Trabucco

1
Trabucco
De Piero
5/6/15
Modern technology has greatly improved the capability of experts to study the
brain. One of the most serious injuries one can get when playing sports is a
concussion. Because of this growing understanding of the brain, concussion awareness
has become a big topic being promoted by the media, universities, and many other
organizations. When comparing three different articles on the topic of sport-related
concussions, I recognized similar and also different tactics used to educate and convince
the audience. Lunsford in the article Everythings an Argument explains, Most
arguments are composed with specific audiences in mind, and their success depends, in
part, on how well their strategies, content, tone, and language meet the expectations of
that audience (Lunsford, 75). All three sources shared the main goal of educating the
dangers of concussions in order to prevent them, but used different rhetorical features to
do so. The two scholarly articles are aimed toward a highly educated audience , while the
non-scholarly article is directed at a more broad and younger audience. The three articles
I analyzed on concussion prevention were, Why is it so Hard to Stop Sports
Concussions? a scholarly article, Sport-Related Concussion: Evaluation and
Management,also a scholarly article, and Concussion Prevention a non-scholarly
article. I found that Why is it so Hard to Stop Sports Concussions? was the most
convincing because of the way Stephen Piazza used rhetorical features such as analogy
and logical appeal to convince the reader of his argument.

Trabucco 2
The first scholarly article examined was Why is it so hard to stop Sports
Concussions? in which Piazza uses several devices to contribute to his successful
argument. In this article, Piazza explains what exactly and concussion is and why they
are so common. His argument is the strongest of the three articles because of his working
rhetorical features and credible sources he uses throughout the article. His format is the
standard format of a scholarly article including an introductory paragraph explaining his
main ideas. Throughout his article he uses several images that go along with what he is
stating. One of the rhetorical devices Piazza uses is analogy. One of his most effective
arguments is using the analogy of the human brain to that of a woodpecker. He uses this
analogy to create an image in the readers head to something they can actually
picture. He also cites a study on why a woodpecker can peck without any concussion and
see if the result can somehow help the prevention of human concussion. This rhetorical
feature was extremely effective and a main argument in Piazzas article. It was
discovered that the woodpecker has a special hyoid bone that absorbs impact. Piazza also
provides that because of this study, helmets have been created that was inspired by the
woodpeckers hyoid that have proven to be more effective.
In Purcells article Sport-Related Concussion: Evaluation and Management,
she focuses on informing about concussions and does so in a very academic
matter. Unlike Piazza, whos tone was academic, but understandable, Purcell uses lots of
high-level vocabulary and sometimes hard to understand sentence structure. The article
Style in Arguments claims, The words you choose for an argument help define its
style-and yours. For most academic arguments, fairly formal language is appropriate
(160). Both academic articles follow the conventions of a scholarly article by using very

Trabucco 3
appropriate and formal language to express their arguments in a well-educated sounding
way. Purcell does not use images which makes the article hard to understand on a basic
level. One rhetorical feature shes use is ethos. Although unlike Piazza who quotes
directly from certain studies, she references many different sources making her article
very credible. At first glance, her article seems to not be as credited as Piazzas, but
when examined closely she actually uses many sources to form her argument. Purcell
declares several statements such as, Specialized imaging techniques, including singlephoton emission computed tomography, positron-emission tomography, and functional
magnetic resonance imaging might demonstrate physiological and functional
abnormalities following concussion. This demonstrates the sophistication of language in
the article, along with the lack of references. The minimal support for the points made,
creates a challenging environment for the average reader. Her statement is therefore less
credited than Piazzas because he provides the reader with scientific studies that prove his
claims and statements.
Concussion Prevention, the non-scholarly article, shows a very different format
and different conventions than the first two scholarly articles. The conventions for this
non-scholarly article is that it is more of an essay-like format and somewhat easier to
read. There are bullet point main ideas, which are not found in the scholarly
articles. Although the article appears easier to a reader to understand at first glance, the
article is much less credited than the scholarly articles. There are no references pages
listed at the bottom, and no studies are explained or referenced throughout the
article. The articles main point to is better educate the reader, just like the first two
articles, but I find it much less credible. However, the article does include some key

Trabucco 4
rhetorical features. One rhetorical feature used is amplification, or repetition of a word or
phrase. The phrase education is key is mentioned multiple times allowing the overall
theme to come across clearly to the reader. This repitition allows the reader to sometimes
unknowingly begin to think about this repeated phrase; therefore grasping the main idea
the author is trying to get across.
Piazza uses modern technology study examples, which add great credibility to his
argument by proving that what he is stating is up to date. He uses a study called The
Head Impact Telemetry System run by Richard Greenwald and Brown
University. Piazza claims, HITS allows researchers to monitor linear and angular
accelerations during real-world impacts, as well as the locations where the impacts
occur. With explaining this modern technology, Piazza explains how the study was
conducted and how researchers were able to see exactly how many concussions were
produced from almost 300,000 impacts recorded. By citing this source, his argument
becomes more credible and understandable to the reader because they are able to see a
real-life study being conducted and analyzed. Following a similar format, SportRelated Concussion: Evaluation and Management has the typical layout of a scholarly
article, but approaches the topic slightly differently. Purcell creates five tables
throughout her article and references many sources, making her article
credited. However, unlike Piazza, she does not go into detail or even mention any
specific studies she only references her work at the bottoms in a long page of
references. I believe both scholarly articles are greatly credited, but to a reader, Piazzas
article comes across as easier to understand and formatted in a way that comes across as
better established and verified. Comparing these two scholarly articles to the non-

Trabucco 5
scholarly article Concussion Preventions by the Brain Injury Alliance of New Jersey, it
seems that Concussion Preventions is a lot less credible. The non-scholarly article
states a lot of facts, but they dont seem to be backed up by any hard evidence like the
scholarly articles are. The article does state some examples of what is being stated, but
they are meant for helping the reader fully understand the concept, they are not stated or
cited as facts or evidence.
When comparing non-academic articles to academic articles, the academic articles
are always going to be proven more effective because of their evidence and highly
educated authors. However, a non-academic article can still be very effective in other
ways. An academic article, such as Why is it so Hard to Stop Sports Concussions? is
restricted to using academic language and a serious tone. Non-academic articles are able
to uses more of a logical and emotional appeal to interest the reader. The non-scholarly
article written by The Brain Injury Alliance of New Jersey declares that, The risk of
second impact syndrome is real and a matter of life and death or long-term severe
disability. For all of these reasons it is extremely important that everyone involved in
youth sports and recreation understands how to recognize the signs and symptoms of
concussion, and knows what to do if a concussion is suspected both on the field and off.
This statement has more of a dramatic tone than the scholarly articles because it is less
academic and is given more freedom to hook its readers in other ways then just listing
facts. The authors use emotional appeal by bringing up the importance of being informed
about concussions in youth sports because readers are more likely to be worried about
issues if they are involving children. Although non-academic articles may not be

Trabucco 6
supported by large scientific studies like academic articles are, they are able to use
rhetorical features and moves that academic articles cannot.
All authors create their own moves, which can be frequently used rhetorical
features, or simply writing style. When comparing the three articles Why is it so Hard
to Stop Sports Concussions? Sport-Related Concussion: Evaluation and Management,
and Concussion Prevention, it became clear that Piazzas article Why is it so Hard to
Stop Sports Concussions? gave the most backed up evidence while also interesting the
audience. If a writer can follow the conventions of the genre they are writing, while also
giving it factual evidence, they will be successful in proving their argument.

Trabucco 7

Works Cited

Purcell, Laura. "Sport-Related Concussion: Evaluation and Management." N.p.,

Mar. 2014. Web.
Piazza, Stephen. "Why Is It so Hard to Stop Concussions?" N.p., 1 Sept. 2014.
Web.
"Concussion Prevention." The Best Ways to Prevent Concussions. N.p., n.d. Web.
05 May 2015.
"Chapter 6." Everythings an Argument-Rhetorical Analysis. N.p.: n.p., n.d. N.
pag. Print.
"Chapter 13." N.p.: n.p., n.d. N. pag. Style in Arguments. Web.