User:Gjd001aquinas/Cultivation theory/Dianevanderwal Peer Review

General info
Greg DeYoung- Cultivation Theory Article
 * Whose work are you reviewing?


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * User:Gjd001aquinas/Cultivation theory :
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Cultivation theory :

Evaluate the drafted changes

 * 1) What does the article do well? Anything that impressed you?
 * 2) What changes can be made to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?
 * 3) What's the most important change that can be made?
 * 4) Anything that could be applicable to my own article?


 * 1) I appreciate the inclusion of visual aids, they provide clarification for sections that may not make verbal sense. The general organization of the article is logical- however it may make more sense to include the critiques section later on in the article, maybe after the research section to implicate that more work/research needs to be done? In comparison to my article, I really appreciate that there are nearly no [citation needed] or [clarification needed] superscripts. It makes the general read of this article so much easier. This article is so easy to read and relatively easy to understand, in my opinion.
 * 2) The "sports" section needs some love, though. I think that any additional citations or clarifications that you can provide would be greatly beneficial. If the sports section could be condensed and added to the perception of violence section, I think it would clarify a lot. By doing this, too, you'd likely be able to eliminate a lot of the un-cited and unclear parts of this section. I guess maybe I am reading too much into it, but I'm confused why sports are so relative to this theory that they need their own section. If a TV element is worthy of a full section, I'd argue it to be news services, not sports.I also think it would be interesting to read more about the 'altruism' section if you're able to find more supporting research on that. The last paragraph of the "tv viewing and fear of crime" mentions parents being more likely to warn their children of crime when they consume more media surrounding youth violence. I'd be curious if you could find any information on how that relates to school shootings. It would be interesting to see also how the children themselves perceive this news as well. Also, one last thing. While it is so great that this article has lots of sources, some of them are realllllllllllyyyy old. Like 1980 old. And there's lots of them. So a good double checking of those sources would be awesome as well as updating them if needed.
 * 3) I think in all, the most important change to be made would just be an overall clarification of the sports section. If it makes more sense from your understanding to elaborate on the unclear/not cited sections, then do that. Or, if it would be easier and more logical to just cut a lot of it out and add it to the violence section, then do that! Also, and arguably more important would be an analysis of the sources. It's awesome that they have so many citations in the article already, but they are ancient. Some though do appear to be directly from the Journal of Communication. So, if you can access their website, you could likely just search Cultivation Theory and plenty of updated sources will show up. I've also found it helpful to just search statistics in the article on ProQuest- which will show you articles that found the same info... if that makes sense.
 * 4) For my own article, I think it would be really important for me to analyze the way that the Cultivation Theory article organizes their information. My article's general organization is all over the place, and needs some serious help.

(Compose a detailed peer review here, considering each of the key aspects listed above if it is relevant. Consider the guiding questions, and check out the examples of what feedback looks like.)

Peer Review Review

Thank you, Diane for your insightful critique of this article. First of all agree that the critique section needs to be place way farther down the article. It gives my thoughts more confidence that you had the same opinion.

I found it interesting that you thought the sports section needs love. I think this theory is mostly about "dramatic violence" and not violence depicted in sports. I think you are right, the sports section needs to some love whether that is condensing it, deleting it, or adding it to "perceptions of violence" section. I am GLAD you pointed that out. That will be a significant edit to my project.

Your suggestion for more about "altruism" is another thing I will consider. I do have a hunch that heavy consumption of the news and "altruism" may have a correlation which would be very relevant to the theory.

You have some creative solutions for my article! Your suggestion on school shootings sounds super relevant to this theory. I think I will look into this!

As far as ancient sources go, I will probably keep the "old" ones that are the founder, George Gerbners work, or the old sources that are used in the textbook. Other than that I agree, I should watch out for ancient sources that are not significant contributors to the theory.

I'll do a "statistics" search on ProQuest. Hopefully, I'll figure that out on my own. If not, I might ask you about it later...

Again, thank you for your peer review! This was helpful in figuring out my next moves in editing this article. You have pointed out some crucial areas of the article that need editing like the "sports" section. I overlooked that part.