![]() |
futureatlas.com, "Citation needed," October 30, 2010 via flickr, Attribution 2.0 Generic License |
References
Breel, K. (2013,
September 27). Why We Need to Talk About Depression | Kevin Breel | TED Talks.
Retrieved September 6, 2015.
Florence, C.,
Emmanuelle, L., Florence, B., Mathilde, H., & Viviane, K. (2015).
Bereavement-related depression: Did the changes induced by DSM-V make a
difference? Results from a large population-based survey of French residents. Journal
of Affective Disorders, 182, 82-90. doi:10.1016/j.jad.2015.04.039
Florence, Emmanuelle, Florence, Mathilde, and Viviane researched whether the new criteria for diagnosing Major Depressive Disorder increased the prevalence of depression significantly. They found that overall depression diagnoses only increased slightly. The purpose of this research was to investigate how significant of an impact the recent revisions to the DSM would have on the prevalence of depression. The intended audience for this article was other scholars in the field of psychiatry. This is fairly new research as it was published 8/15/15. I predict I will use this source to illustrate the minor implications that the revisions to the DSM actually had.
Hamilton, Jon.
"Why Is Psychiatry's New Manual So Much Like The Old One?" NPR.
NPR, 16 May 2013. Web. 12 Sept. 2015.
This article explains the reasons
why psychologists must rely on symptoms to make diagnoses instead of lab tests.
It explains that scientists haven’t made enough progress in understanding the
human brain. Research has not advanced enough to find the biological indicators
needed to develop a lab test to diagnose a mental disorder. The purpose of this
article is to inform the public why the DSM is a limited tool in diagnosing
mental disorders, which would explain the complications surrounding the recent revision,
DSM-5. This article was written in 2013, around the time the DSM-5 was
published, and its intended audience of this article is the general public. I
predict I will use this source to explain the limits of the DSM to my audience
and why there is currently no better diagnostic method available.
Hamilton, Jon.
"Experts Agree: 'Psychiatry's Bible' Is No Bible." NPR. NPR,
17 May 2013. Web. 12 Sept. 2015.
This article explains that the DSM
is continuously evolving with expanding medical knowledge and is therefore not
perfect. The purpose of this article was to respond to critics who say that
relying on one cookie-cutter description of a mental illness is problematic and
that psychiatrists should have a more individualistic approach to diagnosing
disorders. This article explains that most of the doctors who create and use
the DSM see it as a guide and not a “bible” that is the absolute truth to
diagnostic criteria. This article was published in 2013, around the time the
DSM-5 was published, and its intended audience of this article is the general
public. I predict I will use this source to demonstrate how most doctors do not
see the DSM as a “bible,” as the media portrays it, but as a dictionary and
guide to help standardize diagnoses.
Lane, C. (2013,
May 4). The NIMH Withdraws Support for DSM-5. Retrieved September 6, 2015.
Maccallum, F.,
Sawday, S., Rinck, M., & Bryant, R. (2015). The push and pull of grief:
Approach and avoidance in bereavement. Journal of Behavior Therapy and
Experimental Psychiatry, 48, 105-109.
doi:10.1016/j.jbtep.2015.02.010
News analysis:
Controversial mental health guide DSM-5. (2013, August 15). Retrieved September
6, 2015.
Pies, R. (2012,
December 11). Bereavement and the DSM-5, One Last Time. Retrieved September 6,
2015.
In Pies' article, he explains the reasons for the recent revisions to the DSM, citing research to back up his claims. The purpose of Pies' article is to answer questions regarding why certain changes were made to the DSM. The intended audience is opponents of the DSM revisions. This is a fairly old article, published in 2012, and it slightly biased in favor of the revisions to the DSM, as Pies is an editor of the DSM himself. I predict I will use this source to illustrate the reasons the editors of the DSM provided for the recent revisions made.
Tanner, Lindsey.
"DSM-5: Mental Health Professionals, Critics Face Off Over Upcoming
Psychiatric Manual." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 15
May 2013. Web. 12 Sept. 2015.
This article explains the
controversy surrounding the DSM. It also clarifies why some of the recent revisions
are such a big deal. This article gives context on the time in which the DSM-5
was published; it explains that the health field has grown increasingly
influenced by pharmaceutical companies and how these circumstances are
affecting the argument and possibly increasing backlash to the DSM-5. This
article tends to be critical of the DSM revisions but still includes a pro-DSM
viewpoint at the end of the article. The purpose of this article is to explain
to the DSM-5 controversy to the reader and provide possible explanations for
its cause. This story was published in 2013 and its intended audience is the
general public. I predict I will use this source to give context to the story
and provide possible explanations as to why these DSM revisions have become
such a large controversy in the modern medical field.
Yale, Kathleen.
"Psychological Disorders: Crash Course Psychology #28." YouTube.
Ed. Blake De Pastino. Youtube, 25 Aug. 2014. Web. 12 Sept. 2015.
This YouTube video educates the
audience on the basics of mental disorders and the DSM. It also explains that
the DSM is a work in progress that evolves with science’s growing understanding
of the brain. This video is from the Crash Course channel on YouTube, meant to
help tutor and teach students about different topics in school. For that
reason, this source is pretty neutral and unbiased. The purpose of this video
is to tutor psychology students in understanding the basics of mental disorder
diagnosis techniques. This video was published in 2014 and its intended
audience is psychology students. I predict I will use this source to help
introduce what the DSM is and explain the basics of mental disorder diagnoses.
Here is an example of an annotated bibliography in APA style.
Your annotated bibliography seems to match the APA style perfectly. Looking at both the style guide and your example there are no differences that I can tell from yours and theirs. You even managed to create the indentation for the paragraphs which seems very difficult to do on blogger. One thing I noticed about your style is that in general it seems to be much briefer than others although the formatting is a little more complex.
ReplyDelete