Points

1

1.5

2

Criteria

Summary provides some detail from the article but misrepresents key concepts covered. The writing is reflective of only a cursory glance at the article. While some knowledge is demonstrated, it is scant and/or overly simplistic in nature.

Corresponding question is missing or otherwise insufficient

Summary has a good amount of detail from the article. While some misinterpretation of the article may be present, the writer generally demonstrates that they read and understood the article. The summary may be a bit too brief to summarize the article in enough detail.

Corresponding question is lacking in sufficient depth or relevance.

Summary is clear and concise but provides enough information that the general reader will understand what the article was about. In addition to detail about the article itself, the writer includes information about the impact of the article on social psychological research and demonstrates a high level of understanding of the article.

Corresponding question submission is thoughtful, deep, and relevant to the article.