 | Peer review
Complete your peer review exercise below, providing as much constructive criticism as possible. The more detailed suggestions you provide, the more useful it will be to your classmate. Make sure you consider each of the following aspects: LeadGuiding questions:
ContentGuiding questions:
Tone and BalanceGuiding questions:
Sources and ReferencesGuiding questions:
OrganizationGuiding questions:
Images and MediaGuiding questions: If your peer added images or media
For New Articles OnlyIf the draft you're reviewing is for a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.
Overall impressionsGuiding questions:
Examples of good feedbackA good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.
Additional Resources |
- Whose work are you reviewing?
@Bmallery99
- Link to draft you're reviewing
- User:Bmallery99/Developmental Psychology
- Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
- Developmental psychology
Hi Bri! Here's my peer review for you. I did not see anything in your sandbox, so I'm going to review the entire Wikipedia article and give some areas I think you can improve on.
Content
- Some of the content and sources are outdated and could be updated with more updated information. For example, the source of the fuzzy-trace theory is sourced from 1998. It may be valuable to explore more updated sources related to children's memory development and see if the fuzzy-trace theory is the most relevant and updated theory. The Stability vs change section states a message that it needs to be improved with more reliable sources. The section itself is also very general and limited compared to the other sections within the article. It may be an area you can expand upon and provide recent research.
- From reading the language and infancy section, citations are needed in those areas. Additionally, I think other theories and research could be added especially in the section related to infancy language development. Theories regarding the importance of babbling in language development could be added
Source and References
- Overall, various areas have content that is supported by sources that are more than 10 years old. So, it would be valuable to examine the sources and find more relevant sources that describe recent perspectives on those topics.
- Some links to the sources do not work or are unable to be accessed such as the link for the study related to the impact of fathers on their child's development (128). Some citations, specifically in the Attachment Theory section, need pages for the citations which you could update and provide.
- The article could benefit from sources and perspectives of other cultures around the world. The theories and research are highly focused on the Western perspective. For example, parenting styles may vary across cultures or they may not. It would be beneficial to highlight the possibility of these theories being consistent across various cultures.
Organization
- The grammar can be improved in various sections such as in the Stages of Psychosocial and stages based on the model of hierarchical complexity. There are issues with incomplete sentences, run-on sentences, and punctuation. Specifically, in the Constructivism and Evolutionary developmental psychology sections, it can be difficult to follow the flow of the sentences. The sections are confusing, and the long-winded, confusing sentences could be simplified to be easier to understand.
Overall
- The article can definitely benefit from improvements in grammar, reducing confusing sections, and citations. The article needs more up-to-date sources and more diverse perspectives in the research. If you look in the Talk section, you can see other areas editors are suggesting to look into such as including a research study about language development in deaf children in Nicaragua and including IQ tests in discussing intelligence.
| Peer review
Complete your peer review exercise below, providing as much constructive criticism as possible. The more detailed suggestions you provide, the more useful it will be to your classmate. Make sure you consider each of the following aspects: LeadGuiding questions:
ContentGuiding questions:
Tone and BalanceGuiding questions:
Sources and ReferencesGuiding questions:
OrganizationGuiding questions:
Images and MediaGuiding questions: If your peer added images or media
For New Articles OnlyIf the draft you're reviewing is for a new article, consider the following in addition to the above.
Overall impressionsGuiding questions:
Examples of good feedbackA good article evaluation can take a number of forms. The most essential things are to clearly identify the biggest shortcomings, and provide specific guidance on how the article can be improved.
Additional Resources |
- Whose work are you reviewing?
@Bmallery99
- Link to draft you're reviewing
- User:Bmallery99/Developmental Psychology
- Link to the current version of the article (if it exists)
- Developmental psychology
Hi Bri! Here's my peer review for you. I did not see anything in your sandbox, so I'm going to review the entire Wikipedia article and give some areas I think you can improve on.
Content
- Some of the content and sources are outdated and could be updated with more updated information. For example, the source of the fuzzy-trace theory is sourced from 1998. It may be valuable to explore more updated sources related to children's memory development and see if the fuzzy-trace theory is the most relevant and updated theory. The Stability vs change section states a message that it needs to be improved with more reliable sources. The section itself is also very general and limited compared to the other sections within the article. It may be an area you can expand upon and provide recent research.
- From reading the language and infancy section, citations are needed in those areas. Additionally, I think other theories and research could be added especially in the section related to infancy language development. Theories regarding the importance of babbling in language development could be added
Source and References
- Overall, various areas have content that is supported by sources that are more than 10 years old. So, it would be valuable to examine the sources and find more relevant sources that describe recent perspectives on those topics.
- Some links to the sources do not work or are unable to be accessed such as the link for the study related to the impact of fathers on their child's development (128). Some citations, specifically in the Attachment Theory section, need pages for the citations which you could update and provide.
- The article could benefit from sources and perspectives of other cultures around the world. The theories and research are highly focused on the Western perspective. For example, parenting styles may vary across cultures or they may not. It would be beneficial to highlight the possibility of these theories being consistent across various cultures.
Organization
- The grammar can be improved in various sections such as in the Stages of Psychosocial and stages based on the model of hierarchical complexity. There are issues with incomplete sentences, run-on sentences, and punctuation. Specifically, in the Constructivism and Evolutionary developmental psychology sections, it can be difficult to follow the flow of the sentences. The sections are confusing, and the long-winded, confusing sentences could be simplified to be easier to understand.
Overall
- The article can definitely benefit from improvements in grammar, reducing confusing sections, and citations. The article needs more up-to-date sources and more diverse perspectives in the research. If you look in the Talk section, you can see other areas editors are suggesting to look into such as including a research study about language development in deaf children in Nicaragua and including IQ tests in discussing intelligence.