week 4 assignment annotated bibliography

For your Signature Assignment for this course, you will submit a written or video 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 . The Signature Assignment is due in Week 8.
2. Watch the
4. Read details about the case study below.
5. 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 35 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 sources 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:

• (This is a link to the library.)

Visit the Writing Resources link under the Student Resources Tab to learn more about annotated bibliographies.

Rubric

PSYC_160_OL – Annotated Bibliography

PSYC_160_OL – Annotated Bibliography

CriteriaRatingsPtsThis criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Annotated Bibliography

20 to >17.33 pts

Exceeds Expectations

Sources 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 pts

Meets Expectations

Some 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 pts

Approaches Expectations

Few 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 pts

Not Meeting Expectations

Sources 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.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Review/ Critique of Scholarly Research

20 to >17.33 pts

Exceeds Expectations

Fully 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 pts

Meets Expectations

Answers 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 pts

Approaches Expectations

Answers most questions posed and demonstrates some ability to critically think about and evaluate scholarly research.

11.8 to >0 pts

Not Meeting Expectations

Most questions posed are not answered. Work does not demonstrate the student’s ability to critically think about and evaluate scholarly research.

20 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

APA Style

5 to >4.5 pts

Exceeds Expectations

The assignment accurately and consistently follows APA Style. Meets length and formatting requirements of the assignment.

4.5 to >3.95 pts

Meets Expectations

The 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 pts

Approaches Expectations

The 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 pts

Not Meeting Expectations

The assignment has significant errors in APA Style. Does not meet length and formatting requirements of the assignment.

5 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning Outcome

Writing Mechanics

5 to >4.5 pts

Exceeds Expectations

The 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 pts

Meets Expectations

The writing is clear, concise, and well organized. May contain a few punctuation, spelling, or capitalization errors.

3.95 to >2.95 pts

Approaches Expectations

Writing lacks clarity, conciseness, or organization. Several errors in punctuation, spelling, and capitalization detract from the readability of the paper.

2.95 to >0 pts

Not Meeting Expectations

The writing is unfocused and poorly organized. Many errors in punctuation, spelling, and capitalization detract from the readability of the paper.

5 pts

Total Points: 50