ATS1279 Annotated Bibliography
Instructions.

An annotated bibliography is an alphabetical list of scholarly journal articles, book chapters or
books, formatted like a bibliography or a reference list and accompanied by a commentary on
each source (which is called an annotation).

In general, the purpose is to:
● learn about a particular topic through critically reviewing the literature
● provide an overview of the main issues, arguments and research within a particular
● encourage deeper engagement with individual sources to develop your analytical skills
The annotation may include one or more of the following components:
● summary or description of the source
● evaluation and analysis of the study
● reflection on its usefulness to your research

The first part of an annotation is usually a summary or description that outlines the author’s
main points and provides an overview of the approach or methodology.

Here’s an example from an article that we discuss in lectures.

Bulck, J.V., & Vandebosch, H. (2003). When the viewer goes to prison: learning
fact from watching fiction. A qualitative cultivation study. Poetics, 31, 103-116.

This study interviewed first-time inmates to investigate how their experience of going to prison was affected
by exposure to fictional gaol dramas prior to their incarceration. The author’s point out that fictional
drama can affect what we expect from the real world for two reasons. First, although audiences can tell
fact from fiction, they expect dramas about real-world scenarios-like law and order-to resemble how things
work in the real world. Second, we often find ourselves in new situations that we have seen modelled time
and time again onscreen, and under these circumstances, drama can powerfully guide our expectations of
what is about to happen. To examine how these processes work, the researchers interviewed new convicts
in Belgian prisons. They did this to gather first-hand accounts of how media-based expectations had
influenced the experience of going to gaol for the first time.

As you read each source, focus on understanding the main ideas. Take notes on the following
questions in your own words, and this will then form the basis of your summary:
● What was the aim of the research?
● What is the main argument or research findings?
● How does the study use evidence to make its argument? Is it a theoretical essay? Does it
use other methods, such as content analysis, surveys, experiments, observation of
people using media in everyday settings? Does the approach appropriate to the research
aim?
● Do you think the conclusions are justified? If they are, how does this study benefit all
media researchers? If not, what ideas or evidence have the author(s) missed?
● What is the evidence to support the conclusions?
● Why was the research done? What issues were addressed?
● Are there any quotations that summarise the main argument if appropriate to your
subject area?

Note that you don’t need to summarise everything in your annotated bibliography. Here’s
another example

Van den Bulck and Vandebosche provide three things; a conceptual argument for how screen fiction can
influence audience beliefs about the real world; a method for demonstrating how the process works in
practice; and a discussion on how media entertainment affects social life. Although audiences can tell fact
from fiction, the authors argue that they expect dramas about real-world places- prisons, prisons, and police
stations- to depict those places in broadly realistic terms; it’s not that the things we see have happened, but
they *could* happen. Indeed, the authors also point out that many productions go to great lengths to
assure viewers that they meticulously research the realities that inspire their dramas. Therefore, film and
television become a learning resource when we encounter one of these places for the first time. Typically,
we meet a doctor, lawyer or police officer after ‘meeting’ such people countless times on screen. It’s
reasonable to hypothesise that this can influence our expectations. To test this idea, the researchers
interviewed Belgian prisoners. They found that these convicts had expected Belgian prisons to resemble the
American gaols they had seen on screen, and were often confused at the difference between the ‘fictional’
and ‘real’ experiences. Intriguingly, they found that some convicts were reluctant to dismiss some media
representations as unrealistic, even when they were contradicted by first-hand experience. There are two
valuable points to be taken from this study. First, the relationship between media and perceptions of social
reality is too complex to be explained by simple distinctions between fact and fiction. Second, talking to
people about particular experiences in particular circumstances, even if the sample is tiny, can reveal
compelling details about how media affects social life.