You are on page 1of 9

Martin 1

Zach Martin
Gloria Creed-Dikeogu
RESEARCH-TECHNIQUES-&-TECHNOLOGY-LAS-13525
October 20, 2015
Evaluation of Sources
1. Gerber, Rudolph J. Legalizing Marijuana: Drug Policy Reform and Prohibition Politics.
Westport, Conn.: Praeger, 2004. Print.
The primary audience for this book is someone interested in this particular
political matter and how it is effecting people in congress and other people in the
political world. This book meets the expectations for this particular audience
because it discusses the history of the drug, the previous laws there have been
against marijuana. Also it discusses congress as a whole and how they are dealing
with this. This source does fit my particular needs as a researcher because it
discusses some of the major topics I would need to cover in my article such as
previous laws against marijuana and the laws that are foreseen in the future for

this drug.
This book applies to my research project because it gives a detailed history of
marijuana and how it has affected people in the past. It describes exactly what
marijuana is and gives a brief description of how in the past they sold marijuana
(such as, in motas which are marijuana cigarettes). The reason I would choose
to use this source in my research project is as an introduction paragraph or in one
of my first couple of paragraphs just so that I could give you a brief history of

marijuana and how it has affected people in the past.


I do not detect any bias in this source because it is mostly just for informational
purposes. I also do not detect any unsupported claims because all of them have
citations to them so you know exactly where the author got them. I do not detect
any dubious support, this author is merely trying to inform the reader with this

Martin 2
book and all of his statements are straight forward to the point and you know
exactly what he means, there is no hesitation. One example of a supported claim
is on page 1 and he talks about Jacki Rickert and how she was using marijuana
and the police raided her house but all the information he got for another source
is quoted and at the end he uses a citation to show exactly where he got it.
Another example to show that he doesnt display any bias is on page 2 when he
discusses what marijuana is and what it does to you. He doesnt take a stand he is

just informing the reader.


The works cited tells me he got his information from many different sources and
they are all credible so none of his information is faulty. The bibliography tells
me that Gerber is very interested in this topic and did a lot of research to produce

this book.
This source is not up-to-date it was published in 2000. For this particular source
the age of it does not really hinder the information because it is giving a history

of marijuana so with time this information would not change.


The author does not have any experience to be considered an authority on the
subject, this is his only work on the subject of the legalization of marijuana. He
does have the credentials though because he at one point was in congress so he

knows what people in congress are thinking and their points of view.
The publication of this article does not have a major impact on this area of

research.
This source has not had a major impact on other scholars. It had a lot of
information throughout it that was cited so it wasnt that original. It has not been
cited that often. The reviews were unbiased they believed it did a good job of
giving the history of marijuana and its implications on society.

Martin 3

I imagine this source will have little to no impact on the future considering it was

written 15 years ago and it has almost had no impact to date.


I believe this source is about a 3 out of 5 on quality for me because I could use
this article to give some history on marijuana and how it has affected people in
the past and what implications it has made but that would be very brief so it

would not make a major impact in my essay.


2. D.C. Marijuana Initiative. Congressional Digest 94.3 (2015): 13. Academic Search
Premier. Web. 20 Oct. 2015.
The main audience for this article is researcher such as myself to inform them on
the progress of legalizing marijuana is making. It meets the expectation for this
particular audience because it tells the progress it is making and exactly how it is
making this progress and exactly what the progress is. This source does fit my
particular needs as a researcher because it discusses how marijuana is being
legalized and what laws there are now and my project is over the legalization of

marijuana.
The content of this source applies to my project because it discusses the process
of legalizing marijuana and how Obama didnt really condone it but the states can

use their own state funds to do so.


I do not detect any bias in this article. I also do not detect any unsupported claims
or dubious support or faulty reasoning. It does a good job of quoting information
it got from different sources and citing those sources. Also through the article they
are giving facts so this article is not hesitant or faulty at any point because it is

giving straight facts and information from congress about this topic.
There are no notes. The works cited tells me that this information that is quoted or
used from other sources are all credible and have reliable information.

Martin 4

The source is very up-to-date the information only goes as far back as 2014 so it
is very relevant which makes it easier for me to use in my essay because all the

information is current.
The author is not displayed at any point to which I can see. But it by the
Congressional Digest so I imagine that whoever did write this article is very
knowledgeable on the subject and how congress has impacted the legalization of

marijuana.
The publication played a major role in this article because it is the Congressional
Digest so people of important figures have definitely read through this because

they want to stay updated on what is happening in congress.


This source has had an impact on other scholarly websites or even some none
scholarly websites because it has been used as evidence to show what is

happening within congress and how marijuana is being legalized.


I imagine this source will have some impact on the future because it is discussing
how Obama feels about it so how likely legalizing marijuana is becoming and
also discusses how states are legalizing marijuana although the government isnt

giving them the money to do it.


I would rate this a 4 out of 5 because it is very relevant so all the information I am
obtaining is current and will still be having an impact on society. I could
definitely use majority of this information stated through this article in my paper
when I talk about how people in congress feel about the legalization of marijuana

and how states are doing it even without support from president.
3. Roffman, Roger A. "Legalization of Marijuana: Unraveling Quandaries for the Addiction
Professional." <i>Front Psychiatry</i> (2013): n. pag. 31 May 2013. Web. 20 Oct. 2015.
The audience for this article is citizens who are wondering about the
legalization of marijuana. This article meets the expectations for this
audience because it discusses the history of how it is becoming legal and

Martin 5
what countries it is becoming legal in. As a researcher this source does fit
my particular needs because it talks about where marijuana is becoming

legal in and how it is doing so.


This content of this source applies to my project because it discusses how
they are going about making marijuana legal and my project is over the

legalization of marijuana.
I do not detect any bias, unsupported claims, dubious support, or faulty
reasoning. All of the claims in this article are backed up with citations and
information that is supported. He discusses how congress needs to go

about legalizing marijuana and exactly what they need to do in depth.


The works cited tells me that this author got its information from other
credible sources about similar topics. So all of the information in this
article is accurate. The bibliography tells me that the author is an authority

on the subject because he was a Washington initiative.


This source is up-to-date it was published in 2013 so the information is
current. So all the information that I could use is credible because it still

pertains to events happening now-a-days.


Yes the author does have the credentials to be considered an authority on
the subject. He is the Washington initiative they discuss multiple times
throughout the article so he is an insider and knows this information first

had.
The publication doesnt play that major of a role in this article other than

the fact that it shows that it is a scholarly article.


This article has had a major impact on other scholars. It has been cited
quite a few times all on scholarly websites. Much of the information in
this article is original and came first had from the author.

Martin 6

I imagine that this article will have some implications on the future.
Considering it was written 2 years ago and necessarily hasnt had an
impact on us but some of the things it discusses in the article (ways to

make marijuana legal) are happening right now.


I would rate this article a 5 out of 5 because it has all the information I
need. It discusses some brief history of marijuana and how it has been
illegal in the past. It talks about how other countries, not just the US are
wanting to make marijuana legal and what countries those are. It also

discusses how the congress should go about this legalization.


4. Laird, Lorelei. "Do Ethics Rules Allow Lawyers To Advise Clients On New Laws
Legalizing Marijuana?." ABA Journal 100.6 (2014): 1. Legal Collection. Web. 20 Oct.
2015.
I believe the primary audience for this article is other states that are deciding
whether or not to legalize marijuana. This information from this article meets the
needs for that particular audience because this article discusses how other states
went about it and what they are going through now that it is legalized. This source
does fit my particular needs as a researcher because it gives me the knowledge of

how people are being affected now that it is being legalized in some states.
The content of this source applies to my project because it gives me the
knowledge I need to be able to tell you what states had to go through to legalize
marijuana and how they are now being effected. Such as, the states having to go
through lawyers and figure out exactly how they can legally sell marijuana so that

they dont later get into trouble.


I do not detect any bias, unsupported claims, or faulty reasoning. I do detect some
dubious support because when the author talks about how he believes that

Martin 7
marijuana should be legalized but then he goes on to talk about how difficult it is

to do so. It makes his point of where he stands a little difficult to determine.


The citations tell me that the author got his information from credible sources that
all have to do with a similar topic. The notes tell me that this is a well thought out

article. The bibliography tells me that the author is an authority on the subject.
The source is up-to-date. Since it was written only a year ago all the information

in this article is very current and still applies.


The author could not be considered an authority on the subject. She is neither a
congressman nor a lawyer so she has no real way of knowing if a lawyer should
advise a client. She does have credible sources so all of her information is

prevalent but she could not be considered an authority.


The publication does not play a major role in this article the only major impact it

has it that it shows that this is a credible source and is scholarly.


This article has not had much impact on other scholarly articles. It has not been
cited too often and the originality of this article is good but a lot of the

information is quoted from other sources.


I imagine this source will have some impact on the future with the likely hood of
marijuana being legalized a lot of lawyers will be utilized and this article

discusses whether or not they should give their opinion or not.


I give this article a 4 out of 5. I could use majority of this information in my

research project when discussing the actually legalization of marijuana.


5. "Majority Now Supports Legalizing Marijuana." Pew Research Center for the People and
the Press RSS. 4 Apr. 2013. Web. 20 Oct. 2015.
The audience for the article is citizens to show that majority would like marijuana
to become legalized. The information meets the needs for this particular audience
because it discusses percentages and how much percent of the US would like it to
become legal. This source does not fit my particular needs as a researcher because

Martin 8
it just discusses numbers and I dont really need to know how much of the

population would like marijuana to be legal.


This content does not really apply to my research project because I couldnt really
incorporate the information because I dont really need to tell you how much

people would like marijuana to become legal I want to discuss it.


I do detect some unsupported claims because throughout the article he gives many
percentage but never really tells you where he got those from. I do also detect
some bias because he is mostly talking about the legalization of marijuana not the

other side of things.


There is no works cited so I question if this source is credible. I also do not detect

a bibliography.
The source is up-to-date being that it was released in 2013. So all of the
information used is pretty current. So it could still be used rather than an article

that was release in 2010.


I do not know if the author has the credentials to write this article because there is

no bibliography.
The publisher of this article does play a role in its credibility because it is not
necessarily a scholarly website so I do not know if all of this information is

viable.
This source has had little to no impact on other articles. I do not believe that it has
once been cited. Although since none of the information is cited I do believe most

of this information is original.


I imagine this source will have no impact on the future. Most of this information

isnt even necessary.


I would give this article a 2 out of 5. I could possible use some of the percentages
as an opening sentence to discuss how majority of the population would like

Martin 9
marijuana to be legalized although that is probably the only thing so I most likely
would not use this.

You might also like