Chia 1

Alexandra Chia
Zack De Piero
WRIT 2
February 2016
The Views on Recreational Use of Artificial Happiness
As the years pass us by, drugs began to evolve in terms of use and purpose. There are a
variety of over-the-counter drugs acceptable to take as a way to cure ones illness, whether
physical or mental. Ecstasy used to be one of these drugs. Prior to fully understanding the serious
repercussions of ecstasy use, it was once used to cure patients diagnosed with severe PTSD. We
now view the drug more accurately, understanding the dangers that come with its usage. Here,
different disciplines will approach the subject of ecstasy as well as give different points of views
that apply to individuals who abuse these drugs. The disciplines of statistics, psychology, and
political science as well as the genres of scholarly texts and non-scholarly articles largely
influence how the subject is approached, why particular structural conventions are applied, and
what types of moves used by the authors.
Adopting the approach used in the discipline of statistics, one analyzes ecstasy based on
the numerical data of different factors. Rather than approach the drug in the present, statisticians
will approach factors of life prior to ecstasy use. Particular elements are used in order to
determine which factors cause a higher likelihood of ecstasy abuse. In Factors Associated with
Teenage Ecstasy Use, data regarding the lifestyle, behavioral patterns, and abuse of other
substances is collected. This data is then analyzed alongside data regarding the ecstasy use of
participants in order to easily draw parallels between the two sets of information. The study
provided information that allowed statisticians to infer that female gender, delinquency,

Chia 2
problem behaviours at school and the number of evenings spent out with friends each week were
[...] significant [in] predicting [ecstasy use] (McCrystal et al. 507). In other words, there are
many factors, especially regarding negative adolescent behavior, that are positively associated
with patterns of ecstasy use.
The scholarly peer-reviewed journal article Modelling the Adverse Effects Associated
with Ecstasy Use highlights the psychological effects of long-term ecstasy use. Unlike the
previous scholarly article, the psychological approach taken here is more preoccupied with the
future and the condition of the mind after continual abuse of ecstasy. Evidence allows the
scholars to come to the conclusion that great exposure to the drug [increases] the likelihood of
experiencing [...] paranoia, poor general health, irritability, confusion, and moodiness] (Fisk et
al. 799) . The statement concludes that high exposure and use of ecstasy will, in the long run,
lead to many negative unwanted effects on an individuals psychological state of mind.
Dying to Dance, an online news article regarding the current recreational use of ecstasy,
views the use of the drug from the standpoint of a political scientist. Whereas the two previous
scholarly articles were peer-reviewed journals that viewed ecstasy more in terms of the
individual or in patterns of individuals, this discipline views the drug as one small piece in the
big picture of the war on drugs. It speculates how to better the role of law enforcement and drug
policy in order to create a safer environment for the drug users and be more efficient with
government funds. Rather than have billions spent on enforcing anti-drug laws, (Balendra et
al.) the article suggests that one should find a way to enforce these laws without it being [an
expensive way of achieving failure] (Balendra et al).
Despite the fact that the disciplines of statistics and political science are quite different
and the fact that one article was from a scholarly source while the other was from a media outlet,

Chia 3
both came to the conclusion that a change in drug policy and intervention needs to be
implemented. However, opinions cause the two disciplines to deviate from each other in terms of
what kinds of changes are needed. The statistical scholarly journal argues that these policies
should be based on empirical evidence and data. The political science article, on the other hand,
believes that law enforcement and the war on drugs should be more focused on the the safety and
wellbeing of drug users. As one can imagine, statisticians seem to have more of a logical
approach in regards to response based on empirical information whilst political scientists seem to
place greater importance on the country and its citizens. Psychologists are more engaged with the
psychological problems the individual faces as repercussions for long term recreational use of
ecstasy. This causes them to think a much smaller scale, recognizing how these issues can be
resolved with a more scientific approach.
In terms of structure, we are able to draw parallels between the two scholarly articles that
have been chosen and analyzed. They both are neatly sectioned off into abstract, introduction,
methods, results, discussion, acknowledgements, and references. Each section seems to be quite
identical style-wise, only majorly differing in the actual content. Both methods and discussion
sections are chalked full of tables, organizing information and displaying it in a way much easier
to digest. There are slight differences, however. The psychological article seems to be missing a
section present in the statistical article that is very crucial in these articles: a conclusion. It does
have several sentences that appear to be a conclusion, but it lacks the impact of an isolated
section whose sole purpose is to discuss the relevance of the information found. There also
seems to be a slight difference when comparing the methods section: the psychological
researchers is split into two sections and then subsequently into smaller sections, whereas the
statisticians simply begin a new section for each method. This minor detail aids in the overall

Chia 4
organization of the methods section for the psychological information, allowing the reader to
better understand its relevance.
The structure of the non scholarly article represented by the political science approach is
dramatically different from the scholarly journals. There is much less evidence and analysis
overall. The article seems to be very spaced out, with a few empty rows between every couple of
sentences. This makes the article very easy to read as it demonstrates a much looser structure
similar to online blogs, which works well since the author is trying to reach a specific [and
similar] group of readers (Bunn 76). In other words, the writers of the article seem to be
targeting an audience who would most likely read online blogs as well. In order to reach out to
this audience, this article was written in a form reminiscent of blogs.
There are also similarities that can be seen between the many moves that scholars seem to
make when writing articles. These are very distinguished from the common moves of writers
whose works appear in mainstream articles meant for the public. Scholars have a large tendency
to use hedged language. Since these conclusions are not always completely accurate, hedged
languages allows for more leeway for a their claims. The careful phrasing infuses [the] narrative
with words that establish room for doubt (Boyd 91). When claiming that strong links have
been established (McCrystal et al. 508), the authors seem to understand that using these
particular words and phrases indicate that evidence clearly supports their conclusions. Phrases
such as statistically significant and investigated are also thrown in more often, since this
type of language and vocabulary are much more acceptable in this setting. Introduction and
analysis of evidence are also far more specific with descriptions, incorporating empirical data in
phrases such as a 400% relative increase (McCrystal et al. 508) and temperatures reaching 40
degrees Celsius (McCrystal et al. 508). Counterarguments are much more likely to be brought

Chia 5
up in order to combat any controversy regarding the legitimacy of the journal. Often, any
mistakes possibly made in the study as well as contradicting information from other studies are
brought up and discussed. Doing so will increase the legitimacy of the article. To build upon this
validity, citations are made after each and every incident in which information was drawn upon
from an outside source.
The mainstream media article, however, does not use any of the moves that the authors of
the scholarly journals used. It seems as though this article is much less objective than the
scholarly texts. Rather than having empirical data displayed in charts, the article uses personal
opinions in order to establish validity. Views such as, this law enforcement effort is not only not
effective but is actually harmful (Balendra et al.), is used as evidence. To establish that a
valid opinion has been stated, the authors recognizes and bolds the relevance of the persons by
their title. During this article, there are also several times when the writers attempt to appeal to
their reader by relating to them and appealing to their humanizing qualities. In order to better
connect with the reader, they directly address them by proclaiming that drug users could be
[their] friends, [their] workmates, [their] children (Balendra et al.). The article mentions
several times that multiple lives were lost due to drug abuse. This appeals to our emotions and
evokes empathy in order to persuade us to adopt their opinion (Carroll 53). It catches the reader
off guard, which helps in effectively manipulating ones feelings.
The differences between scholarly texts and non-scholarly media articles as well as
approaches by different disciplines have now been discussed over and over, establishing known
facts regarding how they differ. Why they differ is the most important. It is easy to recognize that
each article varies from the other because each individual discipline seems to focus on a very
particular point of view. Every discipline has its own range of acceptable jargon, diction, and

Chia 6
tone (Boyd 92), making it evident that the differences are due to the different cultures of the
authors distinct fields of study. However, it is also very apparent that the two scholarly journals,
though written by authors originating from different disciplines, are very similar in structure,
approach, and style. This is because these two have audiences very similar to one another,
matching in level of intellect as well as reasons for reading the text. Audience can determine the
type of language used, the formality of the discourse, the medium or delivery of the rhetoric, and
even the types of reasons used (Carroll 49). Because the audiences of the scholarly journal
pieces seem to draw many parallels to each other, the authors of the individual texts ultimately
use similar language, tone, and style. The non-scholarly piece differs from the other two articles
in terms of discipline and genre, resulting in a strong contrast with the two.
In conclusion, it is important to note that discipline plays a large role in approaching a
certain subject. However, genre of the discourse has a larger influence on the overall components
of the text. The structure and tone, which are determined more by audience and genre rather than
the discipline, are both vastly important in the delivery of the message and the means of delivery
is just as important as the message itself.

Works Cited

Boyd, Janet. "Murder! (Rhetorically Speaking)." Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing. By

Charles Lowe and Pavel Zemliansky. Vol. 2. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor, 2010. 87-101.
Print.
Bunn, Mike. "How to Read Like a Writer." Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing. By Charles
Lowe and Pavel Zemliansky. Vol. 2. West Lafayette, IN: Parlor, 2010. 71-86. Print.

Chia 7
Carroll, Laura Bolin. "Backpacks vs. Briefcases: Steps toward Rhetorical Analysis." Writing
Spaces: Readings on Writing. By Charles Lowe and Pavel Zemliansky. Vol. 2. West
Lafayette, IN: Parlor, 2010. 45-58. Print.
McCrystal, Patrick, and Andrew Percy. "Factors Associated with Teenage Ecstasy Use." Taylor
& Francis. N.p., 26 Aug. 2010. Web. 22 Feb. 2016.
Meldrum-Hanna, Caro, and Jaya Balendra. "DYING TO DANCE." - Four Corners. ABC News,
15 Feb. 2016. Web. 22 Feb. 2016.
Fisk, JE, PN Murphy, C. Montgomery, and F. Hadjiefthyvoulou. "Result Filters." National
Center for Biotechnology Information. U.S. National Library of Medicine, 23 Dec. 2010.
Web. 22 Feb. 2016.

Rubric
Did Not Meet
Expectations

Exceeded
Expectations

Thesis Statement
Use of Textual Evidence from Genres
Use of Course Readings
Analysis
Organization/Structure
Attention to Genre/Conventions and
Rhetorical Factors
Sentence-level Clarity, Mechanics,
Flow
Other Comments

Met Expectations

X+
X
X
X
X

Chia,
Im impressed by your work here -- you
really seem to have gotten how these

Chia 8
two different disciplines approach this
topic in considerably different ways. I can
tell that you put a lot of hard work into
this too, and I really appreciate that.
Please read through my comments on how
you can strengthen this even further for
your portfolio. In addition to that

-What specific data did they collect?

Whatd they find? Whats going to be
done with their work? I dont feel like I
learned toooo too much about drugs from
a stats or psych perspective -- help me
understand what theyre trying to teach
us about this issue. Get into the data.
Get into their RQs. What does it seem
like each perspective values with regard
to understanding this topic?
-Id also like you to find a way to weave
moves throughout this piece a bit more.
How can thinking about moves help you
establish a crisper argument?
That said, I wanna be clear: Im really
happy with your work here, sister.
Z
9.5/10
(PS: I do want you to be happy with this
A, but I dont want you thinking that this
doesnt need work. Everybodys paper
does -- were in the business of getting
our writing as good as it can possibly be.)