Writing critically,

CRITICAL ANALYSIS thinking critically

 In popular usage, ‘criticism’ tends to be
negative, referring to finding fault
But the English word ‘criticism’ comes from
WHAT IS the ancient Greek verb ‘krino’ meaning ‘to
MEANT judge’

BY A ‘critic’ therefore (in Greek) was a judge

• someone who investigated the evidence
‘CRITICIS • tested the evidence (cross-examined
M’? witnesses)
• considered alternative arguments and
explanations
• reached a conclusion (verdict)
BARRIERS TO CRITICAL
THINKING
Reluctance to critique experts
Mistaking critical analysis for ‘just commenting on the bad points’
Assuming authors and experts always ‘have the answers’. Critical
thinking means pursuing your own answers.
Our own assumptions, preconceptions, biases, experiences, beliefs etc.

From Cottrel (2005)

 Persistence: considering an issue
carefully, more than once
WHAT
DOES Evidence: evaluating the evidence put
forward in support of a particular
THINKING viewpoint, and the evidence put forward
CRITICAL against the same viewpoint
LY Implications: considering where the
INVOLVE? viewpoints lead, reaching conclusions,
considering whether these are
reasonable or rational, and deciding
whether the belief, position, argument or
viewpoint should be accepted
 Get beyond the notion that you
are not qualified to critique a
published piece of work

Allocate time to the literature

WHERE search

TO START
Allocate time to reading
literature

Allocate time to the critique

 DEVELOP A SEARCH
STRATEGY…
“Well defined literature search
strategies are crucial for enhancing
the thoroughness of any type of review
… to limit the possibility of
inaccurate results that stem from
incomplete and biased search
strategies” (Conn et al 2013)
READING CRITICALLY
To write critically you must have a full
understanding of the literature base and current
evidence for your particular subject.
It's not enough to merely understand what the
author is saying, you have to challenge it
To do this it is important that you also have an
understanding of the research process
Remember that a critique will often be
positive and should not be considered
as purely negative
 Scan the paper: look at the title, abstract,
intro, etc think about the author and reference
list. Get a feel for the paper
Read through more closely, making notes.
READING Ensure you understand the subject matter (this
will take time)
A As you are reading determine relevant
RESEARC questions to ask of the paper: use these to
H PAPER critique the paper
Look for ‘themes’ – which you may include in
your critical review grid
Be sure to summarise your critique as you go
to save time
IMPACT FACTORS
What are the impact factors of the journal in which the papers
are published? (frequency with which the average article has
been cited in a particular period)
The higher the impact factor, the more prestigious the journal
Institute for Scientific Information produces the Journal
Citation Reports (JCR). This is a tool to evaluate and compare
journals:
https://searchworks.stanford.edu/view/3424974
 Critique

Evaluation

Comparison

Description
THE In descriptive writing you are not developing an
argument; you are merely setting the
DIFFERENC background within which an argument can be
E BETWEEN developed.
DESCRIPTI Descriptive writing is relatively simple. There is
also the trap that it can be easy to use many,
VE many words from your word limit, simply
WRITING providing description.
AND In providing only description, you are presenting
CRITICAL but not transforming information; you are
reporting ideas but not taking them forward in
WRITING any way.
Often comparison is mistaken for criticality
 Rather than merely referring to a specific piece
of research/theory, indicate why it is relevant to
include it in your work+
Avoid giving blow by blow descriptions of a
DEMONST piece of research – focus instead on presenting
and developing selected key points (themes)
RATING
Include relevant material from a variety of
CRITICALI relevant high quality sources
TY Always support your statements with evidence
(refs)
Indicate where you think future research should
move
 Avoid a simple or linear line of reasoning…
“Research A says X, in comparison to research B
which says Y and then another piece of research C,
STRUCTU says Z” (this is just comparing results)
RE OF This doesn’t illustrate criticality, nor does it show
extensive reading or consideration of the validity,
CRITICAL reliability or applicability of the research
WRITING Instead ‘cluster’ the research according to relevant
themes….’papers A,C, D and F all did X which is
evidenced as reliable by research H’
Simplest tool is a straightforward grid (excel spreadsheet)
Complete this as you go along
It’s a basic, but extremely powerful way to build up understanding, discern
significant issues/themes and see patterns in the research
Note points/themes as they immerge from your reading
As you add in more literature you’ll see points of overlap, commonality and
dispute

TOOLS FOR
SYNTHESISING
LITERATURE
So, you start to see the research, not
as isolated papers but in relation to
one another i.e., you start to
synthesise your understanding
You could construct a separate grid
for different methods, reorder them
by sample size, result etc
This helps you to write thematically
and not linearly
In your writing try to ‘cluster’ the research according to relevant
themes….papers A,C & D all did X which is evidenced as reliable by
research H….

However, research A, B & C all used snowball sampling.

Although there are.. advantages to this method such as the
ability to recruit hidden populations as shown by (ref), it is
also subject to numerous issues such as risk of bias, and
the inability to make statistical inferences from sample to
population, as evidenced by (ref)
In comparison research D, E and F used systematic random
sampling which has been shown to be….
 Although there are
Research A, B advantages to this method
such as the ability to In comparison
& C all used
recruit hidden research D, E and F
snowball
populations… used systematic
sampling.
random sampling..

..it is also
subject to
numerous biases
such as….
As evidenced by…..
(Add research
..risk of bias, inability to evidence)
make statistical inferences
from sample to population
RITICAL WRITING EXAMPLE
Whilst Anderson (2018) and Jones (2016) agree that regular walking
can reduce body weight, others argue that higher levels of exercise
intensity are required for weight loss (Fin, 2018; Smith, 2014) –
(considers alternative views). Support for the effectiveness of regular
walking on weight loss has been provided in several studies. For
example, Davis (2015) and Ellis (2016) both found that...Similarly, Clark
(2015) reported that...(provides evidence). However, a limitation of
these studies is that ....(considers a weakness). Other studies
employing more robust designs have failed to support these findings
(Scott, 2014; Taylor, 2017). This more contemporary research has
employed (contrasts) therefore……
 YOU COULD WRITE... Refers to results

There are a number of seminal studies in the field of nurse led care.
Greenhalgh (1994) demonstrated comparable performance by
nurses and doctors when undertaking cannulation, and later
Lattimer et al (2000) found that nurses could safely replace doctors
in the field of telephone triage. In contrast, Vine (2005) found nurse
led consultations in primary care took longer and cost more, and
when asked patients expressed a preference for being seen by a GP.
Comparison, not
critique
From: Rushforth PL MSc Advanced Clinical Practice Uni of Southampton
‘Greenhalgh (1994), in their seminal study Results
exploring the safety of doctors replacing
nurses in expanded roles concluded that OR YOU
‘doctor nurse’ substitution was safe in COULD
conducting venesection and cannulation.
However closer examination of the study
HAVE
detail reveals that the sole outcome SAID
measures considered were the length of THIS...
wait for patients to receive treatment, and
the number of attempts made by each Theme
practitioner....’
OR THIS...
In contrast Lattimer et.al (2020) conducted a large scale
equivalence study to determine whether it was safe for
nurses to undertake ‘telephone triage’ with patients
seeking a same day GP appointment. This was the first
study of its kind to use a sufficiently large sample size to
compare rare adverse events such as serious illness or
death, and consequently their conclusions that nurse led Theme
telephone triage was safe have become a widely respecteds
seminal study in the field of nurse led care.
 The author
There are a number of inherent methodological difficulties in
evaluating treatment efficacy in this area, and this has refers to the
contributed to controversy within the research literature available
surrounding treatment outcomes for this group of offenders evidence, but
(Marshall, 2014). Firstly, while there is no doubt that the also evaluates
primary criterion of treatment success is a reduction in the the validity of
rate of re-offending (Marshall et al., 2016), reconviction data
that evidence,
does not, in isolation, provide a realistic representation of
actual levels of re-offending by this group (Orr et al 2018). It and assesses
is well established that there is a discrepancy between re- what
offending and reconviction rates: the latter underestimating contribution it
the number of offences committed (Grubin, 2019). Indeed, a can
significant proportion of offences committed by offenders are realistically
either unreported, or do not result in the offender being
make to the
convicted (Abel et al., 2017, O’Neill, 2019).
debate.
 Apply caution and humility when challenging established
positions:
 ‘It could be argued that...’; or ‘an alternative viewpoint
might suggest that...’.
ADDITION Take a thematic approach rather than a linear approach to
AL your writing
It is extremely important to seek feedback from tutors, so
ADVICE that with each assignment, you become progressively more
FOR able to engage with the subject discipline.
Make sure you have identified appropriate sources of
CRITICAL literature

WRITING Don’t provide too much information and not enough depth
Show balance both physically as in the distribution of
information and intellectually: present both sides of an
issue
 Get started on your assignments early - you need to
plan and redraft a few times. Don't underestimate the
SOME time you will need.

ADDITION Lay it aside for 48 hours and then reread it. You will
see many areas for improvement that were not
AL apparent to you during the initial writing.

STRATEGI Read it out loud. It is often easier to hear (rather than

see) sections that are unclear or awkwardly worded.
ES FOR Give a copy to a friend (but be sure to proofread it
first!). Then don’t argue if the friend finds a section
IMPROVI that is unclear. By definition, if it is unclear to your
reader then it is unclear period!
NG YOUR Don’t get too attached to a particular phrase,
WRITING sentence, or paragraph. You have to be able to edit out
anything, no matter how cleverly-worded, that does
not advance your story.
 Read extensively
Be Sceptical
FINALLY Be Objective
…. Be Open minded
Devote time to this
Try and enjoy it!!
USEFUL REFERENCES
FOR CRITICAL WRITING
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATd
HnsXQWlI
Cottrell, S. (2011) Critical thinking skills:
Developing effective analysis and
argument. 2nd ed. London: Palgrave.
Morley, J. (2015) Being critical.
Manchester: University of Manchester.
http://www.phrasebank.manchester.ac.
uk/
You can contact the Learning Development
Centre by email:
LDC_hls@gcu.ac.uk
To access useful materials and our booking
system, use this link:
https://sites.google.com/site/ldcgculearn/

HOW TO GET IN
TOUCH