English 324 A Rhetorical Analysis of Childhood Physical Abuse, Internalized Homophobia, and Experiential Avoidance Among Lesbians and Gay Men Introduction? The article “Childhood Physical Abuse, Internalized Homophobia, and Experiential Avoidance among Lesbians and Gay Men” was first published in the journal Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy in 2011. 5 The article is originally 11 pages long, and was online via Google Scholar. In this research article, authors Sari D. Gold, Brian A. Feinstein, W. Christopher Skidmore, and Brian P.
Marx present new information (aimed at others interested in the field of clinical psychology) on internalized homophobia and childhood physical abuse, and how it can affect one’s psychological well-being later in life. After thoroughly reviewing and analyzing this article, I have found it to be an extremely effective piece of writing. I feel that both the writing and findings that the researchers present are very effective to those reading this article. Summary ?The study explores relations among childhood physical abuse, internalized homophobia, experiential avoidance, and current psychological symptoms of gay and lesbian adults.
What the researchers found was that childhood physical abuse predicted depression and posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms. Furthermore, internalized homophobia completely mediated the relation between childhood physical abuse and depression symptoms and partially mediated the relation between childhood physical abuse and posttraumatic stress disorder symptoms. The authors claim these findings suggest that internalized homophobia and experiential avoidance may have differential mediating roles in predicting psychological symptoms among lesbians and gay men who have experienced childhood physical abuse.
Use of Argument Ethos ?The author’s qualifications all vary. Dr. Sari D. Gold is a counseling psychologist who practices out of Seattle, Washington. 4 She has also published several other articles on internalized homophobia and experiential avoidance both before, and after the article reviewed. Her works have been published in articles such as Psychology of Women Quarterly as well as Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy, both revered for their contributions to clinical psychology. ?Brian P. Marx, Ph. D. is an associate professor at Boston University School of Medicine.
Dr. Marx has his doctorate in clinical psychology from the University of Mississippi, and focuses a large part of his degree on research in his field. 2 Most of his research done in the past is done on posttraumatic stress disorder. He analyzes the effects that is has on trauma, memory, impairment, and risk factors. I found this to give him credibility in the article I reviewed by showing that Dr. Marx focuses specifically on posttraumatic stress disorder, and the effects that it can have on specific functions of specific individuals.
This speaks to the article itself which analyzes how posttraumatic stress disorder is associated and affected by homosexual individuals. ?Brian A. Feinstein is a doctoral graduate student in Clinical Psychology at Stony Brook University in Stony Brook, New York. Feinstein focuses mostly on how sexual orientation affects our relationships with one another. 3 Feinstein has been involved with many research proposals, articles, and findings within the past few years. Even though he is only in graduate school, Feinstein has researched and assisted on over 10 published articles all on the topics of lesbian, gay, and bisexual populations.
W. Christopher Skidmore is another graduate student from Northwestern University for his doctorate in clinical Psychology. 1 ? I feel that the credibility of the authors is very strong. They are all very involved in their fields, and all have accomplishments to show in their research. The article itself deals with many issues such as posttraumatic stress disorder, gay and lesbian relationships, and trauma. What each of the authors present is a specialty in one or more of those fields, making the research article very well analyzed.
Pathos ?The emotional arguments in the piece are very subtle. Publications on psychological research usually published in published books and magazines usually play strongly off of emotional arguments to persuade the reader and to make their writing and research effective. However because this piece is research article, it is expected to be very analytical and unbiased. The authors do a great job of presenting the research in a very professional manner, but what makes their piece so effective is the use of subtle emotional arguments.
The article uses words such as “self-blaming”, “physically abused”, “emotional trauma” and “hate crime” which serve as both terms for the research, as well as visually striking words for the audience. These words help paint a graphic image for the research they are presenting, and can subliminally make an emotional impact on those reading the article. ?The biggest emotional argument the article makes is towards the end of the discussion section. The authors go into detail about the importance of their findings, and how it can be used for clinical and counseling psychologists in therapy sessions, as well as how it can be expanded on.
The authors stress how traumatizing childhood physical abuse can be, and how it can drastically affect an individual in their later years of life. It is then followed by a paragraph stating that this is the first research done on this field of study, and how much more can be done to explore this field. This (very subtle) emotional plea reads very emotional for a research article. Logos ?Being a research article, logic is the most effective argument that piece presents. It provides graphs, statistical data, and analysis and goes into detail about what these numbers and figures mean in both a numerical and psychological standard.
The Method section of the article goes into detail about how the participants were selected for the study, how the information was gathered, and about the surveys that the participants were required to fill out for the research. ?It then transitions into the Procedure section, which explains the specific procedure that every participant was standardized to when they were taking the surveys required for the research. They go into important detail about not only what the surveys measure, and how it will be used in their data collection. The article then transitions into the results themselves, and seamlessly begins to analyze the data.
When analyzing the data, the authors provide charts in the columns of the article, to present a visual element to their findings. This is an extremely effective logical argument on the audience, because it enables them to physically see the information that was gathered, and allows them to easily follow the train of thought and conclusions that the authors make. ?The authors take great advantage of using logic to their advantage. The statistics that they present can be easily analyzed because they are their own, and the audience can trust the validity of the data because of their extensive Procedures section.
This not only contributes to the overall effectiveness of the piece, but it helps establish a trust between the authors and the reader. Use of Language ?The use of vocabulary was very interesting for this piece, involving a slight effort on the reader’s part. From the beginning of the article, the authors use terms such as “posttraumatic stress disorder”, “childhood physical abuse”, and “internalized homophobia” among others. The authors apparently thought these words were too long, and after they are mentioned briefly, they assume the reader to recognize them as abbreviations (PTSD, CPA, IH, respectively).
While this can be slightly confusing for casual readers, this practice is actually fairly common among research articles in the field of psychology. This serves a dual purpose: It enables the reader to progress through the article more quickly, and also shows the authors experience in writing research. This satisfies the need of the low-tech audience by familiarizing them with common terms used not only in the article, but throughout clinical psychology. ?Another way the authors effectively address the audience is through the terminology itself.
It uses this genre-specific jargon to not only familiarize the audience, but to also further establish their credibility. The audience is most likely familiar with words mentioned before such as “childhood physical abuse” and “posttraumatic stress disorder”. What is so effective about these words is that they are common enough to be familiar in a low-tech audience, and yet specific enough to be considered specialized terms in this field clinical psychology. This gives the audience a sense of familiarity with the piece, as well as a sense of intellect on the topic being discussed. Conclusion Overall I feel that Childhood Physical Abuse, Internalized Homophobia, and Experiential Avoidance Among Lesbians and Gay Men is a very effective piece of writing. The authors are all very distinguished in their fields, and bring their knowledge and experience to the article. They effectively use logic to clarify the data and assist the reader to understand, and present their own opinions and interpretations of the information using subtle emotional arguments. These and many other aspects make this research article very effective for the reader. Works Cited: 1. “Chris Skidmore, J. Michael Bailey Protege. ” http://www. sroadmap. com/info/chris-skidmore. html 12 Feb. 2012. 2. “Brian P. Marx. ” http://www. bvari. org/PI%20Information/Marx,%20Brian. aspx 12 Feb. 2012 3. “Brian’s Page. ” http://www. psychology. sunysb. edu/jdavila-/webpage/brian. htm 12 Feb. 2012. 4. “Sari Gold, P. h. D.. ”, http://www. healthgrades. com/provider/sari-gold-xd97x. Web. 12 Feb. 2012. 5. Gold, Sari D. , Brian A. Feinstein, W. Christopher Skidmore, and Brian P. Marx. “Childhood Physical Abuse, Internalized Homophobia, and Experiential Avoidance among Lesbians and Gay Men. ” Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice, and Policy (2010) 1