lecture 13 - report writing and research rationales

8/2/2019 Lecture 13 - Report Writing and Research Rationales

1/34

118PY: Research and ProfessionalDevelopment

Lecture 13: Report Writing and

Research Rationales


2/34

Announcements Workshop this week: Figures and plagiarism

Next week (w/c 21st of November 2011)

Wednesday Lecture (GEG31)

Friday Lecture (CSG2)

Workshop SPSS class test t-tests (open book)

Mandatorybut does not form the basis of your endof year mark

Assignment 1 (humour and psychology) dueMonday 21st of November 2011

Turnitin by 11:59pm (latest) email AndyJohnson at that time (attaching your assignment)

if there are problems with the Moodle/Turnitin


3/34

Key Terms From Last Lecture

Exploring/summarising data

Table

Figure

Frequency histograms Stem and leaf display/plots

Box plots/Box and whisker plots

Outlier

Bar chart

Line chart/ interaction line chart


4/34

Report Writing and Research

Rationale: Contents

The eel and the anus

Revision of key concepts acquired this term

Coursework check

General pointers

Structure

Content Referencing


5/34


6/34

A Cautionary Scientific Tale

Lo, S.F., Wong, S.H., Leung L.S., Law, I.C., and Yip, A.W.C. (2004).Traumatic rectal perforation by eel. Surgery, 135(1), 110-111.

CASE REPORT -A 50-year-old man was seen at the Accident andEmergency Department because of abdominal pain. Physicalexamination revealed peritonitis. A shadow of an eel was noticedon the abdominal radiograph. On further questioning, the patientadmitted an eel was inserted into the rectum in an attempt torelieve constipation.Emergency laparotomy found a 50 cm-long

eel biting the splenic flexure of the colon, and a 3-cm perforationwas found over the anterior wall of the rectum. The rectum wasdivided at the site of perforation, and the proximal end wasbrought out as colostomy. The postoperative course wasuneventful. The patient was discharged home on day 7.


7/34

Here it is

The eel is 50cm (i.e.more than a quarterof my height)


8/34

The Scientific Method

(1) Identify the problem and highlight ahypothetical suggestion

Based on the patient self-report, we have arationale to examine the following proposition...

Does insertion of an eel alleviate the symptomsof constipation?

Null hypothesis (H0): ???

Experimental hypothesis (H1): ???

NEED A RATIONALE


9/34


Does insertion of an eel alleviate the symptomsof constipation?

We begin with the null hypothesis

If there is sufficient statistical support we mayreject our null hypothesis and adopt our

alternative/experimental hypothesis


10/34


(2) Design the study

Two groups both with an equivalent level of

constipation (controlled) One group inserts eel, one groups does not

Design =between-participants

Measure effect on constipation

Independent variable (IV) = eel (yes or no)

Dependent variable (DV) = level of constipation


11/34



What are the disadvantages of such a design?

What design could we have instead?

Limitations of this?

Within-participants but order effects


12/34



Type of study?

Quasi experimental or experimental?

What do we need for an experimental design?

Control over IV

Random allocation to IV levels


13/34


(3) Conduct study

We will cover ethics in another session; butsuffice to say, this is not acceptable conduct

Good luck getting participants!

HYPOTHETICALEXAMPLE!


14/34


(4) Evaluate the study by analysing data from thestudy

Compare constipation scores between 2 groups

Descriptives

0

10

2030

40

50

60

70

8090

100

Eel No Eel

Mean

Constipation(%)

HYPOTHETICAL

EXAMPLE!

Figure 1: Mean constipation scores

for the eel and no eel groups

Labels of x and y axis

Axis starts at 0 notmisleading

Appropriatetitle

Gapbetween

bars


15/34




Descriptives

HYPOTHETICAL

EXAMPLE!

Eel group No eel group

Mean 57.32 89.45

Standarddeviation

12.85 15.39

Table 1: Mean constipation scores and standarddeviations for the eel and no eel groupsAppropriate

title

Groups clearly

labelled


16/34




Parametric tests

Assumptions: Independence

Ratio/interval

Normal distribution

Homogeneity of variance

What type of test would be appropriate?

Unrelated t-test


17/34




T-test results

An unrelated t-test was conducted and foundsignificantly higher levels of constipation in theeel group compared to the no eel group,t(37)=6.74, p


18/34

The Scientific Method(4) Evaluate the study by analysing data from the

study Compare constipation scores between 2 groups

Purpose of t-test is to assess the number of

standard errors our score is from the nullhypothesis that there is no difference (this is t)

We use standard deviation to estimate thestandard error

We then divided the obtained difference by theestimate of the standard error = t

Once we have tand the dfwe can assess theprobability of getting that value by chance (t

distribution Gosset)


19/34


(4) Evaluate the study by analysing data from the study Compare constipation scores between 2 groups

Using a non-directional (2-tailed) approach

Falls within5%, therefore

significant

Looks extremedifference but outsidethe 5% critical area;

therefore, cannotreject the null

hypothesis

But if we have a critical area at both tails each area can only be 2.5%

(to equal 5% in total) this score then ceases to be significant

Falls outside 5%,therefore non-

significant


20/34


(5) Communicate the results

Right up an account of your experiment (to be

discussed) Why bother?

Can inform people of your findings increaseknowledge/people may be able to benefit from yourfindings

If people do not believe your findings, they can followyour reported methodology and see if they canreplicate your findings


21/34


(5) Communication/interpretation of the results

Another variable.

What if eel group has a significant reductionThe role of slime

This is called a..

Confounding variable


22/34

Insertion of a live animal into the rectumcausing rectal perforation has never beenreported. This may be related to a bizarre

healthcare belief, inadvertent sexual behaviour,or criminal assault. However, the true reasonmay never be known. (Lo et al., 2004, p. 111)


23/34

Humour and Psychology Practical

Due 21st November 2011

General Points of Advice

Avoid informal language Avoid abbreviations

Avoid unsubstantiated comments (cite)

Keep language concise and scientific

Follow the prescribed structure Check it over


24/34


Due 21st November 2011

General Points of Advice

The Golden Thread you are telling a story andthere should be common link association betweenall things you are writing and your study aim

Signpost these links to the reader otherwise

some things may look out of context


25/34


Title

You need to devise your own title

Should contain, in some respect, the IV and theDV

Keep it concise avoid unnecessary wording

Do not try and make it funny/quirky etc


26/34


Introduction The inverted triangle

A brief introduction to the notion of expectancy (canbe from a different area of psychology)

A brief introduction on humour (factors that influenceit)

Wimer and Beins (2008): how they used expectancy toinvestigate the effects on humour, what they found

Rationale (do not jump from description of studies towhat you predict) for your study (why are you doingthis can be linked to summary of what you read)

Briefly what you are going to do

Prediction plus justification for such


27/34


Method Design

IV, DV, type of design, and any controls

Participants

How many, how many male/female, mean age,who were they, and recruited from where

Materials

Key materials used - describe in some detail anddo not rely uniquely on an appendix

Procedure

Chronological account of your study


28/34


Results(1) Descriptives (table or graph) means and

standard deviations

Ensure that all tables and figures are labelled

appropriatelyInclude an additional line describing pattern ofmeans and SDs

(2)Inferential statistics (t-test)

Sentence describing the type of test, thegroups/conditions under comparison, thedirection of any effects, and then the stats, e.g.t(8)=9.47, p


29/34


Results

Keep concise

Avoid making any evaluative judgments

An objective reporting of the results Do not refer to hypothesis or what it means

It will not be many words so do not worry if it is

short


30/34


Discussion(1) Briefly summarise the results (without the stats)

(2) How do the results relate to previous studiesmentioned in the introduction (consistent or

inconsistent with them?)(3) How might we explain the findings? What is the

theory/mechanism (relate back to the introduction andany explanations in Wimer and Beins. 2008)

(4) Any limitations to the study which may invoke analternative explanation how could these be overcomein future, i.e. Suggest methodological improvements

(5) Practical application

(6) Future research ideas where next....


31/34


Referencing in the text Citing in the text: Wimer and Beins (2008)

investigated...

Consistently cite if any ambiguity about who you are

talking about in a passage cite them again If three or more authors: for the first citation you must

write Martin, Carlson and Buskist (2007:35) arguedthat... and then after that you can refer to them as...

Martin et al. (2007:23) argued... Quotes: e.g. Hills (2007:34) stated that the effect wastransient and difficult to replicate.


32/34


Referencing in the text

Primary source you read the study that you are citing

(e.g. Wimer and Beins, 2008) Secondary sources if you read about astudy/argument/theory in another text

Smith (2004, cited in Martin, Carlson and Buskist,2007) argued that....


33/34


The Reference Section

Alphabetical order

Books: Martin, G.N., Carlson, N.R., and Buskist, W.

(2007).Psychology. Harlow, Pearson EducationLimited, pages 304-312

Journal articles: Wimer, D.J. and Beins, B.C. (2008).Expectations and Perceived Humour.Humour, 21(3),

347-363.


34/34

Reading

Chapter 24: Planning your practicaland writing your report [Coolican, H.

(2009). Research Methods andStatistics in Psychology (5th Edition).London: Hodder and Stoughton]

lecture 13 - report writing and research rationales

Documents