CRITICAL SUMMARY: JOURNAL ARTICLE 500 WORDS THIS IS AN EXERCISE IN SUMMARY AND A

CRITICAL SUMMARY: JOURNAL ARTICLE 500 WORDS
THIS IS AN EXERCISE IN SUMMARY AND ANALYSIS; THE SUMMARY OF YOUR TARGET TEXT SHOULD BE MINIMIZED– THE EMPHASIS IS ON ANALYSIS.
MUST ADHER TO ACADEMIC ESSAY STRUCTURE AS PRESENTED IN CLASS. IN ACCORDANCE WITH UNIVERSITY POLICY AND THE COURSE OUTLINE, THE PENALTY FOR PLAGIARISM IN THIS CLASS IS AN AUTOMATIC ZERO FOR THE PROJECT.
YOU ARE REQUIRED TO INCLUDE TWO DIRECT QUOTES FROM THE TARGET TEXT AND CITE THEM CORRECTLY. YOU COULD
MAKE REFERENCE TO ANOTHER SOURCE (ALSO CITED) IF YOU WISH BUT IT IS NOT MANDITORY. ESSAYS WITHOUT APA
DOCUMENTATION WILL RECEIVE AN AUTOMATIC ZERO ON THE ASSIGNMENT. NO REWRITES.
YOU CAN CRITIQUE THE ARTICLE ON FORMAT AND/OR CONTENT AND/OR LANGUAGE AND CLARITY AND/OR RESEARCH
This is an example which has been provided to me:
Losing One’s Mind: A Review of “New study claims to find genetic link between
creativity and mental illness”
There is a historic debate over whether creativity can be linked to mental illness, and Ian Sample’s (2015) “New study claims to find genetic link between creativity and mental illness”
provides evidence supporting both sides of the argument. It discusses a recent study in which
researchers found that people in creative professions are 25% more likely to carry genes that
increase risk of bipolar disorder and schizophrenia (Sample, 2015, para.3). Sample also provides
quotes from various critics opposing these findings as well as alternative reasons for this
correlation not due to mental illness. The writing has numerous problems which make it
disappointing work as a professional article, however it does provide ample evidence to support
both sides of the argument.
To start, the title, which should reflect the article’s main idea, implies that it will be about
the evidence supporting a link between creativity and mental illness. While this idea is briefly
discussed, it is later deconstructed by critique from Harvard professor Albert Rothenburg (2014),
who believes that “there is no good evidence for a link between mental illness and creativity” (as
cited in Sample, 2015, para.12). This opinion is actually written in a way that would outweigh
the findings of the study if only Sample had included any evidence to support Rothenburg’s
claim. The author basically contradicts himself, as the first half of his article presents findings
from a study that supports the claim of a link, and then the second half completely disagrees. The
result is a relatively unbiased article; however, it is one which does not provide enough
information for the reader to form their own opinion. Overall the article’s beginning is not
successful in introducing the topic.
After the introduction the writer transitions to the article’s body and provides some
research statistics to substantiate the title’s claim. This part is done well, as Sample states the
findings of a recent study in a way that is easy to understand. However, as the study is being
presented it is interrupted by an irrelevant quote of the lead researcher. The interruption disrupts
the article’s flow and distracts from the evidence of the study. This brings us to another problem
with the article: it uses too many quotes from different people rather than concentrating on one
topic. Sample tends to lose focus and include unnecessary information, and the result is a piece
that lacks a central voice.
In contrast to these weaknesses, there are several technical aspects of the article that were
done well. Besides the previously mentioned interrupting quote, most are integrated nicely and
provide fuel for the presented argument. The author has also chosen to quote qualified scientists
and professors, one of which is shown at the beginning of this review. By quoting experts he
adds a higher level of validity to the article. The language used is suitable for the general public,
which is good considering that the author is a science editor and therefore may have been
tempted to use jargon. The only real technical error came in formatting, as the article is cut into
short paragraphs sometimes consisting of only two or three sentences. Besides that, however, the
article’s overall impression is professional.
While the technicalities stood out, the conclusion unfortunately did not. It ends suddenly,
with a long quote which in no way signals the article’s end. It appears as if the article could have
continued, but instead it ends without warning. Overall the impression of the article is
unsatisfactory, as it does not clearly present the debate of mental health’s effect on creativity.
The author should have included some reflection on both arguments, as well as more supporting
evidence. However, he does provide a decent summary of the study mentioned in the article title.
The summary is enough to compel readers to research the study themselves, but that is the only
useful outcome of reading the article. Perhaps Sample needed a little more insanity himself to
write a stronger creative piece.
References
Sample, I. (2015, June 8). New study claims to find genetic link between creativity and mental
illness. The Guardian
http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/jun/08/new-study-claims-to-find-genetic-linkbetween-creativity-and-mental-illness
this is the example