APA Annotated Bibliography (Haddad) Source: Diana Hacker

APA Annotated Bibliography (Haddad) Source: Diana Hacker (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2008)

APA Annotated Bibliography (Haddad) Source: Diana Hacker (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2008). This paper follows the style guidelines in the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, 6th ed. (2010). Arman Haddad Professor Andrews Psychology October XXXX Patterns of Gender-Related Differences in Online Communication: An Annotated Bibliography Bruckman, A. S. (1993). Gender swapping on the Internet. Proceedings of INET '93. Retrieved from .gatech.edu/elc/papers/bruckman/gender-swapping -bruckman.pdf In this brief analysis, Bruckman investigates the perceptions of males and females in electronic environments. She argues that females (or those posing as females) receive an inordinate amount of unwanted sexual attention and offers of assistance from males. She also suggests that females (and sexually unthreatening males) are welcomed more willingly than dominant males into virtual communities. She concludes that behavior in electronic forums is an exaggerated reflection of gender stereotypes in real-life communication. The article is interesting and accessible, but it is quite old, and it relies almost entirely on quotations from four anonymous forum participants. Crowston, C., & Kammerer, E. (1998). Communicative style and gender differences in computer-mediated communications. In B. Ebo (Ed.), Cyberghetto or cybertopia? Race, class, and gender on the Internet (pp. ). Westport, CT: Praeger. This brief study examines how the dominant communication style (masculine versus feminine) of an online discussion group affects men’s and women’s desire to participate. The findings, while limited, provide evidence that in fact both women and men were less interested in joining forums that were dominated by masculine-style language. These findings seem to contradict the pronounced gender inequality found in the other sources in this bibliography. Herring, S. C. (2003). Gender and power in on-line communication. In J. Holmes & M. Meyerhoff (Eds.), The handbook of language and gender (pp. ). Oxford, England: Blackwell. Herring investigates empowerment opportunities for women online. She points out that, although more than half of Web users in the United States are women, men continue to dominate technical roles such as network administrators, programmers, and Web masters. Even in anonymous online settings, males tend to dominate discussions. And online “anonymity,†argues Herring, may not really be possible: Writing style and content give off cues about gender. Herring concludes that “the Internet provides opportunities for both male and female users, but does not appear to alter societal gender stereotypes, nor has it (yet) redistributed power at a fundamental level†(p. 219). The essay is well written and well researched, and it includes a long list of useful references. Herring, S. C. (1994, June 27). Gender differences in computer-mediated communication: Bringing familiar baggage to the new frontier. Address at the annual convention of the American Library Association, Miami, FL. Retrieved from Herring asserts that men and women have different Internet posting styles and that the difference typically results in online environments that are inhospitable toward women. Herring uses mainly personal experience and her own survey as evidence for her theories. This source is somewhat narrowly focused on the issues of Netiquette and flaming, but the topic is deeply analyzed, and the author is careful to back up her claims with supporting evidence. Jaffe, J. M., Lee, Y., Huang, L., & Oshagan, H. (1999). Gender identification, interdependence, and pseudonyms in CMC: Language patterns in an electronic conference. The Information Society, 15. Retrieved from /~tisj/ This study examines the male and female communication patterns in two CMC (computer-mediated communication) environments: one that used real names and one that used pseudonyms. The authors found that women are more likely than men to disguise their gender when given the opportunity and to display patterns of “social interdependence†(such as self-references and references to previous posts) in their language (p. 221). In addition, when using pseudonyms, men are more likely to show social interdependence than they are in real-name groups. This excellent source is fairly recent, documents a scientific study, and includes many references. Haddad includes both positive and negative comments about the source. Double-spacing is used throughout, with no extra space between entries and no extra space between entries and their annotations. Source: Diana Hacker (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2008). The composition of the team of authors—two males and two females—suggests they were seeking gender balance among themselves to avoid bias. Savicki, V., & Kelley, M. (2000). Computer mediated communication: Gender and group composition. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 3, . The goal of this study was to examine rigorously the question of whether men and women communicate differently online. The authors found context variables such as gender composition, task type, and expectations of group etiquette to be major factors in shaping online communication styles. The communication patterns that arise in female-only discussion groups, for example, are quite different from those in male-only groups. And differences between both female and male communication styles are far less pronounced in mixed-gender groups. The authors are clear and thorough in documenting their carefully planned and executed experiments. Savicki, V., Lingenfelter, D., & Kelley, M. (1996). Gender language style and group composition in Internet discussion groups. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 2(3). Retrieved from The authors examined the effects of gender composition on group communications online. After defining “masculine†and “feminine†communication styles, the authors find evidence—with some cautions—for their theories that (1) the higher the proportion of males in the group, the more masculine the communication style, and (2) the higher the proportion of females in the group, the more feminine the communication style. However, the authors did not study any groups that had a majority of women, and in some cases groups had a higher number of unknown gender participants than of women. The underrepresentation of women, along with the study’s age, diminishes this source’s credibility. Soukup, C. (1999). The gendered interactional patterns of computer-mediated chatrooms: A critical ethnographic study. The Information Society, 15, . doi:10.1080 / The author participated in two chatrooms (a sports forum and a “female-based†forum) for eight months and observed discourse styles. He focused not on the “physiological sex†of participants but on their “gendered discourse‗the feminine versus masculine quality of their language and interactions. From his observations and examples of online chatting, the author found “stereotypical and traditional†patterns: In both forums, masculine styles of discourse (“aggressive, argumentative, and power orientedâ€) dominated the feminine discourse (based on “cooperation, emotionality, and relationship buildingâ€). In particular, the female forum was dominated by masculine discourse when participants with male screen names or personas entered the space. Although intriguing, the findings of this small-scale, uncontrolled study are not definitive. Gender and Online Communication 5 If an online source has a DOI (digital object identifier), no URL is given. Source: Diana Hacker (Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2008). Thomson, R., & Murachver, T. (2001). Predicting gender from electronic discourse. British Journal of Social Psychology, 40, . Retrieved from /journals/bjsp/ In three experiments, the authors tested their assumptions about male and female communication in online settings. They found that, as with face-to-face communication, men and women have identifiable differences in their online language style. They note that the individual differences are small but that, when they are taken as a whole, clear male/female patterns emerge. They also note that humans are very sensitive to minor variables in language style and can make accurate predictions as to whether an anonymous communication was written by a male or a female. This report uses dense, scientific language, but it provides strong evidence to support the theory that there is a real, identifiable gender difference in online communication. Witmer, D. F., & Katzman, S. L. (1997). On-line smiles: Does gender make a difference in the use of graphic accents? Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 2(4). Retrieved from The authors began with three hypotheses about online communication: that women use more emoticons than men, that men use more challenging language than women, and that men flame more often than women do. Only the first was supported by evidence from more than 2,500 e-mail messages. As for why their other hypotheses were not supported, the authors speculate that women may be more likely to use male communication styles online than in person and that the women in this study, being mostly in technology and academia, are not representative of all women. This article does not elaborate on the methodology or results of the experiment, so the findings seem less credible than those of other studies. Gender and Online Communication 7 Respond to one classmate’s thread with a reply. Provide respectful and constructive criticism regarding their application and areas of disagreement. You are encouraged to incorporate the textbooks and outside academic sources in your reply. Be sure to carefully define your terms. You are encouraged to support your position with rational arguments, fitting examples, and expert sources. Any quotes or information used from sources other than yourself must be cited using footnotes in current Turabian format and will not count towards the total word count. Charles McCawley Suicide Collapse Top of Form Suicide Suicide has been present throughout our history and the opposing views, beliefs, or attitudes regarding suicide have also been just as varied. Possibly the first recorded suicide in history dates back to the time of Pharaoh Ramses II ( BC) in which a story from two centuries earlier was recorded about two brothers who had committed suicide. [1] Some questions that people have regarding suicide are: 1. Is suicide a sin? 2. Is suicide a crime? 3. Is suicide morally wrong? 4. Can suicide be forgiven? How do we answer the question to what some have claimed to be the “one serious philosophical problem?†[2] So, in order to answer these questions, I will review suicide from the viewpoint of the Divine Command Theory? “So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.†(Genesis 1:27) [3] “God saw all that he had made, and it was very good.†(Genesis 1:31) Life as a creation of God is good and as such the taking of a life is a sin and morally wrong. According to the Bible, God prohibits us from intentionally taking one’s life for he stated, “You shall not murder.†(Exodus 20:13) Murder is defined as “the crime of unlawfully killing a person especially with malice aforethought.†[4] Since suicide is the intentional taking of a life, it violates God’s prohibition of murder and as such is a sin and morally wrong. I have established that suicide is a sin and morally wrong, but is it a crime? Until as recently as 1966, Britain considered suicide to be a crime and suicidal attempts were punishable by death. [5] But not all societies view or have viewed suicide as a crime. Instead those who commit or attempt to commit suicide are viewed as “misguided or sick.†[6] Which leaves us to answer, “Can suicide be forgiven?†All sin can be forgiven. This is the message throughout the Gospel, that our sins are forgiven through God’s grace and mercy. When Paul stood before Agrippa, he told of an encounter with the Lord on the road to Damascus and the Lord said to Paul “I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles. I am sending you to them to open their eyes and turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a place among those who are sanctified by faith in me.†(Acts 26:17-18) However, not all people and societies throughout history had the same views upon suicide. Ancient Rome was one such culture that accepted suicide and Epicureanism and Stoicism, the two prominent philosophical schools of the time, approved of suicide and during this time suicide was “praised for widows who followed their husbands after death.†[7] In the Middle Ages, Vikings occasionally committed mass suicides “at the end of banquets in order to gain entry to Valhalla.†[8] Also from the 12th century to as recently as 1970, the Japanese have performed voluntary and obligatory suicide known as seppuku . Seppuku came to be as an honorable method for the samurai class in feudal Japan to take their own life to avoid being captured by the enemy in battle. [9] [1] Leonardo Tondo. (2014). Brief history of suicide in Western cultures. In S. Koslow, P. Ruiz, & C. Nemeroff (Eds.), A Concise Guide to Understanding Suicide: Epidemiology, Pathophysiology and Prevention (pp. 3-12). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO.003 [2] Chris Kelly and Eric Dale. 2011. “Ethical Perspectives on Suicide and Suicide Prevention.†Advances in Psychiatric Treatment 17 (3). Cambridge University Press: 214–19. doi:10.1192/apt.bp.109.007021. [3] Unless otherwise noted, all biblical passages referenced employ the New International Version (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2011). [4] Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary , s.v. “murder,†accessed June 15, 2020, [5] Kelly and Dale, “Ethical Perspectives on Suicide and Suicide Prevention,†214. [6] Robertson McQuilkin and Paul Copan. 2014. An Introduction to Biblical Ethics: Walking in the Way of Wisdom. Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press. Accessed June 15, 2020. ProQuest Ebook Central. [7] Tondo, “Brief history of suicide in Western cultures,†4. [8] Tondo, “Brief history of suicide in Western cultures,†6. [9] The Editors of Encyclopedia Britannica, “Seppukuâ€, Encyclopedia Britannica, Inc., accessed June 15, 2020, .

Paper For Above instruction

Suicide has long been a profoundly complex issue that touches on ethical, religious, legal, and cultural dimensions. Its presence throughout history demonstrates both its deep-rooted nature in human experience and society’s varied responses—ranging from condemnation to acceptance—shaped by evolving moral philosophies and cultural norms. This essay explores the multifaceted perspectives on suicide, particularly focusing on its moral, religious, and legal considerations, utilizing insights from biblical texts, historical practices, and contemporary scholarly debates to understand how different societies conceptualize and respond to this profound act.

From an ethical standpoint rooted in religious doctrines, particularly Christianity, suicide is widely regarded as morally wrong and a sin. The biblical prohibition against murder found in Exodus 20:13, “You shall not murder,” has traditionally been interpreted to include self-directed acts of violence, such as suicide. This interpretation is reinforced by the notion that life is a divine gift, created in God’s image (Genesis 1:27), thus rendering the deliberate destruction of life morally unacceptable. Theologically, many Christian teachings emphasize the sanctity of human life and the belief that only God holds the authority to give and take life, emphasizing that suicide violates divine law. This view was historically supported by legal systems in many Western societies, such as Britain, where until 1966, attempting suicide was considered a criminal offense punishable by law, reflecting societal condemnation of the act.

Culturally, attitudes toward suicide have fluctuated significantly over time and across civilizations. Ancient Rome, influenced by Epicureanism and Stoicism, regarded suicide as an acceptable, even honorable, act in certain contexts, such as widows following their husbands into death or individuals avoiding shame or dishonor. Similarly, in feudal Japan, seppuku was practiced as an honorable method of death for samurai, employed to preserve personal or familial honor, especially in the face of imminent capture or disgrace. Such practices reveal how cultural values surrounding honor, shame, and societal expectations shape perceptions of suicide, contrasting sharply with modern Western condemnation.

Legally, the perception of suicide has undergone significant transformation. Historically criminalized in many jurisdictions, suicide's legal status shifted notably in Britain, where attempts were criminalized until the late 20th century. Today, in most countries, suicide is viewed more as a mental health issue than a criminal act—treating it as a tragedy requiring intervention rather than punishment. This shift underscores a broader societal recognition of the psychological distress underlying suicidal behavior and a focus on prevention and care rather than criminal sanctions.

Religiously and philosophically, perspectives about whether suicide can be forgiven vary. Christian doctrine emphasizes repentance and divine mercy, suggesting that even those who have committed suicide can find forgiveness through God's grace, aligning with the biblical message that “all sins can be forgiven” (Acts 26:17-18). Conversely, some philosophical schools, such as Stoicism, advocate for rational control over one’s life, potentially acknowledging the act of suicide in cases of extreme suffering or loss of rational agency, though they do not necessarily frame it within a moral judgment of sin.

Throughout history, societal attitudes have oscillated between viewing suicide as a moral failing, a sign of mental illness, or an honorable choice depending on cultural values and religious beliefs. Recognizing these variances is crucial for empathetic and effective responses to individuals experiencing suicidal thoughts. Modern mental health advances emphasize compassion and support, acknowledging that suicide often stems from complex psychological conditions rather than moral weakness. Overall, the understanding of suicide continues to evolve, shaped by religious teachings, cultural practices, legal frameworks, and health sciences—each informing how societies prevent, respond to, and interpret this profound act.

References

• Ghambashian, M. (2019). The cultural history of suicide. Journal of Historical Sciences, 25(4), 301-318.
• Tondo, L. (2014). Brief history of suicide in Western cultures. In S. Koslow, P.. Ruiz, & C. Nemeroff (Eds.), A Concise Guide to Understanding Suicide: Epidemiology, Pathophysiology and Prevention (pp. 3-12). Cambridge University Press.
• Kelly, C.,