Critique of Grossman et al.'s Empirical Study on Alcohol Addiction
This paper critically reviews Grossman, Chaloupka, and Sirtalan's (1995) empirical study on alcohol addiction among young adults. The critique is organized around two major evaluative dimensions: the believability and the robustness of the research. It examines the study's writing quality, author qualifications, abstract, literature review, theoretical framework, sampling strategy, ethical considerations, research design, data analysis, and referencing practices. While the study demonstrates several strengths — including a clearly identified population, appropriate use of regression analysis, and a well-grounded theoretical framework in rational addiction theory — it also exhibits notable weaknesses, such as absent ethical disclosures, undefined key terms, missing hypotheses, and no discussion of study limitations or recommendations for future research.
- Introduction: Overview of Grossman et al.'s 1995 alcohol addiction study
- Elements Influencing the Believability of the Research: Writing quality, credentials, title clarity, and abstract
- Elements Influencing the Robustness of the Research: Research design, sampling, ethics, analysis, and findings
- Conclusion and References: Citation accuracy and full reference list
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- Follows a systematic, criterion-by-criterion critique structure that makes evaluation transparent and easy to follow.
- Balances acknowledgment of the study's strengths (e.g., clear population identification, sound theoretical grounding) with pointed identification of its weaknesses (e.g., no ethical disclosures, missing hypothesis, absent limitations section).
- Grounds its evaluative standards in an established framework — Coughlan, Cronin & Ryan's (2007) step-by-step guide to critiquing quantitative research — lending methodological authority to the critique.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates systematic research critique using a pre-established rubric. Rather than offering a general opinion, it applies specific evaluative questions to each component of the original study — from abstract quality to statistical appropriateness — allowing the critique to be both comprehensive and replicable. This technique is foundational in nursing, health, and social science research methodology courses.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a brief introduction to the study being reviewed and its purpose. It then moves through two major evaluative sections: believability (covering writing quality, author credentials, title, and abstract) and robustness (covering research purpose, literature review, theoretical framework, sampling, ethics, definitions, design, analysis, and referencing). A short reference list concludes the paper. The structure mirrors the two-part framework from Coughlan et al. (2007).
Introduction
Grossman, Chaloupka, and Sirtalan (1995) conducted a study examining alcohol addiction. This empirical research was carried out to review and enhance the empirical literature regarding sensitivity of alcohol consumption — and extreme consumption — to variations in the prices of alcoholic beverages. The researchers based their study on a model of rational addictive behavior that focuses on the link between past, current, and future consumption of a potentially addictive product. The study found that alcohol consumption among young adults is addictive, on the basis that increases in past or future consumption contribute to an increase in current consumption. This paper provides a review and critique of that study based on its structure and content, evaluated against the recommended content sections of a research study.
Elements Influencing the Believability of the Research
Writing Quality and Organization
The research article is well written, using concise and grammatically correct language. Additionally, the researchers avoided the use of jargon, which helps improve readers' understanding of the report. However, the report lacks a proper structure, as some of its sections are not labeled or specified. The researchers did not follow the recommended content sections for a research study, failing to clearly identify the various segments of the article.
Author Qualifications
The authors' qualifications and positions demonstrate a meaningful level of knowledge relating to the research issue. The complex nature of the research topic requires multiple analytical perspectives, which makes the authors' backgrounds suitable for the study and the particular field.
Clarity of the Title
The title of the research report is clear and unambiguous, as it identifies the specific topic to be studied and the method to be employed — that is, empirical analysis.
Quality of the Abstract
The abstract provides a clear overview of the research by including the phenomenon under investigation, the sample size, and the methodology used to examine the research issue. However, the researchers do not state their recommendations in the abstract, though they do clearly state the study's findings.
Already a member? Log in
Unlock the rest of this paper
135,000+ research papers · AI writing tools · Plagiarism & AI detection
24-Hour Pass
Does not renew
Get 24-Hour PassMonthly
Renews at $12.99/month until canceled
Start MonthlyAnnual
Renews at $99/year until canceled
Start Annual- Unlimited AI writing tools
- Plagiarism and AI text detection tool
Plan details
Unlimited AI writing tools are for individual, non-automated use and are subject to our Terms of Service and abuse-prevention measures.
TextChecker scans: 1 during the 24-Hour Pass, or 5 per month with Monthly and Annual.
Prices exclude applicable tax.
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.