The Psychology Student's Guide To Writing A Lab Report

THE PSYCHOLOGY STUDENT’S
GUIDE TO WRITING A LAB REPORT
Sarah Moneer
March, 2023
Melbourne school of psychological sciences | The University of Melbourne
FOREWORD
Hello! In choosing to read this guide (including the foreword, no less), you have already demonstrated
a commitment to learning and self-improvement. Good job! Give yourself a pat on the back; you’re
doing well.
An essential skill for every scientist, psychologist or otherwise, is the ability to communicate
research clearly and concisely. In order to develop this skill during your degree, you will complete a
number of lab reports. As the focus of tutorials is not on lab reports, but content, the purpose of this
guide is to provide you with a better understanding of how to write a lab report. It was written with
students in mind, and offers numerous examples drawn from common student errors observed over
several years of marking lab reports. I hope that reading this guide helps you avoid those mistakes.
Before we begin, two notes of caution: 1) This guide is meant to offer general advice on how to
write a good lab report. If your tutor instructs you to do something contrary to what is in this guide,
do as they say. Your tutor is the individual marking your lab report, and different subjects occasionally
have different requirements. 2) Make sure you read the marking guide for each assignment before
you commence writing to ensure you meet the expectations for that subject.
This is quite a large document, but please don’t let this deter you from reading it! Each of the
main headings in the table of contents is hyperlinked to the relevant page to help you navigate
through it quickly. There are also a few “TL; DR”(too long; didn’t read) tables to provide you with a
quick reference for the dos, don’ts, and common errors. I do strongly recommend that you read
through the full document for maximum benefit, however. Links to additional sources (blue
underlined text) are scattered throughout the document, should you require more information.
If you have any feedback about this guide or have spotted some corrections that should be made
in future editions, please send them to sarah.moneer@unimelb.edu.au. Seriously, please do! I would
love to know if you found this useful, and how I can make it better.
Acknowledgments: Thank you to the wonderful Jun Cheng and Maggie Webb for their help with editing, and to
Maggie for contributing the TL; DR tables and some fun examples.
Table of Contents
(Click on section headings in bold to skip straight to that section)
1. THE TITLE .................................................................................................................. 7

2. THE ABSTRACT .......................................................................................................... 8
2.1 The Informative Abstract ................................................................................................... 8
1.1.1 Purpose ..................................................................................................................................................8
1.1.2 Methodology .........................................................................................................................................8
1.1.3 Results ...................................................................................................................................................8
1.1.4 Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................9
1.2 Writing a good abstract ...................................................................................................... 9

1.2.1 Common errors .....................................................................................................................................9
TL; DR: Abstract Dos and Don’ts ............................................................................................. 12
3. THE INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................13

3.1 Establishing the topic ....................................................................................................... 13
3.2 Reviewing the literature................................................................................................... 14
3.2.1 Structuring your ideas ........................................................................................................................ 15
3.2.2 Finding the relevant literature ........................................................................................................... 17
3.2.3 Citing literature................................................................................................................................... 17
3.2.4 Level of detail ..................................................................................................................................... 18
3.3 Introducing your study ..................................................................................................... 18

3.3.1 The aim ............................................................................................................................................... 18
3.3.2 The hypotheses .................................................................................................................................. 19
TL; DR – Introduction Dos and Don’ts ...................................................................................... 20
4. THE METHOD ...........................................................................................................21

4.1 Participants ..................................................................................................................... 21
4.2 Materials/Apparatus........................................................................................................ 22
4.3 Procedure ........................................................................................................................ 22
TL; DR – Methods Dos and Don’ts ........................................................................................... 23
5. THE RESULTS ............................................................................................................24

5.1 Descriptive Statistics ........................................................................................................ 24
5.1.1 Tables .................................................................................................................................................. 25
5.1.2 Figures ................................................................................................................................................ 25
5.2 Inferential Statistics ......................................................................................................... 26

5.2.1 p values ............................................................................................................................................... 27
TL; DR – Results Dos and Don’ts .............................................................................................. 29
6. THE DISCUSSION ......................................................................................................30

6.1 Interpreting Results And Relating Them To The Hypotheses .............................................. 30
4
6.1.1 Common errors .................................................................................................................................. 30
6.2 Discussing the implications of your findings ...................................................................... 31

6.2.1. Common errors .................................................................................................................................. 31
6.3 Limitations....................................................................................................................... 31
6.3.1 Outlining a limitation .......................................................................................................................... 32
6.3.2 Validating a limitation ........................................................................................................................ 32
6.4 Conclusions and Future Directions .................................................................................... 32

TL; DR – Discussion Dos and Don’ts ......................................................................................... 33
7. GENERAL WRITING STYLE .........................................................................................34

7.1 The Oxford comma .......................................................................................................... 34
7.2 Semicolons ...................................................................................................................... 35
7.3 Sentence Structure .......................................................................................................... 36
7.3.1 Sentence fragments ........................................................................................................................... 36
7.3.2 Run-on sentences ............................................................................................................................... 36
7.4 Word Choice .................................................................................................................... 37

7.4.1 Subjects and verbs .............................................................................................................................. 37
7.4.2 Colloquialisms ..................................................................................................................................... 37
7.4.3 “Significant” ........................................................................................................................................ 37
7.4.4 “Insignificant” vs. “Non-significant” ................................................................................................... 37
7.4.5 “Correlated” ....................................................................................................................................... 38
7.4.6 “Proof”/”True” ................................................................................................................................... 38
7.4.7 “Fewer” vs. ”Less” .............................................................................................................................. 38
7.4.7 “Based off” ......................................................................................................................................... 38
7.5 Paragraph structure ......................................................................................................... 38

7.5.1 One-sentence paragraphs .................................................................................................................. 38
7.5.2 “Run-on” paragraphs .......................................................................................................................... 38
7.6 Language ......................................................................................................................... 39

7.7 Contractions .................................................................................................................... 39
7.8 Abbreviations .................................................................................................................. 39
7.9 “i.e.” / ”e.g.” .................................................................................................................... 40
8. APA STYLE................................................................................................................40
8.1 Voice ................................................................................................................................ 40
8.2 Numbers and their units .................................................................................................. 41
8.3 Separating paragraphs ...................................................................................................... 41
8.4 Italics ............................................................................................................................... 41
8.5 Parentheses ..................................................................................................................... 41
8.5.1 Nested parentheses............................................................................................................................ 41
8.5.2 Back-to-back parentheses. ................................................................................................................. 41
Last updated: July 25, 2021

5
8.6 Abstract........................................................................................................................... 42
8.7 Introduction .................................................................................................................... 42
8.7.1 The heading ........................................................................................................................................ 42
8.7.2 In-text citations................................................................................................................................... 42
8.7.3 Quotation marks ................................................................................................................................. 43
8.8 Method ........................................................................................................................... 43

8.9 Results............................................................................................................................. 43
8.10 Discussion ...................................................................................................................... 44
8.11 References ..................................................................................................................... 44
8.12 Appendices .................................................................................................................... 44
9. PLAGIARISM AND COLLUSION ..................................................................................45

THE PSYCHOLOGY STUDENTS’ GUIDE TO WRITING A LAB
REPORT
A typical lab report is made up of four sections: 1) the title page, 2) the abstract, 3) the report, and 4)
the references. The report itself is made up of an introduction, the method, the results, and the
discussion. Before you commence writing, there are a few points worth keeping in mind:
1) Promote your work
There are a number of mistakes that students make because they think of a lab report as a
hurdle requirement rather than as a method of communicating findings. An example of this is
the way limitations are raised and discussed. A scientist (or clinician) should be capable of
criticizing their own work, as it demonstrates a level of objectivity, but being overly critical
nullifies the validity of your findings for your reader.
2) Narrative
Each part of the lab report reflects the story being told. The title is the first glimpse of the
story (the film poster of the report, if you will). The abstract is the trailer (one of the too-
detailed variety from which you can determine whether you want to see the elongated film
itself). The body of the report is the film itself. Throughout each of these sections, you tell the
same story, but with a variety of concision. Note that the introduction, method, results, and
discussion should all form the same narrative.
3) Time is money (and words are time)
A clear and concise message will triumph. A message that is needlessly and fruitlessly
descriptive and flowery will send the individual reading the sentence off to the land of nod to
sleep for …ZZZZZ… (you see where I’m going with this).
7
1. THE TITLE
The first part of your report that a reader is going to come across is the title. The title appears
first on the title page (go figure), and then again as the heading for the lab report. A good title
contains the central argument of the paper in clear and concise language. It should concisely
summarize the thesis of your argument, informing the reader about the dependent and independent
variables in your study (but without using the words “dependent variable” and “independent
variable”, obviously). It should also ideally give some indication of the main finding of your study.
“Ageing is Associated with a Decline in Episodic Memory” is a much better title than “The Effect of
Ageing on Memory”. You are allowed to use jargon in the title.
Another thing to note is that, while being witty when writing a title can be good, it can all too
easily backfire. In fact, a study by Sagi and Yechiam (2008) demonstrated that articles with highly
amusing titles actually received fewer citations! A safer bet is to keep it clear and simple. Think about
when you’re searching through Google Scholar, looking for relevant research – simple language
makes a paper much easier to find and therefore more accessible (and more likely to be cited!).
If you would like to read some of the more amusing published journal article titles (purely for the
sake of scientific inquiry, of course), check out this Slate article. My favorite (not featured in the
article) is probably this one:

8
2. THE ABSTRACT
The purpose of an abstract is to help readers to evaluate and select a document that they would
find useful in their own research; it’s your two-minute trailer that tells the audience enough about the
film so that they can decide, before entering the cinema, whether or not they want to commit two-to-
three hours of their lives to it. An abstract should display the core components of the narrative of the
report without requiring your audience to read the actual document. In the case of a lab report, the
abstract should be informative1. In the section below, the parts of an abstract are outlined, and
examples are given of both good and bad abstracts to ground this information.
2.1 The Informative Abstract
An informative abstract is a single paragraph made up of four parts: purpose, methodology,

results, and conclusions/implications of results (note that these mirror the four parts of the body of
the report). Also note that while headings are used in this guide to explain what each part should
contain, they should not be used in your actual abstract.
1.1.1 Purpose
This is the first sentence of the abstract, your first attention grab. As such, it is worth outlining
why the topic under investigation is of interest, and state the primary objectives of the experiment.
You might also include the hypotheses of the experiment, although your predictions are of less
interest to a reader than your findings. So, if you were struggling with the word limit, it is better to
omit hypotheses to allow for a more detailed description of your results. The purpose component
would typically be no more than two to three sentences.
1.1.2 Methodology
This section briefly describes the number of participants tested and the task used in the
experiment. This section should give only as much detail as is necessary to understand the
experiment; an abstract rarely focuses entirely on research methods (unless that is the primary focus
of the original document). It’s much more likely that the purpose of the experiment is to answer a
problem of interest rather than extend a component of methodology (particularly in undergrad!).
1.1.3 Results
This section relates the main findings of the experiment, and can include a report of the statistical
test(s) used (i.e., the results of the tests, not simply “we used a t test”). This section should be concise
and informative.
1 An “informative abstract” is a type of abstract. Another type of abstract is a descriptive abstract, which is
typically much shorter and are more like an outline of the work. You may write such an abstract for an essay,
but not a lab report.

9
1.1.4 Conclusion
An informative abstract ends with an evaluation or analysis of the results. This evaluation might
end with the implications of these results (remember, you want your results to sound important so
that people will read the paper!). While the conclusion may respond to whether the driving
hypothesis of the experiment was supported, it should only do so if the hypothesis was included at
the beginning the abstract. Note: A conclusion should not include limitations and future directions as
these are not of primary interest to the reader. (And you want to show your research in a positive
light! Don’t shoot yourself in the foot.)
1.2 Writing a good abstract
Because an abstract is a description of an entire document, you can only write an accurate
abstract once that document is complete. Consequently (and somewhat counter-intuitively), the
abstract will typically be the last section of the lab report that you will write. From an assessment
stand-point, this section of the report is often not worth as many marks as the other sections, but it is
the first section your marker will read (and hence, the first impression you make on your marker) so it
is still worth doing well.
These are the ABCs of abstract writing:
Accuracy: Only report information included in the original document.
Brevity: Get straight to the point in clear and concise language.
Clarity: A good abstract does not contain jargon or colloquialisms and always explains any
acronyms (Note: it is actually unlikely that you will need acronyms in an abstract, as acronyms
are only valuable in the abstract if the terms are being used more than once in that section).
1.2.1 Common errors

Students often put too much focus on the background and method, with only a cursory mention
of the results. Remember that the reader is just as, if not more, interested in what you find, not just
how you achieved that result or why you did the study.
Choosing to end with limitations instead of implications (and/or leaving out the implications
entirely) is another common error. Including a large list of limitations instead of implications is the
researcher telling the reader that they shouldn’t even bother reading the paper because it’s not
worth the time. An example of a poorly written abstract is something like this2:
2
No former students were harmed in the making of this abstract. It is entirely fabricated, but follows many of
the trends seen in poorly written abstracts.

10
As (I hope) you can see, the above abstract is not actually informative (see what I did there?). The
outline of the background was unnecessarily long, contained a tautology3 (“essential and crucial”),
introduced an abbreviation that was never used again in the abstract (“VSTM”), and did not actually
inform the reader about the goal of the study. The methodology section was also unnecessarily
detailed in parts, and quite vague in others: Your audience is unlikely to be interested in the specific
subject studied by the participants, but would definitely want to know more about the experimental
design. For instance, was this a within subjects or a between groups design, and how was
performance actually measured? The results section also told the reader absolutely nothing about
what was found (with a p value that was imprecise and formatted incorrectly to boot! See section
5.2.1 for more on this), and a conclusion which casts doubt on the validity of the findings is sure to
send any reader running back to their Google Scholar search results to find a different paper to read.
A better example of an abstract for the same study would be:
3
This is an excellent word that means saying something twice over in different words. An example of a
tautology is to describe something as “redundantly tautological”.

11
This abstract provides a much clearer summary of the report. It begins by immediately identifying the
topic of interest and the problem the study aimed to address. This is followed by a brief description of
the task and experimental design, and precise (and correctly formatted) report of the main findings.
Finally, the implications of these findings are explained concisely in the last sentence. Interestingly,
the hypotheses, and whether or not they were supported by the results, were not included and yet
did not detract from the clarity of this abstract at all.

12
TL; DR: Abstract Dos and Don’ts
Dos Don’ts Common Errors
Outline the area of Provide information Too many words spent

Introduction interest/ problem to be that is not necessary to on this section. Not
solved in one or two the story you’re telling enough focus on
sentences in the abstract results/implications.
Outline the task used, Including too detailed a

Including unnecessary
Method and pertinent description of the
information about the
characteristics of participants or the
task and participants
subjects procedure
Report the main result, Provide vague

Not including enough
Results including the inferential descriptions like “our
information about the
statistics for that results supported our
main result
result hypothesis”.
Avoid ending with a

End with an intimation discussion of limitations
‘Discussion’ of the importance of and ignoring
Ending the abstract
(Conclusion) the results (for further implications. This tells
with limitations
theory/ for applications your audience that they
– sell your pitch!) should move on from
this paper.

3. THE INTRODUCTION
A good introduction weaves a seamless narrative that leads the reader to conclude that the
experiment you propose is the logical next step, and justifies your predictions. The structure shown in
Figure 1 outlines an effective way to do this.
Figure 1
How to Structure an Introduction
1. ESTABLISH THE TOPIC
What is the topic under investigation?
Why does it warrant further study?
2. REVIEW THE LITERATURE
What are the existing theories that relate to this topic?
What evidence is there to support each of these theories*?
*Describe studies that are similar to yours in more detail (task and results)
to provide a point of comparison in the discussion.
3. INTRODUCE YOUR STUDY
What gap can you identify in the literature you have just reviewed?
How does your study plan to fill this gap (i.e., the aim)?
What do you expect to find (i.e., the hypotheses)?
3.1 Establishing the topic
Establishing the topic occurs in the first paragraph of introduction, and should be quick and to
the point. Here are two examples of opening sentences for a study about visual perception:
14
Example 1: “Visual perception is a complex process that is not yet fully understood.”
Example 2: “Humans need to perceive their environment to perform functions in their

everyday lives, like crossing roads and driving cars.”
The first example efficiently situates the reader within the most pertinent part of the narrative, and
introduces the general problem under consideration. The second example, though possibly relevant
to the narrative, does not add to the reader’s understanding of the topic, and should therefore be
omitted. Remember, your task is to convey as much information as possible within a strict word limit;
make your words count. A further example is provided in Figure 2.
Figure 2
An Annotated Example of Opening Lines Commonly Written by Students
This is considered fluff from a

research standpoint – used to warm
up the writer and not important to
the reader’s understanding.
People have always used technology. Human beings are tool-using animals, so it
should come as no surprise that our tool use includes computers and the internet. In
fact, using tools is something even small children do, and this includes computer use.
There is some controversy surrounding the use of computers by small children.
The real topic of the study is

stated here. This is where the
introduction should begin.
Part of establishing the topic is also outlining the language used. By this, I mean defining key
terms. Although it is sometimes appropriate to hold off defining some key terms until you discuss
them in your literature review, basic key terms regarding the topic of your study are definitely
important! Any term that cannot be assumed to be common knowledge must be defined. While it’s
sometimes difficult to decide what is and isn’t considered common knowledge, a handy tip is: if a
term has been defined for you in a lecture/tutorial, you will most likely need to define it in your
report.
3.2 Reviewing the literature
The literature review (hereafter, “lit review”) accomplishes two objectives at once, largely in
regards to the research question. It both 1) outlines the most important research required to
understand the research question, and 2) validates the research question; in other words, the review
leads the reader to a gap or conflict in the literature. If you think of the broader topic as your starting

15
point, and your specific research question as the finish, the lit review should provide the most logical
and direct connection between the two.
3.2.1 Structuring your ideas
Knowing which parts of the literature to cover and in how much detail can seem like a challenge.
Some background is usually provided for you during tutorials, but not all of it should necessarily be
included in your introduction. Your job is to think critically about what you have learned and decide
how to best justify your study within a strict word count, just as a researcher would have to do when
writing a journal article.
How to do this. Ask yourself: “What theories do I need to include to explain why I am making
these predictions?” Once you have formed a list, then ask yourself: “Does the reader absolutely need
to know about this in order for my research question to make sense?” If the answer to this question is
no, then you probably don’t need to include it in your introduction. A common mistake students
make in this section is including detailed descriptions of irrelevant literature while providing only
vague descriptions of key concepts/studies (or none at all). A good way to avoid this is to think about
your research question and hypotheses (really think – don’t just refer to tutorial slides!), then work
backwards. The chart presented in Figure 3 can also be used to help guide your decision-making
regarding which articles to cite.

16
Figure 3
How to Decide Whether a Paper Should be Included in Your Introduction
“SHOULD I DISCUSS THIS PAPER IN MY INTRODUCTION?”
Does the paper describe a theory that your

study tests or is directly* based on?
YES NO
Does it have a similar design to the

one used in your study, or test the
same theory?
YES NO
Does it describe an alternate theory

to the one on which your study is
based?
YES NO
Maybe include it, or save it for the

discussion (depending on your
research question)**
OH, REALLY? TELL THIS IS NOT THE

ME MORE! PAPER YOU ARE
LOOKING FOR.
*All past research is based on ideas that have come before. There is a lot of history one could
describe, but for a lab report with a limited word count you should stick to what’s directly
relevant.
**If it makes sense for you to point out a controversy in the literature, then include it in your
introduction. If your design is based solely on one theory, you may wish to save the alternate
theory for use as a discussion point (yes, you can introduce studies in the discussion).

17
3.2.2 Finding the relevant literature
Some references will often be provided for you by your lecturers, but you are encouraged to go
beyond these to provide a more comprehensive review of the literature. The papers provided by your
lecturers can form an excellent starting point for your literature search. You can do this in a couple of
different ways:
1) Read through the introductions of papers provided in the course, and look up the studies
they have cited, then read the introductions of the cited papers, and find the papers they
have cited, and so on. It is important, however, that you actually read the papers cited in
the original article and not just cite them because the original article has done so (more
on this in the next section).
2) Search for the papers provided in the course on Google Scholar, and click on “Cited by”
(see Figure 4). The “Cited by” link takes you to those papers that have cited the paper
you’re interested in. If another article has cited your paper of interest, there is a high
chance that that article is also relevant to your study. Go through that list, then read the
introductions of the papers that seem most relevant.
Figure 4
Screenshot of a Google Scholar Search Indicating Where You Should Click to Find the Articles That
Have Cited Your Paper of Interest
Both of these techniques will send you tumbling down a rabbit hole full of interesting theories
and observations (kind of like when you try to watch one YouTube video, and then fifteen videos
later…). Reading the introductions of other papers will also help you gain a better sense of how to
describe your theory/construct of interest. It is important to note here, however, that quality trumps
quantity when it comes to references so only cite the papers most relevant to your study.
3.2.3 Citing literature

An important part of reviewing the literature is citing your sources correctly. It is essential that
you cite the original source of any theory or finding, not simply cite another study which has
described that theory/finding. For example, if you read about a theory developed by Jones et al.
(1974) in a paper written by Smith et al. (1993), then you must cite Jones et al. (1974) in your report
when describing that theory. You should also actually look up and read Jones et al. (1974) to ensure
that Smith et al.’s (1993) interpretation is accurate.
This brings us to another crucial point: It is important to actually read every paper you cite. All of
them. Without exception. You don’t necessarily have to read the entire paper, but you must at least

18
read the abstract and report only what you yourself have read. It’s pretty obvious when a student
cites a paper without reading it, and tutors will often look papers up to check.
3.2.4 Level of detail
The level of detail that you need to include when describing research depends on the nature of
your study.
The replication (+ modification). If your study is a replication of another study, you should
describe the original study in great detail (including methodology) and explain why you are replicating
their design. If your study also includes a slight modification to the original study’s design, then you
must justify this modification and provide evidence that it may yield a different outcome (i.e., what
have other studies shown that leads you to believe this will tell us anything new?). This should also be
done in some detail.
The extension. If your study proposes an extension to an established theory, then you will need
to describe the original theory at length, and highlight the gap in the theory that your proposed
extension intends to address. You will also need to provide empirical evidence to validate your
proposed extension.
The hybrid4. If your study tests a proposed amalgam of two established theories, make sure you
provide a detailed description of both theories, highlight their merits by citing the evidence that
supports them, and point out their flaws by including any observations they cannot account for. You
should then explain how combining the two in the manner you propose will eliminate the
disadvantages of each theory, while maintaining their advantages. Hint: One line saying “This study
combines these two theories to eliminate their disadvantages” will not suffice.
3.3 Introducing your study
3.3.1 The aim
Once you have provided a review of the relevant literature, you should then (and only then)
introduce your study and state your aims. The aims should not appear out of thin air; by the end of
the lit review, you should have identified a gap in the literature and your aim should be to fill this gap.
Also include some information about how you plan to achieve this aim. For example:
4
This is not the official name for this type of study. I’m not sure if there is an official name. Please
don’t say things like “this study is a hybrid”. That would definitely confuse your tutor.

19
3.3.2 The hypotheses
A statement of your hypotheses should follow the aim. A hypothesis is a prediction of the
outcome of an experiment in terms of the operationalized independent variable. A null hypothesis is a
prediction of no effect; that is, an expectation that we will observe no difference between the two
groups on the dependent variable. This hypothesis is what researchers try to disprove, proposing an
alternative hypothesis (a prediction of any sort of difference between the groups) instead.
Your hypothesis should not be framed as a null hypothesis as we can’t provide evidence for
the null using null hypothesis significance testing (tests where significance of results are determined
by the p value) ; we can only reject it. For example, if your hypothesis is that all cats are white and you
find only white cats in a litter of kittens, you would still not be able to state that this means that all
cats everywhere are definitely white (the null hypothesis). In contrast, with an alternative hypothesis
(i.e., that not all cats are white), it would only take a single observation of a black cat (e.g., Figure 5) to
allow us to reject the null hypothesis.
Figure 5
My Sweet Boy, Dexter
Note. Dexter presents definitive proof that not all cats are white.

20
TL; DR – Introduction Dos and Don’ts
Dos Don’ts Common errors
Beginning with a few

fluffy sentences
Make your first sentence
Adding obvious before really getting
quick and to the point.
Establishing statements and to the relevant
Identify the topic under
the topic unnecessary fluff as it problem/question
investigation quickly and
wastes words underlying the paper
concisely
(see above for
examples)
Failing to read papers

Adding research and that are cited
Use the lit review to theories that are not Including detailed
Reviewing the construct a coherent and necessary for your descriptions of
literature concise rationale for the rationale, as this irrelevant information
paper creates a misleading (particularly if this
narrative. information was
presented in tutorials)
Outline the current

study, its aims, and
hypotheses (after they
have been validated by Writing a null
Not presenting a clear
the literature review) hypothesis. It is
rationale leading to
Introducing possible to test a null
Hypotheses should be in the aims and
your study hypothesis, but this is
the form of alternative hypotheses of the
not done in the
hypotheses and be current paper.
undergraduate course.
specific predictions
about
differences/relationships

4. THE METHOD
The purpose of the method is to enable future scientists/clinicians to replicate your study (and
hopefully your results!). To enable replication, researchers need to know about the experimental
design, tasks, participants, and how the tasks were performed (i.e., the procedure).
The method is divided into subsections. These subsections are typically: participants, materials,
and procedure. While these subheadings are standard, they are not always appropriate, and other
subheadings are acceptable. For example, you may wish to include specific information about the task
you used that does not belong in the procedure (e.g., how your stimuli were made/selected).
4.1 Participants
This section briefly describes the number of participants and the pertinent characteristics of the
participants, including (if relevant) the age and gender distributions. What exactly do I mean by
“pertinent characteristics” of the participants? I mean that only information about participants that is
relevant to the study should be included. For instance, if the study was investigating hair length
according to age and where an individual lived in Melbourne (perhaps Brunswick compared to
Southbank), then you’d want to include the proportion of participants from each area, as well as their
age (and possibly hair length).
In most of the lab reports you write during your course, you will be the participants. In this case,
participants may be described as “undergraduate students from the University of Melbourne” and
some mention will be made about how participation was part of a course requirement. This is useful
information about the demographic of your participants and, perhaps, their level of motivation when
completing the task. What the reader does not necessarily need to know, however, is the course or
subject in which the participants were enrolled. Unless the experiment involves some level of
deception that the participants would have prior knowledge of due to their enrolment, this
information is not important and should be left out. The same applies to making statements about
not including certain demographic information because they are not relevant to your analyses – that
point has already made by the fact that you have not reported that information.
This can also be an appropriate place to note if data from some participants has been excluded.
Data may be excluded for any number of reasons. If this is the case, you still report the original
number of participants included in this section, then specify how many were excluded from the data
analyses (Note: this can also be done at the beginning of the results section). Be sure to include the
reason these participants’ data was excluded.
22
4.2 Materials/Apparatus
This section should describe the “things” you used to collect your data. The heading of this sub-
section will change depending on the nature of your experiment. For instance, if you used word lists
or surveys to collect your data, then this section should be called “Materials”. If the data was
collected using an fMRI machine or specific computer software, “Apparatus” might be more
appropriate. Again, we want to only include the pertinent characteristics of your materials: What
would another researcher need to know in order to be able to replicate the conditions of your
experiment?
The mistake most commonly made here is the inclusion of unnecessary information. The reader
does not need to know that you analyzed your data in SPSS. SPSS is just one of many statistical
packages and, unless you are using a feature that is unique to the SPSS, any one of them would
produce the same output. The same principle applies to mentioning operating systems and number 2
HB pencils (unless answering in pen would somehow affect results!). Only describe what the reader
absolutely needs to know to reproduce your experiment (remember, time is money and words are
time–and marks!).
4.3 Procedure
The Procedure describes the order of events in your experiment. Be sure to include information
about any specific instructions given to participants, whether they were allowed any practice/training,
and the timings used, where relevant. Again, think about what the reader would absolutely need to
know and try to be concise. The mistakes commonly made here are including too much information
(e.g., “participants were asked to sit down”), or too little (e.g., Figure 6).
Figure 6
How to Draw Watercolour Cogs
HOW TO DRAW COGS

by Sarah Moneer
1) DRAW A CIRC LE 2) DRAW SOME TEETH 3) DRAW LINES TO ADD

AROUND THE CIRC LE DEPTH TO THE COG
4) ADD DETAILS
Note. This procedure for how to draw a horse is missing some important steps that make it difficult to
reproduce the same drawing shown in the final step.

23
TL; DR – Methods Dos and Don’ts
Include only the Including unnecessary detail Including unnecessary

pertinent like the name of the subject detail about the
Participants
characteristics of students were enrolled in participants
the participants
Include the Including information about Including

Materials/ materials that were generic things that are easily unnecessarily detailed
Apparatus specific to your replaced without affecting information about the
study the outcome of the study materials or apparatus
Provide sufficient Providing unnecessary detail, Including too much or

detail to enable the or leaving out major steps too little information
Procedure
reader to reproduce that would make the about the procedure
your study procedure hard to follow

24
5. THE RESULTS
This section is where you report your findings. This typically begins with a report of the
descriptive statistics (e.g., mean/median of data), followed by any statistical tests you have conducted
to test your hypotheses (i.e., inferential statistics).
5.1 Descriptive Statistics
Descriptive statistics summarize the data. They provide information such as: What was the most
common score in each group? How diverse were the scores? Was the distribution of scores skewed?
The descriptive statistics most commonly reported are the mean (i.e., the average score, and an
indication of the central tendency of the data) and the standard deviation (i.e., the dispersion of the
data). These are reported in ONE – and only one (Figure 7 for emphasis) - of three ways: in text, in a
figure, OR in a table. As a general rule, the latter two are more efficient as they use up fewer words,
but this may vary from experiment to experiment.
Figure 7
A Reminder Not to Report Redundant Statistics
Note. Consider the kittens as a metaphor for the mean scores of each participant group. If you have
pasted in a figure showing the means, then this is represented by the brown tabby. Brown tabby
knows that other representations of the mean (the ginger tabby) must not be allowed to exist. There
can only be one. Be the brown tabby.

25
The most common mistake in this section is reporting the same descriptive statistics in two (and
sometimes even three) forms. This is redundant and will result in a poorer mark for this section. To
avoid redundant reporting of the descriptive statistics, make sure you actually understand what your
figure/table shows.
5.1.1 Tables
A table can be used to summarize descriptive statistics. If you include your means in a table, DO
NOT include a graph of those means or mention those values in text. Tables do not need to contain a
large amount of information, yet there is a creative diversity of mistakes made by students when
using tables to provide descriptive statistics, and most of them relate to formatting. Briefly, and
importantly, it is never acceptable to paste in SPSS output directly into your report as those tables
often contain unnecessary information and are not formatted correctly (more on how to format
tables in section 8.12).
5.1.2 Figures
A graph of the mean scores for each group/condition (plus error bars) is the most common figure
used in the Results section. Many subjects will require you to produce such a graph during one of the
lab classes. If you include a graph of the means in your report, DO NOT report the means again in text
or in a table.
When including a figure, make sure you refer to it in text before you paste it in. A simple
statement like, “The mean scores for the two groups are shown in Figure 1” is a good and simple way
to introduce your figure and briefly tell the reader what it’s about. Note that I state “mean scores” not
simply “descriptive statistics” in that example. You should be specific about what is shown in the
figure. There is no need to specify that the figure is “below” (the reader can see that for themselves,
so it’s a waste of a word).
Presenting a figure (or table) gives you the opportunity to link together descriptive and
inferential statistics in an efficient and elegant way. For example, you can note that “As you can see in
Figure 1, Group A performed significantly better than Group B, t(29) = 3.75, p = .02.” Because lab
reports have a strict word limit, is not recommended to describe the pattern in the data when you
introduce the figure unless the statistical tests tell us this pattern is statistically significant. If the
pattern (e.g., one group scores slightly worse than another group) is not significant, this means that
the difference you observed is due to chance, and hence is not of importance. Describing this pattern
in the data would therefore be an inefficient use of your resources5. Use your (very limited) words
wisely!
Common errors in results figures often relate to the figure caption. A figure caption should
contain a brief description of what is shown in the figure (e.g. “Mean performance accuracy for
5This advice is really specific to completing lab reports in a university environment because of the strict word
count. This is largely because the figures we produce in lab classes are fairly simple and can be interpreted
without a verbal walk-through. In journal articles (including my own!), it is common for scientists to summarise
patterns shown in the figures in text to help the reader understand what is shown.

26
Control and Treatment groups on the word task”), including definitions of all abbreviations used in the
figure, and a description of what the error bars represent. Refer to the latest edition of the APA Style
Guide for information about how to format figure captions.
5.2 Inferential Statistics
These are the statistical tests you use to make inferences about your data (the name gives the
hint). In other words, inferential statistics tell you what conjectures you might draw from your
findings, given your research question and literature review. When reporting the results of these
tests, it is important to specify two things: (1) the direction of the relationship between the variables
(e.g., whether scores increased/decreased across conditions), and (2) the statistical significance of the
relationship (i.e., significant vs. non-significant).
An example of a poor description of the results would be:
In this example, the significance of the mean difference was stated, but not the direction. We are not
told which group had the greater mean, or even on what type of measure the two groups are being
compared.
A better reporting of the same result would be:
This is much more informative. Also note the direction in which the difference between the groups
was reported in the above example: The accuracy of the treatment group was described with
reference to the control group. This is important! In experiments where we investigate the effect of
some independent variable (e.g. a disorder or an experimental manipulation) on a dependent variable
(e.g. performance on some task), we first need to establish a baseline – this is the purpose of the
control. Therefore, what we are interested in is how the test group performed relative to the control
group. So, it is better and more correct to say “the test group scored lower than the control group”
than “the control group scored higher than the test group”.
In the real world, the reporting of inferential statistics is always accompanied by some
explanation of what the result means (e.g., “We found a significant main effect of Age, indicating that
performance on the memory task declined significantly as participants aged”) to make the analyses
easier to follow. There may be differences between courses/subjects regarding whether or not you
should include such explanations. The best bet in this case is to consult your tutor.

27
5.2.1 p values
A lot of students know a p value less than .05 means the result is statistically significant, but few
actually know what a p value is. The “p” in p value stands for probability. A p value of .05 means that,
if the two samples you are comparing in fact belong to the same population (i.e., there’s not actually
a difference between them), there is a 5% chance of obtaining the result you have found in your study
(or one more extreme)6. This means that it is very unlikely that you would obtain such a result if the
null hypothesis was true. This gives us strong evidence to reject the null hypothesis in favor of the
alternative hypothesis (i.e., a prediction of some difference).
The p value is not the probability of getting a type I error (i.e., rejecting the null hypothesis
when the null hypothesis is true; see Figure 8). While these two concepts may seem very similar, they
are not the same! The probability of making a type I error is the alpha. The p value gives you evidence
to reject the null hypothesis if it is less than alpha. So, if your alpha is .05 and your p value is .01, you
have a 5% chance of making a type I error, and a 1% chance of observing a result at least as extreme
as yours if the null hypothesis is true. This p value can not be interpreted as meaning you have a 1%
chance of making a type I error.
Figure 8
Examples of Type I and Type II Errors
Three common mistakes are made when reporting p values.

1) Reporting only “p < .05”.
You must always report the p value precisely (i.e., preferably to 3 decimal places; e.g., “p =
.036”) unless it is smaller than .001 (in which case you would report “p < .001”). (Note the
6
The explanation I provide here is phrased in terms of a between-groups comparison, but the same
principle applies to within-groups (repeated measures) tests.

28
absence of a leading zero and the single space on either side of the mathematical symbol in
the example.)
2) Reporting that the p value was “significant because it was less than .05.”
A significance level (alpha) of .05 applies to all of science, so it doesn’t really need to be stated
(inefficient use of words). You would only need to report the alpha if it was less than .05 for
your experiment.
3) Stating that one result is “more significant” or “almost significant.”
The alpha level of .05 is a categorical threshold, similar to the pregnancy example above. You
wouldn’t say that someone is “almost pregnant,” and it’s poor science to say that something
is “almost significant”. Just report the p value for what it is. A result that has a p value of .045
is only perceived to be “better” than a result that has a value of .055 because of this
threshold that scientists set long ago to determine what an acceptable margin of type I error
is. In reality, the first result is of no less value than the second, and obtaining “more
significant” results is not the goal of research (so please don’t say this in your Discussion!).

29
TL; DR – Results Dos and Don’ts
Provide an indication of Presenting repetitive Providing redundant

descriptive statistics and unnecessary information by
(e.g., mean and information. Only presenting statistics in
Descriptive
standard deviation) choose one method of a both in a figure and in
statistics
presenting descriptive text or in a table.
statistics (e.g., table
OR figure OR in text)
Create a fluid sentence Writing clunky Not presenting

to describe the sentences that are direction of effect
inferential statistics in repetitious or difficult
Inferential
your report which to read. Not indicating whether
statistics
includes the direction or not a result is
of effect (see above significant
for examples)
Present exact p values Writing scientifically “p < .05” (p values

(rounded to two incorrect statements should be exact where
p values decimal places), save such as “nearly possible)
when p is less than .001 significant”.
(then report p < .001)

6. THE DISCUSSION
This section is the one in which you (again, go figure) discuss your findings, and relate them back to
both the literature review and your rationale. To do this, you need to: 1) interpret your results and
relate them back to your hypotheses, 2) relate the results to the relevant literature and discuss their
implications (often in terms of the literature, though can be applications of the results as well), 3)
note the limitations of the study, and 4) suggest areas of future research. This is another section
where it’s important to have a clear narrative.
6.1 Interpreting Results And Relating Them To The Hypotheses
It’s a good idea to reiterate the aims and hypotheses of the paper to ground the discussion for
your reader. This might be easy to remember, but it is challenging to do well.
An example of a poor opening to a discussion:
The writing here doesn’t tell the reader anything about what the hypothesis was, the direction and
significance of the results, or about the constructs of interest. In contrast, an example of a good
reiteration of the hypotheses might be:
Notice how the above statement both relates the results back to the hypothesis and interprets those
results. This is much more informative than the earlier example.
6.1.1 Common errors

A mistake students commonly make is not interpreting the results after relating them to the
hypotheses. Say your results support your hypotheses. Brilliant! But what does this tell you about the
topic under investigation? It’s important to connect all the dots so that the reader has a clear
understanding of what your results mean.
Another (less serious) common mistake is copying the hypotheses from the introduction and
pasting them directly into the Discussion. There are a couple of issues with this: 1) it’s repetitive and
your tutor will recognize that the wording identical (and therefore that you made no effort to
rephrase your predictions), and, more importantly 2) it will be in the wrong tense. The Introduction
31
should mostly be written in past perfect tense, while the Discussion should mostly be written in the
present tense. A list of the appropriate verb tenses for different sections of the report can be found
here.
6.2 Discussing the implications of your findings
This is where you map your results onto the current literature (usually outlined in the
introduction), and into the theories situated in the literature. This is the most important (and
challenging) part of the discussion. While it’s a good start to say, “our findings agree with those of
Smith et al. (2001) and Jones et al. (2002), but not Johnson et al. (2003)”, it’s more important to place
the findings in the context of the existing literature and consider how your findings contribute to our
understanding of the topic. If your findings agree with those of a previous study, does this provide
additional evidence to support a particular model or theory? If they are not consistent with a previous
study, what does this tell us? For example:
6.2.1. Common errors
One of the first hurdles is the assumption that if your results are not consistent with previous
literature, then the results must be inherently flawed, which leads to the rest of the discussion being
limitations of the experiment. While it’s good to be critical of your experiment, you should assume
your results are valid and discuss them accordingly.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with finding something that does not support your hypotheses
or is different to what has been published previously. This happens all the time in science and can
actually give you more to talk about in your discussion. If your results don’t support your hypotheses,
think about the theory you used to justify your hypotheses. Is there an alternative theory you had not
considered initially that might explain your results? If they are not consistent with another study, are
there any methodological differences that might account for this (besides sample size)? Remember to
justify any claims you make by explaining how the difference in methodology would have affected the
outcome of the study.
6.3 Limitations
After discussing the implications of your findings, it is important to consider whether some
aspect of your experimental design could have affected your results. This does not mean, however,
that you should dedicate two thirds of your discussion to trying to poke as many holes in your study
as possible. Remember, this is your pitch, and you shouldn’t be discrediting your own research!

32
When considering the limitations of your study, you should think about aspects of the
methodology that might have affected your results. It’s important to 1) outline a limitation, 2) use
research to indicate how this is a valid limitation, 3) indicate how this limitation might have given rise
to the observed findings, 4) outline how to fix this (this ties in future research quite nicely). It’s also
important to think about whether your proposed limitation has been controlled for within the
experiment. For instance, a noisy class environment may indeed affect performance on a task that
requires a lot of attention, but is this more likely to affect one group more than another? If not, then
the environment, while not ideal, is not likely to influence the results.
6.3.1 Outlining a limitation

These are components of the research that have affected the findings. Look at differences
between the current methodology and findings arising from previous research for hints (e.g., if you’re
investigating creativity, did you use the same measures of creativity? If not, how might these give rise
to different results?).
Some common mistakes here to note:
Sample size: Sample size is probably not a limitation because our sample sizes are generally
quite large in lab classes.
Testing conditions: Yes, we know that testing conditions in the lab were not ideal, but if
performance accuracy for your participants was high, there is not a strong case that
participants found the class environment distracting.
Demographic: The demographic of the participants is also unlikely to be an issue, unless you
can provide evidence that IQ or other social factors can affect performance on your task.
6.3.2 Validating a limitation
Any of the above could be a valid limitation if you are able to support this argument with
research. For example, if the current study looks at Marvel Movie preference, and evidence indicates
that individuals between 18-22 prefer Marvel films significantly more than individuals aged 50-55
(Kosinski, 2011), then you could make a strong argument that your sample is biased in film
preferences and you could offer future research into film preferences across lifespan. This ties future
research into limitations in a neat manner. However, if you are not able to explain to the reader
exactly how your proposed limitation would have affected your results, then it is not a good
limitation.
6.4 Conclusions and Future Directions
This is the last part of the discussion, and is generally one small paragraph. The conclusion should
summarize your main findings and the take home message from your study. This should be followed
by a proposal for future studies that addresses your proposed limitation or expands on your study in
some way. Finally, end your report with some statement about the importance of continued study in
the field.

33
TL; DR – Discussion Dos and Don’ts
Dos Don’ts Common Errors
Remind the reader of Copying the Simply saying “our

what your initial hypotheses from results supported
Relating to predictions were your introduction our first hypothesis”
hypotheses verbatim without reminding
Rephrase them in the
the reader of what
context of your
this hypothesis was
findings
Discuss the implications Simply stating that Glossing over this

of your findings in the your findings section entirely and
context of the supported those of skipping to the
literature you reviewed one study without limitations
Discussing in the introduction elaborating the point
implications
It is acceptable to
introduce new
literature in the
discussion
Think objectively about Going out of your Presenting too many

the methodological way to poke as many limitations and/or
Limitations
factors that may have holes as possible in limitations that are
skewed your results your study not well justified
Remind the reader of Casting doubt on the Concluding with a

what the take-home validity of your statement of the
message from your findings by limitations that ends
Conclusions/ study is emphasizing the your report on a
Future limitations in the negative note
Your proposed future
directions conclusion
direction can, but does
not always, stem from
the limitations you’ve
discussed

34
7. GENERAL WRITING STYLE
The key to effective communication is clear and concise writing. Figure 9 illustrates a number of
the common errors and grammar and style that make your writing much harder to understand. This
section will go through the areas with which students typically have the most difficulty.
Figure 9
The Stuff of Nightmares
7.1 The Oxford comma
The Oxford comma is that comma used after the penultimate item in a list. The APA style guide
requires that we use the Oxford comma in text and in all citations. While some of the APA’s
recommendations can seem tedious and not very helpful, in this case I whole-heartedly agree with it.
The Oxford comma is a brilliantly useful bit of punctuation that can really change the way a sentence
is read (e.g., Figure 10). If you are still not convinced of the merits of the Oxford comma, see this
article to learn how one Oxford comma cost a company $13 million!

35
Figure 10
Illustration of The Difference an Oxford Comma Can Make
7.2 Semicolons
Many a brave student has attempted to use the semicolon in their lab reports, but most do not
do so correctly. Use of a semicolon is required in APA style to separate items in brackets (e.g.,
different citations, or an abbreviation and a citation), but can otherwise be avoided entirely if you are
uncertain about its correct usage.
The basic rule for using a semicolon in a sentence is that it can be inserted to separate two
independent clauses. An independent clause is a clause that has all the elements necessary to qualify
as a complete sentence. You could very well write the independent clauses as two sentences (and this
would be perfectly OK), but you might choose to join them with a semicolon if they are somehow
linked. In the example in Figure 11, the independent clause, “Using a semicolon isn’t hard” is linked to
the subsequent independent clause, “I once saw a gorilla do it”, so they can be joined by a semicolon.
For more information on correct semicolon use, check out this brilliant comic from The Oatmeal.

36
Figure 11
An Example of the Correct Use of a Semicolon
Note: Reproduced from http://theoatmeal.com/comics/semicolon.
7.3 Sentence Structure
7.3.1 Sentence fragments
A complete sentence contains a subject (the one doing the thing), and a predicate (a clause
containing a verb that tells us something about the subject). If your sentence lacks either of those
elements, it is incomplete. For examples and more information on sentence fragments, see this
resource.
7.3.2 Run-on sentences
A run-on sentence contains two or more independent clauses that are not appropriately
separated by punctuation (see example in Figure 12). Effectively, it is a fusion of multiple sentences
that really should be written separately. Grammar Girl provides more detail about identifying run-on
sentences and how to fix them. Handy tip: If your sentence is the length of a short paragraph, it
should probably be broken up into two, three, and sometimes even four smaller sentences.

37
Figure 12
Example of a Run-On Sentence
Note: In this scenario, the woman’s regret for not being home on time is mitigated by her ire at his
poorly constructed complaint. (Image source here.)
7.4 Word Choice
7.4.1 Subjects and verbs

Make sure that the verb you choose can actually be used with the subject of your sentence. For
example, a “model” cannot “process” (the brain does), and a “result” cannot “find” (the scientist
“finds”, the results “show”). It sometimes helps to look up the definitions of words to check your
understanding, even if you think you already know.
7.4.2 Colloquialisms
A lab report is a formal piece of writing, so colloquialisms (e.g., “There were heaps of distractions
in the class environment”, or the ones shown in Figure 8) are not allowed.
7.4.3 “Significant”
In psychology, the word “significant” does not simply mean “important”. It should only be used
to describe statistical results. Use synonyms of “significant” in all other cases.
7.4.4 “Insignificant” vs. “Non-significant”

“Insignificant” refers to something that is not important (e.g., “the vastness of the ocean always
made him feel quite insignificant”). “Non-significant” refers to something that is not statistically
significant. They cannot be used interchangeably.

38
7.4.5 “Correlated”
As with “significant”, this word should only be used to describe a statistical relationship. Use
“associated” in all other cases.
7.4.6 “Proof”/”True”
Avoid using the word “proof” to describe the findings of your (or someone else’s) study,
especially if the study tests a theory or model. All models are inherently “wrong” on some level
because they are oversimplifications of reality. Also keep in mind that we base our findings on the
outcomes of statistical tests, which always have an element of uncertainty built into them. You might
state that your manipulation was effective because you obtained a p value of .01, but remember,
what this actually means is that there is a 1% chance you are making a type 1 error (this is what is
meant by “uncertainty”). It is therefore better to describe results as “providing evidence to support” a
model or theory. The same applies to using the word “true” to describe findings.
7.4.7 “Fewer” vs. ”Less”

This is a very common, but not often discussed, source of confusion. “Fewer” and “less” can’t be
used interchangeably. “Fewer” applies to countable nouns (those that are pluralized by adding an “s”
at the end; e.g., “Participants in the control condition made fewer errors”). “Less” is used when
describing things that can’t be counted (e.g., “Participants took less time to respond when the
stimulus was presented in the cued location”).
7.4.7 “Based off”

I will admit that this grammatical error is a personal peeve of mine and it is an alarmingly
common one that comes up quite often in lab reports. In fact, it’s use is sadly on the rise, but it
remains an error and should be avoided nonetheless! The correct version of the phrase is “based on”
as you build on foundations, not off them.
7.5 Paragraph structure
7.5.1 One-sentence paragraphs

These are generally discouraged in APA style and are rarely warranted. Two-sentence paragraphs
are not much better. Ideas should generally be expressed in fleshed out paragraphs. If you are
describing something in only one or two sentences, chances are you are not doing so in enough
detail.
7.5.2 “Run-on” paragraphs

Paragraphs that are too long are also not ideal. Paragraph breaks give the reader a break from
your stream of thought and allow them to process the meaning of the content. You want to deliver
your information in bite-sized pieces, rather than large chunks. The latter are harder to digest (pun
intended) and so are best avoided.

39
Tip: Each paragraph should only contain a single topic sentence. If your paragraph takes up an
entire page, chances are it contains more than one topic sentence and should be broken up into two
or more smaller paragraphs. Reading your work out loud can help you identify where these breaks
should be.
7.6 Language
The language used in scientific writing should be simple and direct. Avoid use of overly elaborate
language and superfluous7 adjectives. While you may think that this adds sophistication to your writing,
it actually detracts from clarity. For example:
is not as clear (or as pleasant to read) as:
The latter example is also much more concise. It delivers the same message in far fewer words, so it is
far more efficient (and good for dealing with tight word limits!).
7.7 Contractions
Avoid contractions (e.g., isn’t, wasn’t). This is a general rule for formal writing.
7.8 Abbreviations
Abbreviations must be introduced the first time the term to be abbreviated is used. Once an
abbreviation is introduced, it must be used consistently (i.e., you can't switch back to using the full
words).
Avoid the temptation to abbreviate every term that is more than one word to try to cut down
your word count; use abbreviations sparingly and sensibly. If you introduce too many, it will affect the
clarity of your writing because the reader has to try to remember them all and keep them straight in
their head. For further detail about the proper use of abbreviations, see this web page.
7
I suppose one might argue that “superfluous” counts as elaborate language, but it is an excellent
word. Everyone should know at least three excellent words.

40
7.9 “i.e.” / ”e.g.”
The abbreviations for id est (i.e.), which means “that is”, and exempli gratia (e.g.), which means
“for example” are often confused. Understanding the English translation often helps in deciding which
to use (hence is noted here).
Also note that the abbreviated form is only used in brackets. That is, outside of brackets, you
write these terms in full; for example, I have typed these in text in this sentence. When writing out
“that is” or “for example” in a sentence, it’s typical to use a comma to insert a pause. The same
convention follows when the abbreviations are used in brackets (e.g., as I have done here).
8. APA STYLE
The APA style guide is the bane of many psychologists’, and every psychology students’,
existence. No, it is not very pretty, and yes, it can be annoyingly particular. Out there in the real
research world, we don’t always use APA style to format our papers as each journal has different
requirements. An argument is therefore often made that forcing this on students is a waste of
everyone’s time. However, doing so ensures a uniform standard is maintained across all psychology
subjects and it really is not that difficult to do once you acquaint yourself with the rules.
Marks are almost always allocated to formatting, so it is definitely in your best interest to get this
right8. It really is a shame to see so many students lose marks over something they could have easily
done correctly. This section will not go through all of the guidelines, as there are plenty of resources
for this on the internet (Purdue’s Online Writing Lab is a personal favorite, and the official guide can
be found here). Instead, this section will describe most common errors that students make.
8.1 Voice
Opinions differ about whether the use of a passive voice (e.g. “It was hypothesized”) or an active
voice (e.g., “we expected”) is more appropriate in scientific writing. The APA style guide recommends
that you use an active voice in your writing, so you’re advised to use an active voice unless instructed
otherwise.
8Instead of simply staring at your document at 1 a.m. trying to think of a half-way decent limitation to
put in your Discussion, use that time to ensure that your document is formatted correctly. It will
actually earn you some marks! I like to call this “productive procrastination”. It’s how I learned all the
guidelines when I was in your position.

41
8.2 Numbers and their units
Numbers below 10 should be written in words. Numbers above 10 can be written in numerals,
but not if the number is the first word in a paragraph (e.g. “Fifty nine participants were recruited to
the study”). When reporting a number with an associated unit (e.g., a response time), a space should
be included between the number and the unit (e.g., “123 ms”; you wouldn’t write “123words”, so you
shouldn’t write “123ms”). More on writing numbers in APA style here.
8.3 Separating paragraphs
In APA style, all new paragraphs (with the exception of the abstract) begin with an indent. There
is some specification about exactly how big that indent should be, although you will find most
psychologists just hit the “tab” key to create the indent. No extra line break can be added between
paragraphs to separate them (this includes the references section). This can look quite foreign to
some people initially, but resist the urge to make your document look “nicer”. You will grow
accustomed to this also.
8.4 Italics
It can be tempting to use italics to emphasize a word. This is not allowed in APA style.
Underlining, capitalization, and bold typeface also cannot be used for emphasis. For more information
on appropriate use of italics, see this helpful web page.
8.5 Parentheses
Two things are not allowed in APA style: 1) nested parentheses (i.e., brackets within brackets)
and 2) back-to-back parentheses (i.e., one set of brackets immediately followed by another). Both of
these can be rectified with the correct use of a semicolon.
8.5.1 Nested parentheses
This mistake is commonly made when reporting statistics. Students often want to do this in
brackets, but since the degrees of freedom for F and t statistics are reported in brackets, this is not
allowed. Instead, separate the statistics from the rest of the sentence with a semicolon. For example:
“The performance of the test group was significantly worse than the control group; t(78) = 4.63, p <
.001.”
8.5.2 Back-to-back parentheses.
This mistake is commonly made when a student introduces an abbreviation, then wants to follow
that with a citation. The correct way is to enclose both the abbreviation and citation within a single
set of brackets, and separate the two parts with a semicolon. For example, “(SDT; Green & Swets,
1966)”.

42
8.6 Abstract
The abstract is the first section of your lab report. It should start on the page after the title page.
Two common formatting mistakes are made in this section:
1) Using a justified alignment – The abstract should be left-aligned like every other
paragraph in your text.
2) Indenting the abstract – The abstract should be a single, un-indented paragraph.
8.7 Introduction
The introduction is the first part of your lab report. As the report itself is its own section, it
should start on a new page.
8.7.1 The heading
The heading of the introduction should not be the word “Introduction” as it is generally
understood that this is the first section of any report. Instead, you should reprint the title of your
report at the beginning of this section. Since it is a main section heading, it should be center-aligned
and in bold typeface.
8.7.2 In-text citations
In-text citations can be explicit (e.g., “Smith and Jones (2017) were the first to describe APA-
induced psychosis”) or implicit (e.g., “APA-induced psychosis (Smith & Jones, 2017) arises when a
psychologist experiences a psychotic break while attempting to format a document in APA style”). A
study that has already been cited explicitly in one sentence does not need to be cited again implicitly
in the same sentence, or possibly even in the same paragraph if it is clear you are still describing the
same study.
Notice that in the example of the explicit citation, the word “and” was used to conjoin the
authors. In the implicit citation example, an ampersand (i.e., “&”) was used. An ampersand can only
be used with implicit citations and cannot be used anywhere else in text (except in the References
section).
If a study has two authors, both authors must be listed every time the study is cited. If a study
has 3-5 authors, you may use “et al.” (note the period after the “al”) after the name of the first
author. The year of publication must always be included.
Note: A in-text citation made in the abstract does not count towards the body of the report. That
is, if you cite a study in the abstract (which should be avoided unless absolutely necessary9), you must
9
Unlike the body of the report, it is totally acceptable not to cite all of your sources in the abstract. You should
only really be citing research that is especially relevant to your study (e.g., if you are replicating that research).

43
do so in full the first time it appears in the abstract, but you must also cite it in full again the first time
it appears in the report itself.
8.7.3 Quotation marks
Just don’t. Well, I suppose there might be a rare occasion where quoting an author might be
warranted, but these instances are few and far between (and need to cited differently; see here).
Quotation marks should not be used to introduce terms, or to get around paraphrasing a definition.
8.8 Method
As the Method is still part of the lab report, it should start immediately after the introduction.
The subheadings in this section are level 2 headings, and are often not formatted correctly. They
should be left-aligned and in bold typeface. They should not be italicized.
If you wish to begin your description of the participants with the number of participants (i.e., the
first word in the paragraph is the number), you should spell that number out in words. As mentioned
in section 8.4, a paragraph should not begin with numerals.
8.9 Results
The Results section should start immediately after the Method. A wide variety of formatting
mistakes are made in this section. Here are the main things to look out for:
1) A table is a table, not a figure. Therefore, you should not use a figure caption to describe
a table. For more on how to format a table title see this link.
2) Results figures should not be placed in an appendix. Depending on your subject’s

requirements, you will either be asked to place your figure within the results section, or
at the at the very end of the document (check with your tutor!). If you are asked to place
your figure at the end of your document, it should appear on a separate page after the
references; this page should not have an “Appendix” heading (or any heading, for that
matter). The same goes for tables.
3) Figure captions should appear above the figure as described here.
4) Leading zeroes (i.e., the zero before the decimal point) should not be included for values
which can only range from 0-1 (e.g., p values and effect sizes).
5) As a general rule, numbers should be reported to two decimal places unless extra
precision is required for clarification. Extra precision is preferred when reporting p values,
so report those to three decimal places.
6) Learn which parts of the inferential statistics need to be italicized (e.g., F, t, p, effect
sizes).

44
8.10 Discussion
This is the last part of your report and should start immediately after the results. It should not
start on a new page.
8.11 References
This is the final section of the document, so it should start on a new page and the heading should
be center-aligned. The references themselves should have a hanging indent, which is easily achieved
in Word by going to: Format → Paragraph… → Indentation → Special → Hanging. There are several
YouTube tutorials on how to do this. For further information on how to format references, see here.
A note of caution on using Google Scholar: Google Scholar is a terrific tool for finding papers, and
you can copy an APA formatted reference for each paper (minus the font and hanging indent, which
you have to do yourself) by clicking the “Cite” button. This will open up a window with a variety of
format options (see Figure 13), including APA, which you can copy directly into your document.
However, the citations Google Scholar provides are not always complete or entirely correct. Make
sure you check the reference you’re copying and ensure it has all the right components.
Figure 13
How to Copy APA-Formatted References from Google Scholar
8.12 Appendices
Appendices contain supplementary information that is too detailed for the main body of your
report. For most lab reports, an appendix will not be required. The main figure of your results should

45
certainly not be included in an appendix. If, however, you do need to include some supplementary
material in an appendix, you should make sure that you format this section correctly.
9. PLAGIARISM AND COLLUSION
There seems to be some confusion about what constitute plagiarism and collusion under university
guidelines. Presenting the work of someone else as your own is plagiarism. Failing to properly
acknowledge where the idea or work came from is dishonest and not acceptable. This applies to all
written documents, interpretations, computer software, designs, images, photographs, and ideas that
were created by someone else.
Collusion is when work presented as your own has been developed with others in a manner that
is not permissible. This is equally dishonest and unacceptable unless you have been required to
produce a shared piece of work with other students, or if you are specifically allowed to work with
others as part of the learning objectives for the assessment task. You may not present the work of
someone else as your own, even with their permission. Both the student submitting the assessment
and student(s) willingly supplying unauthorized material are considered participants in acts of
collusion.
Now, if you were to compare the above two paragraphs to the information about plagiarism and
collusion on the university’s website, you will notice some striking similarity in the content! Some
words are slightly different, but you can tell that no original thought was put into writing those
paragraphs on my part. Basically, I have plagiarized the university’s description of plagiarism and
collusion10. So, if you copy content from lectures (yes, we check those too) or from a paper and simply
swap a few words around, this will also count as plagiarism.
Proper paraphrasing means expressing something in your own words. First, read the content you
are trying to paraphrase and make sure you actually understand it. Then, use that understanding to
convey that content to the reader without relying on the wording used by the original authors.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And with that, we’ve reached the end of the lab report guide! Use this guide well, remember to
check your formatting, and above all don’t panic! At the end of the day, the lab report is just a
university assignment. It is a thing that you have to do, but it does not define you and will not prevent
you from ultimately achieving your goals. So, be kind to yourself! I wish you all the very best.
10 See what I did there? Also, the original source is here.

The Psychology Student's Guide To Writing A Lab Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Psychology Student's Guide To Writing A Lab Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE PSYCHOLOGY STUDENT’S

GUIDE TO WRITING A LAB REPORT

1. THE TITLE .................................................................................................................. 7

1.2 Writing a good abstract ...................................................................................................... 9

TL; DR: Abstract Dos and Don’ts ............................................................................................. 12

3. THE INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................13

3.3 Introducing your study ..................................................................................................... 18

TL; DR – Introduction Dos and Don’ts ...................................................................................... 20

4. THE METHOD ...........................................................................................................21

5. THE RESULTS ............................................................................................................24

5.2 Inferential Statistics ......................................................................................................... 26

TL; DR – Results Dos and Don’ts .............................................................................................. 29

6. THE DISCUSSION ......................................................................................................30

6.1.1 Common errors .................................................................................................................................. 30

6.2 Discussing the implications of your findings ...................................................................... 31

6.4 Conclusions and Future Directions .................................................................................... 32

7. GENERAL WRITING STYLE .........................................................................................34

7.4 Word Choice .................................................................................................................... 37

7.5 Paragraph structure ......................................................................................................... 38

7.6 Language ......................................................................................................................... 39

Last updated: July 25, 2021

8.8 Method ........................................................................................................................... 43

9. PLAGIARISM AND COLLUSION ..................................................................................45

Last updated: July 25, 2021

1) Promote your work

3) Time is money (and words are time)

Last updated: July 25, 2021

2.1 The Informative Abstract

An informative abstract is a single paragraph made up of four parts: purpose, methodology,

Last updated: July 25, 2021

1.2 Writing a good abstract

These are the ABCs of abstract writing:

Accuracy: Only report information included in the original document.

Brevity: Get straight to the point in clear and concise language.

1.2.1 Common errors

Last updated: July 25, 2021

A better example of an abstract for the same study would be:

Last updated: July 25, 2021

Last updated: July 25, 2021

TL; DR: Abstract Dos and Don’ts

Dos Don’ts Common Errors

Outline the area of Provide information Too many words spent

Outline the task used, Including too detailed a

Report the main result, Provide vague

Avoid ending with a

Last updated: July 25, 2021

1. ESTABLISH THE TOPIC

What is the topic under investigation?

Why does it warrant further study?

2. REVIEW THE LITERATURE

What are the existing theories that relate to this topic?

What evidence is there to support each of these theories*?

3. INTRODUCE YOUR STUDY

What do you expect to find (i.e., the hypotheses)?

3.1 Establishing the topic

Example 2: “Humans need to perceive their environment to perform functions in their

This is considered fluff from a

There is some controversy surrounding the use of computers by small children.

The real topic of the study is

3.2 Reviewing the literature

Last updated: July 25, 2021

3.2.1 Structuring your ideas

Last updated: July 25, 2021