T​‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‌‌‌‍​he link for the article analysis is listed below with the instructions. Please reach out if you have any questions https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5852175/ Guidance Document for the Article Analysis For this assignment please use the article you submitted and was approved from Assignment #1. Remember, that article needed to be an example of a study employing an experimental design. Please answer questions that pertain to the experiment that was conducted in the study. If the study involved more than one experiment, then please just select one of the experiments for the purpose of completing this assignment. Please answer these questions: I. Double-check on peer review status: 1. Does the journal have an editorial board? If not, can you find evidence that there is some sort of peer review process, such as perhaps just an editor or associate editor? 1 point II. The Introduction 1. In your opinion, is the literature review sufficiently extensive. Why or why not? 1 point 2. Briefly describe the introduction. Just state in one paragraph what you learned about the research topic. 2 points 3. Can you see in the introduction an explicit statement concerning the purpose of the study? If so, please write it down verbatim in quotations. If not, please explain briefly the purpose of the study as you see it. 1 point 4. Does the author or authors state hypotheses or research questions? If not, can you infer any hypotheses or research questions based on what you read in the introduction? 1 point III. The Method Section 1. What are the characteristics of the sample? That is, what is the sample size, age, gender breakdown. Were there any other characteristics about the sample that was mentioned. Why do you think these other characteristics reported? 1 point 2. Does the design of the experiment provide a strong test of the hypotheses or research questions that you found or inferred in the introduction? 1 point​‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‌‌‌‍​3. Can you detect any flaws in the methodology used by the researcher/s. 1 point 4. Do you feel that the study details are in sufficient depth that you can try to replicate the study? For example, are the measures clearly described? 1 point IV. Results Section 1. Briefly describe one analysis that involved comparing research groups. Focus on the experiment conducted in the study. You will probably find that the data for the experiment were analyzed using analysis of variance. 2 points 2. Do the authors provide details concerning how large of an effect was found? Were differences between groups small, medium, or large? If yes, how did they report the size of the effect (e.g., differences in means between the groups, Cohen’s d, f-squared, etc. 1 point 3. Do the authors provide a table or figure that helps you, the readers, to better understand the results. If yes, briefly describe what the table or figure includes. 1 point V. Discussion Section 1. Does the discussion start out with a brief summary of the main results? 1 point 2. Briefly describe at least one main result found in the study. 1 point 3. Look over all paragraphs in the discussion. How is it organized? Do you see a brief summary of results, and then paragraphs that tie the current results with prior work? Perhaps there is a section on how the results inform or expand or modify current theory? What about a limitations section? For this question, please list in order the main topics covered in the discussion section. 2 points 4. Please provide a suggestion concerning a “next step” or follow-up study. In other words, based on what you read, what research study could be conducted to further understand what was studied in this article. For example, do you see a flaw or perhaps an interesting follow-up study based on what you read in this article? Write this in a way that attempts to convince me that your suggested follow-up study is interesting to study. 3​‌‍‍‍‌‍‍‌‍‌‌‍‍‍‌‍‌‌‌‍​ points