results

1. Start right after the method, no page break or extra returns. Center the word "Results" in bold. The results section is all past tense.

2. The results section reports the analysis of the data. The reporting language is very precise and formulaic. This is to be sure you get it all in there. I'm including examples for each of the major statistics types. Just copy the one you need and update the numbers and variable names, etc.

a. Chi-square.

The stare detection frequency distributions for stare and non-stare trials were compared using a chi-square test of independence. The frequencies are presented in Table 1. The chi-square was not significant, Χ2(1, N = 80) = 0.09, p > .90. There was not enough evidence to conclude that the two frequency distributions were not independent. Participants were approximately equally likely to “detect” staring whether or not they were being stared at.

b. Correlation.

Magical ideation scores ranged from 26 to 79 (M = 48.6, SD = 9.8). Belief in the paranormal scores ranged from 1.0 to 6.0 (M = 2.7, SD = 1.2). There was a significant, positive correlation between magical ideation and paranormal belief, r = .59, p < .01. Higher magical ideation scores were associated with stronger paranormal belief.

c. t test.

The data were analyzed using a dependent samples t test. The independent variable was the color of the paper over which participants held their hands, and the conditions were red paper and green paper. The dependent variable was rated stickiness on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 meaning “equal to the baseline stickiness” and 5 meaning “much stickier than baseline.” The mean rated stickiness for red paper was 2.85 (SD = 1.15) and the mean rated stickiness for green paper was 1.70 (SD = 0.73). With alpha = .05, the two population means were significantly different, t(62) = -8.05, p < .01, d = .76.

d. ANOVA

1) One-way.

The data were analyzed using a one-way, between-participants ANOVA. The mean for sheep was 9.80 false recalls (SD = 3.04), the mean for neutral participants was 6.55 false recalls (SD = 2.04), and the mean for goats was 3.95 false recalls (SD = 2.11). With alpha = .05, the means were significantly different, F(2, 57) = 28.88, MSE = 5.95, p < .01, η2p = .52. Protected t test comparisons indicated that the differences between sheep and neutral participants, sheep and goats, and neutral participants and goats were all significant.

2) Factorial.

The data were analyzed using a two-way, between-participants factorial ANOVA. The factors were story content (arousing, neutral) and presentation direction (forward, backwards). The dependent measure was the participant’s score on an arousal scale. For all analyses, the significance level was set at .05.

If the hypothesis were correct, then we would expect a main effect for story content. In particular, arousal should be higher for the arousing story than the neutral story. This main effect was significant, F(1, 79) = 15.92, MSE = 13.59, p < .01, η2p = .47. The means for arousing content and neutral content were 5.82 (SD = 1.70) and 2.90 (SD = 1.20), respectively.

The main effect for presentation direction was also significant, F(1, 79) = 6.77, MSE = 13.59, p = .04, η2p = .21. The means for forward and backwards presentations were 4.75 (SD = 1.2) and 4.00 (SD = 1.7), respectively.

The story content by presentation direction interaction was significant, F(1, 79) = 7.73, MSE = 13.59, p = .01, η2p = .36. The means are illustrated in Figure 1. Simple main effects analyses indicated that when the text was presented forward, participants reported more arousal for the arousing text than the neutral text. When the text was presented backwards, participants’ reported arousal did not differ.

We did a dependent t test after the class project. So, you will use the data below to modify the t test paragraph for the results section of your paper.

The dependent variable was change in belief for the two types of items (included in the research or not). The descriptive statistics are presented in Table L4.1.

Table L4.1. Descriptive statistics from the class research project.

The data from the dependent t test are presented in Table L4.2.

Table L4.2. The t test data from the class research project.