Assessment Type 3-Evaluation
Assessment Type 3: Evaluation
Summary of research and outcome: (150 words)
My investigation focused on exploring the effects of anxiety on the cognitive abilities and determining the most effective treatments. The topic was inspired by my interest in medicine and mental disorders that affect large proportions of the contemporary populace.
Various research processes including a series of literature reviews as my secondary sources and an interview as my primary source were conducted to obtain information regarding the effects of anxiety on the cognitive functions. The research conducted yielded in the discovery of the effects of anxiety on the cognitive abilities and other factors such as the hormonal levels, neurotransmitters, and several brain components that are unique to the individual. It also became evident that these factors can be manipulated to prevent the severe effects of anxiety and hence, can be used as an effective treatment. I obtained both qualitative and quantitative key findings that were thoroughly analysed and …show more content…
documented in the form of a report.
Evaluation of research processes, specific to the research question:
Reviewing and evaluating online articles:
Reviewing online articles and websites was a very effective method of obtaining current and relevant sources of information that are credible, reliable and useful, which can be incorporated into the research outcome.
Reviewing existing literature was my preliminary method of obtaining information. The information was valid as they were all from current and relevant sources, such as Bergland C (2016) and Cominski et al (2014). The key findings obtained through this process were reliable as the information from each source was cross-referenced and the results indicated that the information present in most sources were consistent and had minimal conflicting aspects. From the literature reviews, it was found that the factors that are affected by anxiety are the neurological and mental factors of the body and the effects are interchangeable, whilst a few differing sources such as Reiss et al, (2016) established that anxiety primarily affects the bodily functions rather than the cognitive functions. Most of the sources were credible as they were written by qualified researchers and experts in the field of mental health. Therefore, this research process was highly effective as it had a vast array of sources that were both credible and reliable. Consequently, this research process increased the breadth of the information available and subsequently enhanced the quality of the outcome.
Reviewing and evaluating published journals:
Selecting and reviewing published journals was a reliable and useful method of obtaining information that is generally more inclusive and in-depth than online articles and provides information that is specific to the research question. Sources such as Salthouse T (2012) and Colman et al (2014) provided a comprehensive and useful analysis of anxiety and its various inhibiting effects.
The credibility of the information obtained through this process was relatively higher than the other research processes, as authors of these sources were individuals with competency and qualifications in the fields of mental health. In addition to this, published journals are often peer-reviewed before being published, which minimizes the chances of it having any incorrect or inaccurate information, whilst also removing any bias information. A restricting factor of this research process was that some of the sources were ‘out-dated’; an example of this is Dr Airaksinen’s journal that was written in 2006 hence, some of the information from this source may not have been very current and valid. This limiting factor was addressed by identifying and extracting key findings from each article and cross-referencing them with other reliable online articles such as Gamble, A (2016) and Garner et al (2009). As a result of the credibility and reliability of this research process, the information present in the outcome was highly accurate, which also increased the quality of the research outcome. Consequently, this research process was the most effective and successful method in comparison to the other processes conducted.
Conducting an interview (Primary Source):
The utilization of an interview was an effective method of obtaining a personal understanding of the topic and clarifying any queries.. This process was also used in conjunction with the secondary research processes to validate or dispute claims from secondary sources and in doing so this provided pivotal information. For example, I corroborated that anxiety has interchangeable effects as established by Dr J.Legg T (2016) and Cominski et al (2014).
The questions were answered in an ethical and valid manner, forming an integral section of the outcome. The answers obtained were very insightful and informative, and as a result, the interviewee was able to answer most of my personal queries about the topic. The responses obtained for the questions coincided with the information obtained through other various research processes, hence, it can be concluded that all the information obtained through this interview was reliable. The responses from the interview established that anxiety can impede the communication abilities of an individual. This was supported by a project conducted by Fiona Nation (2014), that concluded that anxiety can affect several of the brain functions such as: memory and communication of an individual. The interviewee was Julia Merkel, who is a Psychologist. Therefore, this interview was a highly credible and reliable source of information that increased the quality of the outcome. Despite being a successful research method, although in comparison to the other processes, this research process was the least effective in terms of obtaining new and resourceful information.
Evaluation of decisions made in response to challenges and opportunities, specific to the research processes used:
While conducting research and obtaining information through the secondary sources, it became apparent that my research project needed an inclusive primary source that I can utilize within the outcome to illustrate my growth as a researcher.
In response to this, I commenced with creating a comprehensive survey that investigated the effects of anxiety and ways to prevent them. However, whilst composing a list of questions it became apparent that the results that will be obtained through this process would not be highly relevant to the research question as the survey focused on obtaining qualitative results that relied on the opinions of teenagers regarding anxiety and its unknown effects. Additionally, the participants of the survey did not illustrate a true cross-section of society, given that it was conducted only within the local school with a small sample size of 30 participants. Therefore, the results obtained from the survey may not have been very relevant or reliable.
I overcame this difficulty by using an alternative method of obtaining a primary source. Therefore, I began conducting an interview with a specialist in the fields of anxiety and depression. This research process was very effective as it allowed me to get a personal understanding of the topic and clarify any queries. This was accomplished by composing a list of relevant and useful questions that provided insightful and informative answers that I was able to incorporate within my research outcome. The answers I received coincided with most of the information found through secondary research; therefore, the information obtained through the interview was quite valid and reliable.
Whilst conducting preliminary research by reviewing online articles, I was able to obtain vast amounts of information regarding the topic. However, the concepts involved within the field of mental disorders were quite difficult to comprehend and just reviewing articles was not necessarily enough to thoroughly understand each concept. Therefore, to overcome my lack of knowledge and understanding of the topic, I began viewing reliable and valid YouTube videos, such as Dr Purves (2015), What is Anxiety. In doing so, I discovered that there are a multitude of types of anxiety, however, the complex process of how anxiety affects the brain remained vague. Therefore, further research was conducted through other research processes.
Evaluation of the quality of the research outcome:
The research outcome was a crucial aspect of demonstrating my growth as a researcher by illustrating that I had comprehended and effectively incorporated the key findings in the form of a report. The report focused on exploring the severe effects of anxiety and establishing some effective treatments. The report consisted of several key findings, there were well synthesized, substantiated and presented in a clear and coherent manner. In summary, the research outcome demonstrated my knowledge, skills and ideas that were developed from researching and the information presented was supported by evidence and examples from the research. Nevertheless, just as there were several strengths within my research, correspondingly there were also several weaknesses that affected the quality of my outcome. A negative aspect of my research outcome was that the majority of the key findings were qualitative information regarding the effects of anxiety and the most effective treatments. While a few quantitative key findings regarding the statistics of anxiety were included. Therefore, to enhance the quality of my research outcome, I should’ve utilise more quantitative key findings, which increases the reliability of the research outcome.
The topic of mental disorders is one of the most controversial issues in modern society and has been extensively researched.
Therefore, this allowed me to obtain several key findings from a vast array of sources, which I cross-referenced throughout my research, and as a result, I was able to create an accurate and reliable report on my chosen topic. In addition to this, the Interview process with Julia Merkel (2016), a psychologist, enhanced the credibility and reliability of the research outcome. However, due to the word limit placed on the research outcome, I was required to limit the number of aspects that I could incorporate within the outcome. However, the report primarily focused on most critical effects of anxiety therefore, it was in-depth specific to the effects of anxiety. Due to the extensive range of sources used and investigated, I believe that I have answered my research question with clarity, reliability and
accuracy.
Therefore, my research outcome can be considered to be valuable for many individuals in modern society who might investigate what anxiety is and it’s various effects on the cognitive functions and explore some effective treatments available. Given the nature of the information, my report has a degree of relevance to people in modern society. It is also likely that my outcome may be used and read as an initial source as a part of a larger research process.
The research outcome has also reinforced my desire of becoming a doctor and has encouraged me to explore this career pathway by actively contacting local doctors and possibly attaining work experience at their clinics. Therefore, the research outcome was personally valuable as it assisted me in finding and exploring a possible future pathway. Additionally, the research outcome allowed me to develop my interpersonal skills, research skills and more importantly allowed me to develop new insights into medicine.
Summary of research and outcome: (150 words)
My investigation focused on exploring the effects of anxiety on the cognitive abilities and determining the most effective treatments. The topic was inspired by my interest in medicine and mental disorders that affect large proportions of the contemporary populace.
Various research processes including a series of literature reviews as my secondary sources and an interview as my primary source were conducted to obtain information regarding the effects of anxiety on the cognitive functions. The research conducted yielded in the discovery of the effects of anxiety on the cognitive abilities and other factors such as the hormonal levels, neurotransmitters, and several brain components that are unique to the individual. It also became evident that these factors can be manipulated to prevent the severe effects of anxiety and hence, can be used as an effective treatment. I obtained both qualitative and quantitative key findings that were thoroughly analysed and …show more content…
documented in the form of a report.
Evaluation of research processes, specific to the research question:
Reviewing and evaluating online articles:
Reviewing online articles and websites was a very effective method of obtaining current and relevant sources of information that are credible, reliable and useful, which can be incorporated into the research outcome.
Reviewing existing literature was my preliminary method of obtaining information. The information was valid as they were all from current and relevant sources, such as Bergland C (2016) and Cominski et al (2014). The key findings obtained through this process were reliable as the information from each source was cross-referenced and the results indicated that the information present in most sources were consistent and had minimal conflicting aspects. From the literature reviews, it was found that the factors that are affected by anxiety are the neurological and mental factors of the body and the effects are interchangeable, whilst a few differing sources such as Reiss et al, (2016) established that anxiety primarily affects the bodily functions rather than the cognitive functions. Most of the sources were credible as they were written by qualified researchers and experts in the field of mental health. Therefore, this research process was highly effective as it had a vast array of sources that were both credible and reliable. Consequently, this research process increased the breadth of the information available and subsequently enhanced the quality of the outcome.
Reviewing and evaluating published journals:
Selecting and reviewing published journals was a reliable and useful method of obtaining information that is generally more inclusive and in-depth than online articles and provides information that is specific to the research question. Sources such as Salthouse T (2012) and Colman et al (2014) provided a comprehensive and useful analysis of anxiety and its various inhibiting effects.
The credibility of the information obtained through this process was relatively higher than the other research processes, as authors of these sources were individuals with competency and qualifications in the fields of mental health. In addition to this, published journals are often peer-reviewed before being published, which minimizes the chances of it having any incorrect or inaccurate information, whilst also removing any bias information. A restricting factor of this research process was that some of the sources were ‘out-dated’; an example of this is Dr Airaksinen’s journal that was written in 2006 hence, some of the information from this source may not have been very current and valid. This limiting factor was addressed by identifying and extracting key findings from each article and cross-referencing them with other reliable online articles such as Gamble, A (2016) and Garner et al (2009). As a result of the credibility and reliability of this research process, the information present in the outcome was highly accurate, which also increased the quality of the research outcome. Consequently, this research process was the most effective and successful method in comparison to the other processes conducted.
Conducting an interview (Primary Source):
The utilization of an interview was an effective method of obtaining a personal understanding of the topic and clarifying any queries.. This process was also used in conjunction with the secondary research processes to validate or dispute claims from secondary sources and in doing so this provided pivotal information. For example, I corroborated that anxiety has interchangeable effects as established by Dr J.Legg T (2016) and Cominski et al (2014).
The questions were answered in an ethical and valid manner, forming an integral section of the outcome. The answers obtained were very insightful and informative, and as a result, the interviewee was able to answer most of my personal queries about the topic. The responses obtained for the questions coincided with the information obtained through other various research processes, hence, it can be concluded that all the information obtained through this interview was reliable. The responses from the interview established that anxiety can impede the communication abilities of an individual. This was supported by a project conducted by Fiona Nation (2014), that concluded that anxiety can affect several of the brain functions such as: memory and communication of an individual. The interviewee was Julia Merkel, who is a Psychologist. Therefore, this interview was a highly credible and reliable source of information that increased the quality of the outcome. Despite being a successful research method, although in comparison to the other processes, this research process was the least effective in terms of obtaining new and resourceful information.
Evaluation of decisions made in response to challenges and opportunities, specific to the research processes used:
While conducting research and obtaining information through the secondary sources, it became apparent that my research project needed an inclusive primary source that I can utilize within the outcome to illustrate my growth as a researcher.
In response to this, I commenced with creating a comprehensive survey that investigated the effects of anxiety and ways to prevent them. However, whilst composing a list of questions it became apparent that the results that will be obtained through this process would not be highly relevant to the research question as the survey focused on obtaining qualitative results that relied on the opinions of teenagers regarding anxiety and its unknown effects. Additionally, the participants of the survey did not illustrate a true cross-section of society, given that it was conducted only within the local school with a small sample size of 30 participants. Therefore, the results obtained from the survey may not have been very relevant or reliable.
I overcame this difficulty by using an alternative method of obtaining a primary source. Therefore, I began conducting an interview with a specialist in the fields of anxiety and depression. This research process was very effective as it allowed me to get a personal understanding of the topic and clarify any queries. This was accomplished by composing a list of relevant and useful questions that provided insightful and informative answers that I was able to incorporate within my research outcome. The answers I received coincided with most of the information found through secondary research; therefore, the information obtained through the interview was quite valid and reliable.
Whilst conducting preliminary research by reviewing online articles, I was able to obtain vast amounts of information regarding the topic. However, the concepts involved within the field of mental disorders were quite difficult to comprehend and just reviewing articles was not necessarily enough to thoroughly understand each concept. Therefore, to overcome my lack of knowledge and understanding of the topic, I began viewing reliable and valid YouTube videos, such as Dr Purves (2015), What is Anxiety. In doing so, I discovered that there are a multitude of types of anxiety, however, the complex process of how anxiety affects the brain remained vague. Therefore, further research was conducted through other research processes.
Evaluation of the quality of the research outcome:
The research outcome was a crucial aspect of demonstrating my growth as a researcher by illustrating that I had comprehended and effectively incorporated the key findings in the form of a report. The report focused on exploring the severe effects of anxiety and establishing some effective treatments. The report consisted of several key findings, there were well synthesized, substantiated and presented in a clear and coherent manner. In summary, the research outcome demonstrated my knowledge, skills and ideas that were developed from researching and the information presented was supported by evidence and examples from the research. Nevertheless, just as there were several strengths within my research, correspondingly there were also several weaknesses that affected the quality of my outcome. A negative aspect of my research outcome was that the majority of the key findings were qualitative information regarding the effects of anxiety and the most effective treatments. While a few quantitative key findings regarding the statistics of anxiety were included. Therefore, to enhance the quality of my research outcome, I should’ve utilise more quantitative key findings, which increases the reliability of the research outcome.
The topic of mental disorders is one of the most controversial issues in modern society and has been extensively researched.
Therefore, this allowed me to obtain several key findings from a vast array of sources, which I cross-referenced throughout my research, and as a result, I was able to create an accurate and reliable report on my chosen topic. In addition to this, the Interview process with Julia Merkel (2016), a psychologist, enhanced the credibility and reliability of the research outcome. However, due to the word limit placed on the research outcome, I was required to limit the number of aspects that I could incorporate within the outcome. However, the report primarily focused on most critical effects of anxiety therefore, it was in-depth specific to the effects of anxiety. Due to the extensive range of sources used and investigated, I believe that I have answered my research question with clarity, reliability and
accuracy.
Therefore, my research outcome can be considered to be valuable for many individuals in modern society who might investigate what anxiety is and it’s various effects on the cognitive functions and explore some effective treatments available. Given the nature of the information, my report has a degree of relevance to people in modern society. It is also likely that my outcome may be used and read as an initial source as a part of a larger research process.
The research outcome has also reinforced my desire of becoming a doctor and has encouraged me to explore this career pathway by actively contacting local doctors and possibly attaining work experience at their clinics. Therefore, the research outcome was personally valuable as it assisted me in finding and exploring a possible future pathway. Additionally, the research outcome allowed me to develop my interpersonal skills, research skills and more importantly allowed me to develop new insights into medicine.