Hi this for psychology class called Animal cognition, the idea of the assignment

Hi this for psychology class called Animal cognition, the idea of the assignment is to read three proposal papers written by three different students and write them at least a 300 word feedback each based on the instruction given by the professor below. I have uploaded their proposal paper with their name, so label the feedback by their name. To Mention the names you will see in the pdf file Brooke Reid, Conor Regan and Grace Roberts are the students in the pdf file and each have their own topic as you’ll be seeing in the pdf. I have attached their proposal paper with their name.
Instruction by the professor
Write at least a 300 word feedback on the quality of the proposal paper of the three students assigned. To write a review, reviewers first write a couple sentences recapping what the author proposed, including the hypothesis and a brief description of the method. If the hypothesis was unclear, this should be noted.
Next, your job is to write a critical review that covers both the positive and negative aspects of the proposal. Each of the following points should be addressed:
Did the proposal conform to the formatting requirements? That is, was it 6—7 double spaced pages with a separate literature cited section? Did they cite at least 5 references, using both a formatted (MLA or similar) citation and an html link to the citation?
Was the proposal well organized, well-written, and easy to follow? How was the “flow” of ideas? Did it contain any spelling or grammatical errors? Was it professional and scientific?
Was the topic novel and appropriate for an Animal Cognition course?
Was the research question well motivated? That is, was there a comprehensive treatment of the species in question and what was previously known about the relative cognitive abilities?
Was the method appropriate? Did you understand exactly what the author was trying to do? Had it been used successfully in other species? Is it feasible for the species in question?
Were the methods and analysis clear? Were all the appropriate controls included? What were the measurements taken? Would these measurements provide enough clarity to accept or reject the hypothesis? Was the experiment well-designed?
Were all facts stated in the proposal supported by citations?
Overall, your review should be comprehensive. Each review should be at least 300 words long and should provide plenty of feedback for the author and justification to your fellow review panel members.
When your third review has been attached, then submit a text entry that states the order in which you would recommend these proposals for funding, with #1 being the best, #2 being intermediate, and #3 being the lowest recommendation for funding. Note that these rankings will be kept confidential from your peers.
Thank you!!!