Annotated Bibliography 7

Note from Instructor:   I would suggest putting thoughts in your own words by paraphrasing, summarizing, and putting ideas into your own words. Changing a few words in a sentence won’t get it. Free of plagiarism

Article

” Video Game Violence Use Among ‘‘Vulnerable’’ Populations: The Impact of Violent Games on Delinquency and Bullying Among Children with Clinically Elevated Depression or Attention Deficit Symptoms ”

The Assignment Needs

 

 

During this module, you will submit your third annotated bibliography. This is a clear and concise summary (200 to 300 words) of a journal article, book, or other primary academic source that will be used in your thesis paper. Each submission must also include a brief critique of the source (e.g., how could the study be improved, criticism of the author(s) assertions, ideas for future studies, etc.).

PSY 499 Annotated Bibliography Rubric

 

 

 

 

Instructor comments:

First and foremost, please follow the organization of material outlined in the grading rubric.

Always start with the purpose of the study. This is the normal flow of a research paper. End with

limitations/critique and implications for future research.

 

Criterion #1

Please be sure to address the purpose of the study you are reviewing. If there is a hypothesis or

research question, please be sure to include it in your own words (summarize). For articles that

are case studies or are qualitative research, there may goals and objectives rather than a purpose and hypothesis.

 

Criterion #2

Please address the methods adequately. Discuss the participants and include the demographics, specific material used, and procedures for the study. There should be enough detail in the methods so that the reader could design a replication. For meta-analyses, you may list the number of studies used, the inclusion or exclusion criteria, and the total number of participants. For articles with qualitative analyses there are unique issues that need to be addressed. If there were subjects, they need to be discussed. If the authors used interviews or documents, how where they coded and analyzed? Describe the methods used as clearly as you can.

 

Criterion #3

Describe the results. Were there significant differences between groups or treatments,

correlations between variables etc. Be sure to address in a statement what the results mean with regard to past research (does it support or refute it?). Also, please address the significance of the findings. What are the implications for the research (e.g., policy change, educational reform, future research, etc.).

 

NOTE: There are a few areas where students tend to have questions regarding the grading rubric.

First, criterion #3, “Results and Significance,” is in regard to the study you are reviewing, not

your thesis paper. The rubric does not cover how you are going to use the research, so it does

not need to be covered in the annotated bibliography 11

 

Criterion #4

This criterion addresses strengths and limitations or critique of the article. Limitations are

generally discussed in the discussion section of the article. APA guidelines for both qualitative

and quantitative articles calls for a discussion of limitations (Cooper, 2020; Levitt, 2019). Look

in the discussion section of the article for this information. Remember, no study is perfect.

 

Critique can also be based on theoretical differences or inconsistencies, etc. Please be sure to

critically evaluate the article objectively (based on methodology, etc.).

Think of the critique as limitations of the study in terms of rigor (threats to internal validity) and

generalizability (threats to external validity). Limitations are neither good or bad, do not be

judgmental, rather factual, dispassionate, and objective.

 

Some Common Limitations

• The article is supported by a for profit organization, such as the pharmaceutical industry.

The industry controls the data and what gets published and what doesn’t (potentially

biased data).

 

• The subject pool or participant pool was drawn from a convenience sample, is too small,

or not representative of the population (potential threat to external validity).

 

• Treatment not having sufficient follow up, such as a 12-week treatment, but no follow-up

after 3 or 6 months (does not reflect data on long term effects of treatment).

• Insufficient length of the treatment (treatment may have not been sufficient to show

effect).

 

• Lack of a control or comparison group in a within group pre-test post-test design.

 

• Using a questionnaire or survey without established reliability and validity. Construct and

content validity information can be found in the methods section of the article.

 

• A pilot study that is not based on previous research (insufficient comparison data with

other studies available).

 

• Theoretical critique of the study based on the fact that another theory may explain the

results.

 

• Subject or participant bias can occur with self-report questionnaires and interviews. Halo

effect. 12

 

• Single subjects experimental designs only have one participant. Without comparing

results to other studies, it’s difficult to determine if the results are due to the experimental

manipulation or chance.

 

You should draw from your knowledge of Research Methods I & II to address these issues.

 

NOTE: In the case of qualitative studies, you may see the term “transferability,” or do these

results transfer to similar situations. Also, rather than rigor, you may see terms like transparency, fidelity, and/or utility. In other words, is the study presented in such a way that you can follow it from start to finish? Are all descriptions adequate? Do they follow from one section to another? Do the results have utility in similar “real world” situations?

 

Potential Threats to Internal Validity (experimental rigor)

History (local history) common in cross-sectional designs by age. Some event in one group’s

history caused the results, not the treatment. Maturation can occur in longitudinal studies where something in the group’s development causes the results, not the treatment.

Testing (listed above) does the test have adequate established reliability and validity. Faulty

testing causes the results, not the treatment. Instrumentation, similar to testing has to do with the accuracy of the instruments used to collect the data. If the instruments are not accurate, neither will the results. Statistical regression can occur with test retest studies, scores will tend to cluster around the mean.

Selection (covered above) criteria and whether the sample is a convenience sample, stratified

sample, etc.

Lack of random assignment or matched subjects.

Potential Threats to External Validity (generalization)

Sample size and demographic composition can impact the results of a study’s ability to

generalize to the population.

For more on threats to internal and external validity see link below

https://web.pdx.edu/~stipakb/download/PA555/ResearchDesign.html

https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/internal-vs-external-validity/

 

NOTE: Your annotated bibliographies are NOT part of your thesis paper. Use the information

from the article, do not copy and paste annotated bibliographies together to make up the body of your paper. Consider the annotated bibliographies article summaries only.

 

Criterion #5

Make sure that your annotated bibliographies are 200 – 300 words. Less than 200 words may not cover everything on the grading rubric.

 

Helpful Links

The links below will be helpful with setting up your annotated bibliographies

https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/common_writing_assignments/annotated_bibliograp

hies/annotated_bibliography_samples.html This link gives an example for formatting of a book. Please noted that it does not share the same grading criteria for your assignments, so the content is different (see Grading Rubric). http://libguides.enc.edu/writing_basics/annotatedbib/apa

 

This link also provides information on formatting, but does not include a complete criterion for

grading your assignment (see Grading Rubric) http://advice.writing.utoronto.ca/types-ofwriting/annotated-bibliography/ This link gives an example of the correct format and some of the criteria that you will be required to include, for a full list of criteria, see the Grading Rubric.

https://sites.umuc.edu/library/libhow/bibliography_apa.cfm

This website has two examples of an annotated bib in APA format. Note it does not follow the

same criteria as our assignment. https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=lPhWhRlEWtI

Putting an Annotated Bibliography into APA format. This is good example using MS Word.

There are a few things to note. First, acceptable formats are Times New Roman, Arial, and

Courier 12 font. The other issue presenter forgot the issue number. An issue number should be in parentheses (2) between the volume number and the page numbers.

Open chat