intro-try to tie in the use of twitter and the hashtag that you are using.Then connect it with the opioid crisis. i would try to shorten the into a little.
methods- was good
results- was amazing you do a very good job at making big picture topics come together under smaller claims
1. The report was very well put together and comprehensive throughout. A revision to strengthen the focus on the community is to put the #SupportDontPunish in the intro. This will help the reader to know what specifically you are analyzing before the methods part.
2. The report is able to connect the twitter conversation to a social issue such as drugs and the way we treat those that are addicted. The topic is very focused and a very interesting idea overall. I don't particularly see a way to strengthen the connection between twitter conversations and the topic as the report all ready does a fantastic job with it.
3. The visual was very informative and the right size to where the reader could understand it. A way to improve the methods is to inform the reader of the codes chosen and the reason behind selecting those.
4. The report is not missing anything detrimental and is very cohesive with its thoughts. The flow of the passages are nice and natural.
5. There is nothing that stood out while reading this that needed to be changed. The only thing to add is your hashtag in the introduction.
-The report does a good job of giving some background history about the opioid epidemic and drug reports. The introduction is very effective in opening what this whole report is about. I would maybe introduce the hashtag and the connection of the project with twitter.
-The report does a great job of connecting the twitter conversation to the actual topic. The report breaks down into topics that deal with social interest. Overall, the connections of the topic and conversations are well thought out and put together, so there is nothing that I can think of to adjust.
-The visuals were very effective and did a good job of discussing the tweets. The only thing I can think of to improve the data analysis is to maybe dig a little deeper into the categories.
-Everything looks really good and put together well. Instead of having just a results section, there could be a data analysis or conclusion section to wrap it up instead.
-Overall, the report is very successful. I can’t think of anything else to add.
I'm glad I was given the feedback to include the hashtag in the introduction, because reading back over my paper, I recognize that the third paragraph of the introduction mentions the activism around addiction and policy reform, but does not emphasize the focus of the study- the support don't punish campaign- nor the hashtag from which I am gathering the Twitter data.
I also think it was useful to get feedback on my coding, as that was something I didn't feel confident about, and in the revision I am going to go back through the codes, make them more explicit, and maybe take out some of the less important sentences to make it more succinct and clear.
In terms of formatting, I definitely agree that the results should be separated from the conclusion. That is another suggestion I will integrate into my revised paper.
Comments
intro-try to tie in the use…
intro-try to tie in the use of twitter and the hashtag that you are using.Then connect it with the opioid crisis. i would try to shorten the into a little.
methods- was good
results- was amazing you do a very good job at making big picture topics come together under smaller claims
Peer Review
1. The report was very well put together and comprehensive throughout. A revision to strengthen the focus on the community is to put the #SupportDontPunish in the intro. This will help the reader to know what specifically you are analyzing before the methods part.
2. The report is able to connect the twitter conversation to a social issue such as drugs and the way we treat those that are addicted. The topic is very focused and a very interesting idea overall. I don't particularly see a way to strengthen the connection between twitter conversations and the topic as the report all ready does a fantastic job with it.
3. The visual was very informative and the right size to where the reader could understand it. A way to improve the methods is to inform the reader of the codes chosen and the reason behind selecting those.
4. The report is not missing anything detrimental and is very cohesive with its thoughts. The flow of the passages are nice and natural.
5. There is nothing that stood out while reading this that needed to be changed. The only thing to add is your hashtag in the introduction.
Peer Review
-The report does a good job of giving some background history about the opioid epidemic and drug reports. The introduction is very effective in opening what this whole report is about. I would maybe introduce the hashtag and the connection of the project with twitter.
-The report does a great job of connecting the twitter conversation to the actual topic. The report breaks down into topics that deal with social interest. Overall, the connections of the topic and conversations are well thought out and put together, so there is nothing that I can think of to adjust.
-The visuals were very effective and did a good job of discussing the tweets. The only thing I can think of to improve the data analysis is to maybe dig a little deeper into the categories.
-Everything looks really good and put together well. Instead of having just a results section, there could be a data analysis or conclusion section to wrap it up instead.
-Overall, the report is very successful. I can’t think of anything else to add.
My revisions
I'm glad I was given the feedback to include the hashtag in the introduction, because reading back over my paper, I recognize that the third paragraph of the introduction mentions the activism around addiction and policy reform, but does not emphasize the focus of the study- the support don't punish campaign- nor the hashtag from which I am gathering the Twitter data.
I also think it was useful to get feedback on my coding, as that was something I didn't feel confident about, and in the revision I am going to go back through the codes, make them more explicit, and maybe take out some of the less important sentences to make it more succinct and clear.
In terms of formatting, I definitely agree that the results should be separated from the conclusion. That is another suggestion I will integrate into my revised paper.