User talk:MarissaBannister/sandbox

Peer Review by Meg Lacy & Nico Filice

Peer Review by Meg Lacy and Nico Filice Lead section: We think that your lead section did a good job at giving us a general over view of the topic. However, adding some demographic information about who is likely to experience moral injury (if its available!) may create a better sense of what the phenomenon is. Also, the last statement isn’t supported by an source. When is recently?

A clear Structure: We see that you are editing an existing article and that your intention is to consider the history of moral injury along with an emphases on the influence it has had in the field of psychology. I think this is extremely valuable content and think it’s a great direction to take the page in. It may also be helpful to determine if there are populations at risk besides the military personnel (if not-why not), and what disorders moral injury may be associated with (any other than PTSD). I think touching specifically on military service members is important as it is a salient topic for that culture- good job!

Balanced Coverage: The article only mentions military personnel and we were wondering if there were any other populations that suffer moral injury? Bystanders? First responders? Refugees? (Basically people who were helpless to act?) Based on your outline, it looks like you are covering all aspects of the topic and providing readers with information on the entire topic equally.

Neutral Content: We did not notice any aspects that seemed to promote one viewpoint or another.

Reliable Sources: Of the sources listed they all seem to be reliable.

Overall this looks like a good outline/start!

MegLacy (talk) 03:52, 2 November 2017 (UTC)