The article is “A Randomized Trial Comparing the Effect of
Nicotine Versus Placebo Electronic Cigarettes
on Smoking Reduction Among Young Adult
Smokers
Tuo-Yen Tseng MA1, Jamie S. Ostroff PhD2, Alena Campo BS1,
Meghan Gerard MPA1, Thomas Kirchner PhD1,3, John Rotrosen MD4,
Donna Shelley MD, MPH1”
Instructions/Grading Rubric for Reaction Papers
To facilitate your learning of addiction science, you will read original research reports and
write reaction papers. Each paper should be at least one but no more than two double-spaced pages
long (Times New Roman or Arial, 12-point font, 1-inch margins). Each paper should be a thoughtful
response that: 1) includes a brief description of the main points of the paper, 2) reflects that you have
read and thought about the entire article, not simply skimmed the abstract, and 3) presents your own
opinions and reactions, incorporating relevant material from the course (e.g., the textbook, class
lectures & discussion). Grammar and writing quality will be considered in the grading of your paper.
Please submit your reaction papers electronically.
Papers submitted after the deadline (11:59 PM on the due date) will not be scored in
accordance with the late submission policy stated in the course syllabus. Students are welcome, even
encouraged, to submit their papers early.
The purpose of the summary paper is for you to demonstrate your ability to independently
evaluate and analyze a peer-reviewed, primary-source research report. Be sure to write in your own
words, as this is the best way to convey your understanding and thoughts. Do not use direct quotes!
Use of direct quotes will result in significant point deductions. Strong papers will: succinctly
state the study aims/hypotheses, briefly describe the key elements of the research design, and
summarize the main study findings. Please note, you are not required to report on all aspects of the
study design nor is it necessary to report every individual result from a study. Instead, identify and
describe key aspects of the research method and main results, as you understand them.
Your paper also should provide a concise interpretation of those findings in the context of
strengths/weaknesses of particular relevance to the study aims. For example, simply stating a
longitudinal design is a strength of the study will not be sufficient unless a detailed explanation for
the particular value of studying the phenomenon in question over time is provided. Similarly, stating
that a small sample size limits generalizability will not be sufficient unless a case is made for why
the specific sample studied may differ from other samples based on the methods used.
A rubric for how summary papers will be evaluated and graded is provided below. Please
note that points are assigned not only based on whether an element is addressed, but largely on
how well they are completed.
You may consider this as a checklist or guide as you write your
paper.
Points Excellent Poor Absent
Is the aim/purpose of the selected study clearly
stated? 2 (2) (1) (0)
Does the paper identify and describe the main
research design elements? 4 (4) (1) (0)
Are the key findings of the study reported
accurately and appropriately? 5 (5) (1) (0)
Are the study results interpreted in light of the
study strengths/weaknesses? 4 (4) (1) (0)
Are the study results discussed in the larger context
of themes/concepts from the course more
generally?
4 (4) (1) (0)
Does the writing style allow for easy
understanding/comprehension? Are grammatical
errors/typos absent and/or kept to a minimum?
Proper and adequate use of punctuation?
6 (6) (2) (0)
