Identify the report as a systematic review, meta-analysis, or both.
Provide a structured summary including, as applicable: background; objectives; data sources; study eligibility criteria, participants, and interventions; study appraisal and synthesis methods; results; limitations; conclusions and implications of key findings; systematic review registration number.
Describe the rationale for the review in the context of what is already known.
Provide an explicit statement of questions being addressed with reference to participants, interventions, comparisons, outcomes, and study design (PICOS).
Protocol and registration
Indicate if a review protocol exists, if and where it can be accessed (e.g., Web address), and, if available, provide registration information including registration number.
Specify study characteristics (e.g., PICOS, length of follow-up) and report characteristics (e.g., years considered, language, publication status) used as criteria for eligibility, giving rationale.
Describe all information sources (e.g., databases with dates of coverage, contact with study authors to identify additional studies) in the search and date last searched.
Present full electronic search strategy for at least one database, including any limits used, such that it could be repeated.
State the process for selecting studies (i.e., screening, eligibility, included in systematic review, and, if applicable, included in the meta-analysis).
Data collection process
Describe method of data extraction from reports (e.g., piloted forms, independently, in duplicate) and any processes for obtaining and confirming data from investigators.
List and define all variables for which data were sought (e.g., PICOS, funding sources) and any assumptions and simplifications made.
Risk of bias in individual studies
Describe methods used for assessing risk of bias of individual studies (including specification of whether this was done at the study or outcome level), and how this information is to be used in any data synthesis.
State the principal summary measures (e.g., risk ratio, difference in means).
Synthesis of results
Describe the methods of handling data and combining results of studies, if done, including measures of consistency (e.g., I2) for each meta-analysis.
Samantha Bee. I always enjoyed her segments on The Daily Show, but this past year she has ignited a fire in me…She’s been hitting harder than many other late night shows on the subjects that matter most and isn’t afraid to ‘go there’. (DuDeVoire, 2016v) According to these interview responses, women believe overcoming and accepting fear is an integral part of being successful and can aid in one’s identity management. By evolving from being afraid, we are able to realize our capabilities and put that fear towards greater accomplishments. Conclusion Throughout this study, the aim was to discover how women socially construct ‘powerful’ identities through language use. While there were many types of language depicted throughout the data, the three areas discussed were the most prominent. The results supported the notion that women who express positive self-talk, maintain confidence, and accept various characteristics, such as fear within their lives leads to a more ‘powerful’ identity through the type of language used when speaking about themselves. By integrating language of this type in one’s mind as well as in daily conversations has the possibility to improve others perceptions and the way we are categorized by others. This in turn has the capability of constructing a more powerful identity. By incorporating social construction ideas, as well as a membership categorization analysis approach to analyzing identity, we can begin to analyze how women can construct these more powerful identities. Noticeably, these findings do not provide definitive results on socially constructing a powerful identity through language, but do aid in the discovery of new ways to examine how women do construct such identities through the language styles exhibited within this data set. Limitations Although the study provided a great deal of data to analyze, it must be remembered that all research was conducted on a singular blog site with multiple postings. Additionally, time constraints existed, which led to the restriction of looking into further data that will be posted after this study was conducted. As the blog continued to evolve since its creation, the data is fixed to include responses held prior to this study. Technological limitations. Although an abundance of information was provided on the blog from which to pull data, the limited landscape of an edited blog could have implications on the results of this study and the responses portrayed on each entry. Additionally, the ability for participants to conduct the interviews over email may have altered the type of language generally exhibited from these women in face-to-face interactions.>GET ANSWER