Article Critique

  • Uncategorized



Drago, E. (2015). The effect of technology on face-to-facecommunication. The Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research inCommunications 6(1), 13-19.


The purpose of the study is to demonstrate how technology has had anegative impact on face-to-face communication. Drago (2015) arguesthat technology has become a major part of our daily lives. It isalmost impossible for an individual to spend an entire day withoutaccessing their mobile phones, communicating through social media andusing tablets among other forms of digital communication. As aresult, society has become too immersed in technology, such thatpeople are replacing face-to-face communication with digitalinteractions.

The article is important because it alerts readers on the dangers ofexcessive use of technology. When people become accustomed to usingtechnology, they are likely to eliminate human interaction in thelong run. The increasing use of technology reduces the quality aswell as quantity of face-to-face communications. This will eventuallyhave a negative effect on the people’s ability to interact withallies, families and colleagues.


The article does not explicitly draw on a theory. The author reviewsliterature, which focuses on the relationship between use oftechnology and social or one-on-one interactions. Drago (2015) beginsthe literature review by analyzing how technology has experienced arapid growth, specifically in America. More than half of the Americanpopulation have access to a home computer and live in households thathave internet connectivity. In addition, 90% of U.S. civilians have acell phone. It is important to note that the use of technology ismore widespread among the young people, who spend most of their timeusing technological devices to communicate.

The article explores studies concluding on the fact that technologynegatively affects social interaction. The first study reviewedexplains that although technological developments have beensignificant in allowing billions of individuals to connect easily,the impact of such devices on face-to-face interactions is negative.Devices have a negative effect on the connection, quality ofconversation and closeness that should be achieved when interactingone-on-one. Literature review on the second study concludes thatusing mobile devices reduces the quality of social communications.This is because the use of technology makes it impossible for peopleto express their emotions while interacting.

The literature analysis dominantly demonstrates that technology hasa higher likelihood to have a negative impact on how people interactface-to-face. Hence, the author develops research questions that aimat determining how using technology affects individuals’ capabilityto converse face-to-face, how the availability of technology islikely to affect how people communicate with others in public, andwhether the rise in technology use has resulted in a decline in thequality and quantity of face-to-face communication.


The author uses a survey to measure how participants engage withdifferent technologies and in face-to-face interactions. The methodused is effective as it makes it possible to mark out disparities inthe use of technology, like cell phones and their impact onone-on-one communication. The sample comprised of 100 students fromElon University. It was an appropriate sample because the article hasalready noted that the use of technology is high amongst the younggeneration. University students mainly comprise of young people, whohave devices such as cell phones, tablets, computers and internetconnectivity. Hence, they are highly likely to use these devices tocommunicate, which makes them the best sample to study.

The sampling method used was non-probability sampling throughelectronic mail and Facebook. It was a suitable sampling methodbecause it ensured that the author was able to select participantsthat would be readily available to take part in the study. Inaddition, the method ensures that the researcher selects specificparticipants, for instance those that use technological devices. Theauthor sufficiently defines the variables, which are technology usehabits, face-to-face communication when using technology, andinvolvement during both one-on-one and technology interactions thus,making it possible to respond to if technology has had a negativeimpact on face-to-face communication.

The procedure used to conduct the research involved askingparticipants about their technology use and attitudes towardsface-to-face interactions when using technological devices. Using thesurvey findings, the researcher conducted a field observation oncampus to record interactions between students as well as technology.


The researcher found that most of the study participants frequentlyused their cell phones. This applies to using the devices wheninteracting with friends or family. In addition, many students chooseto communicate using their cell phones as compared to face-to-faceinteractions. As a result, the quality of one-on-one communicationdecreases. When communicating with an individual that is frequentlyusing their phone, it becomes impossible for the person to fullyconcentrate on what is being said. Hence, he or she may miss out onimportant communication characteristics, such as the emotionsexpressed when talking.

Another finding is that the quantity of time spend using technologydecreases the likelihood that people will spend more time interactingface-to-face. The study noted that technology is negatively affectingsocial interactions by limiting the capability of people to conversedirectly. Individuals are able to disguise themselves when usingtechnology, which cannot be achieved via face-to-face chats. Forinstance, it may be easier for a student to post something on Facebook, yet the same learner cannot talk about what they post on aone-on-one basis. As a result, as individuals continue to replacedirect communication with technology use, the ability to expressthemselves in a social context declines.


The survey employed in conducting the research results in aconvenience sample. As a result, it is not possible to generalize thefindings to a larger population. Also, the survey depends onvolunteer participants. The researcher used the list of availableparticipants to select those that would be included in the study,which enhances the possibility of biases. Another limitation is thatthe survey recruited participants that had a Facebook account andemail. Considering that there are many social networking platforms,the researcher should have included individuals that have differentsocial media accounts.


Although the research has been conducted on students, it can be usedto make changes to how people use technology in different settings.For instance, employers can use the study to make work policies thatprohibit employees from using their cell phones when communicatingwith customers. Workers who use their phones when assisting clientsreduce the quality and quantity of interaction between both parties.As a result, this could chase away customers who feel that theirneeds are not fully catered for. In future, research should focus onexploring how people can limit technology use when interactingface-to-face. This ensures that individuals are not only informed onthe negative impact of widespread use of technology on face-to-faceinteractions, but on how to improve public communication.


Drago, E. (2015). The effect of technology on face-to-facecommunication. The Elon Journal of Undergraduate Research inCommunications 6(1), 13-19.

Article critique

  • Uncategorized


Thearticle “response to a mobile health decision- support system forscreening (mhealth DSS) and management of tobacco use “by Kenrick,Sookyung and Suzanne seeks to address the question on response ofnurses to mhealth DSS. Additionally, he aims at describing nurse’sactions in response to a mobile health decision support system forscreening and management of tobacco use. The authors introducedifferent facts about smoking and the importance of screening andtreatment of tobacco users. Several facts such as the prevalence ofsmoking-related disorders and mortality rates have been indicated inthe article.

Accordingto the article, tobacco is a major cause of preventable death in theUnited States. Tobacco is associated with several health conditionssuch as breathing problems and some forms of cancer (Cato, Hyun &ampBakken, 2014). It affirms that Hispanics are likely to be affectedthan other races. The article states that in preventing deaths thatare associated with tobacco usage, screening remains the mosteffective and successful preventive approach to managing thecondition (Cato, Hyun &amp Bakken, 2014). From the study, mHealthDSS can significantly reduce disparities that are witnessed acrosspeople of different races.


Immediatelyone starts to read the article, it is evident that it does not havean abstract and this makes it difficult to determine what the articlewill be discussing. The problem statement is in the last paragraph ofthe introduction. However, some of the important information that onefinds are that the collection and analysis of data can give evidenceon the screening rates of nurses in respond to the reminder bymhealth DSS. It is also necessary to predict on the frequency of theuse of cessation-related intervention on patients who are willing toquit smoking. The primary objective was to predict how nurses wouldreact in response to mhealth DSS. The questions proposed in the studysuch as predictors of screening rates and tobacco cessation inmHealth DSS are found at the end of the introduction.

Sincethe study aimed at analyzing the response to a technologicalinvention, focusing on one group within was not appropriate. This isbecause the study is not an adequate representative of the totalpopulation and is thus biased. There should have been a larger orcomplementary group of nurses who did not have the reminder to serveas control experiments. The results of this study cannot be used togeneralize the response of nurses. In terms of the research designused, it is evident that the authors used both qualitative andquantitative methodology. Additionally, the design for testingnurses’ responses was observational. There was a high chance thatthe results would be biased because the study participants were awarethat they were being observed. The statistical analysis techniqueused in this study was very reliable. The authors used SPPS softwareto determine the correlation between study variables and make hisconclusion.


Froman individual’s perspective, even though the article is quiteinformative and contains relevant information, its reliability isquestionable. The authors have used a small study population, andthis greatly affect the credibility and applicability of thefindings. The fact that there were no comparison groups makes thediscussion unclear. However, the theoretical and practicalimplications of the study have been discussed effectively. Thefindings, however, agree with another study that indicated that therehas been an increase in smoking patterns in the country (Thun et al.2013)


Thearticle concludes by affirming that mhealth DSS can be used to remindnurses to screen for tobacco. The article has several flaws such asmissing introduction and small study population. However, itssuggestion about mhealth DSS can be used in regular nursing practicebecause nurses tend to have a busy schedule and may at times forgetimportant details such as screening tobacco patients. If successfullyimplemented, it is evident that tobacco related conditions such asthroat cancer and respiratory problems will be managed. Additionally,the intervention will allow better diagnosis of various ailmentscaused by smoking tobacco.


Cato,K., Hyun, S., &amp Bakken, S. (2014, March). Response to a MobileHealth Decision Support System for Screening and Management ofTobacco Use. In&nbspOncologynursing forum&nbsp(Vol.41, No. 2, p. 145). NIH Public Access.

Thun,M. J., Carter, B. D., Feskanich, D., Freedman, N. D., Prentice, R.,Lopez, A. D.,&amp Gapstur, S. M. (2013). 50-year trends insmoking-related mortality in the United States.&nbspNewEngland Journal of Medicine,&nbsp368(4),351-364.

Article Critique

  • Uncategorized



Inthe article written by Hester et al., the authors evaluate thefactors associated with injurious falls among adults admitted tohospitals. In the article, the researchers identify the risk factorsfor falls, and they include changes in the laboratory values, oldage, adverse effects of medication, cognitive problems, and mobilityissues (Hester et al., 2016). Besides, the researchers utilizeexisting medical records to evaluate relevant data regarding thepatient factors that result in injurious falls. This assessment willevaluate the article’s usefulness to the nursing practice.


Asignificant proportion of hospitalized individuals become victims ofinpatient falls, with the overall risk of such events being 1.9% to3%, and this is approximately 1 million people annually (Hester etal., 2016). The injuries that patients sustain after falling could besevere, and this means that they have to spend more to cover theirhospital bills. The researchers evaluated the arithmeticalsignificance of the data and then analyzed it using the SPSSstatistical software. From the results that the researchers obtained,they concluded that the patients with ill-defined disorders were at agreater risk of injurious falls.


Thetitle accurately describes the article and its contents. As theheading suggests that the piece of writing discusses the predictionof injurious falls, and their implications for clinical practice, itevidently reflects the research contents. The results prove thathealthcare providers could identify the patients who were more likelyto fall based on their conditions. The abstract is alsorepresentative of the article considering that it contains anoverview of the purpose, background, methodology, findings, andconclusion. Moreover, the introduction clarifies the editorial’spurpose considering that it includes the problem statement, which isquite significant. It also states the hypothesis that screening andassessment tools can be used to evaluate risk factors for injuries,and the expected results are presented. However, Hester et al. (2016)have not clearly defined the study questions, but these do not haveto be present since the investigators have stated the specificconcern in the first part of the introduction.

Thecanvassers included a theoretical framework in their study where theyprovided a rationale that forms the basis of the inquiry. Besides,the literature review used should be relevant to the study (Kaplan,2012). The literature review satisfies this requirement since theterms that the researchers used while conducting searches were allrelated to injurious falls. Although some of the literature used wasnot recent, the hospital-based studies ranged from 2006 to 2013, butthey all support the purpose of the investigation.

Thedesign employed in the methods section is appropriate for the studysince it includes a sample that comprises of adults only, consideringthat neonatal falls are different. This sample fits with the studydesign since the researchers grouped the participants depending onwhether they were injured or not. The study also used electronicmedical records as the data collection instrument, and this wasnecessary since the researchers obtained the information from anacademic medical center. The data was then collected from the medicalrecords, but it did not account for reliability and validity. Theanalytical approach is undeviating since there is the use ofchi-square tests for data appraisal.

Theresearchers have presented their results clearly in the text, andthey have also used tables and figures for the same purpose, but theexplanation of the outcome is in the discussion section. Thediscussion should explain the study and illustrate its relationshipto the research questions, theoretical framework, and its value tonursing (Kaplan, 2012). The investigators used the analysis segmentto explain the results and link them to the theoretical framework andtheir significance to nursing. Equally important, the canvasserspresented the study’s limitations and included their limitations.There are also recommendations for further research, particularly theinclusion of more diverse variables.


Injuriousfalls constitute a critical aspect in the clinical setting, and ahospital that is notorious for such events can be poorly ratedregardless of its performance in other categories. Clinical practicerequires the practitioners to prevent hospital-acquired conditions.As the article indicates that patients with ill-defined conditionsare more likely to have injurious falls, nursing staff should takethis into account while caring for patients.


Thearticle by Hester et al. (2016) is useful to the nursing practicesince it presents some of the most relevant predictors of injuriousfalls. From the results that the researchers obtained, they concludedthat the patients with ill-defined disorders were at a greater riskof injurious falls. This discovery, among others, providesinformation indicating that clinicians should pay attention to aparticular group of patients.


Hester,A., Tsai, P., Rettiganti, M., &amp Mitchell, A. (2016). PredictingInjurious Falls in the Hospital Setting: Implications for Practice.AmericanJournal of Nursing,116(9),34-31.

Kaplan,A. (2012). Frameworkfor How to Read and Critique a Research Study.American Nurses Association.

Close Menu