What are Reaction Papers,

Reviews, and Critiques?

A reaction paper, a review, and a critique are specialized
forms of writing in which a reviewer or reader evaluates
any of the following:

 A scholarly work (e.g., academic books and articles)

 A work of art (e.g., performance art, play, dance,

sports, film, exhibits)
 Designs (e.g., industrial designs, furniture, fashion
design)

 Graphic designs (e.g., posters, billboards, commercials,

and digital media)
Reaction papers, reviews, and critiques usually range
in length from 250 to 750 words. They are not simply
summaries but are critical assessments, analyses, or
evaluations of different works. As advanced forms of
writing, they require skills in critical thinking and
recognizing arguments. However, you should not
connect the word critique to cynicism and pessimism.
Reviewers do not rely on mere
opinions; rather, they use both proof
and logical reasoning to substantiate
their comments. They process ideas
and theories, revisit and extend
ideas in a specific field of study, and
present an analytical response to a
scholarly, literary, or artistic work.
Structure of a Reaction Paper, a Review, and a Critique
You have to follow a logical organization and structure for your reaction paper, critique to be able
to present your critical evaluation effectively.

Structure of Critiques of Scholarly Books and Articles

Introduction (around 5% of the paper)

 Title of the book/article/work

 Writer's name

 Thesis statement
Summary (around 10% of the paper)
 Objective or purpose

 Methods used (if applicable)

 Major findings, claims, ideas, or messages

Review/Critique (in no particular order and around 75% of the paper)
 Appropriateness of methodology to support the arguments (for books and
articles) or appropriateness of mode of presentation (other works)

 Theoretical soundness and coherence of ideas

 Sufficiency and soundness of explanation in relation to other available

information and experts

 Other perspectives in explaining the concepts and ideas It is best to ask the
following questions:

Conclusion (around 10% of the paper)

 Overall impression of the work

 Scholarly or literary value of the reviewed article, book, or

work

 Benefits for the intended audience or field

 Suggestion for future direction of research

For others present, review, there is no prescribed structure, but the flowing sections are almost always
present.
Introduction
 Basic details about the material such as its title, director or artist, name of exhibition/
event, and the like
 Main assessment of the material (for films and performances)
Plot Summary/Description
 Gist of the plot
 Simple description of the artwork
Analysis/Interpretation
 Discussion and analysis of the work
 It is best to ask the following questions:
 What aspects of the work make you think it is a success or
failure? Were there unanswered questions or plot lines?
 If yes, how did they affect the story?
 Does the work remind you of other things you have
experienced through analogies, metaphors, or other
figurative devices?
 How does this contribute to the meaning?
 How does the work relate to other ideas or events in the
world and/or in your other studies?
 What stood out while you were viewing the film,
performance, or artwork?
Writing a reaction paper, a review, and a critique can be made easier by following the guidelines below.

1. For articles or journals

A. Read, view, or listen to the work to be reviewed carefully to get the main topic or the concepts presented. Then revisit
the work to further identify its arguments or message.

B. Relate the content of the work to what you already know about the topic. This will make you more engaged in the
article or book..

C. Focus on discussing how the work treats the topic and not the topic itself. Use phrases such as this work presents and
the author argues.

D. Situate your review. This means that your analysis should be anchored on the theories e. presented by the writer
or creator. Report the type of analysis or mode of presentation the writer used and how this type of analysis
supports the arguments and claims.

E. presented by the writer or creator. Report the type of analysis or mode of presentation the writer used and
how this type of analysis supports the arguments and claims.

F. Examine whether the findings are adequately supported and how the connections between
ideas affect the conclusions and findings.
 G. Suggest points for improvement of the reasoning, explanation, and presentation of ideas, as well as alternative
methods and processes of reasoning.
H. Compare the writer's explanation of the topic to that of another expert from the same field of study.

I. Point out other conclusions or interpretations that the writer missed out. Present other ideas that need
to be examined.

J. State your agreement or disagreement to the writer's ideas along with an explanation for it

2. For artworks and other media

A. When critiquing artworks or posters, make sure to use speculative verbs such as evoke create, appear, and
suggest to show that your interpretation of the artist's work is just that an interpretation.
B. Presume that the reader has not yet seen the material you are reviewing, so make sure to describe it to them.
For reviews of films or plays, make sure not to spoil key events unless they figure in your review, in which case
always add a disclaimer.

C. For artworks, describe the material in simple terms to help your readers visualize it refrain from being vague or
abstract.
3. On a general note, your reaction paper's conclusion may focus on the
answers to the following questions.

A. Did the work hold your interest? b. Did the work annoy or
excite you?

C. Did the work prompt you to raise questions to the author or

creator?

D. Did the work lead you to some realizations?

E. Did the work remind you of other materials that you have read,
viewed, or listened t the past?