PSYC234/235

N=8 SESSIONS HANDBOOK

Year two tutorials

The overall aim of the tutorials throughout the second year is to complete a full piece of research starting from initial design, ethics application, data collection and analysis, ultimately a complete practical report. This should demonstrate the importance of planning research carefully and careful consideration of ethics.

In semester one, students need to produce a research proposal and ethics application. In semester two, they collect the data and write a full practical report. These pieces of coursework represent 50% of the marks for research methods and statistics (the remaining 50% will be assessed with short answer examination).

Group work

Throughout this process students are expected to work together as a group. Tutors should keep a register of who attends the bi-weekly tutorials AND students should keep track of who attends their meetings and working groups when the tutor is not present using a meeting diary. This meeting diary can be submitted in the appendix of the research proposal and practical report so the tutor is aware of who did and did not contribute!

The PSYC234/235 Tutorial Handbook and meeting diaries can be found here:

VITAL > PSYC234 > Content > Research Tutorials>

VITAL > PSYC234 > Content > Research Tutorials>Diaries

Staff will need to submit ethics before end of Semester 1 to allow students to collect data in Semester 2.

The Assessment Co-ordinator for PSYC234 (Dr Andy Jones) and PSYC235 (Dr Paul Christiansen) who is the main point of contact for any questions or concerns regarding the Research Tutorials.

SEMESTER 1: WEEKS 1 & 2

Staff are asked to check students’ first year performance in October and meet with those who are struggling

Students must complete epigium training by the end of semester 1. It is recommended that you mention this to students at the end of the tutorial in weeks 7 & 8 because this session focuses on ethics

EXPECTATION SETTING

It is important to set expectations of students and staff in the first tutorial session. Students need to be clear what you expect of them in terms of attending meetings, responding to email, meeting course requirements etc. You also need to outline to students what they should expect of you, such as when your office hours will be, how quickly they should expect a reply to emails and what feedback on their work they will receive. Setting clear expectations at this time should lead to improved staff-student interactions throughout the second year. There is some information below that students should read:

STUDENT AND STAFF CHARTER

The Staff-Student Charter can be found here:

VITAL > PSYC234 > Content > Research Tutorials > Teaching Week 1-2> Student Charter

VITAL > PSYC234 > Content > Research Tutorials > Teaching Week 1-2> Annex to the Student Charter

The University’s Social Media Policy can be found here:

VITAL > PSYC234 > Content > Research Tutorials > Teaching Week 1-2>University of Liverpool Social Media Compliance Policy

The School of Psychology Communication Policy can be found here:

VITAL > PSYC234 > Content > Research Tutorials > Teaching Week 1-2>School of Psychology Communication Policy

School of Psychology Code of Practice for Students can be found here:

VITAL > PSYC234 > Content > Research Tutorials > Teaching Week 1-2>

ASSESSMENT

The tutorials across this year contribute one coursework assessment in Semester 1 (PSYC234) and one in Semester 2 (PSYC235).

For Semester 1 the assessment is a research proposal and ethics application worth 50% of the total marks for the module PSYC234. Tutors need to introduce this to students and outline how this type of assessment will be marked (rubric can be found in the ‘Assessment and Feedback for PSYC234’ document). The proposal form that must be completed is online.

The word count for this coursework is 4000 words- this is an upper limit and is intended for any group that have particularly lengthy ethics sections (for example some studies may require particularly long information sheets). For each section, the amount of words you can use is fixed by the size of the boxes/character limits.

It is important that students write up all sections independently as the usual penalties for collusion/plagiarism will apply (it is acknowledged that some sections e.g., data storage will be very similar).

There is one exception to this; students can all submit the same information sheet, consent form and debrief. They can co-create this as a group. These are submitted by copy and pasting them to the appropriate section at the end of the application.

TUTORIAL RESEARCH

Staff should introduce the topic students are going to be exploring. This can be done in any way (e.g., a brief presentation, more informal discussion). Some basic reading on the subject can be emailed out in advance of the meeting to facilitate this.

Tutors should lead the group in discussing what the experiment that they are going to design will be exploring. This could be done in the way of theoretical underpinnings of the question, what past research has shown and what the new study will do (explain inconsistent results, add new variables, use a different sample, pure replication, etc.).

Literature

Having introduced the topic of research, tutors need to remind students how to search for relevant literature that can provide relevant background and rationale for their research proposal. At this stage they should be encouraged to look at journal articles rather than textbooks.

It is worth re-iterating the strengths and weaknesses of different sources of literature and approaches to searching for studies. Indeed, pop psychology videos (e.g., TED talks) and basic websites (e.g., simplypsychology.com) should not be used as part of a literature review, often they are sensationalist, misinterpret data, or non-critical.

This was covered extensively in year one, a brief reminder document can be found here:

VITAL > PSYC234 > Content > Research Tutorials > Teaching Week 1-2> Literature searching

Referencing

It is important that sources are all correctly cited in written work following APA guidelines for referencing in the proposal. It is advisable that the reference section is compiled as the research is done, this saves losing important papers, keeps track of what you have read and saves rushing to complete the references just before deadlines.

Referencing was covered in detail in year one and students will already have had feedback on work in which they used references (e.g., PSYC135 report). Looking at feedback on references on these pieces of coursework would be extremely beneficial. In addition a brief guide on referencing can be found here:

VITAL > PSYC234 > Content > Research Tutorials > Teaching Week 1-2>Brief Referencing guide

Following this discussion the group should now know the topic , a very rough idea of the study they are doing, and have been reminded about literature searching and referencing.

They should now spend the next two weeks searching for relevant papers/studies on the subject to get a firm grasp of it. They should independently do searches but not be discouraged from sharing any particularly relevant papers that they find with each other.

FOR THE NEXT SESSION

By the next tutorial all group members should have a thorough understanding of the research area. They will all be expected to contribute to the discussion of the research in the following week. Each student will be asked to give a brief summary (2-3mins) of one paper that they have read, particularly focusing on aims, hypotheses, and research questions (this is not a presentation just an informal discussion!). Each student should talk about a different paper so it is important that they communicate with each other effectively. Students should email versions of the paper to tutors in advance and bring a hard or electronic copy with them. In order to make this more efficient, student could nominate one member of the group to collate the papers and send to the tutor.

Critical evaluation

Critical evaluation skills need to be developed during the process of completing the SGP, with staff expecting students to critically evaluate material they include in their assessments. So they may wish to highlight any issues with the papers that they discuss and suggest what could have been done better. They should also be encouraged to make a note of anything that is done in the study that they think may be particularly useful in informing the design of their study.

SEMESTER 1: WEEKS 3 & 4

The focus of this session is for students to discuss the key paper(s) they have read in advance of this session with an initial focus on the background to the research (rationale, aims and hypotheses).

Each student is to give a brief overview of one of the papers that they have read, highlighting the rationale, aims and hypotheses as well as what the study found. They should also be encouraged to critically evaluate it.

The discussion following this should now focus on developing a rationale, aims and hypotheses for the experiment that the group is designing. Ultimately the group should come up with this with steering from the tutor:

Rationale:

What is the justification for doing the experiment?

Theoretical

Previous research

How will it add to this previous research?

Addressing a gap

Adding a previously ignored factor

Methodological advancement

Different sample

Pure replication

Aims:

What do you hope to find out doing this experiment?

Are the aims reasonable? (e.g., trying to find out what forms of impulsivity is most strongly associated with alcohol misuse vs. trying to see if becoming alcohol dependent makes people more impulsive due to incremental damage to the prefrontal cortex).

Are you able to achieve the aims in the context of a single semester collecting data?

Hypothesis/Hypotheses:

A basic hypothesis should be formed. Remind students that when forming hypothesis/hypotheses they should ensure:

It can be tested – verifiable or falsifiable

It is not too general

It is considered valuable even if proven false

At this stage there will be “Fuzzy” hypothesis, i.e. a broad prediction about an association between variables. A good hypothesis is clearly operationalised, i.e. the variables of interest are defined in the manner you are specifically studying them.

For example, the fuzzy hypothesis

“The more alcohol an individual drinks the more impulsive they will be”

Can be operationalised as

“There will be a positive association between scores on the Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test and errors on a response inhibition task (Go/No-Go)”

The second example clearly states how alcohol use is to be measured and what type of impulsivity (response inhibition) will be measured and what specific task (Go/No-Go) will be used.

An operationalised hypothesis encourages rigorous analyses. Ambiguous hypotheses allow lots of different DVs to be tested under the guise of a single hypothesis. Doing this contributed to the replication crisis in social sciences.

However the final, operationalised, hypothesis can written be done when methods have been decided on.

Methods

Having completed this task, students now need to start thinking about the method. A good starting point is to think about the method(s) used by researchers in the studies that they have described. As a group you can reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of these method(s) as ways to answer the hypotheses/research question(s).

Issues to discuss can include:

Reliability and validity of measures used (validated measures)

Use of between, within, mixed, or correlational designs

Generalisability of results

Ecological validity

Sample size and composition (e.g., student only samples, small sample bias)

The extent to which the methods could be used to test the hypothesis.

The key is to get students to think about what researchers did and why they did it that way. For example, researchers often collect behavioural data using self-report measures because this is more feasible than using objective measures that can be more intrusive. This discussion is important because it will help inform the students’ decisions regarding their SGP.

FOR THE NEXT SESSION

Students need to meet up before the next tutorial to agree their proposed design, variables, procedure and operationalised hypotheses. Make sure they are very specific, for example

“We will use an impulsivity questionnaire” is not acceptable “use the Barrett Impulsivity Scale (BIS-11)” is acceptable.

“We will use working memory task” is not acceptable “use the N-Back working memory task” is acceptable.

Encourage students to get citations for all the methods they use as they go along. The plan will be presented at the next meeting, not as a formal presentation (no slides etc.) just informally. It is important that everyone adds to this discussion and it is not just one group member doing all the talking. A good idea is to break down the method into participants, design, materials and procedure. Two people can talk about each section.

SEMESTER 1: WEEKS 5 & 6

Students will turn up to this session with a rough plan for their research as well as clearly operationalised hypotheses.

This plan will then be presented to the tutor (not as a formal presentation). Ideally the tutor should question decisions that have been made in each section. This should be done regardless of whether it is a good decision or not.

Where a good decision has been made ask them why they selected this method over an alternative one.

Any problematic decisions, e.g., “We will recruit a sample of depressed individuals” should be discussed and a pragmatic solution can be agreed on.

The tutor should make students aware of the pros and cons of methods that have been chosen. For example, if there is a within subjects design then there should be a discussion about practice/fatigue/carry-over effects and what could be done to counteract this (if not already discussed).

It is worth highlighting that these discussions would feed into the limitation section of the discussion that they will be writing next term.

The key thing here is that every decision that has been made regarding the methodology is logical/practical and the students can clearly state why it was done. A non-exhaustive list of things for each section follows:

Participants:

How many?

Who?

Population of interest

Inclusion/exclusion criteria

How will they be recruited?

Design:

Within/between/mixed/correlational?

How many IVs?

How many conditions?

Materials:

Questionnaires selected and why

Cognitive tasks selected and why

Interview schedule

Procedure:

Time taken to do the individual tasks and the whole experiment

Order of events

Method of data collection, online, lab based etc.

Finally, there are some more practical considerations that you can discuss, for example how

to access measures

to create experimental materials

to collect data from their chosen sample (you could introduce Qualtrics if you intend on doing an online questionnaire here).

Taken together, this discussion should be used to fine tune the research plans to ensure that the study they have planned is both robust and feasible. By the end of this discussion they should be able to complete the methods box on the research proposal form.

FOR THE NEXT SESSION

After this session students should arrange to meet up to address any remaining issues with the methods and come up with a proposed analysis strategy how to test their primary hypotheses. Staff should note what they will have covered by this stage (see next tutorial), students should not be expected to do anything they have not be taught without comprehensive guidance.

Finally, the group should consider ethical implications before the next tutorial.

In particular they should think about:

Information sheets, consent forms and debriefing (examples available on VITAL, under research tutorials weeks 7-8) although you may wish to use ones from your own research.

Risk

What are the risks to the participants

What are the risks to the researchers

Data type, storage and protection, how are you going to ensure anonymity?

SEMESTER 1: WEEKS 7 & 8

Analysis strategy

Now that the research plan has been finalised the remaining thing to consider regarding the methods is how the data will be analysed.

By week 7 students will have covered, Chi square, correlation, parametric and non-parametric t-tests, parametric and non-parametric one way ANOVA, complex (two lV) ANOVA, multiple regression, hierarchical multiple regression and simple mediation (joint significance test). They will not yet have covered MANOVA, ANCOVA, logistic regression and PCA (but will have by the time they get their results). If you wish to use these tests you will need to explain them to your students (resources can be made available to you in advance if required email Paul Christiansen prc@liv.ac.uk).

In a guided discussion you will need the students to come up with the analysis strategy to test their hypotheses. You may also want to discuss

what to do if data violates test assumptions

appropriate descriptives

quality control of data (e.g., spotting typos, response acquiesce)

Ethics

By this point, the students should have a clear understanding of what they are doing for their SGP. In this tutorial, they need to think through the key ethical issues regarding their study. They also need to be introduced to the online application procedure and risk assessments.

ONLINE APPLICATION PROCEDURE

After introducing the online application procedure, tutors should provide examples of templates used for Ethics application such as information sheets, consent forms, and debrief sheets as appropriate. Ideally, this would be based on applications completed by tutors that have received ethical approval. In some cases this will not possible (e.g., for new staff) so examples are provided and can be found here in this tutorial (weeks 7-8) folder on VITAL.

Due to complexities with system management each student will not be expected to complete the online ethics form, instead, they complete the boxes that are in the research proposal form. Each section of this form should be discussed in this tutorial.

Please describe the arrangements for obtaining consent from participants

This is where you state the specific procedure around getting informed consent, this is usually through reading an information sheet, being given the opportunity to answer questions and completing a consent form

Risks:

What are the risks to the participants and how will you mitigate them?

Risks are not just physical harm, psychological harm and distress are also important considerations. For example, participants may feel embarrassed/uncomfortable if revealing information about things such as alcohol use, sexual orientation, family income etc.

After considering these issues there must be a decision on mitigating them, you could explain to participants about the nature of the questions in the information sheet so they can make an informed decision about taking part.

You may consider excluding certain groups of participants.

What are the risks to the researchers and how will you mitigate them?

Risks to researchers can also be something that can impact the planned work. In some cases there are no identifiable risks (e.g., if you do an online study) but there are some considerations that you can discuss

Field observations have inherent environmental risks

Lone working, being in an isolated environment (lab) with participants

Is a manipulation likely to influence a participant in some way that may be risky? (e.g., alcohol intoxication might increase aggression)

Please describe the arrangements are in place for monitoring and auditing the conduct of the research

A group discussion on how to monitor research is needed, for example weekly updates of progress? What are the processes if there is an issue with the study?

RISK ASSESSMENT

Risk assessments for on campus and off campus examples should be provided for students to view, these are available in the tutorial folder for this week.

Data

What type of data are you collecting and how will you collect it?

The former is simply a drop down menu, the latter is your proposed method (e.g., “online questionnaire through the Qualitrics system”, “reaction time data will be recorded through computerised tasks and demographic information will be collected using hard copy questionnaires”). All types of data should be included in this if using more than one method of collecting data.

Please describe how the data will be stored

Data needs to be securely stored, if there are hard copies of data they need to be securely stored under lock and key. Electronic data should be password protected (unless open access)

Please describe how long the data will be stored for and how this was decided:

Please describe the plans to ensure the data can be made available for re-use (e.g., open data, safeguarded data, or controlled data):

Please describe the plans for the destruction of the data:

Who will have access to the data?

For all these questions there are competing demands from

Data protection / GDPR

Open science and replication

There needs to be a balance between being compliant with GDPR as well rigorous open science practices. Open science aims to address the replication crisis in which the majority of studies in psychological sciences cannot be replicated. Open data is one solution to the replication crisis.

Open data means that people can access data sets with null results

It allows people to run analyses on the data to see if they are reported correctly/appropriate

Supports meta analyses

Prevents p-hacking

Discourages invention of data (see Diederik Stapel for an example)

Finally, it may be appropriate to discuss other things that encourage best practice in science in particular

Preregistration https://aspredicted.org/

Harking (hypothesising after results are known)

P-Hacking (messing with data until you find significant results)

This feeds back into the analysis strategy discussion that was had at the start of the class this needs to be stuck too.

SEMESTER 1: WEEKS 9 & 10

In the final tutorial of semester 1, do a Q and A for any outstanding issues that students may have regarding the project going forward, e.g. how to recruit etc.

Remind them that next term they will be collecting data on this project and they need to think about:

TIME AND PROJECT MANAGEMENT

Students should plan out the steps they need to meet to complete the SGP. It is highly recommended that they work out deadlines for data collection, data entry and data analysis during semester 2.

GROUP WORKING

Students should be reminded that successful group working requires particular skills, such as effective communication skills and delegation of responsibility. Working together will lead to the best experience for everyone involved.

PROBLEM SOLVING AND RESILIENCE

Students should be encouraged to problem solve themselves, as this is a skill that will serve them well throughout their degree. Students also need to be resilient when conducting research. Recruitment can be challenging (especially when a particular sample is required) and students will likely experience the lows of the research process. However, they need to know that things will work out and that if they work as a group all these issues can be overcome.

Identifying Important Skills and Experiences

Intended Outcomes

Students will understand what “being employable” is and how it relates to their studies

Students will be able to identify how transferable skills are developed both through academic study and extra-curricular activities.

Students will be able to identify skills they have developed from last year and what skills they still need to develop.

Introduction

When surveyed by the Bright Network, 100 graduate employers named gaining work experience as the most important use of students’ time at university, ahead of simply focusing on getting a higher grade. This does not de-value your study experience, however it does highlight the importance of making the most of the time students have at university to develop their skills and networks alongside their subject knowledge.

A psychology degree is a great starting point for a career in both science and the arts, as it equips students with a range of skills and opens up opportunities with a variety of employers. Many employers accept applications from graduates with any degree subject, so it is important to develop skills and experience in different contexts and sectors to widen graduate options.

Activity 1: Blank Profiles – Skills and experience whilst at university

Part 1

Review the LinkedIn Profile and/or CV, in small groups/pairs discuss the activities and experience the graduate has undertaken (during their studies and outside of their studies) and how this might have helped their career development/progression into employment. Consider:

How much of a role do you feel Naomi’s internship played in her being successful to get her current role?

What do you feel was more attractive to the Independent Office for Police Conduct, the MSc Investigative & Forensic Psychology or Hannah’s work experience?

How much do you feel Ben’s current part-time role will prepare him for graduate recruitment?

Do you feel Abigayle would be able to get the same experience opportunities if she stayed in the North West?

Part 2

Once students have commented on the profiles / CVs, the copies with feedback should be shared and discussed. It is important to stress and highlight that the LinkedIn profiles and CVs highlight various skills and how these skills have been developed. Why this is relevant/important:

“54% of graduate hires from companies in RateMyPlacement’s Top Undergraduate Employers Table are comprised of previous interns, placement and insight students.”

The Independent Office for Police Conduct does not require any qualifications for their trainee position, however both qualification and skills would have strengthened Hannah’s application, with requirements such as: Analysing complex information and developing evidence-based conclusions, decisions or recommendations, Experience of engaging effectively with a diverse range of people and stakeholders, Ability to work effectively in a team with diverse ideas and people…

Relocation: demonstrates a commitment to travel for suitable roles and flexibility within the role/ company. Did you know that 52.6% of Psychology graduates in 2017 went on to work in North West England? With 63.3% of them employed in Merseyside…that’s a lot of competition if you decide to stay

Work experience: When surveyed by the Bright Network, 100 graduate employers named gaining work experience as the most important use of students’ time at university, ahead of simply focusing on getting a higher grade.

Activity 2: Experience Audit & “Make a pledge”

Part 1

Work experience includes work that may not appear to be directly relevant to the career students are seeking and/or their current studies. Another way to look at work experience is to think about skills that students have developed over time. This resource will help students to newly recognise and value things that they have already done.

Share the Identifying your Skills link, ask students to pick an example career and allow time for students to complete this and self-reflect individually. The experience audit requires them to reflect on what experiences they currently possess, and begin to think about gaps in their experience, skills and knowledge.

Remind students that the Career Studio can help them when it comes to evidencing and demonstrating the skills they have gained through their extra-curricular activities. They can speak to a Career Coach via the Virtual Career Studio for support with this.

Part 2

After students have completed the activity, encourage students to “make a pledge” and decide one thing they will try / explore going forward. The worksheet suggests two options which they may want to complete following the tutorial to help them make this decision:

Option 1: Complete the Skills and Values Analysis This will help you identify and explain the skills you have developed from the experiences you have already undertaken. You can then begin to articulate your strengths and identify areas for development

Option 2: Co-explore finding work experience with a Career Coach in the Virtual Career Studio. This will allow you to explore your options and identify and create opportunities to gain experience.

Remind students that self-reflection is an ongoing process and that it is good practice to reflect regularly as they inevitably gain more experience within and outside of their university studies.

SEMESTER TWO

SEMESTER 2: WEEKS 1 & 2

Staff are asked to check students’ performance in February and meet with those who are struggling

Before this session send the student the pdf from the ethics application and tell them to bring in the research proposals

ASSESSMENT

For Semester 2 the assessment is a practical report worth 50% of the total marks for the module PSYC235. Tutors need to introduce this to students and outline how this type of assessment will be marked (rubric is in the ‘Assessment and Feedback in PSYC235’ document).

Highlight the following

The word count for this coursework is 4000 words- This figure is excluding abstract, graphs, tables, references and appendix.

Students will already have completed a report albeit a shorter one as part of PSYC135. Encourage them to look at the feedback they got for this report as this will have a significant impact on their performance.

They have a very basic introduction and methods already written as part of the proposal, however these should be significantly expanded for the practical report. Specific details on how to do this will be covered in these tutorials.

EXPECTATION SETTING

Remind the students what their study is about and ask them to remind you about their timetable for completing data collection, data entry and data analysis.

In contrast to last term the “for next session” tasks are reduced, this is because there will be time spent on recruitment and data collection.

ETHICS

By this point, you will have received ethical approval for the study. Discuss ethics approval with the students and clearly articulate what they need to do in order to comply with this approval and what the procedure is if should there be a problem with the study.

It is recommended that the students practice or pilot their study on each other, to make sure they have a clear understanding of the procedure as they will start running the study over the coming weeks.

REPORT WRITING SKILLS

The assessment for this module is a practical report, so students will need to develop their practical report writing skills during this semester (this will build on what was taught in year one). It is worth telling students at this point that the subsequent tutorials will help them to develop these skills.

WRITING AN INTRODUCTION

Often this is the longest part of a report, to write a good introduction you need to have comprehensively read around the subject area that you are studying. It is notable that in different areas of psychology there can be stylistic differences in how introductions are written. It is always a good idea to go through introductions in the area that you are exploring as part of your practical and look at how they structure things.

Some general tips:

Write an introduction plan as if you were writing an essay plan.This will make your job so much easier and compartmentalise the introduction

The introduction can be viewed as an essay which has one goal, justifying your hypotheses

As discussed previously, structures can differ but there is a broad “inverted triangle” structure that introductions have:

1. What is our understanding of the thing in question, this will start broadly and then go more specific

2. What does the above literature lack? Where the contradictions in the research are, or what has not been explored and why might it be important

3. Clear rationale building on the above, leading to a brief description of the methods to be used and ultimately to the hypotheses

Rationale

Rationales are often missing in reports. They are very important to show a real understanding of the link between the reviewed literature and the current study

For example:

“Despite the consistent associations between self-report impulsivity and drug use there is limited evidence for the association between behavioural measures of impulsivity, particularly response inhibition, and drug use. This association may be particularly important as excessive drug use has been associated with deficits in executive cognitive functioning of which response inhibition is a facet”

Essentially the rationale addresses a clear gap in the literature which you have made evident with a well-structured introduction

The current study

Even more so than the rationale, a brief description of the current study is often missing in introductions

Describe the current study simply, no need for excessive details, but the description of the study should allow for an understanding of how the hypotheses are being tested

“The current study used a stop-signal task to examine response inhibition in a sample of long-term polydrug users, all of whom reported using three or more different drugs (excluding smoking) at least once a week for the past three years. Their performance on the stop-signal task was compared to a control sample matched by age and gender.

Hypotheses

The last thing to appear will be hypotheses.

These were written last term. Notably they will have had feedback on them as part of the research proposal

Remember the importance of them being operationalised rather than fuzzy

For example, the fuzzy hypothesis

“Polydrug users will be differ in impulsivity from controls”

Can be operationalised as

“Polydug users have significantly poorer performance on a response inhibition task (stop signal task) in comparison to matched controls”

The second example what type of impulsivity (response inhibition) will be measured and what specific task (stop signal) will be used. It also predicts that the polydrug users will be worse rather than there being ‘a difference’.

FOR THE NEXT SESSION

At the end of this tutorial tell students to start collecting data.

SEMESTER 2: WEEKS 3 & 4

PROGRESS

Check progress on the project and ask the students to tell you how things are going with recruitment.

DATA

Depending on how things are progressing, students may need advice about data collection, such as tips to boost recruitment of participants.

All students will need to develop their understanding of issues around data management, including entering data into a spreadsheet (e.g., Excel, SPSS).

The group should make a spreadsheet, there should be a discussion about what data they will need to put into the spreadsheet and correctly labelling the data (e.g., stating levels of nominal data)

It is critical that students are encouraged to enter raw data into spreadsheets, instead of calculating questionnaire scores, average performance across trials, etc. by hand, as this

Increases the chances of making a mistake

Takes a long time

Introduce them to simple syntax commands, a video guide for this has been done here, or using commands in excel

If you are using Qualtrics data is entered automatically but not usually well labelled and certainly not scored. Students are advised to download the incomplete data from Qualtrics and make a clearly labelled version of the data set and write the syntax to score questionnaires. The final version data can then be copied and pasted into this edited data template and scored as soon as recruitment ends.

Unless students have not collected any data by this point it is recommended that students begin data entry very soon after this session has finished (if they have not already done so).

It is also recommended that the students bring a copy of their entered data to the next tutorial.

TIME MANAGEMENT

Once data collection has begun there is no reason for students to delay writing the introduction and method sections of their report. Writing throughout the data collection phase will develop their time management skills and give them a sense of achievement because they will see the report start to come together.

METHODS

Methods section can be written early on, the only part that you cannot be done is the participants section, as you may be unsure of the final numbers of participants you manage to recruit and their demographic details. All other sections can be completed while you are collecting data.

Writing a good method section

They key thing is that the reader has a thorough understanding of what was done with no ambiguity in the information given. With the information given they should be able to do an exact replication of your study. Repetition should be avoided, everything should be stated under the appropriate section. It is always a good idea to read through method sections of studies that are similar to yours to get a feel for the level of information and structure.

Participants

Keep it concise!

Sampling technique

N (+ n males/females)

Age range + means and SDs (sometimes this is found in the results section)

Any other core demographic information you may have taken

Recruitment strategy

Inclusion / Exclusion

Numbers in each condition? (if between subjects)

Special characteristics e.g., all participants were UG psychology students, all scored above XX on a given questionnaire

Materials

Often the longest section and the section that people struggle with. Materials cover a range of things, questionnaires, computer programs, specialist hardware (not make and models of PC’s). This section can have subheadings, e.g., you may have numerous questionnaires under the subheading of ‘Questionnaires’. A discussion about any particularly specialist equipment should be had with supervisors. Below are examples of how to describe more general stimuli:

Describing questionnaires:

Brief comprehensive effects of alcohol scale (CEOA-B; Ham, Stewart, Norton, & Hope, 2005). This consisted of 15 items measuring what participants expect to happen when they consume alcohol (i.e. alcohol outcome expectancies). The scale contains positive AOE subscales (Tension reduction; Social facilitation; Liquid courage; Self Perception) and negative expectancy subscales (Cognitive-behavioural impairment; Risk taking/aggression; negative self-evaluation). All statements were a possible completion of the sentence “when I drink alcohol, I expect that…” Answers took the form of a four-point scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Cronbach’s alphas for the subscales in the current study ranged from .82 to .94.

Describing experimental tasks:

Stop-signal task (based on Verbruggen and Logan 2008). The beginning of each trial was signalled by a fixation cross (‘+’) that was presented in the centre of the screen for 500 ms. This was immediately followed by a go stimulus—an arrow that pointed left or right—for 1000 ms. Participants were instructed to make a speeded response to the direction of the arrow, by pressing one of two labelled keys on the keyboard. Go stimuli were uninterrupted on 75% of trials (go trials). The remaining 25% of the trials were stop trials: An auditory tone (the stop signal) was presented at a variable delay after the presentation of the go stimulus. Participants were instructed to inhibit their categorisation response whenever they heard the stop signal. The delay between the go stimulus and stop signal onset (stop-signal delay (SSD)) was adjusted using a dynamic tracking procedure. The initial SSD was 250 ms. If the participants successfully inhibited their response, the SSD increased by 50 ms on the subsequent stop trial (making inhibition more difficult), whereas if the participant failed to inhibit, the SSD decreased by 50 ms on the subsequent stop trial (making inhibition easier).

Participants completed 16 practice trials, before 3 blocks of 64 trials. In each block, there were 48 go trials and 16 stop trials. Trial order was randomised for each participant, and the task took approximately 10 min to complete.

Describing stimuli:

Example 1

Example stimuli are shown in Figure 1. Novel patterns were generated on each trial, so no image was presented twice across the entire group of 40 participants. On each trial, a vertical contour was generated using a random-walk algorithm with 12 inward and outward turns. The maximum and minimum displacement from the reference line was ± 0.64°. These vertices were equally spaced by 0.21° on the Y-axis, so contour height was approximately 2.56°. The resulting contour was then translated or reflected across the midline. The horizontal distance from reference to the midline was 0.85° of visual angle.

The two jagged lines (reflected or translated) were not presented in isolation. Instead they were embedded in a context that closed the lines to form either a single central shape, or two opposite shapes.

The overall width of the stimuli was 5.11°, as defined by the two vertical lines on the outside. Horizontal lines at the top and bottom defined whether the patterns constituted one object (lines meeting in the middle) or two objects (lines connecting the contours to the outside edges). Stimuli were presented for 2 s, following a randomized 1.5- to 2-s baseline. A central fixation cross was present throughout the baseline and stimulus presentation period, and participants were encouraged to fixate and avoid blinking during this period.

Example 2

In total 125 pictures (25 neutral scenes, 50 positive scenes, and 50 negative scenes) from the International Affective Picture System (IAPS; Bradley and Lang, 1994; Lang et al., 2005) were used. The three picture categories differed significantly from each other with regard to IAPS normative valence ratings; positive pictures did not differ from negative pictures on arousal ratings. The mean difference for valence ratings (or arousal ratings) between positive and neutral pictures was the same as the mean difference valence ratings (or arousal ratings) between negative and neutral pictures. Each picture was displayed at a resolution of 600 pixels × 800 pixels on a computer screen at a viewing distance of 60 cm using Presentation software (Neurobehavioral Systems, Albany, CA, USA).

Design

Design sections tend to be relatively short for experimental and correlational studies. You need to clearly state if you study is:

Between subjects

Within subjects

Mixed

Correlational

NOTE: People often get confused with correlational designs, and incorrectly call them within subjects. A within subjects design measures DV(s) multiple times under different conditions. A correlational design measures the DV once and essentially explores the association between variables without experimental manipulation.

If you have experimental conditions then you would want to state what the IVs are and how many levels they have. See the complex designs- a primer pdf guide on complex designs.

Other information that can be found in deign sections

How participants were put into groups if not already in the participants section

Counterbalancing techniques used

Procedure

Firstly- if you have already said it in the participants, materials or design sections do not repeat it. Depending upon the experiment type this section may be long or very short.

If your computer tasks and/or questionnaires are already described in detail in the methods section, then you basically state the order it was done in continuous prose. If there was an experiment with two questionnaires followed by a stop signal task, I would have described these things in the materials in detail. So with regard to describing their place in the procedure I could state

“…Participants then completed the CEOA-B and the AUDIT. Following this they were given verbal instructions on completing the stop signal task it was started by the experimenter.”

Procedures often also include

Very basic information on how informed consent was taken

Overall length of time the study took (per participant)

Any verbal instructions given

Some studies have complicated procedures which walk the reader through a series of unfolding events in clear order

Example

Testing took place between 12.00 p.m. and 6.00 p.m. in a laboratory at the second author’s institution. Trials were conducted by three undergraduate students who had received extensive training from the second author with regard to alcohol administration and associated protocols (e.g., the procedures in place in case of any adverse effects). Several qualified first aiders were in the same building during these hours in case of any adverse effects from alcohol consumption (e.g., a participant becoming ill). Each session involved one participant and one confederate. Both were initially asked to confirm they met the criteria for participation (all did) and both signed a consent form agreeing to participate. The consent form informed participants that, if they consumed alcohol, they must agree to remain in the laboratory at the end of the study until their BrAC reading declined to 0.04 g/210 L (half the UK drink drive limit). They were then breathalysed. All participants provided a breathalyser reading of 0.0 g/210 L, indicating sobriety. Both were then weighed so the volume of alcohol to be administered could be calculated (if necessary).

Next, the confederate and participant took part in a rigged lottery draw to determine whether they would receive a soft drink or alcohol. The confederate was always selected to receive a soft drink and the participant was selected to receive either a soft drink (one-third of participants) or alcohol (two-thirds of participants, with half receiving an alcohol placebo). The confederate and participant then completed the Subjective intoxication scales (SIS) and the experimenter simultaneously made the drinks in an adjoining room. Upon completing the SIS, the participant and confederate were given 8 min to consume their drinks and 8 min to absorb them. During this 16-min period, both were given magazines to read. Afterwards, they completed another SIS and were breathalysed again. The breathalyser readings were hidden so participants in the placebo condition would not know they had received a soft drink and those in alcohol condition would not know how intoxicated they were.

The participant and confederate were next shown the six household scenes for 15 s each. They then completed the Alcohol use disorders identification test followed by the collaborative recall test. During the collaborative recall test, they both verbally recalled six items from each scene. The participant always responded first and the confederate second, taking turns to recall one item each at a time. The scenes were recalled in the same order in which they were studied and the researcher recorded all responses. Participants were instructed to be as accurate as possible and to avoid guessing. They were encouraged to say “pass” if they were unsure of an answer. For each scene, the participant and confederate were given six opportunities each to recall an item, even if they passed on a previous turn. During this test, the confederate recalled items that had appeared in the scenes (studied items) as well as items not in the scenes (contagion lures). Specifically, for three of the six scenes, the confederate recalled six items that had appeared. For the remaining three scenes, the confederate recalled four studied items and two contagion lures. The confederate always recalled the contagion lures on their fourth and sixth turn. The three scenes the confederate recalled contagion lures for were counterbalanced. This counterbalancing allowed the authors to assess how likely it is that participants would later spontaneously falsely recall these contagion lures (so these are the control lures). Social contagion would occur if the participants recalled more contagion lures than control lures. Throughout the collaborative recall test, the confederate followed a practiced script. The confederate learnt a list of alternative contagion lure responses for each scene in case the participants recalled one of these items (see Roediger et al., 2001).

After the collaborative recall, the participant and confederate sat at separate tables (facing away from each other) and completed post-collaborative individual free recall tests. Each scene was recalled in the order in which it was studied. Participants were given 2 min to recall as many items as they could per scene, circling R or K for each item recalled. Again, participants were asked to be as accurate as possible and not guess. Afterwards, both were asked to turn their recall booklets over so no responses were visible.

Next, the participant and confederate completed the 36-item source monitoring recognition test. They then completed the partner perception questionnaire. Finally, they completed a third SIS and were breathalysed again. Afterwards, the participants were told they had worked with a confederate and asked if they knew this. Those in the placebo condition were also asked if they were aware they had consumed a soft drink. None claimed awareness of either form of deception. The study then ended and debriefing occurred. The procedure lasted approximately 1 h 10 min. Participants who consumed alcohol were told how intoxicated they were, had the legal and safety implications of their state explained (e.g., they were too intoxicated to legally drive), and were reminded that they had agreed to remain in the laboratory until their BrAC reading declined to 0.04 g/210 L (half the UK drink drive limit). Those who wished to leave prior to this (28 of the 30) were asked to sign an alcohol release waiver form indicating they had been told the above information and that they would not the hold the university responsible for any adverse event upon leaving.

FOR THE NEXT SESSION

Students continue with data collection. They are advised to continue writing up their report, particularly the methods

SEMESTER 2: WEEKS 5 & 6

PROGRESS

Check progress. Confirm that students have written their introduction and method sections and answer any questions that they have about these sections.

Check that students have entered data correctly into their spreadsheet, and answer any questions they have.

ANALYSES

Students need to outline their hypotheses or research questions describe the type of study design they have used and what analyses are appropriate and why. This was covered last term in the analysis plan section.

If you are expecting something not taught as part of the undergraduate course, this tutorial will be a good opportunity to teach the method

RESULTS

Results sections can be daunting but if you know what analyses you are meant to be doing they should be relatively easy. Use the resources that are available, lecture slides/pdfs, practical book and videos. Each member of the group should run the analysis independently.

Writing a good results section

APA formatting

Tables:

APA tables have no vertical lines at all, and there are limited number of horizontal line too (exact number depending on the nature of the results) e.g.,

A simple example is presented above – note N is not always needed particularly in within subjects and correlational designs where it will always be the same.

The PSYC234 and PSYC235 practical handbooks and lectures all contain numerous examples of APA formatted tables for a variety of designs and analysis. A guide on how to make a correlation matrix (like pictured below can be found here)

Appropriate descriptives vary according to the type of data that you have collected, a point of discussion is what type of descriptives and how/if they are broken down into different conditions. All lectures and practical classes contain examples of this.

Inferential statistics:

APA formatting is given where possible in all lectures, in some cases (e.g., mediation) there is no APA formatting so it is suggested that the method taught in lectures is used. Remember there are some very important things to consider when reporting inferential stats

Test hypotheses! Don’t fish for significant results for the sake of being able to talk about significant results. A significant finding has no more importance than a non-significant finding, and a significant finding produced through fishing has no value at all!

Give effect sizes wherever possible, p values tell only part of the story.

Explain effects clearly, “group A differed from group B” is ambiguous, “group A had significantly higher scores than group B” is clear. Similarly “there was a significant association between X and Y” is ambiguous “there was a significant negative association between X and Y” is clear.

If you have multiple analyses, separate them using clear subheadings, indeed you could write a brief structural plan before you write up your results.

Be concise!

Figures:

Figures are a good way of highlighting core messages about your data. There are a wide range of figures that can be produced depending on your data, and notably you do not have to produce figures if not appropriate. A few key things to consider when thinking about graphing data

Do not do pie charts, they are awful things that should not appear in science!

Where you are plotting a descriptive (mean, median, estimated marginal mean, etc.) give error bars wherever possible (95% CI or Standard error of the mean)

Label axis clearly, including units of measurement

Give them clear titles

Structure:

There should be a clear structure to results sections. It is acceptable to have subheadings signposting the analyses, or the hypotheses you are testing clearly. Generally speaking results usually open with descriptive stats and then primary analyses and the secondary (exploratory) analyses (if any). Do not start results section with graphs or tables, always briefly describe them first before adding them below the description.

FOR THE NEXT SESSION

Students MUST analyse data before the next session. While they may not necessarily need to have written the whole thing up, they should be able to interpret their findings as they will have to discuss them during the next tutorial.

SEMESTER 2: WEEKS 7 & 8

COLLECTION OF DATA

Students must have collected all their data, shared this with their supervisor and analysed it before this session. It is recommended that students to send data at least 48 hours BEFORE this session.

Discuss the results with the group, did they support the hypothesis, how big are the effects, are there any issues or caveats?

The rest of the tutorial should focus on how everything done so far can be used to produce an effective discussion.

Key discussion points are around:

What current results mean in terms of your hypothesis

How your results fit in with current research/theory

Limitations and how to deal with them

Implications and future directions

Below is a breakdown of each ‘section’ of a discussion. Each part (barring the opening paragraph section) can be used to guide this discussion.

Writing a discussion

Opening paragraph:

The opening paragraph of your discussion should clearly summarise your results and what they mean in terms of your hypothesis. The key to a good opening paragraph of a discussion is following a simple structure and only giving the most pertinent information.

There are some simple “Do nots” you should remember:

Restate stats – If someone wants specific numbers they will look for them in the results.

All this appears later

All this appears laterRefer to tables or figures

Highlight limitations

Bring in lots of literature (especially new literature, not mentioned

in the introduction)

Discuss nuances of your sample/sampling technique

Waffle- Look at each sentence and ask yourself “does this give some distinct information, and does it help tell the story of my research?” If it does not remove it. You can even do this on a word by word basis, do not use ten words when two will do! (I believe this applies to everything that you ever write).

Structuring your opening paragraph:

Often it is a good idea to open with one or two sentences describing the current study- you can do this with almost all studies even when they are complicated, for example:

“The current study used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to identify patterns of reactivity to appetitive stimuli in the mesolimbic dopamine system. Participants underwent an fMRI scans when in a sated and fasted state during which they were exposed to pictures of high fat appetitive stimuli and low fat control stimuli”

“The current study investigated whether an individualised alcohol Stroop that utilised words associated with participants’ favourite drink predicted more variance in alcohol involvement than a general alcohol Stroop.”

“The superordinate objective of the current meta-analysis was to systematically characterize the overall patterns of findings across studies comparing DRD in groups of individuals exhibiting addictive behaviour to a control group”.

“In the current study we tested whether two aspects of impulsivity, reward sensitivity and response inhibition affected food intake, especially in interaction with variety”.

– The next bit you have a choice, you could structure it like:

1. Restate the hypotheses briefly

“It was predicted that there would be an association between X and Y but only in female participants”

“It was hypothesised both X, Y and Z would all contribute unique variance to anxiety symptoms”

Then you would follow this statement with

“Results were supportive of these/this/our hypotheses…

“Results did not support these/this/our hypotheses…

Then you would briefly summarise the important findings. Of course what the important findings are depend on your hypotheses, and your experimental design. If you, for example, run a regression analysis in which you control for age and gender (but you have no specific hypotheses referring to these variables), and find gender predicts your DV this is not worthy of being discussed in this paragraph as its not fundamentally important to the study, at most you may mention it in passing when discussing important results “variable X predicted variable Y after adjusting for gender”

Likewise, long-winded descriptions of main effects that are not central to hypotheses are best avoided.

Or alternatively:

2. You can summarise the important findings and then state what they mean for your hypotheses

“Both age group and stress were found to significantly reduce reaction times. Importantly, we found a significant age by stress interaction which was the result of age significantly impacting reaction times but only when participants were under stress; age had no effect when participants were not stressed. These results support our hypothesis inasmuch age was associated with reductions in participant reaction times but only under stressful conditions.

After you have written your first paragraph the discussion follows a simple structure

Relate your findings to previous research and theory.

Are your results consistent with similar research?

If it is different to previous research explain why this might be?

Did you use methodologies to assess constructs? Sample? etc.

What does this mean for the theoretical model you research is based upon?

How have you moved the research area forward?

This section is very much dependent upon writing a thorough introduction, a good introduction that has brought in a range of pertinent literature will mean you will be able to integrate your findings more easily. This will be the longest part of the discussion and will show your understanding of the broader literature as well as your study design.

Limitations of your study (and how to deal with them!)

What ways could your study be improved? Often student samples can be expanded to include more diverse age groups, backgrounds etc.

Maybe you would use an alternative design, within subjects/between/quasi experimental etc.

What about causality? Can the current study show causal relationships? If not how would you do so?

Other variables that need to be considered?

Please do not use this section to launch a scathing diatribe about your experiment; if you talk about how terrible your study is, it begs the question why did you do it like that in the first place?!

Future directions

What new research could be done on the back of this study, what else can be explored, does it offer new avenues for interesting research? This can very much tie in with the limitations section.

Clinical/practical implications

Sometimes your results may have clinical implications

Vulnerability in certain groups?

Indicate that certain treatment strategies would be useful

Risk factors?

Maybe there are practical implications

Best practice for those working in the real world, e.g., interviewing strategies for police

Best environments in schools/offices to stimulate productivity

Personality types best suited to different jobs

How to teach children to learn to talk more effectively

Conclusion

Summarise, very succinctly, the study! Often this is missed or done poorly. Here are some examples:

“In summary, the current study has demonstrated that the anticipated effects of alcohol can significantly impair the behavioural substrates of self-control and influence craving. This has significant implications for the study of alcohol priming effects suggesting that the much-used alcohol vs. placebo comparisons will be underestimating alcohol priming effects in the real world (which are the product of anticipated plus pharmacological effects). This also suggests that models of alcohol priming which posit that increased alcohol consumption is the product of alcohol-induced impairments in inhibitory control need to acknowledge a role of anticipated effects. The correlations between AOE and placebo-induced impairment and craving suggest that individual differences in AOE should be monitored in priming studies as they may significantly influence results.”

“In conclusion, this study provides new insights into influences on day to day food choices in African American women. It suggests how factors that vary throughout the day may challenge women’s ability to avoid energy-dense, nutrient poor snack foods. The results underscore the importance of public policies (e.g., fast food moratoriums) and private policies (e.g., within work sites) to curb ubiquitous availability of food, as well as addressing conditions of African American women’s lives (e.g., financial vulnerability, discrimination, under-resourced neighbourhood, underemployment, caretaking responsibilities) that give rise to daily hassles. Findings also suggest that mobile health (mHealth) interventions that take into account time-varying influences on food choices and provide real-time assistance in dealing with easy food availability and coping with stressors be beneficial in improving African American women’s day to day food choices.”

“Our results raise questions for positive theories of decision-making. First, to avoid these biases individuals need to allocate their visual attention evenly among the options under consideration. As shown in Krajbich, Armel and Rangel (2008), individuals are able to do so in the absence of incidental variables that manipulate visual attention artificially. Second, it is likely that there are a number of item characteristics, such as lighting or some forms of packaging, that are irrelevant for the value of consuming an item, but that reliably affect relative attention. The extent to which such variables affect choices remains an important open question”

FOR THE NEXT SESSION

Remind students to book PDPs

SEMESTER 2: WEEKS 9 & 10

Employability material will be put in the week 9-10 folder by the employability team later in the semester.

INDIVIDUAL PDP

During office hours to discuss Personal Development, Academic performance and ESRA.

This is an individual meeting between AA and each student

A tutorial + 1:1 session may be time consuming for AAs, but very effective for the student.

N=8 SESSIONS YEAR TWO

The post PSYC234/235 N=8 SESSIONS HANDBOOK Year two tutorials The overall aim of the appeared first on PapersSpot.