Research Paper Critique (Not a summary!!!!)
APA format

I have uploaded the research paper with needed to write the critique for (Material Flow Cost Accounting, Perceived Ecological Environmental Uncertainty,
Supplier Integration and Business Performance: A Study
of Manufacturing Sector in Malaysia)

I attached a business research summary I did for the research paper.

Introduction
Typically, the introduction is short (less than 10% of the word length) and you should:
• Name the work being reviewed as well as the date it was created and the name of the author/creator.
• Describe the main argument or purpose of the work.
• Explain the context in which the work was created. This could include the social or political context, the place
of the work in a creative or academic tradition, or the relationship between the work and the creator’s life
experience.
• Have a concluding sentence that signposts what your evaluation of the work will be. For instance, it may
indicate whether it is a positive, negative, or mixed evaluation.
Summary
Briefly summarize the main points and objectively describe how the creator portrays these by using techniques, styles, media, characters or symbols. This summary should not be the focus of the critique
and is usually shorter than the critical evaluation.
Critical evaluation
This section should give a systematic and detailed assessment of the different elements of the work, evaluating
how well the creator was able to achieve the purpose through these. .
A critical evaluation does not simply highlight negative impressions. It should deconstruct the work and identify
both strengths and weaknesses. It should examine the work and evaluate its success, in light of its purpose.
Examples of key critical questions that could help your assessment include:
• Who is the author? Is the work presented objectively or subjectively?
• What are the aims/purpose of the work? Were the aims achieved?
• What techniques, styles, media were used in the work? Are they effective in portraying the purpose?
• What assumptions underlie the work? Do they affect its validity?
• What types of evidence or persuasion are used? Has evidence been interpreted fairly?
• How is the work structured? Does it favor a particular interpretation or point of view? Is it effective?
• Does the work enhance understanding of key ideas or theories? Does the work engage (or fail to engage) with
key concepts or other works in its discipline?
This evaluation is written in formal academic style and logically presented. Group and order your ideas into
paragraphs. Start with the broad impressions first and then move into the details of the technical
elements. For shorter critiques, you may discuss the strengths of the works, and then the weaknesses.
In longer critiques, you may wish to discuss the positive and negative of each key critical question in
individual paragraphs.
To support the evaluation, provide evidence from the work itself, such as a quote or example, and you
should also cite evidence from related sources. Explain how this evidence supports your evaluation of
the work.
Conclusion
This is usually a very brief paragraph, which includes:
• A statement indicating the overall evaluation of the work
• A summary of the key reasons, identified during the critical evaluation, why this evaluation was formed