Question Description

I’m working on a psychology multi-part question and need an explanation to help me understand better.

Writing a Critical Review

Adolescents and the Internet

It will be beneficial for you to read Chapter 1 pages 9-12 for this assignment. In this assignment, you will be writing a critical review on an article related to the topic in the reading.

You might want to find an article that discusses some of the advantages and disadvantages of the ease of Internet access for adolescents. Some interesting questions to consider: What limitations do you think should be placed on a teenager who uses the Internet? How has the Internet changed life for today’s teens?
You might write about adolescents and the use of gaming, social media, Internet bullying or any other Internet related topic. Find a research article that addresses adolescents and the Internet by browsing our Keiser Library’s online journal articles or other scholarly resources.

**Next, you will write a critical review of a scholarly article following the “Critical Review” directions, which are posted following the grading rubric information.

*Remember to write a good summary of the article as well as answering the “Who, What, When, Where and How” topic questions presented.

Grading Rubric


Point Value


Adequately covers the 6 areas: “Who, What, When, Where, and How” -Using the required word count of 200 words

60 points

Organization-Uses correct APA format as well as with citations and references

20 points

Spelling/Grammar/Posts word count

10 points

Uses the required number and good scholarly resources

10 points

Critical Thinking Review Directions

You have been asked to find a scholarly article from a trusted resource and provide a critical review of the article along with a summary. You will critically review your research. In our society today, we are exposed to so much information and so many studies. Some of this information is excellent, some is useful, and some is very bad and unreliable.
Critical thinking involves asking five questions: who, what, when, where,and how. Your review will include these 5 questions PLUS a paragraph summary of your own thoughts about the article. Below is an example of what your write-up needs to include.
There is a grading grid in the Weekly Assignment heading which will explain grading criteria.

Critical Thinking Review Directions

You should organize your paper in the following manner:

Your name/Week#


Provide the article citation in APA format. (Please refer to the Student Resources under the course home heading for more information and details on providing APA citations and formatting. Click on the gray square marked: APA Format and view the power point presentation.)
A citation example for a research article from a journal: Author’s name. (Date). Title of article. Name of the Publication, volume#, page #.
From a website: Author’s name, (date of publication if available). Title of article. Retrieved [date accessed] from the World Wide Web: [Web site address]


Where: In this section you will describe where you found the article. Where did this article/Web page appear? Is this a reasonable or credible journal or website? Is the publishing entity respectable/responsible?


Who: Who wrote/published the article/Web page? What are their credentials? Are the credentials appropriate for their argument?


When: Is this current information? If yes, do you think it will stand the “test of time”? If no, is it outdated or is it classic?


What: What argument is/are the author(s) making? Is it logical? Based on what you know, is it reasonable? What evidence is given to support the argument? Can you think of evidence to refute it?


How: How was the supporting/refuting evidence collected? Is this credible? What kind of evidence do you think needs to be gathered to test the argument? Did the author(s) do this? Remember that in the “how” section you will summarize the quality of the article (it does not have to be a “good” article in your opinion), and whether you consider this to be a worthwhile and trustworthy article. Did you think it was biased? Could the author have underlying motives? What do you think? Is it valid?

Summary: In this section you will think about the questions posed in your assignment for the critical review topic. What are your own thoughts? What did you learn from the article?


NOTE: Do not simply answer yes or no to the questions above.Write a thoughtful response to each section.
There is also a sample Critical Review below for your review.



Student Name: Critical Review: Week Number

Name of the author, date, and the resource (APA citation of the article):
Eggenberger, T. Sentinel node biopsy. Retrieved August 30, 2001, from the World Wide Web:…


Where: The Intellihealth Web site is a general information health Web site. It draws information from “trusted sources” (e.g., Harvard Medical School, University of Pennsylvania School of Dental Medicine); however, it sells health products and is financed by an insurance company. They do not endorse specific products. In general, the information on this site should be viewed with caution but may be an appropriate first step.


Who: Ty Eggenberger, a correspondent for Intellihealth. No evidence is given for the author’s credentials, but the Web site indicates that the editors are experts and use trusted sources.


When: Although the site was last updated 8/27/01, there is no indication when the article was written. It appears to be current, but this cannot be evaluated.


What: This article reviews a new diagnostic procedure, sentinel node biopsy, for breast cancer. They suggest that women investigate this option, but caution that the surgeon’s experience level is associated with diagnostic accuracy. The information is supported with quotations from a surgeon at a prestigious hospital. The argument appears reasonable and is appropriately cautious. If I were looking for advice on this issue, I would search in more clinically oriented databases to look for data on hits and misses for this diagnostic tool.


How: I was disappointed that no source was cited. This makes it difficult for me to evaluate how the evidence was collected. In my opinion, this is a good first-step article that presents a new diagnostic tool; however, before insisting on this type of biopsy over an axillary dissection, I would look for further information.

**Summary: My results of the CogLab Experiment surprised me. I scored a 25 on the assigment. I discovered that I do not have a high risk for breast cancer. I realize that the assigment is not an alternative to seeing a doctor and getting good physical care. Also, the critical review article caused me to think more about my own health and ways that I can take measures to insure that I stay healthy.

"Place your order now for a similar assignment and have exceptional work written by our team of experts, guaranteeing you A results."

Order Solution Now