Recent orders
Instructions for Paper III Study Two Literature Review (Worth 35
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 Terror Management Theory 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 like journal articles you have probably read before 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 Terror Management Theory manipulation, using some of the same independent variable (Mortality Salience versus Dental Pain) and similar dependent variables (e.g. Number of word-fragments completed with death-related words) 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 five references (minimum) for this second independent variable, hopefully finding sources that show how you can build a bridge between the two studies. 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?”
You should end your literature review by noting your specific hypotheses for the study. 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!
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 predictions.
The good news is that we are continuing with our topic of the Terror Management Theory 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 Mortality Salience manipulation from study one. 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 Paper I and Paper II.
Title Page: I expect the following format (1 point):
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).
You must have a header and page numbers on each page.
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.
The header goes at the top of the paper and it is left justified.
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
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
Insert a page number as well. While the header is flush left, the page number is flush right.
Want an example header? Look at the title page of these instructions! You can use other titles depending on your own preferences (e.g. TERROR MANAGEMENT THEORY; MORTALITY SALIENCE; DEATH AND PROGRESS; PRIMING DEATH; etc.).
Your Title should be midway up the page, with your name (First Last) and the name of your institution (FIU) beneath the title. For this class, only your own name will go on this paper. Double space everything!
You can also refer to Chapter 14 in your textbook
Abstract, Graphs, and Tables? These are optional – Ask your lab instructor about them:
You DO NOT need an abstract for Paper III: Study Two Literature Review and you DO NOT need a table or figure. You can include them if you want, but they will not be graded and they will not factor into the length of the paper. Check with your lab instructor to see if they prefer to see abstracts and tables.
Literature Review Study One (3 points)
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.
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.
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!
Methods Study One (3 points)
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.
Again, revise, revise, revise or risk losing all points in this section
Results Study One (3 points)
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.
Do I need to mention revise?
Discussion Study One (1 point)
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.
One word – revise!
Literature Review Study Two (10 points)
APA formatting for the first page of your literature review
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.
APA formatted citations for the literature review
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:
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 blackboard 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).
Referring to your first study does not count as a reference.
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
DO NOT plagiarize. You will turn this in on blackboard, 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
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.
Content-based requirements for your study two literature review
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.
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.
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.
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 Terror Management Theory 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.
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 …
give a general overview of your research question
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.
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).
Citations: I expect the following format (4 points)
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)
References: I expect the following format (5 points):
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.
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
For references, make sure you:
use alphabetical ordering (start with the last name of the first author)
use the authors’ last names but only the initials of their first/middle name
give the date in parentheses – e.g. (2007).
italicize the name of the journal article
give the volume number, also in italics
give the page numbers (not italicized) for articles
provide the doi (digital object identifier) if present (not italicized)
Appendices: I expect the following format (1 point)
Copy and paste from Paper II. This should be an easy point! Just make sure the appendices go AFTER the references page
Appendix A: Include your tables for age, gender, and ethnicity.
Appendix B: Include your tables for your chi square and the crosstabs
Appendix C: Include your tables for your first DV
Appendix D: Include your tables for you second DV
Overall writing quality (4 points)
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). 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.
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
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:
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).
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…”)
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!
You “checklist” for Paper III is on the next page
Checklist – Paper III: Study Two Literature Review
Use the check sheet below to make sure your paper is the best it can be! Make sure you answer “Yes” to all questions before submitting your paper! Some sections duplicate checklists from prior papers while those in purple focus on new Study Two Literature Review elements.
General Paper Format (This section is identical to the Papers I and II Checklists)
Yes No Is everything in your paper (including headers, the main body of your mini-literature review, and your references) in 12 point Times New Roman font?
Is everything in your paper double spaced, including references (here I mean the spacing above and below each line, not the spaces following a period)?
Do you have one inch margins on all sides of the paper (one inch from the top of the page, one inch from the bottom, and one inch from each side)
Are the first lines of all paragraphs indented roughly ½ inch?
Are your paragraphs aligned left? (That is, text should be flush left, with lines lining up on the left of the page, but text should NOT line up on the right side of the page – it should look ragged)
Do you need help figuring out how to configure a word document in APA format (inserting headers, page numbers, proper indents, etc.)? If YES, I highly recommend watching this video which walks you through setting up an APA formatted paper! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pbUoNa5tyY
Title page (This section is identical to the Papers I and II Checklists)
Yes No Header
Do you have the phrase “Running head” in your header (with a lower case h)?
Is the rest of your Running head title in ALL CAPS?
Is your Running head in 12 point Times New Roman font?
Do you have a page number (1) that is flush right (also in 12 point Times New Roman font)?
Title / Name / Institution
Is your title 12 words or less (as recommended by the APA)?
Do all title words with four letters or more start with a capital letter?
Are your name and institution correct?
Are your title, name, and institution elements centered and in 12 point Times New Roman font?
Literature Review Study One (This section is nearly identical to Paper I)
Yes No Title for the literature review
Do you have the identical title you used on the title page rewritten at the top of your literature review?
Is this title centered?
Does your literature review start on page 2?
Main body of the literature review
Does your literature review start broadly, giving a brief overview of the study one to come?
Does your literature review start to narrow down toward your hypotheses?
Do your paragraphs transition from one to the next? (That is, avoid simply listing studies you read. Tie them together. How does Study A in paragraph A relate to Study B in paragraph B?)
Does your paper end in your study one hypotheses? (More specifically, you should have a hypothesis for your main dependent variables).
Citations for the literature review
Did you cite a minimum of 5 references (all peer-reviewed resources)? Note that you can give a lot of detail for some references but only a sentence or two for others. How much detail you go into depends on how important the article is in helping your support your hypotheses.
1.a If NO, do your citations between the study one and study two literature reviews add up to ten or more references?
Are your citations in APA format (That is, ONLY the last name of the author(s) and date of publication)? Note that you will NOT include first names, initials, or the title of the article the authors wrote when citing. That information belongs in the references pages only
If you quoted, did you provide a page number for the direct quote?
If you paraphrased in any way, did you cite the source of that information?
Methods Section Study One (This section is identical to Paper II – Methods Study One)
Yes No Title for the methods section
Is the word “Methods” centered and in bold? (Note: No page break needed)
Yes No Participants
Do you have the word “Participants” flush left and in bold, right below the word “Methods”?
Did you list out your demographic characteristics, including gender, age, and ethnicity / race?
Did you provide the descriptive statistics for (means and standard deviations) for age and italicize the letters M and SD?
Did you provide frequencies for gender and ethnicity/race and italicize the N?
Did you use the brand new participant set from study two and NOT the set from study one?
Materials and Procedure
Did you mention informed consent?
Did you thoroughly describe your two independent variable in enough depth and detail that another researcher could duplicate your materials?
Did you give your IVs names that matches up with the name you refer to in the results section?
Did you describe all of your most relevant dependent variables, noting the scales you used (e.g. “Yes / No”, “A scale ranging from 1 (not at all likely) to 9 (very likely))” for EACH of your DVs?
Did you fully describe what participants went through in the study, noting the order in which they received study materials (e.g. first informed consent, then IVs, DVs, and debriefing)?
Results Section Study One (This section is identical to Paper II – Results Study One)
Yes No Results
Do you have the word “Results” centered and in bold, immediately following the methods section?
Did you analyze at least three different dependent variables, including one chi square and at least one ANOVA?
Did you mention all of the IVs and the DV by name when talking about your analysis?
Did you include means and standard deviations within parentheses for each level of your independent variable?
If your ANOVA was significant, did you include post hoc tests?
Did you italicize the letters F, t, p, M, SD, and X2 (where appropriate)?
Discussion Section Study One (This section is identical to Paper II – Discussion Study One)
Yes No Do you have the word “Discussion” centered and in bold, immediately following the results section?
Did you remind your reader of your hypothesis?
Did you mention whether you supported or did not support your hypothesis?
Literature Review Study Two (This section is completely new)
Yes No Title for the literature review
Do you have some title that denotes the start of study two (e.g. something as simple as “Study Two”)?
Is this title centered?
Does your literature review start immediately after the study one discussion (there should be no page break unless it occurs naturally)
Main body of the literature review
Does your new literature review start broadly with your second IV, giving a brief overview of what it entails?
Does your literature review start to narrow down toward your study two hypotheses?
Do your paragraphs transition from one to the next? (That is, avoid simply listing studies you read. Tie them together. How does Study A in paragraph A relate to Study B in paragraph B?)
Do you tie in your new IV with your original study one IV, showing how they might interact?
Does your paper end in your study two hypotheses? (More specifically, you should have a hypothesis for your main dependent variables).
Citations for the literature review
Did you cite an additional 5 references (three of which MUST be peer-reviewed resources)? Note that you can give a lot of detail for some references but only a sentence or two for others. How much detail you go into depends on how important the article is in helping your support your hypotheses.
1.a If NO, do your citations between the study one and study two literature reviews add up to ten or more references? If yes, you are good here!
Are your citations in APA format (That is, ONLY the last name of the author(s) and date of publication)? Note that you will NOT include first names, initials, or the title of the article the authors wrote when citing. That information belongs in the references pages only
If you quoted, did you provide a page number for the direct quote?
If you paraphrased in any way, did you cite the source of that information?
References Page (This section is similar to Paper I, but with 10 references)
Yes No Title for the references page
Do references start on their own page?
Is the word “References” centered?
References – Make sure these are in APA format!
Are references listed in alphabetical order (starting with the last name of the first author listed) for all 10 articles you referenced?
Are all citations from the literature review referenced?
Is the first line of the reference flush left while subsequent lines are indented (Note: Use the ruler function for this. DO NOT simply tab)?
Did you use the “&” symbol when listing more than one author name?
Did you include the date of publication
For article references, is the article title (which is not italicized) with only the first word and proper names starting with a capital letter?
For article references, is the name of the journal present with all major words starting with a capital letter (and this journal title is italicized)?
For article references, is the volume number italicized
For article references, are the page numbers present (not italicized)
For article references, is the DOI present
Appendix Section – Study One (Similar to Paper II)
Yes No Do you have the word “Appendix” centered on each Appendix page, followed by a description of the appendix content, immediately following the results section?
In Appendix A (Demographics), do you have SPSS tables for gender, ethnicity, and age? (Note: Age might be in a ge
Instructions for Paper II Study One Methods, Results, and Discussion (Worth 35 Points)
Instructions for Paper II: Study One Methods, Results, and Discussion (Worth 35 Points)
Ryan J. Winter
Florida International University
Purpose of Paper II: Study One Methods, Results, and Discussion
1). Psychological Purpose
The psychological purpose behind Paper II is to make sure you can tell your reader what you did on your study, how you did it, and what you found. By now you have read several empirical studies in psychology, and you should be familiar with the Methods, Results, and Discussion sections. Now is your chance to write Methods, Results and Discussion!
Like those prior studies you looked at in Paper I, you will provide information about your participants, materials, and procedure in your Methods section. Your participant section goes first, and it includes descriptive statistics about your sample (means and standard deviations for age as well as percentages for gender and race/ethnicity). Your materials and procedure sections include information about what you did and how you did it. You should write this section for an audience who is unfamiliar with your specific study, but assume that they do know research methods. Thus educate your reader about your materials and procedure, giving enough detail so they could replicate the study. This includes explicitly describing your independent and dependent variables and talking about how you presented those variables to your participants. My suggestion is to look over the articles you summarized in Paper I and see how they wrote their Methods. This will give you a good idea regarding the level of depth and detail you need in your own Methods section.
Your Results section follows. The purpose of this section is to make sure you can show how you analyzed the data and describe what you found. You will have a lot of help in this section from your lab instructors.
Finally, I want you to include a short description of your findings. Tell me if you supported or did not support your hypotheses and explain why you got those results (you can actually speculate here if you like, but make it an “educated” speculation!)
2). APA Formatting Purpose
The second purpose of Paper II: Methods, Results and Discussion is to once again teach you proper American Psychological Association (APA) formatting for these sections. 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 (as specific as what to italicize), so pay attention to the instructions below as well as Chapter 14 in your textbook!
3). Writing Purpose
Finally, this paper is intended to help you figure out how to write a Methods, Results, and Discussion section. Many students find statistics daunting, but my hope here is that writing this paper will help you understand both the logic and format of statistics in results sections. We will once again give you a lot of feedback and help in this paper, which you help you when you write Papers IV and V later in the course. Make sure that you write this for an audience familiar with APA methods and results, but also for someone who needs you to tell them what you found.
Note: The plagiarism limit is higher in this paper (up to 65%) since your classmates are doing the same design. Don’t go higher than that, though! 65% is the maximum allowed!
Sorry for the length of the instructions! They are long, but take it one section at a time and you will get all of the content you need in your paper and get a great grade!
Methods
Title Page: I expect the following format (1 point):
The title page for your Paper II is identical to the one you used for Paper I: Literature Review Study One. For proper APA formatting, I suggest you either copy your title page from Paper I or review the title page instructions I gave you in Paper I.
Abstract, Graphs, and Tables? These are optional
You DO NOT need an abstract for Paper II: Methods, Results, and Discussion (Study One), and you DO NOT need a table or figure. You can choose to include them if you want, but they will not be graded. Check with your instructor to see if they prefer to see abstracts and tables. It may give you good practice on learning how to do them if you include them, though!
Methods Section: I expect the following format (15 points):
For this paper, the methods section starts on page 2.
Write Method at the top of this page, make it bold, and center it (see the top of this page as an example!)
The participants section comes next. The word Participants is bolded and left justified. In this section …
Tell me who your participants were (college students, family members, friends?) and how many there were.
Note: If a number starts a sentence, then spell out the number. That is, “Two-hundred and five participants participated in this study.”
If a number is mid-sentence, you can use numerals. “There were 205 participants in this study.”
Keep numbers consistent, though. If you spell them out at the start of the sentence, carry that through and spell out other numbers in the sentence.
For statistics, always use numbers (for the mean, SD, %, etc.)
Provide frequencies and descriptive statistics for relevant demographics.
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).”
Other variables—like age—are continuous (rather than categorical), so use descriptive statistics here (the range, mean, and the standard deviation). “Participants ranged in age from 18 to 77 (M = 24, SD = 3.50).” or “The average age of participants was 24 (SD = 3.50).” Your TA can help you find the mean and standard deviation for this assignment, though information is also available in a lab powerpoint.
Make sure to italicize the N, M, and SD (the letters, not the numbers)
Materials and Procedure
For this section, things are flexible. Some studies include Materials and Procedure in the same section while others break them up into two sections. This is a matter of choice.
In general, the more complex the design, the better it is to split up the methods and results. In one section, the author may describe the materials; in the next, they describe what participants did with those materials (the procedure). This is one option for you. However …
However, your “Paper II: Methods, Results and Discussion (Study One)” is simple enough that I strongly recommend combining them into one overall Materials and Procedure section.
Again, the words Materials and Procedure are flush left. In this section …
Provide information about your materials and your procedure.
I suggest starting with your procedure. Tell your reader what your participants did in the order participants did them. Be specific here. I have the following recommendations:
First, talk about the oral informed consent procedure.
Second, talk about the three versions of the Terror Management Theory questionnaire. Provide enough detail so that your readers know how the three conditions differ. I need to able to replicate your design, so give me enough detail so I can do so. (Hint: Copy and paste the various questions or refer the reader to an appendix that has those materials!)
Third, talk about your dependent variables (that is, your survey questions. For these dependent variables, 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 6, 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 frustrating was this task?’, and they responded on a scale from 1 (very frustrating) to 9 (not at all frustrating).’” Your study has a few really important DVs (including the number of word fragments completed with a death-related word as well as several DVs about the essay). For these DVs, you once again need to tell me what they are specifically!
Fourth, make sure to highlight which specific DVs you analyzed. If there are DVs participants completed but you did not analyze it, feel free to say those DVs were not analyzed, but if you analyze them in the results section, then be specific about them in the methods section.
Finally, mention debriefing
There is no set minimum or maximum on the length of the methods section, but I would expect at least a page or two (though probably more. After all, your own research script took up several pages – you should provide a similar level of depth and detail in your methods section!). Missing important aspects of your IVs and DVs or presenting them in a confused manner will lower your score in this section.
Remember, make sure that another researcher can replicate your study based on your methods section. If they can’t, then you may not have enough detail!
Results Section: I expect the following format (10 points):
The results are the hardest part of this paper, and your lab powerpoints will help you with this part of the paper (also refer to the crash course statistics quizzes, which walk you through similar analyses!).
First, write Results at the top of this section, center it, and use boldface. This section comes directly at the end of the methods section, so the results section DOES NOT start on its own page.
For this assignment, include statistics about the most important variables in your study, including your IV (Terror Management Theory – Mortality Salience, Dental Pain, and College) and the DVs you feel are most important to your hypotheses (again, I suggests the word-fragment question (total # of death-related words each participant completed), as well as any other question(s) as you see fit (You should look at one DV related to the essay). Note that some instructors may not do this Terror Management Theory study at all, but the results section should follow the same guidelines regardless of your study design.
For this paper, you must run at least three different analyses on three different dependent variables. One must be a chi square for the question asking participants which to recall which essay they wrote in Part e (our manipulation check). At least one of the remaining two analyses must be a One Way ANOVA (I actually recommend that both of your last two analyses focus on One Way ANOVAs). The third analysis can be either an ANOVA or a t-Test. Since all of the essay-based questions are scaled 1 to 6, I recommend running ANOVAs on at least one of those dependent variables. However, you should also run an ANOVA on the total number of death-related words. Now, you could run an ANOVA on the number of word fragments and a t-Test on the number of word fragments, but because it is the same DV, that only counts as one DV. We count the number of DVs you analyze – NOT the number of tests you run!
Chi square: Your first analysis will be a chi square, which you use if your DV is categorical (yes / no; yes / no / maybe; male / female, or … in our case, we have our Mortality Salience, Dental Pain, or College multiple-choice options in the question in Part e). So let’s discuss the chi square, which does not look at means but rather counts how many responses there are compared to how many you would expect.
Consider DV e) on your questionnaire – “Without looking back, tell me whether the open-ended question you completed on page one asked you to write about death, dental pain, or getting into college (Mark one with an X).” Here, you can run a chi square looking at the frequencies of the three answer options
We are interested in the chi square (χ2) and p value. We also provide percentages for each of our groups (rather than means and SD).
“Using the essay condition as our independent variable (MS, Dental Pain, or College) and the essay participants recalled writing as the dependent variable, we saw a significant effect, χ2(4) = 68.49, p < .001. Most participants in the MS condition recalled writing about death (98%); most participants in Dental Pain condition recalled writing about dental pain (96%); and most participants in college condition recalled writing about college (90%). This indicates that participants saw our manipulation as intended.”
Make sure to italicize the χ and p
ANOVA: Since you have a condition independent variable with three levels (e.g. MS, DP, or College), the most appropriate test is a One-Way ANOVA if your DV is scaled (like a 0 to 6 scale or a 1 to 6 scale). Your lab and lecture powerpoints show you how to conduct an ANOVA, but there are some guidelines I want to give you about how to write your results. Below, I am going to walk you through one analysis specific to this paper. However, keep in mind that you can run ANOVAs on several different DVs.
First, there are several dependent variables to choose from. For my example analysis below, I want to focus on Part c in your survey (the word-fragment question). Since this is a scaled variable that has a zero point (they could find zero death-related words or up to six), it is a ratio scale, which is perfect for an ANOVA. (Other questions we can look at are all of those ranging from 1 to 6 in Part d).
Second, given that this study has one IV with three levels and one DV that is on a continuous (ratio or interval) scale, a One-Way ANOVA is the best test to use to see if there are significant differences among the levels. We look first at the ANOVA table (or F table) and focus on the between subject factor. We note the degrees of freedom, the F value itself, and the p value. (We’ll get into two-way ANOVAs later in this course, but here we only have one independent variable, so it is a one-way ANOVA. Yes, we have three levels to our IV, but it is still only one IV).
If the p value is significant (less than .05), we have one more step to take. Since this is a three level IV, we need to compare mean A to mean B, mean A to mean C, and mean B to mean C. We do this using a post hoc test (try using Tukey!). That will tell us which of the means differ significantly. You then write up the results (Note: I completely made up the data below, so don’t copy the numbers!) …
“Using the essay condition (MS v. DP v. College) as our independent variable and how many death-related words the participant found as the dependent variable, we found a significant condition effect, F(2, 203) = 4.32, p < .05. Tukey post hoc tests showed that participants found more death-related words in the mortality salience condition (M = 4.56, SD = 1.21) than participants in both the dental pain (M = 2.24, SD = 0.89) and college (M = 2.23, SD = 0.77) conditions. The dental pain and college conditions, however, did not differ. This supports our hypothesis that participants who are death-aware are more likely to complete word fragments with death-related words than those who are thinking about dental pain or college.”
Note there are three possible outcomes: NONE of the three conditions differ (A = B = C). ALL differ from each other (A ≠ B ≠ C). One differs from the other two, but those other two do not differ (A ≠ B = C)
Also note that participants in the dental pain and college conditions DID find some death-related words. This is not a problem. Our prediction was that MS participants would find more death-related words, not that dental pain and college participants would find zero words!
Make sure to italicize the F, p, M, and SD (as in the example)
Pretty simple, right! I suggest going back and doing this same procedure for at least one additional scaled DV (like question 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5).
However, if you choose you can do a t-Test on one of those other dependent variables as well. Here’s how:
t-Test: If you have only two levels to your IV (e.g. MS or Dental Pain only), things are even more simple.
Here, you will run a t-Test (a t-Test looks at differences between only two groups). Again, your lab presentations tell you how to run this, but you can do it on your own as well (you can even run this if your study originally has three levels to the IV – when you go into the t-Test menu in SPSS, choose “define groups” and select 1 and 3 (MS = 1 and Dental Pain = 2). This will let you look at two of the groups! You could also select “2 and 3” or “1 and 3” where the College condition = 3).
Rather than an F value, we will look at the t value in the t-Test data output. Here, we have one number for the degree of freedom, we have the t value, and we have the p value.
The nice thing about a t-Test is that since you only have two groups, you do not need a post hoc test like Tukey (you only need that if you have to compare three means. Here, we only have two means, so we can just look at them and see which one is higher and which is lower when our t-Test is significant). Then just write it up …
“Using the essay condition (MS v. Dental Pain) as our independent variable and the number of death-related words participants found as our dependent variable, we found a significant condition effect, t(203) = 8.12, p < .05. Participants found more death-related words in the mortality salience condition (M = 5.56, SD = 1.21) than participants in the dental pain condition (M = 2.23, SD = 0.77).”
Repeat for other dependent variables
Make sure to italicize the t, p, M , and SD (as in the example)
Statistics order recommendation: For this paper, start your results section with the chi square (your manipulation check). Then talk about your main analyses (The word-fragment question as well as at least one essay-based dependent variable). Make sure the analyses line up with your hypotheses.
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
Appendices (4 points)
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.
Appendix A: Include your tables for age, gender, and ethnicity.
Appendix B: Include your tables for your chi square and the crosstabs
Appendix C: Include your tables for your first DV (This must be an ANOVA table, the descriptive statistics table for that ANOVA, and the post hoc test whether it is significant or not)
Appendix D: Include your tables for you second DV (Although I prefer a second ANOVA like iii. above, you could include t-Test tables here. This would involve both the descriptives for the t-Test and the t-Test output itself
Hint: The best way to get these tables is to copy them directly from SPSS. In the SPSS output, right click on the table, copy it, and then paste it into your appendix. Another alternative is to use a “snipping” tool (search “snipping tool” in Microsoft Word to find it). You can highlight an area on any computer page and save it as a picture. Copy the picture and paste it into your appendix. Easy!Discussion Study One (2 points)
In this section, tell me about your findings and if they did or did not support your results. It might help to refer back to your hypotheses “We expected to find A but instead found B” or “We expected to find A and our results supported this hypothesis.” Explain using plain English why you think your study turned out the way it did.
IMPORTANT – Do NOT give me statistics again here. I can find those in your results section. Here, all I want is a plain English summary of your findings.
Also, don’t give me results for a DV if you did not run an analysis on that DV. Only tell me about the results you actually looked at in the results section.
There is no length requirement for this section, but I recommend at least four or five sentences
Overall writing quality (3 points)
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. I also recommend visiting the FIU Research Methods Help Center if you need additional guidance with writing or statistical analyses. Also, remember to upload this paper through the Pearson writer before uploading to blackboard!
Other Guidelines for Paper II – Methods and Results (Study One)
1). Page size is 8 1/2 X 11” with all 4 margins should be one inch. You must use a 12-point font in Times New Roman.
2). PLEASE use a spell checker and/or Pearson Writer 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.
Use the Paper II Checklist on the next page before you turn in your paper to make sure it is the best paper you can write!
Checklist – Paper II: Study One Methods, Results, and Discussion
Use the check sheet below to make sure your paper is the best it can be! Make sure you answer “Yes” to all questions before submitting your paper! The first two sections duplicate the Paper I checklist, but those elements in purple are unique to you Methods / Results / Discussion Paper II
General Paper Format (This section is identical to the Paper I Checklist)
Yes No Is everything in your paper (including headers, the main body of your mini-literature review, and your references) in 12 point Times New Roman font?
Is everything in your paper double spaced, including references (here I mean the spacing above and below each line, not the spaces following a period)?
Do you have one inch margins on all sides of the paper (one inch from the top of the page, one inch from the bottom, and one inch from each side)
Are the first lines of all paragraphs indented another ½ inch (or 1 ½ inches from the page edge)?
Are your paragraphs aligned left? (That is, text should be flush left, with lines lining up on the left of the page, but text should NOT line up on the right side of the page – it should look ragged)
Do you need help figuring out how to configure a word document in APA format (inserting headers, page numbers, proper indents, etc.)? If YES or NO, I highly recommend watching this video which walks you through setting up an APA formatted paper! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pbUoNa5tyY
Title page (This section is identical to the Paper I Checklist)
Yes No Header
Do you have the phrase “Running head” in your header (with a lower case h)?
Is the rest of your Running head title in ALL CAPS?
Is your Running head in 12 point Times New Roman font?
Do you have a page number that is flush right (also in 12 point Times New Roman font)?
Title / Name / Institution
Is your title 12 words or less (as recommended by the APA)?
Do all title words with four letters or more start with a capital letter?
Are your name and institution correct?
Are your title, name, and institution elements centered and in 12 point Times New Roman font?
Methods Section (New Information in this section)
Yes No Header
Is your header title present and identical to your header title on the title page?
Is your header title in ALL CAPS and 12 point Times New Roman font?
Does your header on this second page omit the phrase “Running head”
Do you have a page number starting on page 2
Title for the methods section
Is the word “Methods” centered and in bold at the top of your methods page?
Methods Section Continued
Yes No Participants
Do you have the word “Participants” flush left and in bold, right below the word “Methods”?
Did you list out your demographic characteristics, including gender, age, and ethnicity / race?
Did you provide the descriptive statistics for (means and standard deviations) for age and italicize the letters M and SD?
Did you provide frequencies for gender and ethnicity/race and italicize the N?
Materials and Procedure
Did you mention informed consent?
Did you thoroughly describe your independent variable in enough depth and detail that another researcher could duplicate your materials?
Did you give this IV a name that matches up with the name you refer to in the results section?
Did you describe all of your most relevant dependent variables, noting the scales you used (e.g. “Yes / No”, “A scale ranging from 1 (not at all likely) to 9 (very likely))” for EACH of your DVs?
Did you fully describe what participants went through in the study, noting the order in which they received study materials (e.g. first informed consent, then IVs, DVs, and debriefing)?
Results Section (New Information in this section)
Yes No Do you have the word “Results” centered and in bold, immediately following the methods section?
Did you analyze at least two different dependent variables?
Note: using a t-Test to analyze question #4 and an ANOVA to once again analyze question #4 does NOT count as two different DVs. That is the same DV analyzed twice. Make sure to look at two different DVs
Did you mention both the IV and the DV by name when talking about your analysis?
Did you include means and standard deviations within parentheses for each level of your independent variable?
Did you italicize the letters F, t, p, M, SD, and X2 (where appropriate)?
Discussion Section (New Information in this section)
Yes No Do you have the word “Discussion” centered and in bold, immediately following the results section?
Did you remind your reader of your hypothesis?
Did you mention whether you supported or did not support your hypothesis?
Appendix Section – Study One (New Information in this section)
Yes No Do you have the word “Appendix” centered on each Appendix page, followed by a description of the appendix content, immediately following the results section?
In Appendix A (Demographics), do you have SPSS tables for gender, ethnicity, and age? (Note: Age might be in a general “statistics” table, but you should have specific frequency tables for both gender and ethnicity)
In Appendix B (Chi Square), do you have the crosstabs table (with percentages) plus the chi square test (with Pearson)?
In Appendix C (ANOVA), do you have the descriptives table, the ANOVA table, and the post hoc table for your first dependent variable?
In Appendix D (ANOVA or t-Test), do you have the descriptives table, ANOVA (or t-Test) table, and post hoc table (for the ANOVA) for your second dependent variable?
Do the analyses in Appendix C and D focus on DIFFERENT dependent variables? (Make sure you answer YES on this one!)
Instructions for Paper I Study One Literature Review Instructions
Instructions for Paper I: Study One Literature Review Instructions (Worth 25 Points)
Ryan J. Winter
Florida International University
Purpose of Paper I: Study One Literature Review
1). Psychological Purpose
This paper serves several purposes, the first of which is helping you gain insight into research papers in psychology. As this may be your first time reading and writing papers in psychology, one goal of Paper I is to give you insight into what goes into such papers. This study one-lit review will help you a). better understand the psychology topic chosen for the course this semester (Terror Management Theory), b). learn about the various sections of an empirical research report by reading five peer-reviewed articles (that is, articles that have a Title Page, Abstract, Literature Review, Methods Section, Results Section, and References Page), and c). use information gathered from research articles in psychology to help support your hypotheses for your first study this semester (Terror Management Theory). Of course, you’ll be doing a study two literature review later in the semester, so think of this Paper I as the first part of your semester long paper. I recommend looking at the example Paper V, actually, to see what your final paper will look like. It might give you a better idea about how this current paper (as well as Papers II, III, and IV) all fit together into your final paper of the semester.
In this current paper (Paper I), you will read five research articles, summarize what the authors did and what they found, and use those summaries to support your Terror Management Theory hypothesis. IMPORTANT: Yes you need five references, but keep in mind that you can spend a lot of time summarizing a few of them and just a sentence or two summarizing others. Thus spend more time on the more relevant summaries!
For this paper, start your paper broadly and then narrow your focus (think about the hourglass example provided in the lecture). My suggestion is to give a brief overview of your paper topic in your opening paragraph, hinting at the research variables you plan to look at for study one. Your next paragraphs will review prior research (those five references required for this paper). Make sure to draw connections between these papers, using smooth transitions between paragraphs. Your final paragraphs should use the research you just summarized to support your research hypothesis. In other words, this first paper will look like the literature reviews for the five research articles you are summarizing for this assignment. Use those articles as examples! See what they did and mimic their style! Here, though, you will end the paper after providing your hypothesis. In Paper II, you will pick the topic up again, but in that future paper you will talk about your own study methods and results.
2). APA Formatting Purpose
The second purpose of Paper I: Study One Literature Review is to teach you proper American Psychological Association (APA) formatting. In the instructions below, I 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 textbook!
3). Writing Purpose
Finally, this paper is intended to help you grow as a writer. Few psychology classes give you the chance to write papers and receive feedback on your work. This class will! We will give you extensive feedback on your first few paper in terms of content, spelling, and grammar. You will even be able to revise aspects of Paper I and include them in future papers (most notably Papers III and V). My hope is that you craft a paper that could be submitted to an empirical journal. Thus readers may be familiar with APA style but not your specific topic. Your job is to educate them on the topic and make sure they understand how your study design advances the field of psychology.
Instructions for Paper I: Study One Literature Review (Worth 25 Points)
Students: Below are lengthy instructions on how to write your study one literature review. There is also a checklist at the end of this document, which I recommend you print out and “check off” before submitting your final paper (we are sticklers for APA format, so make sure it is correct!)
Title Page: I expect the following format. (5 Points)
You must have a header and page numbers on each page.
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.
The header goes at the top of the paper and it is left justified.
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
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
Insert a page number as well. The header is flush left, but the page number is flush right.
Want an example header? Look at the title page of these instructions! You can use other titles depending on your own preferences (e.g. TERROR MANAGEMENT THEORY; MORTALITY SALIENCE; DEATH AND PROGRESS; PRIMING DEATH; etc.).
Your Title should be midway up the page, with your name (First Last) and the name of your institution (FIU) beneath the title. For this class, only your own name will go on this paper. Double space everything!
Again, see my “Title” page above as an example
You can also refer to Chapter 14 in your textbook
This Title Page section will be on page 1
Literature Review Section (12 points)
First page of your literature review (Page 2)
Proper header with page numbers. Your running head title will appear in the header of your page WITHOUT the phrase “Running head”. To insert this header, use the headers program.
The title of your paper should be on the first line of page two, centered. It is IDENTICAL to the title on your title page. Just copy and paste it!
The beginning text for your paper follows on the next line
Citations for the literature review
Your paper must cite a minimum of five (5) empirical research articles that are based on studies conducted in psychology. That is, each of the three citations you use should have a literature review, a methods section, a results section, a conclusion/discussion, and references.
For this first paper, you MUST use at least three of the five articles provided in the blackboard folder. You can use four if you like, but your must use three at minimum – however, you cannot use all five. For that fifth article, you must find it using PsycInfo. There are some other conditions for this fifth article that you must follow:
First, remember that the fifth article cannot be any of the five found in the blackboard folder.
Second, for your fifth article, it can be based on a wide variety of topics, including general Terror Management Theory, Mortality Salience, priming, autobiographical writing, optimism bias, pessimism bias, social cognition, bio- or neuro-psychology literature, confirmation bias, research assessment, etc. Trust me, there are TONS of topics that can help you in your paper. Just choose one that will help you support your experimental hypothesis for your Terror Management Theory study. That is, it has to help you justify your study one hypothesis (all students are using this same hypothesis, so make sure to read it. You can find it in the researcher instructions along with the questionnaires you are giving to participants. I actually suggest copying and pasting that hypothesis into this first paper at the end).
Finally, you can have more than five references if you want, but you must have a minimum of five references.
Proper citations must be made in the paper – give credit where credit is due, and don’t make claims that cannot be validated.
If you use a direct quote, make sure to provide a page number for where you found that quote in the citations. Do not directly quote too often, though. You can have no more than two direct quotes in the whole paper (though no quotes would be even better). Instead, I would like you to paraphrase when possible.
Requirements for the information in your literature review
Your study one literature review should use prior research as a starting point, narrowing down the main theme of your specific project – think about the hourglass example I gave in class.
The last part of your literature review should narrow down your focus onto your own study, eventually ending in your study hypothesis. However, DO NOT go into specific details about your methods. You talk about your specific methods in Paper II in a few weeks.
Again, to make it clear, at the end of your paper you will give an overview of your research question, providing your specific predictions/hypotheses.
The literature review must have minimum of two (2) full pages NOT INCLUDING THE HYPOTHESES. It has a maximum of five (5) pages (thus, with the title page and references page, the paper should be between 4.5 and 7 pages). If it is only two pages and a half pages (again, including the hypotheses), it better be really, really good. I don’t think I could do this paper justice in fewer than three full pages, so if yours isn’t at least three pages I doubt it will get a good grade.
References (6 points)
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.
All five references that you cited in the literature review must be in this section (there should be more than five references here if you cited more than five articles, which is fine in this paper). However, at least three must come from the article folder on blackboard while the remaining two can come from either the last blackboard paper or two new ones from psychinfo. Only peer-reviewed articles are allowed here (no books, journals, websites, or other secondary resources are allowed for paper one).
For references, make sure you:
use alphabetical ordering (start with the last name of the first author)
use the authors’ last names but only the initials of their first/middle name
give the date in parentheses – e.g. (2007).
italicize the name of the journal article
give the volume number, also in italics
give the page numbers (not italicized) for articles
provide the doi (digital object identifier) if present (not italicized)
Writing Quality (2 Points)
This includes proper grammar and spelling. I recommend getting feedback on your paper from the Pearson Writer program prior uploading it on Blackboard.
Between the title page, literature review, and reference page, I expect a minimum of 4 pages and a maximum of 7 pages for this assignment. But like I said, the shorter the paper, the less likely it is to get a good grade, so aim for 5 pages minimum.
The above information is required for your paper, but I wanted to provide a few tips about writing your literature review as well. Students often struggle with the first paper, but hopefully this will give you some good directions:
First, remember that you need 5 references, all of which MUST be peer-reviewed (three coming from the blackboard folder and one or two that you find on your own using PsycInfo).
Second, I don’t expect a lengthy discussion for each and every article that you cite. You might spend a page talking about Article A and a sentence or two on Article B. 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. See if there is a prior study that looks a lot like yours (hint – there is at least one, which I based this study on, but you’ll have to find it on your own!). I would expect you to spend more time discussing that prior research since it is hugely relevant to 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, this paper is all about supporting your 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. My suggestion is to spend some time describing the nature of the Terror Management Theory, and then talking about studies that looked at this area. Use those studies to help defend your own study hypothesis. That is, “Since they found X in this prior study, that helps support the hypothesis in the present study”. Do you remember your two hypotheses? Okay, I’ll be really helpful here. BELOW are your hypotheses. In your paper, support it! Just remember that the rest of your paper needs to be at least two pages NOT INCLUDING the hypothesis below. In other words, including the hypotheses below, your actual text for your paper should be at least two and a half pages!
First, we predict that participants who wrote about death should complete more word-fragments with death-related words (e.g. SKU_ _ with SKULL, COFF_ _ with COFFIN, and DE_ _ with DEAD) than participants who wrote about dental pain or getting into college (who will complete the same word fragments with neutral words, like SKUNK, COFFEE, and DEAL). Second, we predict that participants who wrote about death will disagree with the pessimistic position of the human progress essay author more than participants in the other two conditions.
Finally, 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!
Checklist – Paper One: Study One Literature Review
Use the check sheet below to make sure your paper is the best it can be! Make sure you answer “Yes” to all questions before submitting your paper or you will lose points!
General Paper Format
Yes No Is everything in your paper (including headers, the main body of your study one literature review, and references) in 12 point Times New Roman font?
Is everything in your paper double spaced, including references (here I mean the spacing above and below each line, not the spaces following a period)?
Do you have one inch margins on all sides of the paper (one inch from the top of the page, one inch from the bottom, and one inch from each side)
Are the first lines of all paragraphs indented roughly ½ inch?
Are your paragraphs aligned left? (That is, text should be flush left, with lines lining up on the left of the page, but text should NOT line up on the right side of the page – it should look ragged)
Do you need help figuring out how to configure a word document in APA format (inserting headers, page numbers, proper indents, etc.)? If YES or NO, I highly recommend watching this video which walks you through setting up an APA formatted paper! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pbUoNa5tyY
Title page
Yes No Header
Do you have the phrase “Running head” in your header (with a lower case h)?
Is the rest of your Running head title in ALL CAPS?
Is your Running head in 12 point Times New Roman font?
Do you have a page number that is flush right (also in 12 point Times New Roman font)?
Title / Name / Institution
Is your title 12 words or less (as recommended by the APA)?
Do all title words with four letters or more start with a capital letter?
Are your name and institution correct?
Are your title, name, and institution elements centered and in 12 point Times New Roman font?
Literature Review
Yes No Header
Is your header title present and identical to your header title on the title page?
Is your header title in ALL CAPS and 12 point Times New Roman font?
Does your header on this second page omit the phrase “Running head”
Do you have a page number starting on page 2
Title for the literature review
Do you have the identical title you used on the title page rewritten at the top of your literature review?
Is this title centered?
Literature Review Continued
Yes No Main body of the literature review
Does your literature review start broadly, giving a brief overview of the paper to come?
Does your literature review start to narrow down toward your hypotheses?
Do your paragraphs transition from one to the next? (That is, avoid simply listing studies you read. Tie them together. How does Study A in paragraph A relate to Study B in paragraph B?)
Does your paper end in your hypotheses?
Is your paper at least two pages long (not including the hypotheses)?
Citations for the literature review
Did you cite a minimum of 5 citations? (Note that you can give a lot of detail for some articles you cite but only a sentence or two for others. How much detail you go into depends on how important the article is in helping your support your hypotheses)
Are your citations in APA format (That is, ONLY the last name of the author(s) and date of publication)?
Note that you do NOT include first names, initials, or the title of the article the authors wrote when citing. That information belongs in the references pages only.
Also note that you only use an ampersand – the & symbol – when it occurs within parentheses. In other instances, use the word “and”
If you quoted, did you provide a page number for the direct quote?
If you paraphrased in any way, did you cite the source of that information?
References Page
Yes No Title for the references page
Do references start on their own page?
Is the word “References” centered?
References – Make sure these are in APA format!
Are references listed in alphabetical order (starting with the last name of the first author listed)?
Are all citations from the literature review referenced?
Is the first line of the reference flush left while subsequent lines are indented (Note: Use the ruler function for this. DO NOT simply tab)?
Did you use the “&” symbol when listing more than one author name?
Did you include the date of publication
For article references, is the article title (which is not italicized) present, with only the first word and proper names starting with a capital letter?
For article references, is the name of the journal present with all major words starting with a capital letter (Note: this journal title is italicized)?
For article references, is the volume number italicized
For article references, are the page numbers present (not italicized)
For article references, is the DOI present