Module 4 - AA (Annotation Anxiety) & Reflection Tasks!
The module 4 tasks had started out like this: "Choose your most commonly used internet search engine and do a search with words of your choosing". So anyway, I had decided to use the words "anxiety" and "disorder". The next tasks were all following on from this, so the same words were used. Then I get to this task:
"Next, choose your best 'source' or site from the three you saved....your source should be appropriate for your annotated sites in your Concept Reflection & Research Assessment if you haven't yet completed it. In any case, the source should be relevant to this unit."
So therein lied my problem! I had already completed the Concept Assessment, but I couldn't see how Anxiety Disorder was relevant to this unit....... (although I could argue that anxiety has played a part in my NET11 experience!).
Anyway, to cut a long story short, I decided to do the search again, but this time with the words "internet" and "anxiety disorder". I did the search through Gecko, which came up with literally thousands of links. A lot of them were only abstracts, but I eventually found the title of the following article, which I was able to access through Google Scholar. I felt that 1) this site could be annotated and 2) it was relevant to this unit and 3) it was still related to my original search words!
TITLE: Remote Treatment of Panic Disorder: A Randomized Trial of Internet-Based Cognitive Behavior Therapy Supplemented With Telephone Calls
AUTHOR: Per Carlbring, Ph.D., Susanna Bohman, M.Sc., Sara Brunt, M.Sc., Monica Buhrman, M.Sc., Bengt E. Westling, Ph.D., Lisa Ekselius, M.D., Ph.D., and Gerhard Andersson, Ph.D.
URL: http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/163/12/2119
This site would be classed as a Reference site. I would think that it would be extremely reliable, as the site belongs to the American Journal of Psychology. The "about" page gave me the following information: the journal was rated 3rd out of 94 psychology journals, and was the number 1 cited journal, with over 38,000 citations per year. The actual article was submitted by the Department of Behavioural Sciences, Linkoping University; the Department of Psychology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden; and the Department of Neuroscience, Psychiatry, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden.
The article details the results of a 10 week study into the use of Internet based self-therapy for Panic Disorder sufferers. The study results supported the use of Internet distributed treatment, together with short weekly telephone calls, for panic disorder. The participants were set weekly homework, which was distributed by email.
The purpose of the article was to publish the results of the survey, and to share those results with subscribers of the journal.
REFLECTION
Compare your final analysis and annotation with the material you saved for the last task, and think about these questions.
in terms of your own future use, which 'body ' of information (ie. the original 'snapshot' of the site, or your own, annotated, analytical version) would be most useful to refer back to?
In term of external users (i.e. if you included this site as a hyperlink or resource on a website) which body of information would best help them judge if the site was useful or of interest to them?
It is difficult for me to compare the material I saved for the last task, as I had searched for different terms. But broadly, I will compare the two 'bodies of information', as a 'web page' and an 'annotation'. In terms of my future use, the annotated, analytical version would be more useful than a 'snapshot' of a site. While it may take a little longer to review a site, and make annotated notes, in the long run it would save time. The annotation provides all necessary details (url, references) for academic citing/referencing purposes, plus a summary of the site/article.
Where time is limited, or when initial research into a project/assignment is being done, then I think it is quite appropriate to bookmark a site, or to save a 'snapshot'.
For external users, then definitely an annotated, analytical version is the preferable body of information. The external user could read the annotation (which is really a summary of the article/site) and then decide if they need to read the article further. This would be preferable to having to read a whole webpage, or having to look for links on a page to find information.
REFERENCE
Carlbring, Per, Bohman, Susanna, Brunt, Sara, Buhrman, Monica, Westling, Bengt E., Ekselius, Lisa, Andersson, GerhardRemote Treatment of Panic Disorder: A Randomized Trial of Internet-Based Cognitive Behavior Therapy Supplemented With Telephone CallsAm J Psychiatry 2006 163: 2119-2125
"Next, choose your best 'source' or site from the three you saved....your source should be appropriate for your annotated sites in your Concept Reflection & Research Assessment if you haven't yet completed it. In any case, the source should be relevant to this unit."
So therein lied my problem! I had already completed the Concept Assessment, but I couldn't see how Anxiety Disorder was relevant to this unit....... (although I could argue that anxiety has played a part in my NET11 experience!).
Anyway, to cut a long story short, I decided to do the search again, but this time with the words "internet" and "anxiety disorder". I did the search through Gecko, which came up with literally thousands of links. A lot of them were only abstracts, but I eventually found the title of the following article, which I was able to access through Google Scholar. I felt that 1) this site could be annotated and 2) it was relevant to this unit and 3) it was still related to my original search words!
TITLE: Remote Treatment of Panic Disorder: A Randomized Trial of Internet-Based Cognitive Behavior Therapy Supplemented With Telephone Calls
AUTHOR: Per Carlbring, Ph.D., Susanna Bohman, M.Sc., Sara Brunt, M.Sc., Monica Buhrman, M.Sc., Bengt E. Westling, Ph.D., Lisa Ekselius, M.D., Ph.D., and Gerhard Andersson, Ph.D.
URL: http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/163/12/2119
This site would be classed as a Reference site. I would think that it would be extremely reliable, as the site belongs to the American Journal of Psychology. The "about" page gave me the following information: the journal was rated 3rd out of 94 psychology journals, and was the number 1 cited journal, with over 38,000 citations per year. The actual article was submitted by the Department of Behavioural Sciences, Linkoping University; the Department of Psychology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden; and the Department of Neuroscience, Psychiatry, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden.
The article details the results of a 10 week study into the use of Internet based self-therapy for Panic Disorder sufferers. The study results supported the use of Internet distributed treatment, together with short weekly telephone calls, for panic disorder. The participants were set weekly homework, which was distributed by email.
The purpose of the article was to publish the results of the survey, and to share those results with subscribers of the journal.
REFLECTION
Compare your final analysis and annotation with the material you saved for the last task, and think about these questions.
in terms of your own future use, which 'body ' of information (ie. the original 'snapshot' of the site, or your own, annotated, analytical version) would be most useful to refer back to?
In term of external users (i.e. if you included this site as a hyperlink or resource on a website) which body of information would best help them judge if the site was useful or of interest to them?
It is difficult for me to compare the material I saved for the last task, as I had searched for different terms. But broadly, I will compare the two 'bodies of information', as a 'web page' and an 'annotation'. In terms of my future use, the annotated, analytical version would be more useful than a 'snapshot' of a site. While it may take a little longer to review a site, and make annotated notes, in the long run it would save time. The annotation provides all necessary details (url, references) for academic citing/referencing purposes, plus a summary of the site/article.
Where time is limited, or when initial research into a project/assignment is being done, then I think it is quite appropriate to bookmark a site, or to save a 'snapshot'.
For external users, then definitely an annotated, analytical version is the preferable body of information. The external user could read the annotation (which is really a summary of the article/site) and then decide if they need to read the article further. This would be preferable to having to read a whole webpage, or having to look for links on a page to find information.
REFERENCE
Carlbring, Per, Bohman, Susanna, Brunt, Sara, Buhrman, Monica, Westling, Bengt E., Ekselius, Lisa, Andersson, GerhardRemote Treatment of Panic Disorder: A Randomized Trial of Internet-Based Cognitive Behavior Therapy Supplemented With Telephone CallsAm J Psychiatry 2006 163: 2119-2125
0 Response to "Module 4 - AA (Annotation Anxiety) & Reflection Tasks!"
Post a Comment