• SpringerLink shop

Types of journal articles

It is helpful to familiarise yourself with the different types of articles published by journals. Although it may appear there are a large number of types of articles published due to the wide variety of names they are published under, most articles published are one of the following types; Original Research, Review Articles, Short reports or Letters, Case Studies, Methodologies.

Original Research:

This is the most common type of journal manuscript used to publish full reports of data from research. It may be called an  Original Article, Research Article, Research, or just  Article, depending on the journal. The Original Research format is suitable for many different fields and different types of studies. It includes full Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion sections.

Short reports or Letters:

These papers communicate brief reports of data from original research that editors believe will be interesting to many researchers, and that will likely stimulate further research in the field. As they are relatively short the format is useful for scientists with results that are time sensitive (for example, those in highly competitive or quickly-changing disciplines). This format often has strict length limits, so some experimental details may not be published until the authors write a full Original Research manuscript. These papers are also sometimes called Brief communications .

Review Articles:

Review Articles provide a comprehensive summary of research on a certain topic, and a perspective on the state of the field and where it is heading. They are often written by leaders in a particular discipline after invitation from the editors of a journal. Reviews are often widely read (for example, by researchers looking for a full introduction to a field) and highly cited. Reviews commonly cite approximately 100 primary research articles.

TIP: If you would like to write a Review but have not been invited by a journal, be sure to check the journal website as some journals to not consider unsolicited Reviews. If the website does not mention whether Reviews are commissioned it is wise to send a pre-submission enquiry letter to the journal editor to propose your Review manuscript before you spend time writing it.  

Case Studies:

These articles report specific instances of interesting phenomena. A goal of Case Studies is to make other researchers aware of the possibility that a specific phenomenon might occur. This type of study is often used in medicine to report the occurrence of previously unknown or emerging pathologies.

Methodologies or Methods

These articles present a new experimental method, test or procedure. The method described may either be completely new, or may offer a better version of an existing method. The article should describe a demonstrable advance on what is currently available.

Back │ Next

Banner

Science Research: Primary Sources and Original Research vs. Review Articles

  • Additional Web Resources
  • Health & Science Databases
  • Primary Sources and Original Research vs. Review Articles
  • Citation Guides, Generators, and Tools

Original Research vs. Review Articles. How can I tell the Difference?

Research vs review articles.

It's often difficult to tell the difference between original research articles and review articles. Here are some explanations and tips that may help: "Review articles are often as lengthy or even longer that original research articles. What the authors of review articles are doing in analysing and evaluating current research and investigations related to a specific topic, field, or problem. They are not primary sources since they review previously published material. They can be of great value for identifying potentially good primary sources, but they aren't primary themselves. Primary research articles can be identified by a commonly used format. If an article contains the following elements, you can count on it being a primary research article. Look for sections titled:

Methods (sometimes with variations, such as Materials and Methods) Results (usually followed with charts and statistical tables) Discussion

You can also read the abstract to get a good sense of the kind of article that is being presented.

If it is a review article instead of a research article, the abstract should make that pretty clear. If there is no abstract at all, that in itself may be a sign that it is not a primary resource. Short research articles, such as those found in Science and similar scientific publications that mix news, editorials, and forums with research reports, however, may not include any of those elements. In those cases look at the words the authors use, phrases such as "we tested"  and "in our study, we measured" will tell you that the article is reporting on original research."*

*Taken from Ithca College Libraries

Primary and Secondary Sources for Science

In the Sciences, primary sources are documents that provide full description of the original research. For example, a primary source would be a journal article where scientists describe their research on the human immune system. A secondary source would be an article commenting or analyzing the scientists' research on the human immune system.

  EXAMPLES OF PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SOURCES

Source: The Evolution of Scientific Information (from  Encyclopedia of Library and Information Science , vol. 26).

Primary Vs. Secondary Vs. Tertiary Sources

  • << Previous: Books
  • Next: Citation Guides, Generators, and Tools >>
  • Last Updated: Nov 16, 2023 1:58 PM
  • URL: https://andersonuniversity.libguides.com/ScienceResearch

Thrift Library | (864) 231-2050 | [email protected] | Anderson University 316 Boulevard Anderson, SC 29621

  • Main Library
  • Digital Fabrication Lab
  • Data Visualization Lab
  • Business Learning Center
  • Klai Juba Wald Architectural Studies Library
  • NDSU Nursing at Sanford Health Library
  • Research Assistance
  • Special Collections
  • Digital Collections
  • Collection Development Policy
  • Course Reserves
  • Request Library Instruction
  • Main Library Services
  • Alumni & Community
  • Academic Support Services in the Library
  • Libraries Resources for Employees
  • Book Equipment or Study Rooms
  • Librarians by Academic Subject
  • Germans from Russia Heritage Collection
  • NDSU Archives
  • Mission, Vision, and Strategic Plan 2022-2024
  • Staff Directory
  • Floor Plans
  • The Libraries Magazine
  • Accommodations for People with Disabilities
  • Annual Report
  • Donate to the Libraries
  • Equity, Diversity and Inclusion
  • Faculty Senate Library Committee
  • Undergraduate Research Award

What is an original research article?

An original research article is a report of research activity that is written by the researchers who conducted the research or experiment. Original research articles may also be referred to as: “primary research articles” or “primary scientific literature.” In science courses, instructors may also refer to these as “peer-reviewed articles” or “refereed articles.”

Original research articles in the sciences have a specific purpose, follow a scientific article format, are peer reviewed, and published in academic journals.

Identifying Original Research: What to Look For

An "original research article" is an article that is reporting original research about new data or theories that have not been previously published. That might be the results of new experiments, or newly derived models or simulations. The article will include a detailed description of the methods used to produce them, so that other researchers can verify them. This description is often found in a section called "methods" or "materials and methods" or similar. Similarly, the results will generally be described in great detail, often in a section called "results."

Since the original research article is reporting the results of new research, the authors should be the scientists who conducted that research. They will have expertise in the field, and will usually be employed by a university or research lab.

In comparison, a newspaper or magazine article (such as in  The New York Times  or  National Geographic ) will usually be written by a journalist reporting on the actions of someone else.

An original research article will be written by and for scientists who study related topics. As such, the article should use precise, technical language to ensure that other researchers have an exact understanding of what was done, how to do it, and why it matters. There will be plentiful citations to previous work, helping place the research article in a broader context. The article will be published in an academic journal, follow a scientific format, and undergo peer-review.

Original research articles in the sciences follow the scientific format. ( This tutorial from North Carolina State University illustrates some of the key features of this format.)

Look for signs of this format in the subject headings or subsections of the article. You should see the following:

Scientific research that is published in academic journals undergoes a process called "peer review."

The peer review process goes like this:

  • A researcher writes a paper and sends it in to an academic journal, where it is read by an editor
  • The editor then sends the article to other scientists who study similar topics, who can best evaluate the article
  • The scientists/reviewers examine the article's research methodology, reasoning, originality, and sginificance
  • The scientists/reviewers then make suggestions and comments to impove the paper
  • The original author is then given these suggestions and comments, and makes changes as needed
  • This process repeats until everyone is satisfied and the article can be published within the academic journal

For more details about this process see the Peer Reviewed Publications guide.

This journal article  is an example. It was published in the journal  Royal Society Open Science  in 2015. Clicking on the button that says "Review History" will show the comments by the editors, reviewers and the author as it went through the peer review process. The "About Us" menu provides details about this journal; "About the journal" under that tab includes the statement that the journal is peer reviewed.

Review articles

There are a variety of article types published in academic, peer-reviewed journals, but the two most common are original research articles and review articles . They can look very similar, but have different purposes and structures.

Like original research articles, review articles are aimed at scientists and undergo peer-review. Review articles often even have “abstract,” “introduction,” and “reference” sections. However, they will not (generally) have a “methods” or “results” section because they are not reporting new data or theories. Instead, they review the current state of knowledge on a topic.

Press releases, newspaper or magazine articles

These won't be in a formal scientific format or be peer reviewed. The author will usually be a journalist, and the audience will be the general public. Since most readers are not interested in the precise details of the research, the language will usually be nontechnical and broad. Citations will be rare or nonexistent.

Tips for Finding Original research Articles

Search for articles in one of the library databases recommend for your subject area . If you are using Google, try searching in Google Scholar instead and you will get results that are more likely to be original research articles than what will come up in a regular Google search!

For tips on using library databases to find articles, see our Library DIY guides .

Tips for Finding the Source of a News Report about Science

If you've seen or heard a report about a new scientific finding or claim, these tips can help you find the original source:

  • Often, the report will mention where the original research was published; look for sentences like "In an article published yesterday in the journal  Nature ..." You can use this to find the issue of the journal where the research was published, and look at the table of contents to find the original article.
  • The report will often name the researchers involved. You can search relevant databases for their name and the topic of the report to find the original research that way.
  • Sometimes you may have to go through multiple articles to find the original source. For example, a video or blog post may be based on a newspaper article, which in turn is reporting on a scientific discovery published in another journal; be sure to find the original research article.
  • Don't be afraid to ask a librarian for help!

Search The Site

Find Your Librarian  

Phone:  Circulation:  (701) 231-8888 Reference:  (701) 231-8888 Administration:  (701) 231-8753

Email:  Administration InterLibrary Loan (ILL)

  • Online Services
  • Phone/Email Directory
  • Registration And Records
  • Government Information
  • Library DIY
  • Subject and Course Guides
  • Special Topics
  • Collection Highlights
  • Digital Horizons
  • NDSU Repository (IR)
  • Libraries Hours
  • News & Events

NFS 4021 Contemporary Topics in Nutrition: Research Articles vs Review Articles

  • Research Articles vs Review Articles
  • Citation Help

Agriculture Support Librarian

Profile Photo

Research Articles and Review Articles Defined Review

"A  research article  is a  primary source ...that is, it  reports the methods and results of an original study performed by the authors . The kind of study may vary (it could have been an experiment, survey, interview, etc.), but in all cases, raw data have been collected and analyzed by the authors, and conclusions drawn from the results of that analysis.

A  review article  is a  secondary source ...it is written about other articles, and does not report original research of its own.  Review articles are very important, as they draw upon the articles that they review to suggest new research directions, to strengthen support for existing theories and/or identify patterns among existing research studies.   For student researchers, review articles provide a great overview of the existing literature on a topic.    If you find a literature review that fits your topic, take a look at its references/works cited list for leads on other relevant articles and books!"

From  https://apus.libanswers.com/faq/2324 , "What's the difference between a research and a review article?"

  • Example of a RESEARCH Article Lin CL, Huang LC, Chang YT, Chen RY, Yang SH. Effectiveness of Health Coaching in Diabetes Control and Lifestyle Improvement: A Randomized-Controlled Trial. Nutrients. 2021 Oct 29;13(11):3878.
  • Example of a REVIEW Article Ojo O, Ojo OO, Adebowale F, Wang XH. The Effect of Dietary Glycaemic Index on Glycaemia in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Nutrients. 2018 Mar 19;10(3):373.

Difference between Reviews and Research Articles

Review Article: Identifies previously published research on a topic and summarizes the information (secondary source). Discusses what is already known and can be used to identify gaps in the field.  Usually no set layout. No original research is being presented. Written for a more general audience and easier to read. Both Written by a subject expert such as a scientist or researcher. Can be published in a scholarly, peer-reviewed journal. Research Article: Follows the scientific method. Usually provides a brief background on prior research (introduction) Conducts an experiment and reports the findings. Authors have NEW original research data (primary source) and discusses their results. Written at an advanced level; usually contains lots of jargon.

Research Article Break Down Review

Research articles follow a particular format.  Look for:

  • A brief  introduction  will often include a review of the existing literature on the topic studied, and explain the rationale of the author's study.
  • A  methods  section, where authors describe how they collected and analyzed data.  Statistical analysis are included.  
  • A  results  section describes the outcomes of the data analysis.  Charts and graphs illustrating the results are typically included.
  • In the  discussion , authors will explain their interpretation of their results and theorize on their importance to existing and future research.
  • References  or  works cited  are always included.  These are the articles and books that the authors drew upon to plan their study and to support their discussion.
  • << Previous: Welcome
  • Next: Databases >>
  • Last Updated: Feb 7, 2024 10:28 AM
  • URL: https://guides.lib.lsu.edu/NFS4021

Provide Website Feedback Accessibility Statement

Royal Society of Chemistry

Writing a review article: what to do with my literature review

ORCID logo

Introduction

Review articles allow the readers to get a landscape view of a topic, but readers can also use the collection of references cited in a review article to dig deeper into a topic. Thus, they are valuable resources to consult. Well written review articles are often highly cited and could increase the visibility and reputation of the authors.

Decisions to make before starting to write a review article

It might be tempting to consider adapting a literature review, that is part of an article, proposal or dissertation, into a published review article. Such a literature review can be used as a starting point to build a review article upon. However, a literature review often does not follow the quality criteria of a formal review article or specific types of reviews and therefore should be reworked based on the steps illustrated in this editorial.

Types of review articles suitable for chemistry education research and practice

Perspectives, narrative and integrative reviews, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, appropriate ways of approaching a (systematic) review – writing a review step-by-step, step 1. topic and research question.

After the topic is chosen, it may be helpful to narrow the review down to a clear aim or question that the review seeks to answer. This helps to facilitate the selection of the publications to be reviewed. In addition to the topic, the author should seek to clarify the aim of the review by identifying the likely audience for such a review and how these individuals would benefit from this particular review. Review articles should explicitly mention the nature and scope of the intended review, as well as making a case for who would benefit from the review and how they would benefit.

Step 2. Determine the search and selection criteria

Step 3. inclusion or exclusion of publications, step 4. synthesis of results, step 5. check for clarity and bias, how should review articles be cited as a reference in cerp manuscripts, reflections on the impact of a review article.

One can raise the question of whether a review article is actually supportive or harmful for the original articles included ( Ketcham and Crawford, 2007 ). Authors tend to cite a review article more often compared to original work, thus lowering the number of citations for the respective articles. However, on the other hand, if studies are included and discussed in a review, readers who would like to learn more or access the original perspectives tend to download, read and possibly cite them as well. The benefits of publishing review articles clearly outweigh any potential shortcomings, and their scarcity in the field of chemistry education opens up a venue for publication calls.

  • Alfieri L., Nokes-Malach T. J. and Schunn C. D., (2013), Learning Through Case Comparisons: A Meta-Analytic Review, Educ. Psychol. , 48 , 87–113.
  • Bisra K., Liu Q., Nesbit J. C., Salimi F. and Winne P. H., (2018), Inducing Self-Explanation: a Meta-Analysis, Educ. Psychol. Rev. , 30 , 703–725.
  • Castro-Alonso J. C., de Koning B. B., Fiorella L. and Paas F., (2021), Five Strategies for Optimizing Instructional Materials: Instructor- and Learner-Managed Cognitive Load, Educ. Psychol. Rev. ,  DOI: 10.1007/s10648-021-09606-9 .
  • Flaherty A. A., (2020), A review of affective chemistry education research and its implications for future research, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. , 21 , 698–713.
  • Freeman S., Eddy S. L., McDonough M., Smith M. K., Okoroafor N., Jordt H. and Wenderoth M. P., (2014), Active learning increases student performance in science, engineering, and mathematics, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. , 111 , 8410–8415.
  • Kahveci A., (2013), in Tsaparlis G. and Sevian H. (ed.), Concepts of Matter in Science Education , Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 249–278.
  • Ketcham C. M. and Crawford J. M., (2007), The impact of review articles, Lab. Invest. , 87 , 1174–1185.
  • Rahman M. T. and Lewis S. E., (2020), Evaluating the evidence base for evidence-based instructional practices in chemistry through meta-analysis, J. Res. Sci. Teach. , 57 , 765–693.
  • Taber K. S., (2014), The significance of implicit knowledge for learning and teaching chemistry, Chem. Educ. Res. Pract. , 15 , 447–461.
  • Taylor and Francis, (2021), What is a review article?, https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/publishing-your-research/writing-your-paper/how-to-write-review-article/.
  • Theobald E. J., Hill M. J., Tran E., Agrawal S., Arroyo E. N., Behling S., Chambwe N., Cintrón D. L., Cooper J. D., Dunster G., Grummer J. A., Hennessey K., Hsiao J., Iranon N., Jones L., Jordt H., Keller M., Lacey M. E., Littlefield C. E., Lowe A., Newman S., Okolo V., Olroyd S., Peecook B. R., Pickett S. B., Slager D. L., Caviedes-Solis I. W., Stanchak K. E., Sundaravardan V., Valdebenito C., Williams C. R., Zinsli K. and Freeman S., (2020), Active learning narrows achievement gaps for underrepresented students in undergraduate science, technology, engineering, and math, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. , 117 , 6476–6483.
  • 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 3,066,077 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

original article review article

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?

Sammy James

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

Deal with Friendship Problems at School

Trending Articles

Everything You Need to Know to Rock the Corporate Goth Aesthetic

Watch Articles

Cook Fresh Cauliflower

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

Get all the best how-tos!

Sign up for wikiHow's weekly email newsletter

How to Write a Review Article

  • Types of Review Articles
  • Before Writing a Review Article
  • Determining Where to Publish
  • Searching the Literature
  • Citation Management
  • Reading a Review Article

What is a Review Article?

The purpose of writing a review article is for knowledge updating concerning a topic.

A review article aims to highlight:

  • What has been done?
  • What has been found?
  • What issues have not been addressed?
  • What issues remain to be debated?
  • What new issues have been raised?
  • What will be the future direction of research?

Similarities and Differences to Original Research Articles

Differences Between Original Research Articles and Review Articles

Venn Diagram original research vs review article

  • An original research article aims to: Provides background information (Intro.) on prior research, Reasons for present study, Issues to be investigated by the present study, Written for experts. Authors describe: Research methods & materials, Data acquisition/analysis tools, Results, Discussion of results.
  • Both are Peer-reviewed for: Accuracy, Quality, Biases, Conflict of interest.
  • A review article aims to: Extensive survey of published research articles about a specific topic, Critical appraising of research findings, summarize up-to-date research findings, Identify critical issues to be addressed, Written for experts and general audiences, Be a source of original research.

Figure by Zhiyong Han, PhD

  • << Previous: Home
  • Next: Types of Review Articles >>

Seton Hall logo

  • The Interprofessional Health Sciences Library
  • 123 Metro Boulevard
  • Nutley, NJ 07110
  • [email protected]
  • Visiting Campus
  • News and Events
  • Parents and Families
  • Web Accessibility
  • Career Center
  • Public Safety
  • Accountability
  • Privacy Statements
  • Report a Problem
  • Login to LibApps

Next-Gen. Now.

  • Study resources
  • Calendar - Graduate
  • Calendar - Undergraduate
  • Class schedules
  • Class cancellations
  • Course registration
  • Important academic dates
  • More academic resources
  • Campus services
  • IT services
  • Job opportunities
  • Safety & prevention
  • Mental health support
  • Student Service Centre (Birks)
  • All campus services
  • Calendar of events
  • Latest news
  • Media Relations
  • Faculties, Schools & Colleges
  • Arts and Science
  • Gina Cody School of Engineering and Computer Science
  • John Molson School of Business
  • School of Graduate Studies
  • All Schools, Colleges & Departments.
  • Directories
  • My Library account Renew books and more
  • Book a study room or scanner Reserve a space for your group online
  • Interlibrary loans (Colombo) Request books from external libraries
  • Zotero (formerly RefWorks) Manage your citations and create bibliographies
  • Article/Chapter Scan & Deliver Request a PDF of an article/chapter we have in our physical collection
  • Contactless Book Pickup Request books, DVDs and more from our physical collection while the Library is closed
  • WebPrint Upload documents to print on campus
  • Course reserves Online course readings
  • Spectrum Deposit a thesis or article
  • Sofia Discovery tool
  • Databases by subject
  • Course Reserves
  • E-journals via Browzine
  • E-journals via Sofia
  • Article/chapter scan
  • Intercampus delivery of bound periodicals/microforms
  • Interlibrary loans
  • Spectrum Research Repository
  • Special Collections
  • Additional resources & services
  • Subject & course guides
  • Open Educational Resources Guide
  • Borrowing & renewing
  • General guides for users
  • Evaluating...
  • Ask a librarian
  • Research Skills Tutorial
  • Bibliometrics & research impact guide
  • Concordia University Press
  • Copyright guide
  • Copyright guide for thesis preparation
  • Digital scholarship
  • Digital preservation
  • Open Access
  • ORCiD at Concordia
  • Research data management guide
  • Scholarship of Teaching & Learning
  • Systematic Reviews
  • Borrow (laptops, tablets, equipment)
  • Connect (netname, Wi-Fi, guest accounts)
  • Desktop computers, software & availability maps
  • Group study, presentation practice & classrooms
  • Printers, copiers & scanners
  • Technology Sandbox
  • Visualization Studio
  • Webster Library
  • Vanier Library
  • Grey Nuns Reading Room
  • Study spaces
  • Floor plans
  • Book a group study room/scanner
  • Room booking for academic events
  • Exhibitions
  • Librarians & staff
  • Work with us
  • Memberships & collaborations
  • Indigenous Student Librarian program
  • Wikipedian in residence
  • Researcher in residence
  • Feedback & improvement
  • Annual reports & fast facts
  • Strategic Plan 2016/21
  • Library Services Fund
  • Giving to the Library
  • Policies & Code of Conduct
  • My Library account
  • Book a study room or scanner
  • Interlibrary loans (Colombo)
  • Zotero (formerly RefWorks)
  • Article/Chapter Scan & Deliver
  • Contactless Book Pickup
  • Course reserves

Review vs. Research Articles

How can you tell if you are looking at a research paper, review paper or a systematic review  examples and article characteristics are provided below to help you figure it out., research papers.

A research article describes a study that was performed by the article’s author(s). It explains the methodology of the study, such as how data was collected and analyzed, and clarifies what the results mean. Each step of the study is reported in detail so that other researchers can repeat the experiment.

To determine if a paper is a research article, examine its wording. Research articles describe actions taken by the researcher(s) during the experimental process. Look for statements like “we tested,” “I measured,” or “we investigated.” Research articles also describe the outcomes of studies. Check for phrases like “the study found” or “the results indicate.” Next, look closely at the formatting of the article. Research papers are divided into sections that occur in a particular order: abstract, introduction, methods, results, discussion, and references.

Let's take a closer look at this research paper by Bacon et al. published in the International Journal of Hypertension :

research1

Review Papers

Review articles do not describe original research conducted by the author(s). Instead, they give an overview of a specific subject by examining previously published studies on the topic. The author searches for and selects studies on the subject and then tries to make sense of their findings. In particular, review articles look at whether the outcomes of the chosen studies are similar, and if they are not, attempt to explain the conflicting results. By interpreting the findings of previous studies, review articles are able to present the current knowledge and understanding of a specific topic.

Since review articles summarize the research on a particular topic, students should read them for background information before consulting detailed, technical research articles. Furthermore, review articles are a useful starting point for a research project because their reference lists can be used to find additional articles on the subject.

Let's take a closer look at this review paper by Bacon et al. published in Sports Medicine :

review1

Systematic Review Papers

A systematic review is a type of review article that tries to limit the occurrence of bias. Traditional, non-systematic reviews can be biased because they do not include all of the available papers on the review’s topic; only certain studies are discussed by the author. No formal process is used to decide which articles to include in the review. Consequently, unpublished articles, older papers, works in foreign languages, manuscripts published in small journals, and studies that conflict with the author’s beliefs can be overlooked or excluded. Since traditional reviews do not have to explain the techniques used to select the studies, it can be difficult to determine if the author’s bias affected the review’s findings.

Systematic reviews were developed to address the problem of bias. Unlike traditional reviews, which cover a broad topic, systematic reviews focus on a single question, such as if a particular intervention successfully treats a medical condition. Systematic reviews then track down all of the available studies that address the question, choose some to include in the review, and critique them using predetermined criteria. The studies are found, selected, and evaluated using a formal, scientific methodology in order to minimize the effect of the author’s bias. The methodology is clearly explained in the systematic review so that readers can form opinions about the quality of the review.

Let's take a closer look this systematic review paper by Vigano et al. published in Lancet Oncology :

sysreview1

Finding Review and Research Papers in PubMed

Many databases have special features that allow the searcher to restrict results to articles that match specific criteria. In other words, only articles of a certain type will be displayed in the search results. These “limiters” can be useful when searching for research or review articles. PubMed has a limiter for article type, which is located on the left sidebar of the search results page. This limiter can filter the search results to show only review articles.

original article review article

© Concordia University

"How Do I?" @JWULibrary

original article review article

Sample Question

  • JWU-Providence Library

Q. What's the difference between a research article and a review article?

  • 35 about the library
  • 28 articles & journals
  • 1 Borrowing
  • 9 citing sources
  • 17 company & industry
  • 11 computers
  • 1 copyright compliance
  • 5 countries & travel
  • 2 course registration
  • 10 culinary
  • 51 databases
  • 3 education
  • 2 Interlibrary loan
  • 5 job search
  • 6 libguides
  • 9 market research
  • 25 my library account
  • 12 requests
  • 24 research basics
  • 18 research topics
  • 2 study rooms
  • 16 technology
  • 7 textbooks
  • 42 university
  • 3 video tutorial
  • 1 writing_help

Answered By: Sarah Naomi Campbell Last Updated: Sep 07, 2018     Views: 211848

Watch this short video to learn about types of scholarly articles, including research articles and literature reviews!

Not in the mood for a video? Read on!

What's the difference between a research article and a review article?

Research articles , sometimes referred to as empirical  or primary sources , report on original research. They will typically include sections such as an introduction, methods, results, and discussion.

Here is a more detailed explanation of research articles .

Review articles , sometimes called literature reviews  or secondary sources , synthesize or analyze research already conducted in primary sources. They generally summarize the current state of research on a given topic.

Here is a more detailed explanation of review articles .

The video above was created by the Virginia Commonwealth University Libraries .

The defintions, and the linked detailed explanations, are paraphrased from the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association , 6th ed .

The linked explanations are provided by the Mohawk Valley Community College Libraries .

Links & Files

  • How do I find empirical articles in the library databases?
  • Share on Facebook

Was this helpful? Yes 63 No 19

Comments (0)

Related topics.

  • about the library
  • articles & journals
  • citing sources
  • company & industry
  • copyright compliance
  • countries & travel
  • course registration
  • Interlibrary loan
  • market research
  • my library account
  • research basics
  • research topics
  • study rooms
  • video tutorial
  • writing_help

Downcity Library:

111 Dorrance Street Providence, Rhode Island 02903

401-598-1121

Harborside Library:

321 Harborside Boulevard Providence, RI 02905

401-598-1466

  • Location and Directions
  • Off-Campus Access
  • Staff Directory
  • Student Employment
  • Pay Bills and Fines
  • Chat with a Librarian
  • Course Reserves
  • Interlibrary Loan (ILL)
  • Study Rooms
  • Research Appointment
  • Culinary Museum

How to write an original article

Affiliations.

  • 1 Servicio de Urología, Fundació Puigvert, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, España. Electronic address: [email protected].
  • 2 Servicio de Urología, Fundació Puigvert, Universidad Autónoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, España.
  • PMID: 29779648
  • DOI: 10.1016/j.acuro.2018.02.011

Context: A correctly drafted original article gives information on what was done, why it was done, how it was done, the result of what was done, and the significance of what was done. Many articles fail to report their results effectively.

Objective: To describe the characteristics of an original article and to give practical recommendations to prevent the most common errors in our environment.

Evidence acquisition: We performed a systematic search of the terms "how to write a scientific article", "structure of the original article" and "publishing an article" in the databases PubMed and SCOPUS. We analysed the structure of an original article and the characteristics of its parts and prepared advice on the publication of an article.

Evidence synthesis: The journal's guidelines for authors should be read. It is usual for the original article to follow the IMRAD structure: Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion. The introduction states briefly why the study was performed. The methods' section should give a detailed explanation of how the study was performed. The results should be clearly presented, with the help of tables, without repeating information. The discussion explains the relevance of the results and contrasts them with those of other authors. Any limitations and a conclusion supported by the results must be included.

Conclusions: Writing an original article correctly requires practice and it must be supported by a good research work in order to be published.

Keywords: Escribir un artículo; Estructura del artículo original; Publicar un artículo; Publishing an article; Structure of the original article; Writing an article.

Copyright © 2018 AEU. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

Publication types

  • Guidelines as Topic
  • Publishing / standards*
  • Writing / standards*

Jump to navigation

Home

Cochrane Colloquium Abstracts

Review or original article the manuscript category of systematic review and meta-analysis in high-impact biomedical journals.

Background: Unlike a narrative review, a systematic review involves the application of scientific strategies, in ways that limit bias, to the assembly and critical appraisal of all relevant studies that address a specific clinical question. A meta-analysis is a type of systematic review that uses a statistical strategy for assembling the results of several studies into a single estimate. However, when an author submits a systematic review and meta-analysis to journals, the manuscript category between a review and original article is indistinct.

Objectives: To investigate the manuscript category of systematic reviews and meta-analysis in biomedical journals.

Methods: Biomedical journals (impact factor >6) that consider systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the field of clinical sciences for publication were included. The Instructions to Authors of biomedical journals and the article category printed on the front page of the literature were reviewed for evidence of an editorial policy on the manuscript category.

Results: 63 of 311 biomedical journals publish systematic reviews and meta-analyses of clinical issues. In the Instructions to Authors, 4.76% classified a systematic review and meta-analysis as an original article, 15.9% as a review, 20.6% as an independent type of manuscript, and 58.7% did not mention any policy on the article type for systematic review and meta-analysis. For the article category posted at the front page of the literature, 31.7% printed systematic reviews and meta-analyses as an original article, 9.52% as a review, 4.76% as a meta-analysis, and 39.7% did not reveal the article type on the front page.

Conclusions: Most of the high-impact clinical biomedical journals did not mention their policy on classification of systematic reviews and meta-analyses in the Instructions to Authors. However, a relatively large proportion of journals recognize a systematic review and meta-analysis as an original article.

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

How to Print Tracked Changes and Comments in Microsoft Word Documents

How to track sleep with apple watch: a complete guide, 5 ways to unlock secure folder in samsung without password, how to do a chinese split, 5 best budget bookshelf speakers: wired and wireless, nomad titanium band review: titanium for your apple watch, 3 ways to find photos of you and a friend on facebook, how to reset network settings on windows 11, 5 ways to fix tinder ‘too many login attempts’ error, how to identify a refurbished iphone, how to write an article review (with sample reviews)  .

original article review article

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.

original article review article

How to Splint a Cat’s Broken Leg

original article review article

How to Stay Young: 14 Steps

original article review article

6 Ways to Make Homemade Popsicles

original article review article

How to Fight Like Goku: 12 Steps

original article review article

3 Ways to Be Nice to an Ex

original article review article

How to Begin Running: 11 Steps

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...

original article review article

Writing 100 (Winek)

  • Pre-Activities
  • Session Info
  • Journals in Your Field
  • Primary & Secondary Sources
  • Research Questions & Keywords
  • Review Search Strategies
  • Select Library Databases
  • Databases & Independent Searching
  • Searching in Google
  • LibKey Nomad
  • Use Subject Terms
  • Use Methodology Limiters

Scholarly Articles

Similarities & differences, types of scholarly articles.

  • Known Items
  • About Scholarly Articles
  • Reading Scholarly Articles
  • Database Tutorials
  • How Do I Cite in APA?
  • How Do I Cite in ASA?
  • How Do I Cite in Chicago/Turabian?
  • How Do I Cite in CSE/Science?
  • How Do I Cite in IEEE?
  • How Do I Cite in MLA?
  • Research Help
  • Your Feedback
  • Original (Empirical) Articles
  • Review Articles

original (empirical) article

based on an experiment or study. This type of article will have a methodology section that tells how the experiment was set up and conducted, a results or discussion section, and usually a conclusion section. In psychology courses, you are often asked to find empirical articles. Empirical articles are original research articles.

review article (literature review)

written to bring together and summarize the results/conclusions from multiple original research articles/studies. This types of article will not usually have a methodology section, and they generally have very extensive bibliographies.

systematic review

a form of literature review that comprehensively identifies, appraises, and synthesizes all relevant research on a specifically formulated question.

meta analysis

combines carefully selected data from previous empirical studies to bring more rigor to a statistical or other analysis.

Both original (empirical) articles and literature reviews are useful. One is not better than the other.

  • published in journals
  • often peer-reviewed
  • written by experts in the field

They are different in one important way.

  • Original articles report the findings of one research study the authors conducted themselves.
  • Review articles report on the findings of a variety of research studies that others conducted.

In your case, you are writing a literature review, so you will need to find original articles. However, there may be a literature review related to your topic that could be helpful to point you to the original (empirical) articles.

  • << Previous: Use Methodology Limiters
  • Next: Known Items >>
  • Last Updated: Jan 23, 2024 8:31 AM
  • URL: https://libguides.ucmerced.edu/wri100-winek1

University of California, Merced

  • Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Vision Pro Review: Apple’s First Headset Lacks Polish and Purpose

Billed as the future of computing, the $3,500 goggles can’t replace a laptop for work. At times, wearing them also made our columnist feel nauseated.

original article review article

By Brian X. Chen

Brian X. Chen, the personal tech columnist for The New York Times, has worn more than a dozen tech headsets over 12 years.

About 17 years ago, Steve Jobs took the stage at a San Francisco convention center and said he was introducing three products: an iPod, a phone and an internet browser.

“These are not three separate devices,” he said. “This is one device, and we are calling it iPhone.”

At $500, the first iPhone was relatively expensive, but I was eager to dump my mediocre Motorola flip phone and splurge. There were flaws — including sluggish cellular internet speeds. But the iPhone delivered on its promises.

Over the last week, I’ve had a very different experience with a new first-generation product from Apple: the Vision Pro , a virtual reality headset that resembles a pair of ski goggles . The $3,500 wearable computer, which was released Friday, uses cameras so you can see the outside world while juggling apps and videos.

Apple calls it a “spatial computer” that blends together the physical and digital worlds for people to work, watch movies and play games.

Apple declined to provide an early review unit to The New York Times, so I bought a Vision Pro on Friday. ( It costs much more than $3,500 with the add-ons that many people will want, including a $200 carrying case, $180 AirPods and $150 prescription lens inserts.) After using the headset for about five days, I’m unconvinced that people will get much value from it.

The device feels less polished than past first-generation Apple products I’ve used. It’s not better for doing work than a computer, and the games I’ve tried so far aren’t fun, which makes it difficult to recommend. An important feature — the ability to place video calls with a humanlike digital avatar that resembles the wearer — terrified children during a family FaceTime call.

original article review article

The headset is superb at delivering on one of its promises: playing video, including high-definition movies and your own recordings in 3-D that let you immerse yourself in past memories, which is both eerie and cool.

In the last decade, companies like Meta, HTC and Sony have struggled mightily to sell headsets to mainstream consumers because their products were cumbersome to wear, their apps were limited and they looked uncool.

The Vision Pro has a superior user interface, better picture quality, more apps and higher computing power than other headsets. But it’s slightly heavier than Meta’s cheaper Quest headsets , and it plugs into an external battery pack that lasts only two hours.

The ski-goggle aesthetic of the Apple product looks better than the bulky plastic headset visors of the past. But the videos posted by early adopters walking around outside with the headset — men I call Vision Bros — confirm that people still look ridiculous wearing tech goggles, even when they are designed by Apple.

A Better Interface

The Vision Pro is miles ahead of other headsets I’ve tested in making an immersive 3-D interface simple for users to control with their eyes and hands. I let four colleagues wear the headset in the office and watched all of them learn to use it in seconds.

That’s because it’s familiar to anyone who owns an iPhone or a similar smartphone. You’ll see a grid of app icons. Looking at an app is equivalent to hovering over it with a mouse cursor; to click on it, you tap your thumb and index finger together, making a quick pinch. The pinch gesture can also be used to move around and expand windows.

The Vision Pro includes a knob called the Digital Crown. Turning it counterclockwise lets you see the real world in the background while keeping digital windows of your apps in the foreground. Turning it clockwise hides the real world with an opaque background.

I preferred to see into physical reality most of the time, but I still felt isolated. The headset cuts off part of your periphery, creating a binoculars-like effect. I confess that it was hard at times to remember to walk my dogs because I didn’t see them or hear their whining, and in another session, I tripped over a stool. An Apple spokeswoman referred to the Vision Pro’s safety guidelines, which advise users to clear away obstacles .

Getting Work Done

original article review article

When using the headset for work, you can surround yourself with multiple floating apps — your spreadsheet can be in the center, a notes app to your right and a browser to your left, for example. It’s the 3-D version of juggling windows on a computer screen. As neat as that sounds, pinching floating screens doesn’t make working more efficient because you need to keep twisting your head to see them.

I could tolerate juggling a notes app, a browser and the Microsoft Word app for no longer than 15 minutes before feeling nauseated.

The least joyful part of the Vision Pro is typing with its floating keyboard, which requires poking one key at a time. I had planned to write this review with the headset before realizing I wouldn’t make my deadline.

There’s an option to connect a physical keyboard, but at that point I’d rather use a laptop that doesn’t add weight to my face.

The Vision Pro can also work with Mac computers, where you can mirror the screen into the headset as a virtual window that can be expanded to look like a large display. In my tests, there was a consistent lag — each keystroke took a fraction of a second to register virtually, and the mouse cursor moved sluggishly. I also instinctively wanted to control the Mac with pinches, even though it’s not set up to work that way, which was frustrating.

Video player loading

Next I tried the headset in the kitchen, loading a pizza recipe in the web browser while I grabbed and measured ingredients. Moving around while looking through the camera, I became nauseated again and had to remove the headset. The Vision Pro is most comfortable to use while seated. Apple advises people to take breaks to reduce motion sickness.

Video calling is now an essential part of office life, and here the Vision Pro is especially inferior to a laptop with a camera. The headset uses its cameras to snap photos of your face that are stitched into a 3-D avatar called a Persona, which Apple has labeled a “beta” feature because it is unfinished.

Personas are so cringe that people will be embarrassed to use these in a work call. The Vision Pro produced an unflattering portrait of me with no cheekbones and blurred ears. In a FaceTime call with my in-laws, they said the blur conjured 1980s studio portrait vibes.

One of my nieces, a 3-year-old, turned around and walked away at the sight of virtual Uncle Brian. The other, a 7-year-old, hid behind her father, whispering in his ear, “He looks fake.”

Are We Entertained?

original article review article

Video is where the Vision Pro shines. When streaming movies through apps like Disney+ and Max, you can pinch the corner of a video and drag it to expand it into a jumbo high-resolution TV; some movies, like “Avengers: Endgame” and “Avatar 2,” can be viewed in 3-D. The picture looks much brighter and clearer than the quality in Meta’s Quest products. Audio quality on the Apple headset is excellent, but the speakers are loud, so you’ll need AirPods if you want to use them in public spaces.

The headset’s two-hour battery life is not long enough to last through most feature-length movies, but in my experience, this turned out to be moot because I couldn’t watch movies for more than 20 to 30 minutes before needing to rest my neck and eyes from the heavy headset.

(A caveat: The Netflix and YouTube apps are not available on the Vision Pro, but their websites work OK for streaming content.)

I prefer watching movies on my flat-screen TV because it can be shared, but there are scenarios where a headset would be useful as a personal television, like in a small apartment or on a plane, or on the couch when someone else is watching a TV show that you’d like to tune out from.

Videos shot on an iPhone 15 Pro camera or with the Vision Pro’s cameras can be viewed in 3-D on the headset, a feature called spatial videos. While watching a video of my dogs eating snacks at home, I could reach out and pretend to pet them. The videos looked grainy but were delightful.

Not many games have been made for the headset yet. I tried some new Vision Pro games such as Blackbox, which involves moving around a 3-D environment to pop bubbles and solve puzzles. It looked nice, but after the novelty wore off, my interest fizzled out. It’s tough to recommend the Vision Pro for virtual-reality gaming when Meta’s $250 Quest 2 and $500 Quest 3 headsets have a deeper library of games .

Bottom Line

Brian X. Chen uses the Vision Pro.

The Vision Pro is the start of something — of what, exactly, I’m not sure.

But the point of a product review is to evaluate the here and now. In its current state, the Vision Pro is an impressive but incomplete first-generation product with problems and big trade-offs. Other than being a fancy personal TV, it lacks purpose.

Most striking to me about the Vision Pro is, for such an expensive computer, how difficult it is to share the headset with others. There’s a guest mode, but there’s no ability to create profiles for different family members to load their own apps and videos.

So it’s a computer for people to use alone, arriving at a time when we are seeking to reconnect after years of masked solitude. That may be the Vision Pro’s biggest blind spot.

An earlier version of this article misstated the price of prescription lens inserts. They start at $150, not $100.

How we handle corrections

Brian X. Chen is the lead consumer technology writer for The Times. He reviews products and writes Tech Fix , a column about the social implications of the tech we use. More about Brian X. Chen

Tech Fix: Solving Your Tech Problems

Brian x. chen, our lead consumer technology writer, looks at the societal implications of the tech we use..

Apple’s Vision Pro: The new headset  teaches a valuable lesson about the cost of tech products: The upsells and add-ons will get you .  

Cut Down Your Screen Time:  Worried about smartphone addiction? Here’s how to cut down on your screen time , and here’s how to quit your smartphone entirely .

A New Age of Surveillance:  Meta’s $300 smart glasses can inconspicuously take photos and record videos. They also offer a glimpse into a future with less privacy and more distraction .

Green and Blue Bubbles: Apple announced that it would improve the technology used to send texts between iPhone and Android users. But the bubble culture war is far from over .

Google’s Pixel 8:  The smartphone lets you use A.I. to add or remove elements from your images. It’s not clear we really need this .

Watch CBS News

Team planning to rebuild outside of King Menkaure's pyramid in Egypt told "it's an impossible project"

By Ahmed Shawkat

February 19, 2024 / 8:04 AM EST / CBS News

Cairo — Just weeks after an Egyptian-Japanese archaeological team announced an ambitious project to reconstruct the outer granite casing of the pyramid of King Menkaure, the smallest of the three main pyramids at Egypt's iconic Giza Necropolis, a committee appointed to review the plans has declared it "impossible."

Criticism and fear over the plans for the piece of Egyptian national heritage started to spread online and in the media as soon as the project was announced last month.

The plan had been to dig out and examine dozens of large granite blocks from around the base of the pyramid, with the aim being to eventually reinstall them around the pyramid's exterior to restore it to what it's believed to have looked like when it was built more than 4,000 years ago. 

CORRECTION / EGYPT-HERITAGE-ARCHAEOLOGY

King Menkaure's pyramid now has between three and eight rows of the granite blocks around its base, but it originally had 16 rows of the blocks rising up the four sides of the structure.

Photos posted by the team, showing the existing original lower rows around the bottom of the pyramid, drew scorn from some observers online who thought the reassembly work had already begun. But experts who understood exactly what the team had planned to do also strongly rejected the entire notion of the project.

Last week, a committee tasked by Egypt's Minister of Tourism and Antiquities to look into the matter as the controversy unfolded also issued a firm rejection of the proposed project.

"The Menkaure Pyramid Review Committee (MPRC), has unanimously objected to the re-installation of the granite casing blocks, scattered around the base of the pyramid since thousands of years ago," a report by the committee read.

TOPSHOT-CORRECTION / EGYPT-HERITAGE-ARCHAEOLOGY

The committee underlined "the importance of maintaining the pyramid's current state without alterations, given its exceptional universal and archaeological value."

"There is no way," the head of the review committee, veteran Egyptian archaeologist and former Minister of Antiquities Dr. Zahi Hawass, told CBS News after the decision was reached. "The stones are not shaped at all. How can you put unshaped stones back? There is no way, you cannot know the location of each stone. It's an impossible project."

"The pyramid is in my blood, I lived in this area, I excavated every piece of sand, and I'm telling you that no one can put these granite stones back. It's impossible."

"We are talking about saving the third pyramid, Menkaure. We do not need any changes," Hawass said, adding: "This is one of the Seven Wonders of the World. The project has been discussed by six top Egyptologists, engineers, and architects."

  • Cosmic rays help reveal corridor hidden in Egypt's Great Pyramid of Giza

He said reinstalling the stones would involve the use of modern materials such as cement, which the committee couldn't back.

"All the international organizations' rules, such as UNESCO and others, always like to keep the site as it is, without any changes," Hawass said.

He explained that the committee was open to discussing moving the stones for research and excavation work in the area, assuming a number of conditions were met to preserve the antiquities, but he said even that work was beyond the scope of what the Japanese-Egyptian team could take on.

"In my opinion, I think this is a major, important project, and it will be impossible to do it without an international campaign," he said. "I think we would need UNESCO to participate."

The Egyptian-Japanese archaeological team behind the plans did not respond to CBS News' request for comment on the committee's decision, and it was not clear if they planned to challenge the ruling with the Ministry of Antiquities in a bid to continue with what they had promised would be "Egypt's gift to the world in the 21st century."

  • Archaeologist

Ahmed Shawkat is a CBS News producer based in Cairo.

More from CBS News

Is tax preparation software worth it? Here's what some experts think

Russian opposition leader Alexey Navalny dies in prison, officials say

U.S. military reports 1st Houthi unmanned underwater vessel in Red Sea

"Oppenheimer" wins best picture at the British Academy Film Awards

an image, when javascript is unavailable

Today's Digital Daily

site categories

Parent item expand the sub menu, marques’ almeida: a sweet homecoming, street style at london fashion week, nigo picks iconic paris spots for kenzo campaign, marques’ almeida fall 2024 ready-to-wear: a sweet homecoming.

The design couple reflected on the obsession with youth and age.

Fashion and General Assignments Editor, London

  • Share this article on Facebook
  • Share this article on Twitter
  • Share this article on Flipboard
  • Share this article on Pin It
  • Share this article on Tumblr
  • Share this article on Reddit
  • Share this article on LinkedIn
  • Share this article on WhatsApp
  • Share this article on Email
  • Print this article
  • Share this article on Talk

It’s been a long time coming for Marta Marques and Paulo Almeida , who last showed on the London Fashion Week schedule four years ago. But after spending a few days at the venue of their show, the Truman Brewery in east London, it all started to feel like home again.

“It was a weird feeling coming back because everything was so familiar, but then it’s been so long and we’ve managed to get a lot of our team back here, from the stylists to the hair team and models,” Marques said backstage, standing with Almeida as they were being embraced by the fashion flock.

The couple reflected on the obsession with youth and age in the fashion industry and in turn, put out a tasteful collection that would be just as appealing to a grandmother, mother or daughter.

There were short, loose dresses with exaggerated bottom halves that nod to Marie Antoinette’s hips or the notion of taking up space; corseted bodices with a peplum; gradient denim tie-dyes in frayed miniskirts or belted shirts; motorcycle jackets in fuzzy knit layered with a lighter fine-knit cardigan; and suit skirts or dresses stamped with floral embodies against a black backdrop.

“We went places that were perhaps a bit taboo for us such as elegance or playing with big satin shapes and embroidery,” Marques allowed.

For more London Fashion Week reviews, click here.

Sign up for WWD news straight to your inbox every day

Watch: WWD Reel Talk: ‘The New Look’

WWD and Women's Wear Daily are part of Penske Media Corporation. © 2024 Fairchild Publishing, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Fashion Expand fashion menu

  • Fashion Trends
  • Fashion Features
  • Fashion Scoops
  • Designer & Luxury
  • Ready-To-Wear
  • Accessories

Business Expand business menu

  • Government & Trade
  • Mergers & Acquisitions
  • Marketing & Promotion
  • Human Resources
  • Business Features
  • Real Estate

Beauty Expand beauty menu

  • Beauty Features

Men's Expand mens menu

  • Mens Accessories
  • Mens Clothing Furnishings
  • Mens Designer Luxury
  • Mens Lifestyle
  • Mens Retail Business
  • Mens Sportswear
  • Mens Fashion

Runway Expand runway menu

  • Men’s Fall 2024
  • Pre-Fall 2024
  • Spring Ready-to-Wear 2024
  • Fall Couture 2023
  • Resort 2024

Sustainability Expand sustainability menu

  • Environment
  • Social Impact

Home/Design Expand home-design menu

  • Interior Design
  • Architecture

Eye Expand eye menu

  • Celebrity Real Estate

Shop Expand shop menu

More expand more menu.

  • Fairchild Live

WWD Weekend Expand wwd-weekend menu

Verify it's you, please log in.

original article review article

an image, when javascript is unavailable

‘The Empire’ Review: Bruno Dumont’s Self-Consciously Daft Sci-Fi Bauble Isn’t Quite as Amusing as It Thinks

The forces of good and evil plot an alien Armageddon by occupying and controlling the residents of a humdrum fishing village in the latest and most lumpen of the French director's absurdist comedies.

By Jessica Kiang

Jessica Kiang

  • ‘Dahomey’ Review: Mati Diop’s Exquisitely Strange Documentary Meditation on the Return of Looted Artifacts to Benin 1 day ago
  • ‘Another End’ Review: Gael García Bernal and Renate Reinsve Illuminate a Pensive, Familiar Story of Love After Death 2 days ago
  • ‘Cuckoo’ Review: A Superb Hunter Schafer is Menaced by a Loopy Dan Stevens in a Stylish, Enjoyably Incoherent Horror Romp 3 days ago

The Empire

The humor, as ever with the Dumont of “Li’l Quinquin” and “Slack Bay,” derives largely from the collision of the grandiose with the drolly mundane. This time out, harking back to, but confusingly not quite reprising, the premise of his 2018 TV miniseries “Coincoin and the Extra-Humans” the same coastal village featured in “Quinquin” and “Coincoin” is the inexplicable locus for an alien invasion. In fact the alien race, known as the 0s (zeroes), whose mothership is an echoingly empty replication of the palace at Versailles (or perhaps Versailles is imagined to be its replica here) has been infiltrating the village for some time now, in a process sadly not as scatologically inspired as in “Coincoin” where possessed humans give birth to their own alien clones by farting them out through their rear ends. Indeed, one can’t help but feel we’ve been a little cheated by the comparatively tame and tasteful method (never directly visualized, or even clearly outlined) by which these alien entities colonize and eventually take over their human hosts.  

The 0s’ sentinel has been assimilated into the body of local lobster fisherman Jony, drily played by first-timer Brandon Vlieghe, who from some angles can look runty and rustic and from others like a dashing Han Solo-esque hero, albeit one with nefarious rather than gallantly roguish intentions. Jony has fathered a Messiah-like infant, known as The Wain, who is destined to lead the 0s to global domination. It would appear to be curtains for humanity — in both senses, as the 0s not only want to take over the planet, they are explicitly bent on evil. Guess that makes sense, with a leader unsubtly named Beelzebub (a prancing, preening Fabrice Luchini). 

When Rudy thus dispatches The Wain’s birth mother, two things result. Jony gets a new mate in the (again, comely) form of new arrival Line (Lyna Khoudri) — all the female leads in Dumont’s films are gorgeous while many of the men seem cast for their deviation from classically accepted male beauty standards — which causes friction when Jony can’t suppress his attraction to his opposite number, Jane. And secondly, in the course of the investigation into the mysterious death, the stars of “Quinquin” and “Coincoin,” Captain Van der Weyden (Bernard Pruvost) and his loyal sidekick Carpentier (Philippe Jore) show up. 

To fans of the Van der Weyden character, who for the uninitiated is what would happen if you put Tati, Chaplin, Clouseau and Columbo into a tumble dryer on high spin, it’s a little like burying the lede, and then giving the lede far too little to do. Van der Weyden and Carpentier are cruelly underused here muscled out by a lot of mythmaking mumbo-jumbo that doesn’t do anything substantial with all the opposing forces that Dumont’s scrappy screenplay references. Despite fun trappings — the crosswired sexual encounters, the talking blobs of CG goop, the horseback knights who are a chorus of aging local yokels delivering maguffin speeches in deliciously deadpan style — the actual conflict in the film boils down to a series of very simplistic binaries: good and evil, sacred and secular, female and male, one and zero, being and nothingness. Given all that, it cannot but disappoint when all that really happens is they kind of cancel each other out, in a way that may be supposed to evoke a Sartrean existentialism, or a early-Dumont-ian nihilism but really just feels a little glib. Maybe the cosmic joke that is our place in the universe just ain’t that funny anymore.

Reviewed at Berlin Film Festival (Competition). Feb. 17, 2024. Running time: 110 MIN. (Original title: "L'empire")

  • Production: (France-Germany-Italy-Portugal)  A Tessalit Productions production in co-production with Red Balloon Film, Ascent Film, Novak Prod,Rosa Filmes, Furyo Films. (World sales: Memento International, Paris.) Producers: Jean Bréhat, Bertrand Faivre.  Executive Producers: Jean Bréhat, Bertrand Faivre. Co-producers: Dorothe Beinemeier, Fabrizio Mosca, Andrea Paris, Matteo Rovere, Ines Vasiljevic, Olivier Dubois, Joaquim Sapinho, Marta Alves, Emma Binet.
  • Crew: Director, writer: Bruno Dumont. Camera: David Chambille. Editors: Bruno Dumont, Desideria Rayner.
  • With: Lyna Khoudri, Anamaria Vartolomei, Camille Cottin, Fabrice Luchini, Brandon Vlieghe Julien Manier, Bernard Pruvost, Philippe Jore. (French dialogue)

More From Our Brands

Four years later, canarsie is keeping pop smoke’s name alive, car of the week: the napier ‘samson’ l48 was the first car to cross 100 mph in america. this recreation could fetch $1.1 million., rangers ot win caps memorable metlife stadium outdoor weekend, the best mattress protectors, according to sleep experts, can will trent leave the past (and his romance with angie) behind in season 2 ramón rodríguez weighs in, verify it's you, please log in.

Quantcast

IMAGES

  1. 16+ Article Review

    original article review article

  2. (PDF) Original Article

    original article review article

  3. Review Article: Policy Analysis

    original article review article

  4. Guide on How to Write an Article Review

    original article review article

  5. Article Review Template

    original article review article

  6. Article review sample

    original article review article

VIDEO

  1. Article 370 review by YouTopians #Article370Teaser

  2. 25- article ||use of the||

  3. Journal Article Review Innovative Technology Class C

  4. Original article

  5. Article 370 teaser review by Sonup

  6. ARTICLE REVIEW ( DOES STRATEGIC PLANNING IMPROVE ORGANIZATIONAL PERFORMANCE ? A META ANALYSIS)

COMMENTS

  1. Types of journal articles

    Review Articles: Review Articles provide a comprehensive summary of research on a certain topic, and a perspective on the state of the field and where it is heading. They are often written by leaders in a particular discipline after invitation from the editors of a journal.

  2. Primary Sources and Original Research vs. Review Articles

    "Review articles are often as lengthy or even longer that original research articles. What the authors of review articles are doing in analysing and evaluating current research and investigations related to a specific topic, field, or problem. They are not primary sources since they review previously published material.

  3. Finding and Identifying Original Research Articles in the Sciences

    An original research article is a report of research activity that is written by the researchers who conducted the research or experiment. Original research articles may also be referred to as: "primary research articles" or "primary scientific literature."

  4. Research Articles vs Review Articles

    A review article is a secondary source ...it is written about other articles, and does not report original research of its own. Review articles are very important, as they draw upon the articles that they review to suggest new research directions, to strengthen support for existing theories and/or identify patterns among existing research studies.

  5. Types of research article

    Original research articles are often the first thing you think of when you hear the words 'journal article'. In reality, research work often results in a whole mixture of different outputs and it's not just the final research article that can be published.

  6. LibGuides: Writing 100 (Lanser): Original vs. Review Articles

    Both original (empirical) articles and literature reviews are useful. One is not better than the other. Both are: published in journals. often peer-reviewed. written by experts in the field. They are different in one important way. Original articles report the findings of one research study the authors conducted themselves. Review articles ...

  7. What is a review article?

    A review article can also be called a literature review, or a review of literature. It is a survey of previously published research on a topic. It should give an overview of current thinking on the topic. And, unlike an original research article, it will not present new experimental results.

  8. Writing a review article: what to do with my literature review

    Review articles allow the readers to get a landscape view of a topic, but readers can also use the collection of references cited in a review article to dig deeper into a topic. Thus, they are valuable resources to consult. Well written review articles are often highly cited and could increase the visibility and reputation of the authors.

  9. How to write a good scientific review article

    Care should be taken to cite the original article reporting a specific finding and the overall discussion should be balanced. Figures, tables and other display items should be used to aid understanding and break up long sections of text. ... Most review articles are between 4000 and 6000 words in length and as a rule of thumb, 80-90% of the ...

  10. 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]

  11. How to write a good scientific review article

    A good review article provides readers with an in-depth understanding of a field and highlights key gaps and challenges to address with future research. Writing a review article also helps to expand the writer's knowledge of their specialist area and to develop their analytical and communication skills, amongst other benefits. Thus, the ...

  12. What is a Review Article?

    Differences Between Original Research Articles and Review Articles. An original research article aims to: Provides background information (Intro.) on prior research, Reasons for present study, Issues to be investigated by the present study, Written for experts.Authors describe: Research methods & materials, Data acquisition/analysis tools, Results, Discussion of results.

  13. What are the differences between these kinds of articles: original

    5 Answers Sorted by: 8 This will vary pretty heavily depending on the journal in question. But generally speaking, in broad strokes: "Original Paper" - This is a generic term for a full-length, original research finding paper that doesn't fall into another specialized category.

  14. How I Review an Original Scientific Article

    There has been substantial recent interest in the quality of the peer review system in biomedical publication, with several International Congresses and a recent JAMA issue entirely devoted to the topic ().The quality of reviews of articles submitted for publication varies widely (1, 3-5).Black and colleagues have suggested that their quality might be improved if journals trained their ...

  15. Review vs. research articles

    Review vs. Research Articles How can you tell if you are looking at a Research Paper, Review Paper or a Systematic Review? Examples and article characteristics are provided below to help you figure it out. Research Papers Review Papers Systematic Review Papers Finding Review and Research Papers in PubMed

  16. What's the difference between a research article and a review article

    Review articles, sometimes called literature reviews or secondary sources, synthesize or analyze research already conducted in primary sources. They generally summarize the current state of research on a given topic. Here is a more detailed explanation of review articles.

  17. How to write an original article

    It is usual for the original article to follow the IMRAD structure: Introduction, Methods, Results and Discussion. The introduction states briefly why the study was performed. The methods' section should give a detailed explanation of how the study was performed. The results should be clearly presented, with the help of tables, without ...

  18. Review article

    A review article is an article that summarizes the current state of understanding on a topic within a certain discipline. [1] [2] A review article is generally considered a secondary source since it may analyze and discuss the method and conclusions in previously published studies.

  19. Review or original article? The manuscript category of ...

    In the Instructions to Authors, 4.76% classified a systematic review and meta-analysis as an original article, 15.9% as a review, 20.6% as an independent type of manuscript, and 58.7% did not mention any policy on the article type for systematic review and meta-analysis.

  20. How to Write an Article Review (with Sample Reviews)

    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 ...

  21. 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.

  22. Is it ok to cite a review rather than the original research articles

    If you are citing the conclusions of the review, then you cite the review, e.g. "Ika (2009) reviewed the project management literature and identified three basic approaches to project success,...

  23. LibGuides: Writing 100 (Winek): Original vs. Review Articles

    original (empirical) article. based on an experiment or study. This type of article will have a methodology section that tells how the experiment was set up and conducted, a results or discussion section, and usually a conclusion section. In psychology courses, you are often asked to find empirical articles. ... review article (literature review)

  24. World Court to Review 57-Year Israeli Occupation

    An unprecedented number of countries and international organizations are expected to participate in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) oral hearings on Israel's occupation beginning ...

  25. Vision Pro Review: Apple's First Headset Lacks Polish and Purpose

    Billed as the future of computing, the $3,500 goggles can't replace a laptop for work. At times, wearing them also made our columnist feel nauseated. By Brian X. Chen Brian X. Chen, the personal ...

  26. Team planning to rebuild outside of King Menkaure's pyramid in Egypt

    An expert committee commissioned to review a contentious plan to reconstruct the outside of Giza's smallest pyramid says "there is no way" it can happen. Latest U.S.

  27. Marques' Almeida Fall 2024 Ready-to-Wear Runway, Fashion Show ...

    Marques' Almeida Fall 2024 Ready-to-Wear Runway, Fashion Show & Collection Review. The designers reflected on youth and age.

  28. 'The Empire' Review: A Daft Sci-Fi Bauble From Bruno Dumont

    'The Empire' Review: Bruno Dumont's Self-Consciously Daft Sci-Fi Bauble Isn't Quite as Amusing as It Thinks The forces of good and evil plot an alien Armageddon by occupying and ...