Critical Appraisal Of A Research Paper Nursing Essay

Critical Appraisal Of A Research Paper Nursing Essay Research is the key contributor of professional development in many professions, particularly healthcare. It allows practitioners to inform, adjust and monitor particular ways of practice or issues. The ability to evaluate research evidence appropriately is essential to avoid the assumption that all published research is of equal merit and validity. In order to critically appraise the article, Clinical handover in the trauma setting: a qualitative study of paramedics and trauma team members (Evans, Murray, Patrick, Fitzgerald, Smith Cameron, 2010), the ten point CASP (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme, 2006) framework is used. Current literature will be utilised to guide the discussion and reflection in order to conclude the overall strength of this article. The studys aims are concisely stated and numbered clearly. This is of importance in research keeping the main focus well established and succinct, allowing readers to easily understand the objectives (Collins, 2010; Gerrish Lacey, 2010; Stommel Wills, 2004). and reduce the chance of inter-researcher confusion. The authors discussed their reasons for focussing on clinical handovers, highlighting that communication difficulties can lead to serious, even fatal mistakes. A previous study is used to confirm the severity of this problem. Khan (2008) illustrates the benefits of using previous studies in ones background enforce the discussion of why the research is relevant. The researchers discuss the MIST (Mechanism-Injuries-Signs-Treatment) template used in the military, pointing out that little is known about its effectiveness in more general settings. Other ways of improving communication are discussed, such as radio pre-alerts and the use of electronic tablets, noting that as yet eff ectiveness is unproven, supporting the value of this new research. The researchers have not disclosed reasons for choosing qualitative methodology; however, it is appropriate to their aims. They intended to obtain and illuminate personal views and subjective experiences of using the MIST template during handover, in turn modifying the template in response to recurring findings. The stated aim of understanding issues affecting handover efficiency can be best researched via the qualitative method in order to gain participants interpretations of the other professionals involved and to enlighten the interactions between these groups (Block, 2006). The gathering of opinions on data transmission methods and data display within the emergency department (ED) provides a more in-depth understanding of how errors occur and furthermore, how this problem could be improved (Bowling Ebrahim, 2005). The research design used in this study is grounded theory. This specifically enables a new theory to arise from data in order to explain social phenomenon and human behaviour (Chears, 2009; Williams, 2012). It could be argued that the researchers are not developing a new theory in relation to the improvement of the minimum dataset as they merely adapt the MIST template (an already established theory), whereas typically, grounded theory forms a theory from original data collected during a study, not by testing a theory from previous literature in the field (Giles, 2002). In contrast, Henandez (2011) recommends using datasets from previous research in order to collate secondary and primary research, allowing the combination of ideas to form a theory. Furthermore, the findings seem to show that grounded theory has been used within attributes of an affective and ineffective handover: A set of ideas designed to explain what constitutes handover quality has been developed. An example: 11 o ut of the 17 participants expressed that a poor handover includes extraneous information and interruptions. The researchers developed this as a theory to explain why poor handovers may occur. They have described their use of grounded theory but not clarified why they have used this method or with what aims they wished to develop new theories. In relation to the recruitment strategy, Daymon Holloway (2011) illuminate the importance of disclosing the setting, timeframe and people involved in research in order to clarify the boundaries of the study. Here, details of inclusion of participants are thorough and well recorded, including geographical locations, timeframes and demographics. Table 1 shows all participants had a mean of 5 years post-graduate experience, indicating that those with considerable experience were selected. The researchers used purposive sampling method to find a representative group (participants with experience of transporting trauma patients to a trauma service) and used convenience sampling within this representative group to ensure all participants could contribute to the data (Monsen Horn, 2008). Purposive sampling is highly targeted and forms a specific group, resulting in this method being subject to bias, however, if the researchers are aiming to investigate a phenomenon relating to specific gr oups of people (e.g. paramedics and trauma team members), then purposive sampling is appropriate to warrant the correct target group is selected (Newell Burnard, 2011). In addition, the researchers have explained how they have selected a representative trauma team sample; by involving individuals from different specialty groups involved in management of trauma patients (e.g. burns, anaesthetics). There is no record of anyone who chose not to take part. Data collected via semi-structured interviews was an appropriate way to address the research aims, but there are flaws. Researchers needed to record the subjective experiences of this group of professionals in order to determine the key factors causing communication errors. However, information such as the location of interviews is not stated. Japec (2008) points out how the social context of interviews can affect responses. We do not know whether interviews were carried out in a controlled environment (i.e. in the same room, similar time of day and without disturbances). Moreover, the researchers have not disclosed the reasons why the interview method was chosen. Moniff and Whitehead (2010) and Blaikie (2010) illustrate the importance of including this information, to allow the reader to see the relevance of chosen data collection techniques. Furthermore, there is no description of how the data was recorded; a vital element in research to increase confirmability and replicability (G errish Lacey 2010). The form of data cannot be distinguished through the software used (NVIVO 8.0) as it can upload text, videos and tape recordings (Edhlund, 2007). The use of a minimum topic guide for interviews ensures that similar data is collected from participants and eliminates the sequence of questions being different (Holloway Wheeler, 2010). However, the researchers were ambiguous when discussing their use of the topic guide in the study design. They state it was used when interviewing the trauma team speciality groups about the minimum dataset for handover, yet, do not clearly state whether it was used for questions on effective and ineffective handovers, data transmission or data display (even though these prompts appear in the topic guide). There is also no reference to use of the topic guide during interviewing paramedics (although paramedic specific questions are present on the guide leading to assumption that the guide was used). The interview method enhances data as it shows body language and non-verbal interactions (Gerrish Lacey, 2010). However, it can skew results: social desirability can lead to the participant answering a question so as to please the researcher or sound like a good practitioner (Rubin Babbie, 2010). In addition, the interviewer effect may occur (where interviewers subtly influence participants responses through wording of the questions or body language), especially as some researchers belonged to the professions being studied. In this research, the relationship between researchers and participants has not been sufficiently reflected upon. There has been no consideration of how reflexivity and experimenter bias may have influenced the choice of questions (e.g. the topic guide), the sample selection and location. With no comment on who developed the topic guide, we do not know if it was one researcher or a collaboration. This information is essential: if experimenter triangulation was utilised, this would decrease the chance of experimenter bias and reflexivity skewing the questions, increasing credibility of the research (Merrian, 2009). Researchers have not examined their role within sample recruitment either. One researcher is employed by Ambulance Victoria, and another by the Alfred Hospital Presumably personal backgrounds influenced the choice of these two institutions for sample collection, however, there is no personal reflexivity expressed to determine that they have considered their potential bias in this area. Reflexivity is critical in order to increase the rigor of the research; recognising how personal experiences, disposition and emotions can influence research choices allows researchers to compensate for this where possible, and understand the importance of documenting subjective issues (Kirby, Greaves Reid, 2006). In consideration of ethical issues, the researchers have not discussed how, or even if they briefed and debriefed the participants. Adequate briefing is essential do participants know exactly what to expect and are aware of their rights (Fowler, ONeill Helvert, 2011). Briefing also allows participants to give informed consent and avoids passive deception, whereby the researchers deceive participants by omission (Cottrell McKenzie, 2011). Debriefing is equally important, allowing participants to raise any issues experienced during the research (Jackson, 2011; Morrow, Boaz, Brearley Ross, 2012). An ethics committee has approved this research, meaning the emotional impacts on researchers and participants have been assessed and the safeguards and well-being of the participants have been evaluated (Holloway Wheeler, 2010). This implies that ethical considerations have adequately been taken into account, although more detail should have been provided. With respect to the data analysis, grounded theory is defined and clearly explained. In the abstract, thematic analysis was said to be used, but there is no reference to it in the data analysis section. There is, however a clear demonstration of its stages in the description of how the 3 nodes were developed through collecting reoccurring responses and developing them into codes and themes. Open coding has been used, which primarily allows codes and subsequently themes to emerge from the text alone; by using axial coding in addition, the researchers concepts and categories are implemented  whilst re-reading the text in order to check that categories truthfully represent responses and to examine how concepts are related, increasing credibility and validity (Babbie, 2012). However, researchers have not explained how they collaborated to determine what data to present, nor do they disclose any outliers or contradicting results. Reflexivity can affect this process as their subjective thoughts may influence their choices. The researchers have not considered this issue, resulting in reduced credibility (Brink, 2006). They refer to a general consensus when talking about the usability of MIST rather vague and ignoring differing responses. Nevertheless, sufficient data is presented to support the findings. Quotes are implemented to support the data and MIST is rewritten and displayed, including responses. The attribute box allows readers to distinguish differing views between professionals; adding credibility to the data transmission results. Finally, by assigning a third researcher, experimenter bias is reduced and to some degree helps the issue of reflexivity, as researchers past experiences will all differ, affecting how they may perceive participants ans wers, and subsequently code the text. Triangulation of researchers adds rigor to the research (Inoue, 2012). There is a relatively clear statement of findings in the research; data is affirmed under primary nodes developed by thematic analysis clearly and concisely and they are also logically discussed in the order of aims. Hinshaw (2011) emphasises the importance of clearly presented results to allow the reader easy access to the main outcomes and suggested action points. Specific quotes arising from the interviews to corroborate and increase dependability of the results (Streubert Carpenter, 2011). Discussions are made for and against the researchers suggestions. Supporting discussions include the concept of time out in theatres where team members pause and complete a checklist to ensure safety (this current practice boasts reduction in surgical error), reinforcing the results where paramedics state an effective handover is one where the receiving body stop and exercise listening skills. An example where researchers challenge their findings is the reference to a study, concluding informa tion recall of just 36% even when paramedics were provided with handover training. Using evidence to challenge their research demonstrates that the researchers are not prejudiced in favour of their own results and that they recognise the need to consider additional barriers (Brink, 2006). However, the researchers have not discussed the credibility of their findings; they have employed researcher triangulation to reduce intrinsic biases, but have not mentioned how this improves credibility and rigor in the discussion. There is no comment about respondent validation, raising the question whether this was carried out. It is a of checking the truthfulness of research, by giving participants the findings to comment on if there is any misinterpretation: an effective way of reducing researcher bias (Pope Mays, 2006). The value of this research is limited: the researchers acknowledge their results form a basis for development and recognise that trails and further research must be carried out. Findings are discussed in light of current practice, recognising that the MIST tool needs to be trialled further. Researchers also acknowledge that training will have to be developed for paramedics (as with any new proposed method in ambulance services). It is stated that noise barriers need to be evaluated, however, no new areas of research are proposed. Researchers have not discussed whether their research can be transferred to other populations. They have briefly discussed generalizability, stating the research should be generalised to other hospitals with caution as the data was collected in a busy referral hospital. They also recognise that selecting paramedics with experience in trauma settings can lead to decreased generalizability, as paramedics with less trauma experience may have differing views. In conclusion, this research boasts excellent presentation and structure comprising strong background and aims. Utilising qualitative methodology enabled researchers to gain subjective experiences and views from healthcare professionals to provide a deeper understanding of how communication errors occur during handover and propose a multifactorial strategy for improvement. It could be argued that the researchers are not developing a new theory, therefore not utilising grounded theory correctly, however, there is ample literature disputing this, stating that it is acceptable to build on existing theory in order to develop a new one. The research has been carried out in the light of the original aims throughout and the results are clearly presented, with additional quotes to enforce points. However, there is minimal consideration of potential biases and the effect of reflexivity, reducing credibility. Furthermore, many methods have not been justified (research method, use of grounded t heory, data collection and data presentation) leading to overall low rigor and credibility. Finally, it is recognised that this research will not change future practice without further research and trailing. Nevertheless, the original data collected here and strategies for improvement presented make this research a valuable contribution to the field. (182) =2199 References Babbie, E. (2012). The practice of social research. (13th ed.). Wadsworth: Cengage Learning. Blaikie, N. (2010). Designing social research. (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press. Block, D. (2006). Healthcare outcomes management: strategies for planning and evaluation. London: Jones and Bartlett Publishers. Bowling, A. Ebrahim, S. (2005). Handbook of health research methods: investigation, measurement and analysis. Berkshire: Open University Press. Brink, H. (2006). Fundamentals for research methodology for health care professionals. (2nd ed). Cape Town: Juta Co. Chears, V. (2009). Taking a strand for others: a grounded theory. USA: ProQuest LLC. Collins, H. (2010). Creative research: the theory and practice of research for the creative industries. London: AVA Publishing. Cottrell, R. McKenzie, J. (2011). Health promotion education research methods: using the five-chapter thesis/dissertation model. (2nd ed.). London: Jones and Bartlett Publishers. Critical Appraisals Skills Programme (CASP). (2006). Qualitative research: appraisal tool. 10 questions to help you make sense of qualitative research. Oxford: Public Health Resource Unit. Daymon, C. Holloway, I. (2011). Qualitative research methods in public relations and marketing communications. (2nd ed.). Oxfordshire: Routledge. Edhlund, B. (2007). NVivo essentials: the ultimate help when you work with qualitative analysis. Stallarholmen: Form Kunskap. Evans, S., Murray, A., Patrick, I., Fitzgerald, M., Smith, S. Cameron, P. (2010). Clinical handover in the trauma setting: a qualitative study of paramedics and trauma team members. BMJ: Quality and Safety Health Care, 19(6), 1-6. Fowler, C., ONeill, L. Helvert, J. (2011). The handboom of emergent technologies in social research. New York: Oxford University Press. Gerrish, K. Lacey, A. (2010). The research process in nursing. (6th ed.). Sussex: Blackwell Publishing. Giles, D. (2002). Advanced research methods in psychology. Sussex: Routledge. Henandez, C. (2011). Grounded theory: the philosophy method, and work of barney glaser. USA: Brown Walker Press. Hinshaw, A. (2011). Shaping health policy through nursing research. New York: Springer Publishing. Inoue, A. (2012). Writing studies research in practice: methods and methodologies. USA: Southern Illinois University Press. Jackson, S. (2011). Research methods: a modular approach. (2nd ed.). Wadsworth: Cengage Learning. Japec, L. (2008). Advances in telephone survey methodology. New Jersey: John Wiley Sons. Khan, J. (2008). Research methodology. New Delhi: APH Publishing. Kirby, S., Greaves, L. Reid, C. (2006). Experience research social change: methods beyond the mainstream. (2nd ed.). Ontario: Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication. Merrian, S. (2009). Qualitative research: a guide to design and implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Moniff, J. Whitehead, J. (2010). You and your action research project. (3rd ed.). Oxfordshire: Routeledge. Monsen, E. Horn, L. (2008). Research: successful approaches. (3rd ed.). USA: Diana Faulhaber. Morrow, E., Boaz, A., Brearley, S. Ross, F. (2012). Handbook of service user involvement in nursing healthcare research. Sussex: John Wiley Sons. Newell, R. Burnard, P. (2011). Research for evidence based practice in healthcare. (2nd ed.). Sussex: John Wiley Sons. Pope, C. Mays, N. (2006). Qualitative research in healthcare. (3rd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Rubin, A. Babbie, E. (2010). Essential research methods for social work. (2nd ed.). Belmont: Cengage Learning. Stommel, M. Wills, C. (2004). Clinical research: concepts and principles for advanced practice nurses. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams Wilkins. Streubert, H. Carpenter, D. (2011). Qualitative research in nursing. (5th ed.). Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams Wilkins. Williams, J. (2012). The paramedics guide to research: an introduction. Berkshire: Open University Press.

Communities Essay -- Group Communication Community Essays

Communitites When most people talk about community, they think of a location, an area in which people live. By definition â€Å"community† is a group of people living in the same location and under the same government. Community can also be defined as a group of people with the same common interests or segments in society. However, these definitions, which can be found in any dictionary, are only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to explaining what community really is. Community is the memories and traditions of a certain area, as well as the interactions and responsibilities of its members. In order to truly belong to a community people must follow a set of values. These communal values are needed to provide stability among communities in this ever changing world. In the past ten years, with the advent of the internet and many other forms of communication, communities have become less interactive and isolated. In this paper I will be discussing the purpose of communal values and why t hey should be protected. Having a sense of belonging within a community is very important. Many people who have moved since childhood will always remember where they grew up. It is the memories and history they have there that will always make it home. In the play The Piano Lesson, the author shows the conflict between Boy Willie and his sister Berniece both of whom are African American. The conflict of the story centers on gaining a sense of belonging from one’s past. Boy Willie wishes to buy the land where his ancestors were slaves. In doing this Boy Willie must sell an antique piano which has been in his family for generations. Berniece wishes to hold on to the antique piano because it holds the history of their family in its unique carvings. In Boy Willie’s mind, gaining the piece of land would make his life meaningful and give him a sense of belonging. This story shows how the powerful bonds of memories and history are enough to create conflict between even the closest individuals. However , sense of belonging in a community does not require the history and memories of a place. People can gain a sense of belonging from simple but meaningful acts within the community. In Scott Russell Sanders’s essay on community, he explains how simple acts such as making bread with his daughter and children from the neighborhood gives him a sense of belonging and hope. Communal inte... ...o their communities as a whole. Throughout this paper we see the common problem of limiting the interactions between community members, and how this will hurt communities. Only when these issues become so evident that they begin to cause large problems will they be looked at, and by that time it could be too late. Schools now should be teaching children the importance of group thought and how it forms the basis of community structure around the world. The children of the future must not be sheltered from the outside world with new technology and packaged communities. Works Cited Collie, Tim. â€Å"In 21st Century, Americans are increasingly mobile creatures.† Sun-Sentinel [Fort Lauderdale, FL] 3 Jan. 2001: A4. Ehrenfeld, David. â€Å"Pseudocommunities.† Vitek and Jackson 20-24. Kline, David. â€Å"An Amish Perspective.† Vitek and Jackson 35-40. Paige, Harry W. â€Å"Leave If You Can.† Vitek and Jackson 11-14. Sanders, Scott Russell. â€Å"The Common Life.† Vitek and Jackson 40-49. Tall, Deborah. â€Å"Dwelling: Making Peace with Space and Place.† Vitek and Jackson 104-12. Vitek, William, and Wes Jackson, eds. Rooted In The Lan: Essays on Community and Place. New Haven: Yale UP, 1996.

Childhood Essay

reports that social class plays a very important role in a child’s upbringing because it helps determine the way a child will be raised. In Lareau’s (2003) study she came to the conclusion that there were two different patterns of child rearing: concerted cultivation and natural growth. Concerted cultivation is the child rearing method that middle class parents use focusing on not only caring for their child, but developing a personality by enrolling their children in many structured activities and developing language skills (Lareau, 2003).Natural growth is the child-rearing method that working class and poor parents use to raise their children because there is not a lot of time and money for structured activities and long verbal discussions with the children (Lareau, 2003). Families who practice natural growth child rearing practices need to focus on providing the simpler needs of the child like providing shelter, clothing, food, and water therefore unable to have the structured activities and worry about establishing communication skills. This is important to consider because the way children are raised because this has a social impact.The children that are being raised today will eventually grow up to be a part of their own society; there are social impacts on the current society because of the methods of child-rearing and the consequences that these child-rearing practices are having on children with the way they interact in society, There are benefits and disadvantages to both childrearing methods reported by Lareau (2010) however there are definitive differences in the child’s outcome due to the child’s social class and thus the method the child was raised with.In concerted cultivation children spend a lot of time with adults at structured activities and so they start to communicate with adults as relative equals. The children of concerted cultivation also have longer and more reasoning conversations with their parents which le ads them to the sense of entitlement when dealing with institutions (Lareau, 2003). Children raised with concerted cultivation had a larger group of language skills than children raised with natural growth because they communicate longer and more often with adults.This leads to children raised with concerted cultivation having the ability to manipulate rules and thus deal with institutions easier than those of natural growth, however they also have issues figuring out how to occupy their time because they did not often do â€Å"free play† (Lareau, 2003). The children that are raised with natural growth have less communication skills simply because they have less experience talking to adults (Lareau, 2003).Parents of natural growth have to worry about putting food on the table and taking care of many basic needs so when the children are spoken to its often in short direct phrases, without any room for questioning or discussing. The children who are raised with natural growth a lso do not have that much time spent in structured activities with adults as the children of concerted cultivation (Lareau, 2003). The children who are raised with natural growth developed what Lareau (2003) reported as constraint.Constraint was the disadvantage that natural growth children experience because of their lack of communication skills and the subordination they felt to adults. Children raised with natural growth absorbed their parents feelings of powerlessness with institutions and learned to distrust authority. These differences tend to perpetuate themselves when it comes to differences in child rearing because what class a child is raised in impacts his/her life and then when that child grows up and has children of their own the child rearing practice will most likely be used again if the child grows up to live in the same social class.It is a cycle that continues throughout generations because children usually grow up to be in the same social class they were born into and since the child rearing practices are social class based primarily the children will raise their children as they were raised. After reading Lareau’s (2003) case study I had to do some reflection to figure out with method of child-rearing it was that I was raised in. My family has crossed the line from middle class to working class several times through my childhood, but predominately I feel as if I have been raised using concerted cultivation.My mother and father separated by the time I was seven years old. While at times living with my mother basic necessities were hard to come by because of her poor management of finances, my father always was middle class (I lived with him permanently from age 15 on) and I feel as if I have been raised a middle class child. Since, I was younger I now realize I was active in many structured activities such as: ballet, tap, jazz, girl scouts, youth group at church, choir, bell choir, church plays, cheerleading, cross-country, track, an d swim team.Although I did not always think of the activities I participated in to be particularly hard on my family at the time I now realize with my brother, two sisters, and all of their activates my mother must have found it very hard to transport us all to our different activities. The number of activities I was involved in during my childhood shows proof of my upbringing being concerted cultivation because one of the characteristics of being raised with concerted cultivation is a lot of structured activities such as the ones I participated in (Lareau, 2003).Another concept of concerted cultivation which I know I have also be blessed with in my child-rearing is the better communication skills due to long discussions and reasoning with my parents (Lareau, 2003). Both of my parents have always encouraged my sisters, brother, and me to talk openly and voice our opinions. I did not realized it growing up, but now I understand that the lengthy communications I had with my parents en abled me to have a larger vocabulary, good communication skills, and feel comfortable when talking to authority or adults from institutions.The sense of entitlement I feel due to my middle class upbringing makes sense because of the amount of time I spent in structured activities with adults (Lareau, 2003). The time I spent with adults as a child and the way I spoke to them made them relative equals in my perspective. This is an advantage of having a concerted cultivation middle class upbringing because I do not mistrust authority or feel subordinate to intuitions, on the contrary I feel as if they are to serve me and that I can work with institutions to get both my and the institutions needs met.It makes sense that my entitlement feelings allow me to perform well in college and to communication effectively with all professors or staff at the college because of the experience I had dealing with institutions when I was younger. Another concept of concerted cultivation that I have exp erienced in childhood has to do with social connections. Much like Lareau’s (2003) case study has reported concerted cultivation raised children had weak ties with their extended family.This is true in my upbringing because while I love and sometimes talk to my extended family I seldom see them or would by any means categorize our relationships as strong kinship ties (Lareau, 2003). This I feel has been an unfortunate result of concerted cultivation because I see how some of my other cousins behave towards each other as they are so close talking everyday and meet several times a week for lunch or dinner.I feel this is sad because while I would love to have stronger ties with my extended family I realize it is not a part of the way I was brought up because of my middleclass child-rearing. The concept of my social connections often being mostly in homogenous age groups as a child is very accurate (Lareau, 2003). Because of the activities I participated in and the area in which I lived and went to school I predominately have friendships through activities with children much like I was at the time.

Ed Sullivan, Variety Show Host Influenced American Culture

Ed Sullivan was a newspaperman who became an unlikely cultural force during the early decades of television. His Sunday night variety show was considered a weekly event in homes around the country. The Ed Sullivan Show is widely remembered for giving The Beatles their first exposure in America, an event in early 1964 which seemed to change the culture overnight. A decade earlier, Elvis Presley had also made a huge impression on Sullivans stage, generating a national controversy while turning many young Americans into instant fans of rock n roll. Fast Facts: Ed Sullivan Born: September 28, 1902 in New York CityDied: October 13, 1974 in New York CityKnown For: As host of a weekly variety show broadcast on Sunday nights, Sullivan had enormous influence on American show business.Parents: Peter Arthur Sullivan and Elizabeth F. SmithSpouse: Sylvia WeinsteinChildren: Betty Sullivan Besides showcasing musicians, Sullivans weekly show was marked by its eclectic, and often simply odd, array of performers. Broadway stars might perform a scene from a hit musical, nightclub comedians would tell jokes about their wives and mothers in law, magicians would perform elaborate tricks, and circus performers would tumble, juggle, or spin plates. What happened on Sullivans show became part of the national conversation. By the time his show ended in 1971, it was estimated that more than 10,000 performers had appeared. During the 1950s and 1960s a mark of success in show business meant appearing on The Ed Sullivan Show. Early Life and Career Edward Vincent Sullivan was born on September 28, 1902, in the Harlem neighborhood of New York City. His father, a customs inspector, was the son of an Irish immigrant, and his mother was an amateur painter who loved the arts. Sullivan had a twin brother who died in infancy, and as a child his family moved out of New York City to Port Chester, New York. Growing up, Sullivan was influenced by his parents love of music. He attended Catholic schools, and at St. Mary’s High School he wrote for the school newspaper and played several sports. After high school an uncle offered to pay his college tuition, but Sullivan chose to go directly into the newspaper business. In 1918 he got a job at the local Port Chester newspaper. He briefly worked for a newspaper in Hartford, Connecticut, but then moved on to New York City. In the early 1930s he became a columnist for the New York Daily News. He covered Broadway and show business in general, and began appearing on radio broadcasts. To augment his income, Sullivan would moonlight as the emcee at Times Square theaters that featured live vaudeville acts and movies. After appearing on an early television broadcast, an advertising executive thought Sullivan should host a regular TV show. On June 20, 1948, he first appeared as the host of a CBS variety show, â€Å"The Toast of the Town.† Ed Sullivan. Getty Images   Television Pioneer Sullivans show was not immediately successful, but after obtaining a new steady sponsor, Lincoln-Mercury automobiles, and a new name, The Ed Sullivan Show, it caught on. His 1974 obituary in the New York Times noted that Sullivans appeal was often baffling to anyone seeking to explain it. Even his onstage awkwardness became part of his charm. His weekly promise to the audience was that he was presenting a really big show. For decades, impressionists, playing on Sullivans peculiar diction, mimicked his catchphrase as a rilly big shew. The core of Sullivans lasting appeal was his credibility as a judge of talent. The American public came to believe that if Ed Sullivan put someone on his show they were worthy of attention. The Elvis Controversy 10/28/1956-New York, NY: Elvis Presley, rock and roll sensation, as he rehearses with his band for The Ed Sullivan Show. Bettmann Archive / Getty Images In the summer of 1956, Elvis Presley appeared on television on â€Å"The Steve Allen Show.† But it wasn’t until his appearance on Ed Sullivan’s program on September 9, 1956, that mainstream America was shocked by what they saw. (Sullivan, recuperating from a serious auto accident, didn’t host that night; actor Charles Laughton was the guest host.) Some viewers, appalled by Presley’s â€Å"suggestive† dancing, criticized Sullivan harshly. The television critic of the New York Times, Jack Gould, published a denunciation of Presley the following Sunday. Gould wrote that Presley was a â€Å"gyrating figure† generally found on the fringes of show business, and that his â€Å"bumps and grinds† could â€Å"overstimulate† teenagers. The following month, Elvis returned for a performance on the night of October 28, 1956. Sullivan was back hosting, and again criticism followed. Sullivan hosted Elvis again on January 6, 1957, but CBS executives insisted that the singer only be shown from the waist up, keeping his swiveling hips safely out of sight. Cultural Milestones on Sunday Nights Ed Sullivan with The Beatles. Getty Images Eight years later, Sullivan made more cultural history by hosting The Beatles on their first visit to America. Their initial appearance, on February 9, 1964, set ratings records. It was estimated that 60 percent of American televisions were tuned into their performance. Coming less than three months after the assassination of President Kennedy, Sullivan showcasing The Beatles seemed like a very welcome bit of fun. In the following years, Sullivan would host a number of musicians who were changing the culture, including The Rolling Stones, The Supremes, James Brown, Janis Joplin, The Doors, The Jefferson Airplane, Johnny Cash, and Ray Charles. When network affiliates and advertisers suggested he should avoid booking black performers so as not to offend viewers in the South, he refused. Sullivan’s show endured for 23 years, ending in 1971. He produced some TV specials after giving up the weekly show before becoming ill with cancer. He died in New York on October 13, 1974. Sources Ed Sullivan. Encyclopedia of World Biography, 2nd ed., vol. 19, Gale, 2004, pp. 374-376. Gale Virtual Reference Library.Coletta, Charles. Sullivan, Ed (1902–1974). St. James Encyclopedia of Popular Culture, edited by Thomas Riggs, 2nd ed., vol. 5, St. James Press, 2013, pp. 6-8. Gale Virtual Reference Library.Goldfarb, Sheldon. The Ed Sullivan Show. Bowling, Beatniks, and Bell-Bottoms: Pop Culture of 20th-Century America, edited by Sara Pendergast and Tom Pendergast, vol. 3: 1940s-1950s, UXL, 2002, pp. 739-741. Gale Virtual Reference Library.