Critique on Chen's Article (Essay Sample)

CRITIQUE ON CHEN’S ARTICLE
Name of Student
Institutional Affiliation
Date
Quantitative Critique on Chen’s Article
With rising cases of Spinal cord injuries, an individual's or group's initiative to establish the cause, and derive a solution to the problem, is most commendable. The endeavor undertaken by Cheng and company, to study and figure out the relationship between "moving-forward behavior”, and other pertinent aspects that contribute towards a person’s self-empowerment and uplifting, especially, coming out of an ordeal like spinal cord injury, is noble. It is a show of selflessness and sense of responsibility on the part of the protagonists of the project; a clear signal that they care and are willing to offer solutions that the society is grappling with, without waiting for a solution from another source.
As per the researchers’ understanding of the under study, spinal cord injury is highly dilapidating. The detrimental effects of the condition are most vivid in the challenges that a victim faces during and after the occurrence of the condition. Chen accurately points out the major causes as tragic accidents and certain disease conditions that affect the nervous system of the body. When the condition occurs, a person’s physical, psychological and emotional states deteriorate, leading to an inevitable need for rehabilitation, with which coping is difficult to many people. Although, the main aim of rehabilitation for such people seeks to restore self-belief, confidence and esteem, the realization of such a noble course may not come easy. There is a dire necessity to confirm the relationship between self-efficacy, demographic and disease characteristics, social support and self-perception, and "moving-forward behavior." Cheng and his compatriots seem to have this at their fingertips, and must be commended for taking this as a fundamental step towards dealing with the challenges resulting from spinal cord injuries.
Despite the nobility of Cheng’s undertaking, there are numerous outright limitations of the methodology used in the undertaking of the research. Besides, the scope of the research is too narrow to address the problem fully. Surprisingly, the researchers have been the first ones in pointing out the weaknesses of their undertaking, increasing doubts on the feasibility of the project.
In the introductory part of the written piece of work by Chen, it is clear that the purpose of the work is apparent. It is plausible that this appears vividly in the initial part of the document. However, throughout, there is nowhere Chen, or any of the other actors, addresses the specific problem to be solved. Everyone affirms that spinal cord injuries are adversely damaging. Nonetheless, the mere mentioning of challenges resulting from spinal cord injuries does not offer precise depiction of the problem. Expectedly, this is crucial for the researchers to set objectives that befit the undertaking at hand.
Furthermore, Chen and his research went ahead with the research aware of the fact that the respondents were mainly members of Spinal Cord Injury Associations (SIAs). Essentially, it is a gross violation of research guidelines and waters down the reliability of the research results. Notably, members of the association...