I need someone to rewrite and edit my research paper+abstract APA STYLE REQUIRED!!
Example Methods, Results, and Discussion Sections
Participants
Participants were 16 undergraduate students (93.75% female; median age = 21.00 years) recruited from an introductory research methods and analysis course at a mid-Atlantic university. Participants self-reported their race and ethnicity as African American/Black (43.75%), Caucasian (37.50%), Hispanic (12.50%), and Asian American (6.25%). There were five participants in the low and medium spin conditions, and there were six participants in the high spin condition. Participants were not compensated for their participation.
Design
The study used a single factor, multilevel (number of spins: low vs. medium vs. high) independent groups design. The dependent variable was tail placement accuracy (cm).
Materials
Materials included a picture of a donkey that was projected onto a white board and paper donkey tails with adhesive attached. A tape measure was used to measure distances.
Procedure
Participants were recruited to play the game Pin the Tail on the Donkey and randomly assigned to one of the three spin conditions. Participants stood on a marked spot on the floor. A picture of a donkey was projected onto the white board approximately six feet from the marked spot. There was a red spot marked on the donkey where the tail should be placed.
The experimenter instructed all participants that their objective was to pin a donkey tail on the marked spot on the donkey. Participants were warned to keep their eyes closed and not use the edge of the whiteboard to help them find the donkey. After the experimenter gave the participant the donkey tail, the experimenter spun the participants according to condition. Participants in the no spin condition were not spun at all. Participants in the low spin condition completed five full clockwise turns. Participants in the high spin condition completed 10 full clockwise revolutions. The experimenter paced the spins to keep the speed of the spins as consistent as possible between participants.
After each participant completed the spins, the experimenter pointed the participant towards the picture of the donkey drawn on the chalkboard. After participants placed the donkey tail on the chalkboard, the experimenter measured the distance from the center of the bow on the tail to the spot marked on the donkey. All distances were measured in centimeters. A research assistant wrote down the distances and participants’ demographic information, which were then entered into SPSS.
Results
We hypothesized that participants would be less accurate in tail placement as the number of spins increased. Participants placed the tail an average of 75.47 cm away the spot marked on the donkey. A between-groups one-way ANOVA showed a significant relationship between number of spins and tail placement accuracy, F(2, 13) = 3.95, p = .046, η2 = .38 (see Table 1). Post-hoc Tukey tests revealed there were no significant differences in accuracy between participants in the no spin condition and those in the low spin condition, t(13) = -0.43, p = .902, d = -1.64, CI.95 = -9.99, 6.71, and between those in the no spin condition and those in the high spin condition, t(13) = -2.59, p = .054, d = -1.46, CI.95 = -52.69, 49.77. Likewise, there was no significant difference between those in the low spin condition and those in the high spin condition, t(13) = -2.14, p = .120, d = -1.20, CI.95 = -52.71, 50.32.
Discussion
Overall, results suggested that the number of spins did not impact tail placement accuracy, despite finding an overall relationship between number of spins and tail placement accuracy. Contrary to our hypothesis, this result suggests that dizziness does not impact one’s accuracy when playing pin the tail on the donkey. These results must be interpreted with caution, however, due to limitations in the study design. First, the sample size was small, which may have compromised our ability to ascertain differences between the groups due to a lack of statistical power. Indeed, the effect sizes for the comparisons between the high spin condition and the low and medium spin conditions indicates that a high degree of dizziness may in fact compromise accuracy, but the large confidence intervals around the effect sizes indicate this effect is tenuous.
Moreover, although participants were warned not to use the edge of the whiteboard to help them, several participants still felt for the edge and then moved around the board before placing the tail. Participants were also all tested together, and some participants yelled out helpful hints or cheered while other participants were completing the task. These limitations may have obscured any real differences that may have existed between conditions by making the task too easy for the participants. Participants placed the tail on average just over two feet from the marked spot on the donkey, however, suggesting that the task may instead have been too difficult for participants. Future research should seek to replicate the study in a room without distractions and test each participant without an audience to measure impact. Future research could also vary the distance from the donkey used in the task as a different manipulation of task difficulty.
Table 1
Average tail placement accuracy (in inches) by spin condition
Spin Condition n M SD
None (0 spins) 5 21.20 10.60
Low (5 spins) 5 43.30 18.48
High (10 spins) 6 147.50 52.35
Note: Higher scores mean greater distance from the target and lower accuracy
Appendix
GET
FILE='C:\Users\jperillo\Dropbox\Teaching\Indiana University of Pennsylvania\PSYC 290 RDAI\Assignments\Labs\One-Way ANOVA Lab\PinTheTailResults.sav'.
DATASET NAME DataSet0 WINDOW=FRONT.
ONEWAY Distance BY Condition
/STATISTICS DESCRIPTIVES HOMOGENEITY
/MISSING ANALYSIS
/POSTHOC=TUKEY ALPHA(0.05).
Oneway
|
Descriptives |
||||||||
|
Distance |
||||||||
|
|
N |
Mean |
Std. Deviation |
Std. Error |
95% Confidence Interval for Mean |
Minimum |
Maximum |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lower Bound |
Upper Bound |
|
|
|
0 Spins |
5 |
21.2000 |
10.59835 |
4.73973 |
8.0404 |
34.3596 |
8.00 |
33.50 |
|
5 Spins |
5 |
43.3000 |
18.47837 |
8.26378 |
20.3561 |
66.2439 |
13.00 |
61.00 |
|
10 Spins |
6 |
147.5000 |
128.23533 |
52.35185 |
12.9253 |
282.0747 |
12.00 |
310.00 |
|
Total |
16 |
75.4688 |
94.89195 |
23.72299 |
24.9044 |
126.0331 |
8.00 |
310.00 |
|
Test of Homogeneity of Variances |
|||
|
Distance |
|||
|
Levene Statistic |
df1 |
df2 |
Sig. |
|
30.126 |
2 |
13 |
.000 |
|
ANOVA |
|||||
|
Distance |
|||||
|
|
Sum of Squares |
df |
Mean Square |
F |
Sig. |
|
Between Groups |
51030.634 |
2 |
25515.317 |
3.947 |
.046 |
|
Within Groups |
84036.600 |
13 |
6464.354 |
|
|
|
Total |
135067.234 |
15 |
|
|
|
Post Hoc Tests
|
Multiple Comparisons |
||||||
|
Dependent Variable: Distance |
||||||
|
Tukey HSD |
||||||
|
(I) Condition |
(J) Condition |
Mean Difference (I-J) |
Std. Error |
Sig. |
95% Confidence Interval |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lower Bound |
Upper Bound |
|
0 Spins |
5 Spins |
-22.10000 |
50.85019 |
.902 |
-156.3667 |
112.1667 |
|
|
10 Spins |
-126.30000 |
48.68535 |
.054 |
-254.8506 |
2.2506 |
|
5 Spins |
0 Spins |
22.10000 |
50.85019 |
.902 |
-112.1667 |
156.3667 |
|
|
10 Spins |
-104.20000 |
48.68535 |
.120 |
-232.7506 |
24.3506 |
|
10 Spins |
0 Spins |
126.30000 |
48.68535 |
.054 |
-2.2506 |
254.8506 |
|
|
5 Spins |
104.20000 |
48.68535 |
.120 |
-24.3506 |
232.7506 |
FREQUENCIES VARIABLES=Race Gender
/ORDER=ANALYSIS.
Frequencies
Frequency Table
|
Race |
|||||
|
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
|
Valid |
African American/Black |
7 |
43.8 |
43.8 |
43.8 |
|
|
Asian American |
1 |
6.3 |
6.3 |
50.0 |
|
|
Caucasian/White |
6 |
37.5 |
37.5 |
87.5 |
|
|
Hispanic |
2 |
12.5 |
12.5 |
100.0 |
|
|
Total |
16 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
|
Gender |
|||||
|
|
Frequency |
Percent |
Valid Percent |
Cumulative Percent |
|
|
Valid |
Male |
1 |
6.3 |
6.3 |
6.3 |
|
|
Female |
15 |
93.8 |
93.8 |
100.0 |
|
|
Total |
16 |
100.0 |
100.0 |
|
EXAMINE VARIABLES=Age
/PLOT BOXPLOT STEMLEAF
/COMPARE GROUPS
/STATISTICS DESCRIPTIVES
/CINTERVAL 95
/MISSING LISTWISE
/NOTOTAL.
|
Descriptives |
||||
|
|
Statistic |
Std. Error |
||
|
Age |
Mean |
21.6875 |
.75674 |
|
|
|
95% Confidence Interval for Mean |
Lower Bound |
20.0745 |
|
|
|
|
Upper Bound |
23.3005 |
|
|
|
5% Trimmed Mean |
21.3750 |
|
|
|
|
Median |
21.0000 |
|
|
|
|
Variance |
9.163 |
|
|
|
|
Std. Deviation |
3.02696 |
|
|
|
|
Minimum |
18.00 |
|
|
|
|
Maximum |
31.00 |
|
|
|
|
Range |
13.00 |
|
|
|
|
Interquartile Range |
2.75 |
|
|
|
|
Skewness |
2.056 |
.564 |
|
|
|
Kurtosis |
5.731 |
1.091 |