Critique of Facial Asymmetry and Cognition Research
This paper critically evaluates William A. Smith's 1998 article "Hemispheric and Facial Asymmetry: Faces of Academe," published in the Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. Smith's study examines whether facial asymmetry correlates with cognitive specialty, testing educators from humanities, mathematics, physics, and psychology departments. The paper summarizes Smith's hypothesis and reported findings before offering a pointed critique. Key concerns include unexamined assumptions about brain asymmetry, a potential conflict of interest stemming from the researcher's reliance on his brother's prior work, improper structural organization of the article, and inconsistent measurement methodology. Together, these flaws significantly undermine the study's credibility and conclusions.
- Overview of Smith's Study: Summary of Smith's framework on facial and brain asymmetry
- Smith's Hypothesis and Findings: Smith's departmental experiment and reported results
- Assumptions and Conflicts of Interest: Critique of unproven assumptions and researcher bias
- Research Structure and Argument Flow: Flawed article organization undermines argument credibility
- Methodological Flaws in Measurement: Inconsistent marker use weakens data reliability
- Conclusion: Overall assessment of study's credibility
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The critique is organized around distinct, substantive objections — bias, structure, and measurement — rather than vague dissatisfaction, making each flaw traceable to a specific aspect of the source study.
- Direct quotations from Smith's article are used as evidence for the critique, strengthening credibility by letting the source text expose its own weaknesses.
- The paper maintains an objective, analytical tone throughout, avoiding personal attacks while clearly identifying where the research falls short.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates disciplined source-based critique: it first summarizes the target study accurately and fairly, then systematically applies evaluative criteria (objectivity, proper APA/research structure, and methodological rigor) to expose specific shortcomings. Using a direct quotation — Smith's "in general, approximately 20 to 25 markers" — as the centerpiece of the measurement critique is a strong example of letting evidence do the argumentative work.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a two-paragraph summary of Smith's study, covering his theoretical framework and reported findings. It then moves into a clearly labeled critique section addressing three distinct problems in sequence: researcher bias and unexamined assumptions, improper article structure, and inconsistent measurement. A works cited entry closes the paper. The progression from summary to critique mirrors standard academic article-review format at the undergraduate level.
Overview of Smith's Study
In "Hemispheric and Facial Asymmetry: Faces of Academe" (1998), researcher William A. Smith examines the correlation between facial symmetry and cognition. Facedness, which he describes as facial asymmetry, exists in all faces. This asymmetry is usually divided along the hemispheres of the human face: north and south, west and east. These hemispheres are called, logically enough, hemifaces. No person's face will be perfectly symmetrical; if it were, the perfect balance of features would give someone an unnatural appearance.
Smith is not trying to determine whether asymmetry exists, because he treats it as a given in his experimentation. He similarly treats brain asymmetry as an established fact, arguing that it determines a person's cognitive specialization. Smith points to several research experiments performed in recent years that attempted to locate a correlation between brain asymmetry and cognitive specialty. He argues that facial asymmetry can have a direct correlation to the asymmetry of a person's brain, and that if this relationship holds, a person's cognitive specialty could potentially be determined in childhood based on the asymmetry of their facial features (Smith 1998, p. 664).
Works Cited
Smith, William A. (1998). "Hemispheric and Facial Asymmetry: Faces of Academe." Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 10(6), 663–667.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.