paper for Prof. Moses

Read through your paper and find your claim statement and write it clearly:

Example:

Even though governments/public officials are considered experts in disaster management situations, I claim that there is a notable shift of influence/power from governments and officials to civilians who are highly engaged in dialogue with other individuals because these ‘amateurs’ civilians are more considered as experts than the government itself.

Step 2

Generate ‘research’ questions from your claim statement

Research questions:

How/why are civilians in disaster management situations considered experts?

Write the counter question to the one above

How/why are public officials/institutions/information channels not considered experts?

Write a question that refers back to your specific claim and research questions i.e. what you set out to investigate in your research and what this means.

If/When the power/influence shifts to civilians in disaster response situations, what are the implications?

Step 3

Write answers to the research questions listing studies/articles that provide evidence/examples to support your answer. Use bullets or note form.

Example:

How/why are civilians in disaster management situations considered experts?

· They (civilians) have local knowledge of the area i.e. ‘domain expertise’ – credible (Backchannels/wildfires article)

· Prior to the disaster they have carried out/worked on surveys/environmental scans of the area so the information they provide is useful, practical and factual i.e. they worked in the field –credible, reliable (Backchannel/wildfires article)

· They are opinion leaders who others respect and follow and others identify with (trusted and credible) (Arab spring/cell phone article)

· They are trusted information sources because they are known and familiar – reliable e.g family, friends (trusted – reliable)(Arab Spring and Trust/Context article)

· They have experience with the disaster most likely because they were involved in a similar event in another area so can offer informed advice i.e. they don’t just provide superficial information, they provide useful information that people can act on - credible (Backchannels and Trust articles (Foot & Mouth disease UK)

How/why are public officials/institutions/information channels not considered experts?

· The public don’t trust them because they withhold information (SARS trust/context article) (not credible or trusted)

· They (government/public institutions) also try to control/shut down information sharing channels in times of crisis. (not trusted)(Arab Spring/trust article)

· They focus on protecting/giving information about urban – most popular areas as these are more newsworthy places (Backchannels – wildfires focus on where celebrity homes were burning). (not reliable)

· They lack knowledge of local areas/situations so can’t identify with victims of the disaster (Backchannels/Trust article) (not credible)

· They are slow at responding in times of urgent need and the information they give is not accurate (unreliable) (all three articles).

· They may provide facts about a situation but don’t give the people involved in the disaster practical advice about what to do (not credible) (Backchannel/wildfires – Trust/context – SARS/UK foot and mouth).

If/When the power/influence shifts to civilians in disaster response situations, what do you conclude from your review?

· Governments/public officials need to embrace social media tools to use the power the right way rather than ignore the benefits of using technology. They need to use the social media tools to serve the people rather than try to control them and/or the disaster situation.

Step 4

Put together you outline – structure of the paper so you can ‘synthesize’ the information you have so far into the correct sections.

Introduction

The introduction should identify your topic, discuss the significance of that topic and lead your readers to the problem/issue you are focusing on. Include a sentence that outlines what conclusions you will draw from your analysis and synthesis of the literature.

Example:

(1) A central issue in the field of disaster management is how the growing use of interactive media and social networks are influencing events. (2) As recognized authoritative institutions, governments/public officials have historically been considered experts in disaster management situations; however, advances in communication technology have resulted in increasing numbers of civilians using social media applications during crisis events. (3) Recent studies show that using social media tools, the public and individuals have become important players in exchanging, collecting and disseminating information in crises situations (add the citation to your 3 studies here). (4) As a result of this, there has been a notable shift of influence/power from governments and officials to civilians who are highly engaged in dialogue with other individuals. (5) Given this widespread usage, the traditional steps of emergency management may soon become outdated. (6) Officials cannot neglect the growth in the use of social media applications and must decide how to harness this communication technology for their own activities.

(7). From this, we can draw general conclusions about appropriate ways governments can use communication technologies to manage disaster/crisis events.

Sentence (1): introduces the topic

Sentence (2): starts to lead readers towards the problem by first explaining the ‘traditional/historical view - background

Sentence (3): introduces items of previous research in the area and starts to ‘narrow’ down the problem/issue to be discussed.

Sentence (4): States the problem/claim to be discussed.

Sentences (5 and 6): States implications of the problem (why it is important)

Sentence 7: States conclusions you draw from your synthesis and analysis.

Step 5: Organize your body paragraphs according to theme

In the body paragraphs, discuss and assess the research according to specific organizational principles rather than addressing each source as a separate study. Most, if not all, paragraphs should discuss more than one source. Avoid addressing your sources alphabetically as this does not assist in developing the themes or key issues central to your review. The most common way to organize literature reviews is through key themes.

Example

Body Paragraph 1: Expertise and Credibility

Body Paragraph 2: Expertise and Reliability

Body paragraph 3: Expertise and Trust

Step 6

Structure your body paragraphs as follows:

Topic Sentence

A topic sentence lets the reader know what the focus of the paragraph is. i.e. what the topic is and the main idea that will be explained.

Development

Development is where you explain / expand the idea presented in the topic sentence.

Support

Support comes in the form of examples from the three studies you are synthesizing/analyzing. Refer back to your notes/answers to the research questions that you made in step 3 to find suitable examples from the three articles to support the idea presented in the topic sentence.

Conclusion/transition sentence

This sentence restates the main idea of the paragraph and provides a link to the topic/idea you will focus on in the next paragraph

Example Body Paragraph

(1) In disaster situations, in spite of their relative lack of official authority, civilian users of social media possess relevant expertise due to their firsthand knowledge and experience with the situation. (2) In this way, others perceive them as having a great deal of credibility. (3) In contrast, even though public officials possess official authority, as a result of their limited first hand knowledge and experience with the situation, others perceive them as lacking in credibility. (4) Sutton, Palen and Shklovsi (2008), investigated this idea in their examination of peer-to-peer communications during the 2007 California Wildfires. (5) They were able to demonstrate that ………. (give specific examples that show how/why/where/when civilian users had first hand knowledge of the situation and public officials/government etc. clearly did not). (6) Semaan, Mark and Al-Ani (2010) findings also supported this idea. (7) In their examination of peer to peer communication during the Foot and Mouth Outbreak in the UK, they found that frustrated by not being able to receive instant, relevant and up to date information from the government, the UK farmers used their telephones and online community network to contact local and overseas farmers who had experienced a similar event. (8) Through dialogue with this knowledgeable community, the UK farmers were able to receive first hand ‘expert’ advice on how to deal with their problem. Add example the third article if relevant. If not write the concluding sentence. (9) Thus, according to these findings, civilian users of social media in these crises events were perceived as being a more credible resource than public officials.

Sentence (1) States topic sentence that gives the topic and what the paragraph is about.

Sentence (2) Develops idea in topic sentence.

Sentence (3) Develops idea in topic sentence.

Sentence (4) Supports idea by introducing first study.

Sentence (5) Supports idea by explaining example from the first study.

Sentence (6) Supports idea by introducing second study.

Sentence (7) Supports idea by explaining example from the second study.

Sentence (8) Supports idea by expanding on example from the second study.

Sentence (9) Concluding sentence that restates idea from topic sentence.

Conclusion

The conclusion should provide a summary of YOUR findings from the three articles reviewed. Explain what your analysis of the material leads you to conclude about the overall state of the topic/issue in the literature, what it provides and where it is lacking. You can also provide suggestions for future research.

Example

(1) These studies point to general conclusions about how governments can use communication technologies to manage disaster/crisis events. (2) The findings show that through peer-to-peer communication, civilians experiencing crisis and disaster situations create an online community of perceived credible and trusted ‘experts’ who provide, reliable, current information that the public can act upon. (3) Civilians create this community in response to not being served effectively by public officials/governments. (4) In times of crises, these recognized authoritative institutions may withhold information or through lack of relevant knowledge, fail to offer advice and information that civilians can act on. (5) Although there are challenges and risks associated with social media use in crisis events, to serve the people in the future, governments/public officials need to embrace social media tools to use the power the right way. (6) Future research should investigate how officials can harness this communication technology for their own activities.

Sentence (1): Repeats a key idea from the introduction to connect the ideas.

Sentence (2): Summarizes the findings/ideas mentioned in the review that explain how/why civilians are considered experts.

Sentence (3): Summarizes the findings/ideas mentioned in the review that explain how/why civilians do not consider public officials/governments as ‘experts’.

Sentence (4): Expands on idea in sentence 3.

Sentence (5): Acknowledges challenges and restates claim.

Sentence (6): Repeats key idea from the introduction and suggests future research ideas.

In the example paragraphs, note the use of transitions (in bold). These transitions ‘signal’ words help readers move forward through the text and also create cohesion. Other language features that do this are also in bold. Try to use these features in your revised text.