Sample Article Review On Experiment Review

The analyzed research paper is not an experiment, but a review of statutes regulating sexual assaults, with the statutes being taken from all 50 states. Since this paper does not test any theory, its authors did not develop any hypothesis to test. However, they have outlined the purpose of the review, which is to determine how these statutes are applicable, effective and relevant to campus sexual assaults.
The researchers’ main expectation was to find gaps and possibilities of improvement of state legislation regarding the regulation of campus sexual assault to reduce its instances. Since the researchers did not suggest any idea, claim, theory or hypothesis in their research, it is not subject to checking if it satisfies the principle of falsifiability. However, if they intend to claim that their research will prove that some of the state laws are currently outdated or ineffective, the researchers have satisfied the principle, as further research disprove this claim.
The results of the review have shown that most of the statutes of all states are to some extent imperfect and non-accessible to students, and that they need to be updated and improved significantly. Some of the statutes lacked definition of consent, sexual assault, rape, etc., requirements needed to deem it obtained, regulations regarding consent and intercourse during intoxication. Moreover, some statutes considered sexual assault as a crime against a woman or by a man. None of the statutes had information specifically about campus sexual assault. Since the researchers wanted to merely provide a useful review, they still anticipated the imperfection of statutes and ineffectiveness regarding campus sexual assault, and the results are thus consistent with expectations.
The work conducted by the researchers is very valuable as it provides basis for further research and development of legislation and administrative regulations, and practical improvements. However, this review contained more introductory information than the results of the research, which would be more valuable. For this reason, I would like the researchers to address the implications of their research in a more detailed fashion, including whether the imperfections of legal regulation of sexual assault truly affect the victims’ reluctance to file lawsuits against perpetrators. The research also does not provide analysis of the results state by state with possible hypothesis on why the results of the research differ depending on the state. The analysis of the number of lawsuits and administrative actions regarding campus sexual assaults from the point of view of each state’s regulation drawbacks would be very valuable as well. Among the strengths of the review are the in-depth introductory information about campus sexual assault and the inclusion of all 50 states into the review, which makes it a solid ground for further research.
The findings definitely made me want to learn more about the effects of legislation changes on campus sexual assault problem. If the authors continue this train of research, I would be very interested in learning the effect of legal and administrative regulations on male victims and female perpetrators, as it seems that social stigma and lack of regulation and practice may cause numerous cases of sexual assault on men or by women linger behind the scene.
The researchers have violated the principle of scientific method by making conclusions without proper analysis and test. They state in their conclusions that certain drawbacks of legislation prevent victims of campus sexual assault from taking legal actions against perpetrators. However, they have not provided any proof of direct correlation between the two. For this reason, their conclusion cannot be considered valid unless the aforesaid interrelation is established.