Psychaped

Thesis: Even though some high-ranking persons and politicians deny climate change, blatantly opposing scientists’ findings, students on college campuses gained a renewed interest in starting movements related to sustainability and reducing the effects of climate change.

#1

Douglas, Karen M., and Robbie M. Sutton. “Climate change: Why the conspiracy theories are dangerous.” Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, vol. 71, no. 2, Mar. 2015, pp. 98-106. PAIS ProQuest, doi:10.1177/0096340215571908. Accessed 23 Apr. 2017.

 

#2

Beller, Carolyn. “Students Push College Fossil Fuel Divestment To Stigmatize Industry.” npr, 11 Apr. 2015, www.npr.org/2015/04/11/398757780/students-push-college-fossil-fuel-divestment-to-stigmatize-industry. Accessed 23 Apr. 2017.

 

#3

Anderson, Craig A., “Belief Perseverance.” Encyclopedia of Social Psychology, 2007, pp. 109-110, public.psych.iastate.edu/caa/abstracts/2005-2009/07a.pdf. Accessed 23 Apr. 2017.

 

#4

Mingle, Jonathan. “Fighting for the Future: Activists and scholars debate the role of social movements in climate change.” Environment@Harvard, vol. 5, no. 1, 2013, pp. 1-7, environment.harvard.edu/news/huce-headlines/social-movements-and-climate-change. Accessed 21 Apr. 2017.

 

Each source in an essay has a different purpose. Some provide definitions so that the reader is “on the same page” as the author when reading the essay. Others provide a unique viewpoint on controversial topics. Still others give specific information about news events and happenings. Regardless of the type of source, each will contribute information that is vital to the thesis of the paper.

To begin, source 1 provides a lot of information about why people believe in climate change conspiracy theories. This source is reliable because I found it using an online database, and it is published by scientists. I can mostly use this to explain why there is a disagreement within the population and among highly influential people such as politicians and scientists. The extracted arguments from the source provide psychological reasons why climate change conspiracy theories are so effective in persuasion. I took these psychological reasons and put names and descriptions to them using other source. For example, source 3 is simply a definition of the psychological key term “belief perseverance,” and this is a trusted source because the author is a professor in the Department of Psychology at Iowa State University. In conjunction with source 1, I used source 3 to better explain the psychology associated with climate change conspiracy theories. Therefore, the readers of my essay will better understand the reasons behind conspiracy theories, and, overall, it will strengthen my argument because I specifically defined and named the terms. These two sources, in cahoots, will complement my overall topic by providing adequate background on how climate change conspiracies have created skepticism in the general population.

Next, I used sources 2 and 4 together to strengthen my argument. These two sources are more directly related to my thesis because they give examples of movements related to climate change. Both sources are reliable: source 2 is from an impartial news website and source 4 is from Harvard’s website. Source 2 focuses more on a specific student-led divestment movement while source 4 provides many examples of movements. Source 4 created a backbone summary of different methods of activism, which helped me form the multiple points of the argument while source 2 provided a specific example of one method of activism. This strengthens the argument because of how detailed and specific source 2 is. Together, the two sources add to the overall ideas of my essay because they provide a strong argument in favor of my thesis.

Collectively, these sources direct where my paper will go. For example, because I used psychological terms early in my paper, I should stick with that theme. I will provide a psychological lens with which to view the other arguments in my essay in order to stay consistent. In conclusion, these sources shaped my paper by providing succinct examples that can be easily formed into arguments that support my thesis.

Advertisements

Sources

Bibliography (MLA)

1) “Energy Use at the University of Delaware.” University of Delaware Sustainability, The University of Delaware, sites.udel.edu/sustainability/energy/. Accessed 24 Apr. 2017.

2) Hoffman, Melody K. “Campuses Growing Greener.” Jet, vol. 117, no. 16, 19 Apr. 2010, p. 35. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspxdirect=true&db=8gh&AN=49467284&site=ehost-live.

3) Knox, Nora. “Green Building Costs and Savings.” USGBC, U.S. Green Building Council, 25 Mar. 2015, www.usgbc.org/articles/green-building-costs-and-savings. Accessed 24 Apr. 2017.

4) “Sustainability.” EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, 18 Oct. 2016, www.epa.gov/sustainability. Accessed 24 Apr. 2017.

5) Sutter, John, and Rachel Rodriguez. “COP21: 9 Questions for a Renewable Energy Expert.” CNN, Cable News Network, 10 Dec. 2015, www.cnn.com/2015/12/10/opinions/cop21-facebook-chat/. Accessed 24 Apr. 2017.

How I Use These Sources

Source #1 focuses on the University of Delaware’s plan to become more environmentally sustainable. According to this website, “in 2008, the University set a goal to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by 20% by 2020.” This information demonstrates that the University is taking steps towards becoming a “greener” campus, which leads to my argument that other colleges and uniLOGO-Sust-LG-108suqp.pngversities should follow in UD’s footsteps. Source #2 explains how more colleges are now offering sustainability degrees to students. According to this article, 200 colleges and universities across the nation currently offer a sustainability degree. In my paper, I use this information to argue that more colleges should offer sustainability degrees to students considering that there are over 5,000 colleges in the U.S. (200/5,000 = only 4%). I use source #3 to discredit the opposing side’s argument that converting buildings in an environmentally sustainable way is costlier than traditional building renovations. This is meant to show readers that I’ve acknowledged the other side’s views, yet still believe that mine is correct which gives me ethos. Source #4 provides background information on environmental sustainability in the U.S. and the role of the EPA which I use in my introduction to introduce the topic. Source #5 is another source I use to challenge the opposing side as it explains how converting to more environmentally sustainable practices will actually create more jobs than it replaces, contrary to popular belief. Overall, I feel good about each of these sources and what they add to my paper.