JY

o begin the critique, I evaluated the authors’ use of literature. The actual literature review portion of academic articles are typically found within the introduction and give readers a general overview of the presented topic. With the focus of building on the knowledge of others, it is the obligation of us (and all scholars) to acknowledge and appreciate the work that came before us (Walden University, LLC, 2016). From a more general overview, the Walden “Use of Literature Checklist” demonstrates practical ways to measure an author’s use of literature within his or her work. By following this example, I was able to examine the presented article under a more professional scope. The top four points of this list highlight the importance of establishing the problem, introducing the theory, providing insight to the hypothesis or research question, and comparing the results with existing literature. The research problem- in short- is how interviewers influence the applicant throughout the interview process (Wilhelmy et al., 2016). Researchers also introduce theories early on in the article, drawing on both interdependence theory as well as signaling theory, both of which focus on the relationship between applicants and interviewers (Rusbult & Van Lange, 2003Links to an external site.; Spence, 1973). They provided valuable insight to the research question by completing an in depth literature review and appropriately explaining the aims of the present study. In doing so, they reinforced that their research question was worth exploring and would provide a valuable contribution to the field (Denicolo & Becker, 2017). At the conclusion, they related their results back to previously mentioned literature such as Barrick’s theory of verbal cues in comparison to their observation of conversation (Barrick et al., 2009; Wilhelmy et al., 2016). After following the Walden checklist, I would argue that this article’s use of literature is very strong. 

Respond  to a classmate who was assigned a different article than you by further supporting his or her critique or respectfully offering a differing perspective.