Criteria for judging a research study
A Review of previous research
1. The review of literature in the study has a closer link with the previous literature. The study involves a review of works of an assortment of authors mainly in the field of occupational health and safety. In particular, majority of them were concerned about survival in a hazardous work environment alongside ways of avoiding such environments if need arises. A comprehensive review of such scenario or setting is the basis of the research undertaking and literature analysis (Noguchi 2006).
2. The review is current because most literature assessed and evaluated belongs to authors’ current publications. The review encompasses current trend in work environments as well as ideas that belonged to the ancient cohort of workers. However, the review overlooked at a number of references in the category of peer reviewed materials. Such sources are equally credible and unswerving (Noguchi 2006).
Problem and the purpose
3. The statement of the problem is explicit and covers a range of researches and study findings conducted by previous researchers about the work environment along with some of the hazardous things that occur in such setting. The purpose is to seek a lasting solution to challenges of the work setting since they have a direct effect on the work rate and employees perception of the organization (Shaw 2011).
4. The researcher has clearly indicated the primary purpose of the study, which is to disclose and focus exhaustively, the purpose and aim of the research.
5. The purpose of the study is clearly stated as supported by the articles. In addition, the purpose of the study is dependent on the literature under review. Apparently, the statement, like the review, seeks to examine and analyze some of the fundamental reasons that would make a working environment turn hazardous (Shaw 2011).
6. The review has also stated the primary objective of the research. This will enhance clear logical articulation of the actual problem that prompts the need to conduct a review of previous researches.
7. The hypothesis derives its regard and foundation from the conceptual rationale or framework. The rationale would depend on the aims and general objectives of the research study (Shaw 2011).
Hypothesis
A hypothesis as the researcher explicitly stated, captures the primary reason for conducting the research (Noguchi 2006). However, the researcher did not explicitly state the research hypothesis. Besides, this hypothesis somehow states an explicit association between the variables. The hypothesis derives its establishment in theory as well as a presentation and review of the relevant literature. It is also testable as it involves quantitative products and conclusions made due to changes in the human behavior and challenges of life (Noguchi 2006).
Method
The review would seek to find out the dependent and independent variables. Hazardous work environment attracts considerable number of injured as well as criteria for solving the issues related to the environment (Noguchi 2006).
The sample was selected and it comprised different but approved samples. A section of the society instead of the entire population was considered in the review (Ambrose & Williams 2011).
Results and Discussion
The result is a clear indicator that the management of every organization’s work rate. According the findings of the article, the results directly influenced the nature and composition of the hypothesis (Ambrose & Williams 2011).
Planning the Actual Research
Planning the actual research should go in hand with the objectives as well as the problem statement. Hence, a statement would depend on the functions and agenda the individual wants to accomplish in the future (Ambrose & Williams 2011).
References
Ambrose, W. A., & Williams, D. A. (2011). Recent advances and current research issues in lunar stratigraphy. Boulder, Colo: Geological Society of America.
Cocciardi, J. A., & In Johnson, M. (2013). Operating safely in hazardous environments: Review and refresher. Sudbury, Mass: Jones & Bartlett Learning.
Noguchi, J. (2006). The science review article: An opportune genre in the construction of science. Bern: Lang.
Shaw, W. H. (2011). Business ethics. Boston, MA: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning.
Veasey, D. A., McCormick, L. C., & Hilyer, B. M. (2005). Confined Space Entry and Emergency Response. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
