Pay Someone To Do Homework

Management research

Hyggen, Christer. Does Smoking Cannabis Affect Work Commitment?.nbsp.Addictionnbsp.107.7 1309-1315.nbsp.Academic Search Premier. Web. 15 Oct. 2013.
What makes the project appealing to me.
Critical review of an article is a process that begins with the appearance of the article, its structure and organization. Choice of the topic of study determines the effectiveness of the paper in delivering its intended information to the audience. The topic needs to have a lot of relevance to capture the attention of the audience. Additionally, the use of language in the paper and errors influences how a person judges the paper, even before reading it.
There are a number of interesting things about the journal. The journal has a good structure, with subtopics introducing what the author will discuss. This makes it possible to understand the various concepts discussed in the paper. It is possible to distinguish between the different concepts, making the paper easily understood. The topic too is appealing to me as party of the audience. It is easily to relate the topic to general issues affecting people, regardless of the organizations or social groupings, they are in. whether in a critical review exercise or general reading, a journal or any paper needs to have good structure, should captivate the reader through the topic selected for study and have a good flow of ideas. This journal article has all these characteristics, thus appealing to me.
Elements that make the project good
A number of elements make the project good. The language chosen for instance, easy to understand, with no grammar errors makes it interesting and good. The author makes use of deep research and clarity in explaining the ideas in the project. Although he does not economize on the use of words, he neither uses too many words in the explanations. This makes it an interesting project to read. Additionally, the depth of the research also makes the paper look good. Since the project focuses on a particular concept, the length is enough to cover the entire concepts in depth and to satisfaction.
Max Sully, et al. Contextual Performance And The Job Satisfaction-Dissatisfaction Distinction: Examining Artifacts And Utility.Human Performancenbsp.22.3 (2009): 246-272.nbsp.Academic Search Premier. Web. 15 Oct. 2013.
Elements I dislike in the project
There are a number of things I do not like about the project. The structure of the paper is one of these elements. The structure does not have any appealing power whatsoever to the reader. It looks clumsy and rather unplanned, just from the look of it. The lack of subtopics on the project, and their incorporation only in those areas they appear rather necessary makes it boring to the audience. Some of the concepts appear clumped together, despite being separated by paragraphs. Additionally, the topic of the article appears rather too broad and less interesting to the audience. As such, a person could read the project, not for general knowledge, but with the intentions of fulfilling a particular purpose, such as academic purposes.
Reasons why the project is bad
Several things make the project bad. The language used in the project is rather cumbersome, especially due to the use of jargon and technical terms. The authors appear to have targeted experts in his field of research, locking out those interested in reading simply for general knowledge. Choosing to focus on a broad topic affects the clarity of thought and the depth of the research done on the project. Thus, although the researchers spent considerable efforts in conducting a thorough research, the length of the paper could not accommodate the whole research.
Works Cited
Hyggen, Christer. Does Smoking Cannabis Affect Work Commitment?.nbsp.Addictionnbsp.107.7 (2012): 1309-1315.nbsp.Academic Search Premier. Web. 15 Oct. 2013. http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=3f4e0b16-8dde-4590-b0dd-dd8c337af909%40sessionmgr113amp.vid=15amp.hid=124
Max Sully, et al. Contextual Performance And The Job Satisfaction-Dissatisfaction Distinction: Examining Artifacts And Utility.Human Performancenbsp.22.3 (2009): 246-272.nbsp.Academic Search Premier. Web. 15 Oct. 2013. http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=685199cb-606a-4e82-bd66-ea0eec752742%40sessionmgr112amp.vid=2amp.hid=