Final Paper

Correct both preliminary papers (3 and 4), combine, follow instructions for final paper.

Due by tomorrow night.

Running head: STUDY TWO LITERATURE REVIEW 1

PAPER III: LITERATURE REVIEW 7

Instructions for Paper III: Study Two Literature Review (Worth 35 Points)

Ryan J. Winter

Florida International University

Purpose of Paper III: Study Two Literature Review

1). Psychological Purpose

Paper III is intended to help you take your original Social Comparison study one step further by letting you predict how a second independent variable of your lab’s choosing impacts participants. In this replication with extension study, you have a greater role in a). choosing which articles to include in your follow-up literature review as well as b). identifying how this new variable influences your hypotheses. The bulk of your points in Paper III will come from a new paper “literature review”, but—similar to journal articles you might have read—this second literature review comes between the discussion from study one and before the methods for study two. That is, your Paper III will include your original literature review from study one (revised based on feedback from Paper I), your study one methods, results, and discussion (revised based on feedback from Paper II), and a new literature review that both focuses on the results of study one but adds in new information and references for study two.

In other words, Paper III includes:

1). Your original title page (though feel free to change the title)

2). Your revised study one literature review (ending in the study one hypotheses).

3). Your revised study one methods section.

4). Your revised study one results section.

5). Your revised study one discussion section.

6). Your new study two literature review (ending in the study two hypotheses).

7). References for all citations in the paper (minimum 10 references required)

8). Your appendices from study one

The largest number of Paper III points are provided for your new study two literature review. Unlike your study one literature review, your study two literature review will essentially pick up after study one. Think of it as a “sequel” of sorts. It builds on and extends study one’s Social Comparison focus, using two levels of your original independent variable (either Upward vs. Downward, or Upward vs. Average) and similar dependent variables (e.g. Pat / self-impressions, etc.) but altering or extending them into a new study design. The good news here is that you can refer to study one as you write your study two literature review. In fact, that is something I encourage. You can also refer back to your study one literature review sources.

The bulk of this study two literature review concerns a second independent variable that you and your lab will manipulate during the second part of the semester. You will need to find up to five references for this second independent variable, hopefully finding sources that build a bridge between studies one and two. In other words, in Paper III you will answer the following question: “Given our findings in study one, how will the presence of a second independent variable impact participant decisions?”

Similar to Paper I, you should end your literature review in Paper III by noting your specific hypotheses for study two. Here, you will address both main effects (outcomes associated with each independent variable alone) and interactions (the combined impact of your independent variables).

2). APA Formatting Purpose

The second purpose of Paper III: Literature Review is to once again teach you proper American Psychological Association (APA) formatting. In the pages below, I will tell you how to format your paper using APA style. There are a lot of very specific requirements in APA papers, so pay attention to the instructions below as well as Chapter 14 in your book!

3). Writing Purpose

Finally, this paper is intended to help you refine your writing. My hope is that you will use feedback from Paper I and Paper II to improve your grammar, spelling, and content in Paper III. At the end of the semester, you will actually use Paper III as the opening section for your final course paper, so doing a good writing job Paper III will be very beneficial as you revise your papers for Paper V. Many students use Paper V as their writing sample for graduate programs, so make sure you write clearly and precisely for an educated reader!

Note that the plagiarism limit for Paper III is 50%. This is a bit higher given the overlap in the Paper II material, but your Paper I and new literature review in Paper III should be very unique to you. As usual, references, citations, and the predictions are not included in the plagiarism limit.

Instructions for Paper III: Study Two Literature Review (Worth 35 Points)

This paper will cover both study one (including the literature review, methods section, results section, and brief discussion from that study) and the introduction literature review to study two. This paper essentially tells the literature oriented story of your semester long project thus far. Your main job is to justify your study two predictions, and you do that by both showing how study one influenced your choice of variables in study two as well as citing prior research that supports your second independent variable in study two. At the end of the study two literature review section, you will provide your own study two predictions.

The good news is that we are continuing with our topic of the Social Comparison study. You wrote a lot on that already, so here you simply add to it, noting in a second “literature review” section how a second independent variable might interact with the study one Social Comparison manipulation. Here are the components to keep in mind. By now, a lot of this should be familiar to you, so you’ll see a lot of overlap with the instructions and checklists from Papers I and II.

1. Title Page: I expect the following format (1 point):

a. This title page is a lot like the title page on your Papers I and II. See my “Title” page above as an example or reuse your title page from prior papers (though you may need to modify your title given your new IVs in this study).

b. You must have a header and page numbers on each page.

i. If you don’t know how to insert headers, ask your instructor or watch this very helpful video! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pbUoNa5tyY.

ii. The header goes at the top of the paper and it is left justified.

1. Use “Insert Headers” or click on the top of the page to open the header. Make sure to select the “Different first page” option so that your title page header will differ from subsequent pages

2. The R in Running head is capitalized but the h is lower case, followed by a colon and a short title (in ALL CAPS). This short running head title can be the same one as the rest of your paper or it can differ – the choice is yours, but it should be no more than 50 characters including spaces and punctuation

3. Insert a page number as well. While the header is flush left, the page number is flush right.

iii. Want an example header? Look at the title page of these instructions! You can use other titles depending on your own preferences (e.g. SOCIAL MEDIA AND COMPARISON; SOCIAL COMPARISON; JUDGING OTHERS; etc.).

c. Your Title should be midway up the page. Feel free to alter the title at this point so that it includes a better description of both study one and study two

d. Include your name (First Last) and the name of your institution (FIU) beneath the paper title. For this class, only your own name will go on this paper. Double space everything!

i. You can also refer to Chapter 14 in your textbook

2. Abstract? Again, this is not needed … yet! You’ll include it later in Paper V.

3. Literature Review Study One (3 points)

a. Make sure to revise the study one literature review from Paper I based on feedback to that paper. The Paper I instructions still apply for that second in Paper II, so reread those instructions if you need a reminder on the requirements for your study one literature review.

b. For Paper III, you will need ten references total. You already have five for the study one literature review, so feel free to keep those same references. You can also add a few or take away a few from the study one literature review and make-up the difference in the study two literature review section (#7 below). That is, you can have seven references for study one and three for study two, or six for study one and four for study two, etc. My advice – keep your five references from study one and include five additional references for the study two literature review.

c. Just remember to revise, revise, revise your study one lit review. If we made recommendations for improvement and you don’t change a word, you’ll lose all three points in this section!

4. Methods Study One (3 points)

a. Revise your methods from study one for this section based on feedback we gave you in Paper II. The Paper II instructions for methods still apply for this section.

b. Again, revise, revise, revise or risk losing all points in this section

5. Results Study One (3 points)

a. Revise your results from study one for this section based on feedback we gave you in Paper II. The Paper II instructions for the results still apply for this section.

b. Do I need to mention revise?

6. Discussion Study One (1 point)

a. Revise your discussion from study one for this section based on feedback we gave you in Paper II. The Paper II instructions for the discussion still apply for this section.

b. One word – revise!

7. Literature Review Study Two (10 points)

a. APA formatting for the first page of your literature review

i. Your study two literature review starts right after the discussion for study one. There is no page break, so have it come right after the discussion on the very next line.

b. APA formatted citations for the literature review

i. Between the literature review for study one and the literature review for study two, you have to have at least ten references combined. If you have five references in the study one lit review, you need five more here. If you have seven for study one, you need three here. In total, at least eight of these ten references must be based on empirical research reports (that is, each of these eight cited articles should have a literature review, a methods section, a results section, a conclusion/discussion, and references). The remaining two sources can also be primary sources, but you may also use secondary sources (books, law reviews, newspaper articles, etc.). Of course I would recommend sticking with all primary sources, but the choice is yours for the other two citations. Note: Internet blogs and Wikipedia are not acceptable as secondary sources. Here is a bit more to note:

1. As in Paper I, I am not setting a maximum on the number of citations you can use, but between studies one and two you need at minimum ten of them! These may overlap among students, so it is okay to read the same articles as some of your classmates. You can use all of the articles posted on Canvas for Paper I if you want, but note that you will need to find some new references as well (especially ones that focus on your second independent variable).

a. Referring to your first study does not count as a reference.

2. Proper citations must be made in the paper – give credit where it is due, and don’t make claims that cannot be validated! If it sounds like a fact, then you must provide a citation to support that fact

3. DO NOT plagiarize. You will turn this in on Canvas, and we can check for plagiarism via turn-it-in. Paraphrasing is okay, but you must still cite the original author even if you do not use his or her words verbatim. If you rewrite what they say, it is still them that had the original idea, and they deserve credit for it

4. If you directly quote a source, make sure to provide a page number for where you found that quote. However, I prefer paraphrasing to direct quotes. I allow three quotes total for the whole paper (including the two that I allowed in Paper I). If you quote more than three times you will lose one point for each additional quote.

c. Content-based requirements for your study two literature review

i. Your study two literature review should use your study one results and prior research studies as a jumping off point, once again starting with a broad theme and then narrowing it down – think about the hourglass example your instructors have given you. Now imagine that you have a second hourglass right below the original one. You can start broadly again with information about the new study independent variable, and then once again narrow down as you near your hypotheses for study two.

ii. Think about your study two literature review this way: You are writing a sequel to study one, so your new story picks up where that story left off.

1. I want you to pay close attention to your own brief discussion from study one (Paper II discussion). You drew some conclusions there, but now is your chance to build on those conclusions. At the beginning of your new study two story, your audience knows some of the story from study one, so there is no need to rewrite what you already presented. Rather, you need to set the stage for the new sequel storyline. Introduce your new “character”, or your new independent variable. Talk about this somewhat in isolation (what does research say about this variable on its own). Once you define and clarify what this new variable is and how it has been used in prior research, start to show how it connects to your own study one.

a. For example, let’s say your new independent variable is “the effect of warnings on behavior”, with warning versus no warning as the two levels of the new IV. You would talk about research on warnings and how it impacts people. THEN you talk about how warning about Social Comparison might impact people. So, step one is to introduce the new concept while step two is to show how the new concept fits in with your new study.

2. At the end of the story, start to lead the reader to the big cliffhanger (your study two hypothesis). By now you have introduced the characters as well as the plot, but then you want to build some anticipation in your reader – you want them to wonder what comes next! The last part of the literature review brings the reader to your study two hypotheses, or that potential twist ending to your story. That is, “Given what we saw in the literature, what happens if we do XYZ?” Thus you build your study to your hypotheses and end on another cliffhanger. The next chapter (Paper IV Methods, Results, and Discussion) focuses on the study that you actually did! In other words, at the end of your study two literature review you should …

a. give a general overview of your research question

b. state your specific predictions / hypotheses given the studies you talked about in the literature review. This should look at both main effects and interactions, so you’ll need to address each IV on its own (main effect for belief perseverance and main effect for your second IV) and the interaction of the two IVs as they work together.

d. The literature review for study two must have a minimum of two (2) full pages of text and a maximum of five (5) pages. This time, I’ll let you include the hypotheses within that minimum 2 pages (though it would be very tight to get all of that info in there in such a short lit review section).

8. Citations: I expect the following format (4 points)

a. All in-text citations must be correct (correct APA formatting, correct dates, if directly quoted must have page numbers, and uses et al. and & and correctly)

9. References: I expect the following format (5 points):

a. The References section starts on its own page, with the word References centered. Use proper APA format in this section or you will lose points.

b. All ten references that you cited in the literature review must be in this section (there should be more than ten references here if you cited more than ten articles). However, at least eight must come from empirical articles

c. For references, make sure you:

i. use alphabetical ordering (start with the last name of the first author)

ii. use the authors’ last names but only the initials of their first/middle name

iii. give the date in parentheses – e.g. (2007).

iv. italicize the name of the journal article

v. give the volume number, also in italics

vi. give the page numbers (not italicized) for articles

vii. provide the doi (digital object identifier) if present (not italicized)

10. Appendices: I expect the following format (1 point)

a. Copy and paste from Paper II. This should be an easy point! Just make sure the appendices go AFTER the references page (That is, an appendix “appends” the paper – it goes at the end!)

i. Appendix A: Include your tables for age, gender, and ethnicity.

ii. Appendix B: Include your tables for your chi square and the crosstabs

iii. Appendix C: Include your tables for your first scaled DV

iv. Appendix D: Include your tables for you second scaled DV

11. Overall writing quality (4 points)

a. Make sure you check your paper for proper spelling and grammar. The FIU writing center is available if you want someone to look over your paper (an extra eye is always good!) and give you advice. I highly recommend them, as writing quality will become even more important on future papers.

Other Guidelines for Paper III: Literature Review

 

1. 1). Pay attention to the page length requirements – 1 page for the title page, 2-5 pages for the study one lit review, no minimum page lengths for the study one methods, results, and discussion sections, 2-5 pages for the study two literature review, and at least 1 page for the references page. If you are under the minimum, we will deduct points. If you go over the maximum, we are a little more flexible (up to a half page or so), but we want you to try to keep it to the maximum page.

1. 2). Page size is 8 1/2 X 11” with all 4 margins set at 1”. You must use a 12-point font with Times New Roman font. EVERYTHING in the paper (including references) is double spaced

1. 3). When summarizing articles for your lit review and doing so in your own words, make sure you still cite the original source. Always use proper referencing procedures, which means that:

2. If you are inserting a direct quote from any source, it must be enclosed in quotations and followed by a parenthetical reference to the source. “Let’s say I am directly quoting this current sentence and the next. I would then cite it with the author name, date of publication, and the page number for the direct quote” (Winter, 2013, p . 5).

0. Note: We will deduct points if you quote more than three times in the paper, so keep quotes to a minimum. Paraphrase instead, but make sure you still give the original author credit for the material by citing it or using the author’s name (“In this article, Smith noted that …” or “In this article, the authors noted that…”)

1. 4). PLEASE use a spell checker to avoid unnecessary errors. Proofread everything you write. I actually recommend reading some sentences aloud to see if they flow well, or getting family or friends to read your work. Using Pearson Writer is also required

The above information is required for your paper, but I wanted to provide a few tips about writing your study two literature review as well. Hopefully this will give you some good directions:

· First, remember that you need ten references total, eight of which MUST be peer-reviewed

· Second, I don’t expect a lengthy discussion for each and every article that you cite for either study one or study two. You might spend a page on one study and a sentence or two on another. The amount of time you spend describing an article you read should be proportional to how important it is in helping you defend your hypotheses. If you do a near replication of a prior study, then I would expect you to spend more time discussing that prior research since it has a big impact on your own study. If an article you read simply supports a global idea that ties into your study but has very different methods (like “frustrated people get mad!”), you can easily mention it in a sentence or two without delving into a lot of detail. Tell a good story in your literature review, but only go into detail about plot elements that have a direct bearing on your study!

· Third, like Paper I, Paper III is all about supporting your study two hypotheses. Know what your hypotheses are before you write the paper, as it will help you determine how much time to spend on each article you are citing.

· Fourth, make sure to proofread, proofread, proofread! Use the Pearson Writer for help, but note that their suggestions are just that – suggestions. It is up to you to make sure the flow of the paper is easy to understand. Good luck!

· Fifth, please note that a different grader might grade your Paper III than Paper I or II. As forewarning, the new grader might mark off for Paper I and II elements that the prior grader thought was okay. That is, the two graders may not agree with each other on everything. Unfortunately, this happens, even when I try to publish a paper in a journal. Two reviewers may have no problem with my paper while two others nitpick a lot. The same happens here. Just be aware that graders all use the same paper checklist and grade rubric. They might emphasize some elements more than others in those checklists depending on their personal grading style, but if YOU pay attention to all checklist elements then grading will not differ much regardless of who graded! So, USE THE CHECKLISTS! I mark off a point if the appendix comes before the references. I mark off if reference article titles use incorrect capital letters. I mark off if the letters pF, M, and SD are not in italics. Everything I might mark off for is included in the checklist, so if your paper passes the checklist, I won’t have as much to mark off for! Use it (and look at the example paper and grade rubric as well!)

Running head: FINAL PAPER INSTRUCTIONS 1

PAPER V: FINAL PAPER INSTRUCTIONS 7

Instructions for Paper V: Final Paper (Worth 75 Points)

Ryan J. Winter

Florida International University

Purpose of Paper V (Final Paper)

1). Psychological Purpose

The psychological purpose behind Paper V is to present your final paper. Essentially this paper will be similar to any article you would find in an academic journal. It will include a Title Page, Abstract, Literature Review (study one), Methods Section (study one), Results Section (study one), Brief Discussion Section (study one), Literature Review (study two), Methods Section (study two), Results Section (study two), Brief Discussion Section (study two), General Discussion Section, References, and Appendices. The good news is that for most of this paper you will simply combine Paper I, Paper II, Paper III, and Paper IV (including any needed revisions) for Paper V. Two new components for Paper V include the Abstract and a General Discussion section.

The Abstract is one of the first items readers see. You need to convey a lot of information in this very short paragraph, as the potential reader will decide whether to read your full paper based on the information in the Abstract. There are several elements needed in the Abstract about both of your studies, including information about: a). your research questions, b). your participants, c). your experimental methodology, d). your findings, and e). your conclusions. Being able to write a precise yet succinct Abstract takes some effort, so make sure you go through several drafts before settling on your final version. Make sure to include keywords / key phrases as well (remember entering keywords into PsycInfo when you searched for articles? The authors actually recommended those keywords, so if you want to increase the number of times your paper comes up for readers, use good keywords!)

Your General Discussion section will also be new in Paper V. Here, you will summarize your results from BOTH studies and draw conclusions, but you will NOT use statistics again. This section will evaluate both of your studies and see if (and how) they connect and lead you to general conclusions. That is, your general discussion is the end of your story, so make sure to tie it back to information that you presented throughout both of your studies. You can also identify flaws in your study designs as well as propose new directions for future research in this section.

2). APA Formatting Purpose

Paper V should follow all APA formatting guidelines. See our feedback on prior papers, use Chapter 14 in your textbook, and look at the instructions on the next page for help with formatting

3). Writing Purpose

Paper V is your final paper in the course, and it should reflect the skills and knowledge you have developed throughout the semester. You should be able to convey information to an educated reader, but one who is unfamiliar with your specific study and the content area. More importantly, many students use Paper V as their writing sample for graduate school applications, thus your paper should be grammatically correct and easy to read yet informative for a reader who may have little to no knowledge of your specific topic. Thus educate your reader, but keep in mind that your reader is probably intelligent.

Note that the plagiarism limit for Paper V is 50%. I expect less overlap in your lit reviews and discussions than in the methods / results. As usual, references, citations, and predictions are not included in the plagiarism limit.

Instructions for Paper V: Final Paper (Worth 75 Points)

Note that these instructions relate to the whole paper, but I concentrate on the Abstract and Discussion below since those are new elements in this paper. Refer to the instructions for Paper III: Study Two Literature Review for information on the study one literature review, methods, results, and discussion and the study two literature review and references. Refer to Paper IV: Study Two Methods, Results and Discussion for information on the methods, results and discussion for study two.

1. Title Page: I expect the following format (1 point):

a. This Title Page section will be one (1) page in proper APA format

2. Abstract (7 pointsNEW SECTION

a. The Abstract starts on its own page, with the word Abstract centered (not bolded).

b. Make sure your header and page number is still on this abstract page

c. The abstract should be between 150 and 200 words, and must include ALL of the following elements

i. Identify your general problem or research question

ii. Note your participants

iii. Note your experimental method

iv. Note your findings for both studies

v. Note your conclusions about the studies as a whole

d. Keywords / phrases are required for your paper (at least 5 keywords or phrases)

3. Literature Review (Study One): I expect the following format (6 points):

a. Include your revised literature review from Paper III: Study Two Literature Review. Those instructions continue to apply to this section (recall that you revised the study one literature review for Paper III, so that Paper III literature review will be your most recent version of that study one literature review)

b. The study one literature review must have minimum of two (2) full pages of text (not including the hypotheses) and a maximum of five (5) pages

4. Methods Section (Study One): I expect the following format (6 points):

a. Include your revised methods section from Paper III: Study Two Literature Review. Those instructions continue to apply to this section

b. There is no set minimum or maximum on the length of the methods section, but I would expect at least a page as you detail your materials and procedure. Missing important aspects of your IVs and DVs or presenting them in a confused manner will lower your score in this section

5. Results Section (Study One): I expect the following format (6 points):

a. Include your revised results section from Paper III: Study Two Literature Review. Those instructions continue to apply to this section

b. Like the methods section, there is no page minimum of maximum for the results section, though I would expect it to be at least a paragraph or two for each of the dependent variables you analyzed

6. Brief Discussion (Study One): I expect the following format (1 point):

a. Include a brief description of your study one findings (but avoid using statistics)

b. I expect a paragraph or two, revised from Paper III: Study Two Literature Review.

7. Literature Review (Study Two): I expect the following format (6 points):

a. Include your revised literature review from Paper III: Study Two Literature Review. Those instructions continue to apply to this section

b. The study two literature review must have minimum of two (2) full pages of text (with or without hypotheses) and a maximum of five (5) pages

8. Methods Section (Study Two): I expect the following format (6 points):

a. Include your revised methods section from Paper IV: Study Two Methods, Discussion, and Results. Those instructions continue to apply to this section

b. There is no set minimum or maximum on the length of the methods section, but I would expect at least a page as you detail your materials and procedure. Missing important aspects of your IVs and DVs or presenting them in a confused manner will lower your score in this section

9. Results Section (Study Two): I expect the following format (6 points):

a. Include your revised results section from Paper IV: Study Two Methods, Results, Discussion. Those instructions continue to apply to this section

b. Like the methods section, there is no page minimum of maximum for the results section, though I would expect it to be at least a paragraph or two for each of the dependent variables you analyzed

10. Brief Discussion (Study Two): I expect the following format (1 point):

a. Include a brief description of your study one findings (but avoid using statistics)

b. I expect a paragraph or two, revised from Paper IV: Study Two Methods, Results, Discussion

11. General Discussion (12 pointsNEW SECTION

a. Write the word General Discussion at the top of this section and center it. This section comes directly at the end of the brief discussion section from study two, so the general discussion section DOES NOT start on its own page. See the example paper for some formatting visual hints.

b. At the beginning of this section, give a brief reminder of your predictions from both study one and study two. Then provide a discussion of your results. In English (not statistics), tell me what you found. In this discussion, you should talk about all of the following:

i. An explanation of your findings – across both studies, did your results support or not support your hypothesis?

1. If you found support, tie it in with the prior research you cited in your literature review as well as your predictions. You may want to refer back to your literature review, and re-cite some of the studies you mentioned there (I really recommend that, in fact!).

2. If you didn’t find any support for your hypotheses, contrast your findings with prior research. You can highlight differences in your methodologies. You may also find other studies that either support your results or help explain why you found what you found.

3. If one study found support and the other did not, try to explain the discrepancy.

4. In a nutshell, tell me how both studies help inform the reader about the nature of your variables and how they impact human behavior.

ii. Next, examine study limitations – would other methods have been better? Were there problems with your study that a follow-up study should fix?

iii. Propose future directions for research – If you could do your studies over again, what would you change? Or how might you expand them?

iv. Optional: Talk about the ethics of your study – Did you follow ethical guidelines? Were participants harmed in any manner

c. The general discussion section must have minimum of one (1) full page of text and a maximum of three (3) pages. If it is only one pages, it better be very, very good! I actually expect to see closer to two pages

12. References: I expect the following format (6 points):

a. Include your revised references from Paper III: Literature Review (Study Two)

i. Include any new references you may have cited in the discussion section

b. References start on their own page

c. Follow all APA formatting rules for the references

d. We will mark off per number of error, so really make sure to proofread this. The same error in six references will leave you with zero points!

13. Appendices (3 points)

a. Here, simply include the eight appendices (A, B, C, D, E, F, G, and H) from Papers II and IV. Make sure each are clearly labeled. You might have more than eight, but you should have eight minimum

14. Overall writing quality (8 points)

a. Make sure you check your paper for proper spelling and grammar. The FIU writing center is available if you want someone to look over your paper (an extra eye is always good!) and give you advice. I highly recommend them, as writing quality will become even more important on future papers. NOTE that this writing quality is nearly 10% of your final paper grade, so I suggest you proofread!

b. You can also visit the Research Methods Help Center for some help or just someone to glance over your final paper.

Other Guidelines for Paper V: The Final Paper

 

1. 1). Pay attention to the page length requirements

1. 2). Page size is 8 1/2 X 11” with all 4 margins set at on inch on all sides. You must use a 12-point Times New Roman font. Double space EVERYTHING

1. 3). When summarizing articles for your lit review and doing so in your own words, make sure you still cite the original source. Always use proper referencing procedures, which means that:

2. If you are inserting a direct quote from any source, it must be enclosed in quotations and followed by a parenthetical reference to the source. “Let’s say I am directly quoting this current sentence and the next. I would then cite it with the author name, date of publication, and the page number for the direct quote” (Winter, 2016, p . 4).

0. Note: We will deduct points if you quote more than three times in the whole paper, so keep quotes to a minimum. Paraphrase instead, but make sure you still give the original author credit for the material by citing it or using the author’s name (“In this article, Smith noted that …” or “In this article, the authors noted that…”)

1. 4). PLEASE use a spell checker to avoid unnecessary errors. Proofread everything you write. I actually recommend reading some sentences aloud to see if they flow well, or getting family or friends to read your work.

1. Finally, go look at the supporting documents for this paper. Like prior papers, there is a checklist, a grade rubric, and an example paper for Paper V. All will give you more information about what we are specifically looking for as well as a visual example of how to put it all together in your paper. Good luck!

Running head: STUDY TWO METHODS, RESULTS, DISCUSSION 1

PAPER IV: STUDY TWO METHODS, RESULTS, DISCUSSION 5

Instructions for Paper VI: Study Two Methods, Results, Discussion (Worth 30 Points)

Ryan J. Winter

Florida International University

Purpose of Paper IV: Study Two Methods, Results, and Discussion

1). Psychological Purpose

The psychological purpose behind Paper IV is to make sure you can summarize what you did in your second study, how you did it, and what you found. This is similar to Paper II, but you will include information related to your second independent variable in Paper IV.

For the results section in Paper IV, you will provide information about your participants, materials, and procedure. Your participant section goes first, and it includes descriptive statistics about your sample (means and standard deviations for age and percentages of gender and race/ethnicity). This is a new sample of participants, so you cannot use Paper II for this information. Make it NEW! Your materials and procedure sections include information about what you did and how you did it. You should once again write this section for an audience who is unfamiliar with your newer study two variables, but you can actually summarize or refer back to study one variables if and when they carry over from study one to study two. In the end, just remember that you must educate your reader about your materials and procedure, giving enough detail so they could replicate study two on their own. Your Paper IV Methods section will thus look a lot like your Paper II, but in Paper IV you will describe BOTH independent variables as well as important dependent variables (especially any new ones you added). I suggest reviewing your Paper II feedback to see if you need more clarity in your methods descriptions, but make sure that your reader is clear about the mechanics of your new 2 X 2 factorial design.

You will also write a new Results section. Since you now have two independent variables and potentially new dependent variables, you will not be able to reuse ANY content from Paper II. Rather, you will write a more complicated results section focusing on a 2 X 2 factorial design here.

Your Discussion section for Paper IV will be a short summary of what you found in that study. Similar to Paper II, you can make some educated guesses about what you found and why you found it, but keep the focus on study two only (in Paper V due at the end of the semester, you will include a more advanced discussion section that looks at both study one and study two, so keep the Paper IV discussion focused only on study two).

2). APA Formatting Purpose

The second purpose of Paper IV is to again teach you proper American Psychological Association (APA) formatting for methods and results. In the instructions below, I tell you how to format your paper using APA style, but this time with a focus on your 2 X 2 factorial ANOVAs. Once again, there are a lot of specific requirements in APA papers (as specific as what to italicize), so pay attention to the instructions below as well as Chapter 14 in your textbook!

3). Writing Purpose

Paper IV is intended to help you figure out how to update a Methods, Results and Discussion section using a 2 X 2 factorial design. This is more complicated than the One Way ANOVA you used in Paper II, but you should still be able to clearly and succinctly tell you readers what you did, how you did it, and what you found. Similar to Paper III, we will give you feedback and help in this paper. You will then be able to revise it for your final paper in the course (Paper V). Thus doing a good job on Paper IV will mean fewer revisions for the final paper.

Note: The plagiarism limit is higher in this paper (up to 65%) since your classmates are doing the same study two design and will have similar results. Don’t go higher than that, though! 65% is the maximum allowed!

Note: You do not need to include any content from Papers I, II, and III here. You can use the same title page, but all we will look at and grade are the methods, results, discussion, and appendix information from Study Two.

Methods

This paper should be fairly easy for you! It is essentially a replication of your Paper II: Methods and Results (Study One) paper, except here you will extend that paper to include your second independent variable as well as any new dependent variables you may have created. You will also use a more complex data analysis process now that you have a 2 X 2 factorial design. Keep in mind that Study Two is different from Study One. It may use some of the same materials, but your descriptions in the methods section should be specific to your Study Two idea. If you reuse some of the same variables, please refer to study one (I encourage it! No need to repeat yourself if you are using identical materials), but if the elements are new make sure to FULLY describe them. The results themselves will be completely different, as the results section will take into account two independent variables, and your brief discussion will similarly be new. Below are some of the points to cover in this paper. I will highlight in purple the new components you should pay attention to for this paper.

1. Title Page: I expect the following format (1 point):

a. Use your headers and title information from your prior Paper III: Literature review. See prior instructions for more info about the title page!

2. Methods Section: I expect the following format (10 points):

a. Write Method at the front of this section, make it bold, and center it.

b. The participants section comes next. The word Participants is bolded and left justified. In this section …

i. As in Paper II, tell me who your participants were (college students, family members, friends) and how many there were. If the number starts a sentence, then spell out the number. “Two-hundred and five participants …”. If it is mid-sentence, then you can use numerals. “There were 205 participants in this study.” Make sure this is for your NEW SAMPLE. This sample will differ from Paper II, so you will have to provide all new demographic data.

ii. Provide frequencies and descriptive statistics for the most relevant demographic characteristics.

1. For some variables, like ethnicity and gender, you only need to provide frequency information (the number of participants who fit that category). “There were 100 men (49%) and 105 women (51%) in the study.” Or “The sample was 49% male (N = 100) and 51% female (N = 105).”

2. Other variables, like age, are continuous variables (rather than categorical), so use descriptive statistics here (the range, mean, and the standard deviation). “Participants ranged from 18 to 77 (M = 24, SD = 3.50).” or “The average age of participants was 24 (SD = 3.50).” By now you should be able to find these on your own, but I will give you a hint: run frequencies and descriptives to get demographic data

c. Materials and Procedure

i. For this section, things are again very flexible. Some studies include the Materials and Procedure in the same section while others break them up into two sections

1. It is a matter of choice which you choose. For me, the more complex the design, the better it is to split them up. In one section I will describe what the materials are; in the next I describe what participants did with those materials (the procedure)

2. Your Paper IV: Study Two Methods, Results, and Discussion is simple enough that I recommend combining them into one overall Materials and Procedure section. Here, you can refer back to your methods section from Paper II. (“We used the same social comparison manipulation as in study one, but here we included only the Upward and Downward conditions”).

ii. Again, the words Materials and Procedure is flush left. In this section …

1. Provide information about your materials and your procedure.

a. I suggest starting with your procedure. Tell your reader what your participants did in the order participants did them. Be specific. Assuming your study is similar to study one, I have the following recommendations (though your study may differ, so take these only as recommendations!):

i. First, talk about informed consent.

ii. Second, talk about the different versions of the survey. Provide enough detail so that your readers know how the four conditions differ. Imagine I need to replicate your design – give me enough detail so I can do so. Also fully describe your new independent variable for study two. For example, my additional IV may be whether participants are forewarned or not about the effects of social comparison. I need to fully describe that new independent variable in the methods for this second study

1. For example, study two MIGHT look upward versus downward conditions as two levels of one IV. However, we might also look at forewarning versus no forewarning as a second IV. This involves four cells: 1) Forewarning with upward posts, 2) Forewarning with downward, 3) No forewarning with upward posts, and 4) No forewarning with downward posts.

2. Make sure you have a clear idea about what your four different conditions look like.

iii. Third, talk about your dependent variables (that is, your survey questions. For these DVs, once again provide enough detail so I know exactly what questions you asked. For example, “Participants provided their gender, age, and race”. For other dependent variables, tell me how the responses were recorded (yes/no, true/false, a scale of 1 to 9, etc.). If you used a scale, note the endpoints. That is, does a 1 mean it is high or is it low? “Participants were asked, ‘How surprising was the outcome?’, and they responded on a scale from 1 (unsurprising) to 10 (surprising).’” Highlight any new DVs you created for this study. For example, I may ask a manipulation check question asking if they were forewarned (“Did you read a warning that social comparison impacts how people make judgments? Yes / No – Pick one.”)

iv. Fourth, make sure to highlight which DVs you analyzed. If there are DVs participants completed but you did not analyze them, feel free to say those DVs were not analyzed.

v. Finally, mention debriefing

d. There is no set minimum or maximum on the length of the methods section, but I would expect at least a page or two as you detail your materials and procedure. Missing important aspects of your IVs and DVs or presenting them in a confused manner will lower your score in this section

e. Once again, make the new information VERY specific so that someone unfamiliar with your study could recreate your survey. If they can’t, you won’t do well!

3. Results Section: I expect the following format (10 points):

a. The results are the hardest part of this paper, so again, pay close attention to your lab presentation and book

b. First, write Results at the top of this section and center it boldface. This section comes directly at the end of the methods section, so the results section DOES NOT start on its own page.

c. For this assignment, include statistics about the most important variables in your study. For Paper IV: Study Two Methods, Results, and Discussion, your study design should be more complex than your study one. You are dealing with a factorial design now (that is, you have more than one IV), such as a 2 X 2 or even a 2 X 3 study. Let me walk you through the guidelines for a 2 X 2 design.

i. First, run manipulation checks using at least one of your dependent variables (a dependent variable that assesses whether the independent variable manipulation worked). This analysis will differ depending on whether your dependent variable is nominal or interval / ratio

1. Nominal (categorical) dependent variable: IF you have a nominal DV (“Did you see upward or downward posts?” or “Did you see a warning or no warning?”), you can run a chi square test.

2. Interval / ratio dependent variable: IF you have interval or ratio dependent variable (they have scales ranging from low to high), you can run a t-Test manipulation check (if you only have two levels to the IV) or an ANOVA (if you have three or more levels). For example, if I manipulated anger by giving half of the participants a hard time about their intelligence before they looked at the Facebook posts, I might ask “On a scale of 1 to 9, how angry were you?” and then run a t-Test on the dependent variable anger to see if my manipulation did in fact work. That is, given two levels for my independent variable (angry versus control), they should rate themselves as more angry in the condition where I questioned their intelligence compared to a control condition

3. Note: I suspect you will have a nominal manipulation check question, so the chi square will be more likely. Also note that the manipulation check may have nothing to do with Pat Masters or self-impressions – it might be simply recall of the type of posts or recall of a warning.

ii. Second, run two 2 X 2 ANOVAs. Recall that this is univariate analysis of variance, but rather than focusing on one independent variable (like the One Way ANOVA), a 2 X 2 ANOVA looks at two different independent variables within the same test. YOUR job is to run two different 2 X 2 ANOVAs. Your first 2 X 2 ANOVA will focus on a dependent variable of your choice while the second 2 X 2 ANOVA will look at a different dependent variable. For EACH factorial ANOVA, you will report at least three F tests (an F for the main effect of IV #1, an F for the main effect of IV #2, and an F for the interaction. If your interaction is significant, then you may actually report additional F tests for each DV with the simple effects tests! I know this gets complex, so let’s break it down a bit and focus on just one 2 X 2 ANOVA. This test will yield two main effects and one interaction…

1. Main Effect #1 (IV #1): There will be a main effect in the ANOVA table for the first IV. Provide the degrees of freedom, F value, and p value. Regardless of whether it is significant, I want you to provide the means and standard deviation for both levels of the IV. For example (and ONLY as an example, since YOUR study independent variables will differ and I don’t know what your lab chose), imagine your first IV is “Warning”. Your main effect write up for this EXAMPLE of warning will look like this …

a. “Using forewarning (warned versus not warned) and condition (upward versus downward) as our IVs and the rating of “I feel good about myself” as our DV, there was no main effect for forewarning, F(1, 189) = 1.97, p > .05. Participants did not differ in their feelings in the warned (M = 2.35, SD = 1.21) versus not warned (M = 2.21, SD = 0.87) conditions.”

Warning IV Main Effect
Warned (M = 2.35) Not Warned (M = 2.21)

2. Main Effect #3 (IV #2): There will be a main effect in the ANOVA table for the second IV. Again, provide the F test. Regardless of significance, give the means and standard deviations for both levels of the IV. (This comes in the same paragraph as the main effect for warning)

a. “There was, however, a significant photo social comparison condition main effect, F( 1, 189) = 3.42, p < .05. Participants rated themselves as feeling less good in the upward condition (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21) than participants in the downward condition (M = 5.24, SD = 0.89).”

Social Comparison Condition Main Effect
Upward (M = 2.56) Downward (M = 5.24)

3. Interaction (IV #1 X IV #2): Finally, there will be an interaction for IV 1 X IV 2. Provide the initial interaction F test.

a. Interaction (either significant or not!). That is:

i. “The interaction was not significant, F(1, 187) = 1.22, p > .05.”

ii. “The main effects were qualified by a significant Warning X Condition interaction, F(1, 187) = 6.61, p < .05.”

b. IF the interaction is not significant (e.g. p > .05), then just list the means and tell me they don’t differ. “This implies that participants in the upward and unwarned condition (M = 2.76, SD = 1.27), the upward and warned condition (M = 2.21, SD = 1.90), the downward and unwarned condition (M = 2.72, SD = 2.87), and the downward and warned condition (M = 2.78, SD = 3.45) did not differ from each other.”

c. However, IF there is a significant interaction, there are four more F tests you need to run (“simple effects” tests). This one gets complicated, but I’ll show you an example write-up (normally, this can all go in the same paragraph):

i. First, simple effects showed that upward participants rated themselves as feeling less good in the unwarned condition (M = 2.76, SD = 1.27) than upward participants in the warned condition (M = 5.21, SD = 1.90), F(2, 95) = 6.24, p < .05.

ii. Second, simple effects showed that downward participants did not differ in their ratings of how good they feel in the warning condition (M = 5.78, SD = 3.45) and no warning condition (M = 5.72, SD = 2.87), F(2, 93) = 1.13, p > .05.

iii. Third, for participants who were warned, simple effect tests showed that participants did not differ in their ratings of feeling good between the upward condition (M = 5.21, SD = 1.27) and downward condition (M = 5.78, SD = 3.45), F(2, 95) = 1.31, p > .05.

iv. Fourth, for participants in the no warning condition, simple effect tests showed that participants felt less good in the upward condition (M = 2.67, SD = 1.90) than unwarned participants in downward condition (M = 5.72, SD = 2.87), F(2, 95) = 3.11, p < .05.

Warning Social Comparison Condition
Upward Downward
Warned Upward Warned (M = 5.21) Downward Warned (M = 5.78)
Not Warned Upward Not Warned (M = 2.76) Downward Not Warned (M = 5.72)

v. In general, this shows that participants themselves as feeling less good about themselves only in the upward comparison condition that lacked a warning. For both downward conditions (comparing to someone worse off) and the upward condition that include a warning about social comparison, participants tended to feel good about themselves.

4. Again, the warning is an EXAMPLE here. Your second independent variable will differ.

iii. Please note that you might run a lot of statistical tests for one DV (like the original F test followed-up with simple effects tests). This still only counts as one DV. You need to look at three DVs total (one for the manipulation check and then two additional impression DVs), so you might have as many as 11 or so statistical tests in this section.

d. Like the methods section, there is no page minimum or maximum for the results section, though I would expect it to be at least a paragraph or two for each dependent variable

4. Discussion Section (2 points)

a. In a short paragraph or two, write a brief discussion of your results. Tell me if you did or did not support your hypotheses. In this section, do NOT go into detail about the statistics. If I need that information, I’ll just look at your results section. Here, I just want a plain English summary of what you found. Something like …

i. Overall, these results indicate that participants who compare themselves to someone worse off than them or warning participants about the impact of social comparison decreases participants’ likelihood of feeling bad about themselves.

5. References are not required for this paper

6. Appendices: Study Two (4 points)

a. I want to make sure you are including the correct numbers in your results section, so I want you to include all relevant SPSS tables for each of your analyses in a series of appendices. You can include these as appendices A, B, C, and D for study two, but I actually recommend naming them E, F, G, and H since you have A, B, C, and D from study one already. That way, when you get to Paper V, you’ll have all eight appendices in alphabetical order A through H

i. Appendix E: Demographic Information Study Two

ii. Appendix F: Chi Square (or other Manipulation Check)

1. Make sure to include a table for your manipulation check. If you do a chi square for a nominal variable, this will include the cross-tabulation table and the chi square table. Or, if you do a t-Test or ANOVA, this will include the descriptive statistics as well as the t-Test table itself (or the ANOVA table itself)

iii. Appendix G: first dependent variable (First 2 X 2 ANOVA)

1. Make sure to include your descriptive statistics table and your Tests of Between Subject Effects table. If your interaction is not significant, you’re done. If it is significant, normally you would run simple effects follow up tests. You still need to run them, but for purposes of this appendix all I need to see is the original ANOVA table and the original descriptive table.

iv. Appendix H: Second dependent variable (Second 2 X 2 ANOVA)

1. This is the same as the second dependent variable above, but for a different dependent variable

b. In the end, I expect four appendices for study two (one for demographics, one for a chi square/t-Test and one for each 2 X 2 ANOVA).

c. Appendices will come at the end of the paper

7. Overall writing quality (3 points)

a. Make sure you check your paper for proper spelling and grammar. The FIU writing center is available if you want someone to look over your paper (an extra eye is always good!) and give you advice. I highly recommend them, as writing quality will become even more important on future papers.

Other Guidelines for Paper IV: Study Two Methods, Results, and Discussion

 

1. 1). Page size is 8 1/2 X 11” with all 4 margins set at one inch on all sides. You must use a Times New Roman 12-point font and double space all sentences/paragraphs in the paper.

1. 2). PLEASE use a spell checker to avoid unnecessary errors. Proofread everything you write. I actually recommend reading some sentences aloud to see if they flow well, or getting family or friends to read your work.

1. Below is a write up for the significant interaction for the 2 X 2 ANOVA. Here, I just put it all in one paragraph, as it would appear in a results section (double space YOUR section, though). Notice there are 7 F tests for this significant 2 X 2 interaction.

Using forewarning (warned versus not warned) and condition (upward versus downward) as our IVs and the rating of “I feel good about myself” as our DV, there was no main effect for forewarning, F(1, 189) = 1.97, p > .05. Participants did not differ in their feelings in the warned (M = 2.35, SD = 1.21) versus not warned (M = 2.21, SD = 0.87) conditions. There was, however, a significant photo social comparison condition main effect, F( 1, 189) = 3.42, p < .05. Participants rated themselves as feeling less good in the upward condition (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21) than participants in the downward condition (M = 5.24, SD = 0.89). The main effects were qualified by a significant Warning X Condition interaction, F(1, 187) = 6.61, p < .05. First, simple effects showed that upward participants rated themselves as feeling less good in the unwarned condition (M = 2.76, SD = 1.27) than upward participants in the warned condition (M = 5.21, SD = 1.90), F(2, 95) = 6.24, p < .05. Second, simple effects showed that downward participants did not differ in their ratings of how good they feel in the warning condition (M = 5.78, SD = 3.45) and no warning condition (M = 5.72, SD = 2.87), F(2, 93) = 1.13, p > .05. Third, for participants who were warned, simple effect tests showed that participants did not differ in their ratings of feeling good between the upward condition (M = 5.21, SD = 1.27) and downward condition (M = 5.78, SD = 3.45), F(2, 95) = 1.31, p > .05. Fourth, for participants in the no warning condition, simple effect tests showed that participants felt less good in the upward condition (M = 2.67, SD = 1.90) than unwarned participants in downward condition (M = 5.72, SD = 2.87), F(2, 95) = 3.11, p < .05.

· Finally, go look at the supporting documents for this paper. There is a checklist, a grade rubric, and an example paper. All will give you more information about what we are specifically looking for as well as a visual example of how to put it all together. Good luck!

 
Do you need a similar assignment done for you from scratch? We have qualified writers to help you. We assure you an A+ quality paper that is free from plagiarism. Order now for an Amazing Discount!
Use Discount Code "Newclient" for a 15% Discount!

NB: We do not resell papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.