Effective Writing in Psychology. Bernard C. Beins

of scholarly sources, which increases the strength of its coverage. However, because it is a popular source that targets lay people and is sponsored by a company that wants to sell the product it describes, any arguments you make about treating ADHD should draw from scholarly sources as well. URL http://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/topics/attention‐deficit‐hyperactivity‐disorder‐adhd/index.shtml Host/author The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH), which is a part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Site's purpose The NIMH website states that the mission of NIMH is “to transform the understanding and treatment of mental illnesses through basic and clinical research, paving the way for prevention, recovery, and cure” (National Institute of Mental Health [NIMH], 2011). The purpose of the NIMH website is to provide information related to mental health issues. Possible limitations of the site This site has links to a wide variety of information, and its informative purpose indicates that, like the PBS site, you would find useful coverage of different perspectives about ADHD. Additionally, the site links to resources such as scholarly publications—although the publications are not part of the NIMH site—which strengthens the site's credibility. Nevertheless, the information is directed to a lay audience, so this site alone would not provide sufficient evidence to support a scholarly argument.

      Knowing the purpose of a site's existence can point to the possible biases or assumptions that shape its content. For example, the third URL does not contain a company's name, but a pharmaceutical corporation sponsors the site. Although the company ultimately wants to sell pharmaceuticals, the information is not necessarily inaccurate; however, it could mean that some facts are highlighted whereas others are deemphasized. Knowing this will help you ascertain the credibility and accuracy of the information on the site.

Asking the questions we have offered in this chapter—both for popular and scholarly sources and for websites—will help you identify biases or assumptions in the information presented. You might also find some ideas or perspectives that have been left out or with which you disagree. Noting these limitations will not only help you determine the kind of source you have found, it will also give you insight into the credibility and validity of the author's (or authors') argument. However, remember that all research is based on biases and assumptions and that almost any area of psychology will have reputable scholars who disagree about the best methodology or hypothesis, or how to interpret results. Thus, identifying limitations does not necessarily mean that the source is invalid. Rather, it may have strengths you can draw on and weaknesses that you should consider when developing a hypothesis, structuring an experiment, and supporting your claims.