bio 1322
ARTICLE CRITIQUE
BIOL 1322
The newspaper/magazine article I am critiquing comes from: , dated .
(Name of Publication)
NOTE: You are only required to submit a copy of the article if requested to do so by your professor.
Answer the following questions:
1. What sort of language does the writer use? Do the words imply sensationalism or conclusive findings? Phrases such as “startling revelation” or “now we know” or “the study proved” are clues to whether the report is a sensational one. Does the author take a tentative approach, using words such as may, might, or could? What do these words imply?
I evaluate the language used in the publication as follows:
2. Is the finding placed in the context of previous nutrition findings? Does the article imply that the current finding wipes out all that has gone before it? Can you detect a broad understanding of nutrition on the writer’s part? From what clues? For example, an article about folate and heart disease should say that saturated fat probably plays the major nutrition role in heart disease development.
I believe the author’s understanding of previously reported findings to be:
3. Does the article mention whether the research results under discussion are published in a medical or nutrition journal? Where? Does the journal mentioned publish valid scientific findings?
I judge the credibility of the item to be:
4. How were the results obtained? Can you tell from the article whether this was a case study, an epidemiological study, and intervention study, or a laboratory study? How does that information affect your understanding of what the results have contributed to nutrition science?
The methods used to obtain these results were:
5. Does the finding apply to you? Should you change your eating patterns because of it? In what ways did the subjects resemble or differ from you? Were there enough subjects to make
BIOL 1322
The newspaper/magazine article I am critiquing comes from: , dated .
(Name of Publication)
NOTE: You are only required to submit a copy of the article if requested to do so by your professor.
Answer the following questions:
1. What sort of language does the writer use? Do the words imply sensationalism or conclusive findings? Phrases such as “startling revelation” or “now we know” or “the study proved” are clues to whether the report is a sensational one. Does the author take a tentative approach, using words such as may, might, or could? What do these words imply?
I evaluate the language used in the publication as follows:
2. Is the finding placed in the context of previous nutrition findings? Does the article imply that the current finding wipes out all that has gone before it? Can you detect a broad understanding of nutrition on the writer’s part? From what clues? For example, an article about folate and heart disease should say that saturated fat probably plays the major nutrition role in heart disease development.
I believe the author’s understanding of previously reported findings to be:
3. Does the article mention whether the research results under discussion are published in a medical or nutrition journal? Where? Does the journal mentioned publish valid scientific findings?
I judge the credibility of the item to be:
4. How were the results obtained? Can you tell from the article whether this was a case study, an epidemiological study, and intervention study, or a laboratory study? How does that information affect your understanding of what the results have contributed to nutrition science?
The methods used to obtain these results were:
5. Does the finding apply to you? Should you change your eating patterns because of it? In what ways did the subjects resemble or differ from you? Were there enough subjects to make