Rhetorical Analysis of 5 Scholarly Sources FINAL DRAFT by GAVIN SODERBERG

Audience:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:41:12 UTC

The audience of this paper are most likely parents, caregivers, or cognitive scientists researching the effects of screens on children. We can see the author specifying "caregivers" often, stating "It is imperative to inform caregivers of children younger than 3..." Although this paper isn't as involved in providing solutions to their argued problem, their paper provides a new perspective on affects screens have on toddlers. Additionally, the paper provides useful insight on the cognitive behaviors of toddlers for researchers.

Audience:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:48:35 UTC

The audience of this article was most likely anyone who is concerned about whether adolescents are being negatively impacted by widespread use of screens. Although the article doesn't reference parents specifically, it can provide a perspective that would be most useful for parents to know and to respond to.

Audience:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:49:10 UTC

The audience of this review is most likely intended to be parents or future parents who are looking for information on how to handle technology with them, and what the effects might be, good or bad. This is the most likely audience because the paper provides strategies for parents to use. Additionally, authors specifically mention parents frequently in the article, stating in the abstract that "Setting boundaries, utilizing parental controls, and demonstrating good screen behavior are all techniques that parents may use..." The paper is also most relevant to parents, seeing as their children could be at risk for being negatively affected by technology.

Audience:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:49:16 UTC

The audience for this article are most likely parents, future parents, caregivers/providers, and early years professionals. The latter two are explicitly stated in the abstract of the article, stating "Knowing how young children learn and develop informs best practice for health care providers and early years professionals," but the article will naturally appeal to parents wanting to learn how to handle the changing entertainment environment in a post-COVID world. The article also is more involved in giving solutions and alternatives to the audience, which is especially applicable to parents.

Audience:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:49:22 UTC

The study's intended audience is most likely parents, behavioral analysts, and scholarly cognitive researchers. The study provides plenty of useful data to parents, but would most likely appeal to people looking to study the cognitive effects that screen time has on children. Additionally, this study looks at the actual aspects of cognitive health associated with the affects of screen time, which would interest cognitive researchers.

Purpose:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:50:18 UTC

The purpose of this article is to review the possibility that the content, rather than the quantity, is affecting children negatively. This is explicitly stated in the abstract, "The objective of this review is...to understand the correlates and demographic factors determining exposure to screens." The paper also brings light to the aspects of cognitional function that are affected. The author is wanting to deliver a new perspective on this topic, as well as review and make connections with the studies they researched.

Purpose:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:50:26 UTC

The purpose of this article is to objectively study and review how screen time affects children. This is seen through how screen time might be good, or why excessive screen time might be bad. This purpose is stated in the abstract, stating "This study examines the effects of screen time on many developmental domains and covers management and limitation techniques for kids' screen usage." Additionally, the authors want to bring awareness to the studies and their conclusions.

Purpose:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:50:32 UTC

The purpose of this article is to shine light on the ever-changing entertainment field that is screens in a post-COVID world. The author's purpose is most likely to provide a review on numerous studies and sources which will benefit parents and caregivers. This purpose is highlighted in the abstract, where the author states "This update of a 2017 CPS statement re-examines the potential benefits and risks of screen media in children younger than 5 years, with focus on developmental, psychosocial, and physical health." The author also wants to provide solutions to parents who need them.

Purpose:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:50:38 UTC

The purpose of this study is to look at the cognitive effects that screen time has on 9-10 year old children, such as depression, anxiety, and such. The study informs the audience on whether this effect is negative or not, and to what extent. The study explores the relationship between different effects that screen time brings in children, stating in the abstract that "This study examines the effects of screen time on many developmental domains and covers management and limitation techniques for kids' screen usage." The study sheds light on the more specific aspects of mental health that screens can impact.

Purpose:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:50:44 UTC

The author's purpose was to settle a sort of panic that had spread throughout social media. The author wanted to give the audience a proper view of the situation for what it really was, and to give a logical argument based on it, and whether or not screens were as big a threat as it was being made out to be. Specifically, the article aims to answer questions such as "what does anxiety about social media and digital screen-use tell us about social harm?" or "what does it tell us about the relationship between individuals and society?"

Bias:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:51:17 UTC

The author of this article comes across as very unbiased, based on the overall scientific and analytical tone of the paper. The author also uses plenty of sources to back their claims, which bring out the facts of the topic. Additionally, the paper claims that there is no conflict of interest associated with the article.

Bias:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:51:22 UTC

The authors of this paper seem unbiased. The paper claims there is no conflict of interest, stating that "The authors have declared that no competing interests exist." Additionally, the writers don't use any statements that come across as opinionated or emotion-driven. The authors also look at both views of the argument objectively, which eliminates bias.

Bias:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:51:27 UTC

The author shows no bias, and seems to be gathering conclusions based solely on the data collected, rather than their opinion or belief. The author shows no bias in writing either, refraining from using opinion statements or seeming non-objective about facts presented.

Bias:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:51:33 UTC

The author seems to be unbiased, using an extensive number of sources to provide a solid base to their claims, as well as to show the facts and to stray away from any opinion or emotion-driven arguments. Although the author is less involved in exploring the opposite side of the argument, which may slightly impact their bias.

Bias:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:51:39 UTC

There seemed to be little bias in this article. The author was objectively looking at different situations from different viewpoints, which they used to make a logical conclusion to their argument.

Ethos or "Credibility:"

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:52:37 UTC

The author comes across as very credible, using lots of sources to solidify their arguments and claims. Sources are the backbone for paper credibility, and it's important that the author had used them consistently throughout. Additionally, the ideas of the paper are presented clearly, and credibly.

Ethos or "Credibility:"

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:53:08 UTC

The authors of this paper seem very credible. Their sources list is extensive, and they use these sources to back every claim they make. The paper is also organized and structured in a way that gets their point across efficiently, increasing their credibility.

Ethos or "Credibility:"

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:53:12 UTC

The author of this article seems very credible, having numerous references and studies to back their claims. Consistent use of sources throughout the article establishes a strong credibility. Additionally, the writer's organizational and lack of opinionated or biased claims, solidifies their credibility further.

Ethos or "Credibility:"

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:53:16 UTC

The author comes across as credible, both in their writing and in their research. The research for this study is thorough, and the author provides many references which they use consistently throughout the paper. Additionally, the language is professional and is kept purely informative, which solidifies the ethos of this study.

Ethos or "Credibility:"

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:53:20 UTC

The ethos of the article seemed on-point, and the author seemed to be confident in explaining their argument. The clear flow of ideas and the effective impact of the claims also gave the author more credibility, as did the sources.

Pathos or "Emotion:"

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:54:04 UTC

The paper evokes emotion in the target audience because parents want to know whether or not to change the content their kid is consuming. Parents want what's best for their children which is a driving emotional force.

Pathos or "Emotion:"

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:54:09 UTC

The argument that the authors are trying to make in this paper is emotionally appealing to their audience because parents want their children to grow up healthy. Parents want what's best for their children, and this article gives them helpful information related to that.

Pathos or "Emotion:"

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:54:13 UTC

The emotional impact that this article has on its audience is significant. Not only do parents want to know how their child's health may be in danger, but parents also want solutions to this issue, solutions that they can put into action. These emotions are what each argument and claim holds in this article.

Pathos or "Emotion:"

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:54:17 UTC

The pathos of this study pertains to its outcomes and conclusions, which concern parents and researchers. Parents emotionally connect with this study because they want to keep their children from developing mental health issues, and researchers depend on the information for their own research.

Pathos or "Emotion:"

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:54:22 UTC

The article is emotionally appealing to most audiences because the whole article is about public outcry and whether it was warranted. The controversy sparked much emotional conflict and asked a question that was concerning to many people, which was the pathos of the article.

Logos or "Logic:"

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:56:21 UTC

The paper is organized in a very clear and straightforward way. The article also develops ideas and flows them neatly, making sure that the audience is understanding, but also letting the audience think. The sources of the paper are also helpful for developing its logos.

Logos or "Logic:"

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:56:24 UTC

The ideas of this paper are given to the reader efficiently and with a logical flow. The way that the paper is organized is logical, as well as the claims and information itself. The use of sources and studies to back claims made by the authors also contributes to the logos of the paper.

Logos or "Logic:"

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:56:28 UTC

The author writes in a way in which ideas flow naturally, and their points are driven home clearly. The article is well organized and follows a clear logic that can be understood at its simplest level. Sources the author used to solidify their claims also contribute to the logos of the article, since a solid argument is illogical without proper facts.

Logos or "Logic:"

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:56:33 UTC

The article follows a logical flow of ideas, and clearly states points through the use of writing and visual aids, such as graphs and charts. The writer introduces ideas, explains the purpose, explains the study, and explains the results in a clear and effective way.

Logos or "Logic:"

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:56:37 UTC

The author seems to generate a logical flow of ideas, and draws claims clearly, getting them across to the audience effectively. The author explains the situation generally, in-depth, then concludes in a way that makes sense to the audience. The article also uses sources for claims which establish a logical base for their arguments.

Citation:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:58:27 UTC

Redman, Peter (2021). Too much, too young? Social media, moral panics and young people’s mental health. In: Perriam, Jessamy and Carter, Simon eds. Understanding Digital Societies. London: Sage/The Open University, pp. 387–422.

Citation:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:58:39 UTC

Guellai, Bahia, et al. "Effects of screen exposure on young children’s cognitive development: A review." Frontiers in Psychology 13 (2022): 923370.

Citation:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:58:43 UTC

Muppalla, Sudheer Kumar, et al. "Effects of excessive screen time on child development: an updated review and strategies for management." Cureus 15.6 (2023).

Citation:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:58:48 UTC

Ponti, Michelle. "Screen time and preschool children: Promoting health and development in a digital world." Paediatrics & Child Health 28.3 (2023): 184-192.

Citation:

0508168 — 2024-10-26 02:58:53 UTC

Paulich, Katie N., et al. "Screen time and early adolescent mental health, academic, and social outcomes in 9-and 10-year old children: Utilizing the Adolescent Brain Cognitive