User:Loulougirl5/sandbox

Peer Review 1 (Social Cognitive Theory)

Share the Love:


 * 1) First, what does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way?
 * 2) The article did a great job of presented the information that needed to be presented to be able to understand the article to the best of people's abilities. I was really impressed with how much back up support they had for the information that the article provided.  I feel like the article did a great job of explaining exactly what the topic was and making sure that people would be able to understand the topic as they read through the article.
 * 3) What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?
 * 4) Make the article in some areas a little more concise with its wording. I feel like some of the sections while they were giving good information they were a little dragged out and long.  They could make the sections have the same information but a little more concise and less wordy that way it does not drag as much while reading and not provide the same information over and over again.
 * 5) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?
 * 6) I feel like the best thing the author of this article could do is look through the article and see if there is any information that is unnecessary or put into the article multiple times.
 * 7) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know!
 * 8) I like how well they were able to describe different aspects of the main idea. I feel like explaining different aspects of my topic I am working on could definitely be beneficial.

Follow Their Lead:


 * Looking at the lead by itself, do I feel satisfied that I know the importance of the topic?
 * The lead of the article gives a lot of information to help you have a general idea about the topic. It also makes sure to let you know why the article and topic could be considered and important topic to have information on.
 * Looking at the lead again after reading the rest of the article, does the lead reflect the most important information?
 * The lead reflects information by giving the basic information needed to understand the rest of the article. I feel like it did a good job of covering the important information that you would need while reading the rest of the article.
 * Does the lead give more weight to certain parts of the article over others? Is anything missing? Is anything redundant?
 * The article does not give more weight to one are or the other. It mostly covers general information to give you an idea of what is going to be talked about but not necessarily saying in specifics what is being talked about later.  I do feel like in the introduction it could say a little more about what will be talked about.

A Clear Structure:


 * Are the sections organized well, in a sensible order? Would they make more sense presented some other way (chronologically, for example)?
 * I feel like the order that the information was in worked well. I feel like the information did not need to go in a specific order and that the order that they are in work well.

A Balancing Act:


 * Is each section's length equal to its importance to the article's subject? Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? Is anything off-topic?
 * I feel like for the most part that the article cover subjects fairly well. However while reading through I feel like there was a few sections that dragged on talking about the same thing over and over again.  I feel like this could be more concise and make the sections not so long and wordy.
 * Does the article reflect all the perspectives represented in the published literature? Are any significant viewpoints left out or missing?
 * The article did a good job of covering all the areas that it should cover to let you know enough about the topic that was being taught about.
 * Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view?
 * the article doe not draw any conclusions or try to make the reader lean towards one way or the other. The article is very neutral and does not have any biased information.

Neutral Content:


 * Do you think you could guess the perspective of the author by reading the article?
 * I can not guess the perspective of the author because the article just stated information to help you understand the subject and not necessarily make you feel one way or the other towards the topic.
 * Are there any words or phrases that don't feel neutral? For example, "the best idea," "most people," or negative associations, such as "While it's obvious that x, some insist that y."
 * None of these phrases were present in the article that would make the article not be neutral.
 * Does the article make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people? For example, "some people say..."
 * The article does not speak for other people or unnamed groups and just gives information and definitions of the topic.
 * Does the article focus too much on negative or positive information? Remember, neutral doesn't mean "the best positive light" or "the worst, most critical light." It means a clear reflection of various aspects of a topic.
 * The article mostly focuses on information about the topic so that people are given information and can decide for themselves how they feel about the topic.  n

Reliable Sources:


 * Are most statements in the article connected to a reliable source, such as textbooks and journal articles? Or do they rely on blogs or self-published authors?
 * The information the article relies on are reliable sources that have great information to draw from to contribute to the article.
 * Are there a lot of statements attributed to one or two sources? If so, it may lead to an unbalanced article, or one that leans too heavily into a single point of view.
 * I feel like there are several articles that come together to support the information that is provided in this article. Not one source is carrying too much of the weight of the article than the other.
 * Are there any unsourced statements in the article, or statements that you can't find stated in the references? Just because there is a source listed, doesn't mean it's presented accurately!
 * As far as I was able to see that if there was a statement that had detailed information it had a source that provided back up support to the statement that was provided to the article.

Peer Review Letter:

The article was able to provide information about the topic and open up the article well to the information that you would need to understand the rest of the article. The article did a good job in keeping a neutral perspective throughout the article. I was never able to find an area where there was an instance where the article was trying to persuade the reader any way. The biggest thing that I think could be improved on is that some of the sections seem to be a bit redundant. I feel like you can lessen the amount of information and still be able to fully explain it with less words and by being more concise. Overall this article seem to be well, and just could benefit from a few adjustments.

Peer Review 2 (Creative Problem Solving)

Share the Love:


 * 1) First, what does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way?
 * 2) The article does a good job of introducing the topic and giving people some information. It also does a good job of organizing the information that they provided you with.
 * 3) What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?
 * 4) I feel like one thing the author could do is find more information on the topic. I feel like this is a topic that could be expounded on and could even have more sections talking about different things.  I also feel like they could find some more references to back up the information that they have so that it isn't relying so much on the few references that they do have provided.
 * 5) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?
 * 6) I feel like the most important thing for the author to work on would be to add more information to the article and expand on the information they already have provided. I feel like there is a lot more information that could be provided on creative problem solving than is included in this article.
 * 7) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know!
 * 8) One thing I noticed was that they had an area inside a section where they had a list of technique/categories. I feel like this could be beneficial in the article I am working on as well.

Follow Their Lead:


 * Looking at the lead by itself, do I feel satisfied that I know the importance of the topic?
 * I feel like the lead does give you the definition of what the topic is, but doesn't really give you much information besides that. I feel like the introduction could provide a little bit more information.
 * Looking at the lead again after reading the rest of the article, does the lead reflect the most important information?
 * The lead does reflect the most important aspect of making sure that you understand the main point of the topic. It doesn't really cover anything else besides the main point that needed to be made.
 * Does the lead give more weight to certain parts of the article over others? Is anything missing? Is anything redundant?
 * The lead did not give more weight to one part of the article than the other, it mainly focused on generally introducing you to the topic more than anything else.

A Clear Structure:


 * Are the sections organized well, in a sensible order? Would they make more sense presented some other way (chronologically, for example)?
 * The sections are well organized and seem to be in a good order. They briefly describe different points that are categorized and put in a good order where the subject will make sense.

A Balancing Act:


 * Is each section's length equal to its importance to the article's subject? Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? Is anything off-topic?
 * The section lengths seem to be good and cover the topic that it is talking about. I do think probably a little more information could be added to the sections, as well as adding more sections as well.
 * Does the article reflect all the perspectives represented in the published literature? Are any significant viewpoints left out or missing?
 * The article does reflect the perspective represented pretty well and it seems that they covered some information. Although I feel like more information could be added to help this article be better.
 * Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view?
 * The article does not draw any conclusions that would make the reader have an influence in their point of view.

Neutral Content:


 * Do you think you could guess the perspective of the author by reading the article?
 * I do not think that I would able to guess the perspective of the author. The author did a good job of keeping the article neutral.
 * Are there any words or phrases that don't feel neutral? For example, "the best idea," "most people," or negative associations, such as "While it's obvious that x, some insist that y."
 * There are no phrases that would make the article not seem neutral, and they do not insinuate that they themselves feel one way or the other towards the topic.
 * Does the article make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people? For example, "some people say..."
 * The article does not make claims to groups that are unknown and does to try to persuade the reader.
 * Does the article focus too much on negative or positive information? Remember, neutral doesn't mean "the best positive light" or "the worst, most critical light." It means a clear reflection of various aspects of a topic.
 * The article did not focus on either the negative or the positive more. It just stayed very neutral and talked about what it was and didn't really form any opinions throughout it.

Reliable Sources:


 * Are most statements in the article connected to a reliable source, such as textbooks and journal articles? Or do they rely on blogs or self-published authors?
 * The statements in the article are connected to reliable sources that would be good to get information from and base information from.
 * Are there a lot of statements attributed to one or two sources? If so, it may lead to an unbalanced article, or one that leans too heavily into a single point of view.
 * There are a couple of sources that seem to be a couple of references that are used more than the others. Although, some of the times these sources are used to back information another one is also listed to back up that information as well.
 * Are there any unsourced statements in the article, or statements that you can't find stated in the references? Just because there is a source listed, doesn't mean it's presented accurately!
 * All of the statements that have a source connected to it have the sources listed down in the references. These sources seem to be connected and listed correctly.

Peer Review Letter:

The article has good structure and a great starting out point for the beginning of a great article. The article is unbiased which is important in an article that is providing information to people. This article has the makings to become a great article and has a great start and could really blossom with some added information. I feel like the biggest way that this article can be improved upon is by adding more sources so that way there is more information to back up the article and provide more information to help expound on what already exists in the article. I feel like this article could benefit from more information that could help expound on the topic and give more information about the topic that was not already provided in the article. Overall, this article has a great start and framework for a successful article.

Peer Review 3 (Decay Theory)

Share the Love:


 * 1) First, what does the article do well? Is there anything from your review that impressed you? Any turn of phrase that described the subject in a clear way?
 * 2) What changes would you suggest the author apply to the article? Why would those changes be an improvement?
 * 3) What's the most important thing the author could do to improve the article?
 * 4) Did you notice anything about the article you reviewed that could be applicable to your own article? Let them know!

Follow Their Lead:


 * Looking at the lead by itself, do I feel satisfied that I know the importance of the topic?
 * I think the lead does a good job of providing information on the topic and introducing it. It provided a lot of information that will help you to be able to better understand the topic.
 * Looking at the lead again after reading the rest of the article, does the lead reflect the most important information?
 * I feel like the lead of the article did a good job reflecting the most important information on the topic that it is covering.
 * Does the lead give more weight to certain parts of the article over others? Is anything missing? Is anything redundant?
 * The lead does not sway towards different parts of the article more than others. The article does a good job of having the lead equally represent the whole article.

A Clear Structure:


 * Are the sections organized well, in a sensible order? Would they make more sense presented some other way (chronologically, for example)?
 * The sections in the article seemed to be well organized and even organized into subsections as well. They seemed to be in a good order that made it so that the article flowed well.

A Balancing Act:


 * Is each section's length equal to its importance to the article's subject? Are there sections in the article that seem unnecessary? Is anything off-topic?
 * I feel like that each section of the article was covered enough and was equally represented according to the other things that were also talked about in the article. I do feel like however that the article explained things more towards the inconsistencies and didn't necessarily talk about the theory itself.
 * Does the article reflect all the perspectives represented in the published literature? Are any significant viewpoints left out or missing?
 * The article does reflect all the perspectives and was able to cover the information that was useful and important to the subject. They didn't leave out any information that was important to be able to understand the topic.
 * Does the article draw conclusions or try to convince the reader to accept one particular point of view?
 * The article does not draw any conclusions about the topic and does not try to push the reader into having a certain point of view on the topic either.

Neutral Content:


 * Do you think you could guess the perspective of the author by reading the article?
 * I do not think that I would be able to guess the perspective of the author. The author did a good job of keeping it neutral and not letting their perspective show through the article.
 * Are there any words or phrases that don't feel neutral? For example, "the best idea," "most people," or negative associations, such as "While it's obvious that x, some insist that y."
 * There are a few times when the phrase "it is widely believed" is used. I feel like this does not seem like a very neutral term.  Other than the few instances that the phrase was used it stayed neutral and did not use any other terms like that.
 * Does the article make claims on behalf of unnamed groups or people? For example, "some people say..."
 * Like I said previously there is a few instances where the phrase "it is widely believed" was used. This is the only instance that I was able to find where this was a problem.
 * Does the article focus too much on negative or positive information? Remember, neutral doesn't mean "the best positive light" or "the worst, most critical light." It means a clear reflection of various aspects of a topic.
 * The article does not really focus on negative or positive information. The author did a good job of keeping it where it was not doing these things.

Reliable Sources:


 * Are most statements in the article connected to a reliable source, such as textbooks and journal articles? Or do they rely on blogs or self-published authors?
 * The statements in the article were connected to reliable sources. The sources that were listed were reliable and seemed to be good references to choose to use to back up this articles information.
 * Are there a lot of statements attributed to one or two sources? If so, it may lead to an unbalanced article, or one that leans too heavily into a single point of view.
 * The article seemed to use all of the references and did not use others too much more than some other articles. It seemed to be balanced well.
 * Are there any unsourced statements in the article, or statements that you can't find stated in the references? Just because there is a source listed, doesn't mean it's presented accurately!
 * Looking through the article all the statements seem to be linked to a reference.

Peer Review Letter:

The articles lead did a great job of explaining the decay theory in a very basic way to set up the rest of what the article would contain. I also liked how well they described the inconsistencies in the decay theory which I felt like added to the article. There are a few things that could be improved throughout the article though. I feel like they could add more information to the article to talk more and give more details about the decay theory instead of focusing so much on the inconsistencies of the decay theory. I feel like adding more information on the decay theory itself will really add to the article and help the article to become more cohesive. Overall, this article is a great article that explains the topic so far very well and makes it so it can be understood. With a few improvements this article can really become a superb article.