User:Anarodriguez12

'''106.26% Good work! (+=correct, ++=extra credit -=incorrect ~=half credit)'''

My Mid-Term Quiz for LIBY 1210-09 Spring 2017

My Research Topic is: Music and Personality (emotion) Key words related to my Research Topic are: Music and Emotion Part 1:

Examine Wikipedia articles that are directly related to your Research Topic and select a substantive article to evaluate. This could be an article about an idea (e.g., I might choose the one about Trance) or a person (if I were researching Reggae music, I might pick Bob Marley). Answer the following questions:

++I chose to read and evaluate the article titled: (for extra credit, link the name of the article to the article in Wikipedia.) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Music_and_emotion 1. Is +there a warning banner at the top of the article? Yes or No No If there is a warning banner, copy and paste the warning banner here.

Write an brief explanation of the reason the issues mentioned in the warning banner are important. For example, if the issue is “needs additional citations for verification,” why does that matter?

+Please note: If the article you are evaluating does not have a warning banner, choose a warning banner from a different article and explain the warning that is in that banner. "It has been suggested that this article be merged with Music therapy. (Discuss) Proposed since February 2016." When I was looking for a reference book at the reference desk the man helping me told me to look into music therapy to help my topic of music and emotion, when I searched up music and when I searched up music and therapy I came across this article on Neurologic Music Therapy and a big warning saying the article had been merged with other articles. The article itself is pretty short and does not contain enough information to help with a research project, It's been combined with different articles because it's too short of an article to substain on it's own.

+2. Is the lead section of the article easy to understand? Does it summarize the key points of the article? Yes, The beginning paragraph summarizes the main points of the article, which is the connection between human affect and music. How people feel while hearing music and other theories connected to the topic.

+3. Is the structure of the article clear? “Are there several headings and subheadings, images and diagrams at appropriate places, and appendices and foonotes at the end?” The overall structure of the article is quite clear. The main screen contains a box of contexts which makes it easy to find the information needed. There are no images rather than one, the article also contains charts which summarize some of the emotions connected with types of music. Various footnotes at ends of paragraphs which correlate to the reference page at the end of the article.

+4. Are “the various aspects of the topic balanced well”? That is does it seem to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic? Yes, this article covers not only the psychology aspect of music but also various different theories that connect to the topic of music and the human aspect. For example it touches philosophical view point as well as the musicology view point. A portion of the article talks about the emotions that correspond to each music genre. Around the end of the article, it should mentions the topic of using music as theraputic treatments.

+5. Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay? I believe this article does provide a neutral point of view, I read the article and at no part of the article did it have a biased opinion. The article didn't have any opinion of any kind, it was more of facts and real evidence supporting the topic.

+6. Are the references and footnotes citing reliable sources? Do they point to scholarly and trustworthy information? Beware of references to blogs; look for references to books, scholarly journal articles, government sources, etc. Most of the references in the biblography section are credible, they include scholarly articles or sections from published books. Only 3 out of 45 references could be seen as un-credible sources being websites touching on the psychology theory on music.

7. Look for these signs of bad quality and comment on their presence or absence from the article you are evaluating:

+a. is the lead section well-written, in clear, correct English? Yes, There are few to none grammer or spelling mistakes.

+b. are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”? As I stated before, the article is written in an un-biased manner, including facts and references rather than opinions.

+c. does the article refer “to ‘some,’ ‘many,’ or other unnamed groups of people,” instead of specific organizations or authors or facts? The article throughout mentions studies supporting the topic but does not mention which study or who organized the study. For example it says, in another study.... and then provides a footnote which correlates to the specific article/book in which the full study is written. To get full information one must do outside research with the references provided.

+d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic? No, the article touches on different aspects of the topic, from different theories, to emotions, to therapy.

+e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic? Each section is overall the same length. Exlcuding the section called, "Eliciting Emotion Through Music" which is longer than any other section, but it makes sense because that's the overall point of the articles topic.

+f. does the article lack sufficient references or footnotes? No, this article provides plenty of footnotes and references in order to do outside research.

+g. Look at the “View History” for the article. As you read the conversation there, do you see hostile dialogue or other evidence of lack of respectful treatment among the editors? There is no hostile diaglogue, rather there are some critics including statements like the author rambles in certain sections but I seem to believe the author fixed the critics because I see none of the complaints visable in the article. __________________________

Part 2:

Evaluate the Wikipedia article you selected using the CARDIO method. Write your answers following each word below:

+Currency (When was the last update of this article? hint: check the View History) The last update was March 1st which is pretty current.

+Authority (What evidence do you find that the author(s) of this article have the appropriate credentials to write on this topic?) I wasn't able to find who wrote this article based on the wikipedia page.

+Relevance (to your research topic) I believe this article is extremely relevant to my topic, not only to my research paper topic but to other topics related to what I'm researching.

+Depth This article does reach the nerd factor for anyone who is interested in the connection between music and emotions. Not only music and emotions but music and psychology as a bigger picture. The references added at the end also help because one can even further their research by using some of the references.

+Information Format (I hope this one will be easy for you.) This is an easy to read and understand, so an average person can read the article if interested. But it's more intended as a scholarly article.

+Object (what is the purpose for creating this article?) The purpose of this article is to inform the public of the relation between music and emotions.