of 11 View as TextDownload Automatic Zoom                     Actual Size       

of 11
View as TextDownload
Automatic Zoom                     Actual Size                     Page Fit                     Page Width                                          50%                     75%                     100%                     125%                     150%                     200%                     300%                     400%                   
Page 1 of 11
The Applied Ethics Academic
Article Review
Important Assignment Parameters
✨✨✨Attention: The paper content requirements begin on page 3. If those content requirements are not met,
the paper will earn no credit. ✨✨✨
This is a 625-to-750-word paper (approximately 2.5-3 pages) written about a recent peer-reviewed academic
research article (published in 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, or 2024) of your choice on applied ethics. Papers
must be a minimum of 625 words and a maximum of 750 words. Papers exceeding 750 words must not do so
noticeably, meaning that the length does not exceed 3 pages with standard text size and formatting (i.e. 12
point, double spaced). The assignment has the following aims:
· To show how the ideas and theories discussed in class are also discussed in professional publications;
· To emulate how a professional might write a review of an academic book or evaluation of an
academic article;
· To initiate the very start of the research process;
· To improve writing by forcing any errors to surface through shorter and succinct writing
The academic article can be found through any means, but it must conform to the following parameters:
· Published in 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, or 2024
· No more than 3 authors
· Published in a peer-reviewed academic journal:
o To determine if a journal publishes peer-reviewed articles, you must conduct what I call an
“academic background check” to find the journal’s website and look for the words “peer
review” as explicit evidence. Often, this evidence will be found on a webpage or document
called variously “Instructions for Authors,” “Author Guidelines,” or “Submission Guidelines”
accessible through the journal’s website. You specifically cannot write about:
 a book review
 book chapter
 newspaper article
 magazine article
 an article published in an academic journal publishing only the work of
undergraduate or graduate students.
· On a topic in applied ethics that discusses a moral question or issue
o Applied ethics refers to the application of the ethical theories to moral issues: the “ethics of”
a given topic (for example, the “ethics of” zoos), a given topic’s “ethics” (for example, “zoo
ethics”), or specific applications of ethics (for example, ethics of keeping elephants in zoos).
You specifically cannot write about:
 an article written only about an ethical theory (for example, what is the correct way
to understand utilitarianism)
 an article written about a specific philosopher, text, or a response or reply to
another article
Page 1 of 11
Page 2 of 11
 scientific articles written according to the scientific method typically do not make
moral points, making most of them unsuitable for this assignment, but there are
exceptions.
Grading Policy
· The paper will be graded “like a philosophy paper” in terms of the quality of the content and ideas.
· The paper will also be graded “like an English paper” in terms of the quality of the writing.
· To earn minimal credit, the paper must meet the minimal expectations of the assignment, it
must:
a. Review a peer-reviewed academic article published in an academic journal
b. Have exactly 5 paragraphs with the exact content expected in each paragraph
c. Be at least 625 words in length and not noticeably over 750 words
· 🏆 The most successful papers will include more specific information in each paragraph, adequately
contextualize and define issues and concepts, elaborate on points, and fully develop ideas. Less
successful papers will be written in a vague and superficial way.
✨No Credit Papers✨
· A paper earns no credit if reviews something other than a peer-reviewed academic article
published in an academic journal, or if it reviews any of the following:
 a book review
 book chapter
 newspaper article
 magazine article
 an article published in an academic journal publishing only the work of
undergraduate or graduate students.
· A paper earns no credit if it violates Blinn’s academic integrity policy in the syllabus.
· A paper earns no credit if it does not follow directions and disregards the prompt.
✨✨✨ Discussion 2 is preparation to write the paper and screens articles for suitability—primarily for whether
the article is peer-reviewed, but also for suitability of topic. This should be completed well in advance of the
paper to determine suitability. ✨✨✨
Style Requirements
· Each paragraph should be 125–150 words
· Double-spaced, 12 pt. Times New Roman, 1” margins
· Write in academic style and use formal, elevated language appropriate for college writing
· Use more precise, lucid language: describes, believes, argues, suggests, etc.
· Write in the present tense
· Portray the author as doing the actions, not “the article”
· Reference only the article under review; outside sources are not allowed
· Quotes should not be used
· Avoid this specific sentence construction: “In Thomas White’s article, he writes . . .;” Instead, write
this: “In his article, Thomas White writes . . .”
· Use elevated, specific language. Rather than “talks about,” use “argues,” “claims,” “suggests,”
“implies,” “asserts,” etc.
Page 2 of 11
Content Requirements
Title
The citation of the article functions as the title of the paper and conforms to AMA (American Medical
Association) style:
Author Last Name Author First Initials. Title of article. Title of Journal.
Year;VolumeNumber(IssueNumber):Page-range. DOI link
· DOI stands for Digital Object Identifier. This functions as the article’s unique serial number. You must
use the direct link to the DOI. If no DOI is available, you will need to link to the article’s digital
“home” on the journal’s website. Do not use the permalinks from the library.
· Example: White TI. Dolphins, captivity, and SeaWorld: the misuse of science. Business and Society
Review. 2017;122(1):119–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/basr.12112
The entire heading for the paper should look like this and be offset in bold to distinguish it from the rest of
the paper:
White TI. Dolphins, captivity, and SeaWorld: the misuse of science. Business and Society Review.
2017;122(1):119–136. https://doi.org/10.1111/basr.12112
Reviewed by Steve Dezort, instructor at Blinn College
Paragraph 1: Structure and Scope (approximately 125–150 words)
· Present a synopsis of the article’s context, research question, thesis, and structure
· The first three sentences need to 1) Indicate the issue that the article is addressing, 2) Indicate the
author’s research question, in the form of a statement (E.g., “In this article, Thomas White
questions . . .”), 3) Indicate the author’s answer to the research question, the thesis (E.g., “He argues
that . . .”).
· The remainder of the paragraph should describe article’s structure, organization, and sections,
referencing the content of all of the sections in sequence: First, the author . . . Next, . . . Then, . . .
Finally, . . .
· The content should be specific, not what the author is doing, but what the author is questioning,
describing, explaining, arguing, etc.
· Refer to the author by both their first and last names at first mention, and by last name only at
subsequent mentions.
· Do not reference the title of the article or the titles of the author. For example, do not refer to the
author as Doctor (Dr.), Professor (Prof.), or Mister (Mr.).
Paragraph 2: People, Perspective, and Point (approximately 125–150
words)
· Present a discussion of the article’s authorship: who wrote the article and why did they wrote it
· You will have to do an “academic background check” to find out the author’s discipline and area of
specialization. This “academic background check” will typically lead to a university’s website. Do not
reference this as an outside source. It is not plagiarism.
Page 3 of 11
· Describe the perspective from which the author writes the article by mentioning the author’s
discipline (determined by their degree: a philosopher has a Ph.D. in philosophy, a biologist has a
Ph.D. in biology), and the author’s research specialization within that discipline (a philosopher might
specialize in ethics, a biologist might specialize in botany). You only look at the author’s degrees
“behind the scenes” to determine their discipline, but do not mention these degrees in your paper.
· You should use the same pronouns that the author uses in their self-description.
· Describe the contribution that the author is seeking to make to their research specialization. This is
what the author claims they are seeking to contribute. For example, if your author has a Ph.D. in
bioethics yet wrote an article about business ethics, you need to discuss the significance of that
contribution.
· Do not mention the colleges and universities (“academic affiliations”) that the author either
attended or now works should never be mentioned. If the author is not a professor or academic,
then their profession can be mentioned, as that is unusual and interesting.
Paragraph 3: Thesis and Argument (approximately 125–150 words)
· Present the primary argument of the article, the reasons the author gives in support of their thesis
· This paragraph elaborates on the first 3 sentences of paragraph 1 and therefore must match that
content.
· Describe the author’s argument in the article.
· Summarize their main point (thesis) and sketch their main argument in support of that thesis.
· Explain the author’s reasons for asserting their thesis. The paragraph must focus on what the author
is arguing, rather than what the author is doing. “Doing” is not the same as arguing, and arguing
means giving specific reasons.
Paragraph 4: Limitation (approximately 125–150 words)
· Present a critical discussion of one limitation of the article that you identify
· Discuss just one point of limitation in this paragraph that you identify. Possibilities include:
o What would readers like to know more about?
o What does the author leaves out?
o What is unconvincing about the author’s argument?
· Present the criticisms as “Someone might be interested to know more about …” or “One aspect of
the issue that readers would like to know more about is …”
· Discuss an example of the criticism
· Explain the significance of the criticism: Why is the criticism important? Why does it matter?
Paragraph 5: Usefulness (approximately 125–150 words)
· Present a critical discussion of one strength of the article that you identify
· Discuss just one point of usefulness in this paragraph that you identify. Possibilities include:
o What is done well in article?
o What is interesting about the article?
o What is convincing about the author’s argument?
· Discuss an example of the criticism
· Explain the significance of the criticism: Why is the criticism important? Why does it matter?
· Paragraph 5 is not a conclusion. The conclusion is the last sentence, so end on a positive note with a
sentence on why the article is worth reading and recommended for reading.
· Do not write this paragraph as a conclusion paragraph as you might for an English class
Page 4 of 11
Sample Papers
✨It is plagiarism if you copy anything from these sample papers either in whole or in part.✨
Lee C, Kahle L. The linguistics of social media: communication of emotions and values in
sport. Sport Market Quarterly. 2016;25(4):201–211.
https://fitpublishing.com/articles/linguistics-social-media-communication-emotions-
and-values-sport
Reviewed by John Locke, undergraduate at Blinn College
Values in sports are communicated through social media and reflected in sport marketing.
This raises the question of how values and emotions influence sport marketing on social media,
and the additional question of how sport communication is used to recognize fanbase popularity.
Christopher Lee and Lynn Kahle argue that effective communication on tweets reflects the
values in sport communication and managers should realize their role in consistent language
when managing a social media account for fan support. Lee and Kahle first discuss the
attractiveness of products in relation to values. Next, Lee and Kahle present evidence on
comparing the linguistics of four MLB Baseball Teams by tweeting their values during a
significant moment in the match. They subsequently proceed to the study of four sport apparel
companies to assess how they communicate their values and emotions through social media
when not having a minute-to-minute variation. Lee and Kahle conclude a framework to
understand the values and sports in order to reveal a new lens, implies sport markets seek to
emphasize values and a lifestyle to communicate their desired message to the fans.
Lee and Kahle are marketing scholars. Lee’s research interests are consumer behavior,
framing, linguistics, and marketing communication, and Kahle’s research interests are
Page 6 of 11
sustainability, social values, and marketing communication. They both argue that marketing can
use social media to convey values. They developed a List of Values (LOV) to specify how
tweets are evaluated. The values consist of belonging, excitement, warm relationships, self-
fulfillment, peer respect, fun and enjoyment in life, security, self-respect, a sense of belonging,
and accomplishment.
Lee and Kahle present their study on the values and emotions of apparel companies to
understand the influence of sports marketing. The study of the four largest apparel companies
(Nike, Adidas, Under Armour, and Reebok) and their rhetorical tactics utilizing social media
helps understand how values are analyzed. Kahle’s LOV and LIWC are used in the articulation
of the values and emotions of each apparel company. An example is that Under Armour invests
in popular self-validating and fulfillment tweets stated in the popular slogan “Protect This
House.” This encourages consumers to follow their Twitter account (p. 207). Under Armour
promotes the most positive and emotional brand overall within the studied arenas which assists
in promoting an increased connection with consumers. On the contrary, Nike is the least positive
sport apparel brand overall, directing their tweets toward the sense of accomplishment with
phrases like, “Just Do It” and “Find your Greatness.” The authors argue that the relationship to
values and emotions represented in sport communication is a revealing combination independent
of other sport apparels in the study.
One aspect that Lee and Kahle left out of the article is the significance of the fanbase, and
how the fanbase perceives values and emotions. Put differently, one aspect of the issue that
readers would like to become aware of is why Lee and Kahle did not analyze the values and
emotions of the tweets of the consumers or fans. Lee and Kahle observe the tweets of the
producers (i.e., the companies) and judge how they appeal to the society but could have also
Page 7 of 11
evaluated how consumers react to the tweets to understand collectively and as a sport market,
fulfilling how values are expressed through communication in sport marketing. Another example
is Under Armour, which combines respect and emotional positivity into one category, but the
issue is how those positive emotions affect their followers who support their sport market.
Another interesting aspect of the study is Kahle’s creation of the List of Values to
compare different organizations and what those values are. It explains how focusing on business
expansion is tantamount for producing senses of accomplishment and pleasure and portraying
fun and enjoyment. Nike is the highest business company because it has the highest sense of
accomplishment in their tweets. Conversely, Adidas produce the volume of pleasure business
inducing tweets to convey a sense of enjoyment and fun. One reason Adidas expresses fun and
enjoyment is because their clothing lines present a sense of artistic awe to consumers examining
the product and how it brings excitement in the store with interesting slogans. This article is
worth reading since Lee and Kahle are writing objectively with facts and figures and demonstrate
how other organizations may be assessed based on the tweets they adapt for the purpose of
gaining popularity.
Page 8 of 11
Wareham CS. Substantial life extension and the fair distribution of healthspans. Journal of
Medicine and Philosophy. 2016;41(5):521–539. https://doi.org/10.1093/jmp/jhw021
Reviewed by Thomas Hobbes, undergraduate at Texas A&M
Christopher Wareham begins his article by describing the popular desire for humans to
maintain their youth and extend their lives. In doing so, Wareham asks whether the distribution
of life-extending substances called calorie restriction mimetics (known as CRMs) to the public is
fair, knowing that it would be nearly impossible to distribute the substances fairly amongst
different groups of people. Wareham argues that, assuming there is a way of ensuring fair
distribution of these substances to the public, the distribution of these life-extending substances
is more fair than the alternative of not distributing the substances in the name of equality. To
make this argument, Wareham presents research data on CRMs, the prevailing objection to his
argument, argues against a laissez-faire approach as well as the banning of CRMs, discusses
equal provision of CRMs (sec. 5), and presents the argument for unequal distribution of CRMs.
As an ethics researcher whose focus is bioethics and public health ethics, Wareham
writes to discuss the ethical implications of emerging scientific and nutritional discoveries
surrounding life-extending substances, as they pertain to public consumption. Wareham uses this
background to argue that CRMs should be distributed to the public under the right
circumstances, as well as arguing against competing theories surrounding the debate. For
example, Wareham’s includes recent studies surrounding the biological effects of CRMs on
animals, that are believed to show the positive effects CRMs could have on humans.
Wareham argues for the acceptance of CRMs, and that their ability to rectify the
disparities that exist in life length and quality would be an ethically acceptable practice. He
Page 9 of 11
argues against both the laissez faire approach and the banning of CRMs as he considers them
both to be ineffective and immoral. Wareham claims that the laissez fair approach is problematic
because it would predominantly enhance the lives of the wealthy, while the poor are preoccupied
with more urgent needs. Wareham also maintains that banning the substances would be
unethical, one point being that a ban would be difficult to enforce and those with greater
resources would likely still have access to CRMs, and secondarily the banning of substances that
could improve the livelihoods and ailments of members of the public would be met with great
outcry. Instead, Wareham argues that the most effective solution would be a program that
distributes CRMs to those in need in order to ensure an equal outcome in terms of life length and
quality.
While Wareham explores multiple sides of the ethical debate, there are issues involving
the distribution of CRMs that were not taken into account. In the case of a government program
to distribute CRMs on the basis of need, or what is referred to in the article as unequal provision,
this would be funded by the public’s tax dollars. While Wareham was thorough in his approach
seeking fairness he did not take into account that wealthier areas put more money into tax
programs, so their local programs tend to be higher quality than the programs put into place in
lower income communities. This would lead to wealthier groups having greater access to the
substances that enhance their lives, creating an unethical distribution of resources.
Wareham’s distinct organizational skills help to make this easy for someone with no prior
knowledge of the topic to understand, and retain the most important information well. As he
explains complex moral issues and the many faceted arguments surrounding them, Wareham
condenses massive amounts of information into smaller digestible chunks for the reader to take
advantage of. Wareham elaborates on not only the studies that have led to CRMs, but also the
Page 10 of 11
Page 11 of 11
precedents that they could set for further medical and nutritional advancements. With
Wareham’s experience in bioethics and public health ethics, he is able to provide insight into the
processes for coming up with a solution to the ethical dilemmas faced by innovators in the field,
and the long term consequences that come along with these innovations. This article is worth
reading and helpful to all, and its approach to exploring all facets of the ethical debate make it a
well crafted work of ethical and philosophical writing.