Annotated Bibliography: Sarah Case
For your Signature Assignment for this course, you will submit a written response to a case study, incorporating at least three scholarly sources including your textbook.
This week, you will prepare for the Signature Assignment by creating an annotated bibliography.
1. Review the Signature Assignment instructions. The Signature Assignment is due in Week 8.
2. Watch the Case StudyLinks to an external site.
3. Read details about the case study below.
4. Locate four (4) scholarly resources to be used as you complete the Signature Assignment.
For each source:
• List the source in APA Style. The references should be organized alphabetically by the author on the References list.
• Follow the source with a brief annotation that summarizes the source information (approximately 3–5 sentences). You may quote briefly from the source, but do not copy and paste from the abstract. Include internal citations as needed
• In 1 or 2 sentences, explain and evaluate the source’s relevance and significance to your thesis. Does the information from this source support or discredit your thesis?
• Use an academic tone and style.
Case Study Details (read after viewing the case study video):
Neuroscience: Sarah’s difficulties in language acquisition, social communication, and attention, alongside abnormalities in brain development, particularly in areas associated with language processing, attention, and emotional regulation, suggest underlying neurobiological factors. The decreased activity in the prefrontal cortex points to deficits in executive functioning and cognitive control. These findings highlight the intricate interplay between brain regions and their effect on cognitive and behavioral functioning.
Consciousness and Cognitive Functioning: Sarah’s level of consciousness appears intact, but her cognitive abilities are significantly affected. Her awareness may be compromised in social contexts due to difficulties in social communication. Attentional deficits and executive dysfunction likely contribute to her challenges in maintaining focus
and expressing thoughts verbally. These factors collectively influence her level of consciousness and cognitive processing.
Thinking and Learning: Sarah’s cognitive processes are impaired, particularly in abstract thinking, problem-solving, and academic performance. These challenges align with the characteristics of neurodevelopmental disorders like autism spectrum disorder (ASD), affecting her ability to navigate academic tasks and everyday problem-solving situations effectively.
Development and Memory: Sarah’s developmental milestones are delayed, and it’s evident in her struggles with language acquisition and social communication skills since early childhood. Her memory processes may also be affected with weaknesses in encoding, storage, and retrieval of information. However, she may possess strengths in certain mnemonic abilities, which could be explored further to support her learning and development.
Psychological Disorders: Based on Sarah’s presentation and assessments, she meets the criteria for autism spectrum disorder (ASD). This diagnosis encompasses her difficulties in social communication, restricted interests, and repetitive behaviors. The effects of ASD on Sarah’s psychological well-being underscores the importance of early intervention and comprehensive support to address her complex needs effectively.
Motivation and Emotion: Sarah’s motivation levels appear low, possibly influenced by her difficulties in social interaction and academic performance. Additionally, her challenges with emotional regulation contribute to her withdrawn behavior and overall adjustment. Understanding these factors is crucial in developing tailored interventions to enhance her motivation and emotional well-being.
Visit these sources to learn more about the annotated bibliography:
• Annotated Bibliography (This is a link to the library.)
• Annotated Bibliography TemplateDownload Annotated Bibliography Template
Visit the Writing Resources link under the Student Resources Tab to learn more about annotated bibliographies.
PSYC_160_OL – Annotated Bibliography
PSYC_160_OL – Annotated Bibliography
Criteria Ratings
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAnnotated Bibliography
20 to >17.33 ptsExceeds ExpectationsSources are highly relevant to the topic and add greatly to research potential. Few, if any, additional sources are needed. All sources are from credible, scholarly, peer- reviewed materials. All main/critical points of the research study are included for each annotation. Annotations succinctly and comprehensively describe the source material.
17.33 to >15.8 ptsMeets ExpectationsSome sources are relevant to the topic. May require additional sources. Most sources are from credible, scholarly, peer-reviewed materials. Main/critical points of the research study are included but may be lacking in detail for each annotation. Most annotations are succinct and generally describe the source material.
15.8 to >11.8 ptsApproaches ExpectationsFew sources are relevant to the topic. Requires additional sources. Some sources are from credible, scholarly, peer-reviewed materials. Main/critical points of the research study are lacking in detail for each annotation. Some annotations are succinct and generally describe the source material.
11.8 to >0 ptsNot Meeting ExpectationsSources are not relevant to the topic. Extensive additional research is needed. Sources lack credibility. Main/critical points of the research study are absent or significantly lacking in detail for each annotation and/or some annotations may be missing.
PSYC_160_OL – Annotated Bibliography
Criteria Ratings
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeReview/ Critique of Scholarly Research
20 to >17.33 ptsExceeds ExpectationsFully answers all questions posed and demonstrates a sophisticated ability to critically think about and evaluate scholarly research. Provides substantial, relevant, and clear explanations that are insightful and well-supported.
17.33 to >15.8 ptsMeets ExpectationsAnswers all questions posed and demonstrates ability to critically think about and evaluate scholarly research. Provides explanations that are well-supported.
15.8 to >11.8 ptsApproaches ExpectationsAnswers most questions posed and demonstrates some ability to critically think about and evaluate scholarly research.
11.8 to >0 ptsNot Meeting ExpectationsMost questions posed are not answered. Work does not demonstrate the student’s ability to critically think about and evaluate scholarly research.
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeAPA Style
5 to >4.5 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe assignment accurately and consistently follows APA Style. Meets length and formatting requirements of the assignment.
4.5 to >3.95 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe assignment consistently follows current APA Style with only isolated and inconsistent mistakes. Mostly meets length and formatting requirements of the assignment.
3.95 to >2.95 ptsApproaches ExpectationsThe assignment has numerous errors in APA Style. Reflects incomplete knowledge of APA Style. May not meet length and formatting requirements of the assignment.
2.95 to >0 ptsNot Meeting ExpectationsThe assignment has significant errors in APA Style. Does not meet length and formatting requirements of the assignment.
PSYC_160_OL – Annotated Bibliography
Criteria Ratings
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting Mechanics
5 to >4.5 ptsExceeds ExpectationsThe writing demonstrates sophisticated clarity and conciseness and is extremely well organized. Punctuation, spelling, and capitalization are all correct with minimal to no errors.
4.5 to >3.95 ptsMeets ExpectationsThe writing is clear, concise, and well organized. May contain a few punctuation, spelling, or capitalization errors.
3.95 to >2.95 ptsApproaches ExpectationsWriting lacks clarity, conciseness, or organization. Several errors in punctuation, spelling, and capitalization detract from the readability of the paper.
2.95 to >0 ptsNot Meeting ExpectationsThe writing is unfocused and poorly organized. Many errors in punctuation, spelling, and capitalization detract from the readability of the paper.
Total Points: 50
Annotated Bibliography
Your Name Here
University Name
Course Number: Course Name
Instructor’s Name
Due Date
2
Below are sample entries for an Annotated Bibliography. A bibliography is a list of sources that
are relevant to your research, and an annotation is a short summary (150-200 words) describing
the source. Sometimes, you may be asked to evaluate the source as well as summarize it. After
all your items are listed, rearrange the items so the final version is in alphabetical order. Make
sure to save this and remove all directions for formatting.
The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.) states the
following formatting rules:
• The text and the reference list should be double-spaced.
• Numbering starts on the title page, at the top right of the page.
• There should be 1 inch (2.54 cm) margins all around (top, bottom, left, and right) on each
page.
• Use Times Roman font, or a similar serif font.
• Reference list entries must have a hanging indent
• Each annotation should be a new paragraph below its reference entry. Indent the entire
annotation 0.5 in. from the left margin.
3
Annotated Bibliography
American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological
Association (7th ed.). https://doi.org/10.1037/0000165-000
Highlight this passage and replace it with your annotation. In a descriptive annotation,
you merely describe what the book, web page, or article is about. In a critical
bibliography, you provide a descriptive annotation, and you evaluate the success or
reliability of the book, web page, or article. You might also compare or contrast the
source with another source on the topic.
Barthelemy, J., & Geyer, D. (2005). An empirical investigation of IT outsourcing versus
outsourcing in France and Germany. Information & Management, 42, 533-542.
-
Describe the intervention (what is it meant to impact) and its target population and format for delivery,
-
Summarize at least 2 studies that evaluated the intervention with an experimental design that evaluates the intervention quantitatively,
-
For each study: Describe the study design population type demographic information and sample size,
-
For each study: What outcome measures were used to evaluate the success or impact of the intervention citing and interpreting relevant statistics,
-
Investigate and describe how you would implement this intervention in a community setting (involvement, fidelity, training, cost, clinician difficulties, co-occurring disorders),