Text Analysis
Learning Objectives
In this lesson, you will:
- Analyze how authors structure arguments in research texts
- Identify rhetorical strategies used in academic writing
- Evaluate evidence quality and logical reasoning
- Recognize author bias and perspective in sources
Practice Quiz
Analyze research texts with these questions. Click to reveal each answer.
Question 1: An author writes: "Studies consistently show..." but only cites one study. What analytical concern does this raise?
Answer: This is a generalization fallacy. The word "consistently" implies multiple studies, but citing only one is misleading.
Explanation: Strong research writing accurately represents the scope of evidence. Readers should be skeptical of broad claims supported by limited evidence.
Question 2: How can you identify the thesis statement in a research article?
Answer: The thesis typically appears at the end of the introduction and presents the main argument or claim the paper will support.
Explanation: Look for a sentence that makes a debatable claim and sets up what the rest of the paper will prove or explore.
Question 3: What is the difference between ethos, pathos, and logos in research writing?
Answer: Ethos appeals to credibility/authority; pathos appeals to emotion; logos appeals to logic and evidence.
Explanation: Academic research primarily uses logos (evidence-based reasoning) but may incorporate ethos (citing experts) and limited pathos (highlighting human impact).
Question 4: A study funded by a soda company concludes that sugary drinks have no health risks. What type of bias might this represent?
Answer: This represents potential conflict of interest or funding bias.
Explanation: When funders have financial stakes in research outcomes, results may be influenced. Always check funding sources and consider potential conflicts.
Question 5: What is the purpose of a literature review section in a research paper?
Answer: A literature review summarizes existing research on the topic, establishes context, and identifies gaps that the current research addresses.
Explanation: This section shows the author's familiarity with prior work and positions their contribution within the broader conversation.
Question 6: How does correlation differ from causation, and why does this matter in research analysis?
Answer: Correlation shows two things occur together; causation proves one causes the other. Many studies show correlation but are misinterpreted as causation.
Explanation: Critical readers should note whether a study actually proves cause-effect or merely shows association between variables.
Question 7: What are "hedging" words in academic writing, and why are they used?
Answer: Hedging words (may, might, suggests, appears) indicate uncertainty and prevent overstating claims.
Explanation: Responsible researchers acknowledge limitations. Words like "proves" or "definitely" in research should be scrutinized carefully.
Question 8: Why is sample size important when evaluating research claims?
Answer: Larger sample sizes generally produce more reliable, generalizable results. Small samples may not represent the broader population.
Explanation: A study of 10 people cannot support claims about "most people." Look for sample size and consider whether it's adequate for the claims made.
Question 9: What does it mean for a study to be "peer-reviewed"?
Answer: Peer-reviewed research has been evaluated by other experts in the field before publication, adding credibility.
Explanation: Peer review is not perfect but provides quality control. Academic journals with peer review are generally more reliable than unreviewed sources.
Question 10: How can you identify a straw man argument in research writing?
Answer: A straw man misrepresents an opposing view to make it easier to argue against. Look for oversimplified or distorted descriptions of counterarguments.
Explanation: Strong research fairly represents opposing views. If counterarguments seem weak or absurd, the author may be using a straw man fallacy.
Next Steps
- Practice identifying rhetorical strategies in articles you read
- Evaluate sources for bias and logical fallacies
- Move on to writing application when ready