Based on the information provided, Source 2 can be regarded as a more scholarly text than Source 1 for multiple reasons. Here’s a breakdown of the options:
-
There are no colour photographs included, unlike Source 2. - While the presence of photographs may indicate a more casual presentation, it is not a definitive measure of scholarly quality.
-
All of the above. - This option typically suggests that you can choose this if you believe all other statements are correct.
-
The author’s full details are provided and she is affiliated with a university. - This is a strong indicator of scholarly text, as it suggests credibility and authority in the field.
-
The article was peer-reviewed. - Peer review is a hallmark of academic publishing and signifies that the work has undergone evaluation by experts in the field.
-
The language of the article is formal and academic. - Scholarly texts typically employ formal language and adhere to academic standards.
-
It is a research article that was published in an accredited scholarly journal. - Publication in a reputable journal is a key characteristic of scholarly work.
Given these options, the factors that collectively indicate that Source 2 is more scholarly than Source 1 are points 3, 4, 5, and 6. Therefore, if you are to choose one option, it would be:
All of the above.
This encompasses all the specific reasons given, highlighting Source 2's scholarly nature compared to Source 1.