Maggie Watts

Dr. Zawilski

RC2001

18 September 2017

Split Analysis of Split Personality

Approximately 42.5 million American adults suffer from some type of mental illness.

Within this includes the spectrum of bipolar personality disorder and its various types. The

dictionary defines bipolar disorder as, any of several psychological disorders of mood

characterized usually by alternating episodes of depression and mania - called also manic

depression, manic-depressive illness (Webster). When comparing how different groups of

people address and respond to issues regarding traits and treatments of bipolar disorder, it is vital

to consider the audience as well as analyze several rhetorical strategies implemented to deliver

their points. Two articles exemplify this well; one article is from the Psychology Today website

titled Whats Up With Bipolar Disorder? while the other is from the BMC Psychiatry

Academic journal called Personality traits in bipolar disorder and influence on outcome. These

articles used rhetorical elements such as kairos, Pisteis, ecology and more to address various

aspects of bipolar disorder to two very different audiences.

The rhetorical situation for the Psychology today article is addressing and comparing the

different methods of bipolar disorder treatment, while also explaining how these methods could

be useful to society as a whole. The exigence is dependent on who exactly out of the audience is

reading it. For example, a person with bipolar disorder would find information describing lithium

and Family Focused Therapy treatment methods to be more crucial than someone not on the
bipolar spectrum. However, the article does mention how the treatments can benefit the general

public as well by preventing depression and Bipolar disorder, reducing dementia, increasing

brain volume in the areas responsible for thinking and for memory (cortex and hippocampus),

and even reducing the risk of cancer and neurological disorders (Wang, 2017).

Although the importance of the information mentioned will differ depending on the

individual, the audience of the writing is still the general public. The less professional audience

also points to the constraints of the writing. The language used in the article had to be clear and

simple enough to be comprehended by the public, and the length could not be too long as to not

lose readers attention. The format, diction, and nature of website media all indicate this article is

intended for a broad audience to comprehend. The more common rhetorical strategies are

obvious when examining the ecology surrounding the text because since it is accessible as a blog

on the internet for the general public requires it to be more relaxed and accessible. Despite this

truth, some of the terms featured in Wangs work are more complex and would require a

psychology background to comprehend fully such as nimodipine and all the different genes

listed. However, these more dense terms are either explained to the extent needed to understand

their relevance at a base level or are not entirely essential to grasping the overall meaning of the

article. Conversely, through words such as freakin being included in a quote as well as the title

casually being Whats up with bipolar disorder? Wang clearly indicates an informal

environment and a more common audience, vastly different from a more scholarly article. This

signals a much more lax approach to the discussion at hand and leads to readers relating to the

material and understanding it more in a general sense.

While this article is more simple than the academic journal piece, it still cleverly employs

many rhetorical strategies to guide the readers. For example, Wang utilizes ethos by citing a
myriad of statistics to back up her information. However, one of her main strategies is using the

component of Pisteis known as pathos. This article spends a great deal of time mentioning

numbers of how many people, especially children who are bullied, are affected by bipolar

disorder in America. By carefully selecting and employing these factors, Wang has created an

opportunity for readers to acquire a sense of empathy. Most likely a majority of the audience

members at the very least have a child or can recall their own childhood. Based on these

memories, readers may be able to remember first hand or are able to imagine how bullying feels

and how something like this disorder would make coping with those struggles even more

difficult. A final statement in the article exemplifies this by saying, reducing childhood abuse

and bullying, can prevent the illness, even in children with Bipolar disorder in their genes

(Wang, 2017). By providing these examples within the article, readers are prompted to

identification by the writer and in a way is a call to action to bring about awareness and an end to

bullying.

Another important rhetorical element utilized is the timing, also known as kairos, of this

article. Mental illness is often stigmatized within society, but in many cases conversation,

awareness, and research of mental health issues are on the rise, making the timing of release of

this article more effective than it would have been years ago. A common mythos of interest,

understanding, and knowledge of psychology informs and connects this text with the scholarly

article even if the levels of understanding required from the two different articles differ

substantially. The motivation behind this piece was to discuss various debates surrounding types

of treatment for a fairly significant mental health issue within society.

 The rhetorical situation for the BMC Psychiatry Academic Journal article is to examine

different factors of personality traits in people that are bipolar and how those traits can create

different manifestations of the disorder when they interact. The motivation behind this scholarly

article is to determine whether or not different aspects of a person with bipolar disorders

personality can influence how it affects each individual and their various abilities of control. The

audience is more professional, most likely to be comprised of experts within the psychology and

psychiatry fields. The juxtaposition of the difference between intended audiences for these

articles is even apparent when contrasting the images featured; where the academic journal

article features detailed charts and graphs to help decode research results, the popular article

simply includes more plain images such as people sitting at a conference. However, even though

the BMC article is more professional, the common mythos of bipolar disorder and the

psychology field remain in play between the two works.

For this article in particular, the exigency is rather high because the work is necessary in

adding to our greater knowledge of these illnesses, but more so for those treating or interacting

with patients with bipolar disorder to help understand various causes of behavior and their

controls. The constraints of this article are clear because it was published in an academic journal

so, the material, diction, and the analyzation of results and data from the study must be at a

scholarly level to be considered valuable among peers within the field, which contrasts sharply

from the constraints of the popular article.

An exceedingly more professional ecology surrounds this work in a very similar way to

the audience and constraints. Compared to the popular article, the jargon and work itself are

much more complex because readers are expected to have a substantial and detailed database of

psychological knowledge from which to draw. Since the audience is expected to have this
knowledge, this article was written for readers that are more capable of comprehending lofty

psychology field specific concepts, terminology, and research. For example, it would behoove

readers extremely to be able to decipher the charts and graphs to help grasp the concepts found

from the results of the studies. Another instance where prior experience would be essential is in

parts of the article that describe the DSM or the statistical analyses of the research. For example,

a statistics background at the very least would be necessary to understand terminology such as,

To investigate differences in personality profiles between patients with bipolar disorder I and II,

and healthy controls, we used age-adjusted T-scores-scaled to have a mean of 50 and a standard

deviation (SD) of 10 - derived from a large Swedish sample (Sparding, et al.,2017). Luckily,

due to the medium in which it was published, this is expected to already be a skill that the

audience of this piece possess.

Similarly, the scholarly article focuses much more on the implementation of ethos and

logos rather than pathos, which is to be expected from an article of this level of scholarly

content. Ethos is employed through the extensive research of those working within their own

field reporting results and data, often in the form of charts and graphs to support their claims

making their work extremely credible. Logos is exemplified through the definitive organization

of information into very clear paragraphs. The sections have distinct headings to organize the

complicated research into a very logical progression and explanation of the studies performed

going step by step through theories and hypotheses, then to the research studies done themselves

and the results gained from this research, and finally to the analyzation of how this matches the

hypotheses and how it can be applied to an overall greater understanding of the issues at hand.

While the articles differ in many ways, the kairos of this piece is similar to the other

article in the respect that research on personality disorders and their different influences and
manifestations are more extensive than ever and this could be coming at a time where a

collective understanding of these aspects are essential in moving forward with effective

treatments, prevention methods, or just overall understanding in general.

When analyzing to determine which of the two articles rhetorical strategies were more

effective, it is difficult to compare because the audiences for the two works were vastly different.

Each article was very effective and appropropriate for its intended audience, whether popular or

more scholarly. For example, reading the very scholarly article was difficult for me even though I

am a psychology major. However, that does not mean that the article was not effective to those

that are more proficient in the field, or that the popular article was more effective overall. It

could be argued that the scholarly article is possibly less effective because it reaches a less broad

audience than the one found on the internet. On the converse side, perhaps the popular article

was too generalized to be considered effective by those who are familiar with the disorder or the

psychology field. All of these viewpoints converge to a common theme - much like other

discussions we have had in class, success of rhetorical strategies is extremely subjective and

dependent on the individual reader.

References

Bipolar disorder (n.d.) In Merriam-Websters collegiate dictionary. Retrieved from

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bipolardisorder

Sparding, T., Plsson, E., Joas, E., Hansen, S., & Landn, M. (2017). Personality traits in bipolar
 disorder and influence on outcome. BMC Psychiatry, 171-10.

doi:10.1186/s12888-017-1332-0

Wang, D. (2017, May 24). What's Up with Bipolar Disorder? Retrieved September 18, 2017,

from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-kitchen-shrink/201705/whats-bipolar-

disorder