Discussion-Lucia Rajkovic

Discussion-Lucia Rajkovic

by Lucia Rajkovic -
Number of replies: 2

Hello everyone! I am Lucia. I come from Montenegro and this is my 2nd year at Tallulah Falls School. I am a senior and can't wait to go to university, although I don't know which one yet.

Upon reading the 2 articles my conclusion is that neither one of them is qualified to be a scientific article. The " Frequent TY Watching Shortens Kids' Attention Spans" is a newspaper article that mentions a lot or surveys, scientists, psychologists, and teachers but it also never produces any hard evidence to support any of the presented claims. In my opinion, this article should be regarded as a story and be disregarded as a formal basis for a research paper or anything similar

In regards to the second article, called "Early Television Exposure and Subsequent Problems in Children ", it is written more accurately but it is still lacking the components needed to be regarded as a valid research paper. The format used to write the article is taking the paper in the right direction. Emphasizing the credibility of the authors, the objective of the article, the methods used to support the claim, the results of the previously mentioned experiments, and the conclusion of the research is a sign of a good research paper. However, this article, in my opinion, is not done. For example, the section on methodology needs more accurate and more effective surveys that give out valid results, the data that was collected (longitudinal data) is not the one that the article should have been based on as even the authors say "the longitudinal data of early television exposure and subsequent attentional problems have been lacking" meaning that the survey should have collected data that is more useful to the research.

As psychology is a known subject to me, the first 2 chapters do not provide me with any new information. However, I am looking forward to learning more through future chapters, assignments, and research. 

The knowledge used to write this response comes from the articles provided, common knowledge and past knowledge of psychology.





-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


-


415 words

In reply to Lucia Rajkovic

Re: Discussion-Lucia Rajkovic

by Christopher Waldron -
This document is actually very precise because you mentioned points that are very detailed. As you said, the second source is missing information since they aren't answering every question. this document sounds more like halfway research that is seen as assumptions. And I don't think they will ever be able to prove it because kids are born every day. it may be that they found 10% of kids with this problem, but that is only talking about the kids that they did the test on. It probably works like a stock market statistics, sometimes it is up, and other times they very low.

103 words

In reply to Lucia Rajkovic

Re: Discussion-Lucia Rajkovic

by Iva Ristic -

Your answer really demonstrates a detailed examination of the two articles. You carefully considered strengths and weaknesses of each one of them and also identified the essential components of a valid research paper. Your point about the lack of hard evidence in the "Early Television Exposure and Subsequent Problems in Children" is well-taken; I didn't really think about that, good job! Your evaluation demonstrates a strong understanding of research methodology and critical thinking skills. As someone familiar with psychology, your insight is adding a valuable perspective to our class. I am happy to learn from you.

96 words