You are on page 1of 34

118PY: Research and Professional Development Lecture 13: Report Writing and Research Rationales

Announcements
• Workshop this week: Figures and plagiarism • Next week (w/c 21st of November 2011)
▫ Wednesday Lecture (GEG31) ▫ Friday Lecture (CSG2) ▫ Workshop
 SPSS class test t-tests (open book)  Mandatory but does not form the basis of your end of year mark

• Assignment 1 (humour and psychology) due Monday 21st of November 2011
▫ Turnitin by 11:59pm (latest) – email Andy Johnson at that time (attaching your assignment) if there are problems with the Moodle/Turnitin

Key Terms From Last Lecture
• • • • • • • Exploring/summarising data Table Figure Frequency histograms Stem and leaf display/plots Box plots/Box and whisker plots Outlier

• Bar chart • Line chart/ interaction line chart

Report Writing and Research Rationale: Contents • The eel and the anus • Revision of key concepts acquired this term • Coursework check ▫ ▫ ▫ ▫ General pointers Structure Content Referencing .

.

A 50-year-old man was seen at the Accident and Emergency Department because of abdominal pain. The postoperative course was uneventful. A. Wong.. I. Law. The rectum was divided at the site of perforation. Emergency laparotomy found a 50 cm-long eel biting the splenic flexure of the colon. On further questioning. S.. (2004). .. A shadow of an eel was noticed on the abdominal radiograph.S.. and a 3-cm perforation was found over the anterior wall of the rectum. 110-111. CASE REPORT .W.C. and Yip.C. Leung L. Surgery. the patient admitted an eel was inserted into the rectum in an attempt to relieve constipation. The patient was discharged home on day 7. 135(1). Physical examination revealed peritonitis.H. S. Traumatic rectal perforation by eel.A Cautionary Scientific Tale… • Lo.F. and the proximal end was brought out as colostomy.

e. more than a quarter of my height) .• Here it is… The eel is 50cm (i.

• Does insertion of an eel alleviate the symptoms of constipation? Null hypothesis (H0): ??? Experimental hypothesis (H1): ??? ..The Scientific Method (1) Identify the problem and highlight a hypothetical suggestion NEED A RATIONALE • Based on the patient self-report.. we have a rationale to examine the following proposition.

The Scientific Method • Does insertion of an eel alleviate the symptoms of constipation? • We begin with the null hypothesis • If there is sufficient statistical support we may reject our null hypothesis and adopt our alternative/experimental hypothesis .

The Scientific Method (2) Design the study • Two groups both with an equivalent level of constipation (controlled) • One group inserts eel. one groups does not ▫ Design = between-participants • Measure effect on constipation ▫ Independent variable (IV) = eel (yes or no) ▫ Dependent variable (DV) = level of constipation .

The Scientific Method (2) Design the study • What are the disadvantages of such a design? • What design could we have instead? ▫ Limitations of this? ▫ Within-participants – but order effects .

The Scientific Method (2) Design the study • Type of study? ▫ Quasi experimental or experimental? • What do we need for an experimental design? ▫ Control over IV ▫ Random allocation to IV levels .

The Scientific Method (3) Conduct study • We will cover ethics in another session. but suffice to say. this is not acceptable conduct • Good luck getting participants! HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE! .

The Scientific Method (4) Evaluate the study by analysing data from the study • Compare constipation scores between 2 groups 100 • Descriptives… 90 Mean Constipation (%) 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 Labels of x and y axis Gap between bars Axis starts at 0 not misleading Appropriate title Eel No Eel 0 HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE! Figure 1: Mean constipation scores for the eel and no eel groups .

32 12.85 No eel group 89.The Scientific Method (4) Evaluate the study by analysing data from the study • Compare constipation scores between 2 groups • Descriptives… Table 1: Mean constipation scores and standard Appropriate title deviations for the eel and no eel groups Eel group Mean Standard deviation 57.39 Groups clearly labelled HYPOTHETICAL EXAMPLE! .45 15.

The Scientific Method (4) Evaluate the study by analysing data from the study • Compare constipation scores between 2 groups • Parametric tests ▫ Assumptions:     Independence Ratio/interval Normal distribution Homogeneity of variance • What type of test would be appropriate? ▫ Unrelated t-test .

The Scientific Method (4) Evaluate the study by analysing data from the study • Compare constipation scores between 2 groups • T-test results ▫ “An unrelated t-test was conducted and found significantly higher levels of constipation in the eel group compared to the no eel group.05.74.” . t(37)=6. p<0.

The Scientific Method (4) Evaluate the study by analysing data from the study • Compare constipation scores between 2 groups • Purpose of t-test is to assess the number of standard errors our score is from the null hypothesis that there is no difference (this is t) ▫ We use standard deviation to estimate the standard error ▫ We then divided the obtained difference by the estimate of the standard error = t • Once we have t and the df we can assess the probability of getting that value by chance (t distribution Gosset) .

therefore.5% (to equal 5% in total) – this score then ceases to be significant . therefore significant Falls outside 5%. cannot reject the null hypothesis Falls within 5%. therefore nonsignificant But if we have a critical area at both tails each area can only be 2.The Scientific Method (4) Evaluate the study by analysing data from the study • Compare constipation scores between 2 groups ▫ Using a non-directional (2-tailed) approach Looks extreme difference but outside the 5% critical area.

The Scientific Method (5) Communicate the results • Right up an account of your experiment (to be discussed) • Why bother? ▫ Can inform people of your findings – increase knowledge/people may be able to benefit from your findings ▫ If people do not believe your findings. they can follow your reported methodology and see if they can replicate your findings .

What if eel group has a significant reduction… The role of slime… This is called a….The Scientific Method (5) Communication/interpretation of the results • Another variable….. Confounding variable .

However. 111) . 2004.“Insertion of a live animal into the rectum causing rectal perforation has never been reported. or criminal assault. inadvertent sexual behaviour..” (Lo et al. This may be related to a bizarre healthcare belief. p. the true reason may never be known.

Humour and Psychology Practical Due 21st November 2011 • General Points of Advice ▫ ▫ ▫ ▫ ▫ ▫ Avoid informal language Avoid abbreviations Avoid unsubstantiated comments (cite) Keep language concise and scientific Follow the prescribed structure Check it over .

Humour and Psychology Practical Due 21st November 2011 • General Points of Advice ▫ The Golden Thread – you are telling a story and there should be common link association between all things you are writing and your study aim ▫ Signpost these links to the reader – otherwise some things may look out of context .

the IV and the DV ▫ Keep it concise – avoid unnecessary wording ▫ Do not try and make it funny/quirky etc . in some respect.Humour and Psychology Practical Title • You need to devise your own title ▫ Should contain.

Humour and Psychology Practical Introduction • The inverted triangle ▫ A brief introduction to the notion of expectancy (can be from a different area of psychology) ▫ A brief introduction on humour (factors that influence it) ▫ Wimer and Beins (2008): how they used expectancy to investigate the effects on humour. what they found ▫ Rationale (do not jump from description of studies to what you predict) for your study (why are you doing this – can be linked to summary of what you read) ▫ Briefly what you are going to do ▫ Prediction plus justification for such .

who were they. and recruited from where • Materials ▫ Key materials used . and any controls • Participants ▫ How many.Humour and Psychology Practical Method • Design ▫ IV. type of design. mean age. DV.describe in some detail and do not rely uniquely on an appendix • Procedure ▫ Chronological account of your study . how many male/female.

g.Humour and Psychology Practical Results (1) Descriptives (table or graph) – means and standard deviations Ensure that all tables and figures are labelled appropriately Include an additional line describing pattern of means and SDs (2)Inferential statistics (t-test) Sentence describing the type of test. e.47. t(8)=9. and then the stats. p<0. the direction of any effects.05 . the groups/conditions under comparison.

Humour and Psychology Practical Results • Keep concise • Avoid making any evaluative judgments • An objective reporting of the results • Do not refer to hypothesis or what it means • It will not be many words so do not worry if it is short .

.e.. 2008) (4) Any limitations to the study which may invoke an alternative explanation – how could these be overcome in future. Suggest methodological improvements (5) Practical application (6) Future research ideas – where next. .Humour and Psychology Practical Discussion (1) Briefly summarise the results (without the stats) (2) How do the results relate to previous studies mentioned in the introduction (consistent or inconsistent with them?) (3) How might we explain the findings? What is the theory/mechanism (relate back to the introduction and any explanations in Wimer and Beins. i..

.Humour and Psychology Practical Referencing in the text • Citing in the text: “Wimer and Beins (2008) investigated..” • Quotes: e. Hills (2007:34) stated that “the effect was transient and difficult to replicate”.g. Carlson and Buskist (2007:35) argued that.” and then after that you can refer to them as.” ▫ Consistently cite –if any ambiguity about who you are talking about in a passage cite them again • If three or more authors: for the first citation you must write “Martin. . “Martin et al..... (2007:23) argued...

2007) argued that.. Wimer and Beins..g.Humour and Psychology Practical Referencing in the text • Primary source – you read the study that you are citing (e. .. 2008) • Secondary sources – if you read about a study/argument/theory in another text • Smith (2004. cited in Martin. Carlson and Buskist.

(2007). . W. 21(3). 347-363. (2008).R. D. pages 304-312 • Journal articles: Wimer. B. Pearson Education Limited.J. and Buskist.C.N.Humour and Psychology Practical The Reference Section • Alphabetical order • Books: Martin. N.. Psychology. G. and Beins.. Expectations and Perceived Humour. Carlson. Humour. Harlow.

Research Methods and Statistics in Psychology (5th Edition). London: Hodder and Stoughton] . H.Reading • Chapter 24: Planning your practical and writing your report [Coolican. (2009).