User:Izzy'sHeart/sandbox

Wikipedia Citations:
"Obsessive–compulsive disorder." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 23 Sep. 2014. Web. 30 Sep. 2014. "Fibromyalgia." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 28 Sep. 2014. Web. 30 Sep. 2014.
 * Obsessive-compulsive disorder
 * Fibromyalgia

"Guinea pig." Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia. Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia, 23 Sep. 2014. Web. 30 Sep. 2014.
 * Guinea Pig

Encyclopaedia Britannica Citations:

 * "obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD)." Encyclopaedia Britannica. Encyclopaedia Britannica Online Academic Edition. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2014. Web. 29 Sep. 2014.


 * "fibromyalgia." Encyclopaedia Britannica. Encyclopaedia Britannica Online Academic Edition. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2014. Web. 29 Sep. 2014.


 * "guinea pig." Encyclopaedia Britannica. Encyclopaedia Britannica Online Academic Edition. Encyclopædia Britannica Inc., 2014. Web. 29 Sep. 2014.

Summary:
My topics for this assignment are: Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, Fibromyalgia, and Guinea Pigs. I chose these articles because I am very interested in all three of these topics. I feel that Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder and Fibromyalgia are very important and current topics in the world right now. The topic of Guinea Pigs is just a fun and unique topic!

My search process for this assignment was fairly straightforward. I chose my three topics and then easily found the articles on the Wikipedia website. It was just as easy to find articles on the same topics using the Encyclopaedia Britannica website. I already knew most of the information that I read from the Encyclopaedia Britannica website, but I found information that was new to me using Wikipedia. I've previously researched these topics a lot and so finding new information was exciting!

I found it surprising that Wikipedia had more content than the Encyclopaedia Britannica. However, I think it is very beneficial to do research using more than one source but I definitely prefer Wikipedia. I really enjoyed reading the Wikipedia articles and appreciated the amount of information that they gave compared to the Encyclopaedia Britannica. As I was researching I found that I could easily research narrower topics with one article. The Encyclopaedia Britannica was only focused on the basics of each topic choice.

Assignment 2: Comparing Wikipedia and Britannica on the Topic of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder
There are many sources to choose from when searching for information regarding the topic of Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder (OCD). Currently, some of the most popular sources are online encyclopedias. Wikipedia in particular is a very popular source among information seekers and is one of the first sites to appear when Googling a topic. Though Wikipedia provides comprehensive on most topics, one might want to first start with a source that provides general and factual information. The online Encyclopedia Britannica is a good and solid website to start gathering information. When gathering information on such a complex topic such as OCD, one should start with Britannica and then use Wikipedia as a source of introducing one’s self to smaller details. It is best to gather the essential information on OCD before jumping into the OCD pool of confusing and widely debated details.

The Wikipedia article titled Obsessive Compulsive Disorder begins with defining OCD as an anxiety disorder characterised as intrusive thoughts which produce obsessions and repetitive behaviours (compulsions). The compulsions/rituals are said to be performed to ease anxiety. The examples of OCD provided by the article are repetitive activities such as chronic washing, cleaning, checking, and hoarding. Other examples of OCD include unwanted thoughts of sexual, violent or religious nature. The article states that the results of OCD behavior are severe emotional distress and loss of the sufferer’s relationships. The introduction of the article concludes with noting that up to one half of OCD adults began experiencing symptoms of OCD during childhood.

The article then progresses on to the Signs and Symptoms of OCD. Most of the information from the introduction is restated but more detail is provided on ‘obsessions’. The difference between OCD and Pure-O is also discussed. According to the article Pure-O is referred to as ‘primarily obsessional’. This means that one suffers from unwanted and constant distressing thoughts and therefore performs mental rituals and/or avoids situations, people places etc. that contribute to such thoughts. Psychological and biological factors, such as evolution, genetic mutation, environment, and virus such as strep, are deemed to be the main causes of OCD. One can be diagnosed with OCD by a psychologist, psychiatrist or social worker etc. In order to be diagnosed, the patient must show signs of time consuming obsessions and compulsions. The treatment options for a patient may be behavioral therapy and/or medications (such as SSRI’s).

The concluding headings of the article are prognosis, history, society and research. The prognosis heading briefly states that treatment may reduce OCD symptoms but that even after treatment it is rare to experience a huge reductions in symptoms. According to the article, the most current research for OCD shows that vitamin and supplements may benefit patients as they could have nutrition deficiencies. The most current of OCD research pertain to the role of the neurotransmitter glumate.

The Encyclopedia Britannica article titled Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) defines OCD as a mental disorder in which a person has obsessions and/or compulsions. Britannica defines obsessions and compulsions separately. Obsessions are stated to be uncontrollable and persistant thoughts, images or impulses. Compulsions are said to accompany obsessions in 80% of OCD cases. Compulsions are defined as the sufferer’s strong need to perform repetitive, impulsive and ritualistic acts. Britannica notes that a sufferer usually understands that their obsessions and compulsion are irrational but stopping a compulsion creates great anxiety. The article concludes with noting that OCD effects ‘2%-3%’ of both the male and female population and that OCD occurs mostly in people who may be prone to stress.

Regarding the reliability of references etc., Britannica as an established source provides none of the extra information for its article. The Wikipedia article has a total of 98 references, 7 sources of further reading material and many contributors. Upon review of Wikipedia, all references and sources seem to all come from reputable sources. However, the further reading materials range between the years of 1997-2009 and are therefore not current.

Out of all 98 references 14 is the only reference that may not be deemed reliable. Reasoning for this is because the article titled “I’m Gay and You’re Not”, was published on an unreliable site called BrainPhysics.com. The site is unreliable because regardless of whether the author is educated in the field of OCD or not, it is still a support website unlike the verified medical sites that the other references derive from. The article “I’m Gay and You’re Not,” written by Mark-Ameen Johnson is more-so a biased blog styled post. Furthermore, I’m Gay and You’re Not” is an example of one of the many unnecessary and displaced points of information referenced throughout the Wikipedia article. Reference number 14 is found under the sub heading ‘Obsessions’ in the Wikipedia article.

The Wikipedia article also has medium credibility concerning contributors. One of the top contributors has the username Cosmic Latte and was awarded the Experienced Editors service badge on Wikipedia. While Cosmic Latte has made many contributions to the OCD Wikipage, another contributor by the username Rjwilmsi seems more reliable and was awarded the Master Editors service badge on Wikipedia. Rjwilmsi’s user page is very understandable and clean in comparison to Cosmic Latte’s confusing but creative user page. One may also find a lot of arguing on Cosmic Latte’s talk page compared to Rjwilmsi’s talk page.

In a concluding comparison, the Britannica article clearly separates definitions of the different parts of OCD whereas in the Wikipedia article it is hard to pin point a main idea beneath each heading. For example, the Britannica article is made up of a two sentence introduction defining OCD. Following are three paragraphs. One paragraph is dedicated to an explanation of what ‘obsessions’ are. The second paragraph is dedicated to explaining what ‘compulsions’ are. The concluding paragraph states a few statistics and the briefly notes on treatment methods. The Britannica article is very to the point and still informative even with only three paragraphs.

The Wikipedia article provides the same information but the main points gets lost amongst the article’s twelve headings. Wikipedia does offer some useful information, which Britannica does not, such as giving detailed examples of the different symptoms of OCD as well as the possible causes of OCD. Interesting information such as OCD in History and Society/Culture is also available on the Wikipedia article. However, due to the complicated nature of OCD, one may conclude that the Wikipedia article is not current enough for the topic and/or that the article is too biased. For example, under the Prognosis heading in the Wikipedia article, it is factually stated that it is uncommon for patients to experience a ‘symptom-free’ period and that symptoms will persist at moderate levels (at the least). One may find it unknowledgeable to factually make such a statement considering that OCD symptoms vary greatly according to the patient and what treatment the patient has received. This was discussed on the article’s Talk page, where a reader even asked for the statement to be removed due as it is discouraging and outdated.

In conclusion, there are many differences between the Wikipedia article and the Britannica article. The Wikipedia article provides a substantial amount more of information than the Britannica article. However, the Wikipedia article seems ununiformed and messy compared to the Britannica article. In comparison, the Britannica article provides the main information needed on the topic of OCD in a neat and orderly fashion. While, Wikipedia is not at all a source that shouldn't be used, Britannica is definitely the best place to start for factual and reliable information.