviews affected rejection rates, which were comparable in both sets of reviews.

The gap analysis of desired vs provided features of peer reviews indicated that the key areas on which editors focused were comments on the overall contribution to the field, advice on how problems in the manuscript could be addressed, plausible suggestions for improving the manuscript and suggestions for alternate ways to analyze the data. Content analysis of reviews based on these themes, as well as themes derived from word frequency, indicated that the best reviewers were much more focused on providing information that would be useful in surfacing the unique contribution of the manuscript as opposed to simply identifying deficiencies. And of course this is consistent with the goal of JIBS to publish research that is insightful, innovative and impactful.

GUIDELINES FOR WRITING AN EXCELLENT REVIEW

The following advice is derived from the qualitative assessment of top reviews and the survey responses of action editors on specific elements of excellent reviews. The top five are offered in the following:

Focus the review on the potential contribution : The primary issue for peer reviewers should be the extent to which the manuscript has the potential to make a meaningful contribution to the field of interest. In the case of JIBS , based on your knowledge of the field, identify for the editor (and author) where the potential contribution lies and what must be done to realize that potential. That is, how does or might the paper advance our collective understanding in international business from the lens of your field (e.g., marketing, finance, management)?

Offer details about the strengths and the weakness of the paper : As guardians of the knowledge creation in our respective fields, we are trained to have critical and questioning eyes. Thus, identifying weaknesses is the easiest part of the reviewer's job. However, it is the strengths of the manuscript that provide the platform for development, so it is helpful to identify the strengths of the manuscript along with the weaknesses.

Offer specific and constructive feedback for ways to address problems : The ability to critique, find fatal flaws, suggest alternative explanations and identify problems with methodology and theory are, collectively, half of the skill of great reviewers. The other, and often more difficult, half is to offer constructive suggestions on realistic ways to address a given concern ( Kohli, 2011 ).

Evaluate your objectivity and ability to review before agreeing : For obvious reasons, it is important for potential reviewers to disclose any conflict of interest that might impair their objective judgment, such as familiarity with the manuscript or a personal relationship with the authors. It is often difficult for editors to know about professional relationships between, say, former advisors and advisees, or among co-authors and colleagues. And being overly familiar with a manuscript or its authors has the potential to impair objectivity. To preserve this objectivity, reviewers are encouraged not to try to identify authors by conducting an electronic search of their posted working papers, curriculum vitae and conference presentations ( Hillman & Rynes, 2007 ). At the same time, it is also acceptable to decline to review because you do not feel as though you have the expertise to make a fair judgment on the contribution.

Improve the mechanics your review : Your review should follow a logical order. Often, although not always, the points are written in the same order of the manuscripts’ sections. It is helpful for authors (and the editors) if points are numbered, allowing responses to flow more logically. If you are suggesting additional references, add the complete reference to the review. And, please, do not indicate an editorial decision in the comments to authors.

Of course these suggestions alone are insufficient, as writing an excellent review is as much art as it is science and requires striking a balance between being positive and constructive yet critical and challenging. And it also involves offering ways of resolving research problems while respecting the objective and goals of the author. Footnote 1

IMPLICATIONS FOR GRADUATE SCHOOL TRAINING

Writing high-quality peer reviews, while critical for JIBS and other scholarly journals, is a skill rarely trained, coached or developed. Senior scholars are encouraged to mentor future potential referees “to develop and reinforce peer review skills and capabilities” ( Carpenter, 2009 : 191). Curious to learn how senior scholars learned to write reviews, we asked the action editors the open ended question, “How did you learn to write peer reviews?”

If this group of action editors is representative of the larger body of reviewers, it seems that most learn of us learn from experience, one review at a time. Most of the editors wrote that they learned how to write reviews “by doing them”; some further refined this “learning by doing,” describing that they reviewed for conferences to gain experience. Others refined “learning by doing” by reflecting on how their reviews compared with the editor's letter and other reviewers’ comments on the papers they reviewed. Many reviewers learn how to conduct reviews by mimicking the style of the most helpful reviews they have received. About two-thirds of the editors learned how to review by reading the reviews of their own papers. Some of the action editors (5 of the 17) credited their graduate school training or their advisors in preparing them for how to write a review. They recalled having sessions on how to write reviews in their PhD seminars, having to write mock reviews and receiving feedback on their early efforts.

While experience as reviewers might increase over time, it seems that we rarely receive constructive feedback on our reviews (outside of graduate school or when we request such feedback). Feedback is limited to “best reviewer” awards at one extreme and not being asked to review by the same journal twice at the other. In both cases, we might get the message, but without ever understanding what made our reviews great (or not so great). To prepare the next generation of scholars to be able to write high-quality peer reviews, we recommend the following for doctoral programs:

Offer formal training on how to write a peer review.

Offer feedback on first reviews, perhaps comparing actual reviews with practice reviews.

Encourage graduate students to review for conferences – and offer feedback their comments.

Teach an approach for continually developing reviewer skills (how to evaluate the reviews received on one's own work, how to compare one's review with other reviews for the same manuscript, how to compare one's review with the editors comments on the review conducted).

Mentor young scholars on the mechanics of how journals are managed from an editorial perspective (e.g., getting on editorial boards, the importance of conducting ad hoc reviews, the way in which reviews are rated).

Excellent reviewers are a “scarce and valuable resource” ( Marchionini, 2008 ). Northcraft (2001) found that more senior scholars with the greatest levels of expertise are less likely to agree to ad hoc reviewing. However, Rynes (2006) found a negative relationship between reviewers’ professional age and review quality and suggested that the mix of more professionally junior and senior reviewers would balance innovation with established wisdom. Whether the reviewers are senior or junior, encouraging excellence in reviews is of critical importance to continuing to advance our field with breakthrough ideas along with attention to theoretical and methodological rigor. A list of 20 review features is offered in Appendix A . These could provide a guide for the training of junior scholars to build skills as effective reviewers.

In writing this editorial we drew on the expertise of the current set of JIBS editors as well as an analysis of some of the best (and not so good) reviews by JIBS reviewers over the past 2 years. Reviewing papers for JIBS is a voluntary activity but an activity that goes to the heart of maintaining and enhancing the field of international business. It was a privilege to read some of the best reviews conducted by JIBS reviewers over the past few years and to contrast them with their more run-of-the-mill cousins. We hope our synthesis and report of this activity will be helpful as we all try to perfect our skills in this important endeavor.

We thank the JIBS EIC for reminding us of this.

Bedeian, A. G. 2004. Peer review and the social construction of knowledge in the management discipline. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 3 (2): 198–216.

Article   Google Scholar  

Carpenter, M. A. 2009. Editor's comments: Mentoring colleagues in the craft and spirit of peer review. Academy of Management Review, 34 (2): 191–195.

Hillman, A. J., & Rynes, S. L. 2007. The future of double-blind review in management. Journal of Management Studies, 44 (4): 622–627.

Kohli, A. K. 2011. From the editor: Reflections on the review process. Journal of Marketing, 75: 1–4.

Marchionini, G. 2008. Editorial: Reviewer merits and review control in an age of electronic manuscript management systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 26 (4): 1–6.

Google Scholar  

Miller, C. C. 2006. Peer review in the organizational and management sciences: Prevalence and effects of reviewer hostility, bias, and dissensus. Academy of Management Journal, 49 (3): 425–431.

Northcraft, G. B. 2001. From the editors. Academy of Management Journal, 44 (6): 1079–1080.

Rynes, S. L. 2006. “Getting on board” with AMJ: Balancing quality and innovation in the review process. Academy of Management Journal, 49 (6): 1097–1102.

Suls, J., & Martin, R. 2009. The air we breathe: A critical look at practices and alternatives in the peer review process. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4 (1): 40–50.

Tsang, E. W. K., & Frey, B. 2007. The as-is journal review process: Let authors own their ideas. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 6 (1): 128–136.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

D'Amore-McKim School of Business, Northeastern University, 360 Huntington Avenue, Boston, 02115, MA, USA

Paula Caligiuri

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paula Caligiuri .

Additional information

1 Area Editors

Features of peer reviews

The review is completed in the time allotted.

The review uses the correct perspective and does not offer an editorial opinion (accept, reject, revise) in comments to the author.

The review provides suggestions for missing citations.

The review is separated into major and minor points.

The points in the review numbered or indexed in some way.

The review provides comments on the manuscript's overall contribution to the field.

The review comments on the suitability of the manuscript for JIBS .

The review indicates strengths (as well as weaknesses) of the manuscript.

The review offers advice on how problems in the manuscript could be addressed.

The review makes plausible suggestions for improving the manuscript.

The review corrects grammatical and typographical mistakes.

The review suggests alternate ways to analyze the data.

The review provides an explanation of why a particular comment was made.

The review is honest in the “comments to the author” (i.e., does not provide a different opinion to you from what is written to the authors).

The review is written in a way that is sensitive to manuscript submissions from authors whose native language is not English.

The review is written in language that is polite and respectful.

The comments are directed to the manuscript (as opposed to the author).

The review is free of personal or professional (discipline) biases.

The reviewer discloses any potential conflict of interest.

The reviewer declines if he or she is feels unqualified to judge.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Caligiuri, P., Thomas, D. From the Editors: How to write a high-quality review. J Int Bus Stud 44 , 547–553 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2013.24

Download citation

Published : 09 July 2013

Issue Date : 01 August 2013

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2013.24

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

  • peer reviews
  • blind reviews
  • editorial process

Advertisement

  • Find a journal
  • Publish with us
  • Track your research

Useful Links

Share on Facebook

How to Write an Article Review That Stands Out

blog image

An article review is a critical assessment of another writer’s  research paper  or scholarly article. Such an activity aims to expand one’s knowledge by evaluating the original author’s research.

Of course, writing an article review could be tricky. But a few expert tips and tricks can get you on the right track. That’s what this interesting blog post is all about. So, ensure you read it till the end to make the most out of it.

Table of Contents

A Step-by-step Guide on How to Write an Article Review

Master the art of writing an article review with this step-by-step guide from professional  paper help  providers. 

Step 1: Select the Right Article

The first step is to pick a suitable article for a review. Choose a scholarly source that’s connected to your area of study. You can look for pieces printed in trustworthy journals or by respected authors.

For Example:

For reviewing an article on climate change, consider selecting one from scientific journals like Nature or Science.

Step 2: Read and Understand the Article

It’s super important to read and understand the article before writing your review. Read the article a few times and jot down the notes as you go. Focus on the main arguments, major points, evidence, and how it’s structured. 

Let’s say you’re looking at an article on how social media affects mental health. Ensure to take note of the following: 

  • The number of people involved 
  • How the data is analyzed 
  • The Results 

Step 3: Structure and Introduction

To start a solid review, start with an introduction that gives readers the background info they need. Must include the article’s title, the author, and where it was published. Also, write a summary of the main point or argument in the article.

“In the article ‘The Impact of Social Media on Mental Health by John Smith, published in the Journal of Psychology: 

The author examines the correlation between excessive social media usage and adolescent mental health disorders.”

Step 4: Summarize the Article

In this part, you’ll need to quickly go over the main points and arguments from the article. Make it short but must cover the most important elements and the evidence that backs them up. Leave your opinions and analysis out of it for now. 

For instance, you could write:

“The author discusses various studies highlighting the negative effects of excessive social media usage on mental health.

Smith’s research reveals a significant correlation between 

Increased social media consumption and higher rates of anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem among teenagers. 

The article also explores the underlying mechanisms, such as social comparison and cyberbullying. All are contributing to the adverse mental health outcomes.”

Step 5: Critically Analyze and Evaluate

Now that you’ve given a rundown of the article, it’s time to take a closer look. Think about what the author did well and what could have been done better. 

Check out the proof they used and if it seems solid. Give a thorough assessment, and use examples from the text to support your thoughts. 

For Example

“While the article presents compelling evidence linking social media usage to mental health issues , it is important to acknowledge some limitations in Smith’s study. 

The sample size of the research was relatively small. It comprises only 100 participants, which may limit the generalizability of the findings. 

Additionally, the study primarily focused on one specific age group, namely adolescents. This way, there’s room for further research on other demographic groups.”

Step 6: Express Your Perspective

Here’s your chance to give your two cents and show off your smarts. Put your spin on the article by pointing out the pros, cons, and other potential improvements. Remember to back up your thoughts with facts and sound arguments.

Continuing with the Previous Example

Despite the limitations, Smith’s research offers valuable insights into the complex relationship between social media and mental health. 

Future studies could expand the sample size and include a more diverse range of age groups. It is better to understand the broader impact of social media on mental well-being. 

Furthermore, exploring strategies for developing digital literacy programs could be potential avenues for future research.

Step 7: Conclusion and Final Thoughts

At the end of your article review, wrap it up with a brief and powerful conclusion. Give a summary of your main points and overall thoughts about the article. 

Point out its importance to the field and the impact of the study. Finish off with a thought-provoking conclusion. Give the reader a sense of finality and emphasize the need for additional research or discussion.

For instance

“In conclusion, John Smith’s article provides valuable insights into the detrimental effects of excessive social media usage on adolescent mental health. 

While the research has limitations, it serves as a starting point for further investigation in this rapidly evolving field. 

By addressing the research gaps and implementing targeted interventions: 

We can strive to promote a healthier relationship between social media and mental well-being in our digitally connected society.”

Step 8: Editing and Proofreading

Before submission, set aside some time for editing and proofreading. 

Ensure everything makes sense and everything is correct. Check out how it reads and if your points come across clearly. Get feedback from other people to get a different point of view and make it even better.

Types of Article Reviews

In college, you might be asked to write different types of review articles, including: 

Narrative Review

This type of review needs you to look into the author’s background and experiences. You have to go through the specialist’s theories and practices and compare them. For the success of a narrative review, ensure that your arguments are qualitative and make sense.

Evidence Review

For a solid evidence paper, you got to put in the work and study the topic. You’ll need to research the facts, analyze the author’s ideas, their effects, and more. 

Systematic Review

This task involves reviewing a bunch of research papers and summarizing the existing knowledge about a certain subject. A systematic paper type uses an organized approach and expects you to answer questions linked to the research.

Tips for Writing a Great Article Review

Here are some expert tips you could use to write an exceptional article review:

1. Figure out the main points you want to cover and why they matter.

  • It will help you zero in on the key points.

2. Look for and assess pertinent sources, both from the past and present.

  • It will give you a better understanding of the article you’re looking at.

3. Come Up with a Catchy Title, Summarize Your Topic in an Abstract, and Select Keywords

  • It will help people read your review and get a good idea of what it’s about.

4. Write the main point of a review along with introducing the topic. 

  • It should help readers get a better grasp of the topic.

Outline for Writing a Good Article Review

Here’s an outline to write an excellent article review. 

Introduction

– Begin with a summary of the article 

– Put in background knowledge of the topic 

– State why you are writing the review 

– Give an overview of the article’s main points 

– Figure out why the author choose to write something 

– Look at the article and consider what it does well and what it could have done better.

– Highlight the shortcomings in the article

– Restate why you are writing the review 

– Sum up the main points in a few sentences 

– Suggest what could be achieved in the future research 

Review Article Example

Title: “The Power of Vulnerability: A Review of Brené Brown’s Daring Greatly”

Introduction:

In her revolutionary book “Daring Greatly,” 

Brené Brown, a renowned researcher and storyteller. Delves into vulnerability and how it can positively impact our lives, both professionally and personally. 

Brown’s work has gained lots of praise. Since it resonates with people looking to build real connections in a world that often feels isolated. 

This article looks to recap the main ideas and concepts from “Daring Greatly.” Also explains why it is such a captivating and insightful read.

Summary of Key Ideas:

“Daring Greatly” is all about how the vulnerability isn’t a sign of being weak. but it’s actually what it takes to be brave, strong and live a full life. 

Brene Brown examines how society and culture can make it hard to be vulnerable. And, how fear of being judged or shamed stops us from being our authentic selves.

The book puts a lot of emphasis on shame and how it affects us. 

Brown explains that shame thrives when it’s kept hidden away and can only be cured by being open, understanding, and compassionate. 

By admitting our weaknesses, we can create meaningful connections and a sense of community.

Brown looks into the connection between being open to vulnerability and unleashing creative leadership and innovation. 

She uses her own experiences and research to support her viewpoint. The book also gives useful advice on how to include vulnerability in different parts of life. Such as relationships, parenting, and the workplace.

Strengths of the Book:

Brown’s book is remarkable for her ability to mix her own experiences with comprehensive research. Combining her stories and evidence makes the material engaging and easy to understand. 

Plus, her writing style is so friendly that readers feel they’re being acknowledged and accepted.

There’s advice on how to be kind to yourself. Set your limits, and accept that things won’t always be perfect. It’s like a toolkit to help you build strength and make positive changes.

Final Verdict

This book is really helpful for everyone, no matter who you are. It can help you figure out how to grow in life, have better relationships, and become a better leader. Plus, since it applies to all kinds of people, everyone can get something out of it.

If you want to write a great article review, it’s important to pick the right article, understand and analyze it critically. Finally, express your thoughts on it clearly. Ensure to stay impartial, back up your points with evidence, and write clearly and coherently.

Still if you are having troubles writing an article review, don’t hesitate to count on the expertise of  our writers .

Get Your Custom Essay Writing Solution From Our Professional Essay Writer's

timely deliveries

Timely Deliveries

premium quality

Premium Quality

unlimited revisions

Unlimited Revisions

Calculate Your Order Price

Related blogs.

blog-img

Connections with Writers and support

safe service

Privacy and Confidentiality Guarantee

quality-score

Average Quality Score

The Tech Edvocate

  • Advertisement
  • Home Page Five (No Sidebar)
  • Home Page Four
  • Home Page Three
  • Home Page Two
  • Icons [No Sidebar]
  • Left Sidbear Page
  • Lynch Educational Consulting
  • My Speaking Page
  • Newsletter Sign Up Confirmation
  • Newsletter Unsubscription
  • Page Example
  • Privacy Policy
  • Protected Content
  • Request a Product Review
  • Shortcodes Examples
  • Terms and Conditions
  • The Edvocate
  • The Tech Edvocate Product Guide
  • Write For Us
  • Dr. Lynch’s Personal Website
  • The Edvocate Podcast
  • Assistive Technology
  • Child Development Tech
  • Early Childhood & K-12 EdTech
  • EdTech Futures
  • EdTech News
  • EdTech Policy & Reform
  • EdTech Startups & Businesses
  • Higher Education EdTech
  • Online Learning & eLearning
  • Parent & Family Tech
  • Personalized Learning
  • Product Reviews
  • Tech Edvocate Awards
  • School Ratings

3 Easy Ways to Clean Gutters Without a Ladder

How to get skinnier legs, growth mindset and how to achieve it: everything you need to know, what elearning professionals should know about true or false questions in elearning, how to turn off typing notification on snapchat, best 7 ways to make windows 11 look like windows 10, 5 best nintendo switch accessories in the uk, how to enable song lyrics on youtube music on mobile and desktop, top 5 fixes for the video scheduler internal error on windows 11, 9 ways to fix white screen on samsung and other android phones, how to write an article review (with sample reviews)  .

how to write a business article review

An article review is a critical evaluation of a scholarly or scientific piece, which aims to summarize its main ideas, assess its contributions, and provide constructive feedback. A well-written review not only benefits the author of the article under scrutiny but also serves as a valuable resource for fellow researchers and scholars. Follow these steps to create an effective and informative article review:

1. Understand the purpose: Before diving into the article, it is important to understand the intent of writing a review. This helps in focusing your thoughts, directing your analysis, and ensuring your review adds value to the academic community.

2. Read the article thoroughly: Carefully read the article multiple times to get a complete understanding of its content, arguments, and conclusions. As you read, take notes on key points, supporting evidence, and any areas that require further exploration or clarification.

3. Summarize the main ideas: In your review’s introduction, briefly outline the primary themes and arguments presented by the author(s). Keep it concise but sufficiently informative so that readers can quickly grasp the essence of the article.

4. Evaluate the strengths and weaknesses: In subsequent paragraphs, assess the strengths and limitations of the article based on factors such as methodology, quality of evidence presented, coherence of arguments, and alignment with existing literature in the field. Be fair and objective while providing your critique.

5. Discuss any implications: Deliberate on how this particular piece contributes to or challenges existing knowledge in its discipline. You may also discuss potential improvements for future research or explore real-world applications stemming from this study.

6. Provide recommendations: Finally, offer suggestions for both the author(s) and readers regarding how they can further build on this work or apply its findings in practice.

7. Proofread and revise: Once your initial draft is complete, go through it carefully for clarity, accuracy, and coherence. Revise as necessary, ensuring your review is both informative and engaging for readers.

Sample Review:

A Critical Review of “The Effects of Social Media on Mental Health”

Introduction:

“The Effects of Social Media on Mental Health” is a timely article which investigates the relationship between social media usage and psychological well-being. The authors present compelling evidence to support their argument that excessive use of social media can result in decreased self-esteem, increased anxiety, and a negative impact on interpersonal relationships.

Strengths and weaknesses:

One of the strengths of this article lies in its well-structured methodology utilizing a variety of sources, including quantitative surveys and qualitative interviews. This approach provides a comprehensive view of the topic, allowing for a more nuanced understanding of the effects of social media on mental health. However, it would have been beneficial if the authors included a larger sample size to increase the reliability of their conclusions. Additionally, exploring how different platforms may influence mental health differently could have added depth to the analysis.

Implications:

The findings in this article contribute significantly to ongoing debates surrounding the psychological implications of social media use. It highlights the potential dangers that excessive engagement with online platforms may pose to one’s mental well-being and encourages further research into interventions that could mitigate these risks. The study also offers an opportunity for educators and policy-makers to take note and develop strategies to foster healthier online behavior.

Recommendations:

Future researchers should consider investigating how specific social media platforms impact mental health outcomes, as this could lead to more targeted interventions. For practitioners, implementing educational programs aimed at promoting healthy online habits may be beneficial in mitigating the potential negative consequences associated with excessive social media use.

Conclusion:

Overall, “The Effects of Social Media on Mental Health” is an important and informative piece that raises awareness about a pressing issue in today’s digital age. Given its minor limitations, it provides valuable

3 Ways to Make a Mini Greenhouse ...

3 ways to teach yourself to play ....

' src=

Matthew Lynch

Related articles more from author.

how to write a business article review

6 Ways to Invite People to a Party

how to write a business article review

How to Handle Haters and Jealous People

how to write a business article review

How to Create Glitter Tears: 12 Steps

how to write a business article review

Easy Ways to Ask a Girl to Be Your Girlfriend

how to write a business article review

How to Start an Awareness Campaign

how to write a business article review

3 Ways to Preserve a Pineapple

Questions? Call us: 

Email: 

  • How it works
  • Testimonials

Essay Writing

  • Essay service
  • Essay writers
  • College essay service
  • Write my essay
  • Pay for essay
  • Essay topics

Term Paper Writing

  • Term paper service
  • Buy term papers
  • Term paper help
  • Term paper writers
  • College term papers
  • Write my term paper
  • Pay for term paper
  • Term paper topic

Research Paper Writing

  • Research paper service
  • Buy research paper
  • Research paper help
  • Research paper writers
  • College research papers
  • Write my research paper
  • Pay for research paper
  • Research paper topics

Dissertation Writing

  • Dissertation service
  • Buy dissertation
  • Dissertation help
  • Dissertation writers
  • College thesis
  • Write my dissertation
  • Pay for dissertation
  • Dissertation topics

Other Services

  • Custom writing services
  • Speech writing service
  • Movie review writing
  • Editing service
  • Assignment writing
  • Article writing service
  • Book report writing
  • Book review writing

Popular request:

  • How To Write Article Review Like Professional

May 3, 2022

Do you have an article review assignment, and it is proving challenging? Writing an article review is never easy for many scholars and students because it demands top-notch analytical and writing skills, but this guide will help you turn the tables.

how to write an article review

An article review task requires students and scholars to evaluate the works of other experts in their fields of study to determine originality, clarity, and contribution to the respective discipline. This post is a detailed guide to writing an A-rated article review.

This post will help you learn what an article review is, the different categories, and a step-by-step guide for writing the review. Finally, you will get expert tips and an article review sample to further hone your skills.

Do not get content with poor or standard quality papers; here is how to do an article review like a pro!

Table of Contents

What is an article review, writing an article review: the main types of formats, article review outline for top grades, how to write a review of an article, special tips for writing a great article review outline, article review example.

This piece of writing assesses and summarizes another person’s article or work. The process involves understanding the primary theme of the article/post under consideration, supporting arguments, and possible implications for further studies. Here is a breakdown of what the process entails:

Analysis, classification, summarization, comparison, and critique of the article being reviewed. Assessing the use of key ideas, theories, and studies that are relevant to the subject of the article/post under review. Note that writing a review does not introduce new ideas. Instead, you only respond to another writer’s work.

Before we can look at how to write a journal article review, it is important to appreciate they fall into several categories, which include:

  • Journal Review This is a common type of article review and is used to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the selected publication. In a journal review, you need to do a deep analysis and interpretation that captures the value of the publication. If there are gaps in the article, you must highlight them too.
  • Research Article Review This type of review differs from a journal review in that it focuses more on the research methods that are employed in the publication under consideration. In addition, the research methods are compared with those from other related studies.
  • Scientific Article Review Science article reviews only focus on publications in scientific disciplines, from medicine to engineering. This type of article captures a detailed background of the targeted publication to help readers get a better understanding of the topic.

To write a great article review, it is important to start by developing an outline. Like other types of assignments, your article review should have a clearly defined introduction, body, and conclusion. In some cases, your university professors or teachers provide outlines to be used, but many are the times when you have to work out everything. Here is a sample of the best outlines that you can count on for A-rated reviews:

  • The Pre-Title Page : This part captures important details of the paper, such as the type of the article under review, publication title, and authors. Make sure also to include the author’s affiliations, such as their institution, position, country, and email ID.
  • Corresponding Author Details (optional): These details include things such as the address, name, phone number, fax number, and email.
  • Running Head : If you are preparing the article review in APA format, your title page should also have a running head. This is the title of the paper but shortened to about 40-50 characters.
  • Summary Page (Optional): This mainly depends on whether your lecturer wants it. If he/she does not want students to include it, avoid it. When writing this summary, limit the section to 800 words long and follow these four expert tips:
Provide relevant background. Tell readers why the work was done. Summarize the results. Explain the method used in the publication.
  • Title Page : This page should be restricted to about 250 words. Make sure that it has the most important keywords (about 4-6).
  • Introduction : Introduce your article by providing some highlights about what the reader should expect. Remember that you are not adding new information but only focusing on what the publication is about.
  • Body : Like a standard essay, this is where the bulk of the review goes. Make sure it is broken down into sections to make it easy for readers to get it right.
  • Conclusion : Use this section to wrap the main points that you brought out in the review paper.
  • References : Once you are through with the article review, include all the resources you used.

The process of writing a review article is pretty similar to a literature review. First, you must go through the publication several times to note the main arguments, counterarguments and gaps (if any) and then follow a pre-drawn outline to write the review. Here is a step-by-step guide on how to write a journal article review like a pro:

  • Step One : Put Down the Title The first step when writing an article review is to prepare a title that reflects your focus. So, do you want a declarative, descriptive, or interrogative title?
  • Step Two : Correctly Cite the Article The next step is correct citations for the publication under review. Keep in mind the article review format recommended by your teacher. Take the example of an article review following the MLA formatting guide. In such a case, the citation should take the format shown below:The name of the author. “Article Title.” Journal Title and Issue. Pages. Print.
Article title. Author. Journal Title. Year of Publication.

Make sure to put this information in the first paragraph of the review paper. Check out the demonstration of how to put it below:

Start by drawing a thesis for your review. Prepare a summary of the main points or arguments. Capture the positive aspects and facts in the publication under review. Critique the publication by checking major contradictions, gaps, and disparities. You might also want to check the key questions that go unanswered.
  • Step Five : Write Down the Summary of the PublicationYou can do this by revising what the publication’s author wrote about. Remember to capture crucial facts and findings that were brought out by the publication’s author. Also, include the conclusions drawn by the author.
  • Step Six : Critique the Publication/ Post under ReviewWhat strengths and weaknesses did you find in the publication? Present them at this point. Go ahead and highlight how the author has contributed to the discipline of interest. Also, write about the contradictions and gaps you find in the article.It is also important to take a standpoint on the assertions. Are you supporting or not supporting the main argument of the author? However, you need to ensure that your stand is supported by facts and appropriate theories. You might also want to use rubrics to assess the author.
  • Step Seven : Write Down the ConclusionThis is the last part of the article review, and it requires you to revisit the main points captured in your review paper. So, what were your findings? Here you need to write about the validity, accuracy, and relevance of the results presented in the publication. This is also the moment to point out the future for the topic and area of study.

The process can seem too long and exhausting to me. However, there’s no need to worry. You can hire professional writing services and get perfect result witj no efforts.

Now that you know how to write a good article review, are there ways that you can improve it? Here are some expert tips to consider:

  • Take your time to understand and analyze the publication of interest.
  • Make sure to target the main points for your review paper. Try to be as accurate as possible.
  • Use evidence from other sources and bring them out with direct quotes.
  • Always use the parenthetical citation for referencing. When offering advice on writing review article reviews, experts emphasize citations to help students avoid accidental plagiarism.
  • Reread your paper after a few hours or days to spot grammar, flow, and organization issues and fix them.
  • Consider reading several article reviews done by experts to hone your skills in preparing high-quality papers.
  • Always stick to your lecturer’s guidelines and recommendations.

Why are we going this deep to demonstrate how to prepare a high-quality article review? The answer is that preparing a college or university article review has been a huge challenge for many students. To help you craft even better article reviews, here is one of the best samples:

In the Forbes article, “Three Reasons why Amazon’s Cash Flow is No Comfort” (Trainer, 2014), the author dissects the financial reporting of the online retail giant, Amazon.com. According to the author, the negative or low earnings report, roughly $75 billion annually is not an accurate account of Amazon’s actual financial picture. While many of the Amazon “bulls” argue that viewing the earnings of the company does not provide the appropriate view of its financial position, Amazon’s CEO, Jeff Bezos’ position is that his focus for the company is in having a high free cash flow, rather than a focus on earnings per share. Yet, according to the author, while on the surface it appears that Amazon generates more cash flow than earnings per share, that in fact is a falsehood or imagery due to the way in which Amazon is reporting its financial situation. This articles looks delves into three factors of Amazon’s financial outlook: depreciation, stock-based compensation, and capital lease. It is these three factors, which show that Amazon’s reported operating cash flow is inflated. Amazon recorded $3.3 billion in depreciation, technically a non-cash expense, but in actuality cost $3.4 billion for the cost of purchases of property and equipment. The $1.1 billion stock based compensation gets added back into the operating cash flow, means that this is also a business cost. Within Amazon’s operating cash flows are the build-to-suit leases which totaled $2.7 billion. These costs can be deferred making it appear that Amazon’s cash flow is positive, at least in the long term. Another factor which argues against Amazon’s false front are the operating leases which are included in the financial footnotes, not included on the balance sheet. According to the author, Amazon is using loopholes in order to paint a better picture of its financial position. According to the author, Amazon has lost its position as a profitable online powerhouse. Trainer provides an analysis of Amazon’s invested capital turns since 2003 to show that despite the reports, after a seven year growth between 2003 and a peak in 2009, capital returns show a decline to nearly 2003 levels; revenue on the other hand has actually shown steady increases since 2003. How can invested capital turns peak and decline, despite steady revenue increases? According to the author it is due to efficiency, or lack thereof. Additionally, Amazon has quadrupled its advertising budget since 2009, showing that while revenue is increasing, so are expenses, resulting in the negative cash flow analysis. The article is very critical on how Amazon is reporting its financial health. With hundreds of people to employ and pay, will a negative report help the company maintain its current success or have the negative effect of shaking consumer and investor influence? The price of Amazon shares allows the company to keep its position is the marketplace, and pay stock options, even if the cost of those payouts is rolled back into the operating expenses and possibly decreases the cash flow. Yet keeping stock investors happy, keeps the doors open. The author is critical on the way in which Amazon is reporting its use of capital leases. Yet it is options such as these that keep businesses on the cutting edge and able to expand to meet demand. Its it wrong for Amazon to invest in other types of property ownership or use so that expenses are directly taken from the bottom line, or is this a way of doing business? The author is suggesting that Amazon is not being transparent in its operating of business. In the wake of dozens of companies coming under scrutiny to be more transparent and accurate in their reporting, the assessment of Amazon’s reporting structure is a natural response in keeping businesses accountable. Creative accounting allows companies to project an outward positive financial picture, when in reality business is nowhere near the money-making machine it is perceived to be. Is creative accounting an option for businesses to position it positively in order to stay in business? Is it wrong for a company to position itself more positively in order to stay in business? What will happen to Amazon if in fact all expenditures are reported and pit against the revenues? Articles such as this show the public that companies are making themselves look good in order to stay in business. When companies are not being transparent, it is necessary that professionals who understand accounting procedures to examine profit/loss statements and make those companies accountable. These research inquiries force companies to do what they should be doing. In contrast, it is also necessary for investors to do their due diligence and check on the accuracy of articles like this. Just as this author found data showing that Amazon’s cash flow is not what is being reported, there will be others who may find that Amazon’s financial picture and projections are just as Amazon is reporting. The actual picture may be different depending on who is looking. There is always an analyst who will argue that a company is not doing its due diligence just as there are companies who will report inflated financial results to remain in business and pay investors. Not only is transparency vital, but so is objectivity to ensure that the larger picture is the true focus of research in the financial pictures of companies.

Seek Writing Assistance with Your Article Review

After reading through this step-by-step guide, are you ready to get started with your article review? If you are still finding it challenging or not confident, the best way out is to get assistance from our research helpers . These are expert writers who understand the process of article review writing well and are willing to help and guarantee you top grades. It is like getting your school teachers to do the assignments.

Our experts are also fast, and they can get the job done even with a tight deadline. If your professors issued the article review assignment very close to the deadline or you forgot about the task and now want to get it done in a couple of hours, our online custom writing service will be very helpful.

Our writers are very responsible, and services are affordable. Visit us today to place your order or talk to our friendly support staff for all your article reviews or other assignment needs.

how to write a business article review

Take a break from writing.

Top academic experts are here for you.

  • How To Write An Autobiography Guideline And Useful Advice
  • 182 Best Classification Essay Topics To Learn And Write About
  • How To Manage Stress In College: Top Practical Tips  
  • How To Write A Narrative Essay: Definition, Tips, And A Step-by-Step Guide
  • Great Problem Solution Essay Topics
  • Creating Best Stanford Roommate Essay
  • Costco Essay – Best Writing Guide
  • How To Quote A Dialogue
  • Wonderful Expository Essay Topics
  • Research Paper Topics For 2020
  • Interesting Persuasive Essay Topics

Purdue Online Writing Lab Purdue OWL® College of Liberal Arts

Writing a Literature Review

OWL logo

Welcome to the Purdue OWL

This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.

Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.

A literature review is a document or section of a document that collects key sources on a topic and discusses those sources in conversation with each other (also called synthesis ). The lit review is an important genre in many disciplines, not just literature (i.e., the study of works of literature such as novels and plays). When we say “literature review” or refer to “the literature,” we are talking about the research ( scholarship ) in a given field. You will often see the terms “the research,” “the scholarship,” and “the literature” used mostly interchangeably.

Where, when, and why would I write a lit review?

There are a number of different situations where you might write a literature review, each with slightly different expectations; different disciplines, too, have field-specific expectations for what a literature review is and does. For instance, in the humanities, authors might include more overt argumentation and interpretation of source material in their literature reviews, whereas in the sciences, authors are more likely to report study designs and results in their literature reviews; these differences reflect these disciplines’ purposes and conventions in scholarship. You should always look at examples from your own discipline and talk to professors or mentors in your field to be sure you understand your discipline’s conventions, for literature reviews as well as for any other genre.

A literature review can be a part of a research paper or scholarly article, usually falling after the introduction and before the research methods sections. In these cases, the lit review just needs to cover scholarship that is important to the issue you are writing about; sometimes it will also cover key sources that informed your research methodology.

Lit reviews can also be standalone pieces, either as assignments in a class or as publications. In a class, a lit review may be assigned to help students familiarize themselves with a topic and with scholarship in their field, get an idea of the other researchers working on the topic they’re interested in, find gaps in existing research in order to propose new projects, and/or develop a theoretical framework and methodology for later research. As a publication, a lit review usually is meant to help make other scholars’ lives easier by collecting and summarizing, synthesizing, and analyzing existing research on a topic. This can be especially helpful for students or scholars getting into a new research area, or for directing an entire community of scholars toward questions that have not yet been answered.

What are the parts of a lit review?

Most lit reviews use a basic introduction-body-conclusion structure; if your lit review is part of a larger paper, the introduction and conclusion pieces may be just a few sentences while you focus most of your attention on the body. If your lit review is a standalone piece, the introduction and conclusion take up more space and give you a place to discuss your goals, research methods, and conclusions separately from where you discuss the literature itself.

Introduction:

  • An introductory paragraph that explains what your working topic and thesis is
  • A forecast of key topics or texts that will appear in the review
  • Potentially, a description of how you found sources and how you analyzed them for inclusion and discussion in the review (more often found in published, standalone literature reviews than in lit review sections in an article or research paper)
  • Summarize and synthesize: Give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole
  • Analyze and interpret: Don’t just paraphrase other researchers – add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole
  • Critically Evaluate: Mention the strengths and weaknesses of your sources
  • Write in well-structured paragraphs: Use transition words and topic sentence to draw connections, comparisons, and contrasts.

Conclusion:

  • Summarize the key findings you have taken from the literature and emphasize their significance
  • Connect it back to your primary research question

How should I organize my lit review?

Lit reviews can take many different organizational patterns depending on what you are trying to accomplish with the review. Here are some examples:

  • Chronological : The simplest approach is to trace the development of the topic over time, which helps familiarize the audience with the topic (for instance if you are introducing something that is not commonly known in your field). If you choose this strategy, be careful to avoid simply listing and summarizing sources in order. Try to analyze the patterns, turning points, and key debates that have shaped the direction of the field. Give your interpretation of how and why certain developments occurred (as mentioned previously, this may not be appropriate in your discipline — check with a teacher or mentor if you’re unsure).
  • Thematic : If you have found some recurring central themes that you will continue working with throughout your piece, you can organize your literature review into subsections that address different aspects of the topic. For example, if you are reviewing literature about women and religion, key themes can include the role of women in churches and the religious attitude towards women.
  • Qualitative versus quantitative research
  • Empirical versus theoretical scholarship
  • Divide the research by sociological, historical, or cultural sources
  • Theoretical : In many humanities articles, the literature review is the foundation for the theoretical framework. You can use it to discuss various theories, models, and definitions of key concepts. You can argue for the relevance of a specific theoretical approach or combine various theorical concepts to create a framework for your research.

What are some strategies or tips I can use while writing my lit review?

Any lit review is only as good as the research it discusses; make sure your sources are well-chosen and your research is thorough. Don’t be afraid to do more research if you discover a new thread as you’re writing. More info on the research process is available in our "Conducting Research" resources .

As you’re doing your research, create an annotated bibliography ( see our page on the this type of document ). Much of the information used in an annotated bibliography can be used also in a literature review, so you’ll be not only partially drafting your lit review as you research, but also developing your sense of the larger conversation going on among scholars, professionals, and any other stakeholders in your topic.

Usually you will need to synthesize research rather than just summarizing it. This means drawing connections between sources to create a picture of the scholarly conversation on a topic over time. Many student writers struggle to synthesize because they feel they don’t have anything to add to the scholars they are citing; here are some strategies to help you:

  • It often helps to remember that the point of these kinds of syntheses is to show your readers how you understand your research, to help them read the rest of your paper.
  • Writing teachers often say synthesis is like hosting a dinner party: imagine all your sources are together in a room, discussing your topic. What are they saying to each other?
  • Look at the in-text citations in each paragraph. Are you citing just one source for each paragraph? This usually indicates summary only. When you have multiple sources cited in a paragraph, you are more likely to be synthesizing them (not always, but often
  • Read more about synthesis here.

The most interesting literature reviews are often written as arguments (again, as mentioned at the beginning of the page, this is discipline-specific and doesn’t work for all situations). Often, the literature review is where you can establish your research as filling a particular gap or as relevant in a particular way. You have some chance to do this in your introduction in an article, but the literature review section gives a more extended opportunity to establish the conversation in the way you would like your readers to see it. You can choose the intellectual lineage you would like to be part of and whose definitions matter most to your thinking (mostly humanities-specific, but this goes for sciences as well). In addressing these points, you argue for your place in the conversation, which tends to make the lit review more compelling than a simple reporting of other sources.

U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

  • Publications
  • Account settings
  • Advanced Search
  • Journal List
  • Turk J Urol
  • v.39(Suppl 1); 2013 Sep

How to write a review article?

In the medical sciences, the importance of review articles is rising. When clinicians want to update their knowledge and generate guidelines about a topic, they frequently use reviews as a starting point. The value of a review is associated with what has been done, what has been found and how these findings are presented. Before asking ‘how,’ the question of ‘why’ is more important when starting to write a review. The main and fundamental purpose of writing a review is to create a readable synthesis of the best resources available in the literature for an important research question or a current area of research. Although the idea of writing a review is attractive, it is important to spend time identifying the important questions. Good review methods are critical because they provide an unbiased point of view for the reader regarding the current literature. There is a consensus that a review should be written in a systematic fashion, a notion that is usually followed. In a systematic review with a focused question, the research methods must be clearly described. A ‘methodological filter’ is the best method for identifying the best working style for a research question, and this method reduces the workload when surveying the literature. An essential part of the review process is differentiating good research from bad and leaning on the results of the better studies. The ideal way to synthesize studies is to perform a meta-analysis. In conclusion, when writing a review, it is best to clearly focus on fixed ideas, to use a procedural and critical approach to the literature and to express your findings in an attractive way.

The importance of review articles in health sciences is increasing day by day. Clinicians frequently benefit from review articles to update their knowledge in their field of specialization, and use these articles as a starting point for formulating guidelines. [ 1 , 2 ] The institutions which provide financial support for further investigations resort to these reviews to reveal the need for these researches. [ 3 ] As is the case with all other researches, the value of a review article is related to what is achieved, what is found, and the way of communicating this information. A few studies have evaluated the quality of review articles. Murlow evaluated 50 review articles published in 1985, and 1986, and revealed that none of them had complied with clear-cut scientific criteria. [ 4 ] In 1996 an international group that analyzed articles, demonstrated the aspects of review articles, and meta-analyses that had not complied with scientific criteria, and elaborated QUOROM (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analyses) statement which focused on meta-analyses of randomized controlled studies. [ 5 ] Later on this guideline was updated, and named as PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). [ 6 ]

Review articles are divided into 2 categories as narrative, and systematic reviews. Narrative reviews are written in an easily readable format, and allow consideration of the subject matter within a large spectrum. However in a systematic review, a very detailed, and comprehensive literature surveying is performed on the selected topic. [ 7 , 8 ] Since it is a result of a more detailed literature surveying with relatively lesser involvement of author’s bias, systematic reviews are considered as gold standard articles. Systematic reviews can be diivded into qualitative, and quantitative reviews. In both of them detailed literature surveying is performed. However in quantitative reviews, study data are collected, and statistically evaluated (ie. meta-analysis). [ 8 ]

Before inquring for the method of preparation of a review article, it is more logical to investigate the motivation behind writing the review article in question. The fundamental rationale of writing a review article is to make a readable synthesis of the best literature sources on an important research inquiry or a topic. This simple definition of a review article contains the following key elements:

  • The question(s) to be dealt with
  • Methods used to find out, and select the best quality researches so as to respond to these questions.
  • To synthetize available, but quite different researches

For the specification of important questions to be answered, number of literature references to be consulted should be more or less determined. Discussions should be conducted with colleagues in the same area of interest, and time should be reserved for the solution of the problem(s). Though starting to write the review article promptly seems to be very alluring, the time you spend for the determination of important issues won’t be a waste of time. [ 9 ]

The PRISMA statement [ 6 ] elaborated to write a well-designed review articles contains a 27-item checklist ( Table 1 ). It will be reasonable to fulfill the requirements of these items during preparation of a review article or a meta-analysis. Thus preparation of a comprehensible article with a high-quality scientific content can be feasible.

PRISMA statement: A 27-item checklist

Contents and format

Important differences exist between systematic, and non-systematic reviews which especially arise from methodologies used in the description of the literature sources. A non-systematic review means use of articles collected for years with the recommendations of your colleagues, while systematic review is based on struggles to search for, and find the best possible researches which will respond to the questions predetermined at the start of the review.

Though a consensus has been reached about the systematic design of the review articles, studies revealed that most of them had not been written in a systematic format. McAlister et al. analyzed review articles in 6 medical journals, and disclosed that in less than one fourth of the review articles, methods of description, evaluation or synthesis of evidence had been provided, one third of them had focused on a clinical topic, and only half of them had provided quantitative data about the extend of the potential benefits. [ 10 ]

Use of proper methodologies in review articles is important in that readers assume an objective attitude towards updated information. We can confront two problems while we are using data from researches in order to answer certain questions. Firstly, we can be prejudiced during selection of research articles or these articles might be biased. To minimize this risk, methodologies used in our reviews should allow us to define, and use researches with minimal degree of bias. The second problem is that, most of the researches have been performed with small sample sizes. In statistical methods in meta-analyses, available researches are combined to increase the statistical power of the study. The problematic aspect of a non-systematic review is that our tendency to give biased responses to the questions, in other words we apt to select the studies with known or favourite results, rather than the best quality investigations among them.

As is the case with many research articles, general format of a systematic review on a single subject includes sections of Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion ( Table 2 ).

Structure of a systematic review

Preparation of the review article

Steps, and targets of constructing a good review article are listed in Table 3 . To write a good review article the items in Table 3 should be implemented step by step. [ 11 – 13 ]

Steps of a systematic review

The research question

It might be helpful to divide the research question into components. The most prevalently used format for questions related to the treatment is PICO (P - Patient, Problem or Population; I-Intervention; C-appropriate Comparisons, and O-Outcome measures) procedure. For example In female patients (P) with stress urinary incontinence, comparisons (C) between transobturator, and retropubic midurethral tension-free band surgery (I) as for patients’ satisfaction (O).

Finding Studies

In a systematic review on a focused question, methods of investigation used should be clearly specified.

Ideally, research methods, investigated databases, and key words should be described in the final report. Different databases are used dependent on the topic analyzed. In most of the clinical topics, Medline should be surveyed. However searching through Embase and CINAHL can be also appropriate.

While determining appropriate terms for surveying, PICO elements of the issue to be sought may guide the process. Since in general we are interested in more than one outcome, P, and I can be key elements. In this case we should think about synonyms of P, and I elements, and combine them with a conjunction AND.

One method which might alleviate the workload of surveying process is “methodological filter” which aims to find the best investigation method for each research question. A good example of this method can be found in PubMed interface of Medline. The Clinical Queries tool offers empirically developed filters for five different inquiries as guidelines for etiology, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis or clinical prediction.

Evaluation of the Quality of the Study

As an indispensable component of the review process is to discriminate good, and bad quality researches from each other, and the outcomes should be based on better qualified researches, as far as possible. To achieve this goal you should know the best possible evidence for each type of question The first component of the quality is its general planning/design of the study. General planning/design of a cohort study, a case series or normal study demonstrates variations.

A hierarchy of evidence for different research questions is presented in Table 4 . However this hierarchy is only a first step. After you find good quality research articles, you won’t need to read all the rest of other articles which saves you tons of time. [ 14 ]

Determination of levels of evidence based on the type of the research question

Formulating a Synthesis

Rarely all researches arrive at the same conclusion. In this case a solution should be found. However it is risky to make a decision based on the votes of absolute majority. Indeed, a well-performed large scale study, and a weakly designed one are weighed on the same scale. Therefore, ideally a meta-analysis should be performed to solve apparent differences. Ideally, first of all, one should be focused on the largest, and higher quality study, then other studies should be compared with this basic study.

Conclusions

In conclusion, during writing process of a review article, the procedures to be achieved can be indicated as follows: 1) Get rid of fixed ideas, and obsessions from your head, and view the subject from a large perspective. 2) Research articles in the literature should be approached with a methodological, and critical attitude and 3) finally data should be explained in an attractive way.

'ZDNET Recommends': What exactly does it mean?

ZDNET's recommendations are based on many hours of testing, research, and comparison shopping. We gather data from the best available sources, including vendor and retailer listings as well as other relevant and independent reviews sites. And we pore over customer reviews to find out what matters to real people who already own and use the products and services we’re assessing.

When you click through from our site to a retailer and buy a product or service, we may earn affiliate commissions. This helps support our work, but does not affect what we cover or how, and it does not affect the price you pay. Neither ZDNET nor the author are compensated for these independent reviews. Indeed, we follow strict guidelines that ensure our editorial content is never influenced by advertisers.

ZDNET's editorial team writes on behalf of you, our reader. Our goal is to deliver the most accurate information and the most knowledgeable advice possible in order to help you make smarter buying decisions on tech gear and a wide array of products and services. Our editors thoroughly review and fact-check every article to ensure that our content meets the highest standards. If we have made an error or published misleading information, we will correct or clarify the article. If you see inaccuracies in our content, please report the mistake via this form .

How to use Copilot Pro to write, edit, and analyze your Word documents

lance-31.png

Microsoft's Copilot Pro AI offers a few benefits for $20 per month. But the most helpful one is the AI-powered integration with the different Microsoft 365 apps. For those of you who use Microsoft Word, for instance, Copilot Pro can help you write and revise your text, provide summaries of your documents, and answer questions about any document.

First, you'll need a subscription to either Microsoft 365 Personal or Family . Priced at $70 per year, the Personal edition is geared for one individual signed into as many as five devices. At $100 per year, the Family edition is aimed at up to six people on as many as five devices. The core apps in the suite include Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook, and OneNote.

Also: Microsoft Copilot vs. Copilot Pro: Is the subscription fee worth it?

Second, you'll need the subscription to Copilot Pro if you don't already have one. To sign up, head to the Copilot Pro website . Click the Get Copilot Pro button. Confirm the subscription and the payment. The next time you use Copilot on the website, in Windows, or with the mobile apps, the Pro version will be in effect.

How to use Copilot Pro in Word

1. open word.

Launch Microsoft Word and open a blank document. Let's say you need help writing a particular type of document and want Copilot to create a draft. 

Also: Microsoft Copilot Pro vs. OpenAI's ChatGPT Plus: Which is worth your $20 a month?

A small "Draft with Copilot" window appears on the screen. If you don't see it, click the tiny "Draft with Copilot icon in the left margin."

 width=

2. Submit your request

At the text field in the window, type a description of the text you need and click the "Generate" button.

 width=

Submit your request.

3. Review the response and your options

Copilot generates and displays its response. After reading the response, you're presented with a few different options.

 width=

Review the response and your options.

4. Keep, regenerate, or remove the draft

If you like the draft, click "Keep it." The draft is then inserted into your document where you can work with it. If you don't like the draft, click the "Regenerate" button, and a new draft is created. 

Also: What is Copilot (formerly Bing Chat)? Here's everything you need to know

If you'd prefer to throw out the entire draft and start from scratch, click the trash can icon.

 width=

Keep, regenerate, or remove the draft.

5. Alter the draft

Alternatively, you can try to modify the draft by typing a specific request in the text field, such as "Make it more formal," "Make it shorter," or "Make it more casual."

 width=

Alter the draft.

6. Review the different versions

If you opt to regenerate the draft, you can switch between the different versions by clicking the left or right arrow next to the number. You can then choose to keep the draft you prefer.

 width=

7. Revise existing text

Copilot will also help you fine-tune existing text. Select the text you want to revise. Click the Copilot icon in the left margin and select "Rewrite with Copilot."

 width=

Revise existing text.

8. Review the different versions

Copilot creates a few different versions of the text. Click the arrow keys to view each version.

 width=

Review the different versions.

9. Replace or Insert

If you find one you like, click "Replace" to replace the text you selected. 

Also: ChatGPT vs. Microsoft Copilot vs. Gemini: Which is the best AI chatbot?

Click "Insert below" to insert the new draft below the existing words so you can compare the two.

 width=

Replace or Insert.

10. Adjust the tone

Click "Regenerate" to ask Copilot to try again. Click the "Adjust Tone" button and select a different tone to generate another draft.

 width=

Adjust the tone.

11. Turn text into a table

Sometimes you have text that would look and work better as a table. Copilot can help. Select the text you wish to turn into a table. Click the Copilot icon and select "Visualize as a Table."

 width=

Turn text into a table.

12. Respond to the table

In response, click "Keep it" to retain the table. Click "Regenerate" to try again. Click the trash can icon to delete it. Otherwise, type a request in the text field, such as "remove the second row" or "make the last column wider."

 width=

Respond to the table.

13. Summarize a document

Copilot Pro can provide a summary of a document with its key points. To try this, open the document you want to summarize and then click the Copilot icon on the Ribbon. 

Also: The best AI chatbots

The right sidebar displays several prompts you can use to start your question. Click the one for "Summarize this doc."

 width=

Summarize a document.

14. Review the summary

View the generated summary in the sidebar. If you like it as is, click the "Copy" button to copy the summary and paste it elsewhere.

 width=

Review the summary.

15. Revise the summary

Otherwise, choose one of the suggested questions or ask your own question to revise the summary. For example, you could tell Copilot to make the summary longer, shorter, more formal, or less formal. 

Also: The best AI image generators

You could also ask it to expand on one of the points in the summary or provide more details on a certain point. A specific response is then generated based on your request.

 width=

Revise the summary.

16. Ask questions about a document

Next, you can ask specific questions about any of the content in a document. Again, click the Copilot icon to display the sidebar. In the prompt area, type and submit your question. Copilot displays the response in the sidebar. You can then ask follow-up questions as needed.

 width=

Ask questions about a document.

More how-tos

 width=

I've tried Vision Pro and other top XR headsets and here's the one most people should buy

 width=

The best AI image generators to try right now

 width=

The best TVs of 2024: Expert tested

  • Performance
  • AI features
  • Battery life
  • Unlocking methods
  • Should you buy it?

Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra review: A stunning phone with a justifiably steep price tag

When you buy through our links, Business Insider may earn an affiliate commission. Learn more

The Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra is a superb and impressive phone, and Samsung made some great year-over-year improvements that I appreciate tremendously, like a new flat display and cameras that take photos and videos with more natural color. 

In many ways, the Galaxy S24 Ultra justifies the $300 premium you'd pay over other large Android phones in the $1,000 range. The new titanium frame sets it apart from typical aluminum builds, its battery life is second to none, its four cameras offer unmatched versatility, and it's the best (and only) option for those who find the S Pen indispensable. And while its display is only 0.1 inches bigger than typical large Android phones, it feels bigger thanks to its unique sharp corners. 

In other ways, the $300 extra the Galaxy S24 Ultra demands can be a stretch, depending on your priorities, as it shares many important characteristics with less expensive phones.

It isn't noticeably more powerful in day-to-day use than the other two Galaxy S24 phones, and the whole S24 lineup includes the same new AI features. Additionally, while it has a singularly large display, the Galaxy S24 Ultra doesn't offer anything special that other large premium Android phones don't provide, stylus compatibility aside.

I'd also expect better overall photo quality from a $1,300 phone. While I laud the four cameras and improved colors in photos, the Galaxy S24 Ultra fails in some areas other phone makers have figured out, like overexposure.

how to write a business article review

The Galaxy S24 Ultra is Samsung's top-end phone in 2024. It's in a league of its own among the competition, even against Apple's iPhone 15 Pro phones, with its four cameras, giant 6.8-inch display, stunning battery life, and included S Pen stylus.

  • Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Gorgeous design with titanium frame
  • Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Supreme performance and battery life
  • Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Stunning 120Hz display
  • Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Versatile four-camera system
  • Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Built-in S Pen
  • Check mark icon A check mark. It indicates a confirmation of your intended interaction. Effective AI features
  • con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Expensive starting price
  • con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Includes unwanted bloatware
  • con icon Two crossed lines that form an 'X'. Photos can suffer from overexposure

A sleek titanium build with a sharp, flat display

To charge a $1,300 starting price for the Galaxy S24 Ultra , Samsung couldn't simply make a slightly larger version of the Galaxy S24 Plus with an S Pen and a quad-lens camera system. The Galaxy S24 Ultra needs to set itself apart aesthetically, and Samsung has achieved that to great effect.

The Galaxy S24 Ultra distinguishes itself with a large display and sharp corners, typical characteristics of Samsung's Ultra line of phones. 

However, Samsung made a big change it should have made a long time ago — it finally ditched the silly and pointless curved screen edges and opted for a flat display instead. As a result, the Galaxy S24 Ultra looks mature and classy. 

A flat display also offers better functionality on several fronts, which I elaborated on in the performance section below. And it's worth quickly mentioning that any of the best Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra screen protectors will better adhere to the phone's flat display than screen protectors ever did on the frankly stupid curved screen edges of previous Ultra generations.

The black borders around the display are also noticeably thinner than past iterations of the phone, and they're equally narrow all around — the forehead and chin (the borders at the top and bottom of the phone) are the same width as the borders on the sides, where previous Ultras were a bit more uneven. 

Samsung's new titanium frame has a matte finish rather than the shiny polished aluminum frames on Ultras of yore, and it's another positive upgrade. Although, it hasn't resulted in lower weight like the titanium's effect on Apple's iPhone 15 Pro models. The Galaxy S24 Ultra is still quite a weighty phone at 8.18 ounces. The rear glass is also matte-textured, and I'm pleased Samsung didn't replace it with clear glass during its materials overhaul. 

On the Titanium Gray, Titanium Yellow, Titanium Violet, and Titanium Orange colorways, the S24 Ultra's frame is a brighter color that beautifully contrasts against the display and creates a classy border around it that looks smart and sophisticated.

Superb performance and a dynamic screen to match

The Galaxy S24 Ultra runs on Qualcomm's Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 Optimized for Galaxy — the latest and fastest processor available to Android phones with a little extra, exclusive oomph for Samsung's Galaxy S24 lineup. 

As a result, running Android, apps, and games is a dream, but it's worth knowing that the Galaxy S24 Ultra's high price doesn't get you extra performance over the Galaxy S24 Plus , as both run on the same optimized processor and include the same 12GB RAM. And while the base Galaxy S24 has 8GB RAM, it doesn't feel any slower or less powerful in real-life use, even if it scores slightly lower in benchmarks than its bigger siblings. 

Further, while the Galaxy S24 Ultra's processor is optimized, its performance isn't noticeably greater than the OnePlus 12 , which runs on a standard version of the Snapdragon 8 Gen 3 processor. That's to say, the Galaxy S24 Ultra's is excellent, but it's nothing out of the ordinary for a premium Android device. 

What is out of the ordinary is the Galaxy S24 Ultra's large 6.8-inch display and the unique sharp corners, which impart a sophisticated and mature vibe compared to the rounded corners on 99% of other phones. And, as mentioned above, a new facet of the Galaxy Ultra series is that the S24 Ultra's display is now completely flat — gone are the impractical, unsightly curved screen edges of past models.  

These characteristics combine to offer as much screen space as possible when you want to use the S Pen. And with the flat display, the Galaxy S24 Ultra feels noticeably less cramped than Galaxy Ultras and Notes before it. I wasn't worrying as much about reaching the curved edge with the S Pen during testing.

Otherwise, the Galaxy S24 Ultra's display expectedly includes premium features, like an adaptable 1-120Hz refresh rate, an OLED panel, and the option to use a sharp 1440p resolution. These are display specs that many premium Android phones share, even in the last couple of years. 

While 1440p resolution is an option, I find it more beneficial to keep the default 1080p setting thanks to lower power consumption, which leads to better battery life. Still, 1440p resolution is there if you want it. 

Effective features for the S Pen, but it's still awkward to write notes 

Don't be put off by the S Pen if you have no interest in using it and are considering buying the Galaxy S24 Ultra . You can essentially forget it's there.

For those who find it indispensable, the Galaxy S24 Ultra continues to be the only high-end phone in the US with a stylus for advanced features.

Whether you use the S Pen for taking notes or gaining finer control, the stylus is universally good. It's responsive, and it feels accurate. And some of Samsung's latest AI features are also geared toward the S Pen.

Some new S Pen AI features include converting handwritten notes to digital text with improved handwriting recognition. It works surprisingly well, but it's not perfect. Still, I give it a passing grade, considering how scratchy my handwriting is when using the S Pen. 

What is impressive, however, is the summarization and auto-formatting features. Even if the Galaxy S24 Ultra couldn't quite recognize everything I wrote, it succeeded in both tasks. 

Still, outside of testing, I rarely use the S Pen, as I find taking notes with the phone in my hand hovering in the air awkward and uncomfortable. And while palm rejection is good enough to let me rest my hand on the screen while writing, I simply can't avoid my palm touching some kind of on-screen element, resulting in distracting menus or actions constantly popping up to interrupt my note-taking.

The Galaxy S24 Ultra's camera bump also makes it wobble when I place the phone on a table, so there's no stability on a flat surface. The only comfortable way to take notes, in my experience, is when the hand holding the phone rests against a surface, whether it's my knee or a table. 

AI features make the Galaxy S24 series the smartest and most helpful yet

Samsung introduced new mobile AI features to the entire Galaxy S24 series, so these aren't exclusive to the Galaxy S24 Ultra . In fact, many of them aren't exclusive to Samsung phones, either. Some of these features exist already on Google Pixel phones; Google itself introduced some during Samsung's Galaxy S24 launch event, and those will feature on Google's Pixel 8 phones. 

Circle To Search is the major AI feature announced in partnership with Google, and it's a hit. It's basically Google's Lens feature, which searches the web based on what you have on your screen. Except, Circle To Search lets you circle something specific on your screen, which is infinitely more useful if you want to search for a single object within an image. Amazingly accurate, it is especially good at finding products, celebrities, and even some locations or buildings. I was able to trip it up a few times where it confused what I was looking for as something else, but overall, it's very impressive and can only get better from this point on.

Another headlining photo editing AI feature is the ability to delete objects or subjects in the Samsung Gallery app. It can work well, like the example below, where it removed some unsightly gas piping toward the top right.

It also succeeded in removing the wall toward the bottom right of the image below.

However, the AI can also work badly, like in the example below, where I intended to remove the cat from the photo, but the Galaxy S24 Ultra inexplicably replaced him with a rock. (Impressively, however, the rock is casting an AI-generated shadow.) 

Overall, the AI image features are best used for smaller details, as moving or deleting larger objects or subjects means the Galaxy S24 Ultra has to make a greater AI-based guess for what should be behind the object or subject. The more it has to guess, the more odd and out of place the fill-in details tend to be. Although, it can still trip even with small details, like with the cat above. 

An improved camera system still has some flaws

One of the reasons the Galaxy S24 Ultra is in a league of its own is thanks to its 200MP main camera when most main cameras on premium phones are "only" around 50MP. The Galaxy S24 Ultra also has four rear cameras when three is the norm. In a way, the Galaxy S24 Ultra effectively has five cameras (more on that below).

Talking broadly about the Galaxy S24 Ultra's camera quality, Samsung has finally addressed the overly saturated colors and opted for a more natural color tone. The color green, especially, looks much better — grass often had a neon vibe on previous Galaxy S phones. 

Overexposure is an issue that's lingered for generations on Samsung phones, and the Galaxy S24 Ultra shows no progress. The barn's broader side and stone foundation above have bright white patches without detail, for example, as some details are less visible thanks to being overly brightened. And below, patches of white fur on the cat's back are bright white and void of detail.

In ultra-bright situations and when there's lots of white detail (like snow), the Galaxy S24 Ultra conversely compensates very well to prevent overexposure while keeping darker details visible.

As for the 200MP main camera, I can't say it delivers better photo or video quality than a more traditional 50MP sensor during the day. 

In fact, despite the huge sensor, the Galaxy 24 Ultra still struggles to take sharp photos of moving subjects, like kids or pets, when I'm not outside during the day. Too many photos of my kids taken with plenty of indoor lighting when it's dark outside look ever-so-slightly blurry for my liking. 

Low-light performance with Night mode is stunning, however. As with most phones, you and your subjects need to be as still as possible for a couple of seconds while the phone absorbs as much light as possible for a sharp photo in dark scenarios.

The extra camera on recent Galaxy Ultra phones was typically a 10x optical zoom lens, which far exceeds the usual 3x to 5x magnification on most premium devices. However, the Galaxy S24 Ultra's extra zoom lens is now 5x instead of 10x. 

Those who often take photos at 10x or higher zoom will be disappointed, but according to Samsung, you'd be in the minority. The company says more people hang around the 5x zoom range when taking zoomed photos.

The move makes sense, however, and the 5x zoom range is a good middle ground. Previous Galaxy Ultras left a huge gap between their 3x and 10x zoom lenses, and if you ever wanted to go beyond 3x (but under 10x), digital zooming from the 3x lens would take over and produce inferior-quality photos. 

I mentioned earlier the Galaxy S24 Ultra arguably has five cameras. That's because it can still take optical quality 10x zoom photos by cropping into the middle 12MP of the 5x lens' 50MP sensor. The results are surprisingly good if you can keep your hands and the subject as still as possible and the lighting is optimal. 

If you can't achieve these conditions, 10x zoomed photos can appear soft on details at best or grainy and blurry at worst. 

The best battery life in recent memory

If you're looking for a phone with the most battery life, the Galaxy S24 Ultra should be at the top of your shortlist. It endured our intensive battery test with a 66% charge remaining, whereas most phones obtained results of around 60%. 

The result shouldn't be too surprising, as larger phones typically have longer battery lives, and the Galaxy S24 Ultra is among the largest phones you can buy, thanks to its 6.8-inch display. However, the Galaxy S24 Plus has a 6.7-inch display and scored a comparatively paltry 60%.

Ultimately, the Galaxy S24 Ultra's score means that you'll be able to get farther in daily use without having to charge the phone than with other large phones, but you'll likely still need to charge the phone overnight. 

The Galaxy S24 Ultra supports up to a speedy 45W charging, which is significantly faster than Google Pixel and Apple iPhone charging. Still, the OnePlus 12 has the Galaxy S24 Ultra beat here with its absurd 80W charging speed. 

For wireless charging, the Galaxy S24 Ultra supports up to 15W with first-generation Qi. Again, OnePlus destroys the Galaxy S24 Ultra with its proprietary 50W wireless charging. To put that into perspective, the OnePlus 12 can charge faster wirelessly than the Galaxy S24 Ultra can with a cable. It doesn't include Qi2 support, which would add a magnetic alignment element similar to Apple's MagSafe.  

Fingerprint sensors and basic facial recognition have been outdated for years

Android phone makers at large, not just Samsung, need to make moves with biometric authentication for unlocking phones and mobile payments. The incumbent fingerprint sensors and basic facial recognition that use the selfie camera have been showing their limitations ever since Apple came out with Face ID in 2017 with the iPhone X. 

To be sure, the Galaxy S24 Ultra's fingerprint sensor is quite accurate and fast most of the time. However, it's irritating when it doesn't work when Face ID would, like when my thumbs are wet from doing dishes or when my skin is cracked from extremely dry winter air. 

When fingerprints don't unlock the phone, the Galaxy S24 Ultra falls back on basic facial recognition, which uses the selfie camera. It's very clearly slower and less accurate than Apple's Face ID. Either Samsung and Android phone makers need to include a notch with advanced facial recognition, as Apple has for Face ID, or they need to innovate.

Should you buy the Galaxy S24 Ultra?

Despite new features and improvements, the main allure of the Galaxy S24 Ultra still lies in its large display, superior battery life, and the versatility of its four cameras. If these assets are important to you, and you're willing or able to pay extra for them, the Galaxy S24 Ultra comes highly recommended. 

For those who can't do without the S Pen, the Galaxy S24 Ultra is a no-brainer, as it's the lone current-generation, high-end phone with a built-in stylus. 

At its $1,300 starting price, the Galaxy S24 Ultra may not be the most value-forward proposition for you, even with its "Ultra" attributes. If a 6.7-inch display and traditional triple-lens camera are enough, you could easily pass up the Galaxy S24 Ultra for phones in the $1,000 range, like the Galaxy S24 Plus , OnePlus 12 , or Google Pixel 8 Pro . Each device excels in different areas, which I point out in our guide to the best Android phones . 

If you decide the new Ultra model is worth your while, however, it makes sense to protect the phone with any of the best Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra cases . 

You can purchase logo and accolade licensing to this story here . Disclosure: Written and researched by the Insider Reviews team. We highlight products and services you might find interesting. If you buy them, we may get a small share of the revenue from the sale from our partners. We may receive products free of charge from manufacturers to test. This does not drive our decision as to whether or not a product is featured or recommended. We operate independently from our advertising team. We welcome your feedback. Email us at [email protected] .

how to write a business article review

  • Main content

Taxes 2024: Our Indispensable Cheat Sheet for Filing Your Tax Return This Year

This essential guide can help you find all the answers you need for getting your taxes filed this year.

peter-butler-6276-square

Taxes are complicated, but it can help to break down the filing process into simple steps.

an illustration of two people surrounded by tax forms, calculators, money and other financial items

Three weeks into the 2024  tax season , and the IRS has already  sent nearly 7.5 million refunds  back to taxpayers. If you're expecting money back too, submitting your tax return is probably high on your to-do list. And if you plan to file soon, make sure to gather all the necessary paperwork to make filing easier.

Completing your taxes isn't always easy, especially when you aren't a tax professional or up to date with the latest tax laws. The rules vary by year and by person, depending on your filing status, age, income and other factors. 

As you navigate the 2024 tax season, use our cheat sheet to help you find all the answers you need. The resources below provide expert advice on tricky tax topics and can help you start your return. 

Hopefully, these resources can help you file with confidence, get the biggest tax refund possible and minimize stress.

Read more:   File Early and Get Up to 20% Off Your 2023 Taxes With TurboTax

How to get started with your taxes

 width=

As with most tasks, the hardest part of doing your taxes is starting. You have to gather all your necessary forms (and track down any that are missing), pick a service or software to use and then spend hours completing your return.

No wonder almost a third of Americans wait until the last minute to file, according to a survey from financial services company IPX1031 . Filing as early as possible has its advantages to consider.

Here's some info to help you jumpstart your tax return:

  • What Are the Tax Deadlines for the 2024 Tax Season?
  • How to Create an Online IRS Account and Why You Should
  • 7 Good Reasons to File Your Tax Return Early
  • How to File Your Taxes With a Phone or Tablet
  • All the Ways You Can File Taxes for Free
  • Best Tax Software for 2024
  • Tax Season Filing Statistics Week by Week

What to know about the child tax credit in 2024

With the child tax credit tax break, you could be eligible for up to $2,000 per child. The rules around which kids qualify and how much money you could get refunded can be confusing, however. Here's what to know about this benefit.

  • What Is the Child Tax Credit and Who Qualifies for It?
  • When You Can Expect Your Child Tax Credit Money to Arrive
  • Which States Have Child Tax Credit Tax Breaks?
  • Will the Government Expand the Child Tax Credit in 2024?

Form, forms and more tax forms

There are a lot of tax documents: There's the W-2 your company sends you, assorted 1099 forms for other income, a 1098 form for mortgage interest and many others.

In all, the IRS provides 2,854 different tax forms on its website. Learn about the ones you need in 2024, and what to do if you are missing any.

  • What Is a W-2 Form and What to Do If You Haven't Received Yours
  • All the Different 1099 Tax Forms Explained
  • Venmo and Cash App Income: Will You Get a 1099-K?
  • How to Scan Important Tax Documents With Your Phone

Review your tax credits and tax deductions

Once you've started your return for tax year 2023, make sure you get every penny owed to you. One way to maximize your tax refund is to check all of the potential tax credits and deductions that could lower your tax bill.

Learn the basics of itemizing deductions (or taking the standard deduction), and review all the ways that you can pay less or get a bigger refund.

  • How to Choose Between the Standard Deduction and Itemized Deductions
  • Biggest Tax Credits Boost Your Tax Refund Even if You Don't Itemize
  • All the Possible Tax Credits and Deductions for Homeowners
  • Green Tax Breaks Give Money Back for Energy Efficiency

All about tax refunds

After you've finished your 2023 tax return and sent it to the IRS, the waiting begins. Fortunately, the IRS makes it easy to track your return and refund. 

Learn more about how to track your tax refund, whether it's directly deposited or mailed as a paper check, as well as other tips for getting your money quickly and securely.

  • Where's Your Tax Refund? How to Track Your IRS Money
  • Will Your Tax Refund Be Delayed If the Federal Government Shuts Down in March
  • How to Track Your Tax Refund Check in the US Mail
  • Get Your Tax Refund Faster With Direct Deposit
  • How to Get Your Tax Refund Two Days Early
  • How to Protect Your Tax Refund From Identity Theft

What about taxes and Social Security or other government benefits

The rules around taxes and benefits can be baffling. Here are a few guides on what to know about taxes and your government benefits. 

  • Do Social Security Recipients Need to File a Tax Return?
  • Do SSI Recipients Need to File Taxes?
  • Do SSDI Beneficiaries Need to File a Tax Return?
  • Will You Get Your Social Security Check on Time if the Government Shuts Down in March?

Answers to specific tax questions in 2024

Everyone's financial situation is unique, but several common quandaries flummox even the most diligent taxpayers.

Here are a few of the more common tax questions for 2024:

  • Do I Have to Pay Taxes on My State Stimulus Check?
  • Can You Claim a Boyfriend or Girlfriend as a Dependent?
  • Which Divorced Parent Gets to Claim the Child Tax Credit?
  • If Your Student Loan Debt Is Forgiven, Do You Owe Taxes?

How to get help on your taxes

If you can't find the tax answers you need on your own, don't despair. There are free resources that can help get your tax return finished and filed. 

  • How to Get Free Help on Your Taxes
  • Got Tax Questions? Do This Before Calling the IRS
  • CNET Tax Tips

Good luck with filing your return. Be sure to check back as we update this list often with more tax explainers and tips for 2024.

  • Election 2024
  • Entertainment
  • Newsletters
  • Photography
  • Press Releases
  • Israel-Hamas War
  • Russia-Ukraine War
  • Latin America
  • Middle East
  • Asia Pacific
  • AP Top 25 College Football Poll
  • Movie reviews
  • Book reviews
  • Financial Markets
  • Business Highlights
  • Financial wellness
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Social Media

OpenAI reveals Sora, a tool to make instant videos from written prompts

FILE - The OpenAI logo is seen on a mobile phone in front of a computer screen displaying output from ChatGPT, March 21, 2023, in Boston. On Thursday, Feb. 15, 2024, the maker of ChatGPT unveiled its next leap into generative artificial intelligence with a tool that instantly makes short videos in response to written commands. (AP Photo/Michael Dwyer, File)

FILE - The OpenAI logo is seen on a mobile phone in front of a computer screen displaying output from ChatGPT, March 21, 2023, in Boston. On Thursday, Feb. 15, 2024, the maker of ChatGPT unveiled its next leap into generative artificial intelligence with a tool that instantly makes short videos in response to written commands. (AP Photo/Michael Dwyer, File)

  • Copy Link copied

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — The maker of ChatGPT on Thursday unveiled its next leap into generative artificial intelligence with a tool that instantly makes short videos in response to written commands.

San Francisco-based OpenAI’s new text-to-video generator, called Sora, isn’t the first of its kind. Google, Meta and the startup Runway ML are among the other companies to have demonstrated similar technology.

But the high quality of videos displayed by OpenAI — some after CEO Sam Altman asked social media users to send in ideas for written prompts — astounded observers while also raising fears about the ethical and societal implications.

“A instructional cooking session for homemade gnocchi hosted by a grandmother social media influencer set in a rustic Tuscan country kitchen with cinematic lighting,” was a prompt suggested on X by a freelance photographer from New Hampshire. Altman responded a short time later with a realistic video that depicted what the prompt described.

The tool isn’t yet publicly available and OpenAI has revealed limited information about how it was built. The company, which has been sued by some authors and The New York Times over its use of copyrighted works of writing to train ChatGPT, also hasn’t disclosed what imagery and video sources were used to train Sora. (OpenAI pays an undisclosed fee to The Associated Press to license its text news archive).

OpenAI said in a blog post that it’s engaging with artists, policymakers and others before releasing the new tool to the public.

“We are working with red teamers  —  domain experts in areas like misinformation, hateful content, and bias  —  who will be adversarially testing the model,” the company said. “We’re also building tools to help detect misleading content such as a detection classifier that can tell when a video was generated by Sora.”

how to write a business article review

  • Do Not Sell My Personal Info

Download Your Copy

  •  ⋅ 

Google Uses AI To Detect Fake Online Reviews Faster

Google blocks over 170 million fake reviews, uses AI-powered algorithm to protect businesses' reputations.

  • Google is now capable of detecting fake reviews faster.
  • Google blocked 170 million fake reviews in 2023.
  • A new algorithm detects fake reviews with 45% higher accuracy than before.

Google is harnessing new AI technology to block a surge of fake online reviews that mislead customers and harm local businesses.

The company stopped over 170 million fake reviews in 2023 – a 45% increase over the previous year.

The crackdown provides welcome relief for local business owners who have struggled with fraudulent reviews that damage their reputations on Google Maps and Search.

In a blog post , Google discusses how its algorithms now analyze patterns over time to identify suspicious review activity quickly. This includes spotting identical reviews copied across business pages or sudden spikes of 1-star and 5-star ratings.

A Year Of More Honest Reviews

In 2023, Google received approximately 20 million daily updates to local business information, including details such as business hours and customer reviews.

To maintain data integrity amidst this high volume of incoming data, Google implemented a new algorithm to rapidly identify and remove misleading or deceptive information.

Google notes the new algorithm identified a scam where people were paid to write false positive reviews. By detecting it, Google could take action to shut it down. This prevented the further spread of deceptive reviews.

Additionally, Google reported removing or blocking the following:

  • 170+ million reviews that violated policies,
  • 14 million increase in detecting policy-violating videos
  • 2+ million attempts of fraudulent claims on business profiles being thwarted due to enhanced security protocols.

Key Benefits For Local Businesses

Google reports that its new fake review detection algorithm can help local businesses in the following ways:

  • Faster Detection: The new machine learning system detects suspicious review patterns more quickly than previous methods, which can help protect businesses from the harm of fraudulent reviews.
  • Increased Accuracy: The accuracy of identifying fake reviews has improved by 45% compared to 2022, which can give businesses more confidence that their online ratings primarily reflect real customer experiences.
  • Scam Protection: The algorithm identifies individual fake reviews and broader coordinated efforts to post scam reviews, providing businesses with enhanced protection from organized fake review campaigns.

Takeaways For Local Marketers & Business Owners

Google states its continued effort to tackle fake content will benefit users and protect local businesses by better securing their online reputations.

The update could lead to a more level playing field, with reputation becoming a more accurate reflection of service quality and genuine customer satisfaction.

For businesses, the message is to concentrate on delivering exceptional products and services, while Google works to ensure online reputation matches real-world performance.

Featured Image: Screenshot from blog.google/products/maps/how-machine-learning-keeps-contributed-content-helpful/, February 2024. 

How has the new algorithm changed the efficiency of Google’s review moderation process?

The new algorithm has significantly enhanced the efficiency of Google’s moderation process by:

  • Identifying Patterns: By analyzing review patterns over time, the algorithm can swiftly pinpoint anomalous activities like duplicated content and unusual rating fluctuations.
  • Volume Handling: Google’s ability to manage roughly 20 million daily updates to local business information demonstrates the algorithm’s capacity to handle large volumes of data while maintaining accuracy.
  • Stopping Scams: Google’s proactive measures have shut down schemes where individuals were compensated to write falsified reviews, protecting the integrity of business ratings.

What practical measures can I take as a marketer in light of Google’s new review detection capabilities?

With Google’s improved fake review detection capabilities, marketers should consider the following actions:

  • Focus on Authenticity: Encourage genuine customer feedback instead of using artificial means to inflate ratings.
  • Monitor Reviews: Regularly assess your business reviews on Google for abnormal patterns and report suspicious activities.
  • Engage with Customers: Respond to positive and negative reviews to demonstrate active engagement and concern for customer experience.

Matt G. Southern, Senior News Writer, has been with Search Engine Journal since 2013. With a bachelor’s degree in communications, ...

Subscribe To Our Newsletter.

Conquer your day with daily search marketing news.

Related posts:

  • 8 Ways To Future Proof Your SEO Career In A Fast-Changing Industry
  • WordPress Migration Guides Undermines Divi & Elementor?
  • 5 Best Google Ads Alternatives To Diversify & Grow

BHP considers closure of Nickel West operations that employ about 3,300 workers

Sparks flying near workers operating near a furnace.

The WA premier has hinted at royalty relief for the embattled nickel industry, as mining giant BHP revealed it is considering mothballing its Nickel West division in a move that could affect thousands of workers.

It would be the biggest blow yet to the state's once-booming nickel industry, which has seen mine closures and hundreds of job losses this year amid a sharp fall in metal prices. 

In a statement to the stock exchange on Thursday, BHP flagged a $US3.5 billion ($5.4 billion) pre-tax impairment against the value of Nickel West ahead of its half-year results announcement on February 20. 

Nickel West employs about 3,300 workers in WA, including mines at Leinster and Mt Keith in the northern Goldfields, the Kalgoorlie nickel smelter, Kambalda nickel concentrator and its Kwinana refinery.

The company said it expected to report a circa $US200 million loss for the first half from its Nickel West operations, and estimated it would cost about $US900 million for closure and rehabilitation costs.  

BHP CEO Mike Henry at the company's global headquarters in Melbourne. February 2022.

BHP, which supplies nickel to electric vehicle manufacturers Toyota and Tesla, acquired the Nickel West business in its $9.2 billion takeover of WMC Resources in 2005.  

It said it was focused on preserving cash during the current downturn and placing Nickel West into a "period of care and maintenance" was under consideration. 

"This is an uncertain time for the WA nickel industry and we are taking action to address the current market conditions," chief executive Mike Henry said in a statement.  

"We are reducing operating costs at WA nickel and reviewing our capital plans for Nickel West and West Musgrave."

Sunset at a mining operation with a big smoke stack.

Premier concerned for workers

Premier Roger Cook said the announcement was not a good sign for the future of the state's nickel industry. 

"I think all the workers will be concerned by today's announcement and we'll do everything we can to support them," Mr Cook said. 

"It will not only need the state government, it will need government at all levels to do the heavy lifting to make sure we can assist the industry to deal with these global trends."

He hinted that royalty relief was among the options being considered to help the sector.

"I've been speaking with [federal resources] minister Madeline King almost daily over the past week and meeting with industry representatives as recently as last night," Mr Cook said.

"Obviously we have some levers around royalty relief and rebates and we are looking at all options in terms of how we can support the industry." 

The WA Premier Roger Cook in a suit jacket and business shirt crossing the street in Kalgoorlie-Boulder

Nickel, a key ingredient in stainless steel and lithium-ion batteries used in electric vehicles, is a historically volatile commodity prone to periods of boom and bust.  

In the past five years, nickel has traded as high as $US21.98 per pound and as low as $US5/lb, according to Kitco data. 

The price on Thursday morning was trading about $US7.28/lb — 41 per cent lower than the price 12 months ago.  

BHP blamed the fall in prices on the increase of nickel supply from Indonesia through the London Metals Exchange.  

"These unfavourable operating conditions are expected to endure for a considerable time," BHP said in its statement.

"Due to the deterioration in the short-term and medium-term outlook for nickel, BHP has lowered its nickel price assumptions." 

'We all knew it was coming'

Mining analyst Tim Treadgold said the announcement reflected the state of the industry.

"We all knew it was coming, but the surprise is the amount of money involved," he said.

"They're talking about writing off billions of assets. Writing off simply means that asset is no longer worth anything.

"For a big company to say its entire nickel division has been written down to zero, so you've got 3,000 jobs, goodness knows how many mines and processing plants operating, but it now has a value of nothing.

"That is a very, very powerful statement about the health of the nickel industry in Western Australia or lack of health."

Industry hit by mine closures

While the potential closure is considered, BHP is also weighing up whether to continue construction at the $1.7 billion West Musgrave nickel-copper mine, which it inherited in last year's $9.6 billion takeover of Oz Minerals .  

Work at West Musgrave, near the WA, Northern Territory and South Australian border, was 21 per cent complete, BHP said. 

BHP's Kambalda nickel concentrator will be placed into care and maintenance from June following the decision by Andrew Forrest's Wyloo Metals to suspend mining at its Kambalda mines from May 31.

Wyloo's Cassini and Long mines provide the majority of ore that feed into the Kambalda concentrator, which BHP said made it "no longer viable".  

The review of BHP's operations also throws into doubt a proposed furnace rebuild at the Kalgoorlie nickel smelter , which would require up to 2,000 construction workers during peak periods.   

Thursday's announcement follows January's mothballing of the Savannah nickel mine in the Kimberley , and the decision by First Quantum Minerals to cease mining at the Ravensthorpe nickel mine on WA's south coast and cut 30 per cent of its workforce. 

By May, the Cosmos nickel mine in the northern Goldfields will also shut, resulting in another impairment hit of between $150 million and $175 million for its Perth-based owner IGO.  

IGO has said its Nova and Forrestania nickel mines in WA were cash positive in the current market.  

  • X (formerly Twitter)

Related Stories

Struggling nickel sector asks for urgent support, but analysts say 'folly' to give a taxpayer-funded lifeline.

Two Caucasian hands holding a large rock, person wearing jeans and hello and grey mining shirt, dirt and grass behind.

Plummeting critical mineral prices are causing near panic. What's behind it and what comes next?

Ardea Goongarrie Hub rock

Kambalda nickel mines to close less than a year after $760m sale

mine worker with nickel ore

Another blow for WA's nickel boom as Ravensthorpe mine suspends mining

An aerial shot of the closed Ravensthorpe nickel mine

  • Company News
  • Kwinana Town Centre
  • Mining (Rural)
  • Mining and Metals Industry

IMAGES

  1. Guide on How to Write an Article Review

    how to write a business article review

  2. How to write article for publication

    how to write a business article review

  3. Write My Article Review for Me

    how to write a business article review

  4. Definition Essay: How to write article review example

    how to write a business article review

  5. 🌈 Example of article review format. Example Of Article Review Format

    how to write a business article review

  6. how to write article review

    how to write a business article review

VIDEO

  1. How to write article for free

  2. How To Write Business Law Answers l Semester 1 l Delhi University l Jan 24 Exams l

  3. How To Do a Business Article Review??የቢዝነስ አርቲክል ሪቪው እንዴት ይሰራል??

  4. 5 Steps to Writing a Business Article

  5. How to write Article on Clicksadd| Article writing Job

  6. ⁉️WAIT!⁉️ Write "BUSINESS" in the comment and I will help you! #marketing #copywriting #business

COMMENTS

  1. How to Write an Article Review (with Sample Reviews)

    1 Understand what an article review is. An article review is written for an audience who is knowledgeable in the subject instead of a general audience. When writing an article review, you will summarize the main ideas, arguments, positions, and findings, and then critique the article's contributions to the field and overall effectiveness. [2]

  2. Contributor Guidelines for Harvard Business Review Authors

    Here are the five qualities we look for when evaluating what to publish: Expertise: You don't have to be well known to be a contributor, but you must know a lot about the subject you're ...

  3. How to Write an Article Review: Template & Examples

    How to Write an Article Review: Template & Examples (7 votes) An article review is an academic assignment that invites you to study a piece of academic research closely. Then, you should present its summary and critically evaluate it using the knowledge you've gained in class and during your independent study.

  4. How to Write an Article Review: Tips and Examples

    Writing Involves: Summarization, classification, analysis, critiques, and comparison. The analysis, evaluation, and comparison require the use of theories, ideas, and research relevant to the subject area of the article.

  5. The Science of Strong Business Writing

    Strong writing skills are essential for anyone in business. You need them to effectively communicate with colleagues, employees, and bosses and to sell any ideas, products, or services you're...

  6. How to Write an Article Review: Types, Format, & Examples

    How to Write an Article Review? 10 Easy Steps 5. Article Review Outline 6. Article Review Examples 7. Tips for Writing an Effective Article Review What is an Article Review? An article review is a critical evaluation and analysis of a piece of writing, typically an academic or journalistic article.

  7. How to Improve Your Business Writing

    Carolyn O'Hara. November 20, 2014. Carolyn O'Hara is a writer and editor based in New York City. She's worked at The Week, PBS NewsHour, and Foreign Policy. carolynohara1. Post.

  8. How to Write Critical Reviews

    To write a good critical review, you will have to engage in the mental processes of analyzing (taking apart) the work-deciding what its major components are and determining how these parts (i.e., paragraphs, sections, or chapters) contribute to the work as a whole.

  9. How to Write a Peer Review

    Here's how your outline might look: 1. Summary of the research and your overall impression. In your own words, summarize what the manuscript claims to report. This shows the editor how you interpreted the manuscript and will highlight any major differences in perspective between you and the other reviewers. Give an overview of the manuscript ...

  10. An editor's guide to writing a review article

    Writing a compelling review article is about more than picking an interesting topic and gathering the latest references. It's an opportunity to share your views on the most recent trends in the area, discuss which hypotheses seem best supported or which technologies seem most promising, and even chart a course for how the field could develop in the future. Matt Pavlovich and Lindsey Drayton ...

  11. Writing Help: The Article Review

    For an article review, your task is to identify, summarize, and evaluate the ideas and information the author has presented. You are being asked to make judgments, positive or negative, about the content of the article. The criteria you follow to do this will vary based upon your particular academic discipline and the parameters of your assignment.

  12. How to Review a Journal Article

    How to Review a Journal Article For many kinds of assignments, like a literature review, you may be asked to offer a critique or review of a journal article. This is an opportunity for you as a scholar to offer your qualified opinion and evaluation of how another scholar has composed their article, argument, and research.

  13. How to Write an Article Review: Tips, Outline, Format

    Here is how to write an article review APA: Journal: Author's last name, First and middle initial. (Year of Publication). Publication Title. Periodical Title, Volume (Issue), pp.-pp. Website: Last name, initials. (Date of Publication). Title. Retrieved from {link}

  14. From the Editors: How to write a high-quality review

    The peer review process is widely used by academic journals, including the Journal of International Business Studies (JIBS), to evaluate the quality of manuscript submissions relative to the journals' scholarly goals. Our overview suggests that the best reviews also facilitate the introduction of new and important ideas to the field. Content analysis of 156 past JIBS reviews found that the ...

  15. How To Write a Review

    1 A thesis Before you write, make sure you know the general message you want to convey. A simple thesis will help keep your review from straying off-topic.

  16. How to Write an Article Review

    Here are some expert tips you could use to write an exceptional article review: 1. Figure out the main points you want to cover and why they matter. It will help you zero in on the key points. 2. Look for and assess pertinent sources, both from the past and present.

  17. What is a review article?

    How to write a review article Below are 8 key items to consider when you begin writing your review article. Check the journal's aims and scope Make sure you have read the aims and scope for the journal you are submitting to and follow them closely.

  18. How to Write an Article Review (with Sample Reviews)

    Follow these steps to create an effective and informative article review: 1. Understand the purpose: Before diving into the article, it is important to understand the intent of writing a review. This helps in focusing your thoughts, directing your analysis, and ensuring your review adds value to the academic community. 2.

  19. How to Write an Article Review in Business Studies: Complete College

    Pre-writing Steps: Before You Start Choosing and Perfecting Your Topic Sometimes the instructor assigns an article you should review, sometimes you are free to choose any article you want to work with.

  20. How To Write Article Review

    Start by drawing a thesis for your review. Prepare a summary of the main points or arguments. Capture the positive aspects and facts in the publication under review. Critique the publication by checking major contradictions, gaps, and disparities. You might also want to check the key questions that go unanswered.

  21. Writing a Literature Review

    Summarize and synthesize: Give an overview of the main points of each source and combine them into a coherent whole Analyze and interpret: Don't just paraphrase other researchers - add your own interpretations where possible, discussing the significance of findings in relation to the literature as a whole

  22. How to write a review article?

    Clinicians frequently benefit from review articles to update their knowledge in their field of specialization, and use these articles as a starting point for formulating guidelines. [ 1, 2] The institutions which provide financial support for further investigations resort to these reviews to reveal the need for these researches. [ 3]

  23. How to Review a Business on Google With Google Maps

    To write a Google review on the Google maps website or mobile app, follow these steps: 1. Make sure you're signed into your Google account. 2. Go to maps.google.com or open the Google Maps mobile ...

  24. How to use Copilot Pro to write, edit, and analyze your Word ...

    2. Submit your request. At the text field in the window, type a description of the text you need and click the "Generate" button. Submit your request. Screenshot by Lance Whitney/ZDNET. 3. Review ...

  25. Samsung Galaxy S24 Ultra review: A stunning phone with a justifiably

    The Galaxy S24 Ultra's flat display with sharp corners and narrow black borders gives it a smart, sophisticated, and ultra-premium look. To charge a $1,300 starting price for the Galaxy S24 Ultra ...

  26. Taxes 2024: Our Essential Cheat Sheet to Filing Your Tax Return ...

    As you navigate the 2024 tax season, use our cheat sheet to help you find all the answers you need. The resources below provide expert advice on tricky tax topics and can help you start your ...

  27. OpenAI reveals Sora, its new text-to-video generator

    SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — The maker of ChatGPT on Thursday unveiled its next leap into generative artificial intelligence with a tool that instantly makes short videos in response to written commands. San Francisco-based OpenAI's new text-to-video generator, called Sora, isn't the first of its kind. Google, Meta and the startup Runway ML are ...

  28. Google Uses AI To Detect Fake Online Reviews Faster

    A Year Of More Honest Reviews. In 2023, Google received approximately 20 million daily updates to local business information, including details such as business hours and customer reviews.

  29. BHP considers closure of Nickel West operations which employ about

    The review of BHP's operations also throws into doubt a proposed furnace rebuild at the Kalgoorlie nickel smelter, which would require up to 2,000 construction workers during peak periods.