Assignment Description:
Write a 750-1,000 word review of a website about ADD or ADHD. You will write this review for the general public, so you might target a particular publication, such as a student or local newspaper or one of the national magazines. This will help you anticipate what your readers already know, what they value, and what criteria they accept as a basis of evaluation. Complete the following:
1. Develop a set of criteria that the general public would see as acceptable for a website about diseases and disorders (like ADHD).
2. Describe the website you have chosen, and then explain how it does (or does not) perform the criteria you established above.
3. Use at least two scholarly sources outside of class texts to augment your understanding and perspective on these facts and elements. Use the GCU library for sources. Include this research in the paper in an appropriate scholarly manner.
Prepare this assignment according to the APA guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance. Please be sure to review your LopesWrite score before submitting the draft to your instructor.
The final draft of this assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion of the assignment.
You will receive completion points for the first draft based upon the successful submission of your draft. The points are not an evaluative statement about your draft; be sure to consider all instructor comments as you revise your draft.
Please contact Assignment Samurai for help with this or any other assignment.
Email: assignmentsamurai@gmail.com
SOLUTION to First Draft of a Review Writing Assignment.
SAMPLE 1
Review of the NIMH Website on ADHD
Globally, it has been estimated that approximately 5% of children and adolescents are affected by Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) (Song et al., 2021). A similar report on ADHD by Danielson et al. (2024) indicates that by 2022, 11.4% of children aged between 3-17 years in the United States had been diagnosed with this neurodevelopmental disorder. This global prevalence underscores the need for various groups such as healthcare professionals, teachers, and parents to conduct research from different sources in an effort to understand the condition better. Nonetheless, finding reliable health information online can be extremely challenging, especially with the possibility of misinformation. Thus, this paper seeks to assess the NIMH website - as one of the sources that provides detailed explanations of ADHD symptoms, potential causes, and treatment options -based on three key criteria. The essay will argue that by meeting the criteria of authority, accuracy, and objectivity, the NIMH website is a highly credible and valuable resource for the general public seeking information on ADHD.
Authority is a critical factor in evaluating the credibility of a website. According to Grand Canyon University (2022), authority refers to how correct the website or document is and can be determined by assessing who authored the website, whether they can be contacted, and whether the author has the proper credibility to write about the topic in question. Based on this information, the NIMH website can be argued to have excelled in this criterion. As part of the National Institutes of Health, NIMH is the lead federal agency for research on matters related to mental disorders in the United States. This governmental affiliation is immediately apparent from the “.gov" domain, which instills confidence in the user about the legitimacy of the website.
The authority of the NIMH website is further reinforced by its clear attribution of content. While individual authors are not listed for each article, the site explicitly shows that the information is developed by NIMH. This institutional authorship carries significant weight given the organization’s reputation as a leading authority in mental health research. Additionally, the Evaluating Websites Tutorial video by Grand Canyon University (n.d.) posits that authority can also be evidenced when the author identifies themselves accurately by providing contact information. The website provides multiple ways to contact NIMH, including the number “1-866-615-6464” and email address “nimhinfo@nih.gov”. This further demonstrates transparency and accountability.
Accuracy is another crucial criterion for evaluating websites. It refers to the qualifications of the website or document and relates to who the publisher is, what institution has published the information, and whether they are qualified to address the topic (Grand Canyon University, 2022). Moreover, the Uniform Resource Locator (URL) on the website should be able to inform who owns the website (Grand Canyon University, n.d.). Building on this information, the NIMH website demonstrates high accuracy in its ADHD content due to various reasons. First, the publisher and owner of that website is the United States government. This is clearly shown through the URL domain which is a “.gov” thus establishing the webpage as federal.
To further ensure accuracy, the NIMH website cites reputable sources and references recent studies that are fact-checked by experts. For example, the text “PubMed: Journal Articles about Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder” is hyperlinked and leads to journals that provide verified and accurate information on ADHD. Reputable organizations and departments linked to the website to support the information include the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the U.S. Department of IDEA, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Linking these organizations to the website to support the information reaffirms that NIMH is qualified to address the topic. Nonetheless, it is also important to assess the credibility of the information.
Ayani et al. (2020) underline that while most health information websites adhere to the criteria of accuracy, privacy, and purpose, they fail to take into account the possibility of bias. This underlines the need to evaluate the NIMH website based on the criterion of objectivity. Chapter 9 of Writing with Purpose states that “objectivity refers to not only the goals and objectives of the site or document but also to whether or not it is biased (Grand Canyon University, 2022). The website’s goal to remain objective when presenting facts to the general audience is clear. For instance, the NIMH highlights multiple treatment options for ADHD without focusing on one particular approach. "This includes medication, psychotherapy, education or training, or a combination of treatments" (NIMH, n.d.). This reflects the page’s objectivity and lack of prejudice as it does not suggest that one particular approach is the only solution. Additionally, there are other statements on the page that illustrate objectivity. For example, "researchers are not sure what causes ADHD, although many studies suggest that genes play a large role. Like many other disorders, ADHD probably results from a combination of factors". By doing so, it shows NIMH is dedicated to reporting objectively based on facts and evidence.
The NIMH website on ADHD proves to be a highly credible and valuable resource for the general public seeking information on this complex disorder. Its strong authority, demonstrated by its governmental affiliation and connection to cutting-edge research, instills confidence in users. The high accuracy of its content, supported by recent data and scientific evidence, ensures that visitors receive reliable information. Finally, its clear objectivity, evident in its balanced presentation of information and lack of commercial influence, allows users to trust the impartiality of the content. For individuals seeking trustworthy information on ADHD, the NIMH website stands out as an exemplary resource that meets the critical criteria of authority, accuracy, and objectivity.
References
Ayani, S., Sadoughi, F., Jabari, R., Moulaei, K., & Ashrafi-Rizi, H. (2020). Evaluation criteria for health websites: Critical review. Frontiers in Health Informatics, 9(1), 44.
Danielson, M. L., Claussen, A. H., Bitsko, R. H., Katz, S. M., Newsome, K., Blumberg, S. J., … Ghandour, R. (2024). ADHD Prevalence Among U.S. Children and Adolescents in 2022: Diagnosis, Severity, Co-Occurring Disorders, and Treatment. Journal of Clinical Child & Adolescent Psychology, 53(3), 343–360. https://doi.org/10.1080/15374416.2024.2335625
Grand Canyon University. (n.d.). Evaluating website Tutorial [Video]. GCU media. https://lc.gcumedia.com/mediaElements/evaluating-websites-tutorial/v2.1/
Grand Canyon University (2022). Writing with purpose. (2nd ed.)
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH). (n.d.). Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/attention-deficit-hyperactivity-disorder-adhd
Song, P., Zha, M., Yang, Q., Zhang, Y., Li, X., & Rudan, I. (2021). The prevalence of adult attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: A global systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of global health, 11. https://doi.org/10.7189/jogh.11.04009