Statistical Methods in Psychology

Written Assignment Summary Order Description Statistical Methods in" rel="nofollow">in Psychology Written Assignment 2: Report 150 poin" rel="nofollow">ints Please read the article titled: “Brief Report: Eye Movement Patterns Durin" rel="nofollow">ing an Embedded Figures Test in" rel="nofollow">in Children with ASD” and answer some questions about it. Here are a few tips that should assist you in" rel="nofollow">in critically evaluatin" rel="nofollow">ing this research article: The Title Read the title carefully: more in" rel="nofollow">information is contain" rel="nofollow">ined in" rel="nofollow">in the title than you thin" rel="nofollow">ink. It is very important that you pay attention to in" rel="nofollow">information in" rel="nofollow">in the title. • What are the major ideas addressed in" rel="nofollow">in the article? • Who were the participants? What was their affiliation? • Were they a special kin" rel="nofollow">ind of group (e.g., patients, college students, women only, married people)? The Abstract The purpose of the abstract is to summarize the article. Read the abstract carefully. If the author has done a good job, the abstract should provide you with the theoretical motivation for the paper, the major results and a brief general discussion. You should not JUST read the abstract, but often it is a great help to understandin" rel="nofollow">ing the entire article. • What variables were examin" rel="nofollow">ined? • What were the fin" rel="nofollow">indin" rel="nofollow">ings? • Does the study show a cause-and-effect relationship between variables, or does it just show that a relationship exists? • Where was the work conducted (i.e., laboratory or field). If field, what was the geographical location? The Introduction The in" rel="nofollow">introduction will give you the rationale for the study (an explanation of what the study in" rel="nofollow">investigates and why). The in" rel="nofollow">introduction typically in" rel="nofollow">includes a review of previous research or theory that provides a context for the specific questions bein" rel="nofollow">ing addressed in" rel="nofollow">in the article. You should understand what the research question(s) bein" rel="nofollow">ing studied and what the authors predicted they would fin" rel="nofollow">ind? Readin" rel="nofollow">ing the in" rel="nofollow">introduction of a journal article can be made easier if you keep a number of key questions in" rel="nofollow">in min" rel="nofollow">ind, and look for the answers to them: • What is the purpose of the article? Is it reportin" rel="nofollow">ing an experiment, a new theory, or is it reviewin" rel="nofollow">ing previously published theory and research on a certain" rel="nofollow">in topic? • What is the topic of the article? What specifically is the article is addressin" rel="nofollow">ing? Is it answerin" rel="nofollow">ing a specific question, tryin" rel="nofollow">ing to explain" rel="nofollow">in certain" rel="nofollow">in observations, presentin" rel="nofollow">ing a model of some process, explorin" rel="nofollow">ing the relationship between two or more variables, or somethin" rel="nofollow">ing else? Look to the title and abstract for guidance. What variables are mentioned? • Where is the article goin" rel="nofollow">ing? Look over the structure of the article, payin" rel="nofollow">ing particular note to headin" rel="nofollow">ings and subheadin" rel="nofollow">ings. Scan tables and figures. You want to get an overview of what the article starts out discussin" rel="nofollow">ing, what it ends up concludin" rel="nofollow">ing, and how it leads you to that conclusion. If you get a rough outlin" rel="nofollow">ine of the entire article in" rel="nofollow">in your head before you begin" rel="nofollow">in readin" rel="nofollow">ing, you have a better chance of seein" rel="nofollow">ing how each piece fits in" rel="nofollow">into a larger framework. • Why is this an in" rel="nofollow">interestin" rel="nofollow">ing or worthwhile topic/phenomenon to research? Why would this article in" rel="nofollow">interest researchers in" rel="nofollow">in the field (the journal editors would not have accepted the article for publication unless it met this role in" rel="nofollow">in some way)? • What is already known about this topic/phenomenon? • Where are the gaps in" rel="nofollow">in contemporary knowledge or understandin" rel="nofollow">ing of this topic/phenomenon? • How does the research bein" rel="nofollow">ing reported fill gaps in" rel="nofollow">in our knowledge/ or understandin" rel="nofollow">ing of this topic/phenomenon? What niche does this work fill? • What specific prediction(s) or hypothesis(es) are bein" rel="nofollow">ing tested? What were the main" rel="nofollow">in in" rel="nofollow">independent variables (what the researchers manipulated) and dependent variables (what the researchers measured)? The Method Generally speakin" rel="nofollow">ing, when readin" rel="nofollow">ing the method section you should ask yourself: • What research techniques are used by the author(s)? Readin" rel="nofollow">ing this section should provide you with a better idea of what was actually done in" rel="nofollow">in the research as well as a clue in" rel="nofollow">into the thin" rel="nofollow">inkin" rel="nofollow">ing of the researcher. • Is the method employed a valid test of the predictions or hypotheses? There is rarely (if ever) a sin" rel="nofollow">ingle way of testin" rel="nofollow">ing a prediction or hypothesis. The researcher will have made a choice between a number of possible research designs/sets of materials/procedures/sample groups, etc. You need to consider whether the choices made by the researcher will allow them to make valid claims about their the predictions or hypotheses. • Has the researcher overlooked any possible confounds or extraneous variables which could affect in" rel="nofollow">interpretations of the fin" rel="nofollow">indin" rel="nofollow">ings? No piece of research is 'perfect', and there are usually limits as to how much 'control' can be achieved over the research environment. However, some researchers attempt to achieve more control in" rel="nofollow">in their research designs than others do. You need to consider whether sufficient control has been achieved. • How do the methods employed compare with the methods used in" rel="nofollow">in other in" rel="nofollow">investigations of the same topic/phenomenon? As researchers usually seek to make comparisons between their study and earlier studies, you need to consider whether or not the method employed allows the researcher to make valid comparisons between studies, and how much you feel they are entitled to generalize their fin" rel="nofollow">indin" rel="nofollow">ings. The Results This section is very important because it provides numerical evidence that supports or refutes the hypotheses bein" rel="nofollow">ing studied. When readin" rel="nofollow">ing the results section you should ask yourself: • Please describe the statistics used (e.g. ANOVAs, T tests, F or t reported, degrees of freedom, Means, standard deviations, p values, etc.) • How do the results relate to the predictions/hypotheses set out in" rel="nofollow">in the in" rel="nofollow">introduction (i.e., are they supported or not)? What differences did the authors fin" rel="nofollow">ind that support or refute the project hypotheses? • Are the results reported and analyzed in" rel="nofollow">in an unbiased manner? The manner in" rel="nofollow">in which data are reported and analyzed could dramatically affect in" rel="nofollow">interpretation. For example, different types or formats of graphs can emphasize or de- emphasize the sizes of effects, and different in" rel="nofollow">inferential tests can yield different results. The Discussion The discussion should summarize the main" rel="nofollow">in fin" rel="nofollow">indin" rel="nofollow">ings in" rel="nofollow">in (relatively) plain" rel="nofollow">in English. How do the authors in" rel="nofollow">interpret the fin" rel="nofollow">indin" rel="nofollow">ings? That is, what do they say the fin" rel="nofollow">indin" rel="nofollow">ings tell us about their research question? Do we now know' somethin" rel="nofollow">ing new? Are there new questions raised? Do the authors discuss implications of their fin" rel="nofollow">indin" rel="nofollow">ings for theory, or for the "real world"? When readin" rel="nofollow">ing the discussion section you should ask yourself: • Have the appropriate in" rel="nofollow">interpretations of the results been made? • Are there ways of in" rel="nofollow">interpretin" rel="nofollow">ing the results that haven't been considered? • Has the researcher presented an unbiased evaluation of the study/method employed? • Is the researcher justified in" rel="nofollow">in makin" rel="nofollow">ing any theoretical claims that are made on the basis of the study's fin" rel="nofollow">indin" rel="nofollow">ings? Were the hypotheses supported or rejected? • What are the implications of those fin" rel="nofollow">indin" rel="nofollow">ings (what do they tell us about theory, research, or real life concerns)? • What suggestions are bein" rel="nofollow">ing made about future research in" rel="nofollow">into this topic/phenomenon or what does the researcher consider to be 'the way forward'? The Conclusion or summary The conclusions may be in" rel="nofollow">in a separate section at the end of the article or in" rel="nofollow">incorporated as part of the discussion section. The conclusions should summarize the important fin" rel="nofollow">indin" rel="nofollow">ings of the study and poin" rel="nofollow">int out their significance to the general research area. They might also poin" rel="nofollow">int out avenues for future research based on the fin" rel="nofollow">indin" rel="nofollow">ings of the study.