KOBIOWU ABDULHADI A.

ANS/2014/051 IN FULFILMENT OF CPP 408

CONTENT ANALYSIS OF DIRECTORY OF OPEN ACCESS JOURNALS OF

ANIMAL SCIENCE

KOBIOWU A.A. ANS/2014/051

Department of Animal Sciences,
Faculty of Agriculture, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-ife.
Email:hadidashadidas@yahoo.com.

ABSTRACT

Many authors of articles in various journals are not adhering to the standard format for

writing a good journal article that is acceptable. The review of articles with the aid of a standard

scoring sheet shows the presence or absence of the components and characteristics of a standard

technical report. This study was carried out to evaluate the presence or absence of the components

in the content of Directory of Open Access journals of Animal science articles under the subject

of Agriculture, within the range of 27801-28000. Content analysis approach was used by reading

through 25 articles within the range, and scoring 1 for presence and 0 for absence of the component

being examined. This was compiled and analyzed using Microsoft excel. There were varying levels

of compliance and no article complied 100 % with all the components being reviewed for.

Therefore, content analysis is an important tool to accurately evaluate the component of a journal

article and there is need for authors to comply with the standard to make their works acceptable.

Keywords: Review, component, Scoring, Content analysis, Journal article,

1
 1. Introduction

A journal is a scholarly publication containing articles written by researchers and other

experts in various fields. When scientist have information or an experiment to add to the body of

knowledge in their field of study, they write up their works for inclusions in a scientific journal by

following the guidelines of writing specified by the publishing body. Moreover, a standard

technical report should include the following: Title; Abstract; Introduction; Materials and Method;

Result and Discussion; Summary and Conclusion; and References. These components in turn have

various parts that they contained and must also be observed strictly in order to have a good article

that is up to standard.

Content analysis is a research tool used to determine the presence of certain words or concepts

within texts or sets of texts. Researchers quantify and analyze the presence, meanings and

relationships of such words and concepts, then make inferences about the messages within the

texts, the writer(s), the audience, and even the culture and time of which these are a part. Content

analysis was already an often utilized research method by the 1940's. (Duncan, 1989). Although

initially limited to studies that examined texts for the frequency of the occurrence of identified

terms (word counts), by the mid-1950's researchers were already starting to consider the need for

more sophisticated methods of analysis, focusing on concepts rather than simply words, and on

semantic relationships rather than just presence (de Sola Pool 1959).

The objective of the study is to determine the level of adherence of the authors to the

principles and standard of technical report writing and evaluating the reports writing by several

authors for the students to learn better. Does this have an effect on the readability and

understanding of the articles? The hypothesis of this review is that articles of Directory of Open

2
Access Journals (DOAJ) of Agriculture within the range of 27801-28000, have all the component

parts of a standard technical report. This study is limited to Directory of Open Access Journals

(DOAJ).

2. Methodology

The Animal Science articles reviewed and scored for this study were downloaded from the

Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ) under the agriculture section of range 27801-28000.

The assessment was done in February 2018, and 25 articles were chosen at random from the journal

and a standard score sheet which included all the components of a standard journal article; the

Title, Abstract, Introduction, Materials and Method (Methodology), Results and Discussions,

Summary and Conclusion, and References. The format for score for each main component is

shown in Table 1 - 5

Table 1: Components of Title

Paper Author & Title Brief Cathy Keywords Synchronize Total % of

(max. = 4) Total

1 Subclinical... 1 1 1 1 4 100

Table 2: Components of Abstract

Paper Author & Title J O M R C Total % of
(max. = 5) Total

1 Subclinical... 0 1 1 1 1 4 80
Note: J =justification O = objective(s) M = methodology R = results C = conclusion

Table 3: Components of Introduction

Paper Author & B J P O Q H S&L A&A Total (max. % of Total

Title = 8)

3
 1 Subclinical.. 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 6 75

B = Background information J = Justification , P = Statement of research problem O =

Research objective (s) Q = Research question(s) H = research hypothesis (es) S&L = Scope
and limitations A&A = Abbreviations and acronyms

Table 4: Components of Methodology

Pape Author Expt W Wh Expt Expt Expt Data Data Total % of

r & Title (max Total
type mat design mtce collecti analys
= 8)
n e

`1 Subclin 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 8 100
ical..

Table 5: components of result, discussion and reference

Tables and or figures Discussion Total

Paper Auth Sequ Com- Ref Stat Tally Linked Iden Implica- Ref (max10)

our and plete In Test With To Tify Tion In %

title text used obj lit flow alph Total

order

4
 1 Subclin… 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 8 80

Each section of the articles was evaluated by adding up the number of the component of

that particular section and the percentage was calculated with respect to the total number of the

expected components in the section.

% of the article’s = Total no of components of the section present X 100

component in the section Total no of expected component of the section.

The data was then analyzed using data analysis tool of Microsoft excel package.

3. Result and Discussion

The result from the 25 papers of Agriculture of DOAJ scored shows the following results:

 Evaluation of the Title Section

Table 6 and figure 1 show that 92% of the articles was Brief, 56% of the articles was catchy, 100%

had keywords, and 100% synchronized.

5
 Table 6: Summary of analysis of the component parts of a Title

Brief Catchy Keywords Synchronize

Frequency 23 14 25 25

Percentages (%) 92 56 100 100

TITLE
120
100 100
100 92
% FREQUENCY

80
56
60

40

20

0
BRIEF CATCHY KEYWORD SYNCHRONIZE
COMPONENT OF TITLE

Figure 1: Graphical representation of the components of the 25 paper titles.

From the result shown above, the level of compliance of the 25 papers to the standard format of a

tittle on the average is 87%.

 Evaluation of the Abstract section

Table 7 and Figure 2 show that 48 %of the articles had justification and 72% had objective written,

84% had methodology and result and 52% had conclusion. The summary of the analysis on the

average showed that 85% of the papers adhered to the standard format of writing abstract.

6
Table 7: Summary of analysis of the component parts of an Abstract

Justification Objective Methodology Result Conclusion

Frequency 3 18 25 25 22

Percentages (%) 48 72 84 84 52

ABSTRACT

84 84
72
% FREQUENCY

52
48

J O M R C
COMPONENT OF ABSTRACT

Figure 2: Graphical representation of the components of the 25 paper abstract.

 Evaluation of the Introduction section

Table 8 and Figure 3 show that all the articles had background of the study, 88% of the

articles had justification, 20% had statement of research problem and 76% had research

Objective, 12% had research question, 4% had research hypothesis and 44% had scope and

7
 limitation, while 56% had Abbreviation and acronyms. The summary of the analysis on the

average showed that 50% of the papers adhered to the standard format of writing introduction.

Table 7: Summary of analysis of the component parts of an Introduction

B J P O Q H S&L A&A

Frequency 25 22 5 15 3 1 11 14

Percentages (%) 100 88 20 76 12 4 44 56

INTRODUCTION
120

100
% FREQUENCY

80

60

40

20

0
B J P O Q H S&L A&A
COMPONENT OF INTRODUCTION

Figure 3: Graphical representation of the components of the 25 paper introduction.

B = Background Information

J = Justification

P = Statement of research problem

O = Research objectives

Q = Research Questions

H = Research hypothesis(es)

S&L = Scope and Limitations

8
A&A = Abbreviations and acronyms

 Evaluation of the methodology

Table 9 and Figure. 4 shows that 60% of the articles specified the experiment type, 84 %

of the articles talks about where the experiment was done, 36.96% of the articles talks about

when it was done, 76% had experimental materials used specified and 56% stated the

experiment design used ,68% of the articles had in it experimental maintenance, all stated how

the data was collected and 96% stated how the data was analysed. The summary of the analysis

done with respect to the methodology of the 25 reviewed articles indicate on the average that

72.12% of the papers complied with the standard format of writing methodology.

Table 9: Summary of analysis of the component parts of Methodology

ET WR WH EM ED EMA DC DA

Frequency 15 21 11 19 14 17 25 24

Percentages (%) 60 84 36.96 76 56 68 100 96

9
 METHODOLOGY
120

% FREQUENCY 100

80

60

40

20

0
ET WR WH EM ED EMA DC DA
COMPONENT OF METHODOLOGY

Figure 4: Graphical representation of the components of the 25 paper methodology.

ET = specified, whether field, greenhouse/screen house or lab experiment

WR = location(s) where experiment was done

wH = date, year, season.

EM = experimental material; e.g. varieties, soil types, insect pests, etc that are the objects of the

study as well as materials used in th study.

ED = Experimental design used.

EMA = maintenance of the experiment, including land preparation, agronomic practices,

watering and temp setting for lab or green house expt, drying of samples where applicable etc.

DC = description of data collection method, including methods of analysis used to collect data in

lab expts.

DA = statistical analysis used

10
  Evaluation of the results, discussions and references

Table 10 and Figure 5 show that 84% of the articles had in their results, discussion and

reference, tables and figures that are sequentially arranged,84% of the articles had in their results,

discussion and reference, tables and figures that are complete and Referred to in text, 80% of the

articles clearly applied statistical test and 96% had tables and figures that tally with objectives, and

96% of the result and discussion were linked to the existing literature, 48% identified flaws in the

research and give reason for the deviations, 76% stated the Implication(s) of the results and 80%

arranged references in alphabetical order and 80% presented a Summary highlighting major

findings.

Table 10: Summary of analysis of the component parts of results, reference and Discussion

S C R ST T L Id IM SM REF

Frequency 21 21 21 20 24 24 12 16 20 19

Percentages (%) 84 84 84 80 96 96 48 64 80 76

11
 RESULT, DISCUSSION & REFERENCES

96 96
% FREQUENCY

84 84 84 80 80 76
64
48

S C R ST T L ID IM SM REF
COMPONENT OF RESULT, DISCUSSION & REFERENCES

Figure 5: graphical representation of the result, discussion & and references of the papers reviewed.

S= Table them figures are numbered sequentially as they are presented in the text

C= Table and Figures are complete. For both of them, complete means they are numbered, with

self-explanatory titles and unit of measure and necessary. For tables, the entries are well aligned,

each column has a heading and unit of measure as necessary, not vertical or horizontal lines

footnote are supplies where needed, and statistical test hypothesis clear indicated

R= The Table or figure is not just put in the paper, but in presented to the reader by the author

calling attention to some specific point on the table or figure

ST= The author clearly applied statistical tests such as LSD,DNMRTe.t.c

T= Table or figures are equally tally with the objectives of the study

L= The discussion must be link to the results to the existing Literature relating to the subject of the

research

ID= identify the flaw in the research

IM= Implication or practical application of the result is to be discussed

12
SM= the study provides a summary where major findings are highlighted. This MUST be different

from the Abstract.

REF= References are listed in alphabetical order, or are numbered as they occur in the text.

4. Summary and Conclusion

In reviewing the articles, the results revealed that most of the Animal science articles of

the DOAJ did not comply strictly with the standard format for writing abstract, introduction,

methodology, result and discussion, and summary and conclusion. The component which was

mostly excluded in abstract is justification and that of introduction is research hypothesis.

Analysis of these components of the articles from DOAJ journal was done to know how report

was written in the journal. This was also done for the students to learn some basic things about

report writing in addition to what they have been taught in class and to train them in writing a

good final year thesis. It was observed that most of the authors do not fully comply with the

standard of writing a good technical report.

In conclusion, according to the Animal science articles from the Agriculture section of

the Directory of Open Access Journal analysed, all ingredient needed for a complete journal has

been looked into and has been critically analysed. Abstract, Methodology, Introduction, result,

conclusion References was scored and were tabulated in percentage format. The students were

able to develop a better understanding of how technical reports is written due to the evaluation

that was done during the course of this study.

13
5. Referenece

1. De Sola Pool, I. (1959).

Trends in content analysis. Urbana, Ill: University of Illinois Press.

2. Duncan, D. F. (1989).
Content analysis in health education research: An introduction to purposes and
methods. Health Education, 20 (7).

14