Analyzing a Reaction

Paper and Review Paper

 Analyzing a Analyzing a
01 02
Reaction paper Review paper

Presenting the Refuting the

03 04
counterpoint Counterpoint
ANALYZING A
REACTION PAPER
For you to be able to raise your counterpoints to a reaction paper, you
must first learn how to analyze one properly.
To examine one, you must be familiar with the reaction paper’s features
and structures. Learning more about what their purposes are will also
help you get an idea of what you can expect from the reaction paper,
such as what questions it is answering, what aspects of the original text
or work it is reacting to, and how the ideas in the paper are arranged
and organized.
The first thing you must do when analyzing a reaction paper is to read,
view, or have some knowledge of the material it is reacting to.
Then, the questions you keep in mind when formulating your own
reaction paper can later be used to analyze another person’s paper.
REACTION PAPER FOR CLASS

o what points or aspects, when emphasized, would make the most

sense in the context of the class?
o When you are the one analyzing instead of writing, try to find these
ideas in the paper and see how the writer treats them. Do you agree
with what they said?
o Do you feel that what they chose to focus on in their reaction paper
is something relevant to the class? If yes, how? If not, what would
you emphasize or focus on instead?
o How is the work related to any current national or international
issues?
o Did it help you understand a particular issue even more?
 When writing a reaction paper, you would ask these questions to better
frame your reaction in the context of the world. So it is likely that the
reaction paper you are reading could have done the same. Look out for
how they connect the work and their reactions to contemporary issues.
Do you feel that the paper is relevant to the connected issue? Did they
discuss and connect the work properly to the issue? Is the connection
appropriate or too forced?

 When writing a reaction paper, you could also ask how the work
resonated with you. Did it remind you of an experience you had, a
lesson you learned, the emotions you felt? How did it strike you? When
analyzing a reaction paper, you can also find these types of reactions.
Analyzing a
Review Paper
 Similar to analyzing a reaction paper, you must also be familiar with the work that a
review paper is discussing when you analyze it. As a casual reader of a review, you need
not be too familiar with the work, since the reason you are reading the review could be to
see if the work it is reviewing is worth checking out or not. However, if your goal is to
analyze and possibly raise counterpoints against it, then you should also be familiar with
the work in question.

 A review paper will most likely also have its own analysis and interpretation of the work.
This is where the bulk of the review paper is, and where most of your analysis will focus.
Analyzing a review paper is similar to preparing to write a reaction or review of your own.
The difference is that you will not only provide an analysis of the work in question, but
you will also analyze how the author of the review analyzed and interpreted the work.

 A review paper will most likely have a conclusion where the points and key ideas of the
paper will be summarized. In the conclusion section, your analysis should also focus on
the recommendation. Does the author recommend this work to their readers? They could
explain why or why not during the conclusion, although it is likely that most of the
evidence for this can be found in the body of the paragraph.
Why is it important to keep an
open mind when analyzing
someone else’s review?
 Raising Contrary Views

 First, it is important to remember that even though your goal is to refute the
points of the paper you’ve analyzed, it is best to still look at the opposing
points carefully and without bias. Doing this will show understanding and
respect on your part, will make your arguments more credible, and will help
readers relate to your points.
 When it’s clear that you took a reaction or review paper’s points seriously,
your own arguments become more credible because your audience or your
readers will know you formulated these points after carefully considering the
opposing viewpoints.
Presenting the
Counterpoint
 You can present the point you intend to oppose in any number of ways. You can directly
quote or paraphrase the paper with the argument or you can use your own words to offer
a rhetorical statement or hypothetical scenario. Whichever way you decide to use, you
must do so respectfully, fairly, objectively, accurately, and distinctly.

Use neutral language to present the argument

Make it clear and distinct that you are presenting someone else’s viewpoint, but do so
fairly and objectively by using neutral language. Don’t use emotionally charged or biased
language to present the topic, or you’ll come off as dismissive. This does not weaken their
argument, but it does weaken yours. Present the argument neutrally before shooting it down,
because the more readers see that you are treating the original argument with respect, the
more open they’ll be to your rebuttals.

Avoid the temptation of using the straw man fallacy when presenting the argument
This is when you purposely weaken the opposing argument by overly simplifying it,
taking it out of context, or describing it incompletely. This is a commonly used tactic, but it
is often looked down upon and can be detected easily. Be warned that when you try to
shortchange the opposing argument in this way, it could become obvious to your readers
that you are using it to compensate for the shortcomings of your own arguments.
Example:

Avoid presenting a counterpoint like this:

“David ignorantly calls The Little Prince a predictable book written only for
children, which shows that the point of the book clearly went over his head.”

Instead, try wording it this way:

“David believes that The Little Prince is a predictable book and is primarily
intended for children to read.”
Refuting the
Counterpoint
 After you present the argument that you are opposing, you can then
proceed to show the readers why they should take your side. You should
have convincingly and respectfully presented the opposing views. Your
next step is to introduce your own counterarguments. Remember, the
stronger the starting argument, the stronger your own points are going to
be when you are successfully able to counter them.

There are four main parts that should be part of your refutation:
● introducing the counterpoint
● stating your objections to the points raised by the paper
● offering evidence to support your rebuttal
● concluding your point by comparing the two viewpoints head to head
Example:

Let’s say the counterpoint is:

“The opposition believes that The Hobbit should never have been turned into three movies
because they unnecessarily drag out scenes and add characters and events that never even
happened in the book.”

i. It should be presented, as shown above: with respect, fairness, and accuracy.

ii. Next, the objection can be presented as a question or a statement, and it should be the
reason the readers do not accept the counterpoint. Next, the objection can be presented
as a question or a statement, and it should be the reason the readers do not accept the
counterpoint.

For example, “However, let us consider that books and movies are highly different
forms of media; the same scene described in a book might translate differently when shown
on the big screen.”
iii. Then, support your objection with reliable evidence, expert opinion, and sound
reasoning.

For example, “In the book, the scene with the spiders in the forest is described in a
paragraph or two, which makes sense given the medium. However, if we were to strictly
follow the book word for word when we move the scene onto a movie screen, it would
become a rushed scene with poor pacing and inadequate dramatic weight.”

iv. Finally, conclude it by resolving the conflict. You’ve presented two valid viewpoints. Use
the conclusion to state, once and for all, why yours is the better one.

For example, “While strictly following the book and reducing The Hobbit to only one
movie would be a more faithful adaptation of the beloved classic, extending it to three
movies makes sense because it adds depth, drama, and gravitas to scenes and events that
were otherwise glossed over in the book.”
 WRAP UP
Analyzing a Analyzing a Review
Reaction Paper Paper
Analyze a reaction paper by It is done by presenting your
following the same questions understanding of both the source material
used to write one. and the review’s own analysis.
Present Refute
counterpoints counterpoints
Presenting the author’s ideas, stating
Respectfully, objectively,
your own objections, supporting your
accurately, and distinctively.
objections, and having a clear
conclusion.
 GROUP 3

Joanne Nerida Emman Manoso Iamalady Davis

Winlove Ganuelas Kate Javier

THANK YOU FOR LISTENING!!!