Definition Rewrite – Who’s On First?

Posted on December 9, 2024 by Who'sOnFirst?


Familiarity in Music

Although people say they look for new music, people actually prefer music that is familiar to them. This whole idea of looking for new music is a very modern one, as the variety of music available to a person in modern media has increased greatly, due to being able to stream music instantaneously now. This growth is shown in the chart below. Due to the fact that more music is rapidly becoming popular and available to new audiences, a search has begun for new and exciting music that is often seen as exciting at first, with people eager to discover new genres, artists, and sounds. However, when it comes to people’s actual preference, there is a prevailing tendency for us to gravitate toward music that is familiar, even if we assert we’re looking for something new. This phenomenon highlights humans’ preference for the familiar.

Familiarity is something that is known to us or something we have experienced before. This is a concept that influences much of our behavior and decision-making. The National Library of Medicine explains this phenomenon through what’s called the mere exposure effect, which states that “repeatedly presented stimuli are effectively evaluated more positively than novel stimuli.” In other words, the more we hear a song or artist, the more we tend to like it. This effect helps explain why we keep returning to familiar tracks even when there’s a vast amount of new music waiting to be explored. Familiar music encompasses songs, sounds, or genres that a person has listened to multiple times or heard in various contexts, such as on the radio, in movies, or at social events. These familiar songs become a part of one’s musical landscape and are easily recognized, triggering positive feelings, often evoking a sense of nostalgia or attachment.

The human tendency to prefer the familiar is also rooted in how our brains process music. Studies show the differences in neural responses to familiar and unfamiliar music. In a study conducted by Scientific Reports, it was found that the brain shows a more immediate and positive response to familiar music, as opposed to music that is unfamiliar. This quick response is linked to the brain’s reward system, which processes pleasurable stimuli more efficiently when it is familiar. In contrast, unfamiliar music may not trigger the same pleasure centers in the brain, as it is perceived as more unpredictable and harder to process. This increased cognitive effort can sometimes feel unsettling or even frustrating. The experience of hearing something new might be interesting at first, but if it requires too much mental work, we may quickly lose interest. This physiological reaction is just one more reason why we often return to familiar songs and artists instead of embracing something new.

This preference for familiar music is not just a cognitive phenomenon—it also has emotional ties. Comfort plays a huge role in why we prefer what we already know. Music is deeply tied to our emotions, and familiar tunes have the power to evoke memories and feelings of safety. For example, a song that we loved during a significant period in our life, or one we heard a lot during a season in our lives, can transport us back to that moment, bringing with it a sense of emotional security. When we listen to a song that we don’t know, we don’t have that same emotional attachment, which makes it harder for us to connect with it on the same level.

Something that is unfamiliar on the other hand results in a jarring effect. We are naturally wary of new things as an evolutionary defense mechanism. Something new could be dangerous and so we evolved to naturally be wary of unfamiliar objects or events. Unfamiliar music, especially music from a different culture or genre, can create a sense of alienation. The difference in sound, rhythm, and structure can feel off-putting, particularly if it does not align with the cultural context or musical expectations we are used to.

This resistance to unfamiliar music is particularly evident when we consider the social and cultural influences that shape our musical preferences. The hypothesis that Bruce Wexler tests in Brain and Culture—”that early wiring in the brain makes it hard for people later to accept novelty and unfamiliar experiences. Difficulty in handling the unfamiliar—people with a different skin color, different values or a different ideology, for example—” Or perhaps unfamiliar music, “is an essential feature of the often-negative interactions between cultures.” Popular music, the kind that frequently appears on the radio or is pushed by streaming platforms, becomes part of the cultural mainstream. As such, people often gravitate toward what is widely accepted or familiar in their social circles. Listening to popular songs creates a sense of connection to others, whether at a concert, party, or casual conversation. The familiarity of these songs provides a shared experience, reinforcing the bond between individuals within a group. Unfamiliar music however, requires more cognitive effort to process, which can make it harder to enjoy. The initial experience of unfamiliar music might feel disjointed or unsatisfying, as listeners try to make sense of new structures, melodies, and harmonies.

Another reason we don’t resonate with unfamiliar music is the sense of identity that we associate with our music preferences. The music we listen to is often tied to our self-concept and personal identity. People may feel that their tastes in music reflect who they are, and stepping outside of familiar genres or artists can feel like a departure from one’s sense of self. For example, someone who identifies as a rock music fan may find it harder to enjoy classical music, not because it is objectively less enjoyable, but because it challenges the musical identity they have cultivated over time.

In conclusion, while many people claim to be searching for new and exciting music, they are often more drawn to the comfort and familiarity of what they already know. People are drawn to familiar music because of the mere exposure effect, the comfort of emotional connection, the identity tied to musical preferences, the ease of cognitive processing,  and also because it reflects a shared cultural experience and a sense of identity. As much as streaming platforms and social media might make new music more accessible, it is the familiar tracks that continue to dominate our playlists. No matter how many new artists or genres are out there waiting to be discovered, though people may claim to want something new, they are often drawn back to the music they already know and love.

Links and References

“Music Streaming Services Stats (2024)” Fabio Duarte. Exploding Topics, 1 February 2024. 3 November 2124.

“The Contribution of Attention to the Mere Exposure Effect for Parts of Advertising Images – PMC” PubMed Central. National Library of Medicine, 5 September 2018. 3 November 2124.

“Our Aversion to the Unfamiliar | American Scientist” Judy Illes, Vivian Chin. American Scientist, 28 October 2021. 3 November 2024.

“Rapid Brain Responses to Familiar vs. Unfamiliar Music – an EEG and Pupillometry study | Scientific Reports” Current Opinion in Neurobiology. ScienceDirect, October 2023. 3 November 2024.

Posted in Definition Rewrite, Portfolio Who'sOnFirst?, Who'sOnFirst? | Leave a comment

Definition Argument – Who’s On First?

Posted on December 9, 2024 by Who'sOnFirst?

Familiarity in Music

Although people say they look for new music, people actually prefer music that is familiar to them. This whole idea of looking for new music is a very modern one, as the variety of music available to a person in modern media has increased greatly, due to being able to stream music instantaneously now. This growth is shown in the chart below. Due to the fact that more music is rapidly becoming popular and available to new audiences, a search has begun for new and exciting music that is often seen as exciting at first, with people eager to discover new genres, artists, and sounds. However, when it comes to people’s actual preference, there is a prevailing tendency for us to gravitate toward music that is familiar, even if we assert we’re looking for something new. This phenomenon highlights humans’ preference for the familiar.

Familiarity is something that is known to us or something we have experienced before. This is a concept that influences much of our behavior and decision-making. The National Library of Medicine explains this phenomenon through what’s called the mere exposure effect, which states that “repeatedly presented stimuli are effectively evaluated more positively than novel stimuli.” In other words, the more we hear a song or artist, the more we tend to like it. This effect helps explain why we keep returning to familiar tracks even when there’s a vast amount of new music waiting to be explored. Familiar music encompasses songs, sounds, or genres that a person has listened to multiple times or heard in various contexts, such as on the radio, in movies, or at social events. These familiar songs become a part of one’s musical landscape and are easily recognized, triggering positive feelings, often evoking a sense of nostalgia or attachment.

The human tendency to prefer the familiar is also rooted in how our brains process music. Studies show the differences in neural responses to familiar and unfamiliar music. In a study conducted by Scientific Reports, it was found that the brain shows a more immediate and positive response to familiar music, as opposed to music that is unfamiliar. This quick response is linked to the brain’s reward system, which processes pleasurable stimuli more efficiently when it is familiar. In contrast, unfamiliar music may not trigger the same pleasure centers in the brain, as it is perceived as more unpredictable and harder to process. This increased cognitive effort can sometimes feel unsettling or even frustrating. The experience of hearing something new might be interesting at first, but if it requires too much mental work, we may quickly lose interest. This physiological reaction is just one more reason why we often return to familiar songs and artists instead of embracing something new.

This preference for familiar music is not just a cognitive phenomenon—it also has emotional ties. Comfort plays a huge role in why we prefer what we already know. Music is deeply tied to our emotions, and familiar tunes have the power to evoke memories and feelings of safety. For example, a song that we loved during a significant period in our life, or one we heard a lot during a season in our lives, can transport us back to that moment, bringing with it a sense of emotional security. When we listen to a song that we don’t know, we don’t have that same emotional attachment, which makes it harder for us to connect with it on the same level.

Something that is unfamiliar on the other hand results in a jarring effect. We are naturally wary of new things as an evolutionary defense mechanism. Something new could be dangerous and so we evolved to naturally be wary of unfamiliar objects or events. Unfamiliar music, especially music from a different culture or genre, can create a sense of alienation. The difference in sound, rhythm, and structure can feel off-putting, particularly if it does not align with the cultural context or musical expectations we are used to.

This resistance to unfamiliar music is particularly evident when we consider the social and cultural influences that shape our musical preferences. The hypothesis that Bruce Wexler tests in Brain and Culture—”that early wiring in the brain makes it hard for people later to accept novelty and unfamiliar experiences. Difficulty in handling the unfamiliar—people with a different skin color, different values or a different ideology, for example—” Or perhaps unfamiliar music, “is an essential feature of the often-negative interactions between cultures.” Popular music, the kind that frequently appears on the radio or is pushed by streaming platforms, becomes part of the cultural mainstream. As such, people often gravitate toward what is widely accepted or familiar in their social circles. Listening to popular songs creates a sense of connection to others, whether at a concert, party, or casual conversation. The familiarity of these songs provides a shared experience, reinforcing the bond between individuals within a group. Unfamiliar music however, requires more cognitive effort to process, which can make it harder to enjoy. The initial experience of unfamiliar music might feel disjointed or unsatisfying, as listeners try to make sense of new structures, melodies, and harmonies.

Another reason we don’t resonate with unfamiliar music is the sense of identity that we associate with our music preferences. The music we listen to is often tied to our self-concept and personal identity. People may feel that their tastes in music reflect who they are, and stepping outside of familiar genres or artists can feel like a departure from one’s sense of self. For example, someone who identifies as a rock music fan may find it harder to enjoy classical music, not because it is objectively less enjoyable, but because it challenges the musical identity they have cultivated over time.

In conclusion, while many people claim to be searching for new and exciting music, they are often more drawn to the comfort and familiarity of what they already know. People are drawn to familiar music because of the mere exposure effect, the comfort of emotional connection, the identity tied to musical preferences, the ease of cognitive processing,  and also because it reflects a shared cultural experience and a sense of identity. As much as streaming platforms and social media might make new music more accessible, it is the familiar tracks that continue to dominate our playlists. No matter how many new artists or genres are out there waiting to be discovered, though people may claim to want something new, they are often drawn back to the music they already know and love.

Links and References

“Music Streaming Services Stats (2024)” Fabio Duarte. Exploding Topics, 1 February 2024. 3 November 2124.

“The Contribution of Attention to the Mere Exposure Effect for Parts of Advertising Images – PMC” PubMed Central. National Library of Medicine, 5 September 2018. 3 November 2124.

“Our Aversion to the Unfamiliar | American Scientist” Judy Illes, Vivian Chin. American Scientist, 28 October 2021. 3 November 2024.

“Rapid Brain Responses to Familiar vs. Unfamiliar Music – an EEG and Pupillometry study | Scientific Reports” Current Opinion in Neurobiology. ScienceDirect, October 2023. 3 November 2024.

Posted in Definition Argument, Portfolio Who'sOnFirst?, Who'sOnFirst? | Leave a comment

Rebuttal Rewrite- Andarnaurram

Posted on December 9, 2024 by Andarnaurram

The Constraints on Women’s Impact in Literature in the Late 19th and Early 20th Century

While the late 19th and early 20th century had huge gain in women in literature, it is necessary to acknowledge the setbacks that they faced while trying to advocate for their rights and equality. Though woman writers had transformed literature in many ways that would impact society greatly, they dealt with many limitations from society that often constrained their influence. Marginalization continued for women especially in literature as many female writers were still disregarded and not taken seriously. A few other literary movements at that time were rising and would often overshadow women and their influence such as modernism and realism. 

An argument that is often made against the influence of women in literate at the turn of the century is how women writers were held back by society which often restricted their access to participate in literature in America. Even the most influential female writers such as Virginia Wolf, Kate Chopin, and Edith Wharton were limited in literature despite their success due to the gender norms that women were meant to be wives and mothers, rather than writers. These women had to work double as hard and put up double to fight to be recognized as intelligent and important writers. 

It wasn’t just that society thought women who pursued careers were not as capable as men or as serious, they went as far as to say they were mentally unstable. In Sandra Gilbert’s and Susan Gubar’s novel The Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth-Century Literary Imagination, they analyze Victorian literature and the female characters as they were often either depicted as angels or monsters. The restriction on women’s creativity and expression is argued that it often labeled women who did defy social norms as insane. The authors write, “A life of feminine submission, of ‘contemplative purity,’ is a life of silence, a life that has no pen and no story, while a life of female rebellion, of ‘significant action,’ is a life that must be silenced, a life whose monstrous pen tells a terrible story.” Female writers had faced more significant challenges than male writers as men were able to benefit from better education and already male dominated literary fields. 

Often when women pursued writing, it was seen as a leisure activity. As if woman who had extra time from all their other pursuits, such as maintaining house or raising children, were the only ones who could express themselves in that way. When women did write and gain any type of success they were often confined to specific genres. Romance and children’s literature were the common themes of women’s literature, and it was frequently considered trivial and insignificant. Although some women broke through these boundaries, many were still dismissed by the already male dominated field, supporting the idea that women’s literary work was inferior.

An author who is still highly regarded as one of the most influential female writers today, Virginia Woolf, struggled to gain a voice during her life and receive recognition for her works. The literary field ignored and marginalized women contributions and as for Woolf, her style of writing and intellect were regarded as misunderstood. One can question whether this claim came from genuine confusion on her writing, or the unwillingness to accept a woman in an intellectual position. 

The significance of the female influence on literature in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was also pushed back upon by other literary movements that were typically male-driven. Some of the largest movements during that time period was modernism and realism. Modernism focused on the rise of capitalism and industrialization to break traditional literary forms. Realism is portraying reality and everyday experiences as they are in that time. Some of the most influence writers during these movements were James Joyce, D. H. Lawrence, and T.S. Elliot. Today, female writers such as Virginia Woolf and Edith Wharton are considered to be one of the most notable modernist writers, but during their time, the contributions they made were more overlooked. The article The Gender of Modernism: A Critical Anthology states, “Though some of the aesthetic and political pronouncements of women writers had been offered in public, they had not circulated widely and were rarely collected for academic recirculation.” It is evident that during this period men were more likely to gain the recognition for their work and therefore, gain the financial stability and freedom to continue being great, known writers. 

Through the many setbacks women had to face in literature, it can be argued that they were limited in their influence, but the most impactful notion is their resistance to keep fighting. By writing outside boundaries that were considered acceptable for women, they were able to reshape and challenge literature and societal norms. As women were constantly being oppressed when it came to literature and society, there fight to keep themselves known to the world as intellectual and creative human beings made their work all that more impactful. It is because of the constraints that were set upon them that made their contributions so much more powerful and meaningful. As attitudes in society shifted towards women, the works of previous literary work by female writers, gained recognition and inspired future generations. The limitations imposed on women writers made their impact more profound and important as their contributions to literature shaped the world today.

Resource

Gilbert S, Gubar S. From the Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth-Century Literary Imagination. Short Story Criticism. 2003;62:122-229.

https://primo.rowan.edu/permalink/01ROWU_INST/ttegd8/cdi_gale_lco_AZFFX_SCWSTQ526662063

Scott, B. (1990). The Gender of Modernism: A Critical Anthology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. https://muse.jhu.edu/book/113360.

Posted in Andarnaurram, GRADED, Rebuttal Rewrite | 1 Comment

Rebuttal- Andarnaurram

Posted on December 9, 2024 by Andarnaurram

The Constraints on Women’s Impact in Literature
in the Late 19th and Early 20th Century

While the late 19th and early 20th century had huge gain in women in literature, it is necessary to acknowledge the setbacks that they faced while trying to advocate for their rights and equality. Though woman writers had transformed literature in many ways that would impact society greatly, they dealt with many limitations from society that often constrained their influence. Marginalization continued for women especially in literature as many female writers were still disregarded and not taken seriously. A few other literary movements at that time were rising and would often overshadow women and their influence such as modernism and realism. 

An argument that is often made against the influence of women in literate at the turn of the century is how women writers were held back by society which often restricted their access to participate in literature in America. Even the most influential female writers such as Virginia Wolf, Kate Chopin, and Edith Wharton were limited in literature despite their success due to the gender norms that women were meant to be wives and mothers, rather than writers. These women had to work double as hard and put up double to fight to be recognized as intelligent and important writers. 

It wasn’t just that society thought women who pursued careers were not as capable as men or as serious, they went as far as to say they were mentally unstable. In Sandra Gilbert’s and Susan Gubar’s novel The Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth-Century Literary Imagination, they analyze Victorian literature and the female characters as they were often either depicted as angels or monsters. The restriction on women’s creativity and expression is argued that it often labeled women who did defy social norms as insane. The authors write, “A life of feminine submission, of ‘contemplative purity,’ is a life of silence, a life that has no pen and no story, while a life of female rebellion, of ‘significant action,’ is a life that must be silenced, a life whose monstrous pen tells a terrible story.” Female writers had faced more significant challenges than male writers as men were able to benefit from better education and already male dominated literary fields. 

Often when women pursued writing, it was seen as a leisure activity. As if woman who had extra time from all their other pursuits, such as maintaining house or raising children, were the only ones who could express themselves in that way. When women did write and gain any type of success they were often confined to specific genres. Romance and children’s literature were the common themes of women’s literature, and it was frequently considered trivial and insignificant. Although some women broke through these boundaries, many were still dismissed by the already male dominated field, supporting the idea that women’s literary work was inferior.

An author who is still highly regarded as one of the most influential female writers today, Virginia Woolf, struggled to gain a voice during her life and receive recognition for her works. The literary field ignored and marginalized women contributions and as for Woolf, her style of writing and intellect were regarded as misunderstood. One can question whether this claim came from genuine confusion on her writing, or the unwillingness to accept a woman in an intellectual position. 

The significance of the female influence on literature in the late 19th and early 20th centuries was also pushed back upon by other literary movements that were typically male-driven. Some of the largest movements during that time period was modernism and realism. Modernism focused on the rise of capitalism and industrialization to break traditional literary forms. Realism is portraying reality and everyday experiences as they are in that time. Some of the most influence writers during these movements were James Joyce, D. H. Lawrence, and T.S. Elliot. Today, female writers such as Virginia Woolf and Edith Wharton are considered to be one of the most notable modernist writers, but during their time, the contributions they made were more overlooked. The article The Gender of Modernism: A Critical Anthology states, “Though some of the aesthetic and political pronouncements of women writers had been offered in public, they had not circulated widely and were rarely collected for academic recirculation.” It is evident that during this period men were more likely to gain the recognition for their work and therefore, gain the financial stability and freedom to continue being great, known writers. 

Through the many setbacks women had to face in literature, it can be argued that they were limited in their influence, but the most impactful notion is their resistance to keep fighting. By writing outside boundaries that were considered acceptable for women, they were able to reshape and challenge literature and societal norms. As women were constantly being oppressed when it came to literature and society, there fight to keep themselves known to the world as intellectual and creative human beings made their work all that more impactful. It is because of the constraints that were set upon them that made their contributions so much more powerful and meaningful. As attitudes in society shifted towards women, the works of previous literary work by female writers, gained recognition and inspired future generations. The limitations imposed on women writers made their impact more profound and important as their contributions to literature shaped the world today.

Resource

Gilbert S, Gubar S. From the Madwoman in the Attic: The Woman Writer and the Nineteenth-Century Literary Imagination. Short Story Criticism. 2003;62:122-229.

https://primo.rowan.edu/permalink/01ROWU_INST/ttegd8/cdi_gale_lco_AZFFX_SCWSTQ526662063

Scott, B. (1990). The Gender of Modernism: A Critical Anthology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. https://muse.jhu.edu/book/113360.

Posted in Andarnaurram, GRADED, Rebuttal Draft | Leave a comment

Reflective – Unicorn

Posted on December 9, 2024 by unicorn45678

Core Value 1. My work demonstrates that I used a variety of social and interactive practices that involve recursive stages of exploration, discovery, conceptualization, and development.

Writing has always been enjoyable to me ever since high school, However, when I was in high school, I never really thought about how writing would be like in college. I honestly thought it would be similar, Until I took Composition 2 this semester. I realize that writing isn’t that simple and there are certain steps you need to follow to succeed. Although I didn’t follow some of the steps that were meant to be followed, I still thought I did a good job overall. The perfect example would be my Definition. This piece didn’t have enough information which caused me to keep repeating myself, about the same topics throughout half of the essay, I also had a hard time finding sources that agreed with my topic. However, I finally revised the definition essay, and I guess I could say there has been a improvement but I would still like to work harder to become better than before.

Core Value 2. My work demonstrates that I read critically, and that I placed texts into conversation with one another to create meaning by synthesizing ideas from various discourse communities. 

I remember in one of our class discussions we did a class assignment together and it was very similar to the assignment that’s I’m using for this core value. We watched a video, and we’ve basically pointed out the little details that took place in each setting of the video and analyzed them, we also wrote about. As we were doing this assignment in class I realized that it was a pretty simple task to complete and I really enjoying doing it as well. My Visual Rhetoric writing shows that I’ve watched the video that I chose for this assignment carefully enough to gather enough details to create more information. By doing this it also helped the reader to picture these little details while watching it as well.

Core Value 3. My work demonstrates that I rhetorically analyzed the purpose, audience, and contexts of my own writing and other texts and visual arguments.

Trying to stay organize is one of the challenges I face during writing, I tend to provide less information and sometimes it doesn’t make my topic clear. However, in My Rebuttal Argument I feel like that this was my most organize piece I’ve wrote. I really paid close attention to my work and also adjust the style to fit the reader needs. Although it took me a few times to finally get my writing where it’s supposed to be, I still manage to work hard and make changes to prefect my work. Writing my rebuttal argument really helped me understand how important it is to have organized paragraphs, enough sources that support your topic, making sure that my writing is clear so that readers understand it well.

Core Value 4: My work demonstrates that I have met the expectations of academic writing by locating, evaluating, and incorporating illustrations and evidence to support my own ideas and interpretations.

When it comes down to making sure that the examples I use in my writing always have enough evidence to support my details, I find myself dedicating considerable time and effort to research and organization. It’s very important for the reader as well, as they always need a very clear understanding of what’s going on in each of my paragraphs; clarity fosters engagement and comprehension. In my Causal Rewrite, I believe that I did a decent job on providing information to support my arguments and ideas in a coherent manner. However, it was quite challenging making my essay understandable and also finding sources that support every detail in my paragraphs. I can finally say that I somewhat improve while writing this piece of work compared to my others.

Core Value 5. My work demonstrates that I respect my ethical responsibility to represent complex ideas fairly and to the sources of my information with appropriate citation. 

Making sure that my essays show that I explained my ideas clearly and fairly is very important to me. Although I tend to struggle with this flaw, I often receive feedback comments from my professor telling me that my paragraphs weren’t clear enough and that I was just repeating the same points without adding new details to it. This pattern can be frustrating, especially when I put a lot of effort into my writing. In my Research essay, I tend to face the same issues; however, I feel like after all the revising I had to do and the process of eliminating some of the wording that wasn’t very useful, I began to recognize the elements that truly needed clarification. This experience taught me the value of editing and how it can really enhance the clarity of my writing. Overall, I believe I did a decent job of following the guidelines to make my essay stronger than it was before.

Posted in GRADED, Portfolio Unicorn, Reflective, Unicorn, X Archive | 1 Comment

Research-Patrickthestar1

Posted on December 9, 2024 by Patrick The Star

The Hidden Cost of Neglect: How covid exposed a broken system

When we think about how people struggle emotionally, it’s easy to assume it just “happened out of nowhere.” But just like how tears aren’t always straightforward—sometimes we cry out of relief instead of joy—mental health challenges rarely arise without deeper reasons, and the COVID-19 pandemic only magnified these reasons. The COVID-19 pandemic didn’t suddenly invent all the problems we’ve been seeing in marginalized communities. Instead, it tossed extra weight onto their shoulders, making issues that had been there all along stand out in painful relief. Economic struggles, limited access to healthcare, and racial discrimination have been simmering for years, and when the pandemic hit, it was like pouring fuel on an already burning fire.

The point is, we can’t look at today’s mental health crisis without acknowledging the long, messy history that made certain groups more vulnerable in the first place. For instance, redlining practices in the 20th century not only segregated housing but also cut off communities of color from essential services, including health care. This exclusion created significant gaps in access to care that still need to be addressed. The Tuskegee Syphilis Study, for example, involved Black men in Alabama who were misled into thinking they were receiving free healthcare when in reality researchers deliberately withheld care to study the disease progression. This unethical study fueled a level of distrust that lingers even into today .

Picture a family in a low-income neighborhood before anyone had even heard of COVID-19. Maybe they’re juggling two or three jobs, barely making rent, and certainly not able to pay for therapy sessions or costly mental health care. Sure, they might be stressed, but they’ve gotten used to a steady grind of making do with less. Now fast-forward to the pandemic. Suddenly, job security vanishes overnight, schools close, and everyone’s packed into a small apartment with no space and no quiet. Stress isn’t just stress anymore—it’s a crushing sense of “How will we afford next month’s bills?” and “Who will help us if one of us gets sick?” Their mental health deteriorates fast, and it’s not some random coincidence. It’s the direct outcome of years of being on shaky ground.

An important factor that gets overlooked in these discussions of inequalities is the role of community resilience and the ways marginalized groups have historically relied on informal networks for support. While networks such as churches or extended families can be a source of strength, they should not be a replacement for systemic care. For example, throughout the pandemic, aid groups in neighborhoods provided food and financial help to those who could not rely on the official channels of “help,” if you can even call it that. While these efforts demonstrate human compassion and solidarity, they underscore the failure that these systems are. Expecting communities to fill in these gaps isn’t just unrealistic; it’s also unjust.

Immigrant communities know this story well, too. Even before the virus spread, many immigrants struggled with language barriers, limited trust in the healthcare system, and fear that seeking help might raise questions about their legal status. When COVID-19 hit, those fears and challenges multiplied. Confusing public health messages and uneven financial help made it harder than ever to stay calm and hopeful. Feeling anxious or depressed in that situation isn’t just about COVID-19—it’s about living in a place that never truly felt safe or supportive to begin with.

For many immigrants, legal status created significant barriers to accessing mental health care during the pandemic. Undocumented individuals often faced overwhelming fear that seeking help might expose their status and lead to deportation. A study by Page et al. (2020) found that undocumented immigrants were much less likely to seek healthcare services because they worried Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) might get involved, even when those fears were unfounded. Policies like the 2019 Public Charge rule made the situation worse by penalizing immigrants who used public benefits like Medicaid, causing even greater hesitation. Fear alone prevented families from getting the help they needed, turning treatable mental health issues into long-term crises.

Language barriers also kept many immigrant families from accessing mental health care during the pandemic. Nearly 25 million individuals in the U.S. speak limited English; this, in turn, makes it difficult to navigate such a complex healthcare system. Translation services do exist however, they fail to completely and accurately translate the emotional complexities of mental health conversations. Even as telehealth expanded, it left behind families without access to multilingual providers, forcing many to give up on treatment. These barriers don’t just delay care; they leave entire communities behind and abandoned (Đoàn et al., 2021).

Another key issue we need to address is stigma within communities and outside of them and the role they play in accessing care. These communities often face two problems: not just accessing the care they need but also the problem that is tied to their racial identity. There are certain cultural expectations in some immigrant families that discourage the conversation of mental health and frame seeking help as a sign of weakness. At the same time, however, systemic bias means that when individuals from these groups finally seek care, they are met by judgment from healthcare providers who, unfortunately, cannot understand their situation. Addressing these issues means not only tackling access but also tackling the stigma behind these unfair judgments. Culturally tailored outreach programs and training that prioritize empathy and understanding could change the direction of someone’s life completely (Thomeer et al., 2023).

The pandemic’s impact on children’s education exposed just how deeply inequality affects underprivileged communities. When schools shut down, many low-income families found themselves without devices or reliable internet, which made remote learning almost impossible. Not only did the pandemic disrupt academics, but it also cut children off from critical mental health resources like school counselors that they previously relied on for support. According to the Pew Research Center (2020), 59% of low-income households with children lacked adequate internet access, leaving them disconnected from both education and emotional help. Imagine being a child feeling stressed, anxious, or isolated, with no one to turn to simply because your family can’t afford Wi-Fi or a laptop.

Telehealth could have been a lifeline during the pandemic; unfortunately, for many families, it was just out of reach like online schooling. Without a stable connection or the right technology, many students from underprivileged backgrounds were forced to suffer and manage overwhelming emotions from the pandemic on their own. This digital divide not only affected their schooling but it also deepened the mental health crisis. The pandemic pushed children further into cycles of struggle. If we’re serious about addressing these issues, making telehealth more accessible is the first step. Telehealth should be available to address mental health crises no matter the resources or the zip code to make sure both children and adults have a chance to thrive academically and emotionally.

The effects of untreated mental health often extend past the individual. Left untreated, these issues can affect communities and, more importantly, families. A parent who is struggling emotionally or mentally can have devastating effects on a child’s well-being. A parent struggling with a disorder like depression or anxiety may find it harder to support their children, whether that be financially or emotionally. This, in turn, creates a pattern of instability that could very well impact generations to come. For immigrant families, these challenges are amplified by the burden of many language and cultural barriers. Children in these families often take on the role of the unofficial translator or caregiver, adding stress to their already vulnerable mental health (Đoàn et al., 2021). When communities are left to cope without receiving the necessary support, the cost extends past emotional it becomes both an economic and social problem as well.

We have actual research showing that the pandemic made existing inequalities worse. For example, Rathore, Connolly, and Karter (2020) point out that COVID-19 “deepened pre-existing socioeconomic and related inequities.” This means everything we’ve been seeing—the rise in stress, anxiety, and depression—was pretty much set in motion by older problems no one fixed in time. 

While personal responsibility matters, it can’t overcome the systemic barriers that block access to mental health care for marginalized communities. Take Dr. Sally Satel’s argument: she claims disparities are mostly driven by factors like income and education, but this view overlooks the deeply ingrained effects of structural racism and implicit bias. For example, Black Americans in urban areas face hurdles like racial profiling and housing segregation, which make it harder to access even basic healthcare. These challenges aren’t just about personal effort—they’re the result of a system built to disadvantage certain groups. Even when income gaps are addressed, implicit biases within healthcare still leave marginalized patients underserved. Expecting personal effort to fix such a broken system is like asking someone to climb a mountain with their hands tied. Real change requires systemic solutions that level the playing field .

Government action also isn’t about replacing personal responsibility—it’s about breaking down the barriers people can’t overcome on their own. The pandemic exposed how deeply inequalities are embedded in healthcare systems, leaving the most vulnerable populations to fend for themselves. The cost of this neglect is staggering. The U.S. loses $1.03 trillion annually due to health inequities, with $421.1 billion linked directly to racial and ethnic disparities (LaVeist et al., 2023). But this isn’t just a financial failure—it’s a moral one. Policies like expanding Medicaid or funding culturally sensitive mental health programs aren’t handouts; instead, they’re tools to give everyone a fair shot at proper care. When the government steps in to address these systemic issues, it doesn’t diminish personal responsibility it simply empowers communities to thrive. Addressing health inequities isn’t just a policy choice it’s a matter of justice and humanity.

Picture walking into a doctor’s office with pain and not being taken seriously enough. For many Black Americans, this isn’t a rare occurrence but a recurrence. Research shows that African American patients with schizophrenia are more likely than White patients to show symptoms of major depression, but those symptoms often go unnoticed or untreated (Thomeer et al., 2023). This is the sign of a system that fails to see everyone equally. The problem extends past a few bad doctors—it’s based on a system that repeatedly fails those who need it most. Part of the issue lies in implicit biases among healthcare providers, which can lead to misdiagnosis or outright dismissal of symptoms. Imagine being in excruciating pain, only to have your suffering minimized simply because of the color of your skin. Studies show that Black patients are 40% less likely than White patients to receive adequate pain management for the same conditions (Crowe,Kennel, 2023). This isn’t just a statistic—it’s a painful reminder. A reminder that injustice stems from inaction. The problem is not about receiving special treatment but about confronting a system that continues to treat pain as less real simply because of who is feeling it.

We must also recognize the intersectionality of mental health disparities, particularly for those who belong to multiple marginalized groups. For example, members of the LGBTQ+ community who are also people of color face a unique set of challenges. Oftentimes, they can face discrimination not only at a societal level but also from those within their own community. Intersectionality is not just an abstract concept—it’s a reality that demands intervention tailored to these groups. In this way, we can begin to dismantle a system of inequality that leaves some groups more vulnerable than others.

Immigrant communities faced a similar pile-up of issues. According to Đoàn et al. (2021), limited financial resources, confusion around health services, and cultural barriers made it even tougher for immigrants to deal with the pandemic’s emotional toll. This is a classic example of how a crisis exposes old wounds. Without clear support and understanding, stress skyrockets. We can’t blame COVID-19 alone for that; we have to see the pandemic’s impact as part of a chain reaction set off by long-standing inequities.

Even well-meant solutions didn’t always fix things. Take telehealth, for example. Sure, it helped some people get therapy during lockdown. But what if you don’t have a stable internet connection or speak the same language as the counselor? Thomeer, Moody, and Yahirun (2023) showed that racial and ethnic disparities in mental health care got wider during the pandemic, proving that “one-size-fits-all” solutions just aren’t enough. If the ground is uneven to start with, giving everyone the same tool doesn’t level it out.

Seeing a community in crisis without understanding the systemic barriers they face—poverty, inequity, and neglect—is like seeing someone cry without knowing the months of pain that led them there. We might shrug it off or feel annoyed because we don’t get it. Similarly, when confronted with the stats and stories of mental health struggles in certain communities during COVID-19, some folks might say, “Well, everyone’s stressed.” But that misses the point. Not everyone had the same chances to stay afloat before the pandemic hit. If you were already on the edge, something like COVID-19 is going to hit you ten times harder. The big takeaway? We can’t treat this mental health crisis as a fluke or a one-time emergency. We need policies that actually acknowledge these built-in inequalities. Expanding health coverage, making sure mental health services are easy to find and culturally sensitive, and improving basic living conditions would help prevent future disasters from pushing these communities over the brink. When we understand why the tears are flowing, we’re more likely to show compassion and work on the root causes instead of just handing out tissues .

When we are faced with big, systemic problems, we tend to react in one of three ways. We either deny the problem exists, try to tear down the entire system, or defend it as “not that bad.” The mental health disparities exposed by the COVID-19 pandemic are a perfect example of this.

Some people deny the problem altogether. They say mental health disparities are just about personal choices or cultural differences and refuse to face the overwhelming evidence that these gaps are rooted in systemic failures. Others go straight to deposing the system, demanding that we scrap the whole thing and start over. While this is bold, this approach often overlooks the reality that people are suffering now and need immediate help. And then there are the defenders, the ones who claim the system is mostly fine and just needs a few tweaks. They ignore how deeply these inequities are embedded and how much damage it continues to cause.

Denying the problem is just plain dishonest, tearing down the system without a plan leaves people stranded, and defending what’s broken just supports failure and injustice. The only way forward is to acknowledge what’s wrong, fix what’s broken, and rebuild a system that finally serves everyone fairly.

In moments like this of overwhelming inequity, it’s important to recognize that change is not impossible. There have been success stories that demonstrate the possibility of change. For example, California’s “Health4All” initiative expanded Medicaid access for undocumented immigrants. This program effectively gave thousands of individuals access to care that they were previously denied and excluded from, including mental health care (California Health Care Foundation, 2022). Programs like this not only work to fix the gap in healthcare access but also work to build trust between marginalized communities and the systems that have previously failed them. Similarly, New York City’s “NYC Well” program offers 24/7 multilingual mental health support, ensuring that residents can access care regardless of their language proficiency or financial situation (NYC Well, 2021). These initiatives are proof that culturally competent and accessible care can be used to get rid of barriers. If we scale these efforts nationwide, there would be a dramatic change in how mental health care is accessed for communities that have been left behind for far too long.

There is just too much at stake to do nothing. Millions of families will continue to suffer under the weight of untreated mental health issues. Cycles of poverty will continue and economic losses will grow. However, it does not need to be this way. By implementing policies that expand access and protect vulnerable populations, we can create a system that works for everyone. These changes are not only investments in care but they are investments in opportunity, dignity, and the future of our society.

In the end, the COVID-19 pandemic didn’t create mental health issues out of thin air. It exposed and intensified them, showing us who had been left behind all along. Just as understanding why a friend cries at a supposedly happy event gives us deeper empathy and better ways to help, understanding the causes behind today’s mental health disparities should drive us to fix the underlying problems. If we learn anything from this moment, it’s that we have to address the big picture—those long-standing economic, social, and racial imbalances—so that when the next crisis comes around, we’re not replaying the same painful scene.

However, understanding is only the first step. If we stop to acknowledge the issue without taking any necessary action to change the outcome, we are complicit in supporting this broken system. Imagine the possibilities if every child, regardless of zip code or economic status, had access to tools that expand their education. Imagine a system where immigrants could seek help without fear of repercussions. And imagine a system where health care providers treated every patient with the care and understanding they deserve. These aren’t far-fetched dreams—they can become an achievable reality if we commit to changing. This isn’t just about fixing a broken system; it’s about creating a society in which no one feels as if their pain is dismissed.

The question we face here is not if we can afford to make the necessary changes but if we can afford not to. The communities that we uplift, the lives that we save, and the futures we protect will shape a society we can all be proud of.

Reference List

  1. California Health Care Foundation. (2022). Health4All: Expanding Medicaid for undocumented immigrants in California. California Health Care Foundation. https://health-access.org/campaigns/health4all/
  2. Connell, C. L., Wang, S. C., Crook, L., & Yadrick, K. (2019). Barriers to healthcare seeking and provision among African American adults in the rural Mississippi Delta region: Community and provider perspectives. Journal of Community Health, 44(4), 636–645. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10900-019-00620-1
  3. Crowe, R. P., Kennel, J., Fernandez, A. R., Burton, B. A., Wang, H. E., Van Vleet, L., Bourn, S. S., & Myers, J. B. (2023). Racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic disparities in out-of-hospital pain management for patients with long bone fractures. Annals of Emergency Medicine, 82(5), 535–545. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annemergmed.2023.03.035
  4. Đoàn, L. N., Chong, S. K., Misra, S., Kwon, S. C., & Yi, S. S. (2021). Immigrant communities and COVID-19: Strengthening the public health response. American Journal of Public Health, 111(S3), S224–S231. https://doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.2021.306433
  5. Klick, J., & Satel, S. (2011). The health disparities myth: Diagnosing the treatment gap. The AEI Press. Click to access 20080630_HealthDisparitiesMyth.pdf
  6. LaVeist, T. A., Pérez-Stable, E. J., Richard, P., Anderson, A., Isaac, L. A., Santiago, R., Okoh, C., Breen, N., Farhat, T., Assenov, A., & Gaskin, D. J. (2023). The economic burden of racial, ethnic, and educational health inequities in the US. JAMA, 329(19), 1682–1692. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2023.5965
  7. Nix, E. (2017, May 16). Tuskegee Experiment: The infamous syphilis study. History. Updated June 13, 2023. Retrieved from https://www.history.com/news/the-infamous-40-year-tuskegee-study
  8. Page, K. R., Venkataramani, M., Beyrer, C., & Polk, S. (2020). Undocumented U.S. immigrants and COVID-19. New England Journal of Medicine, 382(21), e62. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp2005953
  9. Pew Research Center. (2020). 59% of U.S. parents with lower incomes say their child may face digital obstacles in schoolwork. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2020/09/10/59-of-u-s-parents-with-lower-incomes-say-their-child-may-face-digital-obstacles-in-schoolwork/
  10. Rathore, K., Connolly, G., & Karter, C. (2020, September). Recommendations to address the inequitable impacts of COVID-19 in child welfare, housing, and community capacity. Chapin Hall Issue Brief. Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago.
  11. Thomeer, M. B., Moody, M. D., & Yahirun, J. (2023). Racial and ethnic disparities in mental health and mental health care during the COVID-19 pandemic. Journal of Racial and Ethnic Health Disparities, 10(2), 961–976. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40615-022-01284-9
Posted in PatrickTheStar, Portfolio PatrickTheStar, Research Position Paper | 1 Comment

Reflection – Burnbook04

Posted on December 9, 2024 by Burnbook04

Core Value 1: My work demonstrates that I used a variety of social and interactive practices that involve recursive stages of exploration, discovery, conceptualization, and development.

I illustrated Core Value 1 in Paper 2 by rewriting my argument and considering criticism. My argument was overly general at first, but after talking about it in a review session, I saw that I needed to make a more precise point. I was able to enhance my argument and improve my views through this process of contemplation and editing.

Link to Assignment:https://rowancomp2.com/2024/09/24/hypothesis/

Core Value 2: My work demonstrates that I read critically and that I placed texts into conversation with one another to create meaning by synthesizing ideas from various discourse communities.

I critically examined writers’ arguments and combined ideas from other sources in my Paper to support my thesis. For example, I looked at how many scholars defined a key concept and used their definitions to bolster my arguments, which improved and refined my thesis.

Link to Assignment: https://rowancomp2.com/2024/11/23/robust-verb-burnbook04/

Core Value 3: My work demonstrates that I rhetorically analyzed the purpose, audience, and contexts of my writing and other texts and visual arguments.

When writing my proposal for Paper 3, I gave serious thought to who I was writing for. I concentrated on using clear, succinct language and solid facts since I knew that my audience would be interested in doable solutions and simple arguments. In order to determine the most effective techniques for persuading an audience, I also examined alternative approaches.

Link to Assignment:https://rowancomp2.com/2024/09/19/fabienne-cherisma/

Core Value 4: My work demonstrates that I have met the expectations of academic writing by locating, evaluating, and incorporating illustrations and evidence to support my ideas and interpretations.

I assessed each source’s reliability and cited academic papers to back up my claims in Paper 1. To demonstrate my views and make sure my argument was backed up by solid proof, I also provided statistical data and professional comments.

Assignment:https://rowancomp2.com/2024/12/08/annotated-bibliography-rewrite-burnbook04/

Core Value 5: My work demonstrates that I respect my ethical responsibility to represent complex ideas fairly and to the sources of my information with appropriate citations.

Before offering my counterarguments in Paper 2, I made sure to fairly reflect the opposing viewpoint by recognizing its advantages. In order to respect other people’s intellectual property and make sure my work complied with academic honesty, I also made sure to properly credit all of my sources.

Link to Assignment: https://rowancomp2.com/2024/12/01/casual-argument-rewrite-burnbook04/

Conclusion

I found it challenging at first to incorporate the basic values, but after taking some time to think things through, I was able to better grasp and redo the majority of my papers for a higher grade and overall paper. Every link I provide corroborates the paper’s central thesis. This class has greatly enhanced my writing abilities, and I would without a doubt suggest it. 

Posted in Burnbook, Portfolio Burnbook, Reflective | Leave a comment

Bibliography—GamersPet

Posted on December 9, 2024 by GamersPet

1.) Blum J, Gerber H, Gerhard U, et al. Acute effects of heroin on emotions in heroin-dependent patients. The American journal on addictions. 2013;22(6):598-604. doi:10.1111/j.1521-0391.2013.12025.x

Background: A team of researchers did a study on the adverse effects of heroin where they believed that there is a correlation between the feeling of euphoric emotions and people. Based on their clinical observations, researchers have identified a bunch of negative emotion-related signs in the process of drug addiction. Their findings suggest that a person who uses heroin has a high risk of anxiety disorder and withdrawal.

Researchers mention the identification of heroin as part of opioids, but they never stated in their introduction to define what heroin is part of. The reason is that they keep bringing up the word opioids in opioid substitution but fail to explain the origin of opioids.

How I used it: I wanted background knowledge of what heroin is to differentiate from caffeine where they both are the same psychological addictions, but heroin is more extreme than caffeine for my definition argument.

2.)Boppana SH, Peterson M, Du AL, Kutikuppala LVS, Gabriel RA. Caffeine: What Is Its Role in Pain Medicine? Cureus. 2022 Jun 2;14(6):e25603. doi: 10.7759/cureus.25603. PMID: 35795518; PMCID: PMC9250334.

Background: It’s an article about researchers studying the medicinal effects of caffeine in a person’s body. Researchers found out that most people would use caffeine to treat migraine headaches as over-the-counter medications. Their report explains how caffeine works inside a person’s body as soon as one consumes caffeine.

How I used it: I like this research report, which explains the purpose of caffeine, to help me understand why people use this type of substance to alleviate headaches. The fact that we feel physically hurt in our heads is a roundabout way of saying that our brains are the cause of headaches, which would lean towards mental pain.

3.)Çakır ÖK, Ellek N, Salehin N, et al. Protective effect of low dose caffeine on psychological stress and cognitive function. Physiology & behavior. 2017;168:1-10. doi:10.1016/j.physbeh.2016.10.010

Background: Researchers in this article wanted to test the effects of caffeine on anxiety-like behaviors or stress conditions. They experimented on rats by giving them a low dose of caffeine to see if the positive effects of caffeine could change the rats’ behavior drastically. Their results approved that the increase in anxiety-like behavior under stress conditions was improved by a small amount of caffeine.

How I used it: This gives me a better understanding of how caffeine can negate negative behaviors like anxiety and stress under small amounts of caffeine. I wanted to claim the effects on people instead of rats, but this test proves that it doesn’t matter how much caffeine to take to reduce stress or anxiety which supports my case.

4.)Carrageta DF, Dias TR, Alves MG, Oliveira PF, Monteiro MP, Silva BM. Anti-obesity potential of natural methylxanthines. Journal of functional foods. 2018;43:84-94. doi:10.1016/j.jff.2018.02.001

Background: This article discusses the problems of obesity where researchers are studying the role of methylxanthine which is the subset of caffeine in food diet. Their findings of methylxanthine can promote lipolysis, a pathway that leads to free fatty acid, and glycerol release which can contribute to weight loss.

How I used it:  Based on my knowledge of caffeine, methylxanthine is the subset of caffeine, and I wanted to know how methylxanthine works well with caffeine when it comes to weight loss. This helps me prove the difference between caffeine being psychological and methylxanthine working as an active compound towards weight loss.

5.)CE Noticias Financieras. What Are the Types of Addictions and How Many Are There? Maybe You Have One and Don’t Know It. English ed. ContentEngine LLC, a Florida limited liability company; 2024.

Background: This news article describes different types of addictions, and how it is affecting a person’s health. It explains each addiction like sex, gambling addiction, and workaholism in a couple of sentences.

How I used it: This article helps me narrow down to identify what caffeine is for my argument about addictions. It also helps me differentiate psychological addiction from chemical and compulsive behaviors where caffeine is not in either of the two categories.

6.)Jain S, Srivastava AS, Verma RP, Maggu G. Caffeine addiction: Need for awareness and research and regulatory measures. Asian journal of psychiatry. 2019;41:73-75. doi:10.1016/j.ajp.2017.01.008

Background: This article discusses the increase in the consumption of caffeine in India towards children. Researchers surveyed 300 Indian students to spread awareness to teachers, parents, and medical practitioners about the health hazards of caffeine.

 How I used it: This real-life example helps me understand the negative effects of caffeine in their personal case reports about a 23-year-old student who uses coffee. This gives me a better understanding of caffeine being a “health hazard” that is linked to stress, and psychological consequences.

7.)Mirza J, Sultana M, Esrafil M, et al. Rapid High-Performance Liquide Chromatographic Method for Quantitative Determination of Caffeine in Different Soft and Energy Drinks Available in Bangladesh. Current research in nutrition and food science. 2021;9(3):1081-1089. doi:10.12944/CRNFSJ.9.3.33

Background: This article is a report about caffeine in soft, and energy drinks by researchers who wanted an internal control system to regularly check the level of caffeine in Bangladeshi. They claim that caffeine is a flavor enhancer that is used as a food additive even though the flavor characteristics of caffeine are bitter. The outcome of their studies is true that soft energy drinks have exceeded the range of the usual amount by the international body and national authorities.

How I used it: I wanted to get some knowledge about energy and soft drinks since both are categorized as caffeinated products. The problem in this article that I didn’t want to use in my research paper is their studies on caffeinated products from their own products, whereas I want to claim all of the products as one.

8.)Prem Community Writer. Understanding Caffeine Addiction and Withdrawal. Athena Information Solutions Pvt. Ltd; 2018.

Background: This article shows a blog post by Dr. Prem, a Community Writer, who summarized a brief explanation of the effects of caffeine addiction, and withdrawals. The doctor briefly described caffeine being addictive, and how difficult it is to quit caffeine. The method that the doctor gave is on how to deal with the effects of caffeine addiction by lowering the intake of drinks. The theory was that a person who drinks 4 cups a day should reduce it to 3 to slowly cut back the amount of caffeine.

How I used it: I wanted another source of background information about the adverse effects, and caffeine. I wanted to clarify that my other sources align with the same conclusion as other research studies. I even wanted to know any other additional information about caffeine that my other sources didn’t mention in their reports

9.)Redmond J. The Dangers of Drug Abuse. National Highlights Inc.; 2017.

Background: This is an eBook by Jodee Redmond where she wanted to spread awareness of drug addiction. She explains the meaning of the words drug abuse and addiction where eventually in her chapters she uses opioids as her main example for her book. Not only that, but Redmond defines what opium is and starts to identify different types of drugs such as heroin, morphine, codeine, and methadone that contain opium itself.

How I used it:  I used this source to understand the definition of drug addiction, and how opioids can affect both physical and mental health. This is also crucial information for my definition of addiction. As for my causal argument, I can enhance my claims that caffeine exclusively targets our mental health rather than our physical health.

10.)Sampaio-Jorge F, Morales AP, Pereira R, Barth T, Ribeiro BG. Caffeine increases performance and leads to a cardioprotective effect during intense exercise in cyclists. Scientific reports. 2021;11(1):24327-13. doi:10.1038/s41598-021-03158-2

Background: The researchers of this article wanted to test their theory to investigate the effects of different amounts of caffeine on athletes’ cardiac systems. Their sample subject to test their theory is cyclists where they are put under a double-blinded test where one takes the placebo, and the other takes a small dose of caffeine. The theory they concluded is valid from the results of cyclists is different from the intake of caffeine which improves physical performance.

How I used it: This helps me identify the opposing side of my argument that caffeine is psychological, not physical. It also strengthens my argument because their studies are like other reports of the use of caffeine in physical activities. They also didn’t include the factor of caffeine affecting the performance of a cyclist’s mind when the effect wears off.

Posted in Bibliography, GamersPet, GRADED, Portfolio GamersPet, REGRADED | 1 Comment

Rebuttal Rewrite – CourageTheCowardlyDog

Posted on December 9, 2024 by Courage The Cowardly Dog

Can holding onto physical objects help or hinder the grieving process?

Grieving the loss of a loved one is an incredibly painful and sad process. But for this process, there are also many ways to cope which are shaped by individual emotions, memories, and cultural influences. One of the more common ways to cope is by holding onto physical objects that once belonged to the deceased, whether it be clothing, photos, or personal mementos. While this offers comfort while grieving, there is the argument that the attachment made to these physical objects can hinder or complicate the grieving process. 

“It’s okay to take your time to sort through things but if everything in the room is there to remove their death, the linking objects are likely being used more for the purposes of denial. This holding on and denying death can stir up other emotions that make grief feel more painful.” states Reid Peterson in an article titled Coping with Sentimental Objects After Loss. He points out that holding onto these objects and taking time to sort out your emotions through this process is okay, but he also says that holding onto them might not be the best way to move on. This could create an almost negative emotion toward the object and lead to unintentionally making the grieving process more painful. “But what if someone just cannot allow themselves to let go of something because they remind them so much of their special person who died? What if this holding on to the past has become self destructive, even to the point that the items are taking over their home and lives?” He also points out that holding onto these objects can have its own danger take a toll on the mind and lead us to self-destruction. It has potential to overwhelm a person and their daily lives by having these things around them.

Though he does have some reasons as to why he believes this isn’t a good way to cope, at the end of the day this does really depend on the person. Most people seek comfort in the objects left behind. Instead of viewing this as a form of denial, this can be viewed as an emotional connection between the deceased and the grieving. He says that holding onto these objects for too long could prolong the painful process. But holding onto these objects could be a way to honor the loved ones and help process the fact that they are gone. This could help the acceptance stage of grief instead of being stuck in the denial stage. Many people look at these objects as a way to still be connected to those who have passed, not refusing to accept that they are gone. Holding onto objects doesn’t necessarily mean that you are reducing to accept this but oftentimes is a necessary step in the grieving process. They allow the grieving person to engage with their memories and maintain an emotional connection to their loved one. For example, some people may wear their deceased partner’s jewelry or keep a photo on display as a way of cherishing and honoring their memory. This does not necessarily mean they are refusing to acknowledge their death, but rather an intentional and healthy way to stay connected during a time of vulnerability.

Many people think that “decluttering” or getting rid of these items can actually help you move on than keeping them. “We hold onto stuff for so many reasons – guilt, comfort, anxiety, uncertainty, security and more. We hoard because we’re scared, we hold onto things because we’re frightened what will happen if we let go, we can’t afford to buy new or a replacement, we spent money on it already, it was handed down through generations, we seem frivolous to just get rid of it, waste is bad for the environment, we don’t know where to get rid of it.”  Antonia Colins basically explains the reasons why we hold onto things while also showing that most of the reasons are because of the negative emotions we are feeling at the time. We are holding onto things as a sense of security and short-term comfort, but that is all it really is. A short-term solution to a long process or problem. Even though in the moment having these objects could help, this solution leaves the person feeling stuck and unable to find true comfort.

“Jo Hamer, the Bereavement Coordinator at the Marie Curie Hospice, Bradford, says that decluttering can be a practical method of accepting  that someone has died.” Some people think that “decluttering” can help a person accept that the deceased is gone. The reason for this is because be surrounded by belongings of our passed loved ones can cause more pain. She states that “If you cared for a family member or spouse in your home before they died, you can be surrounded by things that remind you of that difficult time. In this case it could be healthy to remove them.” Removing the items could help us accept their passing. By doing this, we could avoid the constant reminder of them and in a way speed up the grieving process

In both of these articles, they use and say about the same thing. They both talk about how removing the physical objects and belongings of the person can help us avoid the constant reminder of them being gone. The word decluttering was also used a lot in both. The word decluttering is often used when talking about cleaning out. An example would be when we do our “spring cleaning”. We declutter and get rid of all the things we don’t need or use just because they are taking up space. Using this word to describe the belongings of someone who was held dear to our hearts is almost like minimizing the emotions and telling the person who is grieving to move on. Forcing ourselves to move on can do a lot more harm than sitting in our feelings for a while. Holding onto objects could be for many different reasons and more than likely won’t lead the person to a place of denial. Yes, denial is one of the grieving stages. But that will happen whether or not they have a physical object to hold onto.

Circling back to the main point, grieving is a very personal process and everyone goes through it differently. Letting go of objects isn’t a bad thing but these things happen with time and depending on if the person who is grieving even wishes to let go of these objects.

References

Peterson, R. (2021a, September 20). Coping with sentimental objects after loss. Medium. https://griefrefuge.medium.com/coping-with-sentimental-objects-after-loss-a0625fa9b6c8#:~:text=Linking%20objects%20are%20things%20that,a%20beginning%20and%20an%20end.

Colins, A. (2024b, November 2). Decluttering and grief: A personal perspective. BALANCE THROUGH SIMPLICITY. https://balancethroughsimplicity.com/decluttering-and-grief/

Wheaton, O. (2020, July 24). “decluttering” after someone dies: How and when should you do it? Marie Curie. https://www.mariecurie.org.uk/talkabout/articles/decluttering-after-someone-dies/277411

Posted in CourageTheCowardlyDog, GRADED, Rebuttal Rewrite | 3 Comments

Rebuttal-CourageTheCowardlyDog

Posted on December 9, 2024 by Courage The Cowardly Dog

Can holding onto physical objects help or hinder the grieving process?

Grieving the loss of a loved one is an incredibly painful and sad process. But for this process, there are also many ways to cope which are shaped by individual emotions, memories, and cultural influences. One of the more common ways to cope is by holding onto physical objects that once belonged to the deceased, whether it be clothing, photos, or personal mementos. While this offers comfort while grieving, there is the argument that the attachment made to these physical objects can hinder or complicate the grieving process. 

“It’s okay to take your time to sort through things but if everything in the room is there to remove their death, the linking objects are likely being used more for the purposes of denial. This holding on and denying death can stir up other emotions that make grief feel more painful.” states Reid Peterson in an article titled Coping with Sentimental Objects After Loss. He points out that holding onto these objects and taking time to sort out your emotions through this process is okay, but he also says that holding onto them might not be the best way to move on. This could create an almost negative emotion toward the object and lead to unintentionally making the grieving process more painful. “But what if someone just cannot allow themselves to let go of something because they remind them so much of their special person who died? What if this holding on to the past has become self destructive, even to the point that the items are taking over their home and lives?” He also points out that holding onto these objects can have its own danger take a toll on the mind and lead us to self-destruction. It has potential to overwhelm a person and their daily lives by having these things around them.

Though he does have some reasons as to why he believes this isn’t a good way to cope, at the end of the day this does really depend on the person. Most people seek comfort in the objects left behind. Instead of viewing this as a form of denial, this can be viewed as an emotional connection between the deceased and the grieving. He says that holding onto these objects for too long could prolong the painful process. But holding onto these objects could be a way to honor the loved ones and help process the fact that they are gone. This could help the acceptance stage of grief instead of being stuck in the denial stage. Many people look at these objects as a way to still be connected to those who have passed, not refusing to accept that they are gone. Holding onto objects doesn’t necessarily mean that you are reducing to accept this but oftentimes is a necessary step in the grieving process. They allow the grieving person to engage with their memories and maintain an emotional connection to their loved one. For example, some people may wear their deceased partner’s jewelry or keep a photo on display as a way of cherishing and honoring their memory. This does not necessarily mean they are refusing to acknowledge their death, but rather an intentional and healthy way to stay connected during a time of vulnerability.

Many people think that “decluttering” or getting rid of these items can actually help you move on than keeping them. “We hold onto stuff for so many reasons – guilt, comfort, anxiety, uncertainty, security and more. We hoard because we’re scared, we hold onto things because we’re frightened what will happen if we let go, we can’t afford to buy new or a replacement, we spent money on it already, it was handed down through generations, we seem frivolous to just get rid of it, waste is bad for the environment, we don’t know where to get rid of it.”  Antonia Colins basically explains the reasons why we hold onto things while also showing that most of the reasons are because of the negative emotions we are feeling at the time. We are holding onto things as a sense of security and short-term comfort, but that is all it really is. A short-term solution to a long process or problem. Even though in the moment having these objects could help, this solution leaves the person feeling stuck and unable to find true comfort.

“Jo Hamer, the Bereavement Coordinator at the Marie Curie Hospice, Bradford, says that decluttering can be a practical method of accepting  that someone has died.” Some people think that “decluttering” can help a person accept that the deceased is gone. The reason for this is because be surrounded by belongings of our passed loved ones can cause more pain. She states that “If you cared for a family member or spouse in your home before they died, you can be surrounded by things that remind you of that difficult time. In this case it could be healthy to remove them.” Removing the items could help us accept their passing. By doing this, we could avoid the constant reminder of them and in a way speed up the grieving process

In both of these articles, they use and say about the same thing. They both talk about how removing the physical objects and belongings of the person can help us avoid the constant reminder of them being gone. The word decluttering was also used a lot in both. The word decluttering is often used when talking about cleaning out. An example would be when we do our “spring cleaning”. We declutter and get rid of all the things we don’t need or use just because they are taking up space. Using this word to describe the belongings of someone who was held dear to our hearts is almost like minimizing the emotions and telling the person who is grieving to move on. Forcing ourselves to move on can do a lot more harm than sitting in our feelings for a while. Holding onto objects could be for many different reasons and more than likely won’t lead the person to a place of denial. Yes, denial is one of the grieving stages. But that will happen whether or not they have a physical object to hold onto.

Circling back to the main point, grieving is a very personal process and everyone goes through it differently. Letting go of objects isn’t a bad thing but these things happen with time and depending on if the person who is grieving even wishes to let go of these objects.

References

Peterson, R. (2021a, September 20). Coping with sentimental objects after loss. Medium. https://griefrefuge.medium.com/coping-with-sentimental-objects-after-loss-a0625fa9b6c8#:~:text=Linking%20objects%20are%20things%20that,a%20beginning%20and%20an%20end.

Colins, A. (2024b, November 2). Decluttering and grief: A personal perspective. BALANCE THROUGH SIMPLICITY. https://balancethroughsimplicity.com/decluttering-and-grief/

Wheaton, O. (2020, July 24). “decluttering” after someone dies: How and when should you do it? Marie Curie. https://www.mariecurie.org.uk/talkabout/articles/decluttering-after-someone-dies/277411

Posted in CourageTheCowardlyDog, GRADED, Rebuttal Draft | Leave a comment