An essay approximately 10 pages is needed (For Psychology 101)

101.pdf

Home >Psychology homework help >An essay approximately 10 pages is needed (For Psychology 101)

PSYC101 – Introductory Psychology

Psychology Research Proposal Packet

Schedule/Table of Contents Due Dates Assignment/Resource Pages Research Proposal Overview 2-5 Grading Details 5 9/8 (Fri) Topics of Interest 6 9/18 (Mon) Articles of Interest + Research Questions 7-8 10/4 (Wed) Hypothesis + Summary Statement 9-10 10/20 (Fri) Draft #1 (put ID# on paper instead of name) 11-12 11/6 (Mon) Draft #2 (put ID# on paper instead of name) 13 11/20 (Mon) Draft #3 (put ID# on paper instead of name) 14 12/6 (Wed) Final Research Proposal (hard copy in class) 15 12/9 (Wed.) 2-minute Presentations 16 Writing and APA Style/Formatting Tips 17-18 Appendix A – Sample Outline 19-21 Appendix B – Proposal Grading Rubric 22 Appendix C – APA Formatting Guide 23-29

2 Research Proposal Overview

Psychology is a rich and interdisciplinary field that investigates the underlying mechanisms governing behavior and mental processes. Throughout the term, you will develop a research proposal for a study of your own design. You will not be collecting real data, so the sky is the limit for what you decide to study! With this proposal you will have the opportunity to think like a psychological scientist to review a body of psychology literature of interest to you and propose a correlation OR experiment to investigate an original research question. There are a series of exercises throughout the semester designed to help you along the way. These exercises are designed to move beginning scientific writers through the process, but all students, regardless of their level, can benefit from working from the ground up. Learning Goals

1) Practice using clear scientific thinking to propose a study to fill a current gap in the scientific literature

2) Practice finding, comprehending, and synthesizing peer-reviewed primary research articles

3) Develop an argument and lay out scholarly published evidence to support it 4) Produce a well-organized and clearly written paper to serve as a model for any future

scientific writing assignments 5) Become familiar with and practice using APA writing style and editorial format

**Remember to hold onto each of the graded assignments you turn in for this proposal. All

of them will be placed in a folder as your writing portfolio, showing your progress from a research interest to a fleshed out proposal.**

Proposal Content The body of your research proposal will be between ~2,500-3,000 words (per typical research proposal guidelines from funding agencies like the National Science Foundation). The title page, Abstract, References section, figures/tables, and any appendices are not included in this word count. Below is the structure I recommend for your research proposal. If you feel that your proposed project warrants a different structure or use of subheadings, you’re welcome to play around with that. However, you should somehow cover all of these topics in your proposal and write no more than 3,000 words in the body of your proposal.

I. Abstract: (200-250 words, not counted towards word limit) This introductory section is brief – a single paragraph is enough. You should state your underlying research question (using 1-2 important cited sources as a framework) and then briefly describe how those sources, when synthesized, are relevant to answering your research question. A brief reference to the study’s general hypothesis with specific predictions should also be included here, as well as a sentence or two explaining how you will conduct your study, and one major discussion point. You should write this section after revising your first draft. Do this section after revising Draft #1 because the abstract provides practice in condensing and pulling out the most important points of your proposal, which you may not have been ironed out until the second draft.

3 II. Background Literature: (3 pages) This consists of two parts. First, you will review

the literature on the current state of knowledge relevant to your study using primary scholarly journal articles (i.e., specific studies conducted by researchers). Second, after your literature review, you will end this section by using scholarly sources to provide a strong justification for why a study like the one you will be proposing in the next section should be conducted (i.e., identify the gap in the literature your study will fill). This Background Literature section should be sufficiently detailed to enable the reader to place your study in the broader context of related theories and scholarly literature and make it clear why your study is necessary and will contribute to the psychology community. Do not write about your specific study details/methodology or your hypothesis just yet!

III. Proposed Work: (2-3 pages) This should be a description of the participant/subject details, design, materials/apparatus used, data collection procedures you will use to test your hypothesis for your original research question, as well as your theory-driven hypothesis and specific predictions. Enough detail is needed to show that you have read relevant articles’ methodology sections and have thoughtfully developed an original, realistic, and ethical study. In the real world, the more organized a researcher appears to be, the more likely his or her research grant proposal is to be funded, so feel free to include diagrams or schematics explaining your design if needed. The Proposed Work section will include four subheadings: Participants (for humans) OR Subjects (for nonhumans), Materials (for surveys or images, not equipment) OR Apparatus (equipment that is built or major technology like fMRI machine), Procedure, and Hypothesis and Predicted Results. Look to the published literature you’re reading to get an idea of what sort of information is relevant to include in each of these sub-sections. For example, even though this is a proposal for a study, you should still provide your desired participant demographics (e.g., ethnicity, gender break down, sample size, and average age). The Hypothesis and Predicted Results subsection should start with a recap of the gap in the literature you identified in the Background Literature section. Next, use scholarly literature to develop and explicitly state a well-supported, logical hypothesis. Next, include what specific quantitative data you will collect, what you will do with those data in terms of descriptive statistics (e.g., compare means, correlate the two variables), what you specifically predict (e.g., the Photo Group will recall significantly more objects on average than the Word Group) as well as whether you would predict a p-value greater than or less than .05. [Grant proposals submitted to the National Science Foundation, for example, must include details about statistical procedures and tests to be used. If you have not recently taken a statistics course, you do not need to worry too much about statistics for this proposal. If you have taken statistics, feel free to include a sentence about the test you would use!] Finally, illustrate what your specific prediction(s) would look visually like by creating one original figure (i.e., graph) of hypothetical data. This figure should be referenced in the text (e.g., “See Figure 1”), must be created in Excel, and must be formatted in APA editorial format. You’re welcome to include additional figures, tables, and appendices as needed. See Appendix C of this packet for formatting help. I will provide more resources for this if you need it!

IV. Implications: (1 page) While the significance of the project at a scientific level should have been made clear in the Background section (e.g., filling a gap), this is where you will think critically about your predicted results and the greater significance of your study. How will your results (if your hypothesis is supported) affect the Big Picture of the field about which you have been reading? That is to say, who should care about your study and why? Who in the real world would be affected, and how? Is there an applied value down the road, or even currently? These are hard questions, but every researcher has to be able to justify why their research is of value. This need not always require any kind of immediate benefit, nor relate to improving the human or nonhuman condition—but it can, so talk about it if it does! The quest for knowledge, applied or basic, in psychology is sufficient if you can provide evidence (with the help of a few relevant primary sources, possibly new ones you haven’t used yet in your proposal) that both the scientific and greater communities should be interested in the research question your proposal addresses.

V. Discussion: (1.5 pages) In this section, you should address the following two questions using primary sources to support your claims: 1) How would obtaining negative (i.e., opposite of what you predict) results inform the scientific community? That is to say, what would be some plausible explanations for negative results? For example, why might the control group score higher on the spatial reasoning task you developed, even though what you read up to this point suggests the opposite should have occurred? 2) How would obtaining null (i.e., no correlation or no difference in mean scores) results inform the scientific community? That is to say, what would it mean if the control and experimental groups scored the same on your task or there was zero correlation? What could account for such findings? “Cop-out” arguments such as “participants lie on surveys,” “I don’t have enough participants,” or “something was wrong with my task” are not acceptable here, as any good researcher would do their best to design around superficial problems such as these. Think critically (!!), and consult the literature to try to explain alternative findings of negative and null results. To support your alternative explanations, you will need to seek out and cite additional scholarly sources. This section is one of the more challenging ones, so do not put off thinking about it until last! VI. References: You are required to include as many primary research articles (plus 1 scholarly book or book chapter) as necessary in order to completely address the four sections above. There is no minimum or maximum number of primary research articles to include, but I will say that students in the past who dove into the literature and really practiced synthesizing and integrating >5 sources scored substantially higher than their peers and went on to be substantially better prepared for PSYC201. Any article cited in the text must be fully referenced in the References section at the end of your proposal, and vice versa. Citations in the text and in the References section must be in APA editorial format. Please DO NOT use a citation exporter to do your citations for you. They are rarely ever accurate. There are many resources available to help you with formatting by hand. See Appendix C of this packet for details.

5 Grading Details Proposals must be no more than 3,000 words (i.e., aim for 8-10 pages of content). This will be sufficient space to write a formal APA style research proposal at the PSYC101 level. The separate title page, Abstract, References, table(s)/figure(s) pages, and appendices do *not* count towards total page length or word count. Feel free to use textbooks as resources to find primary sources and scholarly books. However, a textbook cannot serve as your scholarly book source for this proposal, nor should textbooks appear in the text or References section (since you’re using them to find journal articles). Please double-space your proposal and use 12-point Times New Roman font, with 1-inch margins on all sides, and adhere to APA editorial format at the level that is provided in this packet’s resource guides. Full credit cannot be earned for non-compliance in formatting. Your final proposal (100 pts.) will be graded using the rubric, which can be found in Appendix B. A portion of the grade (10%) will be devoted to writing improvement. This includes not only making appropriate revisions directed by peer-reviewers and me, but also making independent changes and making use of the resources available to you as you improve your writing. What makes a great proposal? Along with following the section instructions, Grading Details and rubric, and the resources starting on p. 17, a great paper makes novel connections among many sources to create something new (called “synthesizing” the literature). Think of articles as puzzle pieces that can be put together to form a completely new puzzle depending upon how you use them. A great proposal also pays attention to details that are being asked for in each section. Read carefully to make sure you include everything. Also, a great proposal is one that has been written by a student who is invested in their work and excited to learn! Finally, believe it or not, a great proposal involves collaboration. You are encouraged to collaborate every step of the way except for serious thinking and writing. I support and encourage you to work together, with me, and with writing tutors at the Center for Writing, Learning, and Teaching (CWLT, Howarth 109) to discuss your ideas early on and to seek help for revision; however, the critical thinking to determine how to use sources and all writing must be completed independently!

Topics of Interest

Due: Friday, September 8

Most students will not have taken a psychology course before this one, and therefore may not know what aspects of the field are most intriguing to them. That is okay and expected! However, you’ll need to start thinking seriously about topics before we get too far into the course. To generate ideas and help you discover your interests in psychology, you will get started by completing the Topics of Interest assignment. 1. Read through the entire Subject Index (yes, A-Z!) at the end of the textbook. 2. Record the 10 topics and their page numbers in the textbook that you find most intriguing.

6 Get specific with a sub-topic if one is available. For example, you might have an item on your list that looks like: Memory, priming, p. 330 If you are unfamiliar with a particular topic but it catches your attention in the index, flip to the page in the textbook or do a quick Wikipedia search and read a little bit about it. 3. From this list of 10, put asterisks next to the FOUR (4) topics about which you’d most like to do some further reading. If you have an interest within the field of psychology and it does not appear in the textbook, I invite you to add those interests to your list and consult me. As you formulate your list, ask yourself if the topics you’re choosing are ones that can be studied with a testable hypothesis and a correlation or experimental design. For example, while synesthesia, dreams, and psychological disorders are interesting topics, could you design a realistic research proposal around one of them? Maybe, but you’d have to get really creative. 4. In one paragraph, briefly reflect on what you’ve discovered about your interests in psychology and/or the breadth of the field. !The list of 10 sub/topics with 4 asterisked and your one-paragraph reflection on the exercise is what you will turn in at the start of class on Friday, Sept. 8. Everything should be typed. Note: To complete this assignment, you need only skim Subject Index topics. But of course, feel free to do some further investigative work on Wikipedia, Google Scholar, or PsycINFO if you know how. We will do a formal researching workshop on Wednesday, September 11. Go where your intellectual curiosity takes you! Keep the end goal in the front of your mind… You will develop an original research proposal for a correlation or experiment on a subject in psychology that is of great interest to you. You’ll need to start by getting a good understanding of that topic and its underlying theories, and then consider some important questions that come to you. Any preliminary thinking you do now will set you up for the next exercise, which involves looking at the published literature in journals relevant to your interests!

7 Articles of Interest + Research Questions – 15 pts.

Due: Monday, September 18

With the Topics of Interest exercise, you discovered topics in the field of psychology that are most intriguing to you. Since then, we have solidified the difference between a correlation and an experiment, as well as what makes a research question scientific and testable. Now, the goal of this assignment is to put your reading and researching skills to the test to access and become oriented with primary literature related to your interests. To assist with this, I will have already provided you with relevant journal titles for you to search. 1. Skim through the Table of Contents (TOC) and read the article titles contained in the TWO (2) most recent issues for each of the three journal titles that I provided. You can access issues for journals by going to Collins Memorial Library’s Journal Locator by clicking on the Journals tab in the rectangular box on the main library page: www.library.ups.edu Type in the name of the journal I provided and follow the links to the journal’s website. From there, you should be able to figure out how to access the TWO (2) most recent issues to which the university has access, but if you have any trouble with this, please ask me or Andrea Kueter—our liaison librarian—for help! Andrea can be reached at x2875 or by email at [email protected]. 2. Write APA format citations for the TWO (2) journal articles that you find most intriguing from each journal issue’s ToC. Organize your list by journal and issue number so it is easy for me to see your progress. Use the APA citation guide in Appendix C of this packet to help you with APA formatting. DO NOT use a citation exporter. It may be tempting to use, but it will not be 100% correct, and you won’t learn anything about how to write APA citations. For each citation you record, open and skim the article and practice searching for important points (e.g., question, alternative answers, method, logical predictions, results, inferences). Look carefully at any figures that are provided. Using what you learned from your article skimming, write a 3-sentence summary for each article under its citation. Avoid looking at the Abstract until after you summarize the article to reduce temptation to plagiarize ideas from it. 3. Under each summary, write TWO (2) strong research questions that arose as you skimmed and considered that article’s ideas and findings. Consider the population, species, task, findings, implications, or anything else you found interesting as you read, and jot down questions that arise. For example, I once read a paper that suggested writing about a value that is personally important decreases prejudice expressed toward others. I wondered, though, why writing about a personally important value decreases group-level prejudice. Perhaps writing about a value important to a social group may be a better strategy to reduce prejudice.

8 You’ll notice my research question has some logic behind it. The best research questions will, but some of yours might be uninformed “I wonder what would happen if…” questions that come from what you read, and that’s okay, too! Get creative, and have fun with this exercise! Keep in mind, you will be writing a proposal for either an experiment or a correlation study. While “why” questions (e.g., Why are social mammals better problem solvers than nonsocial mammals?) are great, they cannot easily be answered with an experiment or correlation. For this assignment you will be assessed heavily on your ability to develop research questions that are testable with an experiment or correlation. To help me assess your ability to design such studies, beside each question, write whether it represents an Experiment or Correlation. For example: Question – Does providing a therapy dog for one hour twice a week for 6 weeks reduce behavioral outbursts in autistic children compared to a control group? (Experiment). 4. Place an asterisk next to the FOUR (4) research questions from this exercise by which you are most intrigued. ! Following the instructions carefully, you should have 12 APA article citations with brief original summaries, 24 testable research questions that indicate Experiment or Correlation, and 4 of the questions asterisked. This is what you will turn in at the start of class on Wednesday, September 18. Everything should be typed. Note: Once you turn in this assignment, you can get ahead by doing a little more reading on the questions you asterisked. You’ll be asked to select your favorite research question and search for multiple relevant articles to support a strong hypothesis. This Hypothesis + Summary Statement (your next writing exercise) will be the foundation of your research proposal.

9 Hypothesis + Summary Statement – 20 pts.

Due: Wednesday, October 4

With the Articles of Interest + Research Questions assignment, you identified questions that arose out of recent literature in a field of psychology relevant to your interests. Since then, you hopefully have been continuing to consider these questions and are now ready to decide which one you would most like to pursue for your research proposal. Now, the next step towards the development of your proposal will be to fully READ some articles and construct an argument leading to a supported hypothesis and methodology. Here are your goals for this assignment:

1. Present the research question that you predict from your reading as well as the scholarly information to help you design an original experiment OR correlation study (your choice).

2. Develop a testable hypothesis that is supported and informed by the literature in your topic’s field. Return to your notes and textbook about science and research questions.

3. Carefully select 4-5 primary research articles (the scholarly book can wait until Draft #1) that help you communicate to the reader the Four Ws (see next page). You will do more reading and expand your number of sources as you write your drafts.

Below is an example of how you could format the assignment. This is one of my own research studies (CAUTION: The study I describe is a quasi-experiment; you may NOT propose a quasi- experiment!). You should not use the exact wording (e.g., “As I read about the topic…”) below. Rather, use my example to see the information to include and notice how the hypothesis came supported directly out of the literature that I read. Further, notice that I walked my reader through my argument/train of thought using sources to arrive at my hypothesis at the end: As I read about the topic of self-affirmation and prejudice, I wondered why Fein and Spencer (1997) tested whether a self-affirmation (writing about a personally important value, like creativity) would reduce prejudice, given that prejudice is a group-level phenomenon. (! This was one of my asterisked research questions from the Articles of Interest exercise, if you recall.). From here, I read articles about self-affirmation theory (Steele, 1989), social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1986), and social categorization theory (Turner et al., 1987). I learned that while writing about personally important values can produce positive outcomes, the task cues categorization at the individual level (“I am a unique person)” rather than at the group level (“I am a part of XXX group”) (! This was all more reading that came out of my research question and honed my topic to affirmation- reduction strategies to reduce prejudice). I noticed there was little published literature about using a group-affirmation (writing about a value important to one’s social group) to reduce prejudice (! Identifying a gap in the literature!), so I thought I would read more about the conditions in which thinking about your social group may actually decrease (as opposed to increase) prejudice. I learned that a group-affirmation would work best when the groups under examination have a clear ingroup/outgroup distinction (i.e., White vs. Black Americans). For my study, I would like to design an experiment that compares the effect of a self-affirmation and group-affirmation on prejudice. The manipulation will be the type of affirmation task. Participants will be White Americans, and the target group will be Black Americans (so White participants will be given an opportunity to express prejudice toward Blacks. (! Final piece of the puzzle… a reference to design to be used and proposed methodology!)

10 HYPOTHESIS: I predict that a group-affirmation will reduce prejudice more than a self- affirmation or control condition. Past work has suggested that a self-affirmation can reduce prejudice (Fein & Spencer, 1997), yet the social identity approach (Tajfel & Turner, 1986; Turner et al., 1987) suggests that the affirmation task (writing about a personally important value) forces people to categorize as an individual level. Therefore, a group-affirmation (which keeps people categorized at the group level) is a better test of whether or not an affirmation reduces prejudice. (! A hypothesis that is logically built out of cited literature) As you work, make sure you address the Four Ws of any good scientific paper. Great researchers in any field of psychology know they must provide context in order for their readers to understand the value of their study. As was illustrated in the example above, the sources that a researcher selects are CRUCIAL to formulating a coherent argument. As your audience, I want to be able to read your Hypothesis + Summary Statement assignment and understand very clearly:

1) What is the theory and/or background context surrounding your proposed study? 2) What is the study doing that advances the field of psychology? That is, explain the gap

you observed in the literature. 3) Why is the author (you) predicting what he/she is predicting? 4) What methodology will the author (you) use to answer the question?

To address the Four Ws, carefully select all your sources so that each contributes in some way to answering at least one of these questions. In the case of theory and background, more than two sources may be more helpful.

In the above example, you’ll see the Fein and Spencer (1997) article I cited was selected because it provided a strong theory from which my research question developed (W#1). The Steele (1986), Tajfel and Turner (1986), and Turner et al. (1987) sources provided background research (W#1 & 2) on affirmation theory and intergroup processes. The Turner et al. (1987, and Sherman & Hartson, 2006) work provided more background that helped me see the disconnect between theories and lead to my prediction (W#3). The Fein and Spencer (1997) article also provided me with information about the affirmation task that I would use for my method (W#4).

Notice how carefully the articles were selected? I did not pick the first 5 articles I found on PsycINFO and try to make them work. I was strategic! If you find a source that doesn’t answer one of the Four Ws, don’t use it here. Be specific and thoughtful with your choices.

!The paragraph summary statement, hypothesis, and APA style citations for the sources included in the statement (as an attached sheet with “References” centered at the top of the page) are what you will turn in at the start of class on the due date. Everything should be typed and in APA style and editorial format. Use the provided resources starting on p. 17 of this packet for help. Note: Over the next three weeks, you will be expanding and developing the ideas from this statement into a formal first draft of your paper. Start looking for more sources to include, thinking more carefully about your methodology and implications of your study, and getting help with Excel if you need it!

11 Draft #1: CONTENT AND ORGANIZATION – 20 pts.

Due: Friday, October 20

The goal of this first draft is to get all your ideas on paper in paragraph form in a coherent fashion for all sections of the paper with the number of sources you think you need to communicate a developed, clear argument. You will be graded on the thoughtfulness of your work, your fleshed out incorporation of the previous writing exercise—along with the quality of the points below. You will receive feedback on this draft from two peers, so you need to bring three stapled hard-copies of your paper. You will be unprepared without all these items. **Since the Abstract section should be written when your ideas are more fully formed (see p. 2 of this packet), omit the Abstract in Draft #1.** This first draft is all about addressing Higher-Order Concerns (HOCs). Consider the following, and use the checkboxes to mark off each item during your final editing of Draft #1:

! Content Logistics ! Have you covered important literature to provide the context for your study? ! From the Hypothesis + Summary Statement exercise, you should have a testable

research question, an identified gap in the literature, AND a hypothesis that is supported by literature. Are all three of those present and articulated?

! Did you actually design a correlation or experiment in your Proposed Work section? That is to say, did you develop an appropriately-designed study?

! Did you include a figure that illustrates hypothetical predicted results?

! Sentence/Paragraph Structure ! Does each paragraph communicate one major point and have a topic sentence? ! Are there transitions within and between your paragraphs? ! Do your sentences start with old information and end with new information? ! Does each paragraph end with an analysis or conclusive point?

! Use of Sources

! Are all your sources peer-reviewed and scholarly? Have you included a scholarly book?

! Did you use APA editorial formatting in the text of your proposal? ! Do you have enough sources to review the literature and provide context? ! Did you appropriately incorporate the Four Ws? ! Do you have a References section that includes only the sources you actually used

in your proposal?

! Critical Thinking ! Have you given serious thought to what your study would contribute and

who/what will be impacted by it in your Significance section? ! Have you given serious thought to what negative or null findings would mean by

taking time to find relevant scholarly articles that could explain such findings in the Discussion section? Do you have “cop out” explanations like small sample sizes?

An important reminder: While Drafts 1 and 2 are subject to the normal lateness policy, it will be incredibly inconvenient for your group members, me, and you to coordinate your exchange of papers. An unprepared student is still responsible for providing hard copies of their draft to their group members as soon as it is completed, which could involve house visits. This is obviously not ideal. Please be considerate of others’ time by being prepared when drafts are due. !Three copies of your first draft of your proposal with your UPSID in place of your name (for anonymity purposes) are what you will bring to class. Remember, the Abstract section will be added for your second draft once you’ve ironed out your proposal details better. A title page, References page, table/figure page(s), and appendix (supplemental information if needed, e.g., survey questions) are necessary in Draft #1. Your draft should be typed and in APA style and editorial format (see resources starting on p. 17).

13 Draft #2: ORGANIZATION, TONE, AND APA FORMAT – 15 pts.

Due: Monday, November 6

In the first draft of your paper, you got the content and organization down. You should now have a good idea about what was missing and how you need to proceed for this next draft. Along with revising your current content and APA formatting, the main goals of the second draft are to make sure all ideas are organized and that you have further developed your scientific tone as a writer. Don’t forget to add your Abstract section!

Make revisions using your Draft #1 feedback and your own independent editing. In addition to getting your peers’ feedback on this second draft, I will also be making detailed comments. Students will be graded on the overall quality of the work, incorporation of and attention to their Draft #1 comments, as well as independent revisions unsolicited by peers. For full credit, you must turn in your peer-reviewed Draft #1 copies. Draft #2 is still focused on HOCs. Along with the HOCs from Draft #1 and Wagenmaker’s (2009) tips for good writing, consider and check off the following new points as you work:

! Content ! Have you included unnecessary summary information just to fill pages? ! Are your sources appropriate for what you are trying to say? Are there better

articles that you could be using? AKA: Are you “square-peg round-holing” your articles to make them work?

! Do all your claims have support from the primary literature?

! Voice and Tone ! Are you writing like you want to be taken seriously as a psychological scientist? ! Are you unnecessarily making your sentences too complex? Simple is clearer! ! Are you using unfamiliar vocabulary without consulting a dictionary first? ! Did you remove casual language like, “As I read more about the topic, I

learned…?” Remove yourself from the proposal as best you can.

Remember: Writing is a work in progress… ALWAYS! Learning how to articulate clearly in writing is one of the most important skills to master for success in almost any field! ! Three copies of your second draft of your proposal as well as all previous proposal work in your writing folder are what you will bring to class on Monday, November 6. Your draft should be typed and in APA style and editorial format (see resources starting on p. 17).

**Before starting revisions of Draft #2 using the feedback you will receive, read the Draft #3 assignment!**

14 Draft #3: POLISHING – 20 pts.

Due: Monday, November 20

In the first draft, you compiled your sources and got your content on the page. In the second draft, you revised your content and focused on organization and tone. Now, you will submit a third draft to me before the final paper is due. The hope here is that our extensive revision process has demonstrated the importance of revision to any paper you write in the future. **To complete this assignment correctly, open Draft #2 in Microsoft Word, select the Review tab, and click Track Changes. This will make any changes in the document visible to both of us. Search YouTube/Google if you need help. Move paragraphs around, delete entire sentences, etc. I want to see your work as you improve your paper from Draft #2 to Draft #3. You will be graded based on the thoughtfulness of your next round of revision. In this third draft, you will focus on Lower Order Concerns (LOCs). That is to say, you should be in the refining/polishing stage now. Here are some points to check off:

! Writing Clarity ! Do you use transitions to help your reader through your proposal? ! Does each sentence really say what you want it to say? Can you do it with fewer

words (or commas) to improve clarity? Did you remove all contractions? ! Are pronouns used correctly or are their referents ambiguous? Have you searched

and removed the words “it” and “thing” from your paper? ! Are there better words for the ones you have selected to use?

! Technical Issues

! Have you proofread your work by reading it ALOUD slowly and carefully to yourself? This will help you catch omitted or extra words, run-on sentences, grammar, etc. that spellcheck may not catch.

! Are all references in the References section included in the text? Are all references in the text included in the References section?

! Did you use proper APA format in the text and in the References section? Refer to the Resources section of this packet for help (starting p. 17).

! Did you follow APA editorial format for the title page, running head, font, size, margins, citations, table/figure(s), and References page?

This third draft with tracked changes visible is what you will email as a Microsoft Word document to me ([email protected]) by the start of class by Monday, November 20.

15 Final Research Proposal – 100 pts.

Due: Wednesday, December 6

After doing all your drafts and revisions, you will most likely be very tired of your proposal and topic. This is GREAT! It probably means you have put a lot of work into improving as a writer and becoming an expert on your topic. Now, make final changes then set it aside. After a day or two, come back to it for final proofreading. You could even have someone you know read it and give final feedback. As always, do not hesitate to make an appointment with me or with the Center for Writing Learning and Teaching (CWLT) to speak to a writing tutor. The CWLT is located in Howarth 109. Be sure to re-read the Research Proposal Overview (pp. 2-5) and Grading Details (p. 5) to make sure you have adhered to all expectations and guidelines. Pages 17-18 offer more resources and advice to help you with your paper. You also have the final paper rubric in Appendix B and the APA formatting guide in Appendix C of this packet. In the first draft of your paper, you compiled your sources and got your content organized on the page. In the second draft, you revised and focused on tone, organization, and editorial details. Now, you will submit your final paper. The hope here is that our extensive writing and rewriting process has demonstrated the importance of revision to any paper you write.

Remember: The final paper is also subject to the late policy (see syllabus for details). You have worked so hard over the semester. Get that paper printed early and turned in on time by December 6 at the start of class!

16 2-minute Presentations

During Class Time Monday & Wednesday, December 4 & 6

2-minute Presentation You will share your exciting research proposals in a 2-minute presentation during the last two classes of the semester. Each student must adhere to the following strict guidelines:

• You will have 2 minutes and will be cut off to move on to the next speaker, so cover ONLY the most important information to share relevant background, what your study is, why it’s valuable, what the hypothesis is, etc.

• You must include a figure to show your expected results. • You may NOT read from a script or notes. This means you must practice your

presentation outside of class time to make sure it is within the time limit and that all relevant content is covered.

In academia, researchers would refer to this style of presentation as the “elevator version” of your research. Imagine you’re in an elevator with a stranger. She asks what your research is about. You have one minute (but you get two!) to tell a complete story and have it make sense to someone unfamiliar with your field before the elevator stops and you both exit. Following the 2-minute presentation, each speaker will have a brief Q&A session to clarify points that were unclear to the audience. Two minutes to condense 12 weeks’ worth of work. How EXCITING! What a challenge!

Please send your slides AND the final title of your proposal to me by 8am on your presentation day (more later on this) so that I can organize them before class! Slides

MUST be sent as a PowerPoint .ppt or .pptx file.

Writing and APA Style and Editorial Formatting Tips Outline (Strongly Encouraged) After you have created your literature review matrix and your concept map, consider organizing your ideas and sources to create an outline of your proposal before writing the first draft. Seriously, outlines are a fantastic way to focus the components of a paper, and they actually make the writing process go by faster and more cohesively! Please see me for help well in advance if you’d like to sit down and discuss the organization of your paper, how to write an outline, or both. There is a sample outline for a different type of paper provided in Appendix A of this packet. Note the level of detail and use of references. This is one way to do it. As a writer, all I’d have to do is flesh out the outline into paragraphs and my draft would be done! General Tips for Scientific Writing Paragraph Structure • EVERY paragraph should have a topic sentence and the sentences in the paragraph should

speak to that topic sentence. I should be able to lift a paragraph out of your paper and understand that paragraph without needing to reference the rest of the paper.

• Avoid the box-car literature review, i.e., simply describing a number of different studies on a topic back to back without integrating/synthesizing those studies. You will fill out a literature review summary matrix to combat this problem beginning writers often face.

• In a time crunch, it is common to write about a study before fully and deeply understanding the researcher’s argument and terminology. The result is a superficial paraphrasing of someone else’s argument without explaining the logic of the argument to the reader. Thus, it is really important that you read and understand a researcher’s argument thoroughly so that your own voice comes through in your paraphrasing.

APA Style The American Psychological Association (APA) has established a writing and editorial style that it uses for its published works. For writing, APA stresses (1) clarity, (2) objective, unbiased language, and (3) economy of expression and detail. APA also specifies rules for (1) in-text citations, (2) formatting references that appear on the References page, and (3) the use of quotations. APA is therefore not just formatting, but rather it is a whole approach to acquiring, presenting, and discerning knowledge that attempts to place a premium on critical thinking and evidence. As a psychological scientist you need to be intimately familiar with APA style. APA Editorial Format Like MLA or Chicago, APA is another formatting style. All psychology students and researchers are trained in APA format. Many (but not all!) journals require it. Consistency in formatting and attention to detail are great transferable skills you’ll develop as you practice APA formatting. Your proposal must apply the basics of APA editorial format as outlined beginning on p. 23 of this packet. A few additional tips on APA formatting: 1) It is extremely rare to have direct quotes in scientific writing! Rather, it is more common to succinctly paraphrase, drawing attention to the evidence that supports your topic sentence, and then cite the supporting work. If you do use a direct quotation, you must indicate the page number (e.g., Hurewitz et al., 2000, p. 12) or page numbers (e.g, Hurewitz et al., 2000, pp. 12-

18 13). To encourage paraphrasing, only one properly APA formatted quote is allowed in your whole proposal. 2) Feel free to use the sample student paper on Moodle or the Summary Statement (p. 9) to get ideas for how in-text citations can be either parenthetical or freely written. If you freely write them, as in the example, “Byrne and Whiten (1989) discuss…..” notice that the date ALWAYS immediately follows the last name in the author list. The date should NOT be at the end of the sentence unless the authors’ names are also at the end of the sentence. Keep names and dates stuck together! The depth of APA formatting for which you are responsible is contained in this packet. Additional guidelines can be found online at http://alacarte.pugetsound.edu/course-guide/88 or http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/. If you have specific questions that aren’t covered in this packet or online, please see me or send me an e-mail.

19 Appendix A – Sample Outline

Paper Assignment: Literature Review Topic: Cultural Differences in the Bystander Effect I. Introduction A. Bystander Effect: Definition (Smith & Johnson, 2003)

B. Classic Example – Describe the case study of the Kitty Genovese murder (Calhoun, 1964)

C. What’s missing? Western psychology textbooks don’t discuss the influence of culture on whether or not individuals intervene to help someone in need, but we know culture plays a significant role in most social behavior (Fink, Brown, & Harmon, 2003) D. Purpose of the paper: Provide a literature review of empirical studies on the bystander effect to assess whether the bystander effect is a species-wide phenomenon among humans, or if cultural differences in social behavior can explain it.

II. Bystander Effect Studies A. In some ways, it makes sense to avoid others in distress. Dunbar (2005) explains that an individual who is in distress a) could be contagious if it’s an illness, b) may provoke further attack on the bystander who tries to help if the original attacker is still present, and c) is not a relative of the bystander and so should not be helped for self-preservation reasons on the part of the bystander. B. All famous bystander effect studies were conducted in Western cultures using a sample of predominantly white, all American-born adults.

1. Aimes (1967) was conducted in the United States, all white male participants, all American-born. Ninety percent of participants ignored a man who appeared to have fallen.

2. Dyre (1975) was conducted in the United States, 85% white participants, all

American born. College students (78%) refused to help a fellow college student when her books fell on the ground as she ran to class.

3. Eddler (1981) was conducted in the UK, all white participants, UK-born. All

participants ignored a domestic dispute between a husband and wife in a busy parking lot.

C. Above are the three most famous empirical studies. All of them had the same results (majority did not help the individuals in need of help. However, all three of these major studies were conducted in Western, 1st world countries.

II. Collectivist vs. Individualist Cultures A. Collectivist definition (Walen, 2013)

1. Brash (1996) example of collectivist cultures describing themselves more in language related to community

B. Individualist definition (Walen, 2013)

1. Brash (1996) example of individualist cultures describing themselves more in language related to individuality

C. Concluding remarks: There is a possibility that the belief in how an individual feels they fit into society could affect behavior in a bystander situation.

IV. Relevant Multicultural Studies

A. To this author’s knowledge, there have been no replications of the bystander effect in countries whose citizens self-identify as collectivist according to Walen’s (2013) definition.

B. There have been some multicultural studies on altruism and helping behavior. These studies suggest that individuals in collectivists cultures would be more likely to aid a fellow community member during a time of distress.

C. Study descriptions

1. Boglidesh et al. (2006) had Chinese participants indicate how likely they would be to help a woman who appeared ill on the side of the road, 88% self-reported that they would stop to help the woman in need.

2. Ishima (2001) had Japanese participants indicate how likely they would be to help an elderly man who was being verbally harassed, 55% of participants said they would step in to help in some way. Ishima contrasted this with a similar study in the United States (Brown, Buckley, and Smart, 1995) where in the same situation, only 14% of Americans said they would step in to help. 3. Jeyeraj (2010) had Indian participants self-report on how often they helped strangers. Participants were asked to say more than once per week, a few times per month, or a few times per year. All participants indicated more than once per week.

D. All three studies above suggest that, at least on paper, Eastern, collectivist societies help strangers more often than in Western cultures.

V. Conclusion

A. Given the strong influence that culture plays on behavior, particularly social behavior, it is important to study psychological phenomena from multiple perspective.

21 B. This literature review presented the most well-known Western studies on the bystander effect, and contrasted their results with survey-based altruism and helping surveys from countries whose citizens self-identify as collectivist.

C. Of course, there are difficulties in comparing actual real-life situations to survey questions asking about helping behavior. According to Meywether (1998), individuals’ attitudes regarding their behavior on paper and in practice often conflict. Despite this, the American self-report study by Brown et al (1995) found Americans did not even self- report that they would help. This lends support to the idea that for bystander behavior, bystanders may self-report similarly to how they actually behave.

D. Why the paper is important: This paper has, for the first time, synthesized cross- cultural literature on a topic relevant to introductory social psychology. The hope is that the contents of the paper will spark a discussion about the importance of thoughtfully considering the influence that culture has on social behavior. The bystander effect does not appear to be a species-wide phenomena in humans.

E. Instead, it appears as if cultural differences in how individuals view other community members fuels differences in how and if bystanders step in to help.

22 Appendix B – Proposal Grading Rubric

Proposal Content

___ / 25 Synthesizing (not just summarizing!) primary source material: proposal appropriately draws on arguments and claims from multiple scholarly sources; integrates sources across topics; formulates well-developed, organized paragraphs that lay out the author’s arguments; no major topical holes in content

___ / 15

Demonstrating knowledge of research design: methodology reflects mastery of relevant research design concepts/language; careful consideration and detail in the study’s four methodology-related sections; appropriate figure and discussion (with literature) of specific directional predictions; reference to inferential statistics is made

___ / 20 Thinking critically as a psychological scientist: author has identified a clear gap in the literature; hypothesis is clearly deduced from the literature; greater significance of the proposed study is strong; author has thoughtfully considered and defended (with literature) explanations for alternative results (i.e., null and negative)

Style and Mechanics

___ / 10 Scholarly sources: there is at least one scholarly book included; all sources are scholarly and/or credible (e.g., government sources)

___ / 10 Overall style: appropriate scientific tone and APA style (e.g., conciseness) used throughout; no slang/colloquialisms; formal, not casual language; transitions within and between paragraphs

___ / 5 Grammar/spelling: author has done substantial proofreading; very minimal errors

___ / 5 APA editorial format: paper follows APA editorial format throughout, especially for title page, in-text citations, references page, and figure

Author Improvement

___ / 10

Writing development: author demonstrated significant scientific writing improvement from start to finish; author used previous work to improve subsequent drafts; revision went beyond only those changes pointed out by peers/instructor; author had a positive, proactive attitude; author took advantage of available writing resources

Overall Grade and Comments

___ / 100

Appendix C – APA Formatting Guide

Tables and Figures Tables and figures go on their own separate pages. One per page. They go in order first all tables then all figures. Place them after your References page, before any appendices. You must reference your tables/figures in the proposal so the reader knows to look for them.

Source:!6th!Edition!APA!Manual

Italicized, period. “Note” is a description of important content

Must refer to tables in text. Numbered in order in which they appear in the text. Italicized table title below

Italicized, period. Figure “caption” or “legend” goes next. Description of figure rather than title (e.g., table title, see right)

Must refer to figures in text. Numbered in order in which they appear in the text

No color, no horizontal lines, no box around figure

APA Citations

Journal articles:

de Villiers, J. G., & Johnson, V. E. (2007). Children’s language: Acquisition across dialects of American English. Journal of Child Language, 34, 133-158. doi:10.1017/S03050009

Last names separated from first/middle initials; no first names ever; space between initials; period after each initial

Capitalize only first word, first word after any punctuation, and proper nouns in title

Capitalize first letter of journal title and all nouns; no abbreviations for title words (e.g., “J. of Child Language”)

Italicize volume number; no issue number if doi is provided; if no doi number is provided, issue number is not-italicized and in parenthesis, with no space between volume and parenthesis (e.g., 34(2), )

If no doi (digital object identifier) is provided in the article, look up and use the journal’s homepage URL, preceded by Retrieved from:

e.g., Retrieved from: www.apa.org/pubs/journals/abn

Hanging indent, double spaced

No space

Books where each chapter is written by the book author:

Ladefoged, P., Doe, R., & Miles, G. (1975). A course in phonetics and phonology (4th ed.). Fort Worth: Harcourt

College Publishers.

Hanging indent, double spaced

Italicized, capitalize only first word, first word after any punctuation, and proper nouns in title

Edition number (if applicable)

Location (first city if multiple locations provided) of publisher: Name of publisher

Last names separated from first/middle initials; no first names ever; space between initials; period after each initial

Book chapters that have a different author from the book author (i.e., “edited books”):

Choi, S. (2006). Preverbal spatial cognition and language-specific input: Categories of

containment and support. In R. Golinkoff & K. Hirsh-Pasek (Eds.), Action meets word:

How children learn verbs (pp. 191-207). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hanging indent, double spaced

Italicized, capitalize only first word, first word after any punctuation, and proper nouns in title

Location (first city if multiple locations provided) of publisher: Name of publisher

Capitalize only first word, first word after any punctuation, and proper nouns in title

Book chapter’s entire page range

The author (Ed.) or authors (Eds.) of the whole book (front cover of book); note first/middle initials appear BEFORE last names

Last names separated from first/middle initials; no first names ever; space between initials; period after each initial

Citing Authors in the Text

Source: 6th Edition APA Manual

Title Page

The label “Running head:” is written with capital “R” and lowercase “h” and appears on the title page (p. 1) of the document, but is removed from p. 2 onward

The actual running head is a shortened version of title, and is written in all capitals

Page numbering starts on title page and spans entire document

Document header appearing in upper margin of page

Centered in upper half of page

References Page

Header and page numbering continued at the top of the page

Not bold

Keep authors’ names in the order in which they appear in the source, alphabetize the References list by last name of first author (e.g., Bednarz, Byrne, Mader, Pepperberg)

Note “Running head:” is gone but shortened title remains