Part 1: Introduction (2 pages)

In your Introduction to your critical analysis, include the following:

Introduce the research you selected (title, authors)

Describe the study (i.e., purpose of the study)

The study is based on the concept of trying to solve the multilayered conflict which exists in the former Yugoslavia. Which since the war in the 1990s has had numerable name changes and shifts in governments. Not to mention more than a few genocidal actions and activities. The participants claim they are performing the agtios for x, y, z, etc. actions. But as the article clearly shows, there is nothing but out of context facts, evidence, and a almost impossible to understand ethos of collectivism working to further the conflict.

Of course the conflict is well beyond any simple study to try and unravel. This specific study is all but entirely lost when it comes to both the applications of the mathematics, both the quantitative and qualitive equations used were missing the point of the regional conflict almost completely.

A novice in history can notice where the “mistakes” in the scientific method assumptions are made. The reader simply needs to examine the sentence structures to determine where the authors are reaching to find answers to how to solve the equation without any real foundation to workable solutions.

A hard and significant examination of the history of the area, reveals just how huge and inappropriate the gaps in both the quantitative and qualitive equations are.

Describe the problem addressed in the study as well as the research question

The study itself was focused and centered upon trying to find ways in which it might be possible to find the ethos of the current conflict and its aftermath from previous conflicts (some of which stretch back in time by in some cases to the Vinca Culture itself circa 6000 bce.) conflicts. The study finds the most difficultly in trying to identify why the cultures would rather fight and fight and fight rather than come to an understanding and try to collectively work for peace. The shear level of miss understanding and research bias on dozens of levels leads to a great start but most of the efforts are a pure hard core waste of time.

A slight academic argument can be made that this among dozens if not hundreds of other studies in a similar line of thinking not only did not deescalate the conflicts but it could have just as easily refocused the particants deeper into their rage and need to erase the fact their enemies existed at all.

Part 2: Methods and Design (2 pages)

Describe the overall design of the study you selected

Describe the type of methodology used (i.e., qualitative, quantitative, or mixed method)

Describe any ethical considerations within the study you selected. If none are mentioned, explain any potential ethical issues the researcher(s) might have needed to consider.

Part 3: Culture within Research (4 pages)

This portion of your assessment is your analysis of how the researchers incorporated culture into their research. Include the following:

How did the researcher(s) incorporate the nature of culture within their study?

Are there aspects of the study where researchers could have better incorporated the influence of culture in the sample, methods, analyses or conclusion, and how?

If the researchers were given an opportunity to improve on their research, what would you suggest? Be specific.

How would your suggestion facilitate positive social change?