Critically analyse a website resource (400 words) | Homework Writings Help

I’m working on a Social Science question and need guidance to help me study.

Critically analyze this website resource: “Why girls can be boyish but boys can’t be girlish”

In the essay, please follow the instructions as below:

?? Give a brief summary of this article. (100 words)
??Critically analyse the content using these criteria:

1. Reviewing the Source (100 words)
   A. Author
   B. Date of Publication
   C. Edition or Revision
   D. Publisher
   E. Title of Journal
2. Critical Analysis of the Content: (200 words)
   A. Intended Audience
   B. Objective Reasoning
   C. Coverage
   D. Documentary
   E. Writing Style

Please follow the APA style.

——————————————————————————-

?? Details information about each criteria:

?? Reviewing the Source

A. Author

1. What are the author’s credentials–institutional affiliation (where he or she works), educational background, past writings, or experience? Is the article written on a topic in the author’s area of expertise? In which communities and contexts does the author have expertise?
   Does the author represent a particular set of world views?
   Do they represent specific gender, sexual, racial, political, social and/or cultural orientations
   Do they privilege some sources of authority over others?
2. Do the author have a formal role in a particular institution (e.g. a professor at Oxford)? Is the author associated with a reputable institution or organization? What are the basic values or goals of the organization or institution?
3. Have you seen the author’s name cited in other sources or bibliographies? Respected authors are cited frequently by other scholars. For this reason, always note those names that appear in many different sources.

B. Date of Publication

1. When was the source published?
2. Is the source current or out-of-date for your topic? Topic areas of continuing and rapid development, such as the sciences, demand more current information. On the other hand, topics in the humanities often require material that was written many years ago.

C. Edition or Revision

1. Is this a first edition of this publication or not? If it is a Web source, do the pages indicate revision dates?Further editions indicate a source has been revised and updated to reflect changes in knowledge, include omissions, and harmonize with its intended reader’s needs. Also, many printings or editions may indicate that the work has become a standard source in the area and is reliable.

D. Publisher

1. Note the publisher. Although the fact that the publisher is reputable does not necessarily guarantee quality, it does show that the publisher may have high regard for the source being published.

• Were there any apparent barriers to publication?
  • Was it self-published?
  • Were there outside editors or reviewers?
• Where, geographically, was it originally published, and in what language?
• In what medium?
  • Was it published online or in print? Both?
  • Is it a blog post? A YouTube video? A TV episode? An article from a print magazine?
    • What does the medium tell you about the intended audience?
    • What does the medium tell you about the purpose of the piece?

E. Title of Journal

1. Is this a scholarly or a popular journal? This distinction is important because it indicates different levels of complexity in conveying ideas. If you need help in determining the type of journal, see Distinguishing Scholarly from Non-Scholarly Periodicals. Or you may wish to check your journal title in the latest edition of Katz’s Magazines for Libraries (Olin Reference Z 6941 .K21, shelved at the reference desk) for a brief evaluative description.

?? Critical Analysis of the Content

A. Intended Audience
Is it for scholars? Is it for a general audience? What type of audience is the author addressing? Is the publication aimed at a specialized or a general audience? Is this source too elementary, too technical, too advanced, or just right for your needs?

B. Objective Reasoning

1. Why was this source created? Does it have an economic value for the author or publisher?

• Is the information covered fact, opinion, or propaganda? It is not always easy to separate fact from opinion. Facts can usually be verified; opinions, though they may be based on factual information, evolve from the interpretation of facts. Skilled writers can make you think their interpretations are facts.
• Is it an educational resource? Persuasive?
  • What (research) questions does it attempt to answer? Does it strive to be objective?
• Does it fill any other personal, professional, or societal needs?

1. Does the information appear to be valid and well-researched, or is it questionable and unsupported by evidence?Assumptions should be reasonable. Note errors or omissions.
2. Are the ideas and arguments advanced more or less in line with other works you have read on the same topic? The more radically an author departs from the views of others in the same field, the more carefully and critically you should scrutinize his or her ideas.
3. Is the author’s point of view objective and impartial? Is the language free of emotion-arousing words and bias?

C. Coverage

1. Does the work update other sources, substantiate other materials you have read, or add new information? Does it extensively or marginally cover your topic? You should explore enough sources to obtain a variety of viewpoints.
2. Is the material primary or secondary in nature?
   Primary sources are the raw material of the research process.
   Secondary sources are based on primary sources. For example, if you were researching Konrad Adenauer’s role in rebuilding West Germany after World War II, Adenauer’s own writings would be one of many primary sources available on this topic. Others might include relevant government documents and contemporary German newspaper articles. Scholars use this primary material to help generate historical interpretations–a secondary source. Books, encyclopedia articles, and scholarly journal articles about Adenauer’s role are considered secondary sources. In the sciences, journal articles and conference proceedings written by experimenters reporting the results of their research are primary documents. Choose both primary and secondary sources when you have the opportunity.

D. Documentation

• Did they cite their sources?
  • If not, do you have any other means to verify the reliability of their claims?
• Who do they cite?
  • Is the author affiliated with any of the authors they’re citing?
  • Are the cited authors part of a particular academic movement or school of thought?
• Look closely at the quotations and paraphrases from other sources:
  • Did they appropriately represent the context of their cited sources?
  • Did they ignore any important elements from their cited sources?
  • Are they cherry-picking facts to support their own arguments?
  • Did they appropriately cite ideas that were not their own?

E. Writing Style

Is the publication organized logically? Are the main points clearly presented? Do you find the text easy to read, or is it stilted or choppy? Is the author’s argument repetitive?

Additional informations related to the topic:
Chitrakorn, K. (2019) Men Are Changing. Are Brands Keeping Up? Retrieved from https://www.businessoffashion.com/articles/intelligence/men-are-changing-are-brands-keeping-up.

DiDonato, L., & Strough, J. (2013). Do college students’ gender-typed attitudes about occupations predict their real world decisions? Sex Roles, 68, 536-549. doi:10.1007/s11199-013-0275-2.

England, P. (2010) The Gender Revolution: Uneven and Stalled. Gender and Society. 24. 149-166. 10.2307/27809263.