Critiquing a Research Article for Quality Standards Research Issue and Purpose:

Critiquing a Research Article for Quality Standards
Research Issue and Purpose: The research problem is not clearly stated, and the aim of the research is also unclear. The authors propose to search for personality disorders (PDs) as well as maladaptive interpersonal schemas in patients with misophonia. However, they fail to present a clear rationale or research questions.
Participants: The sample size is too small, with only three participants involved. Therefore, the small sub-sample size decreases the generalizability of the findings and hinders the researchers from drawing any serious conclusions (Riener et al., 2020). Additionally, the authors do not provide enough information concerning the sampling method or about who is excluded from this research.
Research Design: There is no clear outline of the principal research design in the study. It seems to be a case series or qualitative study, but the authors do not clearly state the design or give a reason for their decision.
Data Collection/Generation Methods: Researchers applied different tools including the Amsterdam Misophonia Scale (A-MISO-S), On-Structured Clinical Inventory for DSM-IV Personality Disorders (SCID-II), Young Schema Questionnaire (YSQ-L3), Beck Depression Inventory-II (BDI-II) and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-Y) (Natalini et al., 2019). However, they do not include evidence of the suitability and credibility of these tools as it relates to their study.
In general, the study appeared to involve several methodological issues, comprising a small sample size, lack of clarity in research design, and inappropriate discussion of the limitations and implications. It is highly recommended that the authors address these problems to improve the validity and reliability of the study.
References
Natalini, E., Dimaggio, G., Varakliotis, T., Fioretti, A., & Eibenstein, A. (2019). Misophonia, maladaptive schemas and personality disorders: A report of three cases. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 50(1), 29–35.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10879-019-09438-3
Riener, G., Schneider, S. O., & Wagner, V. (2020). Addressing validity and generalizability concerns in field experiments. MPI Collective Goods Discussion Paper, (2020/16). https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3637868
PLEASE RESPOND TO THIS POST.   must include an 1 APA reference to a relevant scholarly article. 1 PARAGRAPH PLEASE