Locating and Reviewing a Peer-Reviewed Article on Criminology Research

Understanding Peer-Reviewed Journals in Criminology

In the field of criminology, peer-reviewed journals house manuscripts that discuss research projects that have been examined by experts in that research field. Typically, two or three peer reviewers are asked to evaluate a submitted research paper to determine whether or not the paper meets the standards of the discipline.

 

To become familiar with current published research in criminology, you will need to locate one peer-reviewed article related to criminal justice and/or criminology. Locating a peer-reviewed article is most effective when searching a database that has collected published articles from numerous journals.

 

For example, when you go to the Educational tab under My Resources in the TESU portal, you can select the New Jersey State Library databases (like Academic Search Complete and Criminal Justice Database), EBSCOhost, or ProQuest. These databases are a great place to begin searching for a peer-reviewed journal article.

 

Many databases allow you to limit the search query to peer reviewed only, which you should do. Also, limit your search to the last two years to ensure a current article. In your database search, choose a type of crime of interest to you (a property, person, or public order crime). Your search should list several articles on your topic. Choose one article to read. Make sure you have access to the full article and not just the abstract.

 

When reading the article, respond to the following prompts in your own words. A paragraph for each bullet point is most appropriate to allow elaboration of your article review. Be sure to format your paper in APA style, including the citation of your chosen article.

 

What is the research question or research statement? In other words, what are the authors trying to find out in the research project? The next sections of the paper will discuss existing research articles on the topic to provide significance to the project. Briefly summarize the key points of interest you found in the research on the topic.

 

The Methods section is typically next in a peer-reviewed article. Researchers need data to answer their research question(s). Data comes in many forms, such as interviews, police records, crime statistics, observations, and other options. Discuss the data the researchers used and how the data was collected.

 

Analyzing the data comes next. There are many different ways to analyze data that are based on the data itself. Simple tallying of frequencies to statistical programs may be used. Review this section, but do not get bogged down in trying to understand the analysis. After the data has been analyzed, the researchers discuss what the findings actually mean. They will discuss if their research question or statement has been answered.

Finding Peer-Reviewed Articles for Criminal Justice and Criminology Research

 

Discuss what the researchers found in their data. What does the data mean? Researchers will end the article, typically in a section called Discussion or Conclusion, with future research ideas. They will provide researchers with suggestions on research projects that will continue to add insight into this area of study.

 

Identify one suggestion that the researchers discussed as a future research project on the topic. Do you agree with their suggestion? Explain. Lastly, discuss which sociological perspectives this article represents. Choose one perspective and give examples of how you think that theory best relates to the research project. Research question or statement You authoritatively describe the research question or statement and astutely explain what the authors are trying to find out in the research project.

 

You describe the research question or statement and satisfactorily explain what the authors are trying to find out in the research project. You haphazardly describe the research question or statement and/or incompletely explain what the authors are trying to find out in the research project. You inadequately describe the research question or statement and/or barely explain what the authors are trying to find out in the research project. null Key points of interest You adeptly discuss existing research articles on the topic, effectively summarizing key points of interest.

 

You satisfactorily discuss existing research articles on the topic, briefly summarizing key points of interest. You loosely discuss existing research articles on the topic, partially summarizing key points of interest. You inadequately discuss existing research articles on the topic, incompetently summarizing key points of interest. null Methods You masterfully discuss the data used by the researchers and how they collected the data. You capably discuss the data used by the researchers how they collected the data.

 

You vaguely discuss the data used by the researchers and how they collected the data. You unsoundly discuss the data used by the researchers and how they collected the data. null Data You insightfully review the data in a manner that is appropriate to the data itself. You review the data in a manner that is appropriate to the data itself.

 

You somewhat review the data in a manner that is appropriate to the data itself. You substandardly review the data in a manner that is appropriate to the data itself. null Findings You comprehensively discuss what the researchers found in their data and what the data mean. You adequately discuss what the researchers found in their data and what the data mean. You superficially discuss what the researchers found in their data and what the data mean.

Reading and Analyzing a Peer-Reviewed Article on Criminology Research

 

You unsatisfactorily discuss what the researchers found in their data and what the data mean. null Future research project You identify one suggestion that the researchers discussed as a future research project and eloquently explain whether you agree with their suggestion. You identify one suggestion that the researchers discussed as a future research project and satisfactorily explain whether you agree with their suggestion.

 

You identify one suggestion that the researchers discussed as a future research project and somewhat explain whether you agree with their suggestion. You inaccurately identify one suggestion that the researchers discussed as a future research project and insufficiently explain whether you agree with their suggestion. null Sociological persepctives You thoroughly discuss which sociological perspectives the article represents, choosing one perspective and giving effective examples of how you think that theory best relates to the research project.

 

You satisfactorily discuss which sociological perspectives the article represents, choosing one perspective and giving examples of how you think that theory best relates to the research project. You partially discuss which sociological perspectives the article represents, choosing one perspective and giving inconclusive examples of how you think that theory best relates to the research project.

 

You incompetently discuss which sociological perspectives the article represents, choosing one perspective and giving ineffective examples of how you think that theory best relates to the research project. null Content development You use carefully chosen, authoritative, and compelling content that demonstrates mastery of the subject; provide an advanced and thoughtful analysis of ideas; and present an in-depth synthesis of ideas demonstrating insight and interpretation.

 

You use appropriate and relevant content that demonstrates sufficient command of the subject and provide a germane analysis of ideas. You use somewhat appropriate content that demonstrates limited command of the subject and/or provides a cursory analysis of ideas that lacks insight and interpretation. You use inappropriate and irrelevant content and/or provide little, if any, analysis. null Organization You lucidly organize material into well-formed paragraphs and arrange ideas logically to support the purpose of the paper;

 

writing is fluid with an explicit focus and sensible structure. You logically organize material into well-formed paragraphs; writing has focus and structure. You loosely organize material and provide limited supporting detail; writing is somewhat disjointed and disorganized. You incoherently organize material, often impairing the reader's ability to comprehend it; significant details are missing or irrelevant; writing is completely disjointed and lacks correct form and structure.

 

null Evidence You support points and subpoints with abundant clarifying detail, include relevant and clearly attributed sources as necessary, and effectively link ideas; comprehensive evidence extends ideas and fully authenticates the purpose/thesis of the writing assignment or paper. You support points and subpoints with sufficient detail, attribute sources as necessary, and link ideas; evidence relates to the purpose/thesis of the writing assignment or paper.

 

You support points and subpoints with limited detail and improperly link ideas at times; most evidence does not relate to the purpose/thesis of the writing assignment or paper. You inadequately support points and subpoints with irrelevant detail and do not properly link ideas; little, if any, evidence relates to the purpose/thesis of the writing assignment or paper. null Sources and documentation You clearly and effectively document sources of information with in-text citations linking to References at the end of the paper;

 

format is complete and entirely accurate. You properly document sources of information with in-text citations linking to References at the end of the paper; format may include a few minor errors. You incompletely document sources of information with in-text citations linking to References at the end of the paper; format includes significant errors. You inadequately document sources of information with either in-text citations or References at the end of the paper; whatever documentation exists includes multiple and serious errors. null Mechanics You write in complete,

 

well-constructed sentences with faultless grammar, word choice, punctuation, and spelling; writing is sharp, coherent, and demonstrates sophisticated clarity. You write in complete sentences with mostly correct grammar, word choice, punctuation, and spelling; minor errors may exist but do not compromise meaning. You write in unclear sentences with significant errors in grammar, word choice, punctuation, and spelling that may compromise meaning. You writes in incomplete, incomprehensible sentences filled with serious errors in grammar, word choice, punctuation, or spelling.