Skip to main content

mock annotated bibliography



Camilla Chavez 

Desmet, Charlotte, Van Der Wiel, Alko, Brass, Marcel. (2017). “Brain regions involved in observing and trying to interpret dog behavior”. PLOS One. Edited by Sam Gilbert.

The authors in this article are informing their readers if parts of the brain that process human behavior are also involved in processing dog behavior. In order to attain accurate results on this matter, the author gives FMRI scans to see which parts of the brain are used when processing dog behavior. Due to FMRI scans, the author is able to state accurate information on the topic. The result states that brain regions are more receptive to dog behaviors that are hard to respond to than those that are easy to respond to. The authors also performed a search on whether owning a dog has an effect on understanding dog behavior. Being a dog owner, does influence ones understanding in a dog’s behavior but it does not have enough factual information for it to be considered accurate. This article withholds information that can be helpful to people that are researching about the parts of the brain used when interpreting dogs behavior as well as the differences in dog and human brains and the way the parts of the brain work.

Comments

  1. Katherine KumpfFebruary 22, 2018 at 12:47 PM

    Citation is correct, the thesis is there and is correct, she also put the results of the experiment and who they would help.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Katherine KumpfFebruary 22, 2018 at 12:49 PM

      Quotes may be helpful in the future when actually writing the paper.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Action Plan

For my action plan I will add more pictures to my website and continue to expand on my topic. I also plan to make posters to place around campus to reach outside audiences and use that as my nondigital source. I will continue to work over the weekend to finish the project and best carry out my message on my website.
Post a Comment
Read more

Rachel Klahm 3/27/18

1) In project two I first did a lot of research to gather ideas and topics that I wanted to include in my essay. Then I went through and proofed it while adding citations and formatting everything. I did ended up doing three drafts rather than two. Project one was a little easier to write in my opinion because it was based off of our observations rather than facts and statistics. 2) I liked taking my first draft and transforming it into a final draft. This is where I organized all my thoughts and made the paper flow nicely. Once I have all my ideas out on the paper I can easily reorganize, cut and add new things. 3) I enjoyed project one more. I think it was lighter in the sense that it was more fun to write about. I liked exploring the different kinds of social adaptions in the films while also comparing time eras.
1 comment
Read more

"Really Responding"

Sophia Fundora  The text "Really Responding" surprised me in the way that Richard Straub claimed that putting forth maximum effort when peer reviewing someone else's paper could make you an even better writer. He emphasizes the importance of writing comments within the margarines and summarizing the paper in your own words. I believe that this strategy mentioned could be very helpful not only for the person who's paper your reviewing but for yourself as well. It helps the writer see how the audience would perceive their paper and what they need to work on. It helps the reviewer by enhancing their comprehension skills and applying their own comments on their own paper as well. I also believe his strategy of taking the stage of drafting in to consideration when peer reviewing could be very helpful. For example, Straub mentions how if it's a first or rough draft, try not to deal with all the editing at once but instead focus on the large picture like the focus, con...
1 comment
Read more