Blog post #2: Sources of Scientific Information
For this blog post, I chose an article titled Oil Spills and Marine Mammals in British Columbia, Canada:Development and Application of a Risk-Based Conceptual Framework.
Upon reviewing the article and following the steps provided in the tutorial, I have classified it as academic, non-peer-reviewed material. The article as written by multiple authors who are experts in the field, referenced a wide array of sources that were cited within the article and stated each one with a bibliography at the end. The reason that I was not able to deem it peer-reviewed was as per the tutorial, I could not find any named referees. While the article was published in a scientific journal, it refers to affiliates that provided financial support (National Contaminants Advisory Group of the Department of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard) rather than any referees. Following this, if I were to have deemed it peer-reviewed, it would be considered research rather than a review, as the conceptual framework they created included an introduction, methods, results, and discussion. Multiple tables and graphs are used within the article to display the research done. It seems that the information gathered and used in this article is to be provided as a framework for others to use in oil spill data and marine mammal vulnerability, so it is likely that in the future it will be peer-reviewed if it is not already deemed as such.
Source: Jarvela Rosenberger, A. L., MacDuffee, M., Rosenberger, A. G., & Ross, P. S. (2017). Oil spills and marine mammals in British Columbia, Canada: Development and application of a risk-based conceptual framework. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 73(1), 131–153. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00244-017-0408-7