User:GS214/Social comparison theory/Flamenquera Peer Review

General info
GS214
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing:User:GS214/Social comparison theory
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists):Social comparison theory

Evaluate the drafted changes
The Lead has not been updated, only the article draft was added to. Therefore, they may consider updating the current version of the article's introductory sentence and description of the article's major selections.

It is important to note that they have copied and pasted several paragraphs from the current version of the article into their sandbox draft. The content pertains to the role of media influence in social comparison theory. There is interesting data related to the subject. They make important connections about the effects of the internalization of this theory. The draft should aim to more adequately explain what upward social comparisons are. Some of their references date a little too far back. There are only a few that are over fifteen years old. The others can be considered recent enough. They are still missing expansions on the other major sections of this article. It does not seem that information that is not relevant has been added. The article does not deal with matter included in Wikipedia's equity gaps.

While much of the material is neutral, there is opinion-based content. There should be an explanation of what makes them say that the majority of women have a daily opportunity to make upward comparison. Also, when expounding upon the cross-sectional study's results in the fourth paragraph, they should speak in correlational terms. Their language may be misleading for readers as it makes conclusions freely. They could discuss what the possible positive consequences of social comparison are to touch on a different viewpoint. The element of persuasion is not apparent here, though, there is a lot of content covering the negative consequences of social comparison.

There are missing reference citations. It is understood that a citation at the end of a paragraph means that the entire paragraph's content has to do with that reference. However, there are paragraphs with missing citations. For example, the second and third paragraphs require this clarification. The sources could be more thorough. This is a prominent theory among media effects, which has a wider display of literature available to reflect that. The authors in the references section seemingly reflect at least a couple ethnical backgrounds. While the links checked do work, they show that only the abstracts are available at no cost. Unless they are planning on paying for the research provided by these links, they should add more references they have to complement the amount of information at their disposal.

The content is well-written and easy to read. It lacks spelling or grammatical errors. The way the paragraphs are broken up makes sense. However, some are very short.

They did not add images or media yet.

The article is more complete as it expounded upon media influence, but there should be changes made in their language use.