The module is Evolutionary Psychology and the assignemnt is a 2000 word (+10%) C

The module is Evolutionary Psychology and the assignemnt is a 2000 word (+10%) Critical review. The critical review should begin with a clear introduction to their chosen paper, followed by a concise, critical evaluation of the paper. You should consider the findings and conclusions within the paper but also the wider
theoretical implications, finishing with a strong conclusion. The critical review needs to be done in an APA 7TH format with double spacing and Times New Roman font in size 12.
The paper I have chosen is: The Cinderella Effect
Block, K. & Kaplan, J. (2022). Testing the Cinderella effect: Measuring victim injury in child
abuse cases. Journal of Criminal Justice, 82, (I have attached the PDF of the paper in uploaded files) ENSURE that you read the paper I have chosen specifically the findings and conclusion as this is what will be critiqued. I have also attached lecture slides of what the cinderella affect is as well as two examples of what a psychology critical review is meant to look like. PLEASE ENSURE YOU READ EVERYTHING AS THIS IS IMPERATIVE TO UNDERSTANDING THE ASSIGNMENT.
IMPORTANT: To be successful within this critical review you need to research other papers that are either supporting or have different views to the paper I selected, disect this and offer out of the box views by doing further research. Include any relevant theories that may be necessary for this.
Questions to apply to the critical review:
– Have the authors presented a clear and accurate overview of the
existing literature?
– Are the research aims and hypotheses clear and appropriate?
– Will the methodology enable them to reach their research aims
and adequately test their hypotheses?
– Is there a better methodology?
– Have they found what they said they have found?
– Have they used appropriate statistical analyses?
– Is there a better approach to analysis?
– Have they interpreted their findings
correctly?
– Are their alternative interpretations that
they have not considered?
– Have they fit their findings into the existing
literature?
– Have they acknowledged shortcomings in
their approach?
– Have they drawn justified conclusions?
All of his needs to be supported by other papers and research in this field! INCLUDE RELEVANT RESEARCH TO SUPPORT FINDINGS AND IN TEXT CITE THEM CORRECTLY.
Introduction:
– Include a few opening sentences that announce the author(s) and the title, and briefly explain the topic of the text. Present the aim of the text and summarise the main finding or key argument. What is the paper about?
Succinct and clear summary of the research paper and surrounding literature (300-500
words). Conclude the introduction with a brief statement of your evaluation of the text. This can be a positive or negative evaluation or, as is usually the case, a mixed response.
Critical Review/Main Paragraph:
– Present a summary of the key points along with a limited number of examples. You can also briefly explain the author’s purpose/intentions throughout the text and you may briefly describe how the text is organised. The summary should only make up about a third of the critical review. Strengths and weaknesses of the research paper. These should be substantive and non-trivial (1000-1200 words). The critique should be a balanced discussion and evaluation of the strengths, weakness and notable features of the text. Remember to base your discussion on specific criteria. Good reviews also include other sources to support your evaluation (remember to reference).
You can choose how to sequence your critique. Here are some examples to get you started:
Most important to least important conclusions you make about the text.
If your critique is more positive than negative, then present the negative points first and the positive last.
If your critique is more negative than positive, then present the positive points first and the negative last.
If there are both strengths and weakness for each criterion you use, you need to decide overall what your judgement is. For example, you may want to comment on a key idea in the text and have both positive and negative comments. You could begin by stating what is good about the idea and then concede and explain how it is limited in some way. While this example shows a mixed evaluation, overall you are probably being more negative than positive.
You can also include recommendations for how the text can be improved in terms of ideas, research approach; theories or frameworks used can also be included in the critique section.
Conclusion:
– Restate your overall opinion of the text.
– Briefly present recommendations.
– Strong, justified opinions on the merits and shortcomings of the research paper (300-500 words).