Evaluating of a Work's K Van Royen Severe Sexual Harassment on Social Networking Sites - Article Example

Assessment 2 Worksheet for Evaluating a Health Research Study Report Instructions: Use this template to record your evaluation of the article that you have critiqued for Assessment 2. See separate instructions for detailed guidance on completing assessment. NOTE: Hide or remove the rows in the summary table, and pages of the detailed critique, not relating to the article chosen for critique. Your summary table should reflect the score and overall assessment given (and supported by evidence) for each component, in the detailed tables to follow. The current row width can be expanded as high as necessary to provide a complete base of evidence. Critic’s Name End-text citation of article critiqued: Kathleen Van Royen, Heidi Vandebosch & Karolien Poels (2015) Severe Sexual Harassment on Social Networking Sites: Belgian Adolescents’ Views, Journal of Children and Media, 9:4, 472-491, DOI: 10.1080/17482798.2015.1089301 Summary Table Component of evaluation Max score Score Overall assessment of component Part A: Evaluating the Front Matter in a Research Report 12 10 High Quality Part B: Evaluating the Statement of the Problem in a Research Report 21 15 Adequate Quality Part C: Evaluating the Literature Review in a Research Report 21 13 Adequate quality Part D: Evaluating a Purpose in a Research Report 21 19 High Quality Part E1: Evaluating the Research Design in a Quantitative Research Report 9 Part F1: Evaluating the Participants and Data Collection in a Quantitative Research Report 24 Part G1: Evaluating the Data Analysis and Results in a Quantitative Research Report 21 Part E2: Evaluating the Research Design in a Qualitative Report 12 7 Adequate Quality Part F2: Evaluating the Participants and Data Collection in a Qualitative Report 21 13 Adequate Quality Part G2: Evaluating the Data Analysis and Findings in a Qualitative Report 21 12 Adequate Quality Part H: Evaluating the Conclusion and Back Matter in a Research Report 21 17 High Quality Maximum possible score / total score given And Overall assessment 1 Quantitative OR 2 Qualitative 150 129 106 Adequate Quality Summary evaluation and justification After careful consideration of all the aspects of this research paper, its overall evaluation is adequate. The following parts were found to be of superb quality: front matter, purpose of the research and back matter. With the clear justifications found in the tables below, all the other aspects of the paper were found to be of adequate quality. Part A: Evaluating the Front Matter in a Research Report Quality Criteria Quality Rating Your Evidence and/or Reasoning 0 = Poor 1 = Fair 2 = Good 3 = Excellent HEALTH RESEARCH STUDY SELECTION The Key Elements 1. The study’s authors and journal are reputable. 2 The article is authored by Kathleen Van Royen, Heidi Vandebosch and Karolien Poels. Kathleen Van Royen is a PhD student at the Department of Communication Studies, University of Antwerp, Belgium. Heidi Vandebosch is associate professor of Strategic Communication at the Department of Communication Studies, University of Antwerp, Belgium. Karolien Poels is associate professor at the Department of Communication Studies, University of Antwerp (Belgium). Each of the three authors has a significant number of collaborative publications in areas such Communication, Developmental Psychology and Public Health. Additionally, they are all affiliated with the University of Antwerp which is a reputable institution. The “Journal of Children and Media” is also reputable since it falls in the second quartile in three different rankings of the Journal Scholar Metrics in the fields of communication and sociology. 2. The title reflects the content and focus of the study. 2 The title “Severe Sexual Harassment on Social Networking Sites: Belgian Adolescents’ Views” is appropriate but fails to give the reader a clear indication of the study’s focus. 3. The abstract concisely but accurately summarizes the aim, methodology and main findings of the report. 3 The abstract gives a concise summary of the study. It clearly outlines the purpose of the study i.e. to interrogate what Belgian adolescents perceive as severe sexual harassment on social networking sites. It also clearly indicates who the participants of the study were: focus groups of adolescents aged between 12-18 years. It additionally indicates that the research is qualitative by design. Finally, it gives an overview of the study’s findings: that Belgian adolescents perceived “personally targeted gender harassment, situations with restricted escape possibilities, the use of insulting words, the non-consensual use of pictures for sex-related purposes, or frequent adult-initiated sexual attention” severe cases of sexual harassment on social networking sites. General Evaluation 4. The front matter accurately reflects the content of the report and allows an evaluation of relevance. 3 The front matter is appropriate since it enables the reader to determine if the study is pertinent to their needs. Overall Quality Part A 0 - 6 = Low quality 7 - 9 = Adequate quality 10 - 12 = High quality Total Part A Score = 10 My Overall Assessment of Part A = High Quality Part B: Evaluating the Statement of the Problem in a Research Report Quality Criteria Quality Rating Your Evidence and/or Reasoning 0 = Poor 1 = Fair 2 = Good 3 = Excellent The Key Elements 1. The topic is interesting. 1 The study fails to include a selling point for itself. While the topic is no doubt of great relevance, the study does little to portray its concerns as an interesting subject 2. There is a meaningful problem. 3 The problem explored by the study is definitely meaningful. Understanding sexual harassment from adolescents’ point of view is of significance to parents, educators, health professionals and SNS providers. Lack of an understanding of sexual harassment of adolescents on social networking sites limits the ability of relevant actors to come up with relevant interventions. 3. The importance of the problem is justified. 2 The importance of the problem is justified thought not in a succinct manner. By implication, the following justifications are provided: Children’s perspective is missing in the area of sexual harassment on SNSs even though adolescents are themselves perpetrators and victims Lack of knowledge of adolescents’ perspective on sexual harassment on SNSs inhibits stakeholders’ ability to formulate relevant solutions Sexual harassment of adolescents on SNSs leads to emotional, psychological, social and educational impacts 4. There are deficiencies in the knowledge about the problem. 3 This study seeks to provide insights into the perception of sexual harassment on social networking sites from adolescents’ point of view. The study intends to fill the gap of the absence of children’s voices in sexual harassment in social networking sites. 5. There are audiences who can benefit from the missing knowledge. 3 Knowledge provided by this study benefits parents, educators, health professionals and SNS providers. General Evaluation 6. The passage clearly argues that the study is warranted. 2 Key aspects of the problem are present though most are scattered and not clearly communicated 7. The passage is well written. 1 Statement of the problem is not consolidated and the ideas are not arranged in a logical order. Overall Quality Part B 0 - 10 = Low quality 11 - 16 = Adequate quality 17 - 21 = High quality Total Part B Score = 15 My Overall Assessment of Part B = Adequate Quality Part C: Evaluating the Literature Review in a Research Report Quality Criteria Quality Rating Your Evidence and/or Reasoning 0 = Poor 1 = Fair 2 = Good 3 = Excellent The Key Elements 1. The review includes the relevant literature. 2 In research literature review ought to acknowledge what has been written on the subject of the study, explore the ongoing dialogue on the subject, position the study in that ongoing dialogue as well as map what is known and unknown on the subject (Creswell, 2014). The literature review also ought to explicate the theoretical underpinnings of the study. In qualitative research, theory serves to provide the ideological lens through which phenomena is considered (Creswell, 2014). Literatures reviews should move from a general consideration of a subject area towards the specific focus of a particular study. The literature review in the study includes relevant literature. The literature explores: The theoretical positioning of the study- theories of stress and appraisal theories The state of knowledge in the area of sexual perception of sexual harassment among adolescents on SNSs 2. The review examines sources that are recent and of high quality. 2 Most sources cited are from the last decade meaning they are fairly recent. Additionally, most primary sources are from reputable journals alluding to their satisfactory quality. 3. The literature review is appropriately documented. 3 Both in-text and end-text citations are appropriately done 4. The literature is thoughtfully synthesized. 2 The literature reviewed is organized according to themes. 5. The literature is critically examined. 0 No critical effort is evident in the literature review. The studies and publications cited only serve to enhance the credibility of claims made by the authors. The use of existing literature to enhance one’s arguments without due considerations of their weaknesses however serves to weaken one’s claims rather than strengthen them (Baumeister & Leary, 1997). It is notable however that the authors strove to differentiate between citations that provided empirical proof from those that were mere assertions. General Evaluation 6. The study has a strong foundation in the literature. 2 The study has an acceptable basis in literature with an acceptable length, average synthesis and no critical analysis. Since there was no critical analysis, the study to outline how it will remedy shortcomings from past studies. 7. The use of the literature fits the study's overall research approach. 2 The use of literature in the study is adequate. Overall Quality Part C 0 - 10 = Low quality 11 - 16 = Adequate quality 17 - 21 = High quality Total Part C Score = 13 My Overall Assessment of Part C = Adequate Quality Part D: Evaluating a Purpose in a Research Report Quality Criteria Quality Rating Your Evidence and/or Reasoning 0 = Poor 1 = Fair 2 = Good 3 = Excellent The Key Elements 1. The study's purpose is clearly specified. According to Creswell, a purpose of a research study should contain “information about the central phenomenon explored in the study, the participants in the study, and the research site”, (2014). The purpose of the study is therefore clearly stated: to interrogate Belgian adolescents’ perception of sexual harassment severity on SNSs. It however doesn’t hint at the research design (phenomenological) and the reader has get tis from elsewhere in the text. 2. The focus of the study is appropriate. 3 Since the research design for this study is qualitative, its focus on the opinions of participants on severity of sexual harassment in appropriate. 3. The overall intent of the study is appropriate. 3 The goal of the study was to interrogate the perception of severity of sexual harassment on SNSs by Belgian adolescents. This purpose is consistent with the research design and is explicitly put across. The study also has a secondary aim- to gather adolescent’s views on how to prevent sexual harassment on SNSs 4. The participants and sites are appropriate. 2 Qualitative research gives researchers a chance to purposefully identify the site and participants of their research (Crewell, 2014). A clear justification should therefore be provided for both the choice of the site and the inclusion criterion of the participants. Of great concern in the choice of the participants is appropriateness and accessibility. The suitability of a cite choice is mostly dependent on the willingness of gatekeepers to grant researchers access to the site (Berg, 2001). This study’s participants were high school going teenagers between the ages of 12-18 years. The specific site(s) is/are unclear and so is the justification for its/their choice. Still, the region(s) where this/these specific sites are located in Belgium are neither acknowledged nor justified. This potentially waters down the dependability of the study’s results. Eligibility for inclusions in the study was dependent on active SNSs use. The study however remains silent on how a participant’s regularity of SNSs use was determined. 5. The purpose is narrowed through appropriate research questions and/or hypotheses. 3 The research has no explicit research questions. It however narrows down its purpose through its explicitly stated objective: “In this study, we will explore sexual harassment starting from the perspective of adolescents themselves. In particular, we focus on adolescents’ severity appraisals of sexual harassment on SNSs along with their views on preventing these situations.” General Evaluation 6. The purpose follows logically from the statement of the problem and literature review. 3 There is a logical flow from the statement of the problem to the literature review. After the explication of the objective of the study, the literature review then explores literature on the major themes that are associated with perception of severity of sexual harassment. These are appraisals of sexual harassment, severity appraisal of online victimization and prevention of online sexual harassment. 7. The purpose is consistent with the study's overall approach. 3 The interrogation of a certain demographics’ (Belgian teenagers) views on a given issue (perception of severity of sexual harassment on SNSs) is consistent with the research design chosen (qualitative research). Overall Quality Part D 0 - 10 = Low quality 11 - 16 = Adequate quality 17 - 21 = High quality Total Part D Score = 19 My Overall Assessment of Part D = High Quality Part E1: Evaluating the Research Design in a Quantitative Research Report Quality Criteria Quality Rating Your Evidence and/or Reasoning 0 = Poor 1 = Fair 2 = Good 3 = Excellent The Key Elements 1. The choice of the research design is appropriate and justified. 1 General Evaluation 2. The study used a rigorous research design. 1 Overall Quality Part E 0- 4 = Low quality 5- 7 = Adequate quality 8 - 9 = High quality Total Part E Score = My Overall Assessment of Part E = Part F1 : Evaluating the Participants and Data Collection in a Quantitative Research Report Quality Criteria Quality Rating Your Evidence and/or Reasoning 0 = Poor 1 = Fair 2 = Good 3 = Excellent The Key Elements 1. The sampling strategy is appropriate and justified. 2. The sample size is appropriate and justified. 3. High quality instruments are used to gather data. 4. The data are gathered using ethical quantitative procedures. 5. The data are gathered using standardized quantitative procedures. General Evaluation: 6. The study has a high level of internal validity. Overall Quality Part F 0 - 12 = Low quality 13 - 20 = Adequate quality 22 - 24 = High quality Total Part F Score = My Overall Assessment of Part F = Part G1: Evaluating the Data Analysis and Results in a Quantitative Research Report Quality Criteria Quality Rating Your Evidence and/or Reasoning 0 = Poor 1 = Fair 2 = Good 3 = Excellent The Key Elements 1. The data were rigorously scored and prepared. 2. Good descriptive analyses were conducted. 3. Good hypothesis testing procedures were used. 4. The results are comprehensive. 5. The results include sufficient information. General Evaluation: 6. The data analysis represents a good quantitative process. 7. The results provide a good explanation of the study’s purpose. Overall Quality Part G 0 - 10 = Low quality 11 - 16 = Adequate quality 17 - 21 = High quality Total Part G Score = My Overall Assessment of Part G = Part E2: Evaluating the Research Design in a Qualitative Report Quality Criteria Quality Rating Your Evidence and/or Reasoning 0 = Poor 1 = Fair 2 = Good 3 = Excellent The Key Elements 1. A research design guides the conduct of the qualitative study. 1 The research design chosen by the researcher should guide how the study is carried out. This being a phenomenological study, the researchers’ fail to acknowledge the aspects this study design that may affect the outcome of study findings 2. The choice of the research design is appropriate and justified. 3 The research design chosen is consistent with suggested methodologies of conducting social studies General Evaluation: 3. The study used a rigorous research design. 0 Rigor refers to a research study’s attention to all the myriad factors that may affect the validity and reliability of its results. While validity as a concept isn’t wholly applicable in qualitative studies, there is need nonetheless to acknowledge that issues of trustworthiness of results are a central concern to a study of whatever kind (Krefting, 1991). The research design employed in this study fails to account for a number of factors that might adversely affect the truth-value of its results. Firstly, the study fails to account for its choice of the study site. Secondly, the study fails to justify the criterion used for the inclusion and exclusion of its participants. Thirdly, the study doesn’t account for its sample size Fourthly, the study to employ any of the strategies that might enhance its credibility, transferability, dependability and conformability (Krefting, 1991). 4. The use of the qualitative research design addresses the study’s purpose. 3 The purpose of this study was to explore the perception of severity of sexual harassment by Belgian adolescents on SNSs. The responses expected from the participants were to be based on their lived experiences. The choice of qualitative research design therefore adequately addressed the study’s purpose. Overall Quality Part E 0 – 6 = Low quality 7 – 9 = Adequate quality 10 – 12 = High quality Total Part E Score =7 My Overall Assessment of Part E =Adequate Quality Part F2: Evaluating the Participants and Data Collection in a Qualitative Report Quality Criteria Quality Rating Your Evidence and/or Reasoning 0 = Poor 1 = Fair 2 = Good 3 = Excellent The Key Elements 1. The sampling strategy is appropriate and justified. 0 Samples are used to make inferences about larger populations (Berg, 2001). In order to increase the dependability of the results of a qualitative research, a great deal of thought ought to go to the sampling strategy. This study adopted purposive sampling in the choice of high school teenagers due to their age (adolescence). The study interviewed a total of 83 high school students until data saturation was reached. The chosen students were then divided into 16 focus groups depending on gender, age group and type of education (vocational or regular). No justification was made for the choice of the site of the study or the region. It is unclear for example whether one or more sites were chosen. It is also unclear whether most, some or all the sites were urban or rural, a demographic factor which might significantly affect the representative nature of the results. To this extent therefore, the sampling strategy of the study remains vague. 2. The sample size is appropriate and justified. 1 The justification given for the total number of participants in this study (83) was data saturation. Whether the sample size was appropriate or not is impossible to determine considering the lack of information of the population they were meant to be representative of. 3. The data types are appropriate. 3 The study required verbal response from their participants regarding their perception of the severity of sexual harassment on SNSs. This being a phenomenological study, the data types collected are appropriate. 4. The data are gathered using rigorous qualitative procedures. 2 The data were collected through semi-structured questionnaires with follow up questions accounting for vigor. With the exclusion of the data collection instrument in the research paper for the benefit of the consumer, it becomes impossible to evaluate the rigor of the study’s data collection. Indeed, without the scheduled questions used in the study, the consumer is incapable of deciding whether they could have elicited accurate answers (Coughian et al., 2007). 5. Data collection issues are handled ethically and thoughtfully. 3 Ethical issues in research involve consideration for one’s subjects’ privacy and welfare in the course of the research (Berg, 2001). Considering this study involved minors as participants, ethical issues were put into consideration in the following fours ways: The study protocol of the study was approved by the Ethical Advisory Committee of the University in the region where the study site was located For teenagers to be eligible for the study, they needed to produced written consents from their parents Participants in the study were awarded with a gift voucher as a token of appreciation. The participants were encouraged to share not only experiences they themselves had undergone but also those they had witnessed amongst their friends and acquaintances. This shielded the participants from feeling they were sharing too much about themselves. Additionally, the choice of semi-structured interviews was apt for the kind of data this study was seeking. Because of the versatility they offer the interviewer, unscheduled questions can benefit this sought of a study since they have been shown to elicit more elaborate and sincere answers from interviewees (Berg, 2001). Lastly, the choice of the focus group atmosphere has been shown to work best with children and teenagers (Berg, 2001). Data collection for this study was therefore handled ethically and thoughtfully. General Evaluation: 6. The selected participants are information rich. 2 The choice of high school teenagers was appropriate as regards age. The absence of information about the participants’ regularity of SNSs use casts doubt regarding how much information they might have held regarding the area of study. 7. The database provides extensive and credible information about the central phenomenon. 2 The sampling shortcomings of the study raises questions of credibility of the data collected. The data collection strategies employed were however apt. the credibility and the extensiveness of the data collected is therefore satisfactory. Overall Quality Part F 0 - 10 = Low quality 11 - 16 = Adequate quality 17 - 21 = High quality Total Part F Score = 13 My Overall Assessment of Part F = Adequate Quality Part G2: Evaluating the Data Analysis and Findings in a Qualitative Report Quality Criteria Quality Rating Your Evidence and/or Reasoning 0 = Poor 1 = Fair 2 = Good 3 = Excellent The Key Elements 1. The analysis process used rigorous qualitative procedures. 3 Data analysis in research ought to relate back to the literature review (Coughian et al., 2007). This study used a thematic approach to data analysis. Existing theories on sexual harassment and cyberbullying were also applied. The analysis process was therefore rigorous and befitting of a qualitative research. 2. Strategies were used to validate the findings. 0 No strategies have been employed to enhance the trustworthiness of the findings. 3. The findings include description of the people, places, or events in the study. 0 The research findings do not include description of people, places or events. 4. The findings include appropriate themes about the central phenomenon. 3 The research findings are analyzed according to themes about sexual harassment on SNSs. These themes are: Severity Appraisal Related to Type of Sexual Harassment on SNSs Situational Factors Influencing the Severity of Sexual Harassment on SNSs The above themes are then further categorized into subtopics. 5. The findings relate multiple themes to each other. 2 The authors of this study have made a great effort to bring out relationships between different themes. For instance, the relationship between the harasser and the victim and ow that affects the perception of severity of sexual harassment has been adequately explored. General Evaluation: 6. The data analysis represents a good qualitative process. 2 The data analysis employed is adequate 7. The findings provide a good exploration of the central phenomenon. 2 The study’s exploration of the central phenomenon is satisfactory. Overall Quality Part G 0 - 10 = Low quality 11 - 16 = Adequate quality 17 - 21 = High quality Total Part G Score = 12 My Overall Assessment of Part G = Adequate Quality Part H: Evaluating the Conclusion and Back Matter in a Research Report Quality Criteria Quality Rating Your Evidence and/or Reasoning 0 = Poor 1 = Fair 2 = Good 3 = Excellent The Key Elements 1. The major results are identified and summarized. 3 A study’s conclusions ought to be succinctly and explicitly put across. This study’s conclusions are clearly identified and summarized. The study found out that adolescents find the following forms of sexual harassment as most severe: “(1) certain forms of personally targeted gender harassment (e.g., slut-shaming, homophobic comments), (2) nonconsensual use and sharing of (naked) pictures for sex-related purposes, (3) the use of insulting words, (4) situations with restricted escape possibilities and (5) frequent unwanted sexual attention from adults” 2. The results are thoughtfully examined in relation to the literature and personal reflections. 1 While relationships are drawn between the study’s literature and the results, little effort was made to draw such relationships between the results and the authors’ personal reflections. 3. Appropriate implications of the results for practice are identified and justified. 3 Research studies should outline how their results will affect stakeholders in the study’s area of interest. This study has clearly outlined the implications of their findings for SNSs, parents and educators regarding online sexual harassment. Indeed, the study found out that: A balance should be struck between protective and educational approaches to curbing online sexual harassment SNS providers should establish a lower tolerance for online sexual harassment These implications are duly justified by the study’s findings. 4. Thoughtful critiques of the study’s limitations are provided and appropriate for the research approach. 3 Researchers ought to provide the limitations of their studies in order to guide the consumption of heir findings. Limitations also provide future researchers with opportunities for the improvement of existing knowledge in a certain area. This study clearly stated its limitations. These are: Due to the qualitative nature of this research, its findings are not generalizable The study failed to account for important social-demographic factors that could have affected their findings The strategy of content interventions was not adequately handled by the study 5. Suitable implications of the results for future research are identified and justified. 3 This study has clearly justified its recommendation for future study. It has cited its shortcomings in research design and sampling to justify need for future study. General Evaluation: 6. The interpretations are consistent with the study’s results and limitations. 3 There is congruence between the study’s findings, limitations and conclusions. For example, the study found out that some perceived ‘good’ (posting a girl’s photo on a ‘beautiful girls’ site’) actions may inadvertently lead to unwanted sexual attention (negative sexualized comments). This ambiguity regarding intent to harm by the party who posted the photo leads the researchers to recommend further studies on content control by SNSs. 7. The back matter is appropriate for the study report. 3 The back matter contains all that is required for a research study. Overall Quality Part H 0 - 10 = Low quality 11 - 16 = Adequate quality 17 - 21 = High quality Total Part H Score = 19 My Overall Assessment of Part H = High Quality References Baumeister, Roy F. & Leary, Mark R. (1997). Writing Narrative Literature Reviews. Review of General Psychology, Vol(3), pp.311-320. Berg, Bruce L. (2001). Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences. Allyn and Bacon. London Coughian Michaei, Cronin Patricia, & Ryan Frances. (2007). Step-by-Step Guide to Critiquing Research. Part 1: Quantitative Research British Journal of Nursing. Vol 16 (2) Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research Design Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (4th ed., p. 304). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications. JournalScholarMetrics.com. 2017. Journal of Children and Media. Retrieved from: http://www.journal-scholarmetrics.infoec3.es/layout.php?id=journal&j_name=Journal+of+Children+and+Media&subject=communication Kathleen Van Royen, Heidi Vandebosch & Karolien Poels (2015) Severe Sexual Harassment on Social Networking Sites: Belgian Adolescents’ Views, Journal of Children and Media, 9:4, 472-491, DOI: 10.1080/17482798.2015.1089301 Krefting, Laura. (1991). Rigor in Qualitative Research: The Assessment of Trustworthiness. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, March Volume 45(3), pp.214-222 Read More