SPIRITUALITY AND QUIET EGO f f f f f f f f f
f f f f f f 1
Your study on the relationship between spirituality and ego reflects a well-put-
together section of the research. In the first section of your research, you described
the demographic attributes of the sample using descriptive and frequency statistics
while noting the symmetry and skewness of the sample based on the demographic
characteristics. In the second section of the study, the Pearson correlation
coefficient was correctly used to evaluate the relationship between the independent
and dependent variables. Formatted the table using the tables in APA format and
named them appropriately was also correctly put together. Further, you correctly
used scatterplot to visualize the relationship between ego and spirituality.
Your interpretation of the output was also correct, and your decision not to reject the
null hypothesis with a p-value of 0.336 was also valid. However, you did not
comment on the direction and strength of the relationship between ego and
spirituality. Was the relationship weak, moderate, or strong, and did an increase in
spirituality lead to lower or higher levels of quiet ego? I think you incorrectly referred
to the correlation coefficient as the coefficient of determination.
In the discussion section, you first summarized the purpose of the study, the
methodology, and the findings. You were also correct in stating the weakness in the
study as it involved only people who used Facebook as they may share specific
characteristics that are not representative of the general population. You then related
the results of your study to previous findings. I commend you for using studies
aligned with your results and those that contracted your results, making your
discussion broad and well-rounded.
You further noted nuances in the definition of spirituality and religiousness, which
may have led to a difference in the expected and the actual results. Finally, the study
suggested further study for the topic while noting its importance and using well-
formatted references. Overall, the study was well thought out and articulated.
The first strength in your result and discussion sections is your breakdown of your
demographics, and the associated limitations presented. Future researchers can
attempt to further diversify the sample of participants. Your second strength is your
effective use of graphs. The correlations graph presented relevant information to
your reader and the scatterplot captured the disassociation between your two
variables.
The first recommendation I would make is including previous research methods and
to comparison them to yours so that the reader is able to grasp a full picture
concept on lessons learned and/or for repeat purposes (15 Steps, n.d.). The second
suggestion is to include if you did or did not brief participants over the definitions of
your variables (15 Steps, n.d.). You explained quite well in your discussion section
how defining the terms can complicate and negatively impact research efforts. The
third suggestion is stressing the big picture on why research in this area is important
and the positive outcomes it can have (15 Steps, n.d).
SPIRITUALITY AND QUIET EGO f f f f f f f f f
f f f f f f 2
f f f f f f f f f The study you mentioned was relevant and your tone and word usage was
appropriate.
Your results and Discussion were well constructed. One suggestion would be to
maintain the anonymity of the participates is if you would have allowed more
participants to fill out the form and randomly selected the number of participants for
the study or post the link on two different social sites to obtain ensure that
anonymity was indeed protected. You nicely explained the results section of the
study and provided the proper table and figure in APA format, which gave a great
visual of the results. One weakness is that there is not a notes section for the figure,
although not required, it would have made the results in the figure easier to
understand (American Psychological Association, 7th ed, p. 227). Another great
aspect of your research is the use of relevant references. This aided in the support
of your study. f Lastly, you did not discuss what the results mean for the field, and
this impacts the big picture.
American Psychological Association. (7th ed.). Publication Manual of the American
Psychological Association. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association
