How to Critique an Article

wikihow.com/Critique-an-Article

Staff Reviewed

A critique of an article is the objective analysis of a literary or scientific piece, with emphasis
on whether or not the author supported the main points with reasonable and applicable
arguments based on facts. It's easy to get caught up in simply summarizing the points of
an article without truly analyzing and challenging it. A good critique demonstrates your
impressions of the article, while providing ample evidence to back up your impressions. As
the critic, take time to read carefully and thoughtfully, prepare your arguments and
evidence, and write clearly and cogently.

Sample Critiques
Sample Research Paper Critique
Sample Literary Journal Critique

1
Reading Actively

1/17
1. Read through the article once to get the main idea. The first time you read
through an article, you should simply try to understand the overall argument that the
author is making. Note the author's thesis.[1]

2. Mark up the text as you read through it again. It is sometimes helpful to use a red
pen to make your markings stand out. Ask yourself questions like these as you read
through a second time:[2]
What is the author's thesis/argument?
What is the author's purpose in arguing said thesis?
Who is the intended audience? Does the article effectively reach this
audience?
2/17
 Does the author have ample and valid evidence?
Are there any holes in the author's argument?
Did the author misrepresent evidence or add bias to evidence?
Does the author reach a conclusive point?

3. Create a legend for your markings. Create a unique symbol to differentiate

between parts of the text that might be confusing, important, or inconsistent.
For example, you could underline important passages, circle confusing ones,
and star inconsistencies.
Creating a legend with assigned symbols allows you to quickly mark up an
article. Though it may take a little bit of time to recognize your own symbols,
they will quickly become ingrained in your mind and allow you to breeze
through an article much quicker than without a symbol legend.

3/17
4. Take some longer notes during subsequent readings. In addition to a legend, it is
helpful to take notes when expanded thoughts come to you as you read. For
instance, if you realize that an author's claim can be refuted by noting a scientific
study that you previously read, make a note of it in the margins, on a separate piece
of paper, or on a computer so that you can come back to your idea.[3]
Don't be foolish enough to think that you will remember your idea when it
comes time to write your critique.
Spend the necessary time writing down your observations as you read. You will
be glad you did when it comes time to put your observations into a complete
analytical paper.

4/17
 5. Develop a preliminary concept for your critique. Form a vague opinion of the
piece in question. Evaluate the author's overall argument after you have read the
article through two or three times. Record your initial reactions to the text.[4]
Make a list of possible sources of evidence for your critique. Jog your memory
for any literature you've read or documentaries you've seen that might be useful
for evaluating the article.

Score
0/3
Method 1 Quiz

What will help you create a legend?

2
Gathering Evidence

1. Question whether the writer's overall message is logical. Test the hypothesis
and compare it to other similar examples.[5]
Even if an author has done research and quoted respected experts, analyze
the message for its practicality and real world application.
Examine the author's introduction and conclusion to make sure they match up
as convincing and complementary elements.

5/17
2. Search the article for any biases, whether intentional or unintentional. If the
author has anything to gain from the conclusions demonstrated in the article, it's
possible that some bias has been demonstrated.[6]
Bias includes ignoring contrary evidence, misappropriating evidence to make
conclusions appear different than they are, and imparting one's own,
unfounded opinions on a text. Well-sourced opinions are perfectly OK, but
those without academic support deserve to be met with a skeptical eye.
Bias can also come from a place of prejudice. Note any biases related to race,
ethnicity, gender, class, or politics.

3. Consider the author's interpretations of other texts. If the author makes a claim
6/17
 about another's work, read the original work and see if you agree with the analysis
provided in the article. Complete agreement is obviously not necessary or even likely;
but consider whether the author’s interpretation is defensible. [7]
Note any inconsistencies between your interpretation of a text and the author's
interpretation of a text. Such conflict may bear fruit when it comes time to write
your review.
See what other scholars have to say. If several scholars from diverse
backgrounds have the same opinion about a text, that opinion should be given
more weight than an argument with little support.

4. Notice if the author cites untrustworthy evidence. Does the author cite an
irrelevant text from fifty years ago that no longer holds weight in the discipline at
hand? If the author cites unreliable sources, it greatly diminishes the credibility of the
article.[8]

7/17
5. Don’t completely ignore stylistic elements. The content of the article is likely the
most important aspect for your literary critique, but don't overlook the formal and/or
literary techniques that the author might use. Pay attention to obscure word choices
and the author's tone throughout the article. This is particularly helpful for non-
scientific articles dealing with aspects of literature, for example.[9]
These aspects of an article can reveal deeper issues in the larger argument.
For example, an article written in a heated, overzealous tone might be ignoring
or refusing to engage with contradictory evidence in its analysis.
Always look up the definitions of unfamiliar words. A word's definition can
completely change the meaning of a sentence, especially if a particular word
has several definitions. Question why an author chose one particular word
instead of another, and it might reveal something about their argument.

8/17
6. Question research methods in scientific articles. If critiquing an article containing
a scientific theory, be sure to evaluate the research methods behind the experiment.
Ask yourself questions such as these:[10]
Does the author detail the methods thoroughly?
Is the study designed without major flaws?
Is there a problem with the sample size?
Was a control group created for comparison?
Are all of the statistical calculations correct?
Would another party be able to duplicate the experiment in question?
Is the experiment significant for that particular field of study?

9/17
 7. Dig deep. Use your existing knowledge, educated opinions, and any research you
can gather to either support or disagree with the author's article. Provide empirical
arguments to support your stance.[11]
While there is no such thing as too much good evidence, over-sourcing can
also be a problem if your arguments become repetitive. Make sure each source
provides something unique to your critique.
Additionally, don't allow your use of sources to crowd out your own opinions
and arguments.

8. Remember that a critique doesn't have to be entirely positive or negative. In

fact, the most interesting literary critiques often don’t vehemently disagree with the
author; rather, they build upon or complicate the author's idea with additional
evidence.[12]
If you do agree entirely with the author, therefore, make sure to build upon the
argument either by providing additional evidence or complicating the author's
idea.
You can provide contradictory evidence to an argument while still maintaining
that a particular point of view is the correct one.
Don’t “take it easy” on the author due to misguided empathy; but neither should
you be excessively negative in an attempt to prove your critical bona fides.
Forcefully express your defensible points of agreement and disagreement.

Score
0/3
Method 2 Quiz

What are examples of biases you may find in an article?

3
Formatting Your Critique
10/17
1. Begin with an introduction that outlines your argument. The introduction should
be no more than two paragraphs long and should lay out the basic framework for your
critique. Start off by noting where the article in question fails or succeeds most
dramatically and why.[13]
Be sure to include the name of the author, article title, the journal or publication
the article appeared in, the publication date, and a statement about the focus
and/or thesis of the article in your introductory paragraph(s).
The introduction is not the place to provide evidence for your opinions. Your
evidence will go in the body paragraphs of your critique.
Be bold in your introductory assertions and make your purpose clear right off
the bat. Skirting around or not fully committing to an argument lessens your
credibility.

11/17
2. Provide evidence for your argument in the body paragraphs of your critique.
Each body paragraph should detail a new idea or further expand your argument in a
new direction.[14]
Begin each body paragraph with a topic sentence that summarizes the content
of the paragraph to come. Don't feel like you have to condense the entire
paragraph into the topic sentence, however. This is purely a place to transition
into a new or somehow different idea.
End each body paragraph with a transitional sentence that hints at, though
does not explicitly state, the content of the paragraph coming next. For
example, you might write, "While John Doe shows that the number of cases of
childhood obesity is rising at a remarkable rate in the U.S., there are instances
of dropping obesity rates in some American cities." Your next paragraph would
then provide specific examples of these anomalous cities that you just claimed
exist.

12/17
3. Complicate your argument near the end of the critique. No matter how solid your
argument is, there is always at least one dramatic way in which you can provide a
final twist or take your argument one step further and suggest possible implications.
Do this in the final body paragraph before your conclusion to leave the reader with a
final, memorable argument.
You might, for instance, utilize a counterargument, in which you anticipate a
critique of your critique and reaffirm your position. Use phrases like
“Admittedly,” “It is true that,” or “One might object here” to identify the
counterargument. Then, answer these possible counters and turn back to your
strengthened argument with “but,” “yet,” or “nevertheless.”[15]

13/17
 4. Present your arguments in a well-reasoned, objective tone. Avoid writing in an
overzealous or obnoxiously passionate tone, as doing so can be a turn-off to many
readers. Let your passion shine through in your ability to do thorough research and
articulate yourself effectively.[16]
While writing “This piece of garbage is an insult to historians everywhere” might
garner attention, “This article falls short of the standards for scholarship in this
area of historical study” is more likely to be taken seriously by readers.

5. Conclude your critique by summarizing your argument and suggesting

potential implications. It is important to provide a recap of your main points
throughout the article, but you also need to tell the reader what your critique means
for the discipline at large.[17]
Are there broad implications for the field of study being assessed, or does your
critique simply attempt to debunk the messy work of another scholar?
Do your best to make a lasting mark on the reader in the conclusion by using
assertive language to demonstrate the importance of your work: “Challenging
the claims of such a distinguished scholar is no easy or enjoyable task, but it is
a task we all must agree to do for our generation and those to follow.”

Score
0/3
Method 3 Quiz

What should you include in the introduction to your critique?

You're helping people by reading wikiHow

14/17
wikiHow's mission is to help people learn, and we really hope this article helped you.
Now you are helping others, just by visiting wikiHow.

Direct Relief is a humanitarian nonprofit with a mission to improve the health and lives of
people affected by poverty and emergencies. Recognized by Charity Navigator and Forbes
for its efficiency, Direct Relief equips health professionals in the U.S. and throughout the
world with essential medical resources to effectively treat and care for patients – without
regard to politics, religion, or ability to pay.

Click below to let us know you read this article, and wikiHow will donate to Direct Relief
on your behalf. Thanks for helping us achieve our mission of helping everyone learn how to
do anything.

Click here to be counted

Community Q&A
What do you mean by "A critic does not have to be entirely positive or entirely
negative"?
wikiHow Contributor
People tend to view the terms critic or criticism in a negative light, but in fact they
refer in this context to a detailed, defensible analysis of the content and claims in
another's work. A good critique doesn't have to rip the article to shreds, nor does it
need to hail it as the greatest thing since sliced bread. Rather, try to identify the
various strengths and weaknesses in the piece under review.
Not Helpful 4 Helpful 23
How could I critique an article about bullying?
wikiHow Contributor
Identify the claims made in the article, and determine whether they are supported by
convincing evidence and clearly expressed. Look for strengths and weaknesses in
15/17
 the content and style of the article, and provide supported evidence regarding ways in
which the article could be improved.
Not Helpful 1 Helpful 10
How do you critique a learning objective?
wikiHow Contributor
Follow many of the same guidelines you would use critiquing a scholarly article. Ask
yourself whether the learning objective clearly presents its main concepts and
establishes their importance; whether the organization, structure, and content are
sensible and easy to follow; and how you would approach it differently (and why).
Not Helpful 1 Helpful 8
How would I critique a medical case report?
wikiHow Contributor
Make sure you've read the medical case report. Then, evaluate the information in the
case report for accuracy, usefulness, etc.
Not Helpful 2 Helpful 6
How do I critique a map?
wikiHow Contributor
Ask yourself questions like: Is this map easy to follow? Does it provide the necessary
information? Are there any biases or limitations that become obvious when looking at
this map? How does it compare to similar maps? How might I have created this map
differently, and why?
Not Helpful 2 Helpful 3

Unanswered Questions
How do I critic a journal about determinants of inflation in a country?
Answer this question Flag as...
How do you critique an article that explains about steps to start designing and
scheduling program?
Answer this question Flag as...
How do I critique Progressing the Analysis of improvised explosive devices?
Answer this question Flag as...
Am I not supposed to see problems in this?
Answer this question Flag as...
What is the article domain?
Answer this question Flag as...

Show more unanswered questions

Ask a Question
Submit

Warnings
Avoid style-based critiques that include comments such as "I liked it" or "It was
written poorly." Instead, focus on the content of the article.
Avoid summarizing the article at all costs. It is better to write a shorter critique than to
attempt to fill up blank space with boring summation.

16/17
Tips
Write your critique in the third person and present tense, unless the style indicates
another preference. Always review the style guidelines prior to starting to write.
Write with confidence and bold assertion.
Always proofread your written work at least twice before turning it in to your
professor, boss, or publisher.

Sources and Citations

1. ↑ http://twp.duke.edu/uploads/media_items/scientificarticlereview.original.pdf
2. ↑ http://www.uis.edu/ctl/wp-
content/uploads/sites/76/2013/03/Howtocritiqueajournalarticle.pdf
3. ↑ http://www.uis.edu/ctl/wp-
content/uploads/sites/76/2013/03/Howtocritiqueajournalarticle.pdf

Show more... (14)

17/17