My choice of addiction that I would like to further my research on is the addiction of opiates. I would like to research pharmacotherapy and research this type of therapy. As I continue my research on this particular therapy, I may choose to change my type of therapy and if that happens I will definitely advise.
Goal
To produce a complete annotated references document for your research project. You will need 5 research articles (not reviews) that meet the following criteria.
Criteria for 5 research articles. All 5 of your articles MUST be a write-up of an original research study (primary research) or a meta-analysis. You must choose research articles from a journal—no blog articles, news articles about a study, dissertations/theses, organizational reports, books, or book chapters. Look for quality research by checking the “peer-reviewed” box on the database search page. There is no requirement for publication date, but obviously the more current the research, the better. Usually, we stick within 10 years.
You will have a plethora of articles for your final presentation. These 5 articles you annotated are specific to your chosen therapeutic intervention. Do not annotate articles that are meant to provide background on the addiction.
In terms of the summary that you have to provide, it does not need to cover every aspect of the published research article. For example, if the researchers conducted 8 experiments and only 2 of them are relevant to your project, those are the only 2 you should write about. The purpose of this assignment is for you to have a solid amount of literature and information for your chosen/proposed treatment.
If you choose a very novel therapeutic approach you can, in ADDITION to published research, have some that are still currently under investigation or a news article/blog. remember that this is in addition and be sure to have it filtered such that the platform has some basis of popularity such as a ‘Vice’ for example. I understand that some of it might not be published yet. Or even being conducted informally. But it may yield helpful and meaningful information which I feel is worth discussing rather than discrediting because it has not been allowed to be investigated by the authorities.
Format
Submit a Word document with a title page followed by the annotated references in APA reference (alphabetical) order. All references must be in precise APA format, with the annotation following immediately below. Use Times New Roman 12-pt. font, and provide page numbers.
Annotated References
An annotation is different from a summary. Summaries are purely descriptive, like the abstracts found at the beginning of a research article. Annotations, however, are both descriptive and evaluative. You will briefly summarize the article, identify the strengths and weaknesses of the research, and discuss its relevance to your research topic. The minimum length for each annotated reference is 400 words for a total minimum of 2000 words for all 5 annotated references. The paper reference is not included in the word count. A sample annotation is available in the Assessment Details module.
Annotation Format for Primary Research Study or Meta-analysis
The format of each annotation should be as follows:
Title Page: Your title is NOT annotated references. It is descriptive informing us of the therapeutic modality of interest and the addiction disorder. Some examples for you; 1) Psychodynamic Psychotherapy Approach to Shopping/Buying Addiction, 2) Psilocybin-Assisted Treatment for Alcohol Dependence, 3 ) Motivational Interviewing and Alcohol Use Reduction, 4)3,4-Methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA) Assisted Therapy as a Treatment for Alcohol Use Disorder, 5) Repetitive Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (rTMS) and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy
(CBT) on Smoking Cessation.
Reference: List the complete reference using APA format. Place the reference in bold
Summary: The first paragraph should be informative. Summarize the article using your own words (no direct quotes allowed). Do not use first-person language. Also, only mention the experiments conducted that are relevant to why you chose this article.
State the purpose of the research. (Why did the authors conduct the research?)
State the hypothesis or research question.
VERY briefly describe the methods used. (Who were the participants? What did the participants do?) *For a meta-analysis, briefly describe the selection criteria and the number of studies selected.
State the results of the study. (These should parallel the research question/hypothesis.)
State the interpretation of results. (How did the authors explain the results?)
Critique: The second paragraph should be evaluative and discuss fit. Examine and report on the quality of the evidence—in support of your topic. How does the research study “fits” with or contributes to your understanding of your presentation topic. First-person language may be used for this part of the annotation. Points to consider for critiquing the study include the following (though you do not need to address all points):
Does this support your proposed treatment modality?
Does this show support that this may be a potential alternative treatment approach that should be considered?
Is the data analysis process clear and appropriate, and do the results make sense? Are these results aligned with the research questions?
Does the interpretation of results make sense and are they placed within the larger context of existing research? Do you agree with the author’s/researcher’s interpretation of the results?
Do you see other strengths or weaknesses that the researcher has not discussed?
Tips for Writing a Good Annotation
Article Selection: Do you have any concerns about the quality of the article chosen?
Summary: For a research study annotation, when you read the summary of the article, can you “picture” the study and how it was carried out? Is there a logical connection between the purpose, research question or hypothesis, and findings? Are the findings clear? For a research review, is the purpose explained and the key ideas from the article highlighted in relation? Are the conclusions drawn by the authors of the review discussed?
Critique: Are the points of the critique clear and do they make sense? Does the critique seem forced, or does it seem too tentative? Based on the summary, would you suggest to your colleague that he/she should go back to the article to evaluate a specific aspect that might have been missed?
APA/Writing: Do you see any errors in the format of citations or the article reference? Are there any grammatical issues, spelling errors, or typos?
