Sex Research Article Review

The assignment is to read an article from a scientific journal on any topic related to human sexuality and write a 5-6 page, double-spaced, typed review of the article.  The article must be recent: 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020.  The article you choose must be approved by me, and summaries and presentations of non-approved articles will receive grades of zero.  Please send me a pdf of the article you want to present so I can review it to see if it will allow you to meet the criteria of the assignment.  The summary should end with a short critique (a paragraph or two) which critically evaluates the article.  When summarizing, you should paraphrase, which means put the summary in your own words.  Do not take whole paragraphs or sentences out of the article as part of your summary.  This can be seen as plagiarism or stealing the work of someone else and passing it off as your own. Students will present their reviews to the class during the semester.  The paper is worth 50 points and the presentation is worth 10 points for a total of 60 points.

A pdf of the article, the paper, and the PowerPoint presentation are due by noon on the beginning of class on the day of the scheduled presentation.  Submit these in attachments in one email.  I will upload your PowerPoint and share my screen while you present.  For the paper, use a cover page with your name, the title of the article, the date, the name of the class and the name of the professor.  Use 12 point font throughout, including the title page.  Staple and do not use paper or plastic covers.  The paper is graded on organization, grammar, spelling, content, and level of analysis.  Do not use contractions, and make sure each paragraph begins with a topic sentence.

The Summary

The article reviewed may be either theoretical, experimental, or phenomenological. Give the name of the article, the name of the author(s), the name of the journal or book it is from.  If from a book, give the names of the editor(s).  Include the year the article was published.

Theory:  Describe the theory and include the following:

The behavior addressed by the theory

The major assumptions of the theory

Evidence presented to support the theory

The alternative theories that are presented

The advantages of the new theory over the older theories (That is, what does it explain that the others do not.  What does it explain better than the others? What questions does it answer that the others do not?)

The limitations of the new theory (What questions remain unanswered? What are alternative explanations to those presented by the theory?)

Does the theory generate testable hypotheses according to the author(s)?  Describe these.

Experiment

What is the behavior in question?

What are the results of past research?

The experiment was done to answer a question in what general area?

What is/are the specific hypothesis(es) of the experiment?

Who were the participants in the study reviewed?

What was done to them or what types of observations were made?

What are the results of the experiment?

Based on the discussion section, how do the results provide support or lack thereof for the experimental hypothesis(es)?

Phenomenological Study (The Lived Experience)

Some research in human sexuality is phenomenological.  That means individuals are asked about their personal experience in some aspect of sexuality.  This type of study is similar to the case study and helps researchers to understand the various components of a phenomenon from the perspective to the person who is living it.  For example, a study might look at Black transsexuals to understand what their experience is in life, the challenges they face as a minority person on multiple levels, and their ideas about what type of support they need to deal more effectively in their life situation.  In this type of study, you can answer the same questions that are in the section on experimental studies, but you will also include reports by the individuals involved.  Be careful not to make your report just a narrative of all of the comments rather than a real analysis of the scientific question. Use quotations from the participants to support your analysis and give examples, but do not report just the descriptions and comments of the participants.

Critique of a Theory:

In your opinion is the theory involved logical and useful?  Why or why not?  Do you see any problems or inconsistencies with it, if so explain.  Does it have any particular strengths or weaknesses in your opinion?  Are some important issues not addressed?  Is the theory an improvement over other theories?  Can the theory be tested?  What tests have been suggested or do you suggest? Are there alternative explanations to those proposed?  Is the theory well-researched?  Is there evidence to support it?  Is the theory new or does it build on older ideas which have been supported or not supported?

Critique of an Experiment:

Does the study seem to be a good test of the scientific question? Why or why not?  Do the results of the study answer a question or just support the already existing knowledge on the issue? Are there problems with how the behavior under study was operationalized and measured?  Were the definitions and measures reliable and valid?  What issues may be undermining the reliability and validity of these?  Who were the participants and how were they recruited?  Are there characteristics of the participants that might cause the results to be biased in a particular way?  What are these?  What types of problems might there be with the research?  Go back to chapter 3 in the text and address any of the problems described there that you see in your study. How generalizable are the results?