Problems with the Introduction

Write about the Article Review for Child Psychology and Psychiatry.

The introduction of the article does not meet the academic standards of a good. The researcher is supposed to give an overview of the topic by providing the background information of the topic. In this case the researcher was supposed to highlight the concept of immunization by giving a brief overview and then a thesis statement that the reader can easily understand (Maxwell, 2017). The author has given a brief background of the research but has given a brief about immunization tracking their history and their relevance today. However, this introduction fails to be conclusive since it lacks a thesis statement which is supposed to guide the reader in understanding what the whole article is about.

The paragraphs in the whole task are not connected to each other making it difficult for the reader to establish the flow of the task. For example, in the second and third paragraph, the article jumps from MMR to autism without establishing a linking between the two paragraphs. Connection between paragraphs allows the reader to understand the body of the article and establish the main ideas in the study (Taylor, 2002). The article is supposed to give the reasons why children should be vaccinated but the researcher has mixed up paragraphs in a way that is difficult to understand because the article has focused more on MMR rather than the whole topic of vaccination. This is seen in the conclusion where the researcher supports the arguments made in the body of the article. However, the conclusion seems to be addressing the topic of why children should be vaccinated from MMR rather than the general topic of vaccination. In my opinion the researcher’s conclusion does not support the thesis statement which is missing in the study.

The author has justified that there is no link between MMR and autism by that there is no adequate evidence that has been produced by researchers on the effect. This is justified by lack of rising cases of autism after the introduction of the vaccine in 1988. Honda, Shimizu, & Rutter (2005) study inidcates the unlikeliness of the vaccine causing autism. This is seen in the works of Rice, et al.. (2012) who concluded that there is established role of the vaccine in causing the disease.

The author shared effectiveness of the anticampaign movement effectively used the vaccine misinformation by using the rising rate of autism that had sparked fear in public leading to discontinuation of the vaccine in Japan. The movements used the media and celebrities to aggravate the public concerns over the side effects of the vaccination. The fact that the disease had been eradicated in the population made it easy for the ani-vaccination group to convince the public against the vaccination. However, these groups should have used evidence from research studies to quote the figures of those affected and those against the vaccination. Leask, et al.. (2012) for a campaign to be effective, a clear framework of communicating with the public must be used to achieve positive response. The campaigns were ineffective since they were not effective.

Lack of Clear Connection Among Paragraphs

The author did not provide the way information should be assessed for reliability. However, the way to present information to the public is through documentation of research findings from scientific studies that used proper methodologies to draw conclusions (Garland, 2015). Scientific inquiry allows researcher to follow established rules of research to generate findings, analyze data and draw conclusions on the study topic. Such studies establish the factors associated with the vaccine, provide scientific evidence of the facts, link the evidence to previous studies and make conclusions through the analyzed data (Maxwell, 2017).

Credible sources are the ones that the researcher can trust and offer reliable information that supports the study. For a resource to be credible, it must be substantiated or vetted by scholarly communities. Such sources are not based on the ideas of the individual but rather evidence of what is being referred to in the source (Taylor, 2002). For example, a good source must link with the works of other writers as a way of adding on the existing knowledge or must be from a source that can be trusted like government websites. The resources used in the study are credible since they are based on data obtained from previous studies that establish a pattern in the challenges witnessed in acceptance of MMR vaccines.

Godlee F, Smith J, & Marcovitch H (2011). “Wakefield’s article linking MMR vaccine and

Autism was fraudulent”. BMJ. 342:c7452 (jan05 1):

c7452c7452.doi:10.1136/bmj.c7452 can be found online through searching the doi.

Gupta S (1996). Immunology and immunologic treatment of autism. Proc Natl Autism Assn

Chicago. 455-460 is available online through searching using the key word “autism and MMR”.

Hideo Honda, Yasuo Shimizu, Michael Rutter (18 February 2005). “No effect of MMR

withdrawal on the incidence of autism: a total population study”. Journal of Child

Psychology and Psychiatry 46 (6): 572–579. doi:10.1111/j.1469-7610.2005.01425 is available online through searching the doi.

Rubin, Benjamin (1980). “A note on the development of the bifurcated needle for

smallpox vaccination”. WHO Chronicle 34 (5): 180–1 is available from the WHO chronicles list.

Stefan Riedel, MD, PhD (January 2005). Edward Jenner and the history of smallpox

and vaccination 18 (1). Baylor University Medical Center. pp. 21–25.PMC 1200696 is available on the NCBI database.

The Editors Of The Lancet (February 2010). “Retraction—Ileal-lymphoid-nodular

hyperplasia, non-specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children”.

Lancet 375 (9713): 445. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60175-4 is available through searching with the doi.

Lack of Proper Citation and Referencing

Thomas, J., (2010). Paranoia strikes deep: MMR vaccine and autism. Psychiatric Times. .27(3):1-6 is available on the Psychiatric Times website.

The Lancet (1998, February 28). The Lancet. Retrieved May 25, 2019, from The Lancet: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(97)11096-0/abstract is available through the provided link.

Wakefield A, Murch S, Anthony A et al. (1998). “Ideal-lymphoid-nodular hyperplasia, non-

specific colitis, and pervasive developmental disorder in children”. Lancet 351

(9103): 637–41. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(97)11096- 0.PMID 9500320. Retrieved

2007-09-05.= is available through searching with the doi.

Autism Spectrum Australia (Aspect). All Rights Reserved .Retrieved on 2014 June from:

https://www.autismspectrum.org.au/content/about-autism-spectrum-disorders is available through using the link provided

The researcher did not quote all the references used in the text of the article. For example, the Lancet, Thomas and Hideo Honda et al. have been wrongly referenced. The references need to have the year of publication and should only use the surname of the author. In the three citations, the author is not consistent with this referencing and despite being wrong, the citations have been differently cited from each other. That is the in-text citation is not uniform. This leaves the reader to wonder whether the reference list a mixture of references and bibliography or not. Further, most of the references lack the year of the study which makes them inappropriate for APA referencing. Under this referencing style, each citation must be quoted using the author’s last name and the year of publication when used in in-text citation.

The author did not comply with the correct APA citations for in-text citations and the reference list. In the in-text citation the author was supposed to quote the last name of the author(s) and insert the year of publication. Since authors work on very many articles, the year of publication assists the reader in identifying the right resource that applies to the article. Further, the researcher failed to acknowledge all the sources used which could be termed as plagiarism. For example, the researcher used statistics and years that certain events took place but failed to quote the sources of this information. This makes the article to fail in meeting academic standards and can termed as full of integrity issues that question the academic ability of the author.

On the other hand, the reference list has not been presented well since the author mixed the organization of references. For example, the third and fourth references have been wrongly referenced by using both names of the authors rather than using the surname name and the rest of the names being initialized. In addition to that the years of publication have been wrongly placed in the second and seventh reference (Astrom, 2008). The year of publication is supposed to come after the names of the authors in APA and not anywhere else as shown in the two references. Putting the year of publication after the title and other details changes the referencing style. However, the reference list has been presented with hanging indents which is a requirement of APA referencing style.

The researcher presented the article using the appropriate language which is third person. The article has been presented by the author to indicate that they are not his/her views but rather findings supported by research from other sources. (White & Griffith, 2010)A good article should not contain personal statements but rather arguments backed up by other studies within the field of research. This is a formal tone that the reader uses to address the reader in a formal voice that respects the academic audience. However, the author missed out on this formal style by using the word “I” in the conclusion. In academic writing, conclusions are the standing point of the author where it articulates a summary of all the findings in the paper. The researcher observes the formal style by avoiding use of contractions where words like; would not and there is not could be written in short form (Jarneving, 2007). These words were chosen to indicate the effectiveness of formal language in the article.  One sentence that confused me was “However, although smallpox is eradicated,” since I did not understand whether two linking words can be used in the same sentence following each other. I believe the author should have used either of the two words.

References

Åström, F. (2008). Citation patterns in open access Journals. Journal of Academic management, 4(2), 12-22.

Garland, J. T. (2015). The Scientific Method as an Ongoing Process. U C Riverside.

Honda, H., Shimizu, Y., & Rutter, M. (2005). No effect of MMR withdrawal on the incidence of autism: a total population study. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 46(6), 572–579.

Jarneving, B. (2007). Bibliographic coupling and its application to research-front and other core documents. Journals of Informetrics, 1(7), 287-307.

Leask, J., Kinnersley, P., Jackson, C., Cheater, F., Bedford, H., & Rowles, G. (2012). Communicating with parents about vaccination: a framework for health professionals. BMC Pediatrics, 12(154).

Maxwell, N. (2017). Understanding Scientific Progress, . Minnesota: Paragon House.

Rice, C., Rosanoff, M., Dawson, G., Durkin, M., Croen, L., Singer, A., & Yeargin-Allsopp, M. (2012`). Evaluating changes in the prevalence of the autism spectrum disorders (ASDs). Public Health Reviews, 34(2).

Taylor, D. (2002). The appropriate use of references in a scientific research paper. Emergency Medicine, 14, 166-170.

White, H., & Griffith, B. (2010). A literature measure of intellectual structure. Journal of the American Society, 49(4), 327-355.