User:M.carrots/Stress (biology)/Jellybean salad Peer Review

General info

 * Whose work are you reviewing?

M.carrots, Anneracine22, WikiMickie7, Lilaclover7, Xxbaileyxx4, Sofiakaramitsos2237129


 * Link to draft you're reviewing
 * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:M.carrots/Stress_%28biology%29?veaction=edit&preload=Template%3ADashboard.wikiedu.org_draft_template
 * Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
 * Stress (biology)
 * Stress (biology)

Evaluate the drafted changes
(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.)

Everything in the article is relevant to the topic however, there are some key points that are relevant that are not listed, for example, the definition of the word stress and how it functions hormonally in the human body.

The article is more or less written in a neutral tone in the way that it presents the readers with the facts of the impacts of stress on the human body most of the time. However, there are a few claims that do seem to be a bit biased on the topic. For example, the phrase "Based on biological dysfunctions in the prefrontal cortex and limbic system, the brain regions in charge of these activities, it is suggested that this actually represents cognitive dysfunction.". Note that the term "it is suggested" is used, this is not favourable to an unbiased opinion and neutral tone since it is not a fact that is known for certain. Another example would be the phrase "By doing this, individuals might boost adaptability, perception of the environment, and a healthy response to stress. By including these mechanisms into stress research, new perspectives on the stress concept in schizophrenia may emerge.". Once again, these suggestions and potential results that "may emerge" are not strictly based on research. Another example of the non-neutral tone present throughout the article is "The body is affected both physically and mentally by prolonged stress. And the likelihood of long-lasting unfavorable impacts increases as your body moves through the stages of general adaptability.", as this once again does not present factually known research based information. Sentences like that should be touched up as they present a bit of a biased opinion.

The article was well written however, we did notice there was a lack of elaboration on the viewpoint of how certain people may still remain perfectly healthy while simultaneously exhibiting symptoms of stress. According to many studies it is true that stress does have a lot of health impacts but some studies have also shown that some individuals who are constantly living with stress are still able to lead a healthy life without these complications.

The article has very little citations and definitely needs more. There are a lot of research based claims that are being made and are not backed up with sources. The links that are included however do function and support the claims for which they refer to. There are definitely more citations that do need to be added though.

There is but two references attached to all the facts listed in the article which are reliable references as mindgarden.com is a publisher of academic and research articles written by professionals in the field of psychology, and ( http://pwatoronto.org/english/pdfs/topic-stress+HIV.pdf ) is a medical site. However, simply using one source in an article that is heavily based on research is not sufficient enough. The reference used is a neutral one.

None of the information in this article is out of date and the only thing that should be added was as mentioned earlier, an elaboration on how people may also lead healthy lives while constantly enduring stress from their environment as well as more references to back up the research in the article.