I need someone to rewrite and edit my research paper+abstract APA STYLE REQUIRED!!

profileFtaen
ExampleMethodsResultsandDiscussionSection1.docx

Example Methods, Results, and Discussion Sections

Methods

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