A research paper’s flaws are often hard to detect. Usually, it’s easy to spot errors in a blurry abstract with little focus and no data, but sometimes it can be more difficult. Good news: there’s a pretty simple solution. When peer-reviewing papers, it is important to understand how to spot an error, how to identify it, and to what extent the flaw is. 

It is possible for flawed research methodologies to result in misleading data. If the methodology is not considered carefully, there are many ways in which research might be conducted incorrectly. Our list is not limited to these, but we will review some of the more common ones.

Hva er de metodiske feilene i forskningen?

Innenfor alle fagfelt gjennomføres det ulike typer studier, noe som resulterer i ulike typer forskningsfeil. Som et utgangspunkt kan denne listen være nyttig for å forebygge vanlige feil i manuskripter. Med øvelse og ferdigheter i å lese manuskripter kritisk, kan listen utvides med mer spesifikke eksempler. 

Du kan lese artikkelen vår for å lære mer om forskningsmetodikk.

  1. Using the wrong research design

To achieve valid, scientifically sound results, the research design is paramount. Understand the terminology pertaining to the subject area of research. Consider how an unusual approach might affect data and analysis if you encounter it in a study. Pay attention to the researchers’ arguments and rationales. Something new and unfamiliar is not necessarily inaccurate or flawed. It only needs more attention during the review process.

  1. Valg av størrelse for prøver

In some cases, results are drawn from a sample size that is too small for an accurate analysis. Real-life data requires a bit of insight when we are analyzing it. Depending on the situation, one scenario may be valid while the other may not be. A sample’s size and whether it encompasses the whole demographic must therefore be considered when analyzing data. Small samples cannot be analyzed using percentages; absolute numbers must always be shown.

  1. Metoder/standarder som ikke er fulgt

An explanation of how the results were produced should be included in the methods section. If you have questions about the validity of the figures, you should raise them. Examine the researchers’ justification carefully for any anomalies, in order to ask more questions if necessary. The use of irrelevant language, biased statements, and opinionated discourse during a study is also considered poor practice.

  1. Ord i massevis

For mange ord er et vanlig problem i manuskripter. Så langt det er mulig, bør du sørge for at teksten er kortfattet, oversiktlig og slagkraftig. En leser kan miste interessen for en forskningsartikkel hvis den er for ordrik, noe som kan føre til feiltolkninger. Slike feil forekommer av og til i mangel av erfaring, men det er viktig å unngå spørsmål som ofte er konstruert på en slik måte at resultatene blir skjeve. En forskningsstudie med et nytt spørreskjema er den eneste måten å løse denne feilen på, i motsetning til andre typer feil.

  1. Konkluderende bevis er ikke tilstrekkelig

It is essential that the summary and conclusion paragraphs of a research paper be based on evidence and justified. There may be an issue with the researchers’ methodological approach, additional references, or a need for additional data that does not agree with the results.

Featuring the world’s largest collection of scientifically accurate illustrations

Yes, you read that correctly. With Mind the Graph, you can communicate science in the best way possible by using scientific illustrations that illustrate a wide range of fields. Make sure you check out our gallery, which is regularly updated.

logo-abonnement

Abonner på nyhetsbrevet vårt

Eksklusivt innhold av høy kvalitet om effektiv visuell
kommunikasjon innen vitenskap.

- Eksklusiv guide
- Tips om design
- Vitenskapelige nyheter og trender
- Veiledninger og maler