The background on existing knowledge

1
Article Review: l-Hassana, M., & Wierenga, M. (2000). Exercise participation decisions
of Jordanian myocardial infarction patients: application of the decisional conflict theory.
International Journal of Nursing Studies, 37, 119-126.
Student’s Name
University

2
Article Review: l-Hassana, M., & Wierenga, M. (2000). Exercise participation
decisions of Jordanian myocardial infarction patients: application of the decisional conflict
theory. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 37, 119-126.
When looking at the research study, the title is supposed to give an overview of the
research by making it easy to understand the problem and the study population. The title of this
study is effective since it makes it easy for the reader to understand the research problem and the
variables of the study. Bavdekar (2015) suggets that the role of the introduction is to lay the
foundation for the study by explaining the rationale of the study and clearly describing the main
purpose of the study. This means that the reader can easily develop the research question for this
study. The introduction part is supposed to give an overview of the topic by highlighting the
background information. It is here that the researcher justifies the research question by justifying
the study. Al-Hassana & Wierenga (2000) used the introduction of the study to give the
background information and existing facts of information on the topic. By linking the study with
previous findings, the researcher has given an in-depth introduction to the topic thus making it
easy for the reader to understand the issues that exist on the topic. Through quoting information
from previous studies, the introduction has been used to offer the background on existing
knowledge in the topic.
The literature review section is the link between the existing findings by other researchers
and what the research study is looking to address. Colquitt (2011) suggests that a research study
is supposed to build on the existing research that has been done by other studies. This means that
the new study is supposed to add knowledge to the existing research by responding to the gaps
that have been identified in previous studies or working on the recommendations (Creswell,
2013). The literature review for this study has been based on the hypothesis that there are

3
benefits and barriers of interaction that are based on the decisional conflict theory. The literature
has thus been presented based on the notion that interaction between perceived benefits and
perceived barriers that are influenced by the degree of stress. However, the literature review
section of this study is limited since it is based on eight previous studies that have been done on
the topic. This literature review lacks critical analysis of previous studies by going from general
ideas to specific conclusions through a logical flow. Although the study has presented a
hypothesis framework, it fails to address the issues that relate to the topic. Further, the literature
section lacks the theoretical framework which is supposed to justify the relationship between the
different variables of the study in the research question. In this case, the literature section is
inadequate since it fails to have a deeper analysis of the existing literature on the topic which was
supposed to open the mind of the researcher to understand the importance of the study.
The study did not have specific research questions that were supposed to be addressed
when looking at the issues within the study. Convenient sampling was used in this study to
determine the number of patients recruited. However, the sample population cannot be related as
a representation of the entire population because all the participants in the two were included.
The purpose of using convenient sampling was to ensure that the patient demographics picked to
represent the needs of the researcher (Bornstein, Jager, & Putnick, 2017). However, this
sampling method has been disputed due to its ability to lead to researcher bias when carrying out
the study (Sedgwick, 2013). This also makes it difficult to generalize the findings since the
sample reflects the needs of the researcher rather than the population. The ethical considerations
were considered by the researcher where consent was sought from Institutional Review Board
approval and hospitals under study. The patients were also required to give written informed
consent on their participation in the study. The role of ethical considerations is to ensure that the