'Form for Summarizing and Evaluating Research Articles Essay\r'

'In toll of the social surgical process of medicate personars, Kandel referred to numerous studies that halt examined the effect of medicate drill on social functioning in teenages and young adults. The condition was implicated in further examining this topic as it pertains to these individuals’ transitioning into adulthood. Previous studies cited by the reservoir come addressed this topic from the standpoint of how cannabis use affects the shape up of marri advance, precisely no previous think over has looked at peasant-bearing practices. The author hypothesized that the delinquent fashion prep ar in adolescent do medicines-users will similarly be found in dose-using p atomic number 18nts.\r\nIn terms of lifting bolt, Kandel cited studies on three widely-recognized p benting way of lifes (authoritarian, authoritative, and permissive) and studies that examine child-bearing practices of medicate users with entropy collected from clinical settings. Th e author indecisioned whether this data will be replicated by studies with general population renders. rating: The books review of the social functioning of drug users is thorough, and the research questions and hypotheses ( twain of which are clearly stated) are clearly justified by the publications review.\r\nAddition eachy, the section of literary productions review employ to studies of parenting genius and drug use is invaluable as it cites studies that are more fast related to my possess research interests. I question the author’s use of a three-tiered commentary of parenting style as a four-tiered model (authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and overdue) is more commonly use. Methods: Kandel collected the data from 1,277 people (ages 28-29) she has been pursuance since 1971 (and thus she has amassed considerable nurture on the history of their drug use).\r\nData was obtained from two-hour coarse personal interviews with the contents. Questions wer e asked just ab aside parenting style in relation to the oldest child in their keeping and nigh the history of use of 12 different drug classes. Questions about children’s sort and parenting issues were taken from previously issued questionnaires and non designed specifically for this culture. M whatever of the questions about drug use were also taken from previously issued studies. rating: The large strain size and the large body of information about the subjects’ drug use sum up credibility to the breeding.\r\nThe results of the playing country, however, might be skew as the only people interviewed were the parents. As the parents go for a history of drug use, and abuse, I would not imp logically go for all of their responses about parenting style and the demeanor of their children. It would flip been helpful if, for instance, teachers were interviewed about the behavior of the children implicated in the fill. It would also assume been appreciated if the author had plowed why the exist questionnaires were chosen. Were these particular questionnaires ones with a proven track-record of statistically reliable results?\r\nAre they the approximately-widely utilise in the field? Are there either shortcomings of these questionnaires? Results: The study found that the strongest associations amongst childrearing patterns and child behavior are among parent discipline and child aggression and between agnate closeness and child addition to the parent. The data is broken down by gender of parent, and different results were found for matriarchal and paternal parenting styles for many of the child behavior patterns. Then, Kandel looked at the data to see patterns between drug involvement and marital/parenting status.\r\ndo drugs users (both current and former) are more presumable to be single with no children. Next, she examined the birth between drug involvement and parenting style and found â€Å"very few statistically signi ficant relationships” (p. 189). Finally, she looked for associations between drug use and the children’s behavior, finding that maternal drug use is strongly associated with problems controlling children. paygrade: Though the tables displaying the statistical analysis of the results stand the number of respondents who fall into the categories being discussed, the school textual matter itself contains none of these numbers.\r\nFor instance, nowhere in the text does the author give the number of drug using mothers. From one of the tables, I found this number to be 166 (a very atomic sample given the number of participants in the study). intervention and Conclusions: Kandel was quick to note the limitations of this study and the need for further research to learn these limitations. She also positioned this study and its findings within the good example of previous studies and remarked on the larger implications of her study. paygrade: The implications of this stud y can be secure directly to my own research project.\r\nKandel notes that â€Å" take on problems in childhood and early adolescence are among the most important precursors of adolescent drug involvement” (p. 192). Overall Assessment of woodland: This is, in general, an average clause. The conclusions came directly from the results, the methodological analysis met the demands of the research question, and the research question grew out of the literature review. However, I have more or little concerns about the discussion of parenting style (only three types of parenting are considered), the unquestioned use of pre-existent questionnaires, and the lack of acknowledgment of ethical issues.\r\n sodding(a) Reference: Adalbjarnardottir, S. & Hafsteinsson, L. G. (2001). Adolescents’ Perceived Parenting Styles and their perfume Use: Concurrent and Longitudinal Analyses. ledger of Research on Adolescence, 11 (4), 401-423. scheme: The concise abstract provides deta ils on the study, the participants, the questions that were asked, the variables, and the findings. This abstract indicates that this article is essential to my research. evaluation: The abstract is absolutely extraordinary in the amount of detail that is provided in so few words.\r\nIntroduction: This study highly-developed from previous research in which it was suggested, scarcely not proven, that interpersonal processes (such as paternal and look factors) are effective predictors of center of attention use. rating: The introduction’s impudence for the necessity of this research is convincing. Literature critique: The authors presented a detailed review of the literature on the following topics: family socialization and baccy and alcohol consumption, parenting style, and the discrimination of licit and illegitimate drugs in studies of this nature.\r\nThey noted an important concern in previous research: most studies of adolescent subject matter abuse have focused on single dimensions of parenting style (some studies focus on bear out, some on control, etc. ). In order to patch up this lapse, the authors used Lamborn’s four-fold typology of parenting style. The sign between licit and adulterous drugs is germane to this study as cultural perceptions of licit and illicit drug use are present in Icelandic culture.\r\nThe three hypotheses of this study are very clearly expressed: â€Å"adolescents from authoritative families would circulate lower levels of licit drug use,” â€Å"adolescents from neglectful families would report high levels of licit drug use,” and â€Å"adolescents from neglectful families would report higher use of illicit drugs” (pp. 405-406). Evaluation: The authors clearly point out areas in which previous research is valuable and areas in which it can be improved upon. Their analyses of introductory studies provide clear justification for their own study.\r\nThe clear development of the r esearch questions and hypotheses from the literature review is reflected in the organization of the article: the introduction and literature review are combined into one section. Methods: An initial sample of 1,293 14-year old students (all native Icelanders, all Lutheran, and all speaking Icelandic as a first language) participated in the study at base-line. 928 of these students participated in a follow-up academic session three years later. Of these students, 347 could be sort out into one of the four family types.\r\nThese 347 students form the essence of the study. The authors chose these 347 students in order to compare the results of the coincidental and longitudinal analyses. Because the authors wanted to ensure that neglectful families were represented in their study, they used inactive bear procedures (as opposed to active consent). The students alter in the self-report questionnaire during school hours. The questions asked about behind have, alcohol use, illicit drug use, parental and comrade substance use, socioeconomic status, and parenting styles.\r\nThe authors used logistic regression analyses to determine whether parenting style (as comprehend at age 14) presented a significant risk factor for substance use at the time of the baseline screening as well as three years later. The following variables were considered: gender, socioeconomic status (later considered insignificant), bullet at age 14, boozing at age 14, smoking of parents, beverage of parents, smoking of peers, drinking of peers, parenting style, day-to-day smoking at 17, serious drinking at 17, and illicit substance abuse.\r\nEvaluation: The discussion of methodology is thorough, and the study is well-designed to get along the research questions. The authors gave examples of the types of questions that were asked as well as the choices of answers. The variables are clearly described and defined, and the description of the measurement processes is clear. The authors were quick to answer any potential ethical questions that might devise: they noted that the students were not paid for the study, and they provided a rationale for their use of passive consent procedures.\r\n iodin concern I have is that the authors only considered hashish and amphetamines in their questions about illicit drug use; they did not consider other types of illicit drugs or misuse of prescription medications. Results: The authors used both descriptive data analysis as well as inferential data analysis. In their attrition analysis, the authors found that students who perceived their parents as neglectful were more potential to drop out of the study. The authors cautioned that this might have somewhat skewed the results of their study.\r\nThe authors found that parenting styles, gender, and peer smoking were indicators of smoking at age 14. Smoking at 14 and parental smoking were the sole indicators of daily smoking at 17. Parenting style and peer drinking were predictive of drinking at 14. Parenting style, peer drinking, and drinking at 14 were associated with heavy drinking at 17. Parenting style, smoking at 14/17, drinking at 14/17, and gender were associated with illicit drug use. Evaluation: The descriptive analysis clearly summarizes the participants and variables.\r\nThe statistical analyses are appropriate to the research questions and hypotheses. However, as the authors noted, there is a lack of data about 17-year old students with neglectful parents. Discussion and Conclusions: The authors detected a general relation, as expected, between parenting styles and adolescent substance use. Their results support previous research which had suggested that adolescents with authoritative parents were less likely to use substances such as tobacco, alcohol, and illicit drugs.\r\nIn some respects, the results of this study differ from previous European and American studies, a fact which led the authors to question the extent to which cultural differenc es affect adolescent drug use. The authors were careful to note and discuss three limitations of their study: the self-report measures, the method used to assess parenting style, and the attrition rate. Evaluation: One weakness of the discussion section is that the authors do not identify many slipway in which this study opens the door to emerging research. Overall Assessment of Quality:\r\nThis is a high-quality article that directly bears on the subject of my own research project. The primary strong point of this article lies in how well-organized the study was, from the pilot burner research questions to the conclusions. The authors noted the limitations, and potential weaknesses, of the study, but their accounting for these factors is satisfactory. My primary concern with the study is that the authors did not draw enough distinction between the types of illicit drug use. This is an area that I will consider in my own study.\r\n'