User:Asialj/Impostor syndrome/Laurenwaters Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

asialj


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)

Evaluate the drafted changes
(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

The lead is relevant, concise, and does a good job of introducing the article content to be discussed. Author added a significant amount of information about the psychometric properties of the Clance IP scale and a more recent study to the occurrence section about psychology doctoral students all of which appears to be relevant to the topic and easy to read/understand. Her sources are all secondary, and she has not added any primary sources that would violate guidelines, so all of the research is relevant and cited appropriately. The inclusion of this information is important in understanding how to measure this construct, so this was a strong addition. The article is easy to read, organized well, and is written as neutral. It is easy to comprehend as written, and has been updated significantly to be more structurally complete. It also offers a good understanding of the subject and is socially relevant.