How To Write Psychology Researc - Findlay, Bruce PDF

Copyright © Pearson Australia (a division of Pearson Australia Group Pty Ltd) 2019 — 9781488618437 — Findlay & Kaufmann/How to Write
Psychology Research Reports and Essays 8e

HOW TO WRITE
8
Psychology
RESEARCH REPORTS AND ESSAYS
Copyright © Pearson Australia (a division of Pearson Australia Group Pty Ltd) 2019 — 9781488618437 — Findlay & Kaufmann/How to Write Psychology Research Reports and Essays 8e
In memory of Associate Professor Jennifer Boldero (1955–2017)
In recognition of your great contribution to research and teaching in psychology in
Australia. Your passion and dedication inspired, supported, and educated hundreds
of psychologists, psychology graduates, and one daughter.
Findlay Kaufmann
HOW TO WRITE
8
Psychology
RESEARCH REPORTS AND ESSAYS
Copyright © Pearson Australia (a division of Pearson Australia Group Pty Ltd) 2019
Pearson Australia
707 Collins Street
Melbourne VIC 3008
www.pearson.com.au
The Copyright Act 1968 of Australia allows a maximum of one chapter or 10% of this book, whichever is
the greater, to be copied by any educational institution for its educational purposes provided that that
educational institution (or the body that administers it) has given a remuneration notice to Copyright
Agency Limited (CAL) under the Act. For details of the CAL licence for educational institutions contact:
Copyright Agency Limited, telephone: (02) 9394 7600, email: info@copyright.com.au
All rights reserved. Except under the conditions described in the Copyright Act 1968 of Australia and
subsequent amendments, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or
transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise,
without the prior permission of the copyright owner.
Senior Portfolio Manager: Stephen Heasley

Sponsoring Editor: Simone Bella
Development Editor: Chakira Lane
Project Manager: Bronwyn Smith
Production Managers: Bernadette Chang and Amandeep Kaur
Content Developer: Stephen Razos
Rights and Permissions Team Leader: Lisa Woodland
Production Controller: Yijing Wu
Lead Editor/Copy Editor: Marie-Louise Taylor
Proofreaders: iEnergizer Aptara®, Ltd and Maryanne Phillips
Indexer: iEnergizer Aptara®, Ltd
Cover and internal design by Lamond Art & Design
Cover illustration © Kraphix/Shutterstock
Typeset by iEnergizer Aptara®, Ltd
Printed in Malaysia
1 2 3 4 5 23 22 21 20 19
ISBN: 9781488618437
ISBN: 9781488618444 (eBook)
Pearson Australia Group Pty Ltd ABN 40 004 245 943
Contents
Preface��viii
Introduction��ix
How to Use this Book��xii
Acknowledgments��xiv
1 Reasons for Writing Research Reports and Essays�� 1

1.1
Why Write Reports and Essays? ��2
1.2
What Is a Research Report?��3
1.3
Writing Essays at University ��5
1.4
Chapter Summaries��5
2 Writing Research Reports and Essays – Getting Started �� 7

2.1 Collaborating Not Copying – The Distinction ��8
2.2 Information Gathering��9
2.3 Evaluating Internet Resources ��15
2.4 Critical Thinking ��16
2.5 Critically Evaluating Psychology Journal Articles ��18
2.6 Writing Style ��21
2.7 Using the Correct Tense��27
2.8 Inclusive Language ��28
2.9 Proofreading and Redrafting ��28
2.10
The Physical Presentation of Your Assignment��30
3 Referencing�� 33
3.1
Plagiarism��34
3.2
In-text Referencing ��36
3.3
The Reference List ��42
3.3.1 Books��44
3.3.2 Journal Articles ��45
3.3.3 Internet Sources��47
3.3.4 Other Sources��48
How to Wr ite Psychology Research Repor ts and Essays
4 Research Reports – How Do You Start? �� 51

4.1
How to Approach a Research Report ��53
4.2
How to Begin��54
4.2.1 Studies Designed by the Psychology Department��54
4.2.2 Studies You Design��57
4.2.3 All Studies – A Brief Introduction to Key Concepts��58
4.3
Research Ethics ��60
4.4
Where to Go From Here ��62
5 Sections of a Research Report �� 67

5.1 Title Page and Abstract ��68
5.2 Introduction��72
5.3 Method��77
5.3.1 Participants��80
5.3.2 Materials��81
5.3.3 Design��85
5.3.4 Procedure ��86
5.4 Results��87
5.4.1 Your Very First Report��87
5.4.2 All Reports��89
5.4.3 Numbers and Words ��92
5.4.4 Decimals��93
5.4.5 Tables ��93
5.4.6 Figures��97
5.5 Discussion��100
5.6 References��105
5.7 Appendices��105
5.8 Further Reading��106
5.9 Feedback��107
5.10
Summary��108
5.11
Checklist ��108
6 Essays in Psychology �� 111

6.1
How Are Essays Different From Research Reports? ��113
6.2
Choosing an Essay Topic ��113
6.3
Deciding What the Essay Topic Asks��114
6.4
Preparation – Reading, Note-taking, and Planning��117
vi
Contents
6.5
Structure of an Essay ��118
6.5.1 The Title Page and Abstract��119
6.5.2 The Introduction��119
6.5.3 The Body (Discussion) ��121
6.5.4 The Conclusion��122
6.5.5 The References ��124
6.6
Redrafting and Presentation��124
6.7
Further Reading��125
6.8
Checklist ��126
Appendix A Sample of a Good Research Report��129

Appendix B Sample of a Poor Research Report��139
Appendix C Sample of a Good Research Report��151
Appendix D Sample of a Poor Research Report��165
Glossary��175
References��181
Index ��187
vii
Preface
The Australian Psychological Society (APS) is pleased to continue its association with the
publication of Bruce Findlay and Leah Kaufmann’s How to Write Psychology Research
Reports and Essays, now in its 8th edition.
Undergraduate psychology education aims to develop psychological literacy.
Knowledge of research methods, critical thinking skills, and communication skills
are valued competencies of psychology graduates. Undergraduate research projects
and assignments are designed to help students master these skills; yet first- and
second-year students may find writing research reports and essays daunting.
Findlay and Kaufmann’s book is designed to make these learning tasks less challenging
for students. It uses easy-to-read and student-friendly language. The book is intended to
complement undergraduate textbooks and the current edition of the Publication Manual of
the American Psychology Association (APA). The book will help students to plan and
organise their research report, to express their ideas clearly, and to follow APA style. The
book also alerts students to key issues, such as referencing sources correctly and avoiding
plagiarism. It now includes information on electronic referencing, online sources, and
submissions. Flowcharts, checklists, and sample reports provide further guidance on
psychological writing. There are now additional examples for postgraduate students.
I am pleased to recommend the new edition of this book as a valuable resource to
students throughout their undergraduate studies. Students interested in a career in
psychology are invited to explore the APS website and our resources for students, including
Psych Student Headquarters (www.psychology.org.au). The APS website also shows the
diversity of careers in psychology, opportunities to network, and resources provided for
students and student subscribers by the APS. You can subscribe to the APS by visiting
https://join.psychology.org.au.
Sabine Wingenfeld Hammond, PhD, FAPS

Executive Manager, Science, Education, and Membership
Australian Psychological Society
viii
Introduction
Introduction to Students
If you’ve picked this up to see what it’s like – buy it! It’ll save you a lot of hassles in your
undergraduate psychology career.
While most psychology students do not go on to become the sort of psychologists who
publish journal articles, most psychology departments treat you as if you will! For exam-
ple, you will be expected to write research reports that differ from typical assignments and
essays, and although they are not as long or complex as those an academic would write,
they are designed to lead you towards that level. This book will give you all the informa-
tion you need about how to prepare and write psychology research reports and essays in
psychology at the undergraduate level, without overburdening you with all those extra
touches that are needed for publication.
There is a glossary of those words that are on the tip of your tongue but whose mean-
ing escapes you at the moment. There is an index that will lead you to the help you need
for any particular feature of a research report or essay that is bothering you. There are
flowcharts of the processes involved in writing a research report and an essay. There are a
couple of good examples of research reports that you can use as a sort of graphical index,
and a couple of examples of badly written reports to show you what to avoid.
If you want some global advice for undergraduate writing in psychology, it is – learn to
plan ahead! It will save you a lot of anxiety of the sort that occurs when your computer
fails at midnight and the assignment is due at 9 o’clock the next morning. This book will
show you how to learn this valuable skill.
Good writing! It’s not nearly as difficult as you might think.
ix
Introduction to Staff Members

Purpose of the book. This book is intended to address the need for a set of guidelines
for writing undergraduate-level psychology research reports and essays. It is aimed at
first- and second-year students, although it may be useful to address weaknesses in prepa-
ration, writing, or even submitting assignments among more senior students. It is not,
however, a guide to writing for publication. It does observe the conventions required by
the 6th edition of the Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA),
and it includes the rationale for those conventions, as well as the steps to be taken in
producing and presenting psychological research reports and essays. A student who
grasps these concepts and learns the conventions will have a sound basis for presenting
research in a professional manner, and writing well-argued essays, so that the later step of
writing for publication should be an easier one to take.
Why such a book is desirable. Increasing student numbers and dwindling resources
(especially, face-to-face teaching opportunities) in Australian universities often result in
students spending less time in classes on the more basic skills and approaches to writing
research reports and essays. It can also mean students get less guidance on this (assessed)
aspect of their learning and are less able to understand or make use of feedback on what
they have written. This is particularly true at first-year level.
Many psychology departments produce handouts on writing research reports and
essays which, however brief, are time consuming to develop, and are a further burden
(beyond core content development) on the demands of increasingly burdened academics.
They may also be produced by staff members who have been writing for publication for
some time and who may take for granted a good deal of information that first-year stu-
dents, in particular, do not know. For this reason, many students find the conventions of
psychological report writing especially difficult, since the requirements differ both from
those of their other tertiary subjects and from their own previous experience. Moreover,
when students are left to seek answers to very basic or seemingly obvious questions
(which they can be too embarrassed to ask of staff members), they often find ad hoc or
inaccurate answers (e.g., from the internet, other students, or even less experienced staff),
and this can lead to complaints from students about what is expected in research reports.
Students will find this book useful because it is considerably more detailed than the
typical departmental handout, but not as overwhelming as books advising on writing for
publication, such as the Publication Manual of the APA. Some of the more advanced books
are mentioned towards the end of Chapters 5 and 6.
Difference from the previous edition. Since the 6th edition of the Publication Manual
of the APA was published in 2010, publishing in general has continued to change, espe-
cially in the accessibility and presentation of electronic resources. While the 6th edition
of the Publication Manual updated some conventions to meet the changes in publishing,
especially the use of the doi, the APA has also published, electronically, a more detailed
style guide to electronic references. The latest edition of the current book includes some
Introduction
of this material. In addition, we have updated guidance on issues like online submission
and the use of online sources (e.g., online journals) and tools (e.g., Turnitin).
The examples of opening sentences, summaries of prior research, and referencing
examples are fairly recent material from Australian and New Zealand academics. We hope
your students are tickled to see the names of academics they may know used as glowing
examples still active at the time of writing, and relevant. The occasional URL used as
examples have been updated to ensure they are still active and relevant.
In response to requests from third- and fourth-year students, who say they are finding
the book useful in their higher years, we have also included some examples of more
sophisticated tables and figures and how they should be reported in text.
Academics are encouraged to consider embedding and using this book in courses. It
may save teaching time by recommending that students buy and frequently refer to this
book. If you are using this book as an aid to your teaching and have any constructive
criticisms to offer, especially about the newer sections, we would appreciate hearing
from you.
Bruce Findlay
Senior Lecturer in Psychology
Swinburne University of Technology
PO Box 218, Hawthorn, Vic 3122
email: bfindlay@swin.edu.au
Leah Kaufmann
Senior Lecturer, School of Psychology
Australian Catholic University
Locked Bag 4115, Fitzroy MDC, Vic 3065
email: leah.kaufmann@acu.edu.au
xi
How to Use this Book
This book has a number of design features which we hope will make it easier to under-
stand the information you need to know. There are often good and poor examples cited.
The examples will be in figures, because one of the conventions you need to learn is that
illustrative material belongs in figures. The format of the figures and tables throughout
this book is the format that you are expected to learn, but in addition there will be icons
to remind you which are good and which are poor examples. They will look like this:
Good examples for you to follow will have this “tick” beside them.
Poor examples or formats that you should avoid using in your work will have
this “cross” beside them.
Notes, which will often accompany tables, will have this little “notepad” icon
beside them. Please read them carefully!
Finally, this icon will accompany comments or instructions that require even
closer attention than usual. It will refer to things that are absolutely essential for
you to be aware of.
Please be aware that the examples throughout the book illustrating the conventions
you need to know about are not exhaustive. You should not get the idea that these exam-
ples are the only way to express those particular conventions, but they are certainly
acceptable ways. As you become more comfortable with writing in this style, you will be
able to be more creative within the existing conventions.
At the start of Chapters 4 and 6 there are flowcharts that indicate the sequence of activ-
ities for the successful writing of research reports and essays, respectively. These may
serve as a useful summary and reminder of the process once you have familiarised your-
self with the details. There are also checklists for research reports and essays, at the ends
of Chapters 5 and 6 respectively, that will help you to plan and mark off your achieve-
ments in your first few assignments. Feel free to photocopy them and use them to mea-
sure your progress.
There are good and bad examples of two research reports, starting on page 129. The
first is a fairly straightforward one, such as you might expect in your first one or two
assignments. The second is rather more complex, but you might encounter one like it late
in first year or early in second year. They are not meant to be the only way you can write
a research report, but they are acceptable ways; they can also be used as a sort of index, if
you are looking for something but can’t think of the word that would allow you to use the
normal index. You can look at the part of the report where you expect to find advice, then
xii
How to Use this Book
be referred to the sections or pages where that advice can be found. The bad examples
include many of the errors that students commonly make. Have a look at them, see if you
can spot the errors, and check the answers on pages 147–149 and 172–174.
At the beginnings of Chapters 2 to 6 there are lists of keywords. Before reading each
chapter, look up these words in the Glossary at the back of the book. This will ensure that
when you first encounter them in the context of the chapter they will already be a little
familiar. Their meaning should become even clearer as you read through the chapter.
Educator Resource – Test Bank

The Test Bank provides a wealth of testing material. Updated for the new edition, each
chapter offers a wide variety of question types, arranged by section. Questions can be
integrated into Blackboard, Canvas or Moodle Learning Management Systems.
xiii
Acknowledgments
Thanks to the many academics who adopted earlier versions of this book for their introduc-
tory psychology classes. Thanks also to the reviewers who made comments on the 7th edi-
tion. We have incorporated most of the changes they suggested. We are also very grateful to
the many students who have expressed their appreciation for the earlier editions of this
book, and whose comments and experiences have led us to clarify or expand some points.
They more than offset the feeling we sometimes get that, although students are persuaded to
buy the book, many seem not to pay attention to it. It’s many years ago now, but one first-year
convenor set as a research report the topic used in previous editions as an example in the
back of the book. The distribution of students’ marks, and the errors they made, suggested
that a large number of students didn’t realise this!
It may not be apparent to the casual reader, but the publications referred to as examples
in reference lists, and from which we draw good examples of opening sentences, hypotheses,
and summaries of prior research, are most frequently the work of Australasian psychology
researchers. We are impressed by the number of publications produced by our academic
colleagues, and the ease with which we can find good examples without looking beyond
Australia and New Zealand. We like to think that we are reinforcing the inspiration they are
to their students.
At many universities, a high proportion of tutorial teaching, and therefore responsibility
for instructions about, and marking of, research reports, is done by sessional staff, primarily
higher degree students. We are continually impressed by, and grateful for, their dedication
and professionalism. Similarly, we are blessed with congenial associates who offer advice in
constructive ways. As ever, the responsibility for any remaining errors must be our own. In
particular we are grateful to Ben Williams for his statistical and graphical advice, and to
Aimee, Adam, Martin, Rose, Kelly, Ian, and Elisa, whose excellent reports allowed us to amal-
gamate them into the good report.
xiv
Reasons for Writing Research
Reports and Essays
1
Reasons for Writing
Research Reports
and Essays
IN THIS CHAPTER
1.1 Why Write Reports and Essays? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2 What Is a Research Report? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
1.3 Writing Essays at University . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.4 Chapter Summaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Reasons for Writing Research
Reports and Essays
1.1 Why Write Reports and Essays?
I
N ANY SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINE, the structure of established knowledge is, on rare
occasions, shaken up by people of the stature of Einstein or Freud. More usually,
knowledge is added to, brick by brick, by well-reported studies in some relatively spe-
cific area. When taken together, these all make up what we know – in the case of psy-
chology – about how people think, feel, and behave. Hopefully, some of you will go on
to contribute to this knowledge. This will involve considerable training in psychology, in
research methods, and in publication.
You may have begun psychology because you were interested in learning how to help
other people, or perhaps in understanding yourself better, and so may not anticipate that
you will publish research articles in your professional life. However, even if you don’t
publish studies, you will have to read many published reports while completing your
studies in psychology. Knowing the conventions and being able to critically evaluate
these works will aid in this. Specifically, you will need to develop skills that allow you to
decide whether the material you read is useful to your own area of work, as well as
strengths and weaknesses within the work itself. You will need to understand how authors
reached their conclusions, and to decide how sound or applicable those conclusions are,
all of which require a familiarity with the conventions of psychological reporting.
The majority of students who study an introductory psychology subject, or even
complete a three-year degree with a major in psychology, do not go on to become psy-
chologists. To become a psychologist, you will need to complete six years of training;
that is, an accredited undergraduate major, a fourth year called an Honours year or a
Postgraduate Diploma, and two more years which may be a Master’s degree, or profes-
sional supervision and training. In contrast, most students with an undergraduate
degree in psychology find themselves working in management, human resources,
human services departments, market research, journalism, the travel industry, or simi-
lar areas. This is because a degree with a major in psychology is well regarded in the
commercial and industrial world, partly because of the experience of quantitative anal-
ysis that goes with writing research reports, but mainly because psychology graduates
have had excellent training in the critical, disciplined, and concise reporting of the
work they do.
There are therefore three good reasons why you need to learn to write good research
reports:
• The first and most pragmatic reason is that you are expected to do so as part
of an undergraduate degree in psychology and will be assessed on your
ability to do so. It is something you need to know in order to complete your
course successfully.
• A better reason is that as a potential psychologist you need to appraise
what other people have written and to report your own research in order
to communicate to the community of scientists/practitioners and
Reasons for Wr iting Research Repor ts and Essays
1
academics what you have learned from your study of human, or perhaps
animal, behaviour.
• Finally, even if you do not intend to become a psychologist, any occupation
will have its own conventions for preparing and writing reports of the work
you do. Learning the conventions of psychology research reports
demonstrates your ability to master the conventions of a discipline to
potential employers. In addition, the generic skills of synthesising material
requiring high levels of theoretical and conceptual understanding, as well as
reporting your conclusions concisely and on time, are skills that will stand
you in good stead in any professional career.
Many undergraduate psychology students are also asked to write essays. In con-
trast to a research report, which expects you to describe a piece of empirical research,
essays usually expect you to argue a point of view in some area of psychological
interest. Essay writing is also a valued skill, since it also gives you an opportunity
to demonstrate the generic skills of assembling and summarising relevant informa-
tion, critically evaluating it, and coming to a considered conclusion about it in a
succinct way.
1.2 What Is a Research Report?

A research report (sometimes called a laboratory report, or lab report for short) is a summary
of a research project, presented in a specific form including: (a) why you undertook this
particular research; (b) what you expected to find; (c) how you actually did it; (d) what
you did find; (e) what you think the results mean; and (f) the theoretical and practical
implications of the conclusions you drew from those results.
Like most disciplines, psychology has conventions for the reporting of research find-
ings. This means that readers who are familiar with these conventions can quickly and
easily find the information they need and evaluate the quality of this information. From
there they can decide whether they want to read the report in more detail. As a result, the
format of psychological reporting is very useful to readers and can help authors commu-
nicate with their audience.
The reason that the conventions used in psychology conform to a “more or less”
standard format is that the research presented differs in a number of important ways
(e.g., number of studies, number and type of samples, use of apparatus, analyses), which
results in slightly different information being presented. We encourage you to look
through some of the major psychology periodicals in your library or browse through
them on the web (and we encourage you to do so in the very near future), such as:
Australian Journal of Psychology; Brain and Cognition; Child Development; Journal of
Experimental Psychology; Journal of Personality and Social Psychology; or Psychological Science.
You will find many articles in formats that are somewhat different to what is usually
taught in first- or second-year psychology, mostly as a result of more complex designs or

methods than you encounter in your first couple of undergraduate years. Another rea-
son is that a journal article expects a greater familiarity with existing research in the area
than that expected of an undergraduate report, which means that some information may
not be fully described, although you will do so in your early reports. However, by your
third year you should be approaching a professional understanding of prior research,
and your understanding of the conventions of presentation will conform more to the
journal article standard.
The qualitative difference between journal articles and undergraduate research reports
is that the research report is primarily an exercise in communication and only secondar-
ily, if at all, a contribution to research. It is important that the information you communi-
cate to your marker reflects your knowledge and understanding of the topic. It is
important that as an undergraduate you become expert at producing the standard format,
and once you are completely in control of it then you can decide whether it is appropriate
to “bend the rules” in particular cases.
The basic rules are that a research report consists of the following sections in the
sequence indicated:
• Title Page
• Abstract
• Introduction (section does not include this title)
• Method
• Results
• Discussion
• References
• Appendices (often not used in undergraduate reports)
The Title Page clarifies what the report is about and contains information about you. The
Abstract is an overview of the report. The rest of the report is the presentation of the full
details of the research, using an hourglass structure (Kidder & Judd, 1986). Your Introduction
should begin broadly, introducing the topic under study and why it is being studied. This will
then begin to narrow down as you describe the work of previous researchers whose results
have led to your own study. The end of the Introduction is like the approach to the waist of
the hourglass, where you state the aims of your study and the specific hypotheses, which are
predictions of what results you expected from your study. The Method and Results sections
are the most specific sections of the report, since they state precisely what was done and what
results were obtained. The Discussion is where the hourglass begins to spread out again. It
starts with a description of results in relation to the hypotheses (i.e., were they supported?);
your interpretation of the results; then broadens this to discuss how those results relate to
previous work. Finally, you describe the implications of your research, including strengths
and limitations, and finish at the broadest point with a general conclusion about the meaning
and contribution of this research to the literature. The References allow others to check the
accuracy of your assertions, and the Appendices contain additional material that doesn’t need
to be included in the body of the report but is specifically referred to (e.g., in your Method).
Reasons for Wr iting Research Repor ts and Essays
1
1.3 Writing Essays at University
An essay in psychology is no different in basic structure from the essays you will
encounter in other tertiary humanities subjects, such as literature or social sciences
like sociology. Unlike research reports, they are not usually divided into sections. They
follow the standard essay pattern of having an introduction, a body or discussion,
which is the bulk of the essay, and a conclusion. However, psychology essays may also
need a Title Page, Abstract, and References. Essays at tertiary level are somewhat differ-
ent from those many of you will have experienced at school. The basic difference is that
at university you will be expected to be more critical of the material you use in your
essays and systematic in your approach to creating an argument or viewpoint.
Psychology essays typically ask you to discuss some research, to compare and contrast
particular theoretical perspectives on some area of behaviour, or to critically evaluate
some area of research.
Chapter 6 describes what is required of each of these sorts of instructions, but in
essence they expect you to read people’s work with a critical eye, and assess the strengths
and weaknesses of a body of work. What is needed of you as a student with a major in
psychology is that you demand particular standards of evidence for the assertions that
researchers make before you give any weight to those assertions. This requires critical
thinking on your part, and we describe some ways in which you can apply critical think-
ing to psychological articles in Chapter 2.
1.4 Chapter Summaries

The following chapters will deal with: (a) where to look for appropriate references; informa-
tion on critical evaluation of earlier research; and the process of producing an assignment, all
of which are common to both research reports and essays (Chapter 2); (b) the expected
conventions of referencing in text and in the Reference list (Chapter 3); (c) what you do to
get started when assigned to write a research report (Chapter 4); (d) detailed instructions on
what sort of material goes in which sections of a research report, and the conventions for
presenting it (Chapter 5); and (e) advice about essay writing for psychology (Chapter 6). At
the end of the book are examples of good and poor research reports, which you may find
useful if looking at specific aspects, but can’t think of the word that will allow you to look it
up in the normal index.
This page intentionally left blank.
2
and Essays – Getting Started

Writing Research Reports
Writing Research
Reports and Essays –
Getting Started
KEYWORDS
active voice, argument, assumptions, collaboration, copying, empirical,
evidence, extraneous (nuisance) variable, factor, generic, hypothesis,
methodology, operationalisation, organised scepticism, participant,
plagiarism, problem (research problem), qualitative, questionnaire, reference,
replication, representative, scientific study, study, theory
IN THIS CHAPTER
2.1 Collaborating Not Copying – The Distinction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
2.2 Information Gathering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
2.3 Evaluating Internet Resources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.4 Critical Thinking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.5 Critically Evaluating Psychology Journal Articles . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.6 Writing Style . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.7 Using the Correct Tense . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
2.8 Inclusive Language . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2.9 Proofreading and Redrafting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
2.10 The Physical Presentation of Your Assignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
T
HERE ARE SEVERAL ELEMENTS and processes that are common to research
reports and essays. Most notably, assignments that receive the best marks are those
that not only follow the conventional format but are also written clearly and con-
cisely. Importantly, get the best marks also meet the requirements of the instructions
given, including word limits, and are submitted on time.
and Essays – Getting Started
Writing Research Reports
This chapter addresses key issues in getting started: (a) the thorny problem of collab-
orating versus copying; (b) the question of the sort of material you should gather to sup-
port your research report or essay; (c) how to evaluate internet resources; (d) critical
thinking and how to apply it to the material you read; (e) writing style, including the
appropriateness of personal pronouns, fluency of expression, and punctuation; (f) the
use of the correct tense; (g) inclusive language; (h) the need for proofreading and redraft-
ing; and finally (i) the physical presentation of your assignment.
2.1
C ollaborating Not Copying –
The Distinction
Collaborative study has many benefits. It is good practice for your professional life,
and it will make your university life more enjoyable and fruitful. However, collabora-
tion in the production of assessable assignments can be confusing and even risky. You
should always check what the expectations of your lecturer or tutor are regarding col-
laboration in the preparation of assessable work, but even when you work with another
student or students, you should never produce one work which is submitted by multi-
ple students. Instead, you might talk about the resources, your understanding of them,
and the expectations of the task, and then you will write your own assignment.
It is desirable for first- and second-year undergraduate students faced with writing
research reports and essays to collaborate in study groups. For example, when working
on research reports, it may help you to discuss hypotheses, if these were not already given
in the instructions, and to discuss which references logically lead to them, and do or do
not support the hypotheses. You may also like to discuss the results, and the strengths
and weaknesses of the research, because sharing ideas can help your understanding of
the material. Collaborating on the preparations for a research report also allows you to
debate your ideas and opinions, and hopefully, that will give you a taste of the intellectual
excitement to be experienced in academic research that makes much of the grind worth-
while. However, it is always important to check with your tutor or lecturer about what is
acceptable and what is not acceptable at your institution.
If your assignment is an essay, the possibilities for collaboration may be much more
limited. Most lecturers would probably be happy for you to share resources, such as ref-
erences. However, the essay probably needs to be a structured argument for your point of
view, and your marker will expect that what you have written is your argument. If you
want advice about whether you are on the right track with your essay plan, it is wisest to
consult with the lecturer who set the essay topic, or your tutor.
Wr iting Research Repor ts and Essays – Getting Star ted
2
So, as we have discussed, there are benefits to collaborating with your fellow students,
especially on the preparatory aspects of the research report or essay. In contrast, when it
comes to the final written work, your marker needs to be confident that what is written is
your own work, reflecting your own research and understanding, except where explicitly
acknowledged. Using other people’s ideas, argument, or expression without acknowledg-
ment is considered plagiarism. If you and a fellow student work too closely together,
which leads to you both developing (or co-authoring) material, this is considered collu-
sion. Both plagiarism and collusion are very serious matters and will typically mean a
loss of marks, perhaps zero, for that report or essay, and a meeting with your lecturer or
tutor to discuss issues of academic honesty. At worst, plagiarism and collusion can, and
have led to expulsion from Australian universities. For more information about your uni-
versity’s approach to academic honesty (or dishonesty), consult the university handbook
or web page (e.g., code of conduct or student responsibilities) of your institution and any
course guides produced by individual departments for subjects you are studying. Ignorance
of these policies and procedures is not an acceptable excuse if you are caught submitting
unoriginal material developed with or by a fellow student, or from books, journal articles,
or the internet. It is also more detectable due to the use of originality-checking software
such as Turnitin. There is more information about plagiarism from books, journals, and
the internet in Chapter 3.
If you have checked that collaboration is acceptable, there are several things you can
do to make sure you stay on the right side of the collaboration versus collusion divide.
First, collaboration is probably best in the planning and early (e.g., reading) stages of a
research report or essay. For example, this will allow you to share practical information
like planning your approach and sharing references. You may also like to discuss your
understanding of such shared references once you have read them to clarify your compre-
hension. However, when it comes to writing the report or essay it is essential that it is
your own work. For this reason, you should never share your drafts, or work on writing
your reports or essays with another student(s). Also, while we will repeatedly stress the
value of getting assignments proofread, your proofreader should not be a student com-
pleting the same assignment. You should be writing for an intelligent layperson, which
means a non-psychology student is ideal as a proofreader.
2.2 Information Gathering

All undergraduate essays and research reports in psychology will require you to read
some material on the chosen topic. You need to decide what to read, and how much.
There is an enormous amount of information available within the discipline of psychol-
ogy and related areas. There are two important considerations that should help guide
your thinking on this issue. First, the information you are given about your research
report or essay is the best guide to the topic and scope of the project. Second, undergrad-
uate psychology majors and graduate psychology training in Australasian universities is
based on a scientist/practitioner model of psychology. The aim of these programs is the
theoretical and, at later stages, practical training for psychology professionals who under-
stand the scientific method and base their practice on knowledge that has been gained
using accepted methods of scientific inquiry. As a result, research reports and essays are
designed to build skills in scientific inquiry and the scientific method. This broad aim
will, therefore, guide the information you will use.
The scientific method. You will learn more about the scientific method throughout
your psychology studies, especially in your Research Design classes. The scientific
method is an approach to learning about the world that, in the simplest terms, involves
(a) observation; (b) hypothesis generation; (c) hypothesis testing using methods as
objective as possible; and (d) the development of theory from findings (e.g., Popper,
1959) with the added conditions that the hypotheses and eventually the theory must be
phrased in such a way that if they turn out to be false this can be discovered (i.e., falsifi-
cation); and the method and findings must be reported in such a way as to be able to be
replicated within a generally accepted paradigm (Eysenck, 2004). Even with these pretty
strict rules, there are many ways of conducting research that broadly fit this ideal. In
undergraduate psychology, you are likely to come across experiments, quasi-experiments,
correlational methods, observational studies, case studies, and perhaps others that use
the scientific method. There is also extensive qualitative research in psychology in recent
literature, but you are less likely to encounter it at undergraduate level.
An example of an experiment is to randomly assign participants to one of two or more
groups, and to manipulate a single variable (e.g., the amount of alcohol consumed) across
those groups. The groups are then compared on an outcome variable that is predicted to
be dependent on amount of alcohol consumed (perhaps number of times a participant
runs off the road in a driving simulator). If there are consistent differences between the
groups, you can be confident that the amount of alcohol consumed caused the differences
in driving performance. You can be confident because the random allocation to the
groups should mean that all other possible causes of driving performance, such as time of
day or differences between participants such as personality or skill levels, are equally
distributed across the groups and so cannot account for the difference in results.
Since it is not always possible to conduct formal experiments in psychology (we can’t
randomly assign you to marry similar or dissimilar people and later test how satisfied you
are), psychologists often use quasi-experimental studies. The groups they compare are
naturally occurring ones, such as males and females, young and older, depressed and not
depressed. We cannot be so confident about what causes what in such studies, because
there may well be factors involved in those groups that affect our outcome measures
other than the ones we manipulate. For example, age differences, especially in children,
are associated with different levels of education and even developmental stages, all of
which may be the actual cause of differences between younger and older children on a
range of variables.
In yet other studies, we measure variables such as self-esteem and satisfaction with life
to find out whether the variables are associated with each other. That is, it may turn out
that people with high self-esteem are generally more satisfied with their lives. A benefit of
10
2
a correlational design of this type is that it allows exploration of existing relationships
between variables that exist in the real world. However, this kind of design does not allow
us to work out which one of those things causes the other or even if they are both caused
by something else entirely, like holding down a good job, which is known to improve
self-esteem and lead to greater life satisfaction.
All of these sorts of designs, and more, are legitimate applications of the scientific
method. You will learn about their strengths and limitations as you progress through
your undergraduate psychology major, including that each of these contributes to our
knowledge of psychology, as can be found in journal articles, books and textbooks, web
pages, and even the popular press. The difficulty is to know where to look, and how to
know which sources provide quality evidence for your research report or essay.
What is a quality source? Different sorts of publications serve different purposes.

Newspaper and magazine reports, as well as blogs, are written for the layperson who is
not expected to be trained in the scientific method, while journal articles are usually
written for people who are not only scientifically trained but may be working in the area
that the study examines. In addition, journal articles are often very narrowly focused,
considering only a very specific subject, whereas a textbook is likely to discuss a range of
theories and findings related to a general topic, in much less detail than a journal article.
How useful a particular reference is depends on what you need it for.
A good place to start both research reports and essays is your textbook. It should pro-
vide you with a general overview of the area of interest, is likely to provide you with defi-
nitions, and should mention one or more studies in that area with the full references. It
is usually acceptable to cite your textbook in your first few research reports or essays,
especially in the Introduction section as you define the topic and key concepts of your
paper. However, in later years your lecturer or tutor will expect fewer textbook citations
and many more references to specific journal articles.
If you are writing a research report, you will probably need to find journal articles
on your specific topic or reviewing related topics. If you can find an article reviewing
the area you are researching, that will help enormously because it summarises a good
deal of knowledge in that area. In contrast, essays allow you to search more broadly, to
include not only specific studies but also opinion pieces, which may be found in web
pages, magazine articles, and perhaps even newspapers if the essay topic allows. These
materials will be of particular use if you are interested in debate or opinion, as well as
real-world applications or implications that may not have been directly studied.
However, it is very important to understand that even well-researched and reasoned
opinion pieces are not equivalent to research evidence as reported in journal articles.
This is because the conclusion reflects different types of information (e.g., opinion
versus data), as well as differences in the process of information gathering (e.g., the
scientific method versus bibliographic research) and publishing (e.g., peer review versus
edited media).
Because psychology is very concerned with the quality of the evidence for the asser-
tions it makes about how people think and behave, you need to be aware that
11
publications vary in the way they report information. To ensure that research is worth
reporting in the first place, psychology, like other scientific disciplines, uses a method of
peer review to decide if studies are worth publishing. This means that several well-qualified
professionals make judgments about whether something is worth publishing in a profes-
sional journal. Therefore, although journals do vary in the quality of the material they
publish, you can be confident that an article in a professional psychology journal has been
through a process of peer review and is an acceptable one to cite in an assignment. That
doesn’t mean that it is perfect or that you can’t criticise it, but it does mean that the article
has been found to make a meaningful contribution to the discipline.
How do you find relevant articles? You will almost always be given one or two articles
as starter references. They may be in the Reserve section of your library, possibly in elec-
tronic form, for you to make a copy, or they may be accessible through web-based sys-
tems like Blackboard or WebCT. These references have been given to you because they
are of specific relevance to your assignment. So, for this reason, it is essential you take the
time to read them and understand why they have been assigned. These references will
probably give you a feel for the area in question and will help you find additional articles
of relevance either by looking through the references cited in these articles or by explor-
ing articles which have subsequently cited them (e.g., by using the cited by link in Google
Scholar). Your textbook may also provide a context for your report, usually the classic
references for a particular area of psychology or authors whose other publications you
can explore.
The next place to look is one of the popular online databases. Commonly used ones
are PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, Scopus, Web of Knowledge, Web of Science, and Academic
Search Complete. Your library will probably have training sessions in-person or online on
how to set up an account, undertake searches, and save articles. You can search databases
by author, article title, abstract, or keyword. For your purposes, the keyword is most rel-
evant. The more specific you can make the keyword, the better, because there is a huge
body of literature available. If you just ask for “depression” you will get thousands of
articles, and then how do you choose which to look at? If you are examining a particular
group, say adolescents, add that to the keywords and limit the search (adolescents and
depression). In this particular case, you will still get a large number of references, so
refining what you ask for as much as you can is a good idea.
Make a judgment, based on the title, of how relevant each reference is to your particu-
lar assignment, then select the most pertinent ones and read the Abstract. Do this for a
small number and, if easily available, briefly look through the articles. You will often find
that several of them cite the same earlier articles. That is a clue that the earlier work is
central to the area and is therefore worth looking at.
You should be able to access full-text versions of articles in the most frequently used
journals dating at least back to the mid-1990s, and many more full-text references from
much earlier. Because they are easily accessed, there is a temptation to use only modern
references; this will often be a good idea, as it will give you the contemporary view of the
phenomenon. However, it is valuable to bear in mind that many studies that are run as
12
2
the basis of first-year research reports are replications of classic psychology research,
which may mean you need to read several key papers from across the last five decades.
This may involve locating hard copies held in the Periodicals section of your library (or
those of nearby universities).
One final point on finding articles for research reports is that although it is acceptable
to use some secondary sources in first-year assignments, for example, Bandura, Ross, and
Ross (as cited in Lilienfeld et al., 2014), they are often frowned upon by markers at other
year levels. In later years, you are expected to have read the original study or to use
another original source to make or support your argument. If you cannot access the pri-
mary source, do not simply cite it from the reference list of the article you do have, espe-
cially if this primary source is an older, foreign article or textbook, as this is easily
detectable (e.g., a simple search of your library’s holdings will reveal the absence of the
resource) and may also be considered a breach of academic honesty (i.e., you are claim-
ing you have read material you have not read).
Psychological essays allow wider scope in the use of material. In addition to academic
materials like those just discussed, it may be appropriate to search internet sources such
as Google or Yahoo for non-academic sources which demonstrate popular views or more
general information currently occupying the minds of writers, researchers, and others.
However, this will require considerable criticality from you, as it is important to be aware
of the quality of evidence that is presented in such sources. Furthermore, it is crucial that
you make clear whether you are reporting a matter of opinion, a public poll, or the result
of (likely, unpublished) research. For example, if it is research, has it been reviewed by
the authors’ peers in the discipline, or is it privately published (e.g., “none of the journals
would accept it, so I put it on the web myself”)? There is more information on evaluating
such material in the next section.
In an essay, the way you might use internet material is to report that a particular
topic is popular or has received considerable attention over a particular period (e.g., by
using a date range in your search), in the sense of having many entries. You might
briefly describe some of them, being careful to note the qualities of the material (e.g.,
opinion pieces, blogs, reports, professional online publications, etc.). Depending on
the way the essay question is framed, you may argue for or against the opinions
expressed, using evidence from other readings or research. Alternatively, you might use
the internet to familiarise yourself with a topic, especially if your library has few
resources in that area. This might allow you to narrow the scope of your inquiry, and
possibly discover some of the names of researchers current in the field whose formal
publications you can then access. The possibilities are limited only by your imagina-
tion, as long as you remember to acknowledge the work of others by properly citing
them in your essay.
Some web resources. Having said all that, the web is great for generally exploring a
topic, and frequently contains material that is both more controversial and current than
journal articles (e.g., publication biases like the tendency to only publish significant find-
ings can affect what is available in academic journals), and much more current than
13
books. That is because almost all universities have websites, and many academics maintain
their own pages discussing their current research, often with links to related material.
Below are some web addresses that you may like to explore. They were all checked at the
time of this publication and all were active then. You may want to use a search engine to
find a specific topic, and that is fine, but this usually results in lots of extraneous material
that is time-consuming to wade through.
Your textbook publisher will also have a website, usually with links to ancillary material
relevant to that text, and probably including study guides and examples of test questions.
Such sites are very well worth exploring.
Here are sites maintained by the peak bodies of psychology in Australia and America:
Australian Psychological Society: www.psychology.org.au

American Psychological Association: www.apa.org
Association for Psychological Science: www.psychologicalscience.org
These sites have a lot of information relevant to professional psychologists, which won’t
be of immediate relevance to you, although they will give you a flavour of what is impor-
tant to psychologists. However, they do have links to student resources.
We’re reluctant to give just a few sites in case they are somehow thought to be special.
They aren’t. They are just ones we’ve found when we’ve been looking. There are plenty
more out there to be found, and they may well be better than these. Having said that, here
is one site that has copies of some of the most famous papers in the history of psychology
and allows you to search them by author or topic:
http://psychclassics.yorku.ca
A site for information within the general area of social psychology is:
http://www.socialpsychology.org
A similar site maintained by the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, which
has a students’ corner, is:
http://www.spsp.org
Some blogs that you may find interesting and useful are:
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/09/170911122615.htm
@mindhacksblog
http://www.spring.org.uk/
http://www.psychologicalscience.org/news/were-only-human
http://www.badscience.net/ (more than psych, but good on science)
Happy searching – but don’t get carried away!
14
2
2.3 Evaluating Internet Resources
This section has been called “Evaluating Internet Resources”, but the advice applies
equally well to various media such as magazines, newspapers, blogs, and podcasts. The
quality of such material is enormously variable, and you should not even consider citing
newspapers or magazines for research reports. However, essays may be a different matter.
Where you are asked to discuss, compare, or evaluate psychological theories, diagnoses
or treatments, it is safer to stick to textbooks and journal articles. Occasionally, you may
be asked to examine popular opinion or the impact of psychological practices on the gen-
eral population. In such a case, it is acceptable to find summaries or opinions in the
broader media, including the internet.
The internet itself provides information on how to evaluate internet material. One
website that we like (though there are others) is found at http://www.virtualsalt.
com/-evalu8it.htm. It is by Harris (2015) and is specifically aimed at evaluating inter-
net research sources. A more general one is an online tutorial from Monash University,
found at http://www.monash.edu.rlo/tutorials, which is more a comprehensive look at
evaluating any material you find, and also contains links to a huge number of other
learning strategies.
Harris (2015) suggests that a good way to evaluate material is to use a checklist with
the acronym CARS, for Credibility, Accuracy, Reasonableness, and Support. Credibility
involves whether the author is known, and how likely they are to be knowledgeable and
trustworthy. Does the web page you are looking at name the author? If so, what biograph-
ical information do they give? Would you consider them to be expert in the field, or at
least experienced? Do they provide contact details? Do they cite material from scientific
sources, such as journal articles, which can be checked by you? Are they employed by a
recognisable institution, and what sort (university, government department, research
organisation)? While you are not expected to recognise the professional standing of par-
ticular individuals, you can at least be more confident of the trustworthiness of material
on the home page of an academic at a university or major research institution than that
of a person whose affiliation is unknown.
Accuracy includes whether the material is comprehensive. Does it give you a rounded
picture of the subject, or does it seem to present a partial or biased view? Does it admit
alternative views, even if only to argue against them? Accuracy also includes a level of
appropriateness. Is the material aimed at a general audience, or schoolchildren, or a spe-
cialist audience? Accuracy also includes timeliness (Harris, 2015). Especially in areas
relating to some effects (e.g., biological effects on behaviour), some information becomes
out of date fairly quickly. Does the document contain a date? However, don’t be too quick
to judge journal articles published before you were born. They may have been updated
but could form the basis of long-lasting and influential theories that are still relevant.
Nonetheless, such “classics” will usually be referred to in your texts and, in the second
and third years, you will be expected to read the original sources, not what some later
author says was done.
15
The standard of Reasonableness includes judgments of whether the article is fair,

objective, moderate, and consistent (Harris, 2015). Does the article present information
in a fair and balanced way, including reporting information or arguments contrary to its
own point of view? Is it trying to raise your emotions to the point where you cannot
think clearly about its arguments? This approach can often be detected by the use of
ridiculous counter examples (i.e., a “straw man”) or sarcasm, and while we cannot be
totally objective, it is essential to beware of articles written in strongly slanted ways. One
such influence is the particular political or ideological point of view that may influence
the material, which can be harder to ignore if at odds with your own views, and equally
hard to identify if consistent with your views. Try asking yourself, “What does the writer
gain or achieve from convincing me of their point of view?” Also, run reality checks on
what seem like unusual or extreme claims. Because psychology deals with how people
think and behave, you are already a good amateur psychology theorist or you wouldn’t
be able to function in society. If a claim seems contrary to your experience, look for
more information, but try to keep an open mind. Moderate and conditional claims are
more likely to be accurate.
The final area of Support refers to the sort of evidence cited in support of the claims
made in the material you find. Claims of fact and statistics frequently come from other
sources (Harris, 2015), and an argument is more credible if those sources are also credi-
ble. Does the author cite their own sources of information? If you find several articles
that agree with each other, you can be more confident of the claims being made, or they
may all be citing the same dubious source (e.g., drinking eight glasses of water a day is
widely cited as the ideal intake, but has no scientific support). Communication scholars
talk about the “given-new” principle: when giving new information, it is better under-
stood if linked to something already known (Haviland & Clark, 1974). Is what you are
being told in the article consistent with things you already know from other areas of your
study? If the material is untrustworthy about something you already know, you should
suspect what it is telling you about something unknown to you.
The process of choosing what material is relevant to your particular writing project
needs more than just being careful about the source. It also requires you to think criti-
cally about the content. This is the subject of the next section.
2.4 Critical Thinking

In the previous chapter we said that tertiary essays in most subjects, but especially in
psychology, require you to demonstrate the skill of critical thinking. Critical thinking is
not nit-picking or disagreeing with what you read. It is showing that you understand the
strengths and weaknesses as well as the main ideas of the work in question. For the pur-
poses of preparing a research report or essay in psychology, a definition of critical think-
ing is “a logical and rational process of avoiding one’s preconceptions by gathering
evidence, contemplating and evaluating alternatives, and coming to a conclusion”
(Smith, 1995, p. 2). This is essentially the generic skill of demonstrating your awareness
16
2
of the strength of a position with regard to the evidence presented in support of it. The
application of this skill maintains one of the major values of good science – an organised
scepticism and a critical awareness of the need to support any claims you make with
adequate evidence.
Critical thinking and the scientific method. You will probably have been told in some
of your early lectures that psychology is a science because of the way it investigates
thought and behaviour. The scientific method generally starts from an observation, which
leads to conjecture about the way the world works, which becomes the basis for a predic-
tion about what will happen, at least in that situation, in future. A hypothesis is the oper-
ationalised form of this prediction using variables that can be measured, which is then
tested. The data collected is then considered against the hypothesis and is interpreted as
support for (or against) the hypothesis. If support is found, this leads to a testable theory
(i.e., a series of predictions and mechanisms describing a larger phenomenon) which
gains further support via the scientific method or is revised and tested further. Even when
the evidence you find supports your hypothesis, you can only gain support for your
hypothesis or theory. This may be described as a “proof”, but it does not mean your the-
ory is proved. In this context, critical thinking is essentially a way of looking at the con-
clusions that psychologists have drawn on the basis of the hypothesis, evidence, or
theory, and asking whether those conclusions are warranted by the evidence put forward
in support of them.
Deciding whether a researcher’s conclusions are reasonable requires several things.
You need to identify and assess their assumptions; you need to decide if their hypothesis
is a good operationalisation of their prediction and whether it is a reasonable derivation
of the theory; you need to determine if their sample is appropriate (e.g., representative
of the population they draw the conclusion about, and of sufficient size to support what
they say); and you need to determine whether the evidence, statistical or otherwise,
actually supports the claim they are making. You also need to decide whether or not
there might be factors that limit or confound their finding, or whether there is another
explanation that fits the evidence.
Assumptions. It is common in psychological research to compare groups and look for

differences. This is based on the assumption that there are differences to be found. It is
good critical thinking to point out that a researcher appears to assume that there are dif-
ferences, such as sex or age-based differences, or differences in ability between any other
groups that are being compared. Identifying apparent assumptions shows that you are
not simply accepting the researcher’s method, or results, but have thought about why
they made those assumptions or adopted the approach that they did.
Good critical thinking also means looking at both sides of a position (or perhaps
more, since there are often many possible explanations for any particular set of observa-
tions). Remember that an experimental report is itself an argument, since it comes to a
particular conclusion on the basis of an argument and evidence. Even if you want to
argue a particular case, it is good to be able to point out arguments against it, if only to
17
say why they don’t apply or are not reasonable. Being able to anticipate and respond to
possible objections to your case strengthens your position.
Types of weak arguments. You should learn to recognise weak arguments in what you
read, and avoid them yourself. There are many good books on critical thinking which
describe such arguments in detail. One weak argument is the illegitimate appeal to
authority. A famous or popular person saying something is not evidence of its truth. You
would need to describe the evidence itself, rather than rely on the authority of the per-
son making the assertion. The straw man argument is where someone misrepresents an
adversary’s argument or states an extreme version of it to make that argument easier to
refute. Another weak argument is appeal to popular belief. “As everyone knows, males are
more aggressive than females” is such an appeal. This may well be a commonly held
stereotype, but it depends heavily on what is defined as aggression. You would need to
be much more specific and cite evidence, rather than make a general assumption that
everyone else agrees with you. Ad hominem arguments attack the person rather than
their argument or evidence. It may be tempting to dismiss someone as a sexist if they
argue that men demonstrate lower scores on some tests of intelligence. However, you
should restrain yourself from attacking the character of that person and confine yourself
to the problems with their argument and the evidence. For example, perhaps the intelli-
gence tests use items that are more familiar to women and this results in evidence that
women tend to score higher on tests of this kind, suggesting that familiarity may be a
confound for these tests.
2.5
C ritically Evaluating Psychology
Journal Articles
One reason that critical evaluation of journal articles is not more formally taught is that
there are few clear guidelines for how to go about it. One person brave enough to put his
thoughts into print is Sternberg (2010). (You know he’s brave because he has also pub-
lished on subjects like intelligence, love, and wisdom!) He argues that there are (at least)
eight standards for evaluating the contribution of psychology papers. Sternberg’s stand-
ards are aimed at practising researchers who are deciding whether something is useful
enough to publish, and so they are broader than what is expected of student research
reports. However, if you are planning a research career they are worth examining.
When critically evaluating a psychological article, especially a report of an empirical
investigation, you need to ask some general questions of the article as a whole, and some
specific questions about particular parts of it. The general questions are about what the
paper does. Does it:
• replicate previous findings and/or support existing theories?

• challenge previous assumptions?
• address important social issues?
18
2
• distinguish between theories that predict similar outcomes, or resolve an
issue where previous theories make different predictions?
• correct flaws in previous research, or introduce better methodology or
stronger results (e.g., more appropriate sample, preregistration, where the
research design has been peer reviewed before the study is undertaken)?
• address a previously unidentified or unexplored issue?
• present a promising new theory?
You then need to consider how it achieves these improvements. You can do this by
recognising whether the paper:
• presents a novel/insightful/critical/extensive/contemporary review of

relevant literature,
• presents the pros and cons of its major argument,
• is clear and unambiguous in its arguments,
• adequately covers the relevant literature (this might be a big ask for under-
graduates, but you should be reading more widely in your higher years).
Having a satisfactory answer to some of these general questions is not the end of the
story. You should then ask some more specific questions about the paper. For example:
• Does the paper present clear hypotheses, and have these been well justified?
• Are the hypotheses well operationalised? That is, is there a clear link
between the phenomenon being studied and the variables chosen, and will
testing them in the proposed ways produce an adequate answer to the
questions the authors are asking?
The adequacy of the operationalisation of the hypotheses has implications for the
Method. For example, you could ask questions about the sample, like:
• Is the sample appropriate (e.g., size, representativeness)?

• If it is a fairly special class of people (e.g., university students), does testing
it with this group restrict generalisation or will the result be universally
meaningful? If the study addresses physiological measures or sensory
perception, it may not matter that an “unrepresentative sample” has been
used because such basic processes are likely to be common even to
university students. If the question addressed is specific to a group (“How
do university students perceive the quality of the teaching they get?”), then
a specific sample such as university students is probably appropriate
(depending on the representativeness of the university!). Alternatively, if the
sample is (as is often the case) North American, predominately female, and
under 30 years of age, can the results be generalised to “people” or are there
cultural implications? If so, do the authors acknowledge this?
• What are the validity checks used with online samples? For example, how
are the authors certain all responses were not just one person who
participated 150 times, or that respondents paid attention to the questions?
19
Other methodological questions might include:
• What measures are used? Are they standard scales or have the authors
created their own? Have they reported the psychometric properties
(reliability, validity)? Is there a chance the participants might not have
answered honestly (e.g., self-presentation concerns)?
• Is there a control group? Is one appropriate?
• Have possible order effects been addressed?
• Are the procedures clear enough that you could replicate the study?
Criticising samples – types and sizes – can be overly simplistic. For example, even if a
sample is small or unrepresentative, it doesn’t mean that the conclusion is implausible;
rather, it may be weak or limited. You should therefore be cautious about dismissing
small or student-only samples. You can acknowledge the weakness by saying things like
“Jones’s (2016) conclusions, based on a small sample of college students, were that . . .”.
Or, alternatively, of course, “Green’s (2017) conclusions, based as they were on a large,
community sample from a major city, are more convincing than those mentioned by
Black’s (2007) and Brown’s (2011) student-based findings.” Similarly, describing self-re-
ported measures as flawed because they are subject to biased responding may be appro-
priate for sensitive topics about which people may feel uncomfortable disclosing, but this
may be addressed by the use of anonymity in responding.
When you consider the Results section of the article you are evaluating, don’t feel too
bad if the statistics are a bit overwhelming! You are not usually expected to comment on
the adequacy of the statistics, unless they are of the kind you have already encountered.
You should, however, be able to comment on the completeness and clarity of the results
that are reported. For example, if the authors are comparing groups, do they present the
actual scores for each group, or just the comparison statistic (e.g., a t-test or F statistic)?
The comparison statistic is affected by the sample size (e.g., small differences can be “sig-
nificant” for large samples but not for small ones). Similarly, are tables or figures inter-
pretable (e.g., well-labelled, consistent with hypotheses)? Does the text make clear what
is to be expected from the tables or figures?
When thinking about the Discussion section of the article, you should ask yourself
questions like these:
• How convincing are the results in testing the hypotheses? Are the results
clear and unambiguous or are they confusing, with no clear pattern? Are
any findings omitted, or added without reference to hypotheses? Do the
authors admit that results are inconclusive, or, if the results turn out to be
more complex than the hypotheses would have led you to expect, do the
authors make this clear?
• How well do the authors link their results with previous findings? Are
similarities acknowledged and differences explained?
• The implications of the results are very important. Do the authors suggest
that the topic or theory should be thought about differently? Do they want
to reframe a theory in the light of their results? Are you convinced that their
20
2
explanation of psychological processes is an improvement over previous
research? Do they make clear suggestions for clarifying unclear results or
addressing other questions which the study may have raised but were not
its original focus?
• Are there any questions in your mind about the adequacy of the
methodology in the light of the results? Do the authors admit
methodological flaws or make suggestions for how different methodologies
might confirm or refute their findings?
• How well does the paper address the broader significance of the results
(i.e., usefulness or significance to the “real world”)?
• How well does the paper indicate whether particular issues need resolving?
Does it suggest how this might be done? Does it identify other factors
that may need to be examined to extend our understanding of the
processes in question?
Finally, just because a conclusion can logically be drawn from a particular result, it
doesn’t mean that it is the correct one. If you were imaginative enough, you might think of
an alternative explanation for the same observed facts. Beware of sounding too dogmatic!
In writing a research report or essay, you will not have space to answer all these ques-
tions. The purpose of this sort of interrogation of an article is to help you to decide which
articles to include (e.g., quality and relevance). This should also help you to develop
hypotheses that are based on previous research and are well-operationalised and justi-
fied. In summary, you should always read research critically. You need to be continually
alert to the assumptions behind the researchers’ claims; to the strength of the evidence
presented in support of those claims; and to the conclusions drawn from the data
reported. In short, good science presupposes genuinely critical thinking.
2.6 Writing Style

Research reports and essays are professional presentations of your work. They should
not be conversational, chatty, or colloquial. In the case of a research report, this is an
argument presenting conclusions about your results, with little room for personal opin-
ion or speculation. The reader is not interested in your unsupported beliefs. The reader
wants to know what the results were, and what it means in light of previous research. If
your findings are unexpected or inconsistent with previous findings, it may be necessary
for you to consider alternative explanations – ideally drawing on research or evidence.
Always justify a belief statement.
You have a little more freedom with an essay, especially with regard to personal opin-
ions. However, the opinions you put forward must be supported by evidence, theory, or
reasoning, and presented in ways that are not dogmatic or in a conversational style.
Remember that you are aiming at a professional presentation to your intellectual peers.
While few scientists these days would argue that science is completely objective, your
writing should be as objective as you can make it. Objectivity is helped if you keep your
21
sentences short and clear, avoid personal pronouns as much as possible, and give evi-
dence for any assertions you make.
Personal pronouns. The current APA Publication Manual (6th ed.) advocates for the use of
active voice. That is, you are required to describe the actions you take in reviewing, research-
ing, and reporting using verbs that reflect your active role. This results in a need to use per-
sonal pronouns (e.g., I, we) such as “In the next analyses we attempted to replicate previous
findings on . . .”, or “To assess whether the . . . manipulations resulted in significant differ-
ences in perception . . . we first examined . . .”. This replaces the historical preference for the
use of impersonal constructions, for example, “The author favours the argument that . . .” or
“The investigators concluded that . . .”; or the passive voice, for example, “Participants were
randomly assigned to groups . . .”. However, it is important to remember that this change reflects
the active role of researchers, not support for subjectivity in your writing.
An advantage of the older passive voice approach was that it seemed to encourage
objectivity. However, the disadvantage was that it often sounded clumsy and implied the
absence of the role or influence of the researcher(s). Active voice and personal pronouns
will improve the simplicity and precision of your writing. However, it is not generally
useful to make statements of opinion or speculation beginning “I believe that . . .”, or “I
lean towards the conclusion that . . .”. Such expressions of opinion should be avoided or
used sparingly, and only in the Discussion, as they rarely add to what can be inferred. For
example, the statement “The evidence suggests that social facilitation is purely an arousal
effect” is clearly a statement of the author’s opinion. Nothing is added by prefacing it with
“In my opinion” or “I believe that”.
Essays give you more scope for personal opinions, and therefore for the use of per-
sonal pronouns. They are usually expected. However, use them sparingly, and justify
your expressions of opinion.
Fluent expression. All other things being equal, the more fluently written your work is,
the better your marks will be. Even if your point or argument is generally correct, poor
written expression that your marker has to struggle to understand will lose you marks.
While your sentences will vary in length to convey differentially complex ideas, it is
generally better to keep your sentences short. Paragraphs should consist of several sen-
tences (i.e., one sentence is NOT a paragraph). However, paragraphs should not be too
long. The average paragraph should be about half a double-spaced page in length.
A paragraph should contain only one main idea. In a review of research (e.g., the
Introduction to a research report), you might describe a previous study in a single para-
graph. It might describe the aim or hypothesis of the study, the size and nature of the sample,
a succinct description of the method, and the major conclusions that are relevant to your
own study. That can usually be done in about two-thirds of a double-spaced page (about
200 words). Alternatively, if you are describing how a particular theory has been applied
to a variety of contexts, you might use a paragraph to state the theory, and then refer, in
the next paragraph, to several studies that have applied the theory in various practical
situations in only a sentence or two each.
22
2
Fluency is also improved by avoiding jargon and preferring short words to long ones.
You should also use the specific terms rather than more general ones (e.g., happy rather
than positive mood), and you should use these terms consistently, since accuracy, even
if a bit repetitive, is preferred over novelty. That said, markers are more impressed if you
describe a theory in your own words than they are by fancy words or quotations from
journal articles. If something is accurately described in simple words, your marker can
be confident that you understand it. If a quotation is used, it is not always clear that
you understand what it means. If unusual words are used, the marker may suspect pla-
giarism. Also, avoid using a thesaurus to help you create interest in your writing.
Frequently, students who do this end up using words that are imprecise and it impairs
the quality of the work.
One way to test whether your writing is fluent is to read it aloud, or, better still, get
someone else to do so. Although there is a difference between material written to be
read and material written to be spoken (e.g., a speech or a lecture), anything that is
poorly written will sound clumsy when read aloud. This is not a foolproof system,
because normal conversation is often appallingly ungrammatical. However, it will help
you identify long sentences and unexpected topic changes, as well as repeated words or
incomplete sentences.
Abbreviations and acronyms. A matter of relevance to fluent expression is the use of

abbreviations or acronyms. You may find it useful to abbreviate commonly used names,
most often in the Introduction and Method sections. Use abbreviations sparingly. It is
asking too much of your marker to remember a lot of acronyms as they read, and it inhib-
its fluent expression. However, it may save you a few words when word limits are tight.
Always introduce the abbreviation the first time it is used, thus: “Smith and Jones
(2017) used the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) to test . . .”. When
using the name of the test later, you must refer to it as the MMPI. Never do this if you
don’t use the name again. Do not use an abbreviation for single words like extraversion
and neuroticism, because the single letters E and N are counted as whole words, so you
don’t save anything off your word count.
Incomplete sentences. Markers are often irritated when students make an assertion in
one sentence, then follow it with a supposed sentence containing only a participle. For
example: “Bloggs (2018) found . . . to be the case. Thus proving Smith (2011) wrong.”
That second sentence is not a sentence. It should be all one sentence, thus: “Bloggs (2018)
found . . . to be the case, thus proving Smith (2011) wrong.” A related issue comes about
from a writer using “they”, “this”, “those”, or “it” to refer to the subject of a previous sen-
tence. The use of these terms often makes it unclear what topic is being referred to.
Consequently, it is often better to restate the subject in each sentence.
Similar words having different meanings. Students frequently use the words “effect”
and “affect” interchangeably. They are words you will frequently find yourself using in
both essays and research reports in psychology. They are easy to misuse because both can
23
be used as either a verb or a noun. However, “affect” is used as a verb (“level of lighting
affects visual acuity”) except where it is used as a synonym for emotion or mood (“the
procedure induced a positive affect”). In contrast, “effect” is usually used as a noun (“the
effect of level of self-esteem on . . .”). Students also confuse “than”, which is used to
describe a comparison (I am better than you), and “then”, which describes a timing (e.g.,
participants self-reported their height then their weight).
Unjustified extension and conclusions. One other misuse of language that irritates
markers is to start a sentence with “therefore”, “consequently”, “as a result”, or “thus” when
the sentence does not follow logically from what has been said before. “Therefore” should
only be used in drawing a conclusion from previously stated pieces of evidence. Similarly,
“furthermore” and “additionally” should only be used to begin sentences that genuinely
add to or clarify the previous point made, joining two related pieces of information.
Commas. How is your punctuation? Although markers vary in how pedantic they are
about punctuation, you never know how fussy yours is until you’ve upset them. For
this reason, it is better to make efforts in the first place to get on top of this aspect of
your writing.
An amusing and instructive book on the subject is Eats, Shoots & Leaves: The Zero
Tolerance Approach to Punctuation by Lynne Truss (2003), though there are also many
others. The APA Publication Manual (6th ed.) has clear expectations about the use of
commas. For example, commas are to be used in lists of three or more items, following
each item. For example:
Concentrating on the cognitive, affective, and social dimensions . . . in a study by

Giddings, Bellamy, and Gott (2017)
A comma is also appropriate when a clause could be omitted from the sentence with-
out affecting the grammar and meaning of what is left. For example:
Laughter, like smiling, can be a social response that serves to punctuate communica-
tions between individuals.
You should also use a comma to separate two independent clauses which are joined by
a conjunction such as “and” or “but”. For example:
Age and tenure did correlate with job satisfaction, but the strongest predictors of job
satisfaction were task variety and the extent of participation in decisions.
You should not use a comma when the clause defines or limits the subject of the sen-
tence. For example:
The participants who held the picture cards responded faster than the others.
24
2
A comma should also not be used where there are two parts to the predicate of the
same subject. For example:
All participants completed the first phase of the experiment and returned the follow-
ing week for Phase 2.
Note the contrast between this last example and the one beginning “Age and tenure . . .”
on the previous page. In the “All participants . . .” example, both “completed the first phase
of the experiment” and “returned the following week . . .” relate specifically to the subject
“All participants”.
We have only tackled the topic of commas, as they are essential to all writing. However,
there are several other punctuation marks (e.g., hyphens, semicolons, colons) and rules
that can enhance your writing if used correctly. Our advice regarding the placement of
commas, and the use of other punctuation marks, is: if in doubt, leave them out.
Apostrophes. Many students seem unclear about the correct use of apostrophes (’). In
formal writing such as essays and research reports, you should never use an apostrophe
for contractions. For example, write “it is”, never “it’s”, and “do not”, never “don’t”. (The
use of such contractions in this book is an example of trying to be didactic, but in a user-
friendly way. Such a tone is inappropriate in a formal essay or research report.) The
acceptable use of apostrophes is to indicate possession. For almost all words, you simply
add an apostrophe followed by s, as follows: “Galligan’s paper . . .”, “Each participant’s
response . . .”, “. . . this study’s results . . .”, “These people’s opinions . . .”. This is true
even when the word already ends with the letter s, as long as there is only one owner, for
example, “Roberts’s article . . .”. However, when the noun is already plural, simply put an
apostrophe after the s, for example: “All participants’ responses . . .”, “These studies’ find-
ings . . .”. The other tricky situation is the possessive of compound groups. In such cases,
you should add the apostrophe to the last word only, as in: “Walker and Broderick’s
(2017) argument was that . . .”, “Crowe and Casey’s (2018) study found . . .”, “Fallon and
Bowles’s (2012) suggestion that . . .”, “Bates et al.’s (2014) finding was that . . .”. If you are
still unsure of the use of the apostrophe, you can almost always reword the sentence to
avoid the need for one. The first example above can be avoided by saying: “It has been
argued by Walker and Broderick (2018) that . . .”. The last example can be reworded as:
“The results from Bates et al. (2014) suggested . . .”.
Quotation marks. If you are using a word which is slang, or are making an ironic com-
ment, put it in double quotation marks the first time it is used:
 . . . considered “normal” behaviour . . .
If you use it subsequently (try not to overuse such words), do not put it in quotation
marks. For more on quotations, see Chapter 3 (p. 42).
25
Spelling. Many markers tend to put a line through misspelled words in assignments.
They probably don’t consciously take marks off for it, but since most students use word
processors, and most word-processing packages have easy to use spell-checkers, it indi-
cates to your marker a lack of care or professionalism with the assignment, which will
likely cost you marks! However, spell-checkers may not pick up psychological terms
(e.g., “valence”) and authors’ names, which you will need to check yourself, or words
that are correctly spelled but wrongly used, such as “their” and “there” or “affect” and
“effect”. This is where it is advantageous to have someone else as a proofreader. Many
spell-checkers use American spellings unless you change this setting, and markers may
or may not be fussy about this, but you should at least be consistent throughout the
report. Various lists of commonly misspelled words can be found on the internet (see also
Burdess, 1991 for 1000 common psychology examples). They can be handy resources.
Latin abbreviations. You will frequently see abbreviations of Latin words and phrases
in professional articles. The ones most used in psychology reports and essays are e.g.,
i.e., and et al.. In psychology, the use of et cetera (and its abbreviation etc.) is best
avoided. In common language, this is used to indicate that you have described part of
the concept of interest and are relying on the reader’s familiarity or imagination to com-
plete the full concept. In contrast, e.g. and i.e., respectively, provide an example of the
concept, or all elements of the concept, and consequently demonstrate greater under-
standing and clarity on the part of the writer. They are therefore more appropriate in
academic writing.
E.g. and i.e. should only be used within parentheses. E.g. stands for “for example”.
You should only use it when making a statement that you have backup for and which you
wish to have the marker understand that there are many articles which say so. Here is an
example: “Social identity relates to our understanding of our membership of a particular
social group (e.g., Jenkins, 2014; Tajfel, 2010).” Note the full stops and the comma in the
abbreviation. In an ordinary sentence, you should not use the abbreviation. Use the
whole word, as we have done on the previous page when talking about apostrophes.
I.e. stands for “that is”. Here is an example: “Study 2 tested a possible explanation for
these findings, namely that the context (i.e., non-humorous components) . . .” Again, if
you use it outside of parentheses, use “that is”. However, most markers are not that happy
with this abbreviation, and you should avoid it if possible.
Et al. stands for “and others”. It is used in its abbreviated form in psychology only to
describe authors of articles or books, both in sentences and in parentheses. In flowing
sentences, it always has a full stop after the “al” as in “Smith et al. (2016) argued that . . .”
or “Jones et al.’s (2017) study found that . . .” Within parentheses it always has a comma
after the full stop: “(Green et al., 2015)”.
Use of different fonts. Another problem of working in changing times is how much
you should take advantage of new technology. Many academics, being used to writing
for publication, will argue that you should not use different font forms (like bold or
italics) for emphasis in your research report or essay. If in doubt, don’t use them. There
26
2
is a good case for arguing that you should be able to make the required emphasis by the
appropriate use of language. The writing style in this book is also more conversational
than you should use in a research report or essay, because this book is essentially an
instruction manual and was written as if you were being spoken to. A research report or
essay, however, is a formal report and so should not be chatty or frivolous.
Use the same size and style font throughout your written work. Do not use larger font
sizes for headings. However, note the use of bold type in headings, described in the
Method section of Chapter 5. The Publication Manual of the APA expects you to use a
12-point serif font, such as Times New Roman.
Your tutor or lecturer will probably be able to easily call to mind other examples of writ-
ing style that bother them. While not of great significance in terms of marks, the presence
of such irritants may just tip the balance to your disadvantage if the marker is judging
whether the assignment is worthy of, say, a high Pass or a Credit grade.
2.7 Using the Correct Tense

An element of writing style that often confuses students is the tense used. The rule of
thumb is that research reports should be written in the past tense. You are reporting
research and theorising that it has already happened. This even applies to your own
hypotheses which were developed before conducting the research (see Figure 4.2 in
Chapter 4 for examples of aims and hypotheses). However, there are exceptions. The
exceptions occur when you refer in your report to something that is happening at the
time the reader is reading your report. For example, in the Method section you might
say, “The questionnaire used is included as Appendix A.” Present tense is used
because it is true as the reader is reading. Similarly, in your Results section you might
say, “These results are summarised in Table 2”, since it is also true as the report is
being read. Finally, in your Discussion, having reported (in the past tense) whether
or not your hypotheses were supported, you could say, “These results suggest
that . . .”. In this case, present tense is used because, although the results were sup-
ported (or not), they have implications for the present and future. In the same vein,
you could say at the very end, “In summary, this study indicates that people judge
corporations more harshly than individuals”, because it is a statement, in the present,
of what the study suggests.
Essays are typically written in the present tense, except where you are reporting some-
thing that has already happened including previous research or an argument that was
made. This is because you are trying, in the present, to convince the reader of your point
of view. For example, you might say that “Smith (2005) performed a study . . .” when
describing what Smith did in the past, and “Smith (2005) argued that . . .”. In contrast,
you might say “I argue, consistent with Smith’s contention”, which mixes these tenses,
reflecting that you are active in presenting your argument, based on points of view other
than your own.
27
2.8 Inclusive Language

It is important, in the interests of accuracy and equity, to use neutral and respectful lan-
guage. This means language that recognises people before their group memberships (e.g.,
people with a physical disability or mental disorder rather than disabled or mentally dis-
ordered people). For more on how this should be considered in writing research reports,
see Chapter 5 (p. 81).
The emphasis on inclusive language in the 6th edition of the APA Publication Manual
highlights the need to address longstanding language biases, such as gender-biased lan-
guage, which has accepted the use of masculine nouns and pronouns when the context
includes both genders (e.g., mankind, chairman). Much research, especially Martyna
(1978), suggests that readers of both genders think of male persons even when the con-
text suggests that both genders are included. The best solution is to use plural pronouns.
Instead of writing “The individual who displays prejudice in his personal relations is . . .”,
write “Individuals who display prejudice in their personal relations are . . .”. Avoid using
s/he, since it is impossible to pronounce, and he/she, which disturbs the flow of the writ-
ing. Further examples of gender-neutral writing are presented in Figure 2.1. On the other
hand, avoid carrying this sensitivity to extremes. If all your subjects are male, of course
you should use “he” and “him” when referring to individuals among them.
For the use of gender-neutral language other than pronouns, a thesaurus should help
keep you out of trouble. Don’t use the collective nouns “man” or “mankind”, use “peo-
ple” or “humanity”. Don’t write “man an observation station”, say “staff” it. Children
need “nurturing”, not “mothering”.
The issue of sexist language is not trivial. It is vital in the interests of equity. It is also
an important part of good communication. Unless you intend your message to refer to
one gender only, you need to choose your words carefully so that it is quite clear that you
are speaking of people in general. Ask your proofreader to watch out for language that is
gender-exclusive, when the exclusion is not justified.
2.9 Proofreading and Redrafting

Always proofread drafts. A distressing number of research reports are handed in for mark-
ing without being proofread. This behaviour is throwing marks away. It indicates to the
marker that you do not care very much about the presentation of the report or have poor
time-planning skills. Apart from minor evidence of carelessness, such as typographical errors
(typos), it is not unusual to find some rather strange expression in undergraduate reports,
such as long sentences, erratic punctuation, or the misuse of psychological jargon. A sign that
you have done a good job on your report is that your work could be read and understood by
a non-academic. We will say more in Chapter 4 about having a friend, parent, or sibling read
your work to indicate just how clear your writing is. If they find that something you have
written is unclear, don’t argue with them or try to clarify the problem verbally – you won’t
28
2
Original: “If a subject has a strong tendency to give socially desirable responses in
self-description, is it unreasonable to believe that he may also reveal this tendency in
his behavior in a learning situation where he is aware of what would be considered
socially desirable, namely to learn fast, to do his best?” (Edwards, 1957, p. 89)
Revised: If participants have a strong tendency to give socially desirable responses
in self-description, is it unreasonable to believe that they may also reveal this
tendency in their behaviour in a learning situation where they are aware of what
would be considered socially desirable, namely to learn fast, to do their best?
Original: “With sufficient analytical subtlety we can tease out the connections from
the behaviour of the man in his actual life situation – without the false situation of
controlling and manipulating.” (Cattell, 1965, p. 20)
Revised: With sufficient analytical subtlety we can tease out the connections from
the behaviour of people in their actual life situations – without the false situations
of controlling and manipulating.
Original: “The goal of the individual includes his expectations for the future, his
wishes, and his daydreams. Where the individual places his goals will be determined
fundamentally by two factors, namely, by the individual’s relations to certain values
and by his sense of realism in regard to the probability of reaching the goal.”
(Lewin, 1948, p. 113)
Revised: The goals of individuals include their expectations for the future, their
wishes, and their daydreams. Where individuals place their goals will be determined
by two factors, namely, by the individual’s relations to certain values and by their
sense of realism in regard to the probability of reaching the goals.
Figure 2.1. Examples of gender-neutral language.
have this opportunity with your marker! If they have read it conscientiously, they are always
right – by definition the writing is unclear. Even if their suggestions for fixing it are wrong or
stupid, readers are never wrong if they have found something unclear.
You may ask a fellow student to proofread for you, as long as they are not writing the
same research report or essay. Of course, this means that you should also be prepared to
do the same for them. This is essentially what happens in the real world of publishing.
Writers usually get peer reviews before submitting their work for publication. Some stu-
dents see their fellows as competitors, particularly third-year students. This is unfortu-
nate and is inaccurate – your mark will not depend on others’ marks. Being prepared to
give and receive criticism, and keeping that criticism focused on the writing and not the
writer, is good preparation for later work experience.
After proofreading, what then? Having received some constructive criticism, you
need to start the long task of polishing and rewriting. Since essays are not constrained by
the same conventions that research reports are, you may find that an essay will need even
more rewriting! Make sure your time management has allowed for this.
29
Time management. Most assignments are set so that you have several weeks before they
are due. You should make a timetable of what needs to be done and do your best to stick to
it. The checklists in Section 5.11 (research report) and in Section 6.8 (essay) are good start-
ing points. There are no foolproof guidelines, because students work at very different rates.
However, experience has shown that students are less stressed if they get some writing done
early, and writing can even help to clarify what you do and don’t understand. It is easier to
correct and elaborate on something already written than to try to hold material in your head
then write it all at once. The steps involved in getting started are described in Section 4.4.
Relation between effort and grades. A common complaint of many students is that
they put an enormous amount of time and effort into their essay, but did not get the grade
they expected. Although there is some relationship between effort expended and grade
awarded, this assumes that the effort is being applied to things that will help (i.e., that
drafts do improve). For example, reading more papers rather than starting writing won’t
necessarily help your final product, and this is especially true for tasks you find difficult!
Redrafting your writing is hard work. Make sure that the feedback you receive is really
addressed in the next draft.
What to look for when redrafting. The sorts of things to look for when rewriting a draft
are: Is there a clear topic sentence in each paragraph, preferably at the start? Are all your
sentences really sentences? Is there only one major point per paragraph? Do the paragraphs
vary in length, without being either too short or too long? Avoid single-sentence para-
graphs. Are the links between sentences or paragraphs logical or coherent?
Not only should your drafts be read for clarity of argument and expression, your final
version should also be proofread for typos or printing errors. The ease with which
word-processing programs allow you to cut-and-paste words, sentences, or paragraphs
leads to the possibility of all sorts of errors. If you can’t get someone else to proofread the
final version, leave it for a day and proofread it yourself. Finally, do not forget to keep a
copy, either on a USB or cloud-based backup service, or as a hardcopy.
2.10
T he Physical Presentation
of Your Assignment
Your university (e.g., library and the student union) will allow you to access word-processing,
internet, and printing facilities if you need them. You should, however, be aware that, if you
are working across multiple machines, you will need to check your final submission carefully
for formatting errors (e.g., repagination, font changes, orphaned headings, even to make sure
the file still opens!).
Typing, spacing, margins, page numbers. The following suggestions may sound
unduly simplistic, but too often they are ignored by undergraduates and can lead to
30
2
unnecessary deduction of marks. First, you may be required to submit electronically or in
hardcopy, although the latter is increasingly uncommon. If you are submitting a hard-
copy, check your institution’s or lecturer’s preference for single- or double-sided printing,
or the need to use an institutional coversheet.
Regardless of mode of presentation, you should always consult your institution’s
requirements about line spacing and margins, as well as for indenting (i.e., the first line
of each paragraph, except for the Abstract) using the tab key to ensure consistency. You
should ensure your pages are numbered in the upper right-hand corner, so that if by
some mischance the pages are separated or are carelessly assembled in the wrong order,
it is immediately apparent and may save you marks. Use a 12-point serif font, such as
Times New Roman. The APA Publication Manual expects you to use a serif font, claim-
ing that it is easier to read in print. Many students, used to reading on a computer
monitor, tablet or smartphone, tend to use sans serif fonts such as Arial. Check with
your tutor or lecturer to see which they prefer. Twelve-point is the smallest easily read
size for essays and reports.
Some institutions insist that research reports should be exactly in the format of a sub-
mission to a journal. If this is the case at your institution, you should include a running
head, repeat the title at the top of the first page of the Introduction, and have no spaces
between paragraphs.
Appendices. There are no consistent expectations about Appendices in undergraduate

research reports, so check with your tutor or lecturer about their expectations. We rec-
ommend that for a research report you should include as Appendices all your raw data
if you collected them yourself, and all statistical calculations if you have conducted them
yourself. You probably do not need to include Appendices for material provided to you
by teaching staff, unless you have specifically found a need to refer to it in the research
report. Appendices that are included but are not referred to in the research report may
be marked down.
Essays do not normally require Appendices. The only exception might be if you have
access to a rare or unusual document that would not be available to the average reader. In
that case you could include it as an Appendix.
Getting advice. Be aware that most lecturers and tutors will not usually read drafts. If
you need advice on your work, you should consult your lecturer or tutor with specific
questions ready. Lecturers and tutors may be available via consultation hours, although
these can be limited, so do not be afraid to have questions written down. Your lecturer or
tutor will appreciate your forethought. In addition, most institutions now have discus-
sion boards accessible over the internet through programs like Blackboard or WebCT.
Students can “post” questions or comments and tutors, lecturers, and fellow students can
post replies. These are a very effective means of communication, since you can access
them at your convenience, as can the staff member, and it saves the staff member answer-
ing the same question many times, since any other student can read the questions and
answers. However, staff monitoring these discussion boards are frustrated if they do find
31
themselves answering the same question repeatedly, so be sure to glance through previ-
ous posts and see if your query has already been answered.
Submit in a folder? This would only be relevant for hardcopy submissions, and most
institutions do not require this. Check with your lecturer or tutor about whether your
report should be in a folder or pocket. In any case, a report is much easier to mark if it is
stapled only at the top left-hand corner. At all costs, avoid those folders where each page
is in a separate sleeve. Taking pages out individually to write comments on them is guar-
anteed to try the fairmindedness of any marker! Make sure that your name, your tutor or
lecturer’s name, the subject and year level, and day and time of your class are clearly
marked on the Title Page of your report, and also on the outside of your folder. Figure 5.2
in Chapter 5 shows an example.
32
3
Referencing
Referencing
KEYWORDS
acknowledgment, citation, paraphrasing, plagiarism, primary source,
quotations, reference, secondary source, Turnitin
IN THIS CHAPTER
3.1 Plagiarism . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
3.2 In-text Referencing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
3.3 The Reference List . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
33
R
EFERENCING, AND ARGUMENT OR narrative are the two components at the
centre of any research (and any fact-based) assignments you will write at univer-
sity. You can think of them as intertwined structures that support every para-
graph and sentence, giving a coherent structure to the work as well as linking it to
established knowledge on the topic of your assignment. Referencing serves an addi-
tional academic purpose in university assignments: in acknowledging sources you have
read and used to complete your assignments, you demonstrate your research and rea-
soning skills. That is, referencing allows you to show the efforts you have made to seek
out, identify, and incorporate relevant evidence in support of your claims, which is a
core skill in the undergraduate psychology program (Australian Psychology Accreditation
Council [APAC], 2014).
In this chapter, we will discuss the mechanics of referencing within reports, and how
to produce a reference list using the APA Publication Manual (6th ed.) style. Referencing
is fairly uncomplicated once grasped and is identical for both essays and research reports.
However, since it is ruled by the strict conventions of the APA Publication Manual, it must
be adhered to or you will find your work penalised. Consequently, this chapter in this
Referencing
book is the one you will most likely refer to often, as it can be hard to remember the
seemingly pedantic details of a referencing style. Nonetheless, it is worth bearing in mind
that having an accurate reference list will help you gain a good grade for your work.
However, before we get to those details, it is essential to understand the typical conse-
quence of not referencing correctly or failing to acknowledge your sources.
3.1 Plagiarism
Why it is important to avoid plagiarism. It is essential that you acknowledge other
people’s ideas, work, and even opinions. Many students think that tutors and lecturers
exaggerate the problems of plagiarism. Conversely, lecturers and tutors tend to think that
students take the problem too lightly. The reason that academics treat plagiarism so
severely is that the published word represents the product of their professional labour. If
this intellectual effort is used by someone else as if it were that person’s own, it is equiva-
lent to theft and is treated as such. Your marker will assume that if you don’t acknowledge
another source, you intend the reader to believe that the ideas or opinions are your own.
If they aren’t, you’ll be penalised, so be careful.
What is plagiarism? There is no doubt that plagiarism has occurred if you use a slab of
someone’s published work and do not acknowledge it. However, plagiarism can occur when
you express someone else’s ideas and do not acknowledge them. Even when you paraphrase
an opinion or description in your own words and style, you must say where the original idea
or description came from. This might happen in the description of a concept, an effect or
finding, or even an argument. For example, if you are making an original argument by bring-
ing together claims and evidence proposed by another researcher, you need to clearly
acknowledge the source of those ideas.
34
Referencing
3
How plagiarism occurs. It is very possible that plagiarism, especially of ideas rather
than word-for-word text, can occur inadvertently or unintentionally unless you have
good research practices. For example, it is possible that, while doing your research for an
assignment, you read a cogent argument which defines or links key concepts of relevance
to your assignment. At the time, it was clear that this understanding was the work of the
author of the article you have just read, but as you read a few more articles, you may for-
get which paper you read it in, and may even come to think you created the definition or
put the ideas together, especially as you have now successfully written your assignment
in your own words. In this case, you have unintentionally plagiarised and you are now at
risk of the penalties resulting from such actions.
A second, not uncommon cause of plagiarism is the poor writing practice of copying
key material into your drafts with the intention of correcting the final version, including
word-for-word quotes without proper acknowledgment of sources. Like the above exam-
ple, this practice can lead to trouble because, while the source may be clear at the time, it
is likely that later you will no longer be able to identify the quote or its source for para-
phrasing or referencing. Again, it is unlikely that this practice reflects intent to plagiarise,
but the outcome is exactly that, and you will again be at risk of the penalties resulting
from such actions. In both of these cases, especially in an early assignment, you should
be aware that lecturing and tutoring staff are not out to catch or punish you, although
they will not give you credit (in marks) for other people’s work. Rather, they will adhere
to their institutional policy, while trying to instruct you in good practice so that an unin-
tentional error of this variety will not occur (or affect your results) in future.
There are two further reasons plagiarism occurs, both of which are far less ambigu-
ous. The first of these is copying from another student. Sometimes, when students are
under pressure (e.g., lots of assignments, fallen behind because of work or illness), a
kindly and well-intentioned student enrolled in the same unit, or who had previously
completed the unit, may offer another student a copy of the completed assignment. It is
unlikely that either party intends the “borrowed” assignment to be submitted as the
struggling student’s own work; rather, that it might help guide the student to a quicker
or more successful completion of their own assignment. However, when time is short
and the pressure is high, students sometimes feel they are without options, and the need
to submit something is overwhelming. The result can range from copying a phrase or
two to copying the whole report, without acknowledgment – although this would be of
little benefit in this case as another student’s work is not an appropriate source. In such
cases, you need to be aware that your action will have jeopardised your result and the
standing of the other student as well. If picked up (e.g., Turnitin will return results over
multiple years), both students will likely be subject to academic honesty or integrity
meetings with staff.
The final and least defensible form of plagiarism is the purchasing of assignments. It
is wholly unacceptable to purchase assignments from any source (e.g., individual,
online, etc.) and submit them as your own work. If you choose to undertake this form
of plagiarism and are caught, it is likely that you will face significant penalties for
doing so.
35
How to avoid plagiarism. Avoiding plagiarism may be as simple as not using others’
words or ideas without appropriate acknowledgment. However, based on many years of
experience with cases of plagiarism, we know that plagiarism is rarely intended and more
commonly occurs as a result of one or more small errors at various points in time. For
this reason, we will now discuss the riskiest stages of assignment preparation for plagia-
rism and how it can be avoided.
Researching. It is not practical to record every idea and its source, just in case you
might use it. However, you should cultivate a practice which allows you to keep track
of what you have read, how it might be useful to your assignment, and any informa-
tion that you might like to quote. You should avoid recording this information directly
into drafts. Similarly, it is not a good idea to be drafting from original sources. For
example, we advise that if you complete your researching and keep good and organ-
ised notes, you will be able to write your assignment from these and will be unlikely to
unintentionally plagiarise.
Paraphrasing. Be very careful when paraphrasing another author’s work. It is not enough
just to change a few words around or replace them with synonyms. This is merely a sub-
tler form of plagiarism and is identifiable. Try to understand what was meant and say it
in your own style, making sure it fits with the text around it, and be sure to acknowl-
edge the source. It can also be helpful to include an example when explaining important
concepts or ideas. Although it may take up more words, it does indicate your under-
standing of the concept being described. Those students who convince their marker that
they really understand what they have read and are not just regurgitating someone else’s
work are the ones who get the better marks. See Figure 3.1 for examples of poor and
better attempts at paraphrasing.
Proofreading. Many institutions require that students use or submit their assignments
through a software program like Turnitin, which tests for word-for-word plagiarism. These
programs have the ability to check (exact and near) word-for-word similarity between
your work and a large number of sources, including other students’ assignments –
both past and present – internet sources (e.g., Wikipedia), online books, and journal
articles. Frequently, institutions will provide you with the opportunity to submit your
work to a program like this before your final submission so that you can correct inad-
vertent plagiarism, where you have not been sufficiently careful about paraphrasing
material you’ve read.
3.2 In-text Referencing

The only sure way to not plagiarise is to be diligent with in-text referencing. As we have
said, the format of this can take a little getting used to. For example, there are differences in
how you will acknowledge other people’s work in the main text of your writing compared
36
Referencing
3
Original
“. . . there is evidence that illusions and false-perceptions (or hallucinations) arise,
at least in part, from the same mechanisms as ‘veridical’ perceptions” (Partos,
Cropper, & Rawlings, 2016, p. 3).
Poor Better (without example)

Evidence exists suggesting that Evidence suggests that the mechanisms
hallucinations and illusions partly that are responsible for accurate visual
result from the same mechanisms as perception may also be partly responsible
true visual perception (Partos, for illusions and hallucinations (Partos,
Cropper, & Rawlings, 2016). Cropper, & Rawlings, 2016).
Original
“The concept of leadership is senseless when abstracted and decontextualized from
the group” (Platow, Haslam, Reicher, & Steffens, 2015, p. 20).
Poor Better (with example)

Leadership, as a concept, is meaningless Platow, Haslam, Reicher, and Steffens
when is it distanced or separated from (2015) argue that the concept of
ideas about groups (Platow, Haslam, leadership only makes sense if
Reicher, & Steffens, 2015). considered in conjunction with ideas
about groups. For example, a leader is
not a leader without people to lead.
Figure 3.1. Poor and better versions drawn from an original reference.
to in parentheses, and a further difference if you wish to quote an author. Then, to make
things a little trickier, there are different rules about different types of sources (e.g., authored
versus edited publications, and publications with many authors). The remainder of this
chapter will describe each of these rules.
How do you acknowledge another’s work? When summarising or paraphrasing a

particular point of view, claim or argument made by another author or authors in your
essay or the body of your report, primarily the Introduction and Discussion, give only the
surname of the author or authors and the date of publication. For example: “Hosking
(2013) stated that . . .” “According to Woodyatt, Wenzel, and Ferber (2017) . . .”. As you
can see in these examples, you do not use initials, the name of the article, or the page
number. This example uses the APA 6th edition style, which is different to other styles
you might have encountered (e.g., MLA) that use footnotes, op. cit., and/or loc. cit.
Footnotes are not used to reference in psychology essays or reports.
If you are discussing ideas or concepts but what you are writing doesn’t really afford
mention of the author, you can describe only the content of interest and provide the
reference in parentheses at the end of the sentence. For example, “reactive aggression
37
can be characterised as an anger-based response to a provoking event (Denson, 2015)”.

This is not a direct quote, but your own paraphrase of another author’s position. The
name or names in parentheses at the end of the statement or paragraph indicate to the
reader that the idea is someone else’s. If not all the ideas in the paragraph came from
someone else, the onus is on you, the writer, to make clear which ideas are those of
other people. Keep a sense of proportion. The research report is primarily an exercise
in communication. Continual interruption of the flow of expression with parenthetical
references detracts from that communication. This must be balanced against the neces-
sity to acknowledge your sources. The best compromise when integrating material
from several sources is to express the ideas in your own words with the sources in
parentheses at the end of the paragraph. The references should be in alphabetical order
of the surname of the first author, with the works of any one author in chronological
order, should not include any page numbers, and should end with the full stop outside
the parentheses. For example: (Crafti, 2014; Dickson & Bates, 2012, 2013; Peyton &
Critchley, 2015).
Note that when multiple authors of a single reference are mentioned in parentheses,
their names are joined by an ampersand (&). In contrast, when authors are named in the
flow of a sentence, they are joined by “and”. This difference is an example of one of the
conventions that you need to learn.
First time citing primary sources (as a function of the number of authors). The first time
you cite a reference with one to five authors, you must include each author’s surname,
and the year of the publication. For references with only two authors, the authors names
must be joined by “and” in-text or “&” in parentheses (e.g., Price & Harmon-Jones,
2015). For references with three to five authors, each author’s surname is followed by a
comma, with an “and” or “&” between the last two authors’ surnames (e.g., Williams,
Giddings, Bellamy, & Gott, 2017). If your article has six or more authors, you always use
“et al.” after the first author, for example, “Cox et al. (2016) . . .”. If what you are citing
comes from a chapter in an edited book, cite the author of the chapter and the year of
publication of the book. See Section 3.3.1 for how it is referenced in the reference list.
Repeat citations. You may find you have reason to cite a paper several times in your essay
or research report. For example, you may present a definition or finding from one publi-
cation in one paragraph and an alternative finding in a subsequent paragraph. Then you
may attempt to compare these in a further paragraph, which would require referencing
each work again. In such a case, if the work has one or two authors, you use the same
format as the first time it was cited. If the work has three to five authors, you use the first
author’s surname and replace the remaining authors’ surnames with the term “et al.,” fol-
lowed by the date. There is an exception to this rule. If you cited the work in the text the
first time, and then cite it again in the same paragraph, you do not need the date. This is
not the case if the second citation was in parentheses, in which case it must include the
date. The 6th edition of the APA Publication Manual is adamant that all citations in paren-
theses must include the date. Figure 3.2 provides an example.
38
Referencing
3
Initial in-text citation and repeat Initial parenthetical citation and
citation repeat citation
Louis, Bastian, McKimmie, and Lee The importance of class attendance
(2016) argue that the importance of has been largely overlooked as a factor
class attendance has been largely affecting academic performance
overlooked as a factor affecting (Louis, Bastian, McKimmie, & Lee,
academic performance. This may be 2016). This may be because of the
because of the difficulties separating difficulties separating this issue from
this issue from factors such as factors such as opportunity and
opportunity and motivation. However, motivation. As a result, Louis et al.
by controlling for previous academic (2016) examined this relationship
performance, and using a modelling- while controlling for previous academic
based statistical approach, it was performance and determined that
possible to determine that class class attendance significantly positively
attendance significantly positively contributed to undergraduate
contributed to undergraduate psychology students’ academic
psychology students’ academic performance.
performance (Louis et al., 2016).
Figure 3.2. Examples of references repeated within a paragraph.
Internet-based titles. If you are referencing an internet source, the rules are identical to
those of journal articles if the author and date can be identified. If the author is not iden-
tified, use the first few words of the entry in your reference list, which is usually the title,
and the year (if known) or the date of accessing it (if the article is not dated). For exam-
ple, “Health issues for men (2017) . . .”.
Classic works. Occasionally you will come across a republication or retranslation of an

older work, typically by writers like Freud or Piaget who have written classics in the field.
Cite these in text like this: “According to Freud (1923/1961) . . .” where the first date is
the original publication date, and the second is the date of the book you actually used.
See page 48 for how this is cited in your reference list. Figures 3.3 and 3.4 give further
examples of the conventions of in-text referencing.
Secondary sources. It is sometimes necessary to refer to a secondary source; that is, a

reference that one of your references has referred to but whose publication you cannot
get hold of yourself. In such a case, you can say “Piaget (as cited in Lilienfeld et al.,
2014) found that . . .” or “According to Burton, Westen, and Kowalski (2012), Piaget’s
early work indicated . . .”. In such cases, you do not include the year for the original
work in the citation, and only the work that you have actually read is listed in your
references. In the above examples, Lilienfeld et al. (2014) and Burton, Westen, and
Kowalski (2012) should be listed in your reference list, but not the authors they
refer to.
39
Second Subsequent
in-text in-text
citation citations First
Type of First citation in same in new parenthetical Subsequent
citation in-text paragraph paragraphs citation citations
Work by one Murray Murray Murray (Murray, (Murray,

author (2017) (2017) 2017) 2017)
Work by two Peters and Peters and Peters and (Peters & (Peters &
authors Kashima Kashima Kashima Kashima, Kashima,
(2015) (2015) 2015) 2015)
Work by three Ward, Sullivan, Ward et al. Ward et al. (Ward, (Ward et al.,
authors and Gilmore (2016) Sullivan, & 2016)
(2016) Gilmore,
2016)
Work by four Williams, Williams Williams (Williams, (Williams

authors Giddings, et al. et al. (2017) Giddings, et al., 2017)
Bellamy, and Bellamy, &
Gott (2017) Gott, 2017)
Work by five Giofre, Giofre et al. Giofre et al. (Giofre, (Giofre et al.,
authors Cumming, (2017) Cumming, 2017)
Fresc, Boedker, Fresc, Boedker,
and Trescoldi & Tressoldi,
(2017) 2017)
Work by six Cox et al. Cox et al. Cox et al. (Cox et al., (Cox et al.,
or more (2016) (2016) 2016) 2016)
authors
Work by a National NIMH NIMH (National (NIMH,

group (readily Institute of (2017) Institute of 2017)
identified Mental Health Mental Health
through (NIMH, 2017) [NIMH],
abbreviation) 2017)
as authors
Internet page, Teen Teen Teen (Teen (Teen

no author, depression depression depression depression depression
no date symptoms symptoms symptoms symptoms, symptoms,
(2017) (2017) 2017) 2017)
Figure 3.3. Examples of in-text citation of references.
40
Referencing
3
Multiple citations by the same author(s):
If citing more than one work by the same author, put them in chronological order.
If published in the same year, identify them by lower case letters after the date both
in the text and in your reference list:
. . . was demonstrated (Haslam, 2015, 2017).
Harmon-Jones, Bastian, & Harmon-Jones (2016a, 2016b) showed that . . .
Two or more works by different authors within the same parentheses:
When referring to several works within the same parentheses, order them in the
same order they would appear in the reference list; that is, in alphabetical order of
the first author or, if there are two by the same author, then in chronological order,
separated by semicolons.
Researchers have explored the effect of mindfulness meditation on implicit cognition
(e.g., Brown & Ryan, 2003; Crescentini & Capurso, 2015; Sauer et al., 2011).
Six or more authors:
Use Cox et al. (2016) in text, as in Figure 3.3. The exception is where this would be
confusing if there was another reference that also contracted to Cox et al. In such a
situation, give the minimum number of authors needed to avoid confusion, e.g.,
Cox, Tsomides, et al. (2016). That is, the use of a second author’s surname is used
to differentiate references.
Figure 3.4. More examples of in-text citation of references.
Secondary sources of any sort are generally frowned upon when you reach the higher
undergraduate years, because you should be personally checking to make sure that you
are accurately describing the work of the original author, not taking someone else’s word
for it. However, if your institution does not have an extensive periodical collection, or
time or library policy does not permit you to obtain copies from other libraries, a small
number of secondary sources are usually acceptable in first and second year. If you want
to be sure how your marker (i.e., lecturer or tutor) feels about this, you should check
with them.
Appropriateness of sources. We briefly revisit this issue from Chapter 2 (p. 11), but
since you are reporting a scientific study, your sources should be appropriately scientific.
Your marker will not be impressed by references in a research report to such publications
as Reader’s Digest or Women’s Weekly and will definitely take off marks if you cite Wikipedia!
41
Even Google Scholar is very uneven in quality and should not be used. Look back at
Section 2.2 for some thoughts on the quality of references.
Quotations. You should try to avoid directly quoting other people’s work. The excep-
tions are where you can’t say it in your own words without using many more words than
the original; you can’t paraphrase it without distorting the meaning; it is so memorable
that you can’t capture the meaning in a paraphrase; or you need an acknowledged expert
to back up a conclusion. Given the general quality of writing of many published reports,
these occasions are very few and far between.
If you do use a quote, ensure that it is brief. Enclose the quote in double quotation
marks (“. . .”) and include the page number after the year in the in-text reference so your
reader can check to see if you’ve quoted the author correctly and in context. For example,
“the key ingredient to genius is productivity – large in volume, extraordinary in longev-
ity” (Albert, 1975, p. 144). If your quote includes quotation marks within it, they should
be single quotation marks, as in: “APA cannot publish previously copyrighted material
that exceeds the copyright holder’s determination of ‘fair use’ without permission”
(American Psychological Association, 2001, p. 122). If you are quoting an internet source
that does not give page numbers, give author, year, and paragraph number, abbreviated as
“para 1”, or if subheadings are used, “Discussion section, para 2”.
If you feel that you really do have to include a quotation longer than 40 words, it
should be presented as an indented paragraph, without quotation marks, finishing with a
full stop followed by the page number in parentheses. For example: Many people favour
Pope’s (1980) definition of love:
A preoccupation with another person. A deeply felt desire to be with the loved
one. A feeling of incompleteness without him or her. Thinking of the loved one
often, whether together or apart. Separation frequently evokes feelings of genuine
despair or else tantalising anticipation of reuniting. Reunion is seen as bringing
feelings of euphoric ecstasy or peace and fulfilment. (p. 4)
Risks and rewards of quotations. As we have already said, it is much better to para-
phrase ideas in your own words, and acknowledge their source. This demonstrates that you
understand what the author was saying and will be much more likely to impress your marker
than large undigested chunks of other people’s work for which you may receive no marks!
For the same reason, you should avoid having more than one or two quotations in any essay
or research report, even if they are brief. If you have a lot of quotations, it is not always clear
to your marker that you understand what has been said, and you will lose marks.
3.3 The Reference List

This section comes after the Discussion, is headed References in bold, sentence case
(also known as title case), centred across the page and, unlike the earlier sections in the
body of the report, does begin on a new page. It is important to recognise that this section
42
Referencing
3
is not a bibliography. A bibliography is a list of all the references you have consulted, even
if you have not included them in the final report. In contrast, a reference list includes
only the references you have cited in the essay or report. Do not include a bibliography in
a psychology research report.
What you should include in your reference list. You should put into your reference
list all those references, and only those references, that you have referred to in the
body of your report, and that you have actually read. If you read in your textbook that
James (1890) said something, it is the textbook (i.e., the primary source) that should
be in the reference list, not James (1890) (i.e., the secondary source). If your marker
sees a particularly interesting or obscure reference, they might ask you for a copy of it.
If you don’t have it, you will be in trouble! Similarly, if you only read an abstract in
PsycINFO and think the reference will be useful in your essay or report, you should
read the whole article and then include it in your reference list. Note that all types of
references, journal articles, books, and book chapters are all mixed in together in a
single list. The categories in this chapter have been separated, but only for your con-
venience in checking out the conventional format. You should include all your refer-
ences in the one list.
Most markers are fairly strict about adhering to the conventions for reference lists as
outlined in the Publication Manual of the APA. Many students are careless about this.
Although it may appear pedantic to be concerned about punctuation, the conventions are
easy to learn, and a good reference list is a simple way to pick up a mark, leaving your
marker with the impression that you care enough about your work to attend to detail.
Order of references. The reference list is in the alphabetical order of the surname of the
first author, and if needed, additional authors of each work cited in the body of your
report. If there are two authors of the same surname, it goes by alphabetical order of their
first initial. If you cite two works by the same author, they go in chronological order of
year of publication. If you cite two works by the same author published in the same year,
call them, for example, (2013a) and (2013b), in both the body of the report and add
them in this order to the References section. Articles by an author alone go before those
by the same author with co-authors. Articles by an author with different co-authors go in
alphabetical order of the second author’s surname.
You must not change the order of authors in any one article. There is an academic
pecking order which makes the order of authors important, since the assumption is that
the first author usually has done the greater amount of work on the article. If you don’t
see why this is important, think about how you refer to your textbook. Even if it has been
written by several authors, the chance is that you refer to it by the name of the first
author. Since professional kudos is gained by being well known, being first author of a
book or article is important!
Specific examples of the conventions for listing particular types of references that you
are likely to come across follow. If you wish to use some of the more exotic examples of
references, see the Publication Manual of the APA for details.
43
Format and style of references. The Publication Manual of the APA was written to tell
authors the conventions of preparing a manuscript for publication, and was designed to
make life easy for typesetters working for publishers of journals. That is one reason why
some of the fussier conventions regarding research reports have come into being.
The current expectation is that the first line of each reference is flush with the left
margin, and the second and later lines are indented one tab, or about 1 cm. Other for-
matting features include the use of author’s surnames and initials, separated by “&”
and commas, as needed. For most reference types you will use, include the title of the
work, and where it was published, in standard case (i.e., not sentence case). Finally,
you will also include some details about the publication. For example, for journal
articles you will report the volume number, page numbers, and the digital object iden-
tifier (doi). In contrast, for books you’ll report information such as edition, volume,
page numbers and publisher information. The specifics of these references will now
be discussed.
3.3.1 Books
An entry in the reference list should contain all the information necessary for identifica-
tion and library search, including place and date of publication, publisher’s name and the
edition. Note also the location of commas and full stops (periods), as well as capitalisa-
tion (i.e., a capital letter is only used for the first letter of the first word in the title), and
italics (i.e., used for the publication title). Like all entries in the reference list, the first
line is flush with the left margin, and all following lines within that reference are indented
about 1 cm.
First editions
Fine, C. (2017). Testosterone Rex: Myths of sex, science, and society. New York, NY: WW
Norton & Co.
If a new edition
Vaughan, G. M., & Hogg, M. A. (2017). Social psychology (7th ed.). Frenchs Forest,
Australia: Pearson Education.
An edited book
Thielking, M., & Terjesen, M. D. (Eds.). (2017). Handbook of Australian school
psychology: Integrating international research, practice, and policy. Cham, Switzerland:
Springer Nature.
A specific chapter in an edited book

von Hippel, W., Ronay, R., & Maddux, W. W. (2016). Of baboons and elephants:
Inequality and the evolution of immoral leadership. In J. P. Forgas, L. Jussim, & P. A.
M. van Lange (Eds.) Social psychology and morality (pp. 289–303). New York, NY:
Psychology Press.
44
Referencing
3
3.3.2 Journal Articles
Note that both the title of the journal and the volume number (but not the page numbers)
are italicised, and sentence case is used for the name of the journal. In some references you
will read, you will see a number in parentheses after the volume number. Don’t do this.
Issue number should only be used when the page numbers start again from 1 for every
issue of that volume of the journal. This is rarely the case for most modern psychology
journals, where the page numbers are typically continuous over the whole year’s issues.
You may like to check with your tutor or lecturer about their preference here, since most
electronic databases link their journals by issue number rather than page number, and it is
difficult to guess whether a reference you’ve been given with pages 850–865 is in issue 6 or
7 or 8. However, the Publication Manual of the APA (6th ed.) is adamant that issue n umbers
are not included, so doing so will not be consistent with these guidelines.
Most modern journal articles are available in electronic form and are being identified
with a digital object identifier (doi), which indicates that it is the archival version of the arti-
cle, and specifically identifies it. In most journals, when you click on the article title and get
to the web page with the abstract and publication material and a further link to either an
html or a pdf version of the article, the doi is somewhere on that page. In some journals, the
doi is shown in the index of articles for that issue. You are expected to include the doi in
your reference list. There may not be one in older print journals (e.g., before 1985), but even
many of these are being scanned and added to electronic databases and given a doi number.
Journal article, one author

Denson, T. (2015). Four promising psychological interventions for reducing reactive
aggression. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 3, 136–141. doi:10.1016/j.
cobeha.2015.04.003
Forgas, J. (2017). Can sadness be good for you? Australian Psychologist, 52, 3–13.
doi:10.1111/ap.12232
Journal article, two authors

Crone, D., & Williams, L. (2017). Crowdsourcing participants for psychological
research in Australia: A test of Microworkers. Australian Journal of Psychology, 69,
39–47. doi: 10.1111/ajpy.12110
Journal article, three to seven authors

If there are three to seven authors, all of them need to be included in the reference list.
Confusingly, in text, you need to cite all of the authors the first time you use the refer-
ence, but only if there are three, four, or five authors. From then on, they can be cited in
the text as, for example, Smith et al. (2017). If there are six or more authors, then you can
use Jones et al. (2016) from the very first citation.
Trounson, J., Critchley, C., & Pfeifer, J. (2015). Australian attitudes toward asylum
seekers: Roles of dehumanization and Social Dominance Theory. Social Behavior and
Personality, 43, 1641–1656. doi: 10.2224/sbp.2015.43.10.1641
45
More than seven authors

Increasingly, journal articles are appearing with eight or more authors. In such a case,
you can cite it in the body of your text as Jones et al. (2017) from the very first citation.
In the reference list, you need to include the first six authors then an ellipsis (three
dots . . .) then the last author, as in the following example.
Knowles, S., Austin, D., Sivanesan, S., Tye-Din, J., Leung, C., Wilson, J., . . . Hebbard, G.
(2017). Relations between symptom severity, illness perceptions, visceral sensitivity,
coping strategies and well-being in irritable bowel syndrome guided by the common
sense model of illness. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 22, 522–534. doi:10.1080/135
48506.2016.1168932
Article in an internet-only or open-access journal

Buzwell, S., Farrugia, M., & Williams, J. (2016). Students’ voice regarding important
characteristics of online and face-to-face higher education. Sensoria: A Journal of
Mind, Brain, and Culture, 12, 38–49. doi: dx.doi.org/10.7790/sa.v12i1.430
This article would be cited in the body of your text in the same way you would cite
any journal article; that is, as Buzwell, Farrugia, and Williams (2016).
Journal article accepted for publication, but not yet published. This convention
applies to articles that a publisher has accepted but that have not yet actually been pub-
lished. You are unlikely to come across these unless your tutor or lecturer gives you one
of their own! This example is for a chapter in a book, but if it was a journal article, you
would simply have the name of the journal, with major words capitalised, after the title.
Keen, J., & Fitness, J. (in press). Can employers screen job applicants for potential white
collar fraud offenders? In S. Boag & N. Tiliopoulos (Eds.), Personality and individual
differences: Theory, assessment, and application. New York: Nova.
Periodical published annually. Treat annually published series, such as the Annual
Review of Psychology, that have specified, regular publication dates as periodicals, not as
books.
Broadbent, E. (2017). Interactions with robots: The truths we reveal about ourselves.
Annual Review of Psychology, 68, 627–652. doi: 10.1146/annurev-
psych-010416-043958
Conference papers
Sebastian, P., Kaufmann, L. M., & de la Piedad Garcia, X. (2017, January). In the nose,
not in the beholder: Embodied cognition effects override individual differences. Embodied
Cognition Preconference at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Psychology and
Social Psychology. San Antonio, Texas, United States.
46
Referencing
3
Abstract only
If you find an interesting abstract using PsycINFO, you need to admit that you’ve only
seen the abstract, not the entire article. Many such abstracts are doctoral dissertations.
Brewster, M. K. (2000). Entering and exiting the corporation: A developmental study of

women executives at mid-life. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The
Sciences & Engineering, Vol. 60(9-B), 4877.
3.3.3 Internet Sources

Articles obtained from the internet. The APA Publication Manual (6th ed.) has
included advice for referencing a large number of possible types of material obtained
from the internet, and the APA also has a guide to electronic references, which is availa-
ble, at a cost, on the web. Here is how you should reference the ones you are more likely
to need.
Document created by a private individual or organisation. If the article has a date of

posting, use this format:
Smith, A. (2016, September 26). This is the title. Retrieved from http://www.etc
If there is no date of posting, use the date of retrieval and make it specific, thus:
Jones, S. (n.d.). This is the title. Retrieved March 11, 2017, from http://www.etc
In text, both of the above would be referenced like any other source with a clear
author and date, as Smith (2016) and Jones (2017). If there is no obvious author, use any
reasonable title from the site, as follows, for the reference list:
Monash transition program. (2017). Retrieved from www.monash.edu.au/study/ parents/

transition
Note that for sites maintained by universities, the date is usually available at the foot of the
page, and you would reference this page in your text as “Monash transition program (2017)”.
Sometimes you will find a page you wish to cite, but it has neither author nor obvious
date. For example:
Marriage equality facts at a glance (n.d.). Retrieved August 2017, from http://www.
australianmarriageequality.org/get-informed/quick-facts/
In this case, the in-text reference would be enough of the title to allow your marker to
find it in your reference list, with the retrieval date as the date, thus “Marriage equality
facts at a glance (2017)”. The problem with using such a source is that there is no
47
guarantee that the page will not have changed when your reader looks it up, and so your
use of it may not be able to be checked. Be sparing in using such sources.
If you wish to reference a website but not a specific document within that site, you
need only give the URL in the text, and not have it in the reference list at all. For exam-
ple, you might say:
An amusing site for aficionados of psychological tests is http://www.queendom.com.
eBooks. Increasingly, books are available electronically, as eBooks. Sometimes they have a
doi, but many do not. You’ve probably come across them in your library, but the university
library web address for the book is probably four lines long. It is probably simpler to look it
up on Google and find the publisher’s URL for that specific eBook and use it as follows:
Bell, N. (2015) We are not amused. Failed humor in interaction. Retrieved from https://
www.degruyter.com/view/product/449175
If you can find a doi for an electronic book, the reference entry is simpler:
Schiraldi, G. R. (2001). The post-traumatic stress disorder sourcebook: A guide to

healing, recovery, and growth [Adobe Digital Editions version]. doi:10.1036/
0071393722
You may also come across an electronic version of a republished book, especially from
seminal authors such as Freud. Here is how you reference them:
Freud, S. (1953). The method of interpreting dreams: An analysis of a specimen dream.

In J. Strachey (Ed. & Trans.). The standard edition of the complete psychological works
of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 4, pp. 96–121). Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books
(Original work published 1900).
3.3.4 Other Sources

Entry in an online encyclopaedia
Haybron, D. (2011). Happiness. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of
philosophy. Retrieved June 20, 2017, from http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ happiness/
Unpublished theses
These are often catalogued and available in the library from graduate students at your
university and are a good source of recent research.
Mizuno, H. (2017). Establishing and validating a measure of the Japanese concept of self.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne,
Australia.
48
Referencing
3
Government reports
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2015, August 8) Alcohol consumption. Retrieved from
http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/4364.0.55.001~2014-
15~Main%20Features~Alcohol%20consumption~25
In the text, the first time this is mentioned, it would be cited as Australian Bureau of
Statistics (ABS, 2015), and the next time as ABS (2015).
Newspaper articles
You should never (or almost never) cite a newspaper article in a research report, but you
may use one in an essay or other piece of assessment.
Miller, N. (2017, May 20). UK migration squeeze hits Australians. The Age, p. 14.
This would be cited in the body of your essay as Miller (2017), just like any journal
article.
Magazine article
Again, you should never include a magazine citation in a research report, but the format
is very similar to a newspaper article.
Palmer J., & Gundlock, B. (2017). Dying of thirst. Good Weekend, pp. 14–19.
Please note carefully in each of the above examples which parts are italicised, which
words are given upper case letters and where there are punctuation marks.
49
4
Research Reports –
How Do You Start?
KEYWORDS
aims, dependent variable, endnote, ethics, experiment, extensions, hypothesis,
independent variable, manipulation, operationalisation, participant,
How Do You Start?

replication, research ethics, study, survey, theory
IN THIS CHAPTER
4.1 How to Approach a Research Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
4.2 How to Begin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
4.3 Research Ethics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
4.4 Where to Go From Here . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62
51
The Process of Writing a Research Report

How Do You Start?
Figure 4.1. The process of writing a research report.
52
Research Repor ts – How Do You Star t ?
4
W
ITH ANY RESEARCH REPORT, the starting point is: “What burning ques-
tion do I want to answer?” From this starting point, a researcher will look
back to the source of the question and then begin to identify the mechanics
of answering it.
4.1 How to Approach a Research Report

There are two general approaches to writing research reports. The first approach is to
write the type of report you had in mind when you designed the study. Many psycholo-
gists, like other scientists, subscribe to the belief that advances in knowledge occur when
a scientist, working from an existing body of knowledge, makes hypotheses about what
would happen in particular situations. These hypotheses are then tested and the research
report is written to publish the results of that experiment, indicating whether the original
hypotheses were supported or not.
If science always worked in a linear fashion, you could write the report before you
even did the study, just leaving blanks for the results, with two Discussions, one for if
the hypotheses were supported, and one for if the hypothesis were not supported.
However, in the real world of the social sciences, things do not always work so simply.
This can be because people are rarely so straightforward, and the concepts being
examined are not always predictable. Consequently, research frequently leads to find-
ings beyond those hypothesised. For this reason, we acknowledge a second approach
to writing research reports, which is to write the report that makes the most sense
after you’ve seen the results of your experiment.
Writing the report based on known results can be criticised as being opportunistic or
even unscientific, as it can encourage practices of “data dredging” or fishing, which
ignores the theoretical background or even the motivating question of the research in
favour of finding significant results. However, this isn’t always the case. Rather, theoreti-
cally guided examination of the results before writing the report can mean you have a
comprehensive understanding of your data and the relationships in it, and that you don’t
ignore interesting results that might not have been anticipated.
Choosing which approach to use will be guided by your lecturer or tutor, but there are
a couple of considerations. Of course, if your original hypotheses are important tests of
one theory over another, you wouldn’t change the tone of your report to suit your results.
On the other hand, many studies, especially in the area of people’s social behaviour,
begin with “I wonder if . . .”, and it makes good sense to reorient your writing to the
interesting things you have found. In this case, you are still expected to find theoretical
justifications for your hypotheses in prior research. You may just have to look a bit harder
to find them.
As an undergraduate, you will rarely be required to design your own studies. Typically,
your lecturer or tutor will run an experiment with your class as participants or will give
you instructions on testing other people. The results will be collated by your lecturer or
tutor and presented to your class to be used to test hypotheses. In this situation you
53
might like, as Kidder and Judd (1986) suggest, to regard your data as uncut jewels. Your
job is to cut and polish them, selecting and highlighting the best facets, and craft the best
settings. In spite of the apparent lack of flexibility of the conventional format, good report
writing does allow ample scope for the use of good judgment and skill.
4.2 How to Begin

The first thing is to decide what your general research question is, and then derive one or
more hypotheses from it. Remember that a hypothesis is a specific, testable prediction of
what you expect to happen when you run the study. Once you have decided on your
question, you need to identify the research context for your question. You will then be
in a position to build the links from this broad context to your specific hypothesis/es.
This will also be true if you are given hypotheses, which may be the case for first-year
research reports.
4.2.1 Studies Designed by the Psychology Department

Many of the research reports you will have to write will be reports on studies which
have already been designed by someone else. You will have been a participant in the
study run by your tutor or lecturer, or you will have been given instructions on how to
run the study on a participant or participants of your choosing. You will therefore be
aware of what was actually done. This situation of having been a participant and the
researcher is not typical in research, but it is essential to your training in psychology.
However, when you come to write up the report, you are expected to do write the report
as the researcher who designed and ran the whole study. Keep in mind, however, the need
for objective writing.
Reading. Begin with the major (key or assigned) reading. It is not unusual for stu-
dent assignments to be replications of those that earlier researchers have published.
That is, they are studies that exactly follow the procedures and materials used in
research with the aim to provide students with the opportunity to understand the
methods and approach of these studies. You will be referred to the journal article
where the report originally appeared, and possibly to other related and more recent
articles. However, we suggest you begin by reading the relevant section in your text-
book for an overview and context of the area. It may also provide a guide for other
useful references. Then carefully read the article to be replicated and any others given
to you. You should see what the authors hypothesised and why, as well as whether
their hypotheses were supported. You will need to read this article (and any others)
critically. For example, before you get to the Method section of any particular report,
ask yourself: “If I had to do an experiment to test their hypotheses, what would I do?”
Then, when you’ve read the rest of the report, ask: “Does the Method actually test the
54
4
hypotheses?”, “Would I draw the same conclusion from those results?”, “If not, how
would I interpret them?”, “Is there any other explanation that would give the same
results?” Make notes as you go. The sort of notes you should make will be dealt with
later in this chapter.
Developing aims and hypotheses. On the basis of your reading (and information
provided by teaching staff), decide what the general aim of your study should be, and
what specific results you expect to obtain when you replicate the experiment. Typically,
you can expect the results to be similar to those of the original study, especially if the
original participants were also university students. However, it may be that there is
something different about the experiment in your study. Perhaps your study was
undertaken in a different context or culture to that of the original, or your participants
differed in gender or age to the original participants, or your method or experimental
manipulation differs (e.g., even in subtle ways such as online versus face-to-face data
collection). You might therefore expect a different result.
Write your expectations in concrete and specific terms. These are your hypotheses.
Figure 4.2 shows possible aims and hypotheses. Please do not confuse the two. Aims are
general statements of the goals of the study, while hypotheses are specific predictions of
what you expected to happen. Because you are reporting on a study that has already been
performed, write your aims and hypotheses in the past tense.
Aim: The aim of this study was to confirm that a conformity effect occurs during
group discussion.
Hypothesis: It was predicted that the range of opinions would be reduced after
group discussion, compared with the pre-discussion range of opinions.
Aim: The present study measured the differences in the ability of participants of
varying ages to recall lists of digits.
Hypothesis: It was hypothesised that for children and adolescents the number of
digits able to be recalled would increase with the age of the participant.
Aim: The aim of the current study was to produce the serial-position effect with
free recall of a list of words.
Hypothesis: The hypothesis was that words at the beginning and end of the list
would be recalled by more participants than words in the middle of the list.
Figure 4.2. Examples of possible aims and their corresponding hypotheses.

Note: The aims are general statements of intent, but the hypotheses are worded in terms of the specific
variables being measured. Also note that they are written in the past tense.
55
More reading. If other journal articles are recommended by your tutor or lecturer, read
them and identify their relevance to your study. If no other articles are specifically pro-
vided, look at the reference list of the major article and see what articles are referred to
in the argument of the reading you were assigned (and consider if these pieces are rele-
vant to your study). You could also look to see if there are more recent articles that cite
your major article. This can be achieved by doing a cited by search. Specifically, in many
databases (e.g., PsychINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar) there is a “cited by”
link which will produce a list of all of the articles in that database that have cited the
paper you are looking at. This will include articles that have cited your paper for any rea-
son, which may be of little relevance but can be searched for more recent relevant arti-
cles. The assessor of your research report will be impressed if you have looked for and
found other relevant publications, and have made pertinent comments about them and
their relationship to your study.
Researching. There are a number of reference sources you can use when searching for
information on a particular subject in psychology. Most libraries will have searchable
research databases, including Scopus, PsycINFO, Academic Search Complete, and
PsycARTICLES, which will allow you to search for psychological publications. These may
include articles from the distant past, although you should generally confine yourself to
recent articles. If you have access to these databases, you will find they are extremely use-
ful in tracing articles by author, subject, or keyword. Most libraries regularly run training
courses on how to search databases. Make use of them.
Books. You will also find books referred to in reference lists. These are often hard to get
hold of, and it is not usually cost-effective in terms of your time to run around looking for
them. Use them if you can get them easily, since they often have overviews of the subject
you are interested in, but journal articles are usually more accessible and up to date.
How many references? (Or when to stop researching). Students frequently ask how
many references they need for a research report. There is no simple answer to this. You
should absolutely use the references you were given, and probably a couple more, as a
minimum. Some departments may also have expectations (e.g., at least two additional
references), so check with your tutor or lecturer. It is generally better to deal with a few
references thoroughly than to superficially use many. We explore this in more detail in
Chapter 5.
Taking notes on references. Taking notes on what you read will help you keep
track of what you have read, and build a clear understanding of the topic. You can
make notes in a number of different ways. One way is to print or photocopy the rele-
vant articles, read them carefully and highlight the most important parts, such as
hypotheses, participants, the design of the experiment, and conclusions about
whether the hypotheses were supported or not. The danger with doing this is that
you are tempted to highlight anything even vaguely interesting. This approach does
56
4
not usually reduce the information to manageable amounts, means you have to refer
back to and maybe even re-read the paper itself to find this information when you
need it, and increases the dangers of plagiarism. If you choose this approach, be strict
about highlighting only material immediately relevant to your own study. In the
interests of saving paper, you can usually download the articles as pdf files, read them
on your computer or tablet, if you are comfortable with this, and only print the most
relevant page(s) as well as the first page, which has the information you will need to
reference the article.
Another very effective way of making notes about articles you read is to create a
summary table (e.g., in Microsoft Excel or in Word) which includes the citation pre-
cisely as it will appear in your reference list (see Chapter 5) and a brief summary of
the relevant parts of the study using the major subheadings: type of participants;
what was done; what was found; what was concluded; what you think is a better or
different interpretation; and anything that the author omitted or questions the study
raised. You should also decide whether the paper, as a whole, supports (or not) the
study you are replicating. This could be done by colour-coding to help you clearly
identify these papers.
A slightly more sophisticated yet similar approach to the references tables is to make
notes about relevant journal articles using one of the flexible databases on your com-
puter. Many students find that having to type in the relevant information from articles is
a more effective way of absorbing information than simply highlighting a photocopy.
This system also allows you to cut-and-paste references from one document to the other
and so saves some typing time. If you have access to a bibliographic program, such as
Endnote or ProCite, this will make producing a good reference list much easier. This is a
valuable skill to learn if you intend to go on to further study after your undergraduate
degree, since you will then be expected to write a thesis, which is essentially a very large
research report.
4.2.2 Studies You Design

Your approach to preparing for a research report will be a little different if you have the
freedom to design your own study. If you have this freedom, first look at what constraints
are placed on you. For example, what is the general area you are expected to work in?
How much time do you have? Are you expected to test something experimentally, or is a
survey study acceptable?
Once you have decided on the scope and type of study, ask yourself what question or
questions you want answered. What answers would you expect? Then have a look
through some recent journals in that subject area to see what other researchers have
done. Look at Scopus, PsycINFO, Academic Search Complete, or PsycARTICLES under the
subject area. If any articles look interesting, look at their reference sections for clues to
similar works. Read and make notes on anything that looks as if it is relevant to what
you want to do, especially if it supports what you expect to happen in your study (but
don’t ignore contrary results; they’ll be handy if your hypotheses are not supported!).
57
Make notes as mentioned in the previous section, and finally decide what you really pre-
dict will happen from the study as you conceive it. It is also good to make use of your
lecturer or tutor’s consultation time or online discussion time to check you are on track.
Once you have the context and aims of the study, you will develop hypotheses which
can be justified on the basis of prior research. Your study design will then follow from
your hypotheses. For example, a study predicting a difference between two groups means
you intend to collect data from two identifiable groups on the variable you predict will
differ. Your hypotheses will also need to be operationalised in such a way that it is practi-
cal to collect the data. That is, if the study is to be a questionnaire study, the scales you
want to use need to be available. If the study is an experimental task, the facilities need to
be available, as does a means of getting participants to become involved. You may have to
apply to the ethics committee for permission to run this study, although if ethics approval
is required, your lecturer will likely have already commenced this process. We discuss
ethics in more detail in Section 4.3.
Given the complexities of study design, it is exceedingly unlikely that you will be
expected to design and run your own study in the first couple of years of an undergradu-
ate degree in psychology. When you are expected to do this, you should be given a good
deal of guidance. If you feel you don’t have enough guidance, ask for assistance.
4.2.3 All Studies – A Brief Introduction to Key Concepts

Any study you conduct will be based on a literature and will need to reflect this. It is also
important that your hypotheses derive from your researching and are specific and con-
crete. They must be expressed in terms that make it clear how you are going to measure
the theoretical concepts you are interested in. Sometimes it is hard to operationalise
hypotheses; that is, to formulate precise, concise, testable statements of what your theory
would predict. You may find, if you are comparing groups of people, that it is useful to
draw up a table of the independent and dependent variables. You can then be more spe-
cific in saying what you predict will happen. Such a table is illustrated in Figure 4.3.
Independent variables (or IVs). Remember, independent variables are defined as vari-
ables that are theoretically unaffected by (i.e., independent of) the other variables in the
Age (Independent)
Younger Older
Gender (Independent)
Female Reaction time (in ms) Reaction time (in ms)
Male Reaction time (in ms) Reaction time (in ms)
Figure 4.3. Example of a matrix of independent and dependent variables.

Note: Reaction time is the dependent variable. Age and gender are independent variables.
58
4
study. Consequently, we often hypothesise that independent variables have some causal
influence on whatever is being studied when undertaking experimental or quasi-exper-
imental research. An independent variable can be varied or manipulated by you, the
experimenter. This can be done by selecting categories of participants, such as people
who differ in gender (men and women) or age (adolescent and middle-aged). Sometimes
the independent variable is simply allowed to vary, such as a score on intelligence or
satisfaction with body image, which is then measured and used to define the groups
(e.g., high versus low scorers). Both of these approaches are considered quasi-experi-
mental as the categories already exist prior to the experiment. This may mean that any
differences found between groups (such as men compared to women) may be a result of
gender, or some other variable also related to gender. Experimental studies use inde-
pendent variables which created different groups of participants by randomly assigning
individuals from the same group (e.g., students) to different conditions (i.e., manipula-
tion). As a result, there were no predicted differences between the created groups prior
to the manipulation, so any difference between these after the manipulation is most
likely to be caused by the condition or manipulation.
Dependent variables (or DVs). Dependent variables are variables that are affected by
another variable, and are typically the main interest of the research. They are called
“dependent” variables because you are hoping that the value of the dependent variable
depends on your manipulation of the independent variables.
As mentioned earlier, it is unlikely that you will have to design and run your own
study before your second, or even your third year of psychology. It is far more likely that
you have either been a participant in a study run by your tutor or lecturer, or have tested
one or more participants using instructions from your tutor or lecturer. You will therefore
know how the study was conducted and will be in possession of a description of the
method, and the results of the study in the form of raw data or perhaps some form of
summary data. You should note, however, that your experience as a participant or
researcher may reflect only one aspect of the research (i.e., you only experienced one
level of the independent variable, such as the control or the experimental group). The
instructions you receive should make that clear, but in order to write your report, you
will need to make sure you have all the details and understand the design of the research,
including all conditions.
Correlational studies. Strictly speaking, there are no independent and dependent vari-
ables in correlational studies. This is because correlational studies do not provide infor-
mation about causation. Rather, correlational research can be used to identify the
relationship between variables which may or may not be causally related. For example,
by measuring the relationship between age and weight in children, it would be possible
to find a significant positive correlation indicating that older children weigh more, and
younger children weigh less. However, it is not possible to determine from this method
that increasing age causes weight gain, and it is pretty clear from general knowledge that
age is not the cause. Rather, growing and developing, itself highly correlated with age, is
59
likely to be the cause of weight gain, as well as increased height, strength, and even verbal
intelligence. Similarly, a correlational study of education and knowledge may find a sig-
nificant positive relationship between these variables, which may be tempting to describe
as the effect of education on knowledge (i.e., causal, with education as the independent
variable and knowledge as the dependent variable). However, this has more in common
with the age–weight study we just described than it does with an experiment. That is,
you may observe a relationship, but it is not possible to determine causation or even the
independence and dependence of these variables. Thus, in correlational research, varia-
bles are not described as independent or dependent.
4.3 Research Ethics

Any psychological study undertaken as research should have been reviewed by your depart-
mental or university ethics committee. This means that studies run for the sole purpose of
your teaching or learning may not have been reviewed by an ethics committee. However,
such teaching and learning activities are typically reviewed by teaching and learning or
curriculum committees. The purpose of ethics and curriculum reviews are to ensure the
quality and appropriateness of activities for students, to protect the rights and well-being of
participants, and to support and guide researchers and research when relevant.
Research ethics is a formal process developed to reflect and uphold the values and prin-
ciples that protect all of the people involved (i.e., participants, researchers, and consumers
of research) and enhance the acquisition of knowledge and understanding. From the per-
spectives of participant and researcher, there are four cardinal rules of research ethics. The
first is that participants’ agency and autonomy must be respected. This is achieved by
informing participants of what they can expect, which allows them to freely give their con-
sent to participate. Second, participants should be told (and it should be true!) that they
can withdraw from the study at any time, without penalty. Third, consideration is given to
the information obtained from participants. Specifically, confidentiality and privacy must
be respected whenever possible, which means individuals should not be able to be identi-
fied from what is reported in the study without their express permission. Finally, any risks
and benefits from the research must be balanced. For example, a study involving little or no
predictable risks (e.g., a survey of attitudes to environmentally friendly cleaning products)
requires fewer benefits than a study involving higher risks (e.g., perceptions of physical
pain from exposure to very cold water). In the latter, a risk-management strategy would be
essential, and participants would likely be compensated (e.g., a small monetary payment).
These considerations seek to ensure that participants should suffer no ill effects from tak-
ing part in the study; that if for any reason participants do suffer distress, mechanisms are
in place to deal with them; and if there are manageable risks to participants, that they are
compensated at a level that does not compromise their ability to freely choose to partici-
pate. For example, participation is never paid at rates to induce participation. By the time
you encounter a project, these considerations should have already been undertaken, and
implemented using the resources of the psychology department.
60
4
As a participant in a study, these considerations are given to you. You may feel some-
what pressured to participate as you will have to write up a report on the study as part
of your educational experience. However, if this research is undertaken within your
course, you should be afforded the opportunity to learn (i.e., participate) and the
opportunity to choose to withdraw your data from the research. This usually involves
seeking your explicit consent for the use of your responses either before or after you
have completed participation, which will allow you to participate in the learning expe-
rience and preserve your choice to participate (or not) in the research. This is because
research reports are an important part of a psychology training and being a participant
in studies lets you discover how participants in your studies may feel if you get to the
stage of running your own. It also gives you an idea of the ambiguities that participants
in studies encounter, which will help you write your report. If answering question-
naires or taking part in studies is a turn-off, you might wish to reconsider your ambi-
tion to become a psychologist. Having said that, if you genuinely and sincerely feel
uncomfortable about participating in a particular study, you are at liberty not to take
part as a participant, and your tutor or lecturer will respect that right. Likewise, if you
are the only 56-year-old male in the class and are concerned about confidentiality, do
not feel obliged to hand in the questionnaire; or you could discuss with your lecturer
how they will protect your anonymity (e.g., you or your lecturer could omit your age
from the dataset). However, regardless of your participation, you are still expected to
write the research report based on the study – that is part of your course requirement,
and you will be provided with the required materials to complete the report.
In situations where the study is an experimental task, if you feel uncomfortable about
being involved as a participant it is usually possible to be allocated as a support person –
a timer, a counter or an “instructor”. If you are feeling distressed or pressured, you should
raise your concern with your tutor or lecturer, since others in the class may feel the same
but be inhibited about speaking out. If you don’t wish to do this publicly, you should
excuse yourself from the relevant class and contact your lecturer or tutor (e.g., via email).
In our experience, it is rare that a classroom study is this uncomfortable for students. In
the unlikely case that you feel your concerns are not treated appropriately, talk to the
coordinator of the course. We say “unlikely”, because the tutor or lecturer is usually more
concerned about ethics than most students.
Ethics become even more important if you are collecting data from people outside the
university. If you are interviewing a child, you will probably be given strict instructions
about obtaining permission from the child’s parents, gaining the child’s confidence, and
discontinuing the interview if the child becomes uncomfortable. People are more impor-
tant than your study! Such experiences of having to meet the concerns of people in the
real world are good practice for anyone wishing to become either a psychologist or a
market researcher, and will allow you to view with a critical or perhaps an admiring eye
some of the research you will read.
You will usually be introduced to the ethics of research very early in your under-
graduate course. Such an introduction may mention some (historical) failures, grey areas
(e.g., use of deception), and exceptions to the rules, all of which are uncommon in
61
modern psychology research and unlikely to apply to undergraduate studies. The

Australian Psychological Society (APS) encapsulates its expectations of the ethical
behaviour of psychologists, both as researchers and practitioners, in a small booklet
called Code of Ethics (APS, 2017), downloadable from the Society’s website (https://
www.psychology.org.au/about/ethics/) as a 32-page pdf.
4.4 Where to Go From Here

What belongs in each section of the report will be dealt with at some length in Chapter 5.
In the present section we deal with the general process of writing the research report,
assuming you have already participated in some way in the study and have some data.
Hypotheses. As a participant, it is unlikely that you were aware of the actual hypotheses
at the time the study was run. It is also common practice for you, as an experimenter, not
to be told the hypotheses at the time you test some other participant, which will help you
not to influence the results. The hypotheses will become clear from your reading about
the study you are replicating or from other reading, and from reflecting on what the
study actually tested.
By deciding on your hypotheses, you have already largely determined the shape of
your report. Your Introduction must consist of a logical argument for why you have made
those particular predictions. Your Method must describe a study that appropriately tested
those predictions. In your Results section you need report only those results that are rel-
evant to your hypotheses. Finally, your Discussion must say whether or not your hypoth-
eses were supported, then interpret them and discuss their implications in relation to the
literature which motivated them.
Get something down in writing. You should begin by writing an outline of the struc-
ture of your report. The best research reports are thoroughly planned, which means
you will have a good idea of the ideal length of each section, and ensure you don’t get
caught up writing one section and end up leaving too little of the word count to com-
plete the Discussion! A good starting point is to jot down the answers to the following
questions:
• What is the specific aim or purpose of studies in this area or topic?

• Which previous study or studies is this one like, and in what way?
• What did previous studies find, and am I predicting similar findings?
• What other studies relate specifically to my predictions?
• What is the overall aim of my study?
We have used the first person pronouns here to reinforce the pretence that you
have designed the study. The answers to these questions will form the Introduction to
your study.
62
4
The Method section is an answer to the questions:
• Who were the participants and how were they recruited?

• What materials were used in the conduct of the study?
• How was the study conducted?
To prepare to write the Results section, the overall question you need to ask is:
• What results, including data and tests, are specifically relevant to my

hypotheses?
Finally, in preparing the Discussion, you need to answer these questions:
• Do my results support my hypotheses?

• What do my results mean?
• How do they relate to the previous studies I’ve mentioned?
• What are the implications of my results for real-world situations?
• How could my study have been improved?
The answers to all the above questions need to be tidied up, expanded and separated
into the conventional sections of the research report, but they are the essentials of the
report. You should note that the information in these sections is related, but never repeated.
It is often difficult for students to grasp just which elements of a study are the impor-
tant ones, especially if it has not been designed by the student. A plan helps to sort out
your priorities. The next step is to start writing the report itself. Often just getting started
is the most difficult part. You should get something down in writing as soon as possible.
You can later edit, rewrite, expand, and tidy it up.
Length of each section. Students frequently ask how long each section of the report
should be. There are no formal rules about this, but a rule of thumb is that the
Introduction should be about a third of the length of the total report. Although the
lengths can vary with the type of study, the remaining sections are often roughly equal
to each other in length.
Word limits. We advise that, in an environment of online and electronic submissions,

word limits are law and should be strictly adhered to. For example, if you are given a
range, including a word limit with an allowance (e.g., 6 10%), then you should absolutely
keep to this range. If you are given an upper limit, then this is the longest that your report
should be. You should not assume there will be lenience or that your marker will not
check. This can also be true for hardcopy reports, as markers may choose to count words,
either by hand or via electronic scanning. It is also obvious when students submit a very
long report, or a report with very narrow margins or tiny fonts, or that is not
double-spaced.
Penalties for long reports are almost certainly applied and may include a percent
deducted from your final result or a percent deducted for each 10, 50, 100 words over the
63
limit. Alternatively, a marker may choose not to read the excess words, meaning any con-
tent not read is also not marked. For example, if five marks are awarded from a conclu-
sion and yours is outside the word count, then you may not receive those marks.
What do I have to do to get a Pass? Experience indicates that the average student
needs to complete the following tasks satisfactorily in order to get a grade of clear Pass for
their report:
• Obtain and report on sufficient relevant references (at least those you were
given, with some institutions expecting a minimum of additional references
in the first year, so check with your tutor or lecturer).
• Develop and clearly state the hypotheses that your study actually tests.
• Calculate or identify the appropriate statistics and decide if your hypotheses
are supported or not.
• Write an outline of your report as indicated above.
• Write a first draft, which may be pretty rough.
• Get your first draft read by another person, such as a friend, parent, or
sibling who is not a psychology student. This is to ensure that your
Introduction is a coherent argument for your hypotheses, that the Method
and Results are understandable, and that the Discussion makes sense of
what the results have told you.
• On the basis of feedback on your first draft, especially about whether it
makes sense, add, subtract, or otherwise alter your draft.
• Type it up, and format it correctly (e.g., double-spaced, APA headings, cover
page with your name and the report title as a minimum).
• Get the final draft proofread (checking that the reference list meets the
conventions), tidy up, and submit on time (which might actually be 24
hours before it is due if you need a report from a program such as Turnitin).
Redrafts. You should never submit the first draft of any written piece of assessment
for marking if you are serious about your work or marks! The chances of producing
even a sentence that is well written the first time are vanishingly small, let alone an
entire report. An average student can improve their work by redrafting the work at
least twice. How often you do that depends on how quickly you work, how important
a good mark is to you, and how patient your proofreader is. However, the process of
reviewing and redrafting is also subject to the law of diminishing returns, which says
that you have to put a lot more work in each time to get only a slightly better mark.
Still, with thoughtful redrafting, even average students can lift their marks each time
the report is redrafted.
Proofreading. If you do not have the luxury of someone else as a proofreader, time your
work so that you leave 24 hours between writing something and proofreading it yourself.
It is very easy in the heat of creation to read what you meant to say instead of what you
64
4
have actually written and so overlook what may be quite gross errors of expression or
logic. Your assessor can mark only what you have written, not what you meant to write!
Time management. Time management is more thoroughly addressed in Section 2.9.

However, it is worth saying that, although it is easier said than done, plan your time so
that you allow more time than you might think you need. University timetables dictate
that you will have assignments in several subjects due around or at the same time.
Murphy’s Law suggests that if you leave everything until the last minute, the computer
will choose that time to have a fatal breakdown, or the dog will chew up your final draft
just as you sit down to type it up. Consequently, time your work to leave at least 48 hours
between getting it finished and handing it in. That way, if there are any catastrophes, you
do have some time up your sleeve in order to correct their effects. For similar reasons,
back up your documents frequently, and in different places, such as a USB stick or cloud
storage (e.g., Dropbox), as well as on your computer.
You should aim to space your work time so that it can be done in several small chunks.
Cooperate with other students to minimise the hassles of finding references and allow
yourself time to discuss them with your colleagues (NB: this is a fun part!). Start early
enough so that if you have to get advice from staff you can do so during their consulta-
tion times and make use of online discussion boards. Most student consultations with
staff seem to revolve around statistics. You should have tackled these early on. Asking
questions about statistical problems at the last minute indicates that your planning is
poor, and tests the fairmindedness of your tutor or lecturer, who probably got where they
are by being on top of their assignments when they were in your shoes!
Extensions. Although institutions will grant extensions of time for genuinely unfore-
seen and uncontrollable difficulties, this does not generally include pressure of other
demands, either paid employment or assignments in other subjects. In addition, most
universities require you to submit supporting documentation on any problems you have.
If your computer fails at the last minute, be prepared to show your tutor or lecturer your
last draft or the USB with the final version on it.
If you are encountering personal or academic problems that you feel are likely to
affect the quality or timing of your work, talk to your tutor or lecturer early. Do not let
problems pile up and overwhelm you. All universities have student counselling depart-
ments that can help you deal with problems. You might feel that you are unique, and
you may be right, but it is very likely the counsellors have helped many students with
similar problems in the past, and they can help you, too. Documentation from the
counselling unit to your tutor or lecturer can be used to support extensions and does
not need to include any personal or intimate details. Such services are free. Make use
of them.
Plagiarism checks. If you have the opportunity to run your research report through
Turnitin or another plagiarism checker, do so. In the process of drafting and redrafting
your report, it is easy to reword a sentence or two back to very much what the original
65
reference said. Turnitin will pick this up and allow you to correct it, thus saving you from
trouble with your marker or your university’s Academic Honesty Policy. For more infor-
mation on plagiarism, see Section 3.1 in the previous chapter.
Copies of your report or essay. Always keep a copy of your final submission. It is a
good idea to include the date in the filename of each draft, so that it is clear which is
the final version. Most institutions have a policy that assignments gaining very high or
very low marks are to be double-marked. Hopefully yours will be the former, but the
policy results in reports being handed on by one staff member to another, and so they
may occasionally be misplaced and you may be asked to produce a copy of your sub-
mitted work.
In the next chapter we give detailed advice about the various sections of a research
report, including examples of the conventions for writing each part.
66
5
Sections of a
Research Report
KEYWORDS
aims, apparatus, bibliography, construct, data, debriefing, degrees of freedom,
dependent variable, descriptive statistics, design, figures, hypothesis, implicit
measures, independent variable, inferential statistics, measurement,
participant, post hoc, proof/prove, quantitative, sample, scale, self-report
measures, significance level, statistic, tables, variable
IN THIS CHAPTER
5.1 Title Page and Abstract . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68
Research Report
Sections of a
5.2 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
5.3 Method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77
5.4 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
5.5 Discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
5.6 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
5.7 Appendices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
5.8 Further Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106

5.9 Feedback . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107
5.10 Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
5.11 Checklist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108
67
T
HE PARTS OF THE report, in the order that they should appear in your final ver-
sion, are as follows:
• Title Page and Abstract
• Introduction
• Method
• Results
• Discussion
• References
• Appendices
That is the order in which they will be treated in this chapter. However, you may find
it easier to draft them in some other order. For instance, the Method and Results sections
follow a set structure for presenting straightforward factual material. Specifically, the
Method describes who the participants were, what materials were used, and the proce-
dure the researcher used. The Results section describes the data you collected and the
outcome of the analyses that were performed to test the hypotheses. For this reason, you
may find it easier to write these two sections first, although you will have specified your
hypotheses and completed (or reviewed) the analyses that test those hypotheses before
you can do so.
5.1 Title Page and Abstract

Title Page. The Title Page should contain a brief but comprehensive title that encapsu-
lates the essence of the research conducted. In the academic world many important refer-
ence sources, such as the Current Contents database, list only the titles of articles, which
demonstrates how critical it is that a title accurately captures the research. This is best
achieved by a title that includes the independent and dependent variables of your research,
and the way they are related. Some real examples of article titles are shown in Figure 5.1.
The title should be centred horizontally on the title page, and about a third of the way
down the page. The APA Publication Manual (6th ed.) indicates the title should be in sen-
tence case (i.e., capitalise important words including nouns, pronouns, adjectives, verbs,
and adverbs, and use lowercase for conjunctions and prepositions; see their Section
Research Report
Sections of a
2.01). You should note that sentence case (also known as title case) is used for your title,
but not for the title of cited works in your reference list (see their Section 6.29).
You should include your name two lines below the title and it should be centred. In
addition, your tutor’s name, the subject or unit name and code, the due date, the day and
time of your class, and your word count (if required) should be at the bottom of the page,
flush with the left margin. One commonly used layout is shown in Figure 5.2.
At this point, it is essential that you check with your tutor or lecturer about the con-
ventions at your university or in your subject or unit. For example, institutions differ
about whether to include a word count and a statement or declaration of originality.
Similarly, assignments might differ in the use of word ranges (e.g., 1/– 10%) or limits, as
68
S ections of a Research Repor t
5
Can Sadness be Good for You?: On the Cognitive, Motivational, and Interpersonal
Benefits of Mild Negative Affect. (Forgas, 2017)
Sexual Objectification in Women’s Daily Lives: A Smartphone Ecological Momentary
Assessment Study. (Holland, Koval, Stratemeyer, Thomson, & Haslam, 2017)
Gender Differences in Weight-Related and Non-Weight-Related Appearance Concerns
in a Community Sample. (Keating, Stephens, Thomas, Castle, & Rossell, 2016)
Teaching Psychology in Australia: Does Class Attendance Matter for Performance?
(Louis, Bastian, McKimmie, & Lee, 2016)
Social-economic Theory and Short-Term Mate Preferences: The Effects of Gender
Roles and Socioeconomic Status. (March & Grieve, 2016)
A Preregistered Study of Competing Predictions Suggests that Men Do Overestimate
Women’s Sexual Intent. (Murray, Murphy, von Hippel, Trivers, & Haselton, 2017).
Sexual Behaviour in Early Adolescence: A Cross-National Comparison of Australian
and United States Youth. (Prendergast et al., 2017)
Trauma Exposure and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder Within Fire and Emergency
Services in Western Australia. (Skeffington, Rees, & Mazzucchelli, 2017)
Stagnant or Successful, Carefree or Anxious? Australian University Students’ Goals
and Beliefs About Adulthood and Their Current Well-Being. (Weier & Lee, 2016)
Sleep Well Feel Well: An Investigation into the Protective Value of Sleep Quality on
Subjective Well-Being. (Weinberg, Noble, & Hammond, 2016)
Figure 5.1. Some titles of published articles by Australasian psychologists.
The Effect of Group Discussion on the Polarisation of

Attitudes in Group and Individual Decision-Making
Kathy Smith
Submitted as a Psychology 201 Practical Report

Due date: 6th October, 2018
Tutor: Oliver Holmes
Class: Wednesday, 10:30–12:30
Word count: 1987 words (excluding reference list)
Figure 5.2. Example of a typical title page.
69
well as what is included in a word limit (e.g., abstract, tables, references). If you are
required to include the statement of these components, be honest! Due to the increased
use of online submissions and technologies such as Turnitin, dishonesty is likely to be
easily identified and penalised, and may be subject to review under your Academic
Honesty, Integrity, or Conduct policy.
Finally, if your university demands that a research report be in the form required for
submission to a journal, the page numbering will start on the title page. In addition, all
pages, including the title page, will also carry a running head, which is a brief title of no
more than 50 characters including letters, punctuation, and spaces. It is capitalised and
is flush left.
Abstract. The Abstract follows the Title Page on a separate page. As you will see from
searching databases like PsycINFO, the Abstract contains sufficient information to
describe all the key aspects of the research. However, since it is restricted in length to a
single paragraph, it must pack a lot of information into a small space. Specifically, it is
critically important that the Abstract contains information about: (a) the topic or aim(s)
of the study; (b) the participants; (c) key aspects of the method such as what was meas-
ured and how; (d) what was found; and (e) what was concluded. For this reason, you
will find it advantageous to write the Abstract section last. By then you will have written
the extended version of each of these pieces of information, including the background
and purpose of the research (Introduction), how your research was conducted and with
whom (Method), what you found (Results), and what you concluded (Discussion).
The Abstract requires a heading (i.e., the word Abstract), in bold sentence case, cen-
tred on the page. The Abstract itself should be formatted as a single paragraph of dou-
ble-spaced typing, flush left, with the first line not indented and located at the top of its
page. The APA Publication Manual (6th ed.) states that the Abstract is typically 150 to
250 words in length (see their Section 2.04), but this allows for the description of mul-
ti-study research, which will not be the case for undergraduate reports. For this reason,
we recommend that your Abstract should be briefer (i.e., no more than 150 words); how-
ever, be sure to check the expectations of the staff member setting your assignment.
In terms of the content of the Abstract, it is customary to begin with a sentence stating
the topic, purpose, or aim(s) of the study. This is followed by a description of the partic-
ipants, including the sample size and information about the participants that is essential
to the conclusions of the research. For example, mention whether participants were uni-
versity students or recruited from another source, but only include age or gender if they
affect either the research question or the representativeness of the sample. You should
then briefly describe what participants actually did (e.g., variables measured and/or pro-
cedures undertaken) and the major findings. Note that it may be possible to state whether
the findings supported your hypotheses, but this is only advisable if it is clear to your
reader (or marker) what your hypotheses were. As can be seen in the four examples given
in Figure 5.3, describing results or discussing results in relation to hypotheses or expec-
tations can be appropriate in different circumstances. A final sentence can then be written
stating the conclusions that you drew from these results.
70
5
This study explored the relationship between Type A behaviour, stress, and task
difficulty. Participants were 30 undergraduates selected from a larger study at a
metropolitan university, whose stress levels were measured before and after a
pattern-matching task which was either unpressured or deliberately designed to
provoke Type A behaviours by providing an environment that was achievement-
oriented, time-pressured, and self-esteem threatening. Self-reported Type A
behaviours were also measured. The hypothesis that people higher in Type A
behaviour are more stressed during a more pressured task was supported, though
they were not more stressed in general. It was concluded that measurement of Type
A behaviour needs to focus on all aspects of this behaviour pattern, not just the
time-urgency.
This study examined “hoped for” selves across adulthood, and their
relationships with current well-being. Two hundred and ninety-four introductory
psychology students and their acquaintances responded to a survey about hoped
for, and feared selves, and psychological well-being. Occupational hoped-for selves
were most frequently reported, possibly reflecting the predominantly young sample
and the current economic conditions. The area of family was also considered
important. Contrary to previous findings, perceived potential to achieve hoped-for
selves did not differ across age groups, nor did type of hoped-for self differ
depending on current well-being. It was concluded that, although the study needs
to be replicated with a more diverse representative sample, most people report
being capable of achieving hoped-for selves.
The aim of this study was to test whether there was a bias towards drawing
left-facing profiles, and if so, whether this is affected by handedness. Under
counterbalanced conditions, 431 undergraduate students were requested to
draw a person’s head in profile, to report, from memory, which way the Queen’s
head faced on a 20-cent coin, and to draw the head side of a 20-cent coin from
memory. Results indicate that a substantial majority of people drew a left-facing
profile, regardless of handedness. When asked which way the Queen’s head
faced on a coin, they answered at no better than chance levels. It was concluded
that a left-facing drawing bias exists which is unrelated to visualisation or
handedness.
The purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis of an inverted-U relationship
between stress and arousal, and judgments of perceptual accuracy. The sample
consisted of 211 women and 89 men undergraduate university students who
judged the accuracy of repeated presentations of the horizontal–vertical illusion
and reported their level of stress and arousal using an affect checklist. Results
indicate that, contrary to expectations, there was no relationship between
arousal and judgments of perceptual accuracy. It was concluded that there was
no relationship between stress or arousal and this rather simple type of
judgment, but that further studies should examine the effect of differing levels of
task complexity.
Figure 5.3. Four examples of Abstracts.
71
You will find it useful to look at some of the major journals for examples of Abstracts.
Try Journal of Experimental Psychology or Brain and Cognition for areas that you may
encounter in your very early studies. Later you may want to look at journals such as
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Child Development, Psychological Science, and
Sex Roles for Abstracts of studies in later units.
5.2 Introduction
By the time you sit down to write the Introduction, you will likely have completed a
review of essential literature (see Chapter 2), will have decided on your hypotheses,
tested them with the appropriate statistics, and determined what the results mean. At this
point, you are ready to write the Introduction from the perspective of the researcher who
designed the study.
The purpose of the Introduction is to provide the reader (or marker) with the context
and background for your research, and the path you took to decide why you tested the
particular hypotheses you did test. As mentioned in Chapter 1, the structure of the
Introduction is like the upper half of an hourglass, with the most general information
(e.g., context, definitions) first, then gradually becoming more focused in the review of
previous research, and concluding with specific, concrete hypotheses.
The Introduction will begin on a new page but does not include the heading
Introduction. The location of the Introduction tells the reader what it is. Institutions
requiring a report in the form of a journal submission expect you to repeat the title, cen-
tred at the top of the page on which the Introduction begins. Some institutions suggest
that the page on which the Introduction begins is not numbered, and numbering begins
with “2” at the top right-hand corner of the second page of the Introduction. Ask your
tutor or lecturer whether this style is expected.
Opening sentences. These must be consistent with the purpose of the Introduction;
namely, to explain why you have undertaken your study, and to set the scene for what-
ever you hypothesise. It is (surprise!) an exercise in communication, and for that
reason should be written in English prose and should avoid psychological jargon
wherever possible. As a result, you should not leap straight into the middle of your
research problem or theory. Instead you should lead the reader step by step through
your reasoning and evidence, beginning with a statement of the context, background,
or broad issue.
Kidder and Judd (1986) note that it is preferable that you open with a statement about
human behaviour, not the behaviour of behavioural scientists or their research. However,
do not allow this general statement to degenerate into cliché. Markers are not impressed
by opening statements such as “Ever since humans came down from the trees, people
have . . .”! However, the behaviour being studied ought to be relevant in some way to the
real world. You should be able to make a one- or two-sentence statement of this relevance.
Some recent Australasian examples are given in Figure 5.4.
72
5
“Time stood still” is a common expression describing the perception of time slowing down
when one is exposed to dangerous or emotional stimuli; however, the processes that underlie the
perceived duration of emotional stimuli (affective chronometry) are not fully understood
(Davidson, 2015). One aspect of affective chronometry that is particularly unclear and has had
inconsistent findings is the distortion of duration at intervals less than 1000 ms. Another
aspect that is not fully understood is whether the distortions are caused by changes in arousal
levels or by changes in attention (Grondin, Laflamme, & Gontier, 2014). (Corke, Bell, Goodhew,
Smithson, & Edwards, 2016)
Self-consistency, the degree to which self-concept elements are congruent across time,
relationships, and situations (Boucher, 2010; English & Chen, 2007), has been associated with
positive psychological adjustment. Specifically, lower levels of self-consistency have been found
to be significantly associated with lower levels of self-esteem, positive emotion, and emotional
adjustment, and higher levels of depression, neuroticism, anxiety, and stress (e.g., Block, 1961;
Campbell, Assanand, & Di Paula, 2003; Donahue, Robins, Roberts, & John, 1993; Sheldon,
Ryan, Rawsthorne, & Ilardi, 1997). (Gage, Coker, & Jobson, 2015)
Initially, perfectionism was understood to be a negative trait where the actions of striving for
excessively high standards were thought to lead to emotional distress (Burne, 1980; Hollander,
1965). Over the past two decades, a multidimensional model of perfectionism has been
established (Dunkley, Zuroff, & Blankstein, 2003; Slade & Owen, 1998). According to this view,
not everyone who has high standards experiences distress. Rather, it is those who attach not
achieving their high standards to failure, who are inclined to experience anxiety, worthlessness
and depression. (Mathew, Dunning, Coats, & Whelan, 2014)
Substantial research into the physical and psychological effects of atypical weight has
established common correlates and consequences of obesity. Despite this knowledge, weight
loss programs are struggling to keep pace with biopsychosocial consequences of overweight and
obesity. This has encouraged new approaches in an effort to better manage the problem.
(Robertson, Davies, & Winefield, 2015)
There is substantial evidence that the transition from elementary to middle school is a
stressful time for young people (Eccles et al., 1993; Simmons & Blyth, 1987). This stress may be
due in part to the challenge of renegotiating peer relationships and establishing oneself in a new
social hierarchy, as well as a potential decrease in classroom emotional support (the affective
tone of interactions within the classroom). (Shell, Gazelle, & Faldowski, 2014)
Research has consistently outlined the contribution of alcohol in the facilitation of

aggression, with alcohol involved in more than half of all violent crimes globally (Pernanen,
1991; World Health Organization, 2007), and recent Australian estimates indicating the
presence of alcohol in up to 73% of all assaults (Collins & Lapsley, 2007). Further reports show
an increase in verbal and physical violence outside licensed venues at times of high-alcohol use
(i.e. between the hours of 8 pm to 6 am Friday to Sunday (Laslett et al., 2006)), with the
majority of assaults occurring in the streets, lanes and footpaths outside venues (Ireland &
Thommeny, 1993; Miller et al., 2011). (Zinkiewicz, Curtis, Meurer, & Miller, 2016)
Figure 5.4. Some actual examples of opening sentences.

Note: These are examples of opening sentences in publication. They are also in the format of block quotes.
Note the full stop at the end of the quote and the source afterwards in parentheses. You should avoid using
such quotes in your assignments. Instead rephrase the material using your own words, with an
acknowledgment, to show that you understand the material (for more information on paraphrasing and
quotation, see Chapter 3, Quotations, p. 42).
73
Define the area under study. The initial statement should be followed by a statement
giving the theoretical framework or context that has generated the particular questions
you used in your study. Information about the context will usually be found in your
assignment information, starter references, or even in the subject or unit textbook. This
section should not be very long, but it is useful in this early part of your report to define
concepts and other technical terms.
You should write for an intelligent lay reader who is generally familiar with psychol-
ogy but not with the specific area you are reporting on. Be careful when defining terms,
because many terms used in psychology have technical meanings that are somewhat dif-
ferent from their everyday use. For this reason, use a dictionary of psychology, not an
ordinary dictionary. If you already know that you intend to major in psychology, a dic-
tionary of psychology is a good investment. Most textbooks also have technical terms
defined either in the body of the text or in a glossary.
Previous research. Usually the studies that you are assigned to read early in your under-
graduate career will be replications or variations of previous research. If this is the case,
then this will provide you with a place to begin. Specifically, you should describe what
the previous research did, including their theoretical position or contention, a brief
review of their method and finding, and what they have concluded from their research.
You should be sure to describe all the relevant material from a particular piece of research
in the one place. It is frustrating for your marker to read a paragraph about a specific
study, then a couple of paragraphs about other research, then find more material about
the first study. The reports that achieve the best marks are those that follow a logical
sequence.
You should be very selective about what you include. There are no strict rules about
which research to review, but one possibility is to describe the most general findings first,
followed by descriptions of the findings in previous research that are specifically relevant
to your hypotheses. In addition, there is a temptation to write all you know about a previ-
ous study. Resist it! You need only include the material that is relevant to your hypotheses.
Typically, that means giving only the briefest overview of the researchers’ aims, what they
did, to whom, and what was concluded from it.
When reading previous research, you should have applied the principles of critical
evaluation already described in Section 2.4, both to your choice of previous studies and
to the contents of them. In writing about previous research, you should briefly describe
the elements of that research in a way that indicates the quality of the evidence you are
using to justify the hypotheses that you will make at the end of the Introduction. Some
examples of summaries of previous findings are shown in Figure 5.5. They are the work
of Australasian students and are published here with permission.
How much prior research should be included? Students often ask how much previ-
ous research they should include. It largely depends on the length allowed for the report.
Check with your own tutor or lecturer, but most first-year research reports are based on
a very limited number (i.e., one or two) of specific references. However, you are typically
74
5
An exhaustive body of research demonstrating similar concrete to abstract
effects for other metaphoric representations exists. This includes research
examining metaphorical associations between weight and importance
(Ackerman, Nocera, & Bargh, 2010; Chandler, Reinhard, & Schwarz, 2012;
Jostman, Lakens, & Schubert, 2009), rough textures and social interactions
(Ackerman et al., 2010), hardness and rigid thinking (Ackerman et al., 2010),
fluid movement and fluid thinking (Slepian & Ambady, 2012), spatial
information or movement and time (Boroditsky & Ramscar, 2002; Cassanto &
Boroditsky, 2007), cleanliness and moral purity (Lee & Schwarz, 2010, 2011),
forward movement and goal achievement (Natanzon & Ferguson, 2012), height
and power (Meier & Dionne, 2009), fishy smells and suspicion (Lee & Schwarz,
2012), and facial expressions and perceptions of brightness (Song, Vonasch,
Meier, & Bargh, 2011).
Reported adherence to the single session drinking guidelines ranged from
26–61%. For example, a UK study of female psychology students (N 5 235)
measured adherence to the single session guideline by asking how many days per
week they exceed three standard drinks in a single drinking session (Murgraff,
McDermott, & Walsh, 2001). Almost 75% of participants reported consumption
above the guideline periodically, with over 50% doing so two or more times per
week. An Australian study (N 5 20,000) found similar adherence rates among
males (35%), but much higher adherence among females (68%) to the single
session guideline (Livingston, 2012). Finally, a study (N 5 992) of North
American college students found 65% of participants do not adhere with the
national guideline for single session drinking, and that over a year, both men and
women exceed the guideline every second week on average (Hoeppner, Paskausky,
Jackson, & Barnett, 2013).
The ability to recognise facial expressions accurately is critical for effective social
functioning (Blair, 2003). Facial expression recognition plays an important role in
regulating behaviour and in guiding social judgements (Willis, Palermo, Burke,
McGrillen, & Miller, 2010). Impairments in facial expression recognition can be
detrimental to interpersonal relationships and wellbeing (Ruffman, Henry,
Livingstone, & Phillips, 2008). However, there are limited effective interventions
available to treat facial expression recognition deficits that are prevalent in a range
of clinical populations (Willis, Murphy, Ridley, & Vercammen, 2015).
Gay men and lesbians are subject to subtle and insidious forms of
discrimination, including being paid less than straight people (Berg & Lien, 2002),
being more likely to be overlooked for employment (Tilcsik, 2011), being less likely
to receive help when needed (Gabriel & Banse, 2006), and being evaluated more
harshly when they make decisions that are unsuccessful (Shepherd & Patzelt, 2014).
As can be seen from these examples, there are social and cultural norms and
practices that result in the unfair treatment of gay people (Kelley, 2001).
Figure 5.5. Some real examples of summaries of previous (student) research.
75
expected to read beyond these assigned or starter references. Second-year research reports
will often be assigned as many as five references, and you will certainly be expected to
read at least as many more. A rule of thumb is that you will need to read at least as many
more references as you have been given, although you may not use them all in the final
report. In deciding what to include, you should review enough previous research to jus-
tify the hypotheses you make, either to show that previous researchers have supported
similar hypotheses, or to show that they have found sufficient data for you to deduce the
predictions that your study tests.
It is common practice to read more references than you end up citing in your report.
A good research report will cite only relevant work and will indicate why it is relevant. A
quality report will demonstrate discernment. That is, it is better to cite a few well-chosen
references than to have a long and unselective reference list including material that is
only tangentially relevant. Moreover, reports will generally lose marks if the Introduction
is little more than a collection of quotes and references.
Using examples. In illustrating theoretical points or introducing technical terms, it is

important to use examples. The more abstract the theory, the more important it is to use
examples. The following poor and good examples (adapted, with permission, from a stu-
dent report) highlight the way a single sentence can describe a general and ill-defined or
a specific and clearly defined relationship between key variables, in this case, parental
criticism and children’s body image:
Poor: “Research has found that parents play a significant role in creating body
image concerns for their children (Levine, Smolak, & Hayden, 1994).”
Good: “Evidence suggests that the extent to which parents are critical of their
children’s weight and shape is significantly correlated with their children’s body
image dissatisfaction and their investment in thinness (Levine, Smolak, &
Hayden, 1994).”
Jargon. Try to avoid jargon. Some people justify the use of jargon as necessary linguis-
tic shorthand. However, an undergraduate research report should be written for a
more general audience, to demonstrate the author’s clear understanding of the content
of the report.
Direct quotes. For the same reason as avoiding jargon, you should avoid lengthy direct
quotes from your references. It is not always obvious from the use of quotations that you
know what they mean. Also, as mentioned in Chapter 3 on referencing, rephrasing them
in your own words (and acknowledging the source) shows your marker that you clearly
understand what you are saying.
Introducing your own study. Once you have reported previous research, it is time to
introduce your own study. First you need a statement of general aims. An example is:
“The present study replicated Forgas’ (2017) finding that sadness can have positive
76
5
consequences on tasks requiring vigilant attention using a university student sample. In
addition, we extended this work by exploring [other pertinent questions or alternative
applications] . . .”. You should also add here any special or different treatments or meas-
ures you used, or ways your study has controlled for problems in previous research. Such
statements show that you are aware of the shortcomings of previous studies.
Hypotheses. Finally, you need concise, specific, concrete hypotheses. These are explicit
statements of what you expected to find. Your expectations should be justified by what
you have already said about previous research. Do not use the abbreviations “H1” or “H0”,
and do not state or write about the null hypothesis (e.g., no difference, no change, or no
relationship between groups or variables). Each hypothesis should be stated operation-
ally. That is, the hypotheses should describe the variables used in your research (e.g.,
scores on the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale) rather than as the broad concepts they reflect
(e.g., self-esteem). You should not number your hypotheses, as doing so typically compli-
cates your writing (e.g., it is insufficient to refer to them by number alone elsewhere, and
there are likely to be too few of them to warrant a list). Similarly, you should not present
them in bulleted note form. They should be written in flowing English prose, with all
hypotheses in the same paragraph. Remember to write your hypotheses in the past tense.
The study has already been run or you would not be reporting on it. Therefore, say, “We/I
predicted that participants would . . .”, or “We/I hypothesised that respondents
would . . .”. You were given some examples of hypotheses in Figure 4.2 in Chapter 4.
There are some more examples, both good and not so good, in Figure 5.6, which illustrate
what the difference is!
Length of sections. There are no formal rules about the appropriate length of each sec-
tion of a research report, but a rough guide is that the Introduction should be about one-
third of the length of the entire report.
5.3 Method
When writing your first draft of a research report, it is easiest to write the Method
first, because this section describes what was done and to whom. You will usually
have been one of the participants in the study, or the person testing participants you
have chosen or been assigned, so you should be well aware of what was done. If, for
any reason (e.g., experimental conditions), you have experience of only one of the
different treatments or materials, your tutor or lecturer should make this clear, so be
sure to read through all of the information provided, and don’t rely solely on what you
experienced.
There are three reasons for having a Method section. One is to give your reader or
marker enough information to judge whether your study really does test the hypotheses
you claim that it tests. The second is to allow someone else to repeat your study if they so
desire, and to test your hypotheses on their particular sample. You therefore need
77
Poor:
Hypothesis 1. Older adults will be less able to ignore the interspersed irrelevant
material than younger adults.
(Don’t give the hypotheses numbers or use subheadings like this. The dependent
measure is not clear. The tense is wrong.)
Better:
It was anticipated that adults older than 45 years would be less able to ignore the
interspersed irrelevant material and, as a result, would read significantly more
slowly and show poorer comprehension than adults younger than 25 years.
Poor:
Perceived positive social support in personal relationships will be negatively
associated with anxiety and mood disorder episodes.
(Wrong tense, and how are these constructs measured?)
Better:
Scores on the XYZ scale of perceived social support were expected to be negatively
correlated with the number of anxiety attacks reported and also with the number
of mood disorder episodes.
Poor:
The hypothesis is that a mother’s positive perception of herself will decrease the
intensity of her daily hassles via social support satisfaction.
(How are these constructs measured? The tense is incorrect.)
Better:
It was hypothesised that scores on a mother’s self-esteem would negatively predict
the intensity of her daily hassles, and this effect would be mediated by scores on
social support satisfaction.
Poor:
The hypothesis is that student willingness to take a psychology course will depend
on the gender of the instructor and the type of course being taught.
(It is not clear what is actually being measured. The prediction is too general. The
tense is wrong.)
Better:
[It was] hypothesised that student willingness to take a psychology course from a
feminine, masculine, or androgynous instructor would vary with the type of course
being taught. Feminine and androgynous instructors would be preferred for clinical
courses, which tend to emphasise personal/social skills. Masculine and
androgynous instructors would be preferred for experimental courses, which tend
to emphasise analytic/objective skills (Freeman, 1992, p. 93).
Figure 5.6. Good and poor examples of hypotheses.
78
5
sufficient detail so that someone else could be confident that by following your instruc-
tions they would be carrying out an identical experiment. The third reason is to allow
your reader to judge if your results may be applicable to any other groups about which
the reader is interested.
The Method section is presented immediately after the Introduction without starting a
new page. It is simply headed Method, in bold sentence case, centred across the page. It
contains a maximum of four subheadings:
• Participants (or Subjects, if non-human)

• Materials or Measures (or Apparatus)
• Design
• Procedure
Note that in contrast to previous editions of the APA Publication Manual, these are
now in bold type.
Levels of headings. The Method section is a good illustration of the need to distinguish
between levels of headings. In most undergraduate research reports, there is a need to use
only two or three levels of headings. For example, the section titles Method and Results
are level 1 headings, in bold sentence case, and are centred across the page. Subsection
headings are level 2 headings, which are bold sentence case, on a line by themselves
aligned with the left margin, and do not have a full stop. Finally, if needed, the subsection
Measures may use a level 3 heading, which is in bold sentence case, begins on a new line
but is indented, and ends with a full stop. Examples of these headings in the context of a
Method are presented in Figure 5.7.
These conventions were introduced to make life easier for typesetters. Although you
might argue that this reason doesn’t apply to undergraduate research reports, treat it as
Method
Participants
Participants were 234 undergraduate psychology students, including 112 men . . .
Measures
Ten Item Personality Inventory (TIPI). Self-reported big five personality traits of
Extraversion, Agreeableness, Emotional Stability, Conscientiousness, and Openness
to Experiences were assessed by the TIPI (Gosling, Rentfrow, & Swann, 2003).
Procedure
All participants were recruited in tutorial classes but participated via the secure
online link at a time and location of their own choosing.
Figure 5.7. Example of use of levels of headings.
79
part of the discipline of writing to a convention. Once you know about it, you don’t have
to make decisions each time you write a research report.
5.3.1 Participants
The participants subsection appears under its own (level 2) heading. In this subsection,
you should state the number of participants tested; how they were selected; refusal rates
(if known); how they were remunerated or compensated for their participation; and any
relevant descriptive demographic variables such as age, gender, education, marital status,
ethnic identity, occupational status, or other features. A demographic variable becomes
relevant when it is used as an independent variable (such as when comparing groups of
different ages) or when it specifically defines the population from which the sample is
drawn. Your statement of these details allows the reader to assess how adequately you
have controlled for some of these variables, and the extent to which your findings can be
generalised to any other groups. Examples are shown in Figure 5.8.
In describing the sample, you should note that you can say, “The sample com-
prised . . .” or “The sample consisted of . . .”, but it is poor English to say, “The sample
comprised of . . .” or “The sample consisted 36 people . . .”. Similarly, don’t say, “The par-
ticipants were divided into two groups . . .” because it gives the impression that each
person was divided! Say, “The sample was divided into two groups . . .”.
The participants were undergraduate introductory psychology students at a

Perth university, 130 women (M 5 19.6 years, SD 5 2.9) and 46 men (M 5 19.7,
SD 5 2.9), who were participating as part of a course requirement.
The sample consisted of 268 women and 76 men who responded to an internet
survey. Mean age was 35.4 years (SD 5 11.7). All participants had been diagnosed
with . . . and the mean time since diagnosis was 11.2 years (SD 5 9.3). Sixty-four
per cent were married or in de facto relationships, 18% were separated, divorced,
or widowed. Approximately half the sample (54.8%) was currently employed.
The respondents were 97 women (M 5 38.5 years, SD 5 9.4), each chosen
non-randomly by an introductory psychology student at a Sydney university. All
subjects were or had been married, and had a mean education level of 11.4 years.
The sample comprised 78 children, 44 girls and 34 boys who were attending
Year 6 classes in two Brisbane suburban State schools serving predominantly
middle-class populations.
Twelve students from the Australian National University participated, in return
for a $10 Coles Myer voucher. All participants had normal or corrected-to-normal
vision and were native English speakers. (This was for an experiment on visual
perception where vision was a relevant variable.)
Figure 5.8. Examples of descriptions of participants in a psychology experiment.
80
5
Avoiding bias. The APA Publication Manual (6th ed.) seeks to increase accuracy and
reduce language-based bias in the description of research. In fact, three general guidelines
have been developed. These are: 1) promoting the specificity in the description of partici-
pants; 2) avoidance of “othering” labels; and 3) acknowledgment of participants’ agency in
the description of procedures. A consequence of these guidelines is that there is a strong
preference for collectively describing individuals who take part in your research as “partic-
ipants” rather than “subjects”. This reflects the current view that these people are not
passive objects of your research; rather, they are active partners in the research. As a result,
participants should be said to have completed (or not) your measures, rather than
described as having a measure “administered” to them or having their data “collected”.
When describing who the participants were, the APA Publication Manual (6th ed.)
encourages descriptions to be as specific as possible (e.g., rather than “over 65 years of
age”, use “65 to 83 years of age”, and “women” rather than “females” unless you are
describing participants’ biological sex) and to only include labels where absolutely neces-
sary – especially labels that may not be chosen by people to whom they may be applied.
One way of achieving this is to use more specific group memberships (e.g., “gay men” or
“lesbians”), and to be generally sensitive in the use of social category labels (i.e., not
“homosexuals”). The Publication Manual suggests this can be achieved by replacing col-
lective nouns with adjectival forms (i.e., adjectives that further specify a less contentious
social group term such as “older adults”, “people with a disability”).
The Publication Manual has some very specific advice on terms that avoid biased lan-
guage across a number of topics. Specifically, gender is typically used rather than sex, and
should be inclusive whenever possible (e.g., strict avoidance of the use of “he” or “man” to
refer to a general case for people). Likewise, sexuality should be described in terms of “sex-
ual orientation” rather than as “sexual preference” and the terms “gay men”, “lesbians”,
“bisexual men”, and “bisexual women” should be used to describe people who belong to
these groups. Furthermore, prejudice towards gay men and lesbians should be described as
“anti-gay bias” or “anti-gay prejudice” rather than “homophobia”. Racial and ethnic iden-
tity should be described using capitalised nouns (e.g., Australian, Sudanese) and, wherever
possible, should be specified or endorsed by participants. Health and disability should
acknowledge personhood and agency and then condition (e.g., “people diagnosed with
PTSD” rather than “victims of trauma”). Finally, age-based groups are: “girl” and “boy” to
refer to children aged to 12 years; “young men” and “young women” to describe 13 to 17
years of age; “men” and “women” to refer to people aged 18 years of age and over; and the
terms “younger adults” and “older adults” can be used if needed to describe generational
differences in research.
5.3.2 Materials
Materials is the most general heading referring to the equipment, including measures,
used in research. If you use equipment, it must be described in sufficient detail so that
anyone wishing to replicate the study can buy, build, or otherwise acquire identical
81
equipment. If you use a computer program, give its name, version number, and source. If
the layout of the equipment is either complex or theoretically important (e.g., for some
perception experiments), it may be necessary to include a diagram of the layout. In this
case, you should label the section Apparatus instead of Materials. In cases where the
apparatus is used in conjunction with actions or tasks, it may even make communication
clearer if you combine the Apparatus and Procedure subsection under the (level 2) head-
ing Apparatus and Procedure. This allows you to say how the apparatus was used at the
same time as you describe it, and is one of the exceedingly few occasions that justify the
use of a combined subsection!
Questionnaires and scales. In undergraduate studies, questionnaires are frequently the

only materials used in a study. If so, this subsection may be described as Measures instead
of the more general Materials; however, check with your lecturer or tutor on what is
required. In describing the measures, be sure to report all information collected from
participants, including demographics such as age, gender, education, and whatever else
was asked. If participants completed well-known psychological tests, be sure to include
the name of the measure and citation (i.e., author and date of publication), the constructs
measured – especially if assessed by subscales – and the number of items assessing each,
and the response format used. It can be useful to include an example item for each con-
struct or subscale. You should also state briefly what you know of the test’s psychometric
properties, such as demonstrated validity and reliability from prior, ideally relevant,
research. Finally, you need to state how the test was scored, including any reverse scoring
required, the full range of scores, and what a high or low score indicates.
If the questionnaire is one that was developed or adapted for your study, include all
the information you would include for a standard measure, as well as a description of the
purpose or adaptation. You should also include the scale as an Appendix, and refer to it in
this subsection (e.g., “see Appendix X”; We will say a bit more about this in Section 5.7).
Several examples are included in Figure 5.9.
Other measures. Across psychology, in line with other developments to enhance the
rigour and quality of the discipline (e.g., statistical reporting standards, preregistration of
studies), there has been an increase in the use of non-questionnaire measures in order to
complement questionnaires and address issues such as self-report biases (e.g., the tendency
for people to over-report desirable and under-report undesirable attributes or outcomes)
and to assess non-reportable concepts such as implicit associations or reaction times. It
should be noted that such measures cannot replace, and are not inherently superior to,
questionnaires. Rather, when used appropriately, they allow consideration of a wider range
of psychological phenomena, and complement questionnaire measures, often providing
convergent support for hypotheses and theories. Such measures include archival (e.g.,
medical records) and observation measures, physiological measures such as heart rate, and
implicit measures including priming and implicit association tests.
It is unlikely that in the early years of your undergraduate studies you will encounter
archival or physiological measures involving complex data sources or apparatus (e.g.,
82
5
Field-independence was measured by the Hidden Figures Test (HFT; French et al.,
1969). The 32-item HFT is a moderately difficult test requiring the ability to recognise
simple geometric forms embedded within complex stimuli. Kardash et al. (1988)
found that undergraduate students in educational psychology needed a score of 12
or better to be in the upper one-third of scores (field-independent), and a score of 8
or less to be in the lower one-third of scores (field-dependent). (Adapted from
Townsend, Moore, Tuck, & Wilton, 1990)
Participants completed the Quality of Relationships Inventory (QRI) developed by
Pierce et al. (1991). The QRI has three scales, two of which were of interest in the
present study. These were: (a) expectations for Social Support (e.g., “To what extent
can you turn to this person for advice about problems?”) and (b) Conflict (e.g., “How
often do you have to work hard to avoid conflict in this relationship?” and “How much
does this person make you feel guilty?”). The authors report good reliability and validity
in a large community sample. (Adapted from Pierce, Sarason, & Sarason, 1992)
Rosenberg’s (1965) 10-item Self-esteem Scale (RSE) was used to assess self-esteem.
Participants rated each item on a 4-point Likert-type scale, from 1 (strongly disagree) to
4 (strongly agree). Overall self-esteem scores were calculated by summing across all
items after reversing some items for consistency of direction of expression. Note that
higher scores indicate higher self-esteem.
The three attachment vignettes originally created by Hazan and Shaver (1987)
were decomposed into 13 individual sentences, each of which was rated on a 7-point
Likert scale, from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). To control for acquiescence
response, five sentences were worded in a negative direction. An example is, “I’m
nervous whenever anyone gets too close to me.” (Adapted from Simpson, Rholes, &
Nelligan, 1992)
Figure 5.9. Examples of overviews of scales in a Materials section.
galvanic skin response, or functional magnetic resonance image or fMRI), specifically for
reasons of limited access. However, you may be asked to report a heart rate or behavioural
data (e.g., observation). In such cases, you will need to describe what is measured (e.g.,
the number of heartbeats) and how it is measured (e.g., the experimenter placed the
index and middle fingers on the participant’s wrist and having located their pulse, counted
all heartbeats occurring during a 20-second period as timed using a stopwatch).
The description of implicit measures differs from the description of other measures
because it involves several unique components. This is because implicit measures use
trials, which present stimuli often under strictly timed conditions, and collect responses
in the form of choices, accuracy, or reaction times. Moreover, as these tasks are not
encountered in everyday life, they often require very specific instructions to participants.
Each of these aspects needs to be described and, as with other information described in
research reports, in more complete detail in your report than you might find in peer-re-
viewed publications. This is again to demonstrate your awareness of key aspects of such
measures. Several examples are included in Figure 5.10.
83
A Stroop task was used to assess participants’ ability to inhibit the irrelevant
information (e.g., the semantic meaning) of targets presented in lowercase letters
or rows of Xs presented in the centre of the computer screen in one of the four
colours (i.e., red, purple, green, or blue) all in Arial 12-point. In the congruent
condition, each target was a colour word presented in the matching colour (e.g.,
the word “red” in red colour). In the incongruent condition, each target was a
colour word presented in a non-matching colour (e.g., the word “red” in purple,
green, or blue). In the neutral condition, the target row of Xs was presented in one
of the four colours. Accordingly, there were four different congruent stimuli,
12 different incongruent stimuli, and four different neutral stimuli. Each test block
comprised 72 trials, composed of 24 congruent trials (each congruent stimulus
presented six times), 24 incongruent trials (each incongruent stimulus presented
twice), and 24 neutral trials (each neutral stimulus presented six times). Thus, a
block contained all possible word/colour combinations, with one third of the trials
being congruent, one third incongruent, and one third neutral. Participants were
instructed at the beginning of each block that each trial would begin with a row of
black Xs (i.e., cueing stimuli), followed by a symbol string in a colour, and that their
task was to ignore the meaning of the string (e.g., word) and to classify the colour
(using the keys: “Z” for red, “X” for purple, “N” for green, and “M” for blue). The
cueing stimuli was presented for 460 ms and followed by a blank screen for 40 ms
before the target was presented for 2000 ms or until the participant responded,
whichever occurred first. Participants were given feedback on each response (e.g.,
correct, wrong, or no response) for 500 ms followed by a blank screen for 500 ms
before the next trial commenced. Participant reaction time for each response was
recorded, but only correct responses were analysed as a function of stimuli type
(e.g., congruent, incongruent, and neutral). (Adapted from Kinoshita, de Wit, Aji,
& Norris, 2017)
An Implicit Association Test (IAT; Greenwald, McGhee, & Schwarz, 1998) was
designed to measure implicit attitudes as implicit associations between negative
attributes and pictures of faces with visible differences compared to those without a
visible difference. The stimuli consisted of photographs depicting faces of people
with a visible difference including eight images displaying moderate acquired or
congenital visible facial differences (e.g. cleft lip, neurofibromatosis, burn scars) and
eight photographs of faces without visible differences matched for age, gender and
facial expression, as well as eight positive and eight negative attributes drawn from
qualitative studies of prejudice towards visible difference and focus groups
conducted by the charity Changing Faces. Stimuli were presented individually, one
per trial, in the centre of a computer screen. Faces were sized to 33% of screen size,
and words were presented in black Arial 16-point font. The design of the IAT
involves seven blocks including five 20-trial practice blocks for familiarising
participants with the stimuli and response pairings (blocks 1, 2, 3, 5, and 6) and
two 40-trial critical blocks (blocks 4 and 7). The order of blocks was face
familiarisation, attribute familiarisation, congruent face and attribute practice block
(i.e., difference faces and negative attributes paired with one response), congruent
Figure 5.10. Examples of overviews of implicit measures in a Materials section.
84
5
face and attribute critical block, reversed attribute familiarisation, incongruent face
and attribute practice block (i.e., no difference faces and negative attributes paired
with one response), and the incongruent face and attribute critical block. Before
commencing blocks, participants were instructed that the task involved sorting
stimuli as quickly and accurately as possible. Specifically, either two stimuli as in
familiarisation blocks, or four stimuli as in practice and critical blocks, were
assigned to two keys (e.g., difference faces 5 “E” and no difference faces “I”) as
indicated by the labels in the top left and right corners of the screen. Participants
were told they would receive “correct” or “wrong” feedback for every response. Only
correct responses for critical trials were analysed using a reaction time-based score
with faster reaction times, and higher IAT D scores indicating stronger implicit
associations. (Adapted from Roberts, Neate, & Gierasch, 2017)
A lexical decision task was used to assess the implicit dehumanisation of women.
Specifically, dehumanisation of women was operationalised as the faster correct
classification of non-human words (e.g., “animal”, “instinct”) as real words,
compared to human words (e.g., “human”, “culture”) following a “women” prime,
compared to “men” or to a control word prime (e.g., “table”). Letter strings were
used as targets to be judged and included 10 human-related words and 10 animal-
related words from Fasoli et al. (2015), and 20 pronounceable non-word letter
strings. Blocks comprised equal numbers of word and non-word trials which began
with the presentation of a fixation point ‘1’ (500 ms) followed by a prime (150 ms),
blank screen (200 ms), and then the letter string which was terminated by the
participant’s response and followed by an inter-trial interval of 1000 ms. Participants
were told that the task was a simple word judgment task which required them to
judge whether a letter string presented in the centre of the computer screen was a real
word or a non-word. If they identified the letters as a word, they should press the “E”
key, whereas they should press the “I” key if the string is a non-word, and this
judgment should be made as quickly and accurately as possible. Participants were
intentionally not informed of the true purpose of the measure, and instructed to
ignore any other aspects of the task. The response times for correctly identified words
were averaged as a function of target type, with faster average response times
interpreted as facilitation of the target (e.g., non-human words) by the prime (e.g.,
women). (Adapted from Piccoli, Fantoni, Foroni, Bianchi, & Carnaghi, 2017)
Figure 5.10. (Continued)
5.3.3 Design
The purpose of the Design subsection is to explain the basic conditions of the experiment
and define dependent and independent variables. If you are instructed to write this sub-
section, state the independent and dependent variables in their operationalised form; that
is, in the units in which they are measured. If groups are being compared, describe how
this comparison is related to the variables being assessed (e.g., “age as a two-level factor
was operationalised by collecting responses from older and younger adults”).
85
When you are not expected to include a Design subsection, the operationalisation of
the independent and dependent variables should be made clear in the Materials subsec-
tion where you describe how they are measured. If your study counterbalances the order
of presentation of questionnaire items, say so in Procedure. If different groups of partici-
pants are expected to perform different tasks, or to do them in different orders, describe
this in the Procedure subsection.
5.3.4 Procedure
This subsection requires a fairly detailed description of how the study was carried out.
Again, the detail should be such that other researchers could easily replicate it.
Increasingly, this section begins with a description of how informed consent was given,
and how or where participation was undertaken (e.g., “in laboratory classes”, “by
accessing an online web link”). If any instructions are given to participants, these
should be quoted in full if they are fairly brief, or overviewed and referred to as present
in an Appendix if longer. Avoid abbreviations if you can. If you think abbreviations are
necessary, use obvious ones that do not need tricky interpretations, and always define
them the first time you use them. Other information to provide in the Procedure is the
order of measures if not described elsewhere (e.g., Design), the duration of participa-
tion, and any debriefing used. Finally, include any other aspects of the execution of the
research, for example, how you controlled for extraneous nuisance factors such as time
and place.
It is typically best to write the procedure in the sequence that a participant experi-
enced it. If deception is involved, be sure to include any “cover story” you told the
participants. It should be noted if your measures or procedure might have caused the
participants to feel any embarrassment or discomfort, and what procedures you took to
ensure anonymity (i.e., this may have been undertaken during data processing). Kidder
and Judd (1986) put it nicely by saying that you should describe how you ensured that
participants were treated with dignity and left with their self-esteem intact, and how
any respect they might have had for you and psychology was enhanced rather than
diminished.
Combined (and confused) sections. It is important not to confuse the Materials and
the Procedure subsections. The Materials subsection describes what equipment, meas-
ures, or tasks were used in the study, and the Procedure subsection describes how the
data were collected. Many modern journal articles do combine Materials and Procedure
sections, but that is usually because they are reporting multiple studies in one article
with very strict word limits. At undergraduate level, you should only use combined sec-
tions if explicitly instructed to do so by your lecturer or tutor.
Do not confuse Procedure with Results. You should not say at the end of the Procedure
section that the data were analysed using SPSS, or say anything about the statistics
used. The Procedure describes only how the data were collected.
86
5
Distinguishing roles. As part of your learning experience, you may have participated in
the research as a participant. This means you are in a unique situation of being both a
participant and the researcher, even though you may not have designed the research or
undertaken all the analyses. This means you have insight about the experience of partic-
ipating and may not feel fully responsible for all aspects of the research. For example,
remembering how you felt while completing a questionnaire or taking part in an experi-
ment may remind you that not only are participants active, but their attitude and even
response to the study may not be what the experimenter really wanted. This should help
you to not make assumptions about the participants’ behaviour or responses, allowing
you to regard the results with a critical and sceptical eye. However, while this should
inform your critical thinking about the research, your experience as a participant should
not be an explicit aspect of how you write up the research, unless explicitly instructed
otherwise. Similarly, you should not state that your tutor or lecturer designed the research,
or collated or analysed the results for you, even though it may be true. Remember that you
are writing the report as if you were the researcher who designed and carried out the study.
5.4 Results
This section follows immediately after the Method section, and should not begin on a new
page. The heading is simply Results, in bold sentence case, and centred across the page.
The purpose of the Results section is to present all the evidence relevant to your
hypotheses. You should report your results in the same order that you presented the
hypotheses in the Introduction.
5.4.1 Your Very First Report

If this is your very first Results section, ask yourself: “What information do I need to
report to convince the reader that I really have tested the hypotheses?” Usually your first
report will require few, if any, statistics. Typically, you are required to report data such as
frequency counts or proportions. For example, you might have compared the propor-
tion of men compared to women drivers who fail to stop at a stop sign. In this case you
simply report that, for example: “Of 100 drivers observed, 60 were men, and 11 of these
failed to stop at the stop sign. Of the 40 women drivers, three failed to stop at the stop
sign.” That allows readers to make judgments of whether the sample size is reasonable,
and to have the information to decide for themselves if your hypothesis was supported
or not. If you are reporting the proportions of more than two groups, it may be simpler
to show them as a bar chart. One example is shown in Figure 5.11, and the conventions
for figures are described in Section 5.4.6.
Some early research reports expect you to calculate the mean and standard deviation
of scores for two groups. For example, a classic study is one in which participants may
have been asked to learn a list of pairs of words, where one group was given no explicit
87
550
Self-report
Ofﬁcial report
500
450
400
350
Frequency
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
Motor vehicle Assault Sex offence Robbery Murder
theft
Charge type
Figure 5.11. Lifetime frequency of self-reported offending and officially recorded charges
for (n 5 1184) convicted offenders. (Adapted from Payne & Piquero, 2016.)
instructions and the other was given instructions to imagine bizarre connections between
the word pairs. They might then have been given one word from each pair in the list and
been expected to remember its matching pair. If your hypothesis was that the bizarre
instructions should lead to better recall of the paired words, then reporting the mean
number of words recalled correctly in each group will allow you to judge whether the
instructions made a difference. A good way to report these results is: “The bizarre imagery
instructions resulted in more word pairs being correctly recalled (M 5 13.20, SD 5 4.30)
than did the no instructions (M 5 8.60, SD 5 5.10).” The conventions for reporting sta-
tistics are described on page 90, but the M is the convention for the arithmetical mean
(note that it is in italics) and the SD for standard deviation.
We would strongly discourage the use of graphs or tables for reporting only one or two
statistics; however, make sure you refer to any instructions provided to you by your lecturer
or tutor. Nonetheless, it is essential that you are able to construct grammatically correct
sentences to say what you have found. If reporting the statistics, you should insert the
appropriate statistics into the sentence. If you are presenting a figure or table, you should
refer to it at the end of the description and be sure not to also report the statistics in text.
In reports where the statistics are numerous and reporting them in sentence form is
tedious and repetitive to read, then tables or graphs are appropriate. However, every table
or figure must be introduced first by a prose description of the results that alert the
reader to what they can expect. Students will lose marks for having a table unless it is
properly introduced, if statistics are repeated in the text, and if the table or figure is not
correctly formatted (see Sections 5.4.5 and 5.4.6).
88
5
5.4.2 All Reports
In research reports for which statistics are calculated, especially if calculated using a com-
puter package, it is advisable to begin the section with a statement about how the raw data
were processed to produce the summary data. Our academic colleagues are divided on
whether you should say, “Data were analysed using SPSS” since it is often taken for granted
in later year reports, and published articles do not include such statements. Ask your tutor
or lecturer which they prefer. In any case, you should not present the raw data themselves
in this section. Again, you should not say that your department or tutor or lecturer col-
lated and summarised the data. Pretend that the data were manipulated by you in such a
way that you could make inferences about the variables you have measured. If there were
no effects due to counterbalancing, you might include this at the start of the Results sec-
tion. There are some examples of introductory statements about data in Figure 5.12.
In later year reports, you may be expected to say whether the data included missing
values and how this was dealt with. You will also be expected to say whether the assump-
tions were met for the statistical tests used. However, this is not usually required of your
early reports, since the staff usually cleans the data before presenting it to you. Check
with your lecturer or tutor if these details are required.
Mean scores for the groups of interest were compared using t-tests.
All sets of items were analysed as a function of the 3 (condition: verbal
instruction, written instruction, no instruction) between subjects by 2 (gender:
men, women) within subjects factors using analysis of variance (ANOVA). Scheffé
tests were used to compare means where appropriate.
Individual-participant mean latency data, collapsed over the eight trial blocks,
were submitted to a repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) to assess the
effects that were due to judgment-type and stimulus complexity. Of 530
respondents at Time 1, three (0.6%) were excluded from analyses because they had
missing data on 10 or more items of the NEO-FFI. Item-level analyses were
therefore performed on a sample of 527 participants. (Adapted from Murray,
Rawlings, Allen, & Trinder, 2003)
“The responses to the four initial on-line judgments were averaged to form an
index, as were the four later memory-based judgments. Means are displayed in
Table 4.” (Schul & Burnstein, 1990, p. 969)
“Characteristics of participants and nonparticipants from the original cohort
are presented in Table 1. Compared with those from the original cohort who did
not take part in the current study (n 5 1648), those participants who took part in
the current study (n 5 1220) were more likely to have older mothers, older fathers,
and to have come from families with an income above the poverty line during
pregnancy with the study child.” (Tearne et al., 2016, p. 4)
Figure 5.12. Examples of introductory statements in the Results section.
89
You should introduce and present descriptive statistics first. This usually entails
describing and presenting the means and standard deviations, or perhaps medians and
semi-interquartile ranges. Then you should describe any inferential tests of significance
that you have calculated, such as correlations, t-tests or analyses of variance (ANOVAs),
and any post-hoc comparisons of means.
You should not assume that your reader has remembered everything already said. It is
important to express your results in a way that makes clear that your hypotheses are
being appropriately tested. You need to express yourself clearly so the reader is reminded
of why the data are important and why they are being compared, but do your best not to
be too repetitive. For studies where there are only one or two hypotheses, it is sufficient
simply to report what you found, as shown in the previous section. For reports with more
than two hypotheses, you might remind the reader what each hypothesis was by saying
something like:
A one-tailed paired-samples t-test found that respondents reported the quality of

their own relationship to be significantly higher (M 5 4.40, SD 5 0.81) than that
of the average person (M 5 3.67, SD 5 0.68), t(120) 5 8.58, p , .001.
If there were six paired comparisons made, you might put the means, standard devia-
tions, and t-statistics (t, degrees of freedom, and p) into a table. In such a case, having
introduced the table by saying something like “Means, standard deviations, and t-statistics
for all pairs of judgments are shown in Table 1”, you could follow that with: “As can be
seen in Table 1, on average, respondents reported that their own relationships were sig-
nificantly better than those of the average typical person.” Do not repeat statistics from a
table in your text. If your table has a large number of means and standard deviations and
no room for t-statistics, you may say in the text: “Table 2 shows that men reported lower
levels of emotional stability than women. This was found to be significantly different,
t(108) 5 4.32, p , .001.” You do not need to give the means again. It also saves on word
count, since tables may not be considered part of your word count.
Reporting statistics. There are strict conventions regarding how statistics are reported.
Any ordinary letter representing a statistic (M, SD, r, t, F) should be italicised, and you should
state the nature of the test, the degrees of freedom, the value of the statistic, and the level of
significance, in that order. Greek letters, such as Chi-square (x2), are not italicised. There are
several examples of the conventions for reporting frequently used inferential statistics in
Figure 5.13. Journal articles usually only report statistics if they are significant. However,
students are typically required to report all statistics in research reports to indicate that you
know that they are non-significant. Check with your tutor or lecturer to see what they expect.
Significance levels. The 6th edition of the APA Publication Manual expects significance
levels to show the exact probability for any value larger than p 5 .001 (e.g., p 5 .023). Of
course, this system needs a statement early in the Results saying that the significance
level has been chosen as p , .05 so that you can tell which probabilities are significant
90
5
A one-tailed t-test for independent samples indicated that the younger adults
group had a significantly faster reaction time (M 5 320 ms, SD 5 48 ms) than the
older adults group (M 5 392 ms, SD 5 56 ms), t(38) 5 4.37, p , .001.
With lower levels of marital satisfaction, husbands tended to exhibit more
avoidant behaviours than wives, r(n 5 120) 5 –.28, p 5 .023. Although the
corresponding correlation for wives was in the expected direction, their marital
satisfaction was unrelated to their avoidant behaviour, r(n 5 145) 5 –.07, p 5 .69.
As shown in Table 3, people with intellectual disabilities were more than twice as
likely as people without disabilities to be the victims of a personal offence, x2(1, N
5 300) 5 32.22, p 5 .003.
An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was performed on participants’ rated
satisfaction with their group’s performance. There was no interaction between own
group and other group feedback, F(1,52) 5 2.03, p 5 .095. The ANOVA did reveal a
significant main effect of own group feedback, F(1,52) 5 120.35, p , .001, but the
main effect of other group feedback was not significant, F(1,52) 5 1.49, p 5 .59.
Figure 5.13. Examples of the conventions of reporting statistical findings.

Note: Roman letters indicating statistics are italicised, and the general information to be stated is: (a) the
type of statistic, (b) degrees of freedom, (c) the calculated statistic itself, and (d) the significance level.
and which are not. The only exceptions are where the exact probability is less than p 5 .000,
when you should write p , .001, or in tables where there are many statistics. In the latter
case you can use an asterisk system, with a note below the table saying that * 5 p , .05,
** 5 p , .01, *** 5 p , .001.
Examples of both significant and non-significant results of statistical tests are also
shown in Figure 5.13. Please note that you should always say “non-significant” and never
“insignificant”. Non-significant means that you have done a statistical test and the result-
ing level of significance is greater than your criterion. Insignificant is a non-technical
term implying “meaningless”. A statistical test may give you a result that is statistically
significant (say a difference in IQ between two groups of only one or two IQ points) but
is, in a practical sense, meaningless. When you come to interpret your results, you are
expected to know the difference.
Confidence intervals and effect sizes. Most undergraduate psychology research reports
use directional hypotheses, for example, that there is a predicted difference or relation-
ship between two values in a specified direction (e.g., “women will score higher than
men on . . .”, “self-esteem will be positively correlated with . . .”). The probability of this
hypothesis being supported is then tested at some significance level, usually p , .05.
Psychologists have long been engaged in a complex argument about significance testing.
The APA Publication Manual (6th ed.) states that this should only be a starting point, and
that more information in the form of confidence intervals and effect sizes should be
reported. However, these are not always taught in first-year psychology or statistics
91
classes. Unless you have been taught them, you cannot be expected to use them in your
first few reports. More advanced statistics classes do teach them, and, if this applies to
you, you will be expected to report them in your later year research reports.
Stating whether hypotheses are supported. There is no formal convention for when
you should state whether a hypothesis is supported or not. If you only have one or two
straightforward hypotheses, which are simply tested, it is best to leave such a statement until
the start of the Discussion. In a more complex study, it may be acceptable to make a state-
ment of support (or otherwise) in the Results section. You can do this succinctly by begin-
ning your statements: “As predicted . . .”, or ending them with “. . . as hypothesised”. In a
study where you report the results of, say, an analysis of variance, you would normally have
the means and standard deviations in a table. Report the main effects, something like this:
There was a significant main effect of type of relationship, F(1, 180) 5 15.31,
p 5 .002. As shown in Table 1, own relationships were reported to be better than
others’ relationships, as predicted.
However, if the interaction effect is significant, it is often meaningless to discuss the

main effects. Assuming that you hypothesised such an interaction, you could remind the
reader of it, as follows:
A significant interaction was found, F(2, 203) 5 10.64, p 5 .006. An inspection of the
means in Table 1 indicated, as hypothesised, that the difference reported between own
and others’ relationships was greater for romantic relationships than for parental ones.
Note that in more advanced research reports you may be expected to perform post-hoc
tests to determine whether the above effect was statistically significant, not just a simple
inspection of the means. However, do not make any further interpretation of the results
beyond the simple statement of support, as illustrated. Check with your tutor or lecturer
about their preference.
5.4.3 Numbers and Words

When reading journal articles, you will sometimes see numbers written in words (three,
eight), and sometimes as Arabic numerals (11, 124). The convention is that you should
use numerals to express numbers 10 and above (e.g., “the remaining 10 participants”,
“25 years old”), but use words for the numbers one to nine. There are, however, excep-
tions to this rule. In the following examples, Arabic numerals should be used: where
numbers below 10 are grouped for comparison with a number of 10 or above (e.g., “3 of
21 analyses”), and when they precede a unit of measurement (e.g., “2 cm”, “5 mg dose”);
when describing mathematical functions (e.g., 3 times as many), quantities, percentages
or proportions (e.g., “5%”); when describing a time, date, age, sum of money, or score on
a scale (e.g., “scored 5 on and 6-point scale”).
92
5
You should use words rather than numerals when beginning a sentence (e.g., “Seventy-
four children participated . . .”), for numbers below 10 that do not fit the previously
mentioned criteria (“a total of six items . . .”), for ordinal numbers (e.g., “first”), and for
common fractions (“one-fifth of the class . . .”, “reduced by two-thirds . . .”). In addition,
a combination of numbers and words should be used to express rounded large numbers
(“almost 3 million people . . .”) and considered for back-to-back modifiers (“two 2-way
interactions”) if this improves readability (e.g., “the first three items were excluded”).
5.4.4 Decimals
The number of decimal places reported should reflect the precision of your measure-
ment, with numbers typically reported to two decimal places even if your analyses pro-
vides you with more! It gives a false impression of the accuracy of your measurement but
is unlikely to be meaningful. The convention is to round up the second decimal place if
the third digit is 5 or greater, and to round down if it is 4 or less. For example, 4.235
should round to 4.24, but 4.234 should round to 4.23. An exception to using two deci-
mals is when reporting probability (i.e., p) values (see Significance levels on pp. 90–91).
Finally, you should use a zero before the decimal point when reporting values that
are less than one, except where the number, by its nature, cannot be greater than one,
such as correlations, proportions, and levels of statistical significance. For example, use
“0.23 cm” but “r 5 .74, p 5 .023”.
5.4.5 Tables
One of the most frequent errors that students make in presenting results is to assume that
a table or figure is sufficient, or even essential. This is not true. Tables or figures should be
regarded as tools that should be used to summarise complex results which are repetitive
to read, and which allow the easy comparison of multiple values. As a result, they must
be described, highlighting the important results or comparisons, and cannot be used to
replace the text, although the actual values should never be expressed in both a table and
in text. As a simple rule, a table should not be used for a single (e.g., t-test or correlation)
result. Such results are best reported using a standard sentence.
There is a good deal of evidence indicating that even experts are poor at interpreting
many tables and figures without clear instructions. You should therefore tell the reader
what to look for in your table or figure and give enough explanation to make the table
easily understandable, before presenting the table in your report. The APA Publication
Manual (6th ed.) reminds us that if you describe every value that appears in a table, the
table is not necessary, so your description should highlight and summarise key findings.
Some examples of introductions to tables are shown in Figure 5.14.
Tables should be shown as soon as possible after you introduce them. This will usu-
ally be before the next paragraph starts, with a space before and after the table or figure
to set them off from your text. However, it is important that tables and their titles are not
93
Table 5 shows the proportions of participants who responded in each category in

each condition.
Table 4 presents the correlations between the two subscales of the Marital
Satisfaction Scale and the three subscales of the Eating Attitudes Scale.
The participants’ payoffs for the two choices as a function of the number of others
who invest in the joint account are shown in Table 1.
Figure 5.14. Introductions to tables.
split over two pages, so it is acceptable to separate them from when you introduced them
by another paragraph.
There are a number of conventions for the presentation of tables that you must
adhere to. Tables are numbered successively, using Arabic integers only (1, 2, 3 . . .),
with each referred to in text. Each has a title at the top, which should be clear and
explanatory, preferably stating which variables are presented in the table and how this
is arranged (e.g., “Means and standard deviations for self-esteem and well-being as a
function of participants’ gender”). The title begins with the word “Table” and the table
number and should be on a line of its own, not underlined or in italics. The title should
begin on the next line and should be in italicised sentence case. Neither line of the
table title has a full stop at the end. There are some examples of good titles for tables in
Figure 5.15.
When preparing an article for publication, tables are expected to be double-spaced.
This is less critical in an undergraduate report, but avoid small, cramped tables.
Separate major sections of a table with horizontal lines, but never include vertical lines
in your tables (so avoid the temptation to show off your computer’s grid-drawing capa-
bilities!). If your table contains comparisons between groups, include the sample sizes
of the groups. Use a lowercase n for group sizes and a capital N for the total sample
size. Use a note below the final horizontal line to explain anything that might not be
Table 3
Percentage of Correctly Classified Stimuli for Younger and Older Adult Participants
Table 1
Mean (and Standard Deviation) Anagram Solution Times for Three Groups of Differing
Task Complexity
Table 2
Correlations Between Components of Defensiveness Composite Score and Independent Variables
Figure 5.15. Examples of titles of tables.

Note: For table titles, major words are capitalised and there is no full stop.
94
5
immediately obvious, such as abbreviations, although it is preferable to use the full
names of variables in the table unless impossible due to length. An example of a typical
simple table is shown in Table 5.1, and a more complex one in Table 5.2. A table of
correlations is shown in Table 5.3. Table 5.4 shows the means and standard deviations
Table 5.1
Mean (and Standard Deviation) Anagram Solution Times for Three Groups of
Differing Task Complexity
Task N M time in seconds (SD)
Difficult 12 51.66 (12.17)

Moderate 13 43.84 (11.35)
Easy 9 29.21 (9.98)
N 5 34
Note: For any report, except perhaps the very first one you do, you need to include standard deviations.
Table 5.2
Mean (and Standard Deviation) Ratings of Individual and Corporate Wrongdoing
by High and Low Conservative Participants
Conservatism
High (n 5 23) Low (n 5 17)

Judgment of Wrongdoing Items M (SD) M (SD)
Individual
Knew beforehand 1.33 (1.10) 1.44 (0.98)
Recklessness 2.33 (0.87) 2.11 (0.88)
Morally wrong 2.56 (0.71) 2.11 (0.61)
Deserves punishment 2.22 (0.94) 2.22 (1.02)
Harm to workers 2.89 (0.63) 3.56 (0.65)
Fairness of criminal charge 2.67 (0.49) 1.89 (0.31)
Corporation
Knew beforehand 2.09 (1.21) 2.00 (1.00)
Recklessness 3.18 (0.88) 4.09 (0.94)
Morally wrong 3.18 (0.74) 3.73 (0.71)
Deserves punishment 3.46 (1.33) 3.55 (1.12)
Harm to workers 3.46 (0.54) 3.46 (0.49)
Fairness of criminal charge 3.37 (0.22) 3.46 (0.24)
N 5 40
Note: In more advanced reports you would be expected to include standard deviations in parentheses beside
each value (as shown here), and perhaps a t-statistic and significance level if you used one to compare the
high and low conservative means for each category.
95
Table 5.3
Intercorrelations Between Lemon Sourness and Personality Variables
1 2 3 4 5
1. Sourness 2
2. Extraversion 2.34* 2
3. Neuroticism .09 2.16* 2
4. Arousability (SEA) .08 2.08 .56** 2
5. Arousal .25* 2.10 .17* .17* 2
Notes: N 5 324, * 5 p , .05, ** 5 p ,.01. SEA 5 Scale of Emotional Arousability (Braithwaite, 1987)
Note: The correlation of any variable with itself is, of course, 1.0, but since everyone knows that, there is no
need to report it. In a more advanced report, you could put the Cronbach alpha reliabilities for the
appropriate subscales on the diagonals instead of a hyphen. If you performed correlations separately for
two groups, say adolescents and elderly people, you could put one lot of correlations above the diagonal
and one below, telling the reader which was which in a note.
Table 5.4
Means (and Standard Deviations) of Personality Factors by Humour Type
Humour Type
Indis. high Optimum Low
Neuroticism 36.61 (8.72) 33.13a (7.92) 38.91a (8.50)

Extraversion 45.03a (5.32) 42.84b (5.21) 37.84ab (5.21)
Psych. well-being 22.62a (2.14) 23.31b (2.54) 20.32ab (3.13)
Note: Figures in parentheses are standard deviations. Means in any row having identical superscripts are different
at p , .05 (Scheffé). Psych. well-being 5 Psychological well-being, Indis. high 5 Indiscriminately high.
expected from an analysis of variance. If you include a note, it should be placed directly
under the table, beginning with the italicised word Note. As can be seen in these exam-
ples, notes can explain several things, such as: abbreviations presented in parentheses
(Table 5.3); the meaning attached to an asterisk, particularly in a table of correlations
to show how significant some correlations are (Table 5.3; note that the level of signifi-
cance is included in the note at the foot of the table); that the superscripts indicate
which means in any row are significantly different (Table 5.4); and the meanings of
abbreviated words used in the table (Table 5.4). It is acceptable to have the note in a
smaller font than the rest of the table.
Tables most often present quantitative data. In undergraduate reports they are usually
collections of numbers, appropriately identified. However, a table could include any
other material that organises information to be presented under two or more headings
simultaneously, for comparison (e.g., systematic literature reviews). Anything else is
called a figure.
96
5
5.4.6 Figures
In an undergraduate research report, a figure will usually be a graph (e.g., a histogram), or
occasionally an example of pictorial stimuli, diagram of apparatus, or the depiction of a
trial (e.g., order of presented stimuli and associated durations). In journal articles, figures
could include photographs or drawings, as in the example research report in Appendix A.
Like tables, figures are numbered sequentially in Arabic numerals and must be intro-
duced in text. Unlike tables, the title of a figure should go below the figure. The figure
number should be italicised and the number is followed by a full stop and followed by
the title itself on the same line, also ending in a full stop; the title is not italicised.
Furthermore, a capital letter should only be used for the first letter of the first word of the
title. Look at Figure 5.16 for some examples of figure titles.
In undergraduate research reports, the figure should not be smaller than about 8 cm
by 12 cm or larger than about half a page. Leave enough space above and below the figure
so that it stands clear of the text. Never continue text alongside a figure, or extend a figure
over a page break, or split the figure and its title over two pages.
The height of the figure should be about two-thirds its width. Each axis of a graph or
histogram should be clearly labelled. It is conventional to plot the independent variable
on the horizontal axis and the dependent variable on the vertical axis. Break the axis with
a double slash if the origin of the coordinates is not zero, but this should be avoided in
the vast majority of cases as it misrepresents the effect or comparison. Similarly, every
attempt should be made to ensure figures are presented using axes that allow compari-
sons when appropriate. Remember to mark accurately the plotted points on a graph.
Figure 5.17 is a typical figure from an undergraduate report.
When producing figures, you should ensure that they convey your findings accurately.
If a result is statistically significant, ensure that the figure shows the difference. This is
largely a matter of choosing the appropriate scales for your axes. The importance of this
is shown by comparing Figures 5.18 and 5.19. In contrast, a statistically non-significant
result should also be reflected in your figure, and if all results being reported are
non-significant, then a figure is not necessary. Rather, you could just say so in words.
Examining the examples, Figure 5.18 does not give any idea about how different
the findings are as the scale hides the range of the effect, where Figure 5.19 does show
Figure 1. Mean number of correctly recalled nonsense syllables and meaningful

words over 10 trials.
Figure 3. Means Ratings (and Standard Deviations) of marital satisfaction by age
and stage of family life cycle.
Figure 4. Proportion of utterances for friends and strangers marked by each cue.
Figure 5.16. Examples of figure titles.

Note: For figure titles, major words are not capitalised and there is a full stop.
97
10
Words
9 Nonsense syllables
Mean number of correct responses

8
0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Number of trials
Figure 5.17. Mean number of correctly recalled nonsense syllables and meaningful words
over 10 trials.
the difference but suggests several results may, in fact, be significantly different
because the slashes allow you to focus on the small range of the vertical axis (i.e., does
not show the whole scale range). For this reason, both Figure 5.18 and 5.19 are inferior
to Figure 5.20, which gives an accurate illustration of the effect because it includes error
bars. As a result, we can see clearly that there is no significant difference between the
lexical decision and naming conditions when the independent variable is words, but
that there is a difference when the independent variable is non-words.
One advantage of the use of error bars indicating confidence intervals is shown in Figure
5.20. This shows the same data as in Figures 5.18 and 5.19, but with error bars added. The
lengths of the error bars, and whether they overlap, give a visual indication of the signifi-
cance of the result. The scale of the vertical axis, so that the height of the histograms largely
fills the figure, also helps you make sense of the differences in variable means.
If results are presented in different figures, as might be the case for multiple studies,
they should be able to be compared, so make sure they have exactly the same axes. This
will save your readers having to make complicated transformations in their heads, which
will hinder your message and lose you marks.
Avoid showing off what you can do with the fancier graphical capabilities of Microsoft
Excel or SPSS. Do not use three-dimensional or coloured graphs. Similarly, there are rea-
sons for using pie charts (e.g., proportions of a total) and line graphs (e.g., indicating that
there has been a change between one point and the next, such as improvement for an
individual or group over time). However, unless this is the kind of result you are present-
ing, you should use a histogram. In sum, it is best to use the simplest graphical design
that illustrates whether your hypothesis has been supported or not. This process should
also help you decide when to use a table or figure.
98
5
7 Lexical decision
6 Naming
Reaction time (seconds)

5
0
Words Non-words
Figure 5.18. Mean reaction time for word and non-word targets as a function of decision
type. The data shown in this figure are the same as in Figure 5.19, but are given in
seconds, so any differences are minimised.
740 Lexical decision

Naming
700
Reaction time (milliseconds)
660
620
580
540
500
0
Words Non-words
Figure 5.19. The data shown in this figure are the same as in Figure 5.18, but are shown
here in milliseconds so that differences are accentuated.
900 Lexical decision

800 Naming
Reaction time (milliseconds)
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Words Non-words
Figure 5.20. The data shown in this figure are the same as in Figures 5.18 and 5.19 but
are scaled to show the entire range, and to show error bars. If you had this figure in a
report, you would need to add to the title a statement saying that the error bars are
confidence intervals or standard deviations, whichever you use.
99
5.5 Discussion
The Discussion, as in the Method and Results sections, follows straight on with the single
(level 1) heading Discussion in bold sentence case, centred across the page. It is not nec-
essary to start a new page.
Remember that in Chapter 1 the report was described as being like an hourglass in
shape? The Discussion can be viewed as the other end of the hourglass from the
Introduction. Where the Introduction begins with a broad statement of the area under
study and becomes more specific as you argue the case for your particular hypotheses,
the Discussion should begin specifically, discussing your hypotheses, and then broaden
out to discuss the more general implications and conclusions of your research. The
Discussion begins with specific statements about whether the hypotheses were sup-
ported. These statements are followed by interpretation of the results, and discussion of
how your results relate to the previous research, most likely discussed in your Introduction.
At the end of the Discussion, the hourglass is again at its broadest, with discussion of the
implications your results have for the “real world”, although you should avoid such a
flippant expression! Let’s look at each of these parts of the Discussion in more detail.
State whether hypotheses have been supported. You should not expect your reader
to remember exactly what your hypotheses were, so it is advisable to restate them.
However, avoid word-for-word repetition from your introduction as well as repeating
information already in the Results section. For example, you could say: “The results of
the current study support the hypothesis that parents perceive greater similarity between
their children than those children perceive between themselves.”
Be very careful about what your results tell you. Never use the words “prove” or “dis-
prove”. A single experiment does not unequivocally disprove a hypothesis, and no
hypothesis can ever be proved. Someone could always come along and think of a differ-
ent explanation that also fits the observed facts. What you should say is that your results
support, or fail to support, your hypotheses.
If you have several hypotheses, it is best to begin your Discussion with a paragraph in
which you state whether each of the hypotheses is supported or not, and how you know.
But do not repeat numbers or statistics from the Results. In the following paragraph(s) you
should then discuss each hypothesis to completion before interpreting the next.
Discussing each hypothesis in turn gives your Discussion greater coherence and continu-
ity. The danger is in repeating your hypotheses frequently, which gets boringly repetitive.
It is acceptable to have an introductory sentence stating: “Results indicate that all (or
most of) the hypotheses were supported.” Or, “While the hypothesis that . . . was sup-
ported by the results, there was only partial support for the prediction that . . .”. The fol-
lowing paragraphs could elaborate on the details, and whether your results support
previous findings.
Interpretation of results – support for previous research. The interpretation of

results relating to any one hypothesis should be dealt with in two ways. The first way is
100
5
to relate your results to previous research. Make a brief but clear statement of whether the
results are or are not consistent with the research you described in your Introduction,
and which led you to make that particular hypothesis. For example: “The observation
that the groups asked to rate whether words were pleasant or unpleasant had better recall
than those asked to judge whether the words contained the letter ‘e’ is consistent with the
findings of Hyde and Jenkins (1969).” This is the second time in the Discussion that the
hypothesis has been stated, although perhaps in a slightly different form. This should be
the last time, as constant repetition of the hypothesis is irritating to a reader. You need to
find a balance between reminding the reader what the hypothesis is and boring them to
death with it. Note that your results support previous research and not vice versa. Theirs
came first, so it is not accurate to say that their work supports your findings!
Interpretation of results – explanation of findings. The second way that your results
need to be dealt with is at the level of explanation. In the first few research reports you
will encounter, the chances are that you will be replicating a previously published study.
Replication is one of the aspects of the scientific method, and its importance should not
be underestimated. You will therefore know how the author or authors of that study
interpreted their results. In that case, you can put their explanation into your own
words. Following the sentence in the previous example, you could say: “Hyde and
Jenkins interpreted such findings as supporting the depth of processing theory, that
material processed at the semantic or deep level would be better remembered than mate-
rial processed at the surface level of appearance.” Remember that since you have just
referred to Hyde and Jenkins (1969) in the previous sentence, you do not have to repeat
the year of publication. However, if it were a new paragraph you would be expected to
include the year of publication.
If your study is not a replication of a previous study, then you have to be more thought-
ful in finding a possible explanation for the results you obtained. There are two major
types of explanation possible for a particular set of results. One explanation is based on
theoretical considerations and the other on methodological considerations. The distinc-
tion is illustrated by the following example from Macrae (1989).
Suppose a psychologist, Jane Bloggs, theorises that due to a genetic factor, men demon-
strate superior spatial ability compared to women, and she finds that several findings
exist to support this theory. Suppose that you have just designed a new test of spatial
ability and have administered it to a large number of psychology undergraduates. There
are three possible outcomes and a number of interpretations.
The first possible outcome is that you find that men do perform better on your test.
Based on the Bloggs theory, you hypothesised that men would do better and your results
supported your hypothesis and, by inference, the theory is further supported. However, it
is not possible to rule out the explanation that a third variable associated with gender is
responsible for this finding. For example, your spatial test and most others are biased
because the items tend to be selected from material that men are more likely to have
encountered at school. Thus, the finding that there is a gender difference is not due to
genetic factors, but to differential socialisation of men and women.
101
The second possible outcome is that you find no difference between mean scores for
men and women. One explanation is that, since you had hypothesised that men would
do better, based on the Bloggs theory, and your results do not support your hypothesis,
that casts doubt on the theory. A finding of this kind pushes you to consider how your
research differs from previous research (e.g., sample, details of the measure, procedure
such as instructions). For example, if Bloggs’ research is the only one to use a university
sample, then perhaps women university students are not representative of the general
population of women but actually have higher spatial ability than most women, while
men university students are more typical of the general population of men, at least in
spatial ability. Your failure to find a gender difference actually reflects inadequate sam-
pling from the population to which the Bloggs theory applies. However, if there are no
clear or systematic differences between your method and previous findings, it might be
necessary to look for an alternative explanation in previous research (e.g., what other
visuo-spatial tasks do men and women typically demonstrate similar performance on?).
This kind of researching will likely be expected for students in later years of study.
The third possibility is that women score better on spatial ability than men. As in the
previous paragraph, your results do not support your hypothesis, and so doubt is cast on
the Bloggs theory. Again, as in the previous paragraph, a different explanation is that
women university students are better at spatial ability than most other women, while, in
contrast to the previous paragraph, men university students are actually worse than most
other men. Once again, your failure to support your hypothesis reflects inadequate sam-
pling from the general population and may require you to return to the literature for
further explanation.
In each possible outcome, the first explanation is a straightforward theoretical one.
Either the theory is supported or it is not. The second explanation for each outcome rein-
forces the importance of not being dogmatic about proving things. A different but quite
logical explanation fits the same observed facts. In the second explanation for each out-
come, there is a clear methodological difference (i.e., the new measure) affecting the
results. These considerations are themselves capable of being tested in later research. A
good research report would recognise that there are alternative explanations, acknowl-
edge the limitations of the current research to distinguish between these, and would rec-
ommend ways of testing them.
New references in the Discussion? A question that is frequently asked is whether it is

permitted to introduce reference material into the Discussion if it has not already been
mentioned in the Introduction. Academics disagree on this, so always check with your
tutor or lecturer as to what they expect. In your first one or two research reports, we
would discourage this practice. Such reports are often replications of well-established
studies, and, whatever your results, you should not need any material in the Discussion
that you have not already dealt with in the Introduction.
In later-year research reports, where the outcome of the study is less certain, you may
find that your hypotheses turn out not to be supported, in spite of you having carefully
justified them in the Introduction using relevant references. In casting around for an
102
5
explanation for why your expectations turned out not to be true, you may occasionally
come across a reference that provides some alternative evidence. If it is directly in the
area you are researching, it should have been mentioned in the Introduction as a possible
alternative outcome. However, if it has some bearing on your findings, but belongs to a
slightly different literature, it may be useful to introduce it in the Discussion. If so, you
will need to explain what the relevance is and how it might inform the interpretation of
your finding, but briefly.
Implications. Having discussed the compatibility of your results with those of previous
research, and given an explanation for the results, you need to discuss the implications of
the results. The explanation you gave for the results you obtained will presumably be
applicable more widely than for the specific instance you tested. Say how this might be
so, especially if the results allow you to extend or consolidate a theory.
Usually, undergraduate studies have a fairly applied flavour, so you should be able to
say what the implications of your results are for the wider community. Keep in mind,
however, that there may be other explanations, so avoid overstating where possible. For
example, in a questionnaire study of attitudes to corporate or individual responsibility
for wrongdoing, you may find that people judge corporations more harshly. You could
then state that such a finding has implications for how monetary compensation is calcu-
lated in legal settlements. However, to conclude that individuals would be unlikely to
sanction would be an overstatement.
Limitations. You also need to deal with other possible methodological considerations in
your Discussion section. Doing so indicates that you are aware of extraneous factors that
may have affected your results. However, you need to distinguish between faults in design
and problems in procedure. An example of a design fault is an investigation of the effec-
tiveness of two different lecturers that uses one class where the students are on average 10
years older than those in the other class. The effects of lecturer are confounded with the
effects of student age. It is unlikely that you will find such design flaws in a study designed
by psychology staff. An example of a procedural problem is running a well-designed study
under crowded and noisy conditions. However, while this may not be ideal, it is not nec-
essarily a confound and may be quite typical of “real-world” settings in which people
perform attentionally demanding cognitive tasks.
A common problem with students’ reports is that they waste space in the Discussion
in criticising the conduct of the experiment. Many undergraduate experiments run as
teaching exercises are impossible to run under ideal conditions. However, unless there is
a specific reason such an environment could compromise your specific results, this is
unlikely to be a limitation of your study. That is, procedural problems such as varying
ages, times of testing (day and evening students), crowded conditions, noise, and similar
factors rarely have systematic effects on the results. Rather, you should focus on faulty
design or methodological confounds, specifically describing any systematic effects this
may have had on the results. Unless the effect is clearly visible and has an explicitly
explained effect on your results, you cannot say that the problem has occurred. Simply
103
saying that something “may” have affected the results will lose you marks. If you want to let
your reader know that you have thought about these factors, you should mention that no
obvious systematic effects on the results were observed.
In many studies using undergraduate psychology students as participants, an obvious
potential limitation is the gender imbalance, since there are usually three times as many
women in the course as men. However, unless there is a good theoretical reason why gender
may have made a difference to the results, there is no point in mentioning this. Similarly,
unless there is a good reason to expect that university students may be different from the
wider community on the variables measured, there is no point in saying that the sample is
unrepresentative. Although modern research is increasingly finding cultural differences in
areas previously considered universal, it is unrealistic to expect any study to account for all
possible cultural differences. Unless you are prepared to cite research describing such differ-
ences, you will lose marks for merely saying that the result may not hold in other cultures.
Finally, students sometimes cite the sample size as a limitation. If your results are sig-
nificant, this is not a statistical limitation. However, it may imply that the sample is not
representative of a wider population.
Conclusion. Finally, you need a concluding paragraph that sums up what the study has
found. Be careful not to repeat statements from earlier in the report. The conclusion should
be a summary or overview. It is sometimes easier to state what future research should be
done to take your findings a step further, or to control for faulty design that became
apparent in the running of the experiment. This should be done carefully. It is boring and
glib simply to say that more research needs to be done. You must be specific in saying
what variables need to be accounted for or controlled.
It is better to have a concluding paragraph that is a neat précis of the study, emphasising
the conclusions you have reached. An example from a first-year report might look like this:
In conclusion, this study has revealed that people perceive their future selves
most often in terms of their occupational or career opportunities. This was partic-
ularly evident in the younger age groups. The area of family was also considered
important. Relative levels of well-being seemed to generate no real difference in
participants’ perceptions of possible future selves. All participants, irrespective of
age, felt capable of achieving their future selves.
The Discussion is the last section in the body of the report. As mentioned earlier, it is
usually easiest to write the Method section first, then the Results, then the Introduction,
and finally the Discussion and Abstract. Having produced a first draft of all these sec-
tions, you should give them, in the correct order, to someone else to read critically.
Based on the feedback you receive from this person, you should redraft your report.
Then repeat the process, getting someone else to read your second draft. Any student
serious about achieving a Pass should do at least this much: a rough draft, then a revised
draft that will need fewer or minor modifications following proofreading, which specif-
ically means reading it aloud, ideally (but not necessarily) to another person.
104
5
Having had your second draft critically read, you are ready to add the finishing
touches. The Abstract and Title Page have already been mentioned. You now need to deal
with the References and the Appendices.
5.6 References
This section comes after the Discussion, has the heading References in bold sentence
case, centred across the page and, unlike the earlier sections in the body of the report,
does begin on a new page. It is important to recognise that this section is not a bibliog-
raphy. A bibliography is a list of all the references you have consulted, even if you have
not included them in the final report. Do not include a bibliography in a psychology
research report.
Your reference list should include all (and only) references that you have referred to
in the body of your report, and that you have actually read. If you read in your textbook
that James (1890) said something, it is the textbook that should be in the reference list,
not James (1890), although many of these texts can now be accessed at York Classics in
Psychology (http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/) if you are interested. If your marker sees a
particularly interesting or obscure reference, they might ask you for a copy of it. If you
don’t have it, you will be in trouble! Similarly, if you only read the abstract in PsycINFO
but not the entire article, be honest in your reference list. So, remember that if you have
written “Stoner (cited in Turner, Hogg, & Wetherell, 1991)” then only the Turner,
Hogg, and Wetherell (1991) reference is included in the reference list. Note that all
types of references, including journal articles, books, and book chapters are presented
in a single alphabetically ordered list. The categories covered in Chapter 3 have been
separated, but only for your convenience in checking out the conventional format.
The details of the conventions of how to report your references were included in
Chapter 3.
5.7 Appendices
It is rare for a journal article to include any Appendices at all, except occasionally for a list of
stimuli or the items in a scale used in that study. However, it is not unusual for student
research reports to do so. In many psychology departments, students are requested to include
their statistical analyses, either handwritten or as computer printouts. This is to allow the
marker to check that what you stated in the Results section has been correctly calculated and
accurately reported. It also allows for realistic damage control. If you have made a mathemat-
ical error that affects your interpretation of the test of a hypothesis, then you will typically be
penalised only for that one mistake, even though it affects the remainder of your report, as
long as the remainder of the report is consistent with the mistaken interpretation.
Another occasion where the inclusion of statistical calculations is especially impor-
tant is in cases where you have been expected to create one or more hypotheses to test,
105
rather than having them given to you. Your marker needs to know that the statistic quoted
to test a hypothesis has been correctly applied and calculated.
Please note, you should not include tables or figures in an Appendix. If tables or fig-
ures relating to your results are worth drawing up, then they belong in the Results sec-
tion. This will also include assumptions, if required (i.e., at higher levels).
Format of Appendices. If there is only one Appendix, label it Appendix in bold sentence
case, centred across the page, and starting on a new page. If there are several appendices,
each should start on a new page, and you should call them Appendix A, Appendix B, etc.,
followed by the title, centred across the page, as follows:
Appendix A
List of anagrams and their solutions used in group size experiment
When you have got this far, you can breathe a sigh of relief. All you need to do is hand
in the completed report. If you have been efficient with your time management, you
should still have 48 hours or so before the report is due. At this point, if you are using
Turnitin, you should submit your final draft. You should then check back in approxi-
mately 12 to 24 hours for the Originality Report, and make changes as needed (e.g., cor-
recting incorrectly attributed quotations or improving paraphrasing).
Finally, proofread (again, preferably aloud) your final draft and check for orphaned
headings (i.e., where section, table, and figure heading have become separated from the
following material). Also, remember to keep a copy of the final report, either a hardcopy
or a file on a USB stick or cloud-based backup service.
5.8 Further Reading

The major arbiter of current convention in psychological report writing is the APA
Publication Manual (6th ed.). Here is the full reference:
American Psychological Association. (2010). Publication manual of the American

Psychological Association (6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
This book gives minute details of the conventions for writing articles intended to be
published in APA journals. If you intend to become an academic psychologist, this book
is an essential purchase. You can usually find a copy on Reserve in your library, and we
encourage you to have a look at it.
If you are happier looking at material online, you might like to explore Purdue
University’s Online Writing Lab, which summarises a lot of the APA Publication Manual’s
conventions. Here’s the link:
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01
106
5
Another useful book is Sternberg’s on writing scientific reports. Although it says it is
for students, it is really aimed at researchers at the beginning of their research publica-
tion careers. However, it is quite readable, and if your library has a copy it is well worth
having a look at it. Here is the reference:
Sternberg, R. J. (2010). The psychologist’s companion: A guide to scientific writing for students
and researchers (5th ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
Some libraries have Sternberg’s book as an eBook, which can be read online.
Alternatively, your bookshop will order one for you.
Study skills books that we have found useful are the following:
Forshaw, M. (2012). Critical thinking for psychology. West Sussex, UK: BPS Blackwell.
Goodson, P. (2017). Becoming an academic writer. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Your library will have many books on student skills. Search the catalogue for “study
skills” or look around call number 371 in your library.
5.9 Feedback
As markers we are frustrated if we have written what we believe to be helpful comments
on students’ reports and find that students look only at the grade they receive. It will help
you if you read the marker’s comments when you get your report back. However, it is
unwise to rush up to your tutor or lecturer demanding an immediate explanation of your
mark or even the comments. Some institutions have a policy that assignment grades will
not be discussed for 24–72 hours after their return. Take the report home and think
about what has been commented on, especially as it relates to what you wrote. If you are
still unclear about what is meant, make an appointment to speak to your tutor or lecturer
about the report at a mutually convenient time, if possible. Make notes about that discus-
sion and keep them with the report. Next time you have to write a report, all the material
will be together, and this will save you having to start from the beginning again.
It is certainly distressing to have put in a lot of work and then find that it has not been
rewarded with the grade you expected. Unfortunately, effort is not marked and may not be
clearly visible to your markers. However, combined with systematic and supported practice
(e.g., across drafts and even assignments), it will lead to improvement both in your under-
standing and in your performance. Psychology research reports are different from most
forms of assignment that you will be familiar with, and it usually takes time to become
good at them. It will be a cumulative process over your undergraduate career. One thing to
bear in mind is that reports function differently in different units (e.g., in first-year units
there may be a focus on APA style, while at second year the focus may be on literature
review). Consequently, it is essential for you to review the information you are given about
a report, which will typically include a description of the marking (e.g., a rubric) that will
107
make such priorities clear. Nonetheless, it is important that you keep all your marked
reports and refer to them on the next attempt so that you may continue to make progress.
Students frequently complain that the comments and feedback they get are inconsist-
ent across various tutors or lecturers. Different staff members may have their pet peeves
about specific aspects of conventions (some fuss about misplaced apostrophes, while
others ignore them), so what is commented on in detail may vary from one marker to
another. However, there are two reasons for feedback. First, markers are trying to provide
you with information to improve your writing, which can be a little idiosyncratic. Second,
markers are clarifying what you have received marks for and where marks have been
deducted. These comments tend to be more consistent and more related to the actual
marks you receive. Moreover, all universities take considerable pains to train markers,
and to moderate or check results, usually by undertaking cross- or double-marking to
ensure consistency in grading. If you are unclear about the comments on your report and
their relationship to your marks, you may wish to check with your lecturer or tutor.
5.10 Summary
In conclusion, the following eight general points summarise the important steps you
should follow when writing a psychology research report:
1. Plan ahead to make best use of the time available.
2. Search for relevant references other than those given.
3. Be crystal clear about your hypotheses. Did the study test them? Did the results sup-
port them?
4. Write an outline of your study.
5. Get something comprehensive down on paper as soon as possible. This will usually
be the Method section.
6. Have someone critically read your first draft and be prepared for a fair amount of
rewriting. Also have someone critically read the revised draft. Stick to the word limit.
7. Get your typed final presentation proofread for typos (and submit to Turnitin, if used).
8. Get it in on time. If there is a genuine trauma, seek an extension before the due date.
5.11 Checklist
For the first two or three reports that you write, you may find it helpful to check off these
steps as you do them (although you may choose to do them in a different sequence to the
one that follows):
Preparation
 Do you have all the handouts from your department (word limit, due date, etc.)?
 Do you have the details of the research (i.e., what was done, how many partic-
ipants, groups, a copy of the questionnaire, etc.)?
108
5
 Have you read (obtained copies of) the references given?
 Have you decided on your hypothesis or hypotheses? This requires some
critical evaluation of the references, unless you’ve been told what hypotheses
are being tested. Are they specific and testable, written in terms of the vari-
ables as measured in your study? Did the study actually test them?
 Have you obtained more references with results relevant to your hypotheses?
Again, some critical thinking is needed, directed at these references.
 Have you calculated the appropriate statistics? Do they really test your
hypotheses? Were the hypotheses supported?
Method (see p. 77)

 Do you have material covering the following subsections:
(a) Participants?
(b) Design? Do you need a Design section?
(c) Materials?
(d) Procedure?
Results (see p. 87)

 Have you included a statement of how the data were processed?
 Does your report include descriptive statistics? Do you need a table or figure?
 Have you included a description of results of statistical tests?
 If you’ve used a table or figure, does it meet APA conventions?
Introduction (see p. 72)

 Have you included an opening statement of the area under consideration (but
not a cliché)?
 Have you introduced the theoretical framework for the study, including only
the relevant parts of previous research, and defined terms where needed?
 Have you provided evidence that your reading of previous research has been
critical, rather than just taking it at face value?
 Have you introduced the present study, stating the aims of it and how it dif-
fers from previous research?
 Have you concluded with your operationalised hypotheses, written in the
past tense?
Discussion (see p. 100)

 Have you begun by stating whether the hypotheses were supported?
 How do the results relate to the previous research mentioned in the Introduction?
 What do the results mean? What are the implications for everyday life?
 Are there any methodological issues? Are problems systematic and observ-
able in the results? If not, do you have a statement saying that there were no
obvious methodological problems?
 Have you concluded with a brief summary of what you found, or a suggestion
for correcting any problems you encountered?
109
Title Page, Abstract, References (see pp. 68, 105)

 Have you produced a Title Page, and written an Abstract?
 Have you ensured that your References section includes all and only the ref-
erences cited and meets APA conventions?
Presentation
 Rearrange the sections into the proper order. Have you numbered the pages?
 Did you have your first draft read by someone else? Was there anything that
was unclear? What do you need to do to make it clear?
 Have you written a complete second draft? Is it clearer to someone else than
the first one? Have you read it aloud?
 Does the overall draft exceed the word limit? If so, cut it back.
 Have you typed it up double-spaced? Have the entire report proofread and
submit it to Turnitin.
 If you are really keen, or really anxious, do as many more drafts as you can
cope with!
 Keep a copy of the final, proofread version, either on a USB or cloud-based
backup service or as a hardcopy.
 Submit your final report – if electronically, via the portal; or attach the institu-
tion, faculty, or departmental cover sheet and hand it in on time (or even early!).
 Celebrate a good job well done. You deserve it! (It’s important to celebrate
achievements.)
110
6
Essays in Psychology
KEYWORDS
analytical categories, argument, evidence
IN THIS CHAPTER
6.1 How Are Essays Different From Research Reports? . . . . . . . . . . 113
6.2 Choosing an Essay Topic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
6.3 Deciding What the Essay Topic Asks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
6.4 Preparation – Reading, Note-taking, and Planning . . . . . . . . . . 117
6.5 Structure of an Essay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118
6.6 Redrafting and Presentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124
6.7 Further Reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125
6.8 Checklist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126
111
The Process of Writing an Essay

Figure 6.1. The process of writing an essay.
112
6
6.1
H ow Are Essays Different From
Research Reports?
C
HAPTER 2 HIGHLIGHTED THE features that research reports and essays have
in common. However, the differences between these formats are considerable.
For one thing, there are fewer conventions used in essays, which allows you
much more opportunity to be creative and to demonstrate your narrative skill. Similarly,
essays are not usually divided into sections the way research reports are. Furthermore,
psychology essays shorter than about 2500 words do not usually include subheadings;
this doesn’t mean there is no structure, but the structure is simpler and more flexible.
Other than the Title Page, Abstract (if your institution requires one – many do not), and
References, as long as there is an introduction, a body (or discussion, or argument), and
a conclusion, you have met the requirements of format.
Writing a good essay is not, however, only about meeting the format requirements. A
good essay clearly and succinctly presents a viewpoint or argument, supported by good
evidence, and provides a good summary and conclusion. This is achieved by the use of a
clear structure to the writing. For example, the Introduction to a research report typically
outlines the particular sort of argument you intend to present – to justify the claims or pre-
dictions you are posing. As a student faced with an essay topic, one of the problems you
must solve is to review the available evidence and decide on what to present and how to
structure your argument. Since an essay doesn’t have a Results section to focus your atten-
tion on the evidence, you need to find a focus for yourself, and make it an integral part of
the structure of the essay. To do this you need to carefully examine the question asked.
6.2 Choosing an Essay Topic

If you are fortunate, you will be given a choice of essay topic. This is typically easier than
being allowed to choose your own topic, because the staff member who set the question
will have already identified answerable questions. However, how should you choose
which one to do? When asked this, some students say they choose the one that looks
easiest. This is a mistake. Typically, questions are designed to be of similar difficulty,
which means that if one seems easy, you may not have understood this topic, or the
others. Alternatively, if there is a comparatively straightforward topic, it is likely that mark-
ers will expect essays on this topic to be executed at a very high level for it to achieve top
marks, whereas a topic which is more difficult to answer may be marked more leniently
and the markers may be more accepting of less-polished answers. In essence, there is no
advantage to choosing a topic just because it seems easy.
Other strategies students use include attempting to decode the directive words used in
the question. For example, students often report that there is a perception that essays
that ask you to “discuss” something are easier than those that ask you to “critically evalu-
ate”. This is not true. For any topic, you are expected to critically evaluate what you read.
113
For example, you should consider the strength of arguments presented by other authors
or the quality (e.g., relevance, applicability) of the evidence. These are the very issues you
will need to discuss in an essay asking you to “discuss” a topic. So, the general description
of what is required may not be a great basis for choosing a topic.
A third approach to choosing an essay topic is to identify a topic of interest to you.
Specifically, since you will be expected to do a fair bit of reading and thinking for any
essay topic, you might as well choose an area that you are interested in or would like to
learn more about. There is a small risk with this approach; namely, that you might get
carried away with researching or, if the topic is something you feel very strongly about,
that you may have trouble being objective or critical. Try this: imagine you were given the
opportunity to evaluate a topic you believed in strongly. Would you be able to fairly and
critically evaluate counter evidence? This can even be true for topics you simply hold a
strong point of view about. For example, students who are given the opportunity to eval-
uate the evidence that suggests using laptops in lectures (i.e., for accessing/taking notes)
actually impairs academic performance (Patterson & Patterson, 2017) often find this is
contrary to their personally held point of view and consequently dismiss this evidence,
sometimes using the flawed “person who” argument (i.e., the evidence suggests use of
laptops in lectures impairs academic performance, but this is not true for me . . .).
You should also think twice about choosing an area in which you think you already
have expert knowledge. If your brother suffers from dyslexia and you are therefore
attracted to the essay question on this topic, be wary of making general statements on the
basis of your single example. Your brother may not be typical. Many students, particu-
larly mature age students, sometimes fall into the trap of writing about areas in which
they have personal experience, and not always sticking to what the question asks of
them. Be particularly careful of ideological hobby-horses. Although we are happy to
encourage passionate belief in a good cause, it is usually very difficult to write objectively
about such a topic, or to stick to what the question requires.
We suggest that if you are given a list of choices, you reduce the possibilities to two or
three topics which look interesting, then have a look at the references given for each and
see how readable they are. Don’t be too easily discouraged, and do think about the topics
you have previously studied (across any units of study). Students often forget that study-
ing psychology is meant to be cumulative. That is, knowledge acquired in one unit can be
useful in other units. That does not mean it’s okay to submit multiple assignments on the
same topic – although the opportunity to do so is unlikely to present itself within a
course – but it may mean you have read something relevant previously that may help you
choose a good topic for an essay.
6.3 Deciding What the Essay Topic Asks

There are relatively few ways that essay topics are commonly worded in psychology.
Figure 6.2 gives examples of some of the sorts of essays that you might encounter in your
first year or two of psychology. Look at the directive words in these topics, which are the
114
6
Discuss research into sibling relationships in children with a focus on the development
of pro-social behaviour, jealousy, and trust.
Discuss the role of deception in social psychological research. To what extent is
deception a necessary methodological component of social psychological
experiments?
What is the impact of genetic factors on the development of self-esteem or self-
worth in adolescents? Discuss the evidence.
It is widely believed that ageing causes a decline in cognitive skills. Evaluate the
assertion in relation to the experimental evidence on memory and skilled performance.
“Being an only child is a disease in itself.” Using current research, evaluate the accuracy
of this statement made by the eminent American psychologist G. Stanley Hall.
Critically evaluate some of the evidence which suggests that under some conditions
rewarding people can actually cause them to become less motivated.
Developmental dyslexia is not a uniform disorder. Critically review the literature
so as to illustrate the major sub-types of developmental dyslexia and the
underlying cognitive and phonological deficits that have been identified with
various types of dyslexia.
Compare and contrast the following theories of love: “Love as attachment” and
Sternberg’s triangular theory of love.
Define, compare, and contrast the concepts of “conformity”, “compliance”, and
“obedience”. Under what circumstances is conformity desirable and when is it
undesirable social behaviour?
Describe the processes involved in solving the problem of the Hobbits and the Orcs
in terms of the three-store memory model and IDEAL problem solving.
Anorexia nervosa is an eating disorder that affects an individual’s physical as well as
psychological health. What are the major theories of the etiology of anorexia nervosa?
The modern conception of companionate marriage puts heavy expectations on
couples. What factors improve the odds of maintaining a satisfactory marital
relationship? Support your assertions with research evidence.
Why do out-group members seem to “all look alike”? Examine the reasons behind
the perception of out-group homogeneity.
Critically examine research based on attribution theory into attributions of victim
responsibility for rape. To what extent does such research support attribution
theories and which attribution theories are most useful in this context?
Are males better equipped to be leaders than females? Critically assess whether it is
just childhood interactions that influence leadership or whether other influences
are involved.
Figure 6.2. Examples of psychology essay titles.
115
words telling you to do something: discuss, evaluate, critically evaluate, critically review,
compare and contrast, define, or describe. It is important that your essay does what is
asked of it; that is, that you answer what is asked, not what you might like to write about
the topic. If it is not clear to you exactly what the question requires, talk to the lecturer
who set the topic.
Discuss means to describe the relevant perspectives and evidence for each as related
to the topic or question under consideration. Typically, you would find journal articles
related to the topic, some in favour of a particular perspective or outcome and some
that are critical of that perspective or outcome, possibly presenting an alternative per-
spective. For instance, the second example in Figure 6.2 is about the role of deception
in research. Some writers argue that deception is necessary. Others argue that it should
not be necessary; and these writers suggest some alternatives to deception. Your essay
should describe what these opposing viewpoints are, but, in view of the second sen-
tence in the question, would then go on to look at why the proponents of deception say
that deception is necessary.
Evaluate or critically evaluate are similar to the direction to “discuss”, but there is an
expectation that you would end up with a judgment in favour of one side of the argu-
ment. You are being asked for an appraisal of the relative strength or weight of the argu-
ments as a basis for drawing a conclusion. Here is a chance for you to express your
evidenced opinion. However, don’t get carried away. Markers are usually not impressed
by dogmatic personal assertions. It is wiser to use the evidence you find and critically
evaluate to draw your conclusion. For example, “The weight of evidence favours . . .”.
Review or critically review means to make a survey of the topic. Such an instruction
usually expects a wide reading in the area. For many other instructions you might only
need a fairly small number of references, but if you are asked to review an area, you must
make an effort to get a fairly comprehensive coverage of the topic. This may mean there
is a review of the topic available to you (e.g., a paper in the Annual Review of Psychology
or a meta-analysis or systematic review). You will be expected to briefly summarise the
work of previous researchers, while being critical of poor arguments or methodological
problems like small sample sizes or unrepresentative samples, or any other systematic
biases that appear, and summarise the current state of the topic, including any weak-
nesses or gaps in the literature.
Compare or compare and contrast means that you are expected to look for similarities
and differences between the theories or approaches described in the topic. These will
most likely be named. Again, you are expected to be critical of what you read, but here
you are not being asked to make a personal judgment between the two. You are really
reporting what other authors have to say about the relative merits or disadvantages of the
different approaches. You must come to some conclusion, at least about the importance
or implications of major areas of similarity and difference.
Define, describe, and examine are instructions expecting you to present the informa-
tion in some depth, and, importantly, in your own words. Define means to say exactly
what the concept, term, or phrase means. For example, if asked to define “conformity”,
you would be expected to say that it is the tendency to change one’s behaviour, attitudes,
116
6
opinions, or even perceptions to match those of the bulk of others around you. You would
also need to provide a reference for your definition, acknowledging where this under-
standing comes from. This will assist you to contextualise your definition. For example,
you would also need to distinguish this tendency in particular situations from the more
general personality trait of conformity. The further instruction to describe or examine
means that you would go on to present a detailed account of the theory or term, includ-
ing the evidence for this, and also implications for real-life situations.
Note that all these directives expect you to be critical of what you read. This does not
necessarily mean that you should be negative, but that, as was said in Chapter 2, you
should apply critical thinking principles to what you read. Are the conclusions drawn by
the authors reasonable on the basis of the evidence they report? It is perfectly acceptable
to compliment authors on the representativeness of their sample or the imagination
employed in operationalising some concept, just as it is to be critical of a small or unrep-
resentative sample, or an interpretation that ignores likely alternatives.
6.4
P reparation – Reading, Note-taking,
and Planning
Having decided what the topic expects of you, you need to spend quite a lot of time in
preparation. As in any effortful exploit, the better the preparation the better the finished
product; so in the case of your essay, time spent in preparation will pay off in the final
product. For the typical psychology essay, you will have been given only one or two ref-
erences to start you off. You will already have skimmed through these in order to decide
which topic to choose. Now read what your textbook has to say about the area in ques-
tion. This will give you a general overview of what conventional thinking is on the sub-
ject and will point you in the direction of further references. So too will the reference lists
in the articles you’ve been given.
With the question in mind, you might do a brief references search – consider
looking for papers that have cited the reference you were given – and make a list of a
handful of references that look as if they might be relevant. Take notes. Many stu-
dents find it helpful to use a separate sheet of paper, or an index card for each article,
and write the author(s), date, title, and journal details at the top of each sheet.
Alternatively, you could use Microsoft Excel to set up a table of references or refer-
encing software such as Endnote. Most universities have an institutional licence
which allows students to download and use Endnote for free. Check with your library
or information technology services. This makes life easier when identifying ideas and
quotes, and correctly citing these in your essay, as well as simplifying writing your
reference list. The notes you should take are the major points made by the author or
authors, any key definitions or quotes, the evidence presented, and the interpreta-
tions or conclusions drawn by the authors. This information may be apparent from
their Abstract or from their subheadings, but you will eventually need to read the
117
article in depth to find all the key information. However, during preparation, focus-
ing on the broad strokes to identify only those papers that are entirely relevant is very
helpful. Many students download or photocopy anything that might appear even
remotely useful. The danger here is that you end up with an indigestible mass of
paper or electronic files, which can be distracting.
Once you have good summary notes, you should then build an essay plan. If the direc-
tive is to “compare and contrast” or “evaluate”, you might separate the references into
heaps of “for” and “against”. If it is “discuss”, you might do the same, or you might organ-
ise them chronologically to show the evolution of thinking about the topic. You should
then jot down the broad outline of what you intend your argument to be, and where you
will use the references. One way to achieve this is to write down the point or claim of
each paragraph and the associated reference(s). You will eventually need an introduction
and a conclusion, but planning is primarily for the main body of the essay and these sec-
tions will be much clearer once your argument is fully elaborated.
Now go back and read your references more thoroughly. This time, your aim is to
flesh out the specific arguments you are going to make, or pieces of research you are
going to describe. Here is where you should highlight parts of what you printed or
photocopied. Never write on or highlight books that aren’t your own. Make a copy of
the relevant bits and write on or highlight your copy, remembering to note the title,
author, and date details for your reference list. Make a note of good page numbers on
the summary sheet or in your table or referencing software. As with research reports,
keep direct quotes to a minimum. It is always better to put the expression into your
own words to indicate that you understand what is meant (acknowledging its source,
of course!).
Now that you have a plan, you are ready to start writing. You will probably find at
first that it is pretty sketchy. You might wish to start with the section that is clearest to
you, rather than the introduction – but this is a matter of writing style and preference,
and you should do what works for you. You should note that you will have to go back to
your references again and again to find evidence to back up assertions that you are mak-
ing, or to check the accuracy of your summaries of research. You may also find that you
need another look through PsycINFO or other sources to find more evidence to support
some of your claims. Finally, you will definitely need to write, and rewrite your work
before you are finished.
6.5 Structure of an Essay

As mentioned earlier in this chapter, the essay structure is to have a Title Page, possibly an
Abstract, an introduction, a body (or discussion), a conclusion, and a reference list. As we
said about writing a research report, it may be easier to write your first draft in a different
order, in this case drafting the body first, then the conclusion, then the introduction and
last of all the Abstract. However, we’ve described them in the order in which they will
eventually be presented.
118
6
6.5.1 The Title Page and Abstract
The format of the Title Page and Abstract is the same as for a research report. Look back
at Section 5.1 for the details. Many universities do not require an Abstract for an essay.
Check with your tutor or lecturer about their expectation. If they do require one, and
since the essay is not describing a study, you won’t have information about participants
and hypotheses in your Abstract. What you will summarise, in less than 150 words, are
your contention or position, and the major arguments that led you to your conclusion.
The conclusion itself should also be succinctly stated.
6.5.2 The Introduction

Although it comes first when you submit the final version, it is advisable to leave the
writing of the introduction until you have a reasonable draft of the essay body and con-
clusion. By then you know what you have argued and concluded and can write an appro-
priate introduction.
Opinions vary on the format of introductions, but one thing is clear: avoid wasting
words with too general an opening statement. Similarly, although some map of the terri-
tory ahead is advisable, avoid too much detail which interrupts the flow or clarity of the
argument. Introductions to essays should not be longer than one long paragraph, per-
haps 150 words or 10% of the word limit. The introduction should not restate the title
but should say why the area being examined or evaluated is important or interesting. It
should then go on to give the reader an idea of what you are going to argue. There are
some examples of introductory paragraphs in Figure 6.3, but be aware that they are not
the only ways to introduce an essay.
One approach to avoid is the detective novel structure – starting with the description
of a problem, followed by a sort of gradual unfolding of information and evidence, lead-
ing up to a final burst of explanation at the end. This approach can be confusing to your
marker who has to wait to the end to find out what is going on! In contrast, more jour-
nalistic styles tell the reader the important information at the very start, and gradually
increase the level of detail. This approach means that the relevance of the details is
always apparent and the argument is always clear. This does not mean that you should
be too journalistic in expression or style (e.g., your claims need to relate to the evi-
dence), since it is an academic essay. However, the overall approach is a good one. This
means there is a lot to be said for beginning with a direct a statement of point or claim
in your introduction, then using the body of the essay to build the argument that sup-
ports your point or claim. It is worth noting that your lecturer or tutor will not be all
that happy with personal opinions, which means you should probably stick to sup-
ported conclusions. However, if you are required to evaluate or compare, you are being
asked to state an opinion based on evidence. In such cases, you can make it clear that
you have done as asked by saying something like: “The weight of evidence from Bloggs
(2015) and Smith (2016) suggests that . . . is the case, in spite of some contrary evi-
dence from Jones (2014).”
119
Title: Critically examine some of the evidence which suggests that under some
conditions rewarding people can actually cause them to become less motivated.
While many people might consider that rewarding an individual for a
particular activity would serve to enhance motivation, a number of studies have
shown that under some conditions rewarding people can actually cause them to
become less motivated (Deci, 1971, 1972; Harackiewicz, Manderlink, & Sansone,
1984; Lepper, Greene, & Nisbett, 1973). This essay will describe the early studies
of Deci, the criticisms of those studies by Lepper and colleagues, and the recent
work by Harackiewicz and colleagues which attempted to address the earlier
concerns, especially the variable of perceived control by the participant over the
activity in question.
Title: Are males better equipped to be leaders than females? Critically assess
whether it is just childhood interactions that influence the leadership potential of
both sexes or whether there are any other influences involved.
Leadership has been traditionally regarded as a male domain (Dunlevy,
1991). Many theorists have attempted to explain the gender differences
pertaining to leadership success (e.g., Singer, 1991). One such explanation has
been offered by Maccoby (1990), a developmental theorist, who suggests that
sex role differences occur primarily through childhood interactions. That is,
during the childhood years, patterns of behaviour emerge that may be seen to
better equip males than females to be leaders. Although childhood
interactions seem to affect leadership potential, they are not the only
influences involved in determining leadership success. Parental, teacher, and
media influences, workplace practices and expectations, and biological factors
are also important considerations in any comprehensive attempt to explain
gender differences in leadership.
Title: Discuss research evidence regarding the development of complex emotions

in children.
A large proportion of the research on the emergence of emotions has focused
on the development of the basic emotions in early infancy, which has resulted in
the temporal development of complex emotions being a comparatively uncharted
area of study (Lewis, Sullivan, Stranger, & Weiss, 1989). The general consensus
seems to consider that happiness, interest, surprise, fear, anger, sadness, and
disgust are the basic emotions, although there is still some debate as to whether
disgust is an emotion or a reflex (Bootzin, Bower, Crocker, & Hall, 1991).
Complex emotions may be defined as those emotions that rely on an awareness
of self, examples being jealousy, shame, embarrassment, envy, and pride (Lewis
et al., 1989). In an attempt to trace the sequence of development of complex
emotions, this essay will briefly examine the three alternative views of emotional
development set out by Lewis et al. in their study of self-development and
self-conscious emotions.
Figure 6.3. Examples of introductory paragraphs from undergraduate essays.
120
6
Title: Religion: Is it a source of increased acceptance of others, or a source of
increased prejudice and intolerance?
The popular maxim “never discuss politics or religion” suggests that both topics,
far from generating a lack of interest, generate much interest but much difference
of opinion amongst people (Batson & Ventis, 1982). Because most religions preach
unconditional love and acceptance of others, it has been presumed that religious
people are generally less prejudiced than non-religious people (Herek, 1987).
However, according to Batson (1976), major religions have often fostered doctrines
leading to violent, inhumane, and antisocial acts. Results of even the earliest studies
(Allport & Kramer, 1946; Rosenblith, 1949) have revealed that religious
involvement correlates positively with prejudice. This essay will critically evaluate the
above claims in the light of subsequent research evidence.
Figure 6.3. (Continued)
6.5.3 The Body (Discussion)

This is the largest section of your essay. Your essay plan should guide this section.
Depending on the directive you’ve been given in the question you have chosen, you will
have a selection of previous research or theory to summarise, criticise, compare, or all
three. The tricky part is deciding on the order in which this is to happen. Burdess (1991)
talks about finding appropriate analytical categories, then dealing with each in turn. If
you are comparing and contrasting approaches or theories, it is a good idea to deal with
them one at a time, elaborating on their strengths, weaknesses, and areas of applicability.
If asked to critically evaluate a body of literature, the analytical categories might be
particular pieces of research. For example, perhaps a methodological theme (e.g., decep-
tion) has been used in a range of contexts (e.g., developmental psychology, social psychol-
ogy, and cognitive psychology). In this case, you might consider the reasons, risks,
consequences, and outcomes for each of these contexts in turn. If the topic has developed
over time, it might be appropriate to consider key pieces of research in a chronological
sequence. This approach respects the development of knowledge on the topic, since much
research is cumulative and builds on previous work. You can either point this out, or show
how it isn’t true (e.g., sometimes research on a topic seems to diverge, leading to little
straightforward progress). Alternatively, if you are dealing with a literature that is fractured
or controversial, you could write first about several pieces of research that support a point
of view, then write about other research that doesn’t support that viewpoint, or at least not
so well, then come to some decision about what you believe on the basis of this evidence.
How much to include? One difficulty is deciding what material to include and what to
omit. It is not unusual to feel that, since you have read an enormous amount of research,
you must say something about everything you’ve read. Resist this temptation, especially if
you have not been particularly discerning in your initial identification of relevant research
to read. If you cite everything you have read, the result is likely to be superficial and
121
even incoherent or inaccurate, since you will be aware that word limits are strictly
enforced; and if you have a lot of things to talk about and limited space, you can only say
a little about each. Your marker will be much more impressed with in-depth description
and critical appraisal of a few references than a superficial treatment of many.
If you are having trouble reducing the amount of material you feel you need to talk
about, you may be interpreting the question too broadly. It is usually acceptable in your
introduction to say that an area is very broad and applicable to a wider range of phenom-
ena or contexts, and consequently that the essay will limit consideration to a particular
scope (e.g., context, period). If you are in doubt about the wisdom of this approach for a
particular essay, talk to the lecturer who set it.
Occasionally you may have the opposite problem. If you make an essay plan, write a
first draft, correct and tidy it up, and are still far short of the word limit, then it is a signal
that you need to do more reading. Have you described research in sufficient detail that
the reader can see the logic of the conclusions reached or the criticisms made? Have you
been fair in arguments for and against, or are your own prejudices showing? While it is
acceptable, in fact expected, that you have an opinion, it is not acceptable to ignore evi-
dence that you don’t like! Even when you’ve written a proper length essay, these are
shortcomings that should not be there!
Another problem in many student essays is the lack of linking sentences so that para-
graphs flow logically. Such essays are a collection of largely unrelated paragraphs. You
need to have a sentence at the end or beginning of each paragraph that allows the reader
to understand the link between paragraphs. This can be done as simply as starting a new
paragraph with “In contrast to Brown’s (2016) findings, Jones (2015) found that . . .” and
using that paragraph to deal with a different idea from that in the previous paragraph.
Alternatively, if you wish to explore one study in one paragraph, and someone else’s work
in the next paragraph, you might say “Additional support for Allen’s (2014) proposition
comes from Bloggs’s (2016) study, where . . .”. This is what we have done with this para-
graph and the preceding one.
The body of the essay will be the major part. As mentioned before, the introduction
should not be more than about 150 words. The conclusion should be similar in length,
about 150 words, and certainly not more than about 10% of the word limit. So if your
word limit is 1500 words, the body of the essay should be about 1200 of them. Don’t be
paranoid about counting words, but use these numbers as a guide.
6.5.4 The Conclusion

The conclusion is a single-paragraph summary of the major points of your argument, and
a final statement of your point, having evaluated conflicting or at least comprehensive
evidence. What you have to do is find a balance between an abrupt ending which looks
like you just ran out of ideas, and a repetition of points that you seem to have just made,
particularly in a fairly short essay. For example, avoid any word-for-word repetition
from the body of the argument. However, the conclusion should not introduce any new
material or ideas.
122
6
The main reason that students have difficulty with conclusions is that they often seem
to have no view or opinions about the material. Once you have seriously addressed the
critical reading of the evidence, you should find that you do have an opinion on the topic.
The conclusion is the place to state it, remembering that even here you need to back up
your opinion with evidence. Since I’ve just said not to introduce new material, you need
to refer back to work in the body of the essay, even if only by citation. Figure 6.4 has
several examples of concluding paragraphs.
Title: The facial feedback hypothesis suggests that the experience of a particular
emotion can follow from a particular facial expression. Laird has used the
manipulation of facial muscles to induce specific emotions as an independent
variable in experiments. Critically evaluate some of this literature, and evaluate how
effective you think the method has been.
In summary, existing research on the muscle by muscle technique of testing
the facial feedback hypothesis is contradictory. However, so many faults have
been pointed out by researchers such as Buck (1980) and Tourangeau and
Ellsworth (1979), and many of the arguments for the hypothesis are so weak,
that those studies which showed positive results are unconvincing. Obviously
more research needs to be done, particularly using between-subjects designs, but
the muscle by muscle technique studies that have been carried out so far simply
appear to contain too many methodological flaws to be considered effective.
Title: How do the gender stereotypes we hold affect our interaction with a member
of the opposite sex? Critically evaluate some of the recent research in this area.
In conclusion, recent research has indicated that differences in behavioural
style do exist between men and women when interacting with each other. These
behavioural differences are parallel to and influenced by gender stereotypes.
Whether the stereotypes are accurate or not, they function as part of sex role
expectations, and so influence the behaviour of men and women. An
understanding of the differences in interaction styles, and the stereotypes that
pervade and direct them, can be helpful in overcoming misunderstandings
between the sexes and so narrow the communication gap of the gender divide.
Title: Are there gender-specific differences in the ways in which parental
socialisation influences the development of empathy in children?
Overall, the proposition that there are gender-specific differences in the
influence of parental socialisation on the development of empathy in children could
be considered highly controversial. In previous research there is both a lack of
consistency in findings and a lack of control for, and consideration of, numerous
possible confounding influences. Although the existing literature tends to favour
the notion that mothers are particularly influential in developing greater empathic
understanding and responsiveness in their daughters, the validity of this finding is
questionable on the basis of the limitations and problems discussed above.
Figure 6.4. Examples of concluding paragraphs from undergraduate essays.
123
6.5.5 The References

The reference list at the end of an essay is formatted in exactly the same way as for a
research report, so look back at Section 3.3. In-text referencing is also the same as for a
research report, and this was dealt with in Section 3.2. You may find markers slightly
more lenient as to what counts as evidence for an essay compared with a research report.
For instance, a newspaper article would certainly indicate current interest in a particular
topic and that may be a valid point in an essay, whereas you would never reference a
newspaper article in a research report. Don’t get carried away, though. Avoid references
to radio or television programs in psychological essays, however interesting or topical
they may be. A newspaper is acceptable, because it is a reference that can be checked.
Usually it is not practical for an interested reader to check on what a radio or television
program said, so as a standard of evidence it is not very good. The same is true for many
internet references. If they are opinion pieces (e.g., personal blogs or vlogs) or home
pages that may change between when you cite them and when a marker may want to
check them, then avoid them. If they are pages with copyright dates, as with many uni-
versity sites, or are electronic journals, then they are much more acceptable.
Students sometimes complain that although they’ve referred to many references, they
haven’t received as good a grade as a friend who used fewer. As with research reports,
there are no firm rules about the number of references to use, but generally speaking it is
better to write sensibly about a few references than to be promiscuous with many. When
reading the references you’ve found, you will often find that many of them say the same
things. It is not necessary to make a general statement then put six references in paren-
theses, unless you are specifically making the point that the statement is a well-supported
one. Your marker is more interested in your critical evaluation of specific references than
in the fact that you’ve read six of them. It is acceptable to make a statement, then refer to
just a couple of representative references like this: (e.g., Moulding, 2010; Nedeljkovic,
2011). The “e.g.,” indicates that these are examples of researchers who have said such
things, but that many more researchers agree with your statement.
Check with the lecturer or tutor who set the question, but as a rule of thumb a
first-year essay should not require more than about six or eight references, and a sec-
ond-year essay should not require more than about 12 references. Some lecturers are
happy with fewer, especially if they are asking you to criticise a particular author’s
thoughts on a topic.
6.6 Redrafting and Presentation

As with a research report, redrafting is crucial. When you have a first draft written,
however brief, congratulate yourself. Then get someone else to cast an eye over it for
you, with a view to pointing out areas which lack clarity or contain poor argument or
insufficient evidence to back up assertions. Look back at Section 2.9 for more informa-
tion about redrafting.
124
6
Presentation is the same as for a research report. As we said in Section 2.10, most
institutions these days expect your assignments to be typed, double-spaced, with wide
margins, and to include a title page that includes your name, your tutor’s name (please
spell it correctly!), and the day and time of your lab class. You may also need an offi-
cial coversheet if submitting in hardcopy. If you can run your essay through a plagia-
rism detector like Turnitin before final submission, that should also help keep you out
of trouble.
Finally, get your essay in on time. It is very rare that students can do enough work on
an essay to make the penalty for any extra day(s) worthwhile! This means it is a good
idea to aim to get your essay completed 48 hours early, so that last-minute hassles with
computers can be overcome, or at least addressed. Back up each draft locally and on a
separate device (e.g., USB, cloud-based backup such as Dropbox, etc.) so you always have
the previous draft you wrote available if something terrible happens to your final draft.
You may find it useful to include the date, or the version number in your filename, in
order to keep track of the latest draft (e.g., psychessay_v3 or essay02May18).
Finally, reward yourself for keeping to your schedule. It is hard, given all the compet-
ing demands on your time, so when you are successful in sticking to your timeline you’ve
earned a special treat. Psychology staff often put more emphasis on due dates than staff in
other subjects, and that is because psychology is an accredited course leading (eventu-
ally) to a professional vocation where time is important. However, if you have a genuine,
documentable reason for an extension, don’t be afraid to ask before the due date.
6.7 Further Reading

There are many books available that address essay writing in the social sciences, and your
library will probably have copies of them. Although none of these were specifically writ-
ten for psychology students, they contain much good advice. Ones that we have found to
be especially useful are:
Betts, K., Seitz, A., & Farquharson, K. (2006). Writing essays and research reports in the
social sciences (3rd ed.). South Melbourne, Victoria: Thomson.
Burdess, N. (2007). Good study. Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Australia.
Marshall, L. A., & Rowland, F. (2013). A guide to learning independently (5th ed.).
Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Australia.
All these books are by Australian academics for Australian students. Burdess’s book
is particularly good on general study skills such as preparing for lectures and tutori-
als, taking notes, examination techniques, and general writing skills. Marshall and
Rowland’s book is very good for making it clear that studying at university is different
from studying at school. One of us found an earlier edition of it valuable as a mature
age student coming back to study after many years away from it. Betts, Seitz, and
125
Farquharson’s book is especially good on essays, though its material on research

reports is aimed more at sociology students.
6.8 Checklist
For the first two or three essays that you write, you may find it helpful to plan your time.
You should aim to sit down to write consistently, for a minimum of 45 (uninterrupted)
minutes. To make sure this writing time is put to good use, check off these steps as you
do them before you start writing (although you may choose to do them in a different
sequence from the one that follows):
Preparation
 Do you have all the handouts from your department (word limit, due date, etc.)?
 Have you chosen an essay topic?
 Have you read (obtained copies of ) the references given?
 Are you clear on what the topic is asking you to do (Evaluate? Discuss?)?
 Have you obtained enough references to allow you to have a reasonable opinion
on the area in question?
 Have you read them critically, taking appropriate notes?
 Have you jotted down an essay plan – at least the rough sequence in which
you are going to argue your case?
Body of the essay (see pp. 121–122)

 Have you listed the arguments for your case?
 What about the arguments against?
 Are you confident of backing up your opinion with evidence?
Conclusion (see pp. 122–123)

 Can you fairly state the reasons for your decisions?
 Is it a single brief paragraph?
Writing
Introduction (see pp. 199–121)
 Have you begun by stating the area under question and your opinion?
 Have you given the reader/marker a verbal map of what to expect in the way
of your argument?
 Is it brief (not more than about 150 words)?
Title Page, Abstract, References (see pp. 119, 124)

 Have you produced a Title Page, and written an Abstract (if required)?
 Have you ensured that your References include all (and only) the references
cited and meets APA conventions?
126
6
Revision and Submission
Presentation
 Rearrange the sections to ensure the clarity and coherence of the argument.
 Did you have your first draft read by someone else? Was there anything that
was unclear? What do you need to do to make it clear?
 Have you written a complete second draft? Is it clearer to someone else than
the first one?
 Does the overall draft exceed the word limit? If so, cut it back.
 Have you typed it up double-spaced? Have you had the entire report proof-
read, and corrected any mistakes?
 If you are really keen, or really anxious, do as many more drafts as you can
cope with!
 Keep a copy of the final, proofread version, either on a USB or cloud-based
backup service or as a hardcopy, as well as on your computer.
 Hand it in on time (or even early!).
 Celebrate a good job well done. You deserve it!
127
Appendix A
Sample of a Good
Research Report
This is the first of two examples of a good research report. It is fairly typical of what you
might encounter in your first research report in your first semester of psychology. We
have always been hesitant to include these sample reports. In the case of the examples of
good research reports, we did not want students to think there was only one way of
writing a research report, or of expressing particular aspects of one, other than the
standard conventions of the sequence of sections. However, we were persuaded because
it seemed desirable to have a graphic index. If you are after a quick reference for something
and know it belongs in, say, the Introduction, but can’t think of a word to allow you to
look up the real index, you can quickly and easily find what you want from the sample
research report. The numbers referred to in the boxes are the chapter, section, and subsection
numbers in this book.
We have also included examples of badly written research reports on the same topics.
Again we have previously hesitated to include these for the reason that students sometimes
have trouble evaluating the quality of their own writing – once in print, the neatness of
presentation overwhelms the critical sense. However, we hope that the abundant
sprinkling of numbers in superscript, indicating that something is wrong, will alert you
to the shortcomings. The numbers refer to notes on pages 147–149 and 172–174
explaining just what is wrong. Please note that such a system of numbers indicating notes
should not be used in your own research reports, even though you will occasionally see
them in published articles. The other important thing to note is that the first poor
example (Appendix B) is unusually short, even for a first-year research report. It is only
there to give you an example of all the things you should not do, and, since we found 102
of them, that should be enough of a dire warning!
We would like to acknowledge our gratitude to Dr Ben Williams who designed and
ran this first good example report with a cohort of first-year students. Thanks are also
due to students Kelly Stepney, Ian Baxendine, and Elisa Spiller, who kindly gave
permission to use parts of their excellent reports to synthesise the good example.
The second good report (Appendix C) is probably a bit more complex than those you
will encounter early in first year, but we thought it worth including to show the variety of
figures. The number of references is also a bit over the top for a first-year report. By
129
second year, your reports will be longer and more complex, so don’t use it as a template,
simply as a way to find what you want in the body of the book. We would again like to
acknowledge our gratitude to Dr Ben Williams who designed and ran this report with a
cohort of second-semester, first-year students, and to students Eliza Griffiths, Jaime Lee,
Aimee McCarten, and Rachael Young, who kindly gave permission to use parts of their
excellent reports for our version of the good example.
130
Appendix A S ample of a Good Research Repor t
Exploring the Prevalence of Weight Stigma and its Impact on Gender
Katie Smith
Title
5.1
1234567
Submitted as an HAY101 Research Report

Due date: 15th October 2018
Tutor: Gordana Bruce
Class: Monday 13:30–14:30
Word count: 1732
Note: Check whether your tutor or lecturer wants your student

number rather than your name on the title page.
131
Note no page number
Abstract 5.1
Abstract
Note no
indent p. 70
In a between-groups design study replicating Harris, Harris, and Bochner
(1982), 220 women and 96 men Australian university students rated a
Numbers
5.4.3 fictitious target on several personality and appearance traits using a series of
7-point rating scales. The target’s weight and sex were manipulated between
groups. As expected, results demonstrated a marked decrease in participants’
ratings on positive traits when the target was overweight, confirming the
existence of an obesity stereotype; however, there was no significant difference
between these ratings between target sexes. A comparison between present
results and Harris et al.’s findings showed a decrease in participant ratings for
both average weight and overweight targets. These results suggest that, while
stereotypes for obesity do exist and may be increasing, this stereotyping is also
experienced by average weight targets.
132
Note no page number
Introduction
5.2
Obese individuals are stigmatized, rejected, and discriminated against in
General our society because of their weight (Rothblum, Miller, & Garbutt, 1988). One
opening factor that may influence this stigmatization is the obesity stereotype people
statement may hold. The obese stereotype is defined as the consistent negative belief
p. 72 In-text
that an overweight person’s condition is a socially deviant, self-inflicted and
Figure 5.4 referencing
disabling characteristic (Maddox, Back, & Liederman, 1968). 3.2
First lines Olds, Tomkinson, Ferrar, and Maher’s (2010) study suggested that obesity
indented rates have only slightly increased since 1985, with 21–25% of the population ‘and’ or
p. 31 ‘&’ p. 38
classed as overweight or obese, and only 5–6% classed as obese. Despite the
stability of obesity and overweight rates, there are suggestions that the bias
and stereotyping against this body type is increasing (Puhl & Heuer, 2009),
and the prevalence of such stigma is suggested as a major contributing factor
to the mental distress that overweight and obese individuals face (Puhl,
Schwartz, & Brownell, 2005; Wott & Carels, 2010).
The term “weight stigma” is used to identify the ridicule, negative
attitudes, and biases that are faced by individuals who are overweight or
obese (Wang, Brownell, & Wadden, 2004). This is manifested in many ways
within society; such as the perceived and actual biases against overweight
individuals within the health care system (Puhl, Andreyeva, & Brownell,
2008; Puhl & Heuer, 2009); the prevalence of negative stereotyping of
overweight individuals in television and film (Puhl & Brownell, 2001); and
stereotypes casting overweight individuals as lazy, sloppy, noncompliant,
undisciplined, and lacking willpower. (Puhl, Andreyeva, & Brownell, 2008;
Puhl & Brownell, 2001).
Overview Tiggemann and Rothblum (1988) investigated attitudes about body
of previous
weight and appearance in a group of 65 men and 218 women undergraduate
research
p. 74 psychology students at two universities. In one of the conditions participants
were to rate a thin man, thin woman, fat woman, and fat man on eight
qualities. The results were consistent with other studies, and indicated
negative stereotyping of obese people. Although the idea of obese people as
Use of “fat jolly people” was confirmed, being rated higher on warmth and
quotation friendliness, they were rated as more self-indulgent, less self-disciplined,
marks lazier, and less attractive. Similarly, Maddox et al. (1968) found that
p. 25
overweight people were evaluated negatively in their study, and suggested that
this may be due to the view that the overweight condition appears to be self-
inflicted and a voluntary condition. An interesting aspect of the study was the
pervasiveness of the negative evaluation, as the samples were chosen to
maximise variability in attitudes towards overweight people, yet still seemed
to evaluate them negatively.
133
Page numbering starts here with p. 2
To understand why the stigma is so strong against overweight people

Klaczynski, Goold, and Mudry (2004) investigated the “thin ideal” in relation
to obesity stereotypes and self-esteem. This is because self-esteem and the
“thin ideal” can both lead to the development of the obese stereotype. The
thin ideal is the message that people constantly receive from media and
friends suggesting that the ideal body is a thin one, and that those who do not
meet these standards are to be perceived as weak, lacking in skills, and
possessing characteristics that are undesirable. Their results indicated that the
belief that obesity is the result of personal flaws mediates the influence of
self-esteem on negative attitudes towards obesity.
In a study exploring these stereotypes, Harris, Harris, and Bochner (1982)
had 46 men and 101 women university students complete a “Person
Perception Study” where each student rated one of eight descriptions of a
person who was either a man or woman, average weight or overweight, wore
glasses or did not, but was otherwise of medium height, had dark curly hair,
brown eyes, a pleasant smile, preferred casual clothes, and often preferred the
colour blue. Harris et al. found that overweight individuals are stereotyped as
less active, intelligent, hardworking, attractive, popular, successful, athletic,
and appropriately sex-typed than individuals of average weight. Interestingly,
neither sex of participant nor sex of target was significant in their results.
However, more recent studies have suggested that overweight women face
much greater discrimination than overweight men within the workforce (Puhl
& Heuer, 2009); and there are suggestions of differential treatment of
overweight children, with girls facing greater discrimination than boys (Puhl
Introducing & Latner, 2007).
the present The aim of the present study was to partially replicate that of Harris,
study p. 76
Harris, and Bochner (1982) and explore the strength of the obesity stigma in
a modern Australian context. It was hypothesised that overweight targets
Hypotheses
p. 55 would be negatively stereotyped compared to those of average weight. It was
Figure 4.2, also predicted, given Puhl and Latner’s (2007) findings, that women would
Figure 5.6
experience harsher weight discrimination than men, measured on a set of
trait scales. Finally, given suggestions of increasing bias (Puhl & Heuer, 2009)
it was hypothesised that the stereotypes in the present study would be more
negative than those in the original study by Harris et al. in 1982. Method does
not start on
Note bold, a new page
Method 5.3 no full stop Method
Participants Italicise
Participants letters
The sample consisted of 316 undergraduate psychology students, 220 women and
5.3.1 representing
Figure 5.8 96 men. The mean age was 20.6 years (SD 5 4.39 years). The students
statistics
p. 90
134
took part in the study as a voluntary requirement for one of their course units
with no reward for participation. The sample comprised students from one
single Victorian university. As BMI was taken into account, 9.5% were
underweight, 62% were of average weight, 17% were considered overweight,
4.5% were obese, and 7% failed to report this.
Materials Materials and Design

5.3.3 The testing instrument in this study was a single-page questionnaire identical
to the one used in Harris et al.’s (1982) original study, with a single minor
change. In the original study, participants were given a description of a fictional
person named “Chris Martin”; this has been changed to “Chris Mortin” in the
present study. All other details of the study were kept consistent with Harris et
al.’s original design, such that each participant saw a description of one
individual who was either average weight or overweight, man or woman, and
wore glasses or did not. The wearing of glasses was not analysed in this study.
Procedure Procedure
5.3.4 Students were randomly assigned to a target by being given randomly ordered
booklets and tested in their usual tutorial groups.
Note that
Results does
Results Results
not start on
5.4 As with the original study by Harris et al. (1982), the key traits identified to a new page
correspond with obesity stereotyping were collapsed into a single Obesity
Stereotype value, which was calculated thus: (active 1 intelligent 1
hardworking – outgoing 1 attractive 1 popular 1 successful 1 athletic 1
appropriately sex-typed 1 7)/9, giving a variable where lower scores mean
more negative stereotyping.
Introduction Figure 1 shows the mean obesity scores for overweight and average
of Figures
weight targets, as well as the means split by sex of target. As seen in Figure 1,
5.4.6
overweight target people were scored more negatively than average weight
ones, supporting the first hypothesis. There appeared to be little difference in
scores depending on the sex of the target, indicating that the second State whether
hypotheses are
hypothesis was not supported. supported
The obesity score means for the present study and those obtained by p. 92
Introduction Harris et al. (1982) are shown in Table 1. They indicate that there was less of
of Tables a negative stereotype towards overweight people in 1982 than there is now.
p. 75
Table 4.12 The hypothesis that obesity stereotype scores obtained in this study would be
lower than the results of Harris et al.’s study was supported.
135
Obesity stereotype scope

3
No frames
2 around
histograms
0
Obese Average Obese– Average Obese– Average
weight female weight– male weight–
female male
Figure titles Target weight status (overall and by gender)

5.4.6
Figure 5.17 Figure 1. Mean obesity stereotype score based on weight.
Leave space
before and
Table titles after figures
Table 1
5.4.5 and tables
Mean Stereotype Scores for Overweight and Average Weight Individuals for the
Present Study and those of Harris et al. (1982)
Note there The present study Harris et al.

are no Italics for
(N 5 316) (N 5 157)
vertical lines number
Average weight (overall) 3.79 4.24 representing
Obese (Overall) 3.09 3.79 statistics
Note that
Discussion Discussion
A comparison of the obesity stereotype score between the weight does not
State whether categories demonstrates support for the hypothesis that obese people would start on a
hypotheses new page
be subject to more negative stereotyping than those of average weight. As the
are supported
p. 100 obesity stereotype score is a calculated score collapsing participants’ ratings
on several attributes, a lower mean obesity stereotype score means that
participants rated these individuals as, on average, less active, less
hardworking, less athletic, less appropriately sex-typed, less successful, less
popular, less attractive, and less intelligent, but more outgoing than those of
average weight (Harris, Harris, & Bochner, 1982). The difference in mean
obesity stereotype scores supports the first hypothesis, suggesting that weight
stigma is still present and demonstrable within this sample.
Support for The suggestion that women would be viewed more harshly than men was
previous
research not supported. This is consistent with Harris et al.’s (1982) study, but contrary
pp. 100–101 to that of Puhl and Latner (2007). However, Puhl and Latner’s study was of
136
children, and it may be that although girls are judged more severely than boys
if overweight, by adulthood this differential disappears. Alternatively, since
much of the obesity research has been done in North America, it may be that
Australians are more equitable in their stereotyping.
The hypothesis that the severity of stereotyping has increased since the
study of Harris et al. (1982) was supported. This supports the findings in the
review by Puhl and Heuer (2009). However, it should be noted that the mean
scores for an average weight individual decreased by a similar amount. It may
be, as Klaczynski et al. (2004) argue, that the current ideal of thinness makes
even an average weight person susceptible to harsh judgment.
Implication
of results An implication of the present study is that since negative stereotyping is
p. 103 more severe, and since the effects of it include mental health issues and
employment concerns, among others (e.g., Puhl & Heuer, 2009), society
should seriously address the causes of such stereotyping.
Some limitations to the present study must be admitted. The sample is
relatively small and consisted only of psychology students, with a severe
imbalance between the sexes. Results cannot therefore be generalised even to
university students overall. It would be desirable for future research to obtain
a sample with a more even balance between the sexes, and preferably from a
wider age and socioeconomic range.
A further concern, perhaps relevant to differences in the sex of the target,
is that participants were only given a written description of the target person,
and the weight variable was simply a distinction between “average weight”
and “overweight”. If a picture had been shown, possible interactions of
perceptions of obesity and physical attractiveness may have come into play.
Although “attractive” was one of the variables measured, the lack of a visual
stimulus could be seen as a limitation.
Concluding
paragraph In conclusion, the current study has demonstrated that, at least for
p. 104 psychology students, stereotyping on the basis of weight is more severe now
than 30 years ago, though it did not appear to be more severe for women than
men. Since the latter result differs from North American research, further
research is warranted, especially into the causes of stereotyping. Given that
severity of judgments of average weight people had also increased, more
attention should be given to how realistic expectations of various weight
levels are.
137
6
Reference list
References
References does begin
5.6 Harris, M. B., Harris, R. J., & Bochner, S. (1982). Fat, four eyed, and female: on a new
Stereotypes of obesity, glasses, and gender. Journal of Applied Social Psychol- page
ogy, 12, 503–516. doi: 10.1111/j.1559-1816.1982.tb00882.x p. 105
Klaczynski, P. A., Goold, K. W., & Mudry, J. J. (2004). Culture, obesity
Format of
stereotypes, self-esteem, and the “thin ideal”: A social identity perspec-
journal
articles tive. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 33, 307–317. doi: 10.1023/B:-
Note digital
3.3.2 JOYO.0000032639.71472.19 object
Maddox, G. L., Back, K. W., & Liederman, V. R. (1968). Overweight as social identifier (doi)
deviance and disability. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 9, 287–298. p. 45
doi: 10.2307/2948537
Olds, T., Tomkinson, G. R., Ferrar, K. E., & Maher, C. A. (2010). Trends in
the prevalence of childhood overweight and obesity in Australia between
1985 and 2008. International Journal of Obesity, 34, 57–66. doi: 10.1038/
ijo.2009.211
Puhl, R. M., Andreyeva, T., & Brownell, K. (2008). Perceptions of weight
discrimination: Prevalence and comparison to race and gender discrim-
ination. International Journal of Obesity, 32, 992–1000. doi: 10.1038/
ijo.2008.22
Puhl, R., & Brownell, K. D. (2001). Bias, discrimination, and obesity. Obesity
Research, 9, 788–904. doi: 10.1038/oby.2001.108
Puhl, R. M., & Heuer, C. A. (2009). The stigma of obesity: A review and up-
date. Obesity, 17, 941–964. doi: 10.1038/oby.2008.636
Puhl, R. M., & Latner, J. D. (2007). Stigma, obesity, and the health of the
nation’s children. Psychological Bulletin, 133, 557–580. doi: 10.1037/0033-
2909.133.4.557
Puhl, R. M., Schwartz, M. B., & Brownell, K. D. (2005). Impact of perceived
consensus on stereotypes about obese people: A new approach for reduc-
ing bias. Health Psychology, 24, 517–525. doi: 10.1037/0278-6133.24.5.517
Rothblum, E. D., Miller, C. T., & Garbutt, B. (1988). Stereotypes of obese
female job applicants. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 7, 277–283.
doi: 10.1002/1098-108X(198803)7:2,277::AID-EAT2260070213.3.0.
CO;2-2
Tiggemann, M., & Rothblum, E. D. (1988). Gender differences in social con-
sequences of perceived overweight in the United States and Australia. Sex
Roles, 18, 75–86. doi: 10.1007/BF00288018
Wang, S. S., Brownell, K. D., & Wadden, T. A. (2004). The influence of the
stigma of obesity on overweight individuals. International Journal of Obesi-
ty, 28, 1333–1337. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijo.0802730
Wott, C. B., & Carels, R. A. (2010). Overt weight stigma, psychological dis-
tress and weight loss treatment outcomes. Journal of Health Psychology, 15,
608–614. doi: 10.1177/1359105309355339
138
Appendix B
Sample of a Poor
Research Report
Weight Stigma and Gender1
Katie Smith
HAY101
139
4
This study looked at weight stigma in 316 men and women.5 They each
got a description of someone who was average weight or overweight. There
were eight different targets.
6
Results showed that targets were rated worse7 on positive traits, just
like8 Harris, Harris & Bochner’s study. There were no differences between
men and women.9 Also, judgments were tougher10 in this study compared
to 1982.11
140
Appendix B S ample of a Poor Research Repor t
Introduction13 12
Obese people are stigmatised because of their weight (Rothblum, Miller

and14 Garbutt, 1988). This is due to the obesity stereotype.15 This is the belief
that people are overweight because they are socially deviant, and bring it on
themselves16 (Maddox17 Back & Liederman, 1968).
Olds, Tomkinson, Ferrar &18 Maher’s 201019, 20 found that obesity rates
have only slightly increased since 1985. Others say that obesity is increasing21
(Puhl & Heuer, 2009), and this causes22 the mental distress that individuals23
face (Wott & Carels, 2010).
This24 is shown in biases against overweight individuals within the health

care system, in television and film, and assumptions that overweight
individuals are lazy, sloppy, undisciplined, and lacking willpower.25, 26
Tiggemann and Rothblum (1988) investigated undergraduate psychology

students27 Subjects28 rated a thin man, thin woman, fat woman and fat
man.29 Obese people were rated as more self-indulgent, less self-disciplined,
lazier and less attractive. Maddox et al.,30 (1968) found that overweight
people were evaluated negatively and said this was because31 the overweight
condition was 32 self-inflicted and a voluntary condition.
Klaczynski, Goold, and Mudry (2004) said33 that the ideal body is a thin
one, and that those who do not meet these standards are34 weak, lacking in
skills and possessing characteristics that are undesirable.25
Harris, Harris and Bochner17 (1982) had university students27 complete a

“Person Perception Study” where each student rated35 descriptions of
people.36 Harris et al. found that overweight individuals are stereotyped as
less active, intelligent, hardworking, attractive, popular, successful, athletic,
and appropriately sex-typed than individuals of average weight.37
Our study38 replicated Harris, Harris and Bochner (1982). It is39

hypothesised that overweight targets will be39 stereotyped harshly.40 It is39
also predicted that women would experience harsher weight discrimination
than men. Finally it is39 hypothesised that our stereotypes will be39 more
negative than Harris’ et al.41 in 1982.
141
42

Method 43 44
Participants45 46
Participants consisted of 47 316 undergraduate psychology students,

220 females48 and 96 males.48 The mean age was 20.6 (SD 5 4.39).49, 50, 51
Materials and design46
The testing instrument in this study was a single-page questionnaire

identical to the one used in Harris et al’s52 (1982) original study, with a single
minor change. In the original study, participants were given a description of a
fictional person named “Chris Martin”; this has been changed to “Chris
Mortin” in the present study. All other details of the study were kept
consistent with Harris et al.’s original design. Each participant saw a
description of one individual who was either average weight or overweight,
man or woman, and wore glasses or did not.53
Procedure
Students were randomly assigned54 by being given randomly ordered

booklets and tested in their usual tutorial groups.
142
42

Results55, 56
57, 58, 59
4
Obesity stereotype scope
0
Obese Average Obese– Average Obese– Average
weight female weight– male weight–
female male
60, 61

Target weight status (overall and by gender)
Figure 1. Mean obesity stereotype score based on weight.62
Figure 1 shows the obesity scores for overweight and average weight
targets, as well as split by sex of target.63 64
The obesity scores63 for the present study and those obtained by Harris
et al52 (1982) are shown in Table 1. They indicate that there was less of a
negative stereotype towards overweight people in 1982 than there is now.65
Table 1. 6642
Mean Stereotype Scores for Overweight and Average Weight Individuals for the
Present Study and those of Harris et al. (1982).68, 69
The present study Harris et al.

70
Average weight 3.79 4.24

Obese 3.09 3.79
143
Discussion71
The first hypothesis was supported.72 The suggestion that women would
be viewed more harshly than men was not supported. This is consistent with
Harris et al.’s (1982) study, but not Puhl &18 Latner’s.73, 74
The hypothesis that the severity of stereotyping has increased since the
study of Harris et al. (1982) was supported. This supports the findings in the
review by Puhl and Heuer (2009). It may be, as Klaczynski et al. (2004) argue,
that the current ideal of thinness makes even an average weight person
susceptible to harsh judgment.75
What this means76 is that since negative stereotyping is more severe, and
causes77 mental health issues and employment concerns, among others (e.g.,
Puhl & Heuer, 2009), society should seriously address the causes of such
stereotyping.
A problem with the study78 is that the sample is relatively small and
consisted only of psychology students, with mostly females.79 Future research
should get a better sample.80
Another problem81 is that participants were only given a written

description of the target person, and the weight variable was simply a
distinction between “average weight” and “overweight”. A picture would have
been better82 because “attractive” was one of the variables measured.83
In conclusion, we found84 that for psychology students, stereotyping on

the basis of weight is more severe now than thirty85 years ago, though not for
females than males.86 Since the latter result differs from North American
research, maybe Australians are different.87 Since average weight people were
judged more severely than they used to be,88 more attention should be given
to how realistic people’s judgments are.89
References90, 91
144
42

Harris, M. B., Harris, R. J., and92 Bochner, S. (1982). Fat, four eyed, 93and
female: Stereotypes of obesity, glasses, and gender. Journal of Applied Social
Psychology, 12,94 503–516.95
Klaczynski, P. A., Goold, K. W., & Mudry, J. J. (2004). Culture, obesity

stereotypes, self-esteem, and the “thin ideal”: A social identity perspective.
Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 33, 307–317.
96
Olds, T.97 Tomkinson, G. R. Ferrar, K. E. & Maher, C. A. (2010). Trends in the

prevalence of childhood overweight and obesity in Australia between 1985
and 2008. International Journal of Obesity, 34, 57–66.
98
Puhl, R. M., & Latner, J. D. (2007). Stigma, obesity, and the health of the
nation’s children. Psychological Bulletin, 133, 557–580.
Puhl, R. M., & Heuer, C. A. (2009). The stigma of obesity: a99 review and
update. Obesity, 17(5), 941–964.
Rothblum, E. D., Miller, C. T., & Garbutt, B. (1988). Stereotypes of Obese

Female Job Applicants.100 International Journal of Eating Disorders, 7, 277–283.
Tiggemann, M., & Rothblum, E. D. (1988). Gender differences in social

consequences of perceived overweight in the United States and Australia. Sex
Roles, 18, 75–86.
101
Wang, S. S., Brownell, K. D., & Wadden, T. A. (2004). The influence of the
stigma of obesity on overweight individuals. International Journal of Obesity, 28,
1333–1337. doi: 10.1038/sj.ijo.0802730.
145
42

Wott, C. B., & Carels, R. A. (2010). Overt weight stigma, psychological

distress and weight loss treatment outcomes. Journal of health psychology,102 15,
608–614.
146
Problems:
1
Titles should be in normal; that is, 12-point font, not bold, and should be centred across the page. The
Title Page should not have borders or decorations.
2
There should be sufficient information to allow your tutor to return the report to you; that is, day and
time of tutorial class. See the good example on page 129.
3
The Abstract should be labelled Abstract, centred across the page, and start at the top of the page.
4
The first line of an Abstract should not be indented.
5
“. . . looked at weight stigma” is too vague. Look at the good example, page 129. You need more details
of the sample, numbers of men and women, and that they were university students. You also need more
details of the method; that is, that the targets were rated on personality and appearance.
6
The Abstract should be a single paragraph.
7
“. . . rated worse” is sloppy expression. Better to say that judgments were more severe on positive traits.
8
Don’t say “just like Harris . . .” say: “. . . supporting Harris, Harris, and Bochner (1982).” Note the
“and” rather than an ampersand (&). Some academics don’t like references in Abstracts, though there is
no APA rule about it. But it’s wise to check your lecturer’s preference.
9
“There were no differences . . .” is vague. Add “in judgment scores” to the end of the sentence.
10
“. . . judgments were tougher . . .” is also sloppy. Say something like “. . . judgments were more
severe . . .”.
11
Better to cite the study: “. . . than in Harris et al.’s (1982) study.” Overall, the Abstract needs to describe
aims, method, hypotheses, results, and provide a conclusion.
12
Page numbering starts at 2 on the second page of the Introduction.
13
Do not have a heading for the Introduction. It is obvious what it is from its location.
14
References in brackets need an ampersand (&) not “and”.
15
Too sweeping. Say “One factor may be the obesity stereotype.”
16
“. . . socially deviant” is ambiguous, as is “bring it on themselves”. See the good example for better
wording.
17
Multiple authors need commas after their names (Maddox, Back, & Liederman, 1968).
18
When not in brackets, references need “and” not “&”.
19
The date should be in brackets.
20
Since there is an apostrophe, the word “study” needs to be added: “Olds, Tomkinson, Ferrar, and
Maher’s (2010) study found . . .”.
21
Ambiguous. Are some people getting fatter, or are more people getting fat?
22
Avoid using “causes” since we can rarely be so dogmatic. Say “may contribute to . . .”.
23
Again, too sweeping. Say “. . . that some individuals face . . .”.
24
To what does “This” refer? It does not belong at the start of a new paragraph. It should be added to the
previous one.
25
Don’t use single-sentence paragraphs.
26
These assertions need references. See the good example.
27
It would be advisable to state the number of students. And this sentence needs a full stop.
28
The preferred term is “participants”.
29
It is not clear whether each participant rated each of these targets or whether different groups each
rated a single target.
30
A reference in the body of the text like this does not need the comma: “Maddox et al. (1968) . . .”
31
“. . . said this was because . . .” is sloppy. Better to say “. . . suggested that . . .”.
32
The authors did not say the overweight condition was self-inflicted. They said that people in general
thought that it was.
33
The authors didn’t say that the ideal body is a thin one. They suggested that this is what people in
general think. Be careful to distinguish between what the authors report and what they assert
themselves.
34
They are not necessarily weak, but are “perceived to be weak . . .”.
35
How did they do the rating?
36
What sort of people?
37
It would be informative to also know if the sex of the rater or the sex of the target person being rated
were also relevant.
38
Avoid personal pronouns as much as possible. Say “The current study . . .”.
39
Hypotheses should be in the past tense.
40
“. . . harshly” is imprecise. Say “more harshly than those of average weight.”
147
41
Apostrophes for the studies of multiple authors belong on the last author’s name or on the “al” thus:
“Harris et al.’s study . . .”. Alternatively, avoid the apostrophe by saying “. . . in the study by Harris et al.
in 1982”.
42
Needs a page number.
43
The Method section does not start on a new page.
44
The title Method should be in bold type.
45
This level of subheading should not be in italics.
46
This heading should be in bold type.
47
It is the sample that consists of the men and women, not the individual participants!
48
Current conventions prefer “women” and “men” rather than “females” and “males”.
49
Say “20.6 years . . .” to confirm what the units are.
50
You should add whether the students were completing the task voluntarily, and if they were rewarded.
51
Other demographics should be included, such as whether they were from a single university, and
whether their weight was measured.
52
This reference needs a full stop – “. . . Harris et al.’s (1982) . . .”.
53
In this study, say that the wearing of glasses was not analysed.
54
Randomly assigned to what?
55
Results does not start on a new page.
56
Results should be in bold type.
57
Check with your lecturer/tutor, but many universities expect a statement that data were (note that
“data” is plural) analysed using SPSS.
58
In this study, the dependent variable had to be calculated from a number of scores. You need to describe
that process here.
59
The figure needs to be introduced.
60
There needs to be a label on the vertical axis.
61
There needs to be a label on the horizontal axis.
62
The Figure 1 needs to be in italics and not bold, and the body of the title should be normal font.
63
These are mean scores. Say so.
64
If sex differences were tested for, state whether there was a difference.
65
State whether the hypothesis was supported.
66
The table title should be in normal font, not bold. There is no full stop after the table number.
67
The format eliminated this error.
68
Table titles should be in italics.
69
There is no full stop after a table title.
70
It is a good idea to show sample sizes where possible. See the good example.
71
Discussion does not need a new page, and should be in bold type.
72
State what the hypothesis was; that is, “The hypothesis that . . . was supported.”
73
This reference needs a date.
74
Remind the reader (marker!) what those references found.
75
“Harsh judgment” is a bit vague. Say what that judgment is, in this case “susceptible to the obesity
stereotype”.
76
This single-sentence paragraph should be attached to the previous paragraph.
77
Beware of being dogmatic about causes. Better to be tentative and say “. . . contributes to . . .”.
78
Better to talk about a limitation. The basic study design was fine, but the sample is limited.
79
Say women, not females. And why is it a problem, since the study did not find sex differences? Possibly
because the number of men is too small to be representative, even of male psychology students.
80
What sort of a better sample? More? Yes.
81
Better to say “A further limitation may be . . .”.
82
What sort of a picture?
83
Why is “attraction” a possible confounding variable? Cite a reference.
84
Try to avoid personal pronouns, though this example would probably be okay.
85
For numbers greater than 10, you can use numbers, so “. . . than 30 years . . .”.
86
This expression is confusing. Is what is meant “More severe now than 30 years ago for men, but just as
severe for women”?
87
“. . . maybe Australians are different.” needs expanding. Is there any reason to expect this, other than
your study, which has just admitted some limitations, especially in numbers of men?
88
“. . . than they used to be.” is too vague. Say “. . . than Americans were 30 years ago . . .”.
148
89
Where did this assertion come from? What evidence might there be that people’s judgments are
unrealistic? If referring to the obesity stereotype, perhaps it could be said that attention might be given
to how to address such a stereotype.
90
The reference list should be on a new page.
91
The heading References should be centred and in bold type.
92
In the reference list, only use an ampersand (&).
93
References need the second and later lines to be indented.
94
The volume number should be in italics.
95
You should include a doi number if one can be found.
96
Maddox et al. (1968) was cited in the text, but is omitted from the reference list.
97
A comma is needed between names; that is, Olds, T.,.
98
If there are multiple references by one author with colleagues, they should be in alphabetical order of
second author, so Puhl and Latner should go after Puhl and Heur (remember to use an “&” in the
reference list!).
99
There should be a capital after a colon, so “. . . obesity: A review . . .”.
100
Titles of journal articles do not have capital letters for major words.
101
Wang et al. (2004) is not cited in the study. Even though it may have been read, if not cited it should not
be in the reference list.
102
Titles of journals do have capital letters for major words.
149
Appendix C
Sample of a Good
Research Report
151
Comparison of Gender Performance on Mental Rotation Tasks Between
(Animal-like) Greebles and Traditional Cube Shapes
Anna Jones
Title
5.1
Submitted as HAY101 Research Report
Due date: 15th October 2018
Tutor: Gordana Bruce
Class: Monday, 13:30–14:30
Word count: 2012
ote: Check whether your tutor or lecturer wants your student

N
number rather than your name on the title page.
152
Appendix C S ample of a Good Research Repor t
Note no page number
Abstract 5.1
Abstract
Not indented The aim of this study was to extend the work of Jansen-Osmann and Heil
p. 70
(2007) by comparing the performance of men and women on mental rotation
tasks using animal-like stimuli called greebles and traditional Shepard and
Metzler (1971) cubes. Participants were 162 women and 59 men

Numbers
5.4.3 undergraduates of a metropolitan university in Melbourne, Australia, mean age
24.3 years (SD 5 8.31). They were presented with two blocks of trials
consisting of pairs of either greebles or cube shapes, which were either the
same copy, or a different image, rotated at one of 12 angles, and were required
to decide if the objects were the same. As predicted, men had faster
comparison times, and faster mental rotation speeds than women when
judging pairs of cube shapes. When judging pairs of greebles, both genders
had faster comparison times than they had when judging cube shapes, but,
contrary to predictions, women were not faster than men. It was concluded
that stimulus type did affect comparison speed, but that further research is
required to determine what strategies led to this difference.
153
Note no page number
Introduction
5.2
Humans seem to be able to represent knowledge and reason in a number
General of ways. One form of mental representation is visual imagery in which

opening pictorial representations of problems can be manipulated (e.g., Kosslyn, 1994, In-text
statement referencing
p. 72 2005). Early work leading to this view came from a study by Shepard and 3.2
Figure 5.4 Metzler (1971) which presented participants with pairs of perspective
drawings representing three-dimensional cube shapes. Image pairs could be
the “same”, depicting equivalent three-dimensional objects differing by a
rotation (Figure 1, panel a), or “different”, depicting two different objects. For
Referral
the different condition in their original study, Shepard and Metzler used to same
shapes which were mirror images of each other to prevent participants authors
within a
developing a strategy of merely identifying a unique feature possessed by one paragraph
of the objects (Figure 1, panel b). Participants had to identify, as quickly as p. 38
possible, whether or not the pair of images represented the same object. They
found that reaction time for same decisions increased linearly as a function of
rotation. This was interpreted as evidence that participants were literally
rotating a visual mental analogue of one image to align it with the other
Abbreviations
image to make a decision, hence the term mental rotation task (MRT). This p. 86
5.3.4
result has been demonstrated for other kinds of stimuli, including
Location of
Figures (or
(a)
Tables)
p. 97
5.4.6
Figure titles
(b) p. 97
5.4.6
Figure 1. “Same” (a) and “different” (b) (mirror-image) pairs of cube shapes
Figure 5.17
differing by rotation: Adapted from Shepard and Metzler (1971).
154
Page numbering starts here with p. 2
‘&’ or polygons (Cooper, 1975) and body parts (Cooper & Shepard, 1975), and the
‘and’ p. 38 linearity of the reaction time function further suggests that the rotation is done
at a constant angular rate. The mental image must contain some three-
dimensional information since the effect is observed for rotations in both the
picture plane and “depth” plane (that is, perpendicular to the image plane, see
Shepard & Metzler, 1971).
Subsequent research found that men could perform MRTs faster than
women (e.g., Maccoby & Jacklin, 1974). Accumulated results from a variety
of cognitive tasks (including those that have found women to be superior to
men on verbal tasks), combined with the male advantage for MRTs, have
been used to support the argument that men have superior spatial reasoning
skills (e.g., Halpern, 1992). Meta-analyses indicate that the gap has not
diminished since the original finding, despite claims to the contrary (Masters
& Sanders, 1993).
Comparatively little work has examined the mechanisms responsible
for the gender differences in MRTs (see Peters, 2005). The male advantage
cannot be explained by an overall faster male cognitive system, because

Summary of
prior research there are tasks which women can perform faster. There must be some
pp. 74–76
specific component in MRTs at which men excel. Jansen-Osmann and Heil
(2007) argued that there are at least three cognitive components that could
create differences in the task of deciding whether two images are the same
or different: (a) rotating one stimulus to align it with another, (b) comparing
the two rotated images, and (c) an essentially attentional cost associated
with task characteristics. They called these three factors rotational speed,
perceptual comparison and rotational uncertainty respectively. Rotational
speed can be determined from the slope of a graph plotting reaction time
as a function of rotation angle (steeper graphs indicate slower rotation).
Comparison time and rotational uncertainty are estimated from the
reaction time for 08 (i.e., no rotation required) – a smaller value indicating
faster comparison.
The form of the test can influence the size of the male advantage (Linn &
In-text
referencing Petersen, 1985). Parsons et al. (2004), using virtual reality to present three-
of multiple
authors p. 38 dimensional Shepard-Metzler-like cubes, found small but non-significant
3.2
155
gender differences in MRTs. Jansen-Osmann and Heil (2007) conducted an
experiment to determine what aspect of MRTs men perform faster and used
five different stimulus types: letters, abstract symbols, animal drawings,
polygons and cube figures. Somewhat surprisingly, they found an overall male
advantage only for polygons, with no significant gender differences for the
other kinds of stimuli, although there was a trend towards women being
slightly faster at farm animals and men being slightly faster for symbols. When
Jansen-Osmann and Heil analysed the cognitive components of the task, they
found that men had a significantly faster rotational speed for polygons, but
that women were significantly faster than men at the perceptual comparison
portion of the task for farm animals.
Since most studies have used geometric or “mechanical” shapes, Quotation

presumably to avoid using stimuli which are highly familiar, it is hard to tell marks p. 25
whether the class of stimuli is important. Given that different types of objects
seem to be represented in different brain areas (e.g., Martin, Wiggs,
Ungerleider, & Haxby, 1996), it is possible, for example, that some particular
male brain areas assist in MRTs but only for abstract, rigid or mechanical
objects. It would be interesting to see whether objects other than geometric
shapes elicit a different pattern of gender differences in MRTs. A novel
stimulus which could be called “organic” or pseudo-animate is the greeble
(Gauthier & Tarr, 1997) – an animal-like object created for studying visual
object recognition. The greebles need to be made asymmetric so that mirror
and same versions of the stimuli can be created (see Tarr & Cheng, 2003 for
examples). The present study sought to extend the work of Jansen-Osmann The present
and Heil (2007) by comparing the performance of men and women on mental study pp. 76–77
rotation tasks using these animal-like shapes called greebles compared to the
traditional Shepard and Metzler (1971) cubes.

Hypotheses
Consistent with past research, it was hypothesised that men would have p. 55
Figure 4.2,
faster comparison times than women for cube shapes, and also have a faster
Figure 5.6
rotational speed. Consistent with Jansen-Osman and Heil (2007), we expected
women to perform an MRT with greebles as fast or faster than men. In particular
we hypothesised that women would have a faster mean comparison time than
men for greebles. There was no specific prediction for gender differences
156
in rotational speed for greebles. However, if men performed this component
faster it would argue for a general male advantage at mental rotation.

Method
Method 5.3 does not
Method
start on a
Participants
new page
5.3.1 Participants
Figure 5.8
The sample consisted of a convenience sample of 221 undergraduate
Levels of psychology students. There were 162 women (M 5 24.6 years, SD 5 8.82) and
headings p. 79 Italicise
59 men (M 5 23.9, SD 5 7.53) who voluntarily participated in their own time. letters
representing
Materials 5.3.3 Materials statistics
p. 90
A computerised program was used to measure speed and accuracy of
mental rotation. The program used was Inquisit2 web edition by Millisecond
Software (2006) and was made available through the student portal. Within
this task there were four asymmetric “greebles” (see Figure 2(a)) and four
different Shepard and Metzler (1971) cubed shapes (see Figure 2(b)),
provided by Tarr (2006). Each stimulus was rotated through 12 different
angles from 08 to 3308 in increments of 30 degrees.
(a) (b)
Figure 2. Examples of stimuli: (a) Three-dimensional greeble: Adapted from

Gauthier and Tarr (1997); (b) Three-dimensional cube shape: Adapted from
Shepard and Metzler (1971).
Procedure
Procedure
p. 86
5.3.4 After approval by the Ethics Committee, students were asked to complete the
mental rotation task in their own time. Submission of the task was taken as
consent to participate. The task was divided into two sections of cube shapes and
greeble stimuli, with a break in between, with the order of presentation randomly
Counterbalancing counterbalanced between participants. An original image was presented on the
p. 86
5.3.3 left of the computer screen with either a same, rotated copy, or a different
157
(mirror-reversed) and rotated image. Participants were required to decide, as
quickly as possible, whether the images were the same (regardless of rotation)
or different, by pressing either the “z” key or the “/” key respectively. Each
stimulus pair remained on the screen until a response was made. Feedback
was then immediately given in the form of a green circle for a correct decision
or a red cross for an incorrect one. The feedback was displayed for 350 ms.
Participants’ age and gender were also collected. Trials were grouped into
blocks by stimulus type (all greebles or all cubes). Within each block the four
images, by two variations (same and mirror-reversed), by 12 angles of
rotation were shown in every possible combination, resulting in 96 possible
image pairs. Each pair was shown twice.

Note that
Results does
Results 5.4 Results
not start on
To examine whether the two types of stimuli produced different mental a new page
rotation patterns, the mean reaction time with respect to each angle of
rotation for same pairs was calculated then compared across genders.
Individual trials were removed if they were more than four standard
deviations from the mean, or if participants made errors on more than half a Report effects
stimulus block. There were no differences depending on whether participants of counter-
balancing
viewed a greeble block or a cube block first. p. 86
Introduction As shown in Figure 3, men had faster reaction times at all rotations for cube 5.3.3
of Figures
shapes, as predicted. At 08 men took, on average, 1325 ms (SD 5 749 ms), while
p. 97
5.4.6
Cubes
4500
M/Shapes
Mean reaction time (miliseconds)
4000 F/Shapes
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330
Rotation in degrees
Figure 3. Mean reaction times for cube shapes as a function of rotation angle
by gender. Error bars indicate confidence intervals using standard error.
158
women took 1623 ms (SD 5 967 ms). The steeper graph for women indicates
slower rotation speed than for men. The only exception was at the 1808
comparison, where women’s reaction time approached that of men.
Figure 4 indicates that there was very little mean difference in comparison
times or rotational speed for greebles, except that men appeared to respond
faster at 1808.
Leave
reasonable
Greebles
space before
4500
figure
4000
3500 M/Greebles
F/Greebles
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330
Degrees of rotation
Figure 4. Mean reaction times for greeble shapes as a function of rotation angle Leave
by gender. Error bars indicate confidence intervals using standard error. reasonable
space after
figure
State
whether
Discussion Discussion
hypotheses
are does not
The results supported the hypotheses that men would have faster start on a
supported
p. 100 comparison time and faster rotational speed than women when rotating cube new page
shapes. These results support previous research by Voyer, Voyer, and Bryden
Support for (1995) and Roberts and Bell (2003). The men’s faster reaction time at 08
previous
research rotation indicates that they are faster at comparison, while their shallower
pp. 100–101
slope of the reaction times as the angle of rotation increases indicates that
men’s rotational speed is faster.
While women did perform the 08 comparison task for greebles at a faster rate
than men, this difference was very small, and was not apparent at other rotations.
The overlapping confidence intervals and the very similar slopes of the reaction
times at varying angles of rotation suggest that there was no gender difference in
159
the mental rotation of the organic greeble shapes. In general, these results tend
to support Jansen-Osmann and Heil (2007), who found, as did the present
study, that reaction times were faster for organic shapes than for cube stimuli.
Jansen-Osmann and Heil (2007) found that fastest reaction times were for
alphanumeric characters, suggesting that familiarity is a factor in mental
rotation. Although greebles are artificial characters, they are more organic than
Possible the cube stimuli. Rilea (2008) suggested that Jansen-Osmann and Heil’s findings
reasons were due to the animals possessing meaning, and that women were faster at
for your
findings processing meaningful stimuli than abstract ones. Sherman (1978, as cited in Secondary
pp. 101–102 sources
Casey, Nuttall, & Pezaris, 1999) argued that men have innate spatial interests, pp. 39–41
and are therefore more likely to participate in spatial activities, increasing their
spatial experience. In support, increasing women’s spatial experiences has been
found to improve their mental rotation performance (Moe, 2009).

Implication The results of the current study imply that, while there are gender
for everyday
life p. 103 differences in mental rotation of cube shapes, these differences reduce with
organic shapes. Mental rotation is an important aspect of spatial ability, which
is strongly related to high mathematics and engineering science ability (Feng,
Spence, & Pratt, 2007). In order to increase the proportion of women entering
high-status professions such as engineering and architecture, strategies to
improve mental rotation skills at younger ages for women would be desirable.
A possible limitation of this study is that the timing of it coincided with

Limitations
pp. 103–104 an assessment requiring exposure to literature on gender differences in
mental rotation, which emphasises a male advantage. This may have induced
a stereotype threat effect (Moe, 2009), where some women may have felt less
competent, particularly given the instant feedback, if they made several
incorrect responses in a row.
Incorrect responses were not analysed in this study. While not a
limitation, accuracy in mental rotation should be a factor for consideration in
future gender difference studies. In addition, the decrease in reaction time at
1808 for men in the greebles block, and for women in the cubes block,
suggests that comparison at this rotation may be performed using different
strategies, and this should be further investigated with other stimuli to see
whether the findings are the same.
160
8
Concluding In conclusion, this study aimed to extend the work of Jansen-Osmann and
paragraph
pp. 104–105 Heil (2007) by comparing the performance of men and women on the mental
rotation task using two different classes of stimuli – cube shapes and greebles.
The results provide further evidence that stimulus type does play a role in
affecting performance outcomes. The insight gained should encourage future
research to focus on other mechanisms, such as performance strategies and
biological and environmental influences, which are responsible for the gender
differences observed in mental rotation tasks.
161
9
Reference list does
begin on a new page
References References
5.6
Casey, M., Nuttall, R., & Pezaris, E. (1999). Evidence in support of a model
Format
of journal that predicts how biological and environmental factors influence
articles
spatial skills. Developmental Psychology, 35, 1237–1247.
3.3.2 Note no issue
doi: 10.1037//0012-1649.35.5.1237 p. 46
Cooper, L. A. (1975). Mental rotation of random two-dimensional shapes.
Cognitive Psychology, 7, 20–43. doi: 10.1.1.211.9457
Cooper, L. A., & Shepard, R. N. (1975). Mental rotation in the identifica-
tion of left and right hands. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Human Perception and Performance, 1, 48–56. doi:10.1037/
0096-1523.1.1.48
Feng, J., Spence, I., & Pratt, J. (2007). Playing an action video game reduces
gender differences in spatial cognition. Psychological Science, 18, digital

850–855. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01990.x object
identifier
Gauthier, I., & Tarr, M. J. (1997). Becoming a “greeble” expert: Exploring (doi)
mechanisms for face recognition. Vision Research, 37, 1673–1682. p. 45
doi: 10.1016/S0042-6989(96)00286-6
Format of Halpern, D. F. (1992). Sex differences in cognitive abilities. Hillsdale, NJ: Law-
books 3.3.1 rence Erlbaum Associates.
Jansen-Osmann, P., & Heil, M. (2007). Suitable stimuli to obtain (no)
gender differences in the speed of cognitive processes involved in
mental rotation. Brain and Cognition, 64, 217–227. doi: 10.1016/j.
bandc.2007.03.002
Kosslyn, S. M. (1994). Image and brain: The resolution of the imagery debate.
Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Kosslyn, S. M. (2005). Mental images and the brain. Cognitive Neuropsycholo-
gy, 22, 333–347.
Linn, M. C., & Petersen, A. C. (1985). Emergence and characterization of sex
differences in spatial ability: A meta-analysis. Child Development, 56,
1479–1498. doi:10.2307/1130467
Maccoby, E. E., & Jacklin, C. N. (1974). The psychology of sex differences. Palo
Alto, CA: Stanford University Press.
162
10
Martin, A., Wiggs, C. L., Ungerleider, L. G., & Haxby, J. G. (1996). Neural
correlates of category specific knowledge. Nature, 379, 649–652.
doi:10.1038/379649a0
Masters, M. S., & Sanders, B. (1993). Is the gender difference in mental rota-
tion disappearing? Behavior Genetics, 23, 337–341. doi: 10.1007/
BF01067434
Moe, A. (2009). Are males always better than females in mental rotation? Ex-
ploring a gender belief explanation. Learning and Individual Differenc-
es, 19, 21–27. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2008.02.002
Parsons, T. D., Larson, P., Kratz, K., Thiebaux, M., Bluestein, B., Buckwalter,
J. G., & Rizzo, A. A. (2004). Sex differences in mental rotation and
spatial rotation in a virtual environment. Neuropsychologia, 42,
555–562.
Peters, M. (2005). Sex differences and the factor of time in solving Vanden-
berg and Kuse mental rotation problems. Brain and Cognition, 57,
176–184.
Rilea, S. L. (2008). Sex and hemisphere differences when mentally rotat-
ing meaningful and meaningless stimuli Laterality, 13, 217–233.
doi: 10.1080/13576500701809846
Roberts, J. E., & Bell, M. A. (2003). Two- and three-dimensional mental ro-
tation tasks lead to different parietal laterality for men and women.
International Journal of Psychophysiology, 50, 235–246. doi: 10.1016/
S0167-8760(03)00195-8
Shepard, R. N., & Metzler, J. (1971). Mental rotation of three-dimensional
objects. Science, 171, 701–703. doi: 10.1126/science.171.3972.701
Format of Tarr, M. J. (2006). Greebles. Retrieved September 27, 2009, from Tarrlab:
internet
http://titan.cog.brown.edu:8080/TarrLab/stimuli/novel-objects/gree-
sources
3.3.3 bles-2-0-symmetric.zip/view
Tarr, M. J., & Cheng, Y. D. (2003). Learning to see faces and objects. TRENDS
in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 23–30.
Voyer, D., Voyer, S., & Bryden, M. P. (1995). Magnitude of sex differences
in spatial abilities: A meta-analysis and consideration of critical
variables. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 250–270. doi: 10.1037//0033-
2909.117.2.250
163
Appendix D
Sample of a Poor
Research Report
Mental Rotation Tasks1
Anna Jones
HAY 101
165
4
This study looked at mental rotation5 by gender, using 221 university
students6 looking at greebles and cube shapes.7
8
We extended Jansen-Osmann’s9 study because of the greebles.10 Shapes
were either the same or different and rotated.11 Men were faster on cubes and
women were not faster on greebles.12 So our13 hypotheses were partially
supported.14 This means that men are still faster on cubes, but different
stimuli make a difference.15
166
Appendix D S ample of a Poor Research Repor t
16
Introduction17
18
Shepard and Metzler (1971) found that men could mentally rotate cube
shapes faster than women.19 Both comparison speed and rotation speed.20, 21
(a)
(b)
22 20
Figure 1. “Same” and “different” pairs of cube shapes differing by rotation.
Lots of studies23 have found that males have superior spatial reasoning
skills.24 This hasn’t25 changed since the early studies (Masters and26
Sanders, 1993).
We don’t25 know why there are gender differences in MRTs.27 It’s25 not
that males are always faster cognitively, because there are some tasks which
females can perform faster. Jansen-Osmann &26 Heil (2007) argued that there
are three things28 that could create differences:29 1)30 rotating one stimulus to
align it with another, 2) comparing the two rotated images, and 3) task
characteristics.31 These are called rotational speed, perceptual comparison
and rotational uncertainty.32 You tell rotational speed33 from the slope of a
graph.34 Comparison time and rotational uncertainty are estimated from the
no rotation reaction.35
167
Parsons, Larson, Kratz, Thiebaux, Bluestein, Buckwalter, &26 Rizzo36

(2004) used virtual reality and cubes,37 and found small but non-significant
gender differences in MRTs. Jansen-Osmann and Heil (2007) used five
different stimulus types38, 39 and found men were better40 only for polygons.
Women were a bit faster41 at farm animals and men a bit faster41 for
symbols.42
Greebles43 might be a good stimulus to test.44 The45 study compared men

and women on greebles compared to cubes.46
The first hypothesis is47 that men will48 be faster than women for cube
shapes.49 Women will be48 as fast or faster than men with greebles.50
168
Method51
Participants52
Participants consisted of 162 women53 (M 5 24.6,54, 55 SD 5 8.82) and

59 men (M 5 23.9, SD 5 7.53).
Materials56
The Inquisit57 program was used for the experiment.58, 59 There were four
cube shapes and four greebles.60, 61 Each was rotated from 08 to 3308.62
There were two blocks.63, 64 Students had to press z or / keys to decide if the
pictures65 were the same. There was immediate feedback.66
Procedure.67
Students completed the task in their own time, on their home computer or
one at uni.68, 69
169
70
Results71
Men72 were faster all the time for cubes.73 Their slope was shallower.74 This
supports the hypothesis, which means that men are better at mental rotation
of cube shapes.75
76
There were no differences between men and women for greebles.77

78, 79
Cubes
4500
M/Shapes
4000 F/Shapes
3500
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330
Rotation in degrees
Figure 2. 80Mean reaction times for cube shapes as a function of rotation angle
by gender. Error bars indicate confidence intervals using standard error.
Greebles
4500
4000
3500 M/Greebles
F/Greebles
3000
2500
2000
1500
1000
0 30 60 90 120 150 180 210 240 270 300 330
Degrees of rotation
Figure 3. 80Mean reaction times for greeble shapes as a function of rotation

angle by gender. Error bars indicate confidence intervals using standard error.
170
Discussion81, 82
The results supported the hypotheses for cubes.83 These results support
previous research.84 Men were faster at comparison,85 and at rotational
speed.85
Women were a bit faster at comparison for greebles.85, 86 But not at other
angles, see Figures 2 & 3.87, 88, 89 These results support Jansen-Osmann and
Heil.90, 91
Maybe men are more used to spatial stuff92 because they get to play with
Lego and computer games more than women.93 Maybe greebles are more like
dolls so women compare them faster.94
A limitation is that students could do the task at any time of the day or
night, and this might have affected the results.95, 96
In conclusion, this study compared males and females97 on mentally

rotating greebles and cubes, and found men better98 on cubes but no
difference99 on greebles. So type of stimulus makes a difference. More
research should be done on this important topic.100
References101,102
Jansen-Osmann, P., & Heil, M. (2007). Suitable stimuli to obtain (no) gender
differences in the speed of cognitive processes involved in mental rotation.
Brain and Cognition, 64,103 217–227.104
Masters, M. S., & Sanders, B. (1993). Is the gender difference in mental rota-
tion disappearing? Behavior genetics,105 23, 337–341.106
Parsons, T. D., Larson, P., Kratz, K., Thiebaux, M., Bluestein, B., Buckwalter,
J. G., and107 Rizzo, A. A. (2004). Sex differences in mental rotation and spatial
rotation in a virtual environment. Neuropsychologia, 42, 555–562.
Shepard, R. N., & Metzler, J. (1971). Mental Rotation of Three-Dimensional
Objects.108 Science, 171, 201–203.
109
171
Problems:
1
Titles should be in normal, that is, 12-point font, and should be centred across the page. Similarly, the Title
Page should not have borders or decorations.
2
There should be sufficient information to allow your tutor to return the report to you, i.e., day and time of
tutorial class. See the good example on page 151.
3
The Abstract should be labelled Abstract, centred across the page. All sections of the research report
should be double-spaced.
4
The first line of an Abstract should not be indented.
5
“. . . mental rotation” of what? This is too vague. It is best to include dependent and independent
variables, so it would help to mention gender and type of stimulus.
6
There should be adequate description of participants, i.e., at least how many, and possibly ages or other
demographics.
7
Although some academics don’t like to see references in the Abstract, the latest APA manual does permit them
(Section 2.04, p. 26). You could say “. . . Shepard and Metzler (1971) cube shapes, and Gauthier and Tarr
(1997) greebles.”
8
The Abstract should be a single paragraph.
9
If you must have a reference, it needs a date.
10
“. . . because of the greebles” is too vague and chatty. Better to say that you extended Jansen-Osmann
and Heil’s (2007) study to include a more organic stimulus, Gauthier and Tarr’s (1997) greebles.
11
Give a bit more detail.
12
“. . . faster” on what? How did this relate to the hypotheses?
13
Try to avoid personal pronouns where possible. “The hypotheses” implies they were yours – it is your
report!
14
This relates to the previous point. What was supported and what was not?
15
“This means that . . .” is too chatty. And you really need a statement of what you concluded. Overall, the
Abstract needs to describe aims, method, hypotheses, results, and provide a conclusion.
16
Do not show a page number on the first page.
17
The Introduction does not have a title.
18
You should have an introductory statement describing why this area is interesting or important to report
on. In fact, it would be better to have a whole introductory paragraph describing mental rotation in the
Shepard and Metzler (1971) tradition.
19
In this report you should distinguish between comparison speed and rotational speed.
20
This is not a sentence. The idea should have been dealt with at greater length.
21
You need to introduce the figure.
22
The figure title should go below the figure, and Figure 1 should be in italics.
23
This is too chatty.
24
You need some references for such a sweeping statement. It is acceptable to have (e.g., . . .) and give two
or three references to indicate the many that you are claiming found this.
25
Do not use contractions. Spell out “This has not . . .”.
26
You need to know when to use “and” (outside brackets!) and “&” (inside brackets). See Section 3.2, p.
38.
27
You need to define an abbreviation the first time you use it. Say “mental rotation tasks (MRTs) . . .”.
28
“. . . things” is too vague. It would be better to say “factors” or “variables”.
29
Again vague. Be explicit. Say “differences in speed of mental rotation”.
30
Series within a paragraph should be letters, not numbers, e.g., (a) (b) (c).
31
“Task characteristics” is a bit vague for what Jansen-Osmann and Heil said.
32
This is ambiguous. Say “These factors are called . . .”.
33
“You tell . . .” is too chatty. Better to say that “Rotational speed is indicated by the slope . . .”.
34
“. . . of a graph.” What graph? The graph of reaction time by rotation angle.
35
Better to say “. . . estimated from the reaction time at 08.”
36
If there are six or more authors, you can use Parsons et al. (2004) from the very first time used.
37
“. . . used virtual reality and cubes” is too telegraphic. You need much more detail of what was done
using virtual reality.
38
Say what the five stimulus types were.
39
State what they did with the five stimulus types.
172
40
“. . . better” at what?
41
“. . . faster” at what?
42
“. . . symbols” would make more sense if you’d said that they were one of the five types of stimuli. Did
they suggest why men and women might have been faster at mental rotation of the different stimuli?
43
Introduce what a greeble is, who did so, and why they did it (especially since they were not designed with
mental rotation in mind).
44
Say why greebles would be a good stimulus for mental rotation studies.
45
Don’t say “the study” if referring to your own. Make clear that you are referring to “the current study” or
“the present study”.
46
This is an ambiguous sentence. You need to make clear that your study used these different stimuli for a
mental rotation study, comparing the performance of men and women.
47
Better to start “It was hypothesised that . . .”.
48
Use past tense for hypotheses.
49
Be more specific about what you expected men to be faster at – comparison speed and rotational speed.
50
The sentence is ambiguous (does having a greeble slow men down?). “. . . as fast or faster . . .” is not a
specific hypothesis. Much better to have a directional one, i.e., women would be faster at comparing
greeble images.
51
The heading Method is centred across the page, and does not start on a new page.
52
Participants should be in bold type.
53
It is the sample that consists of women and men.
54
Statistics letters (M, SD) should be in italics.
55
Say “years” the first time, just to clarify what it is a mean of, i.e., (M 5 24.6 years, SD 5 8.82).
56
Be consistent with subheadings. Materials should be bold, not italic.
57
Give a reference for any software used.
58
Which experiment?
59
How was the software used in the current study? In this case, to run the mental rotation testing program
online via the student portal.
60
Why were there four of each shape?
61
Spell out that they needed to be asymmetric in order to force mental rotation, and allow for mirror images.
62
You need to be more specific. In this case in increments of 308.
63
Two blocks of what? Two blocks of trials – cubes and greebles.
64
Say that the order of presentation of the blocks was counterbalanced.
65
“. . . pictures” is too chatty – be consistent with use – say stimuli. Also, what participants had to do
belongs in Procedure.
66
Say what the feedback was, but this also belongs in Procedure.
67
Be consistent with subheadings. There is no full stop after the Procedure subheading.
68
It is wise to mention ethics approval at the start of Procedure.
69
More detail is expected. Describe what the participant saw on the computer, how they responded, what
the feedback was, and how many trials they had.
70
Results does not begin on a new page.
71
The title Results should be in bold.
72
Indent paragraphs.
73
Be more specific. What were the men faster at?
74
What slope?
75
It is acceptable to state that a hypothesis is supported, but “better at mental rotation” is not specific
enough. Mention both comparison speed and rotational speed.
76
Introduce Figure 2 illustrating what you have just reported.
77
This is also too vague. Be more specific.
78
Introduce Figure 3.
79
Do not use heavy lines around figures.
80
Figure titles should start, e.g., Figure 2 in italics.
81
Discussion should not start on a new page.
82
Discussion should be in bold type and centred across the page.
83
Remind the reader what the hypothesis was.
84
Give references for the previous research you claim it supports, so the reader can check if your claim is
accurate.
173
85
Be a bit more specific. They were faster at comparison and rotational speed for cube shapes. Again, for
women and greebles. Spell it out!
86
Looking at Figure 3, women’s speed may have been faster, but barely. Say so, and that it was only at 08.
87
This is not a sentence.
88
Do not refer back to tables or figures in the Discussion.
89
Do not use ampersands (&) in text.
90
Describe the way in which your results support previous work.
91
Give a date for any reference used.
92
This is far too chatty for a formal report.
93
Unless you have a reference to support your assertion, be tentative in making suggestions. Say “Perhaps
this is because they get to play . . .”.
94
Again, be very tentative in your own suggestions. Here, you could refer back to Jansen-Osmann and
Heil’s findings for animals.
95
Don’t make “this may have affected the results” statements without saying how, and then only if the
evidence is in the results.
96
See Section 5.4 Results for ways of describing possible other reasons for your results. Use this to suggest
that future research test for them.
97
It compared their performance. Since you’ve used “men” and “women” throughout, don’t revert to
males and females now.
98
“Better” is an emotionally laden word. Say “faster” for comparison and rotational speed.
99
“ . . . but no difference . . .” is poor expression. Say “but no different in performance . . .”.
100
This is clichéd. You should have suggested what sort of research could be done earlier in the Discussion.
You should also have said why it is important.
101
References should be on a new page.
102
The heading References should be centred across the page.
103
Journal titles and volume numbers should be in italics, and second and later lines indented.
104
Missing doi numbers.
105
Journal titles should have major words capitalised.
106
Page numbers should not be in italics.
107
Use ampersands (&) in reference lists.
108
Article titles should not have major letters capitalised.
109
Reference lists should be double-spaced, just like the rest of the report.
174
Glossary
acknowledgment See citation. assumptions These are beliefs or suppositions

active voice A style of writing that of the researcher, or even the whole society.
acknowledges the person who is doing the Assumptions may not be explicitly stated,
action described. In psychology writing, this either by intended omission or because the
means using “I” and “we” when writing about researchers lacks conscious awareness. It
your ideas/actions (e.g., “I propose that . . .”). should be noted that assumptions can affect
aims The aims of a study are the statements, in the questions we ask, our attitudes to people
broad general terms, of the goals that you as and research, and our behaviour. When
the researcher expect to achieve. conducting research, it is useful to identify the
analytical categories These are the small and assumptions embedded in the research you are
simple categories that you compare and reading.
contrast or analyse in your essay. You develop
them from larger ideas or topics which define bibliography A list of all the journal articles
the scope of the question. For example, if a and books you consulted in the preparation of
question asked you about the role of deception a report. You do not include a bibliography in
in social psychological research, you could a psychology research report. See also
break this down into the more manageable references.
analytical categories such as lack of awareness
(e.g., participants who don’t know they are citation A citation is the mentioning or
participants), omission (e.g., not describing acknowledgment in your text of the work of
the full purpose of the study), minor deception another person. If you write “Smith and Jones
or commission (e.g., like a misleading heading (1989) suggested that …” you have cited their
on a questionnaire), and more serious work. Your reference list must include all the
deceptions (e.g., leading people to believe they citations you have made in your report.
are inflicting electric shocks on other people). collaboration Collaboration means working
apparatus The instruments or equipment used together with one or more people in some
in conducting the research. Typically, joint activity. Check with your tutor or
apparatus is used to describe experimental lecturer about the amount of collaboration
equipment (as distinct from paper and pencil acceptable when preparing for a research
or online tests, which are usually called report.
“materials”). construct A construct is generally considered
argument An argument is a series of logical synonymous with the term “concept”. In
claims, some of which are called premises and psychological terms, a construct is something
one of which is called the conclusion. that is not itself observable, but is assumed to
175
exist because it can explain observable descriptive statistics This phrase is a general
behaviour. An example is anxiety, which is not label for procedures that organise and
itself observable, but is assumed to be a summarise collections of raw data. The most
mechanism that gives rise to emotions such as commonly reported descriptive statistics are
apprehension, distress, uneasiness, and dread, means and standard deviations. The
as well as physiological symptoms such as procedures are descriptive because they
increased heartrate and sweating. simply describe the data; they do not draw
copying As distinct from collaboration, any inferences about it.
copying is definitely unacceptable. It means design The design of an experiment refers to
using the work of another person, including how the experiment was organised; that is,
another student, and passing it off as your how many groups of participants you had and
own. Do not do this. See also plagiarism. what procedures were carried out on each. In
complex studies, there is a separate
data Data are the body of facts gathered in an subheading in the Methods section to explain
experiment or a study. The singular is the design.
“datum”. “Raw data” are data as they have
been collected, before you have summarised empirical This term is used very loosely to
them or analysed them in any way. cover a number of concepts. Most commonly
debriefing Debriefing is the explanation you it refers to the collection, analysis, or
give to a participant at the completion of a evaluation of data. An empirical finding is
study or experiment. Such an explanation something that has been actually observed, as
should include an overview of the theory the distinct from something inferred or deduced.
research relates to, the research question, your An empirical construct is one that has been
hypotheses, and the relevance of what was inferred from observation of behaviour rather
done to the participant. If any deception was than deduced from a theory.
involved, the debriefing provides an accurate endnotetm A software program that helps you
description of the research, and clarifies the manage references as you write your report. It
nature and necessity of hiding this. may be free to you as a student; check with
degrees of freedom These refer to the your library.
independent pieces of information known ethics See research ethics.
about a sample for which we are about to evidence In the context of psychology research
calculate a statistic. They are important because reports and essays, evidence is the data
they give an idea about how powerful or collected by researchers. The conclusions they
informative the statistic is, and that is why they have drawn from that data are a sort of
are reported when any statistical test is made. evidence, as is any publication that is available
dependent variable A dependent variable is a to be checked, but such information is more
variable whose values are the result of changes questionable.
in the values of other variables. In an experiment An experiment is a set of
experiment, the dependent variable is what conditions and procedures for testing a
you actually measure. You are hoping that the hypothesis. It emphasises control over
values of it are “dependent” on the other independent variables and the measurement of
variables that you already know about (the dependent variables so that cause-and-effect
“independent variables”). relationships can be determined.
176
Glossar y
explicit measures See self-report measures. can be subjected to empirical test and then
extension In the context of research reports, supported or not supported by the evidence.
an extension is the allocation of more time
to complete the assignment than was implicit measures Implicit measures are
originally allowed. This situation will measures that assess a construct of interest
normally be permitted only in traumatic without requiring introspection or self-report
circumstances that can be documented in (See self-report measures). Popular implicit
some way. Requests for extensions should be measures include the Implicit Association Test
made to your tutor or lecturer before the (IAT), priming and the Stroop Test, all of
original due date. which assess concepts such as attitudes or
extraneous (nuisance) variable Sometimes self-esteem as the relative speed with which
called “chance error”, this term refers to the words can be correctly identified.
effects of variables that arise from chance, independent variable This term refers to a
such as running the experiment on an variable where the values it can take are
uncomfortably hot day. Usually, with real-life manipulated or controlled or recorded by an
experiments and large numbers of experimenter, so that their effect on some
participants, such errors tend to cancel each other variable (the dependent variable) can be
other out. In the context of student observed. It is called “independent” because,
experiments, they may affect the outcome of in principle, its values are not dependent on
the study, and you should be aware of their changes in the values of other variables.
possible effect. inferential statistics Statistics of this kind are
used when making inferences. They use the
factor A factor is anything that has a causal mathematics of probability theory to infer
influence on something else. It is often used generalisations about populations from data
interchangeably with “independent variable”, taken from samples of those populations. The
especially in writing about statistical ones you will first come across are t-tests and
procedures. Some of those procedures talk analysis of variance.
about “levels” of a factor. This term refers to
the magnitude of whatever the factor is, such manipulation (experimental) This term
as decibel level or dosage level. usually refers to controlling the values of an
figures The graphical depiction of an idea. independent variable; for example, having
Figures are most commonly used to present three groups of participants, each of which is
data in psychology reports, but they can also given a different treatment.
be used to represent models or to depict measurement Measurement is the assigning of
experimental materials or methods. numbers to events or objects within strict
rules. It might be as simple as obtaining
generic Used in the sense of “generic skills”, it people’s height in centimetres, or as
means more widely applicable than just to complicated as recording their intelligence
psychology. according to IQ scores.
methodology Strictly speaking, methodology
hypothesis A hypothesis is any statement that refers to the way in which knowledge and
could serve as an explanation of certain facts. understanding are achieved. Many people use
It should be presented in such a form that it the term as synonymous with “scientific
177
method”. It is a much broader term than effects and the psychological effects operating
“method”, which refers to the particular on subjects who believe they are being given
procedures used in a specific investigation. the real drug.
plagiarism In simple terms, plagiarism means
operationalisation Operationalisation refers to “copying”. It is used to refer to copying from
the procedure by which a theory gives rise to a someone else’s published work without
specific hypothesis that is concrete and acknowledging the real source of the work. It
testable. For example, you might have a is unacceptable because it is the academic
theory that says that attention is directly equivalent of theft: taking the work of other
related to proximity of a stimulus. Such a people and using it as if it were yours. It does
statement is very broad. You could not simply apply to quoting the exact words of
operationalise it to hypothesise that students someone’s published work without
at the front of the class would maintain more acknowledgment. Using someone’s published
eye contact with the lecturer than students at ideas without acknowledgment is also
the back of the class. This statement is now a plagiarism. You are encouraged to express
specific and testable hypothesis. If supported, other people’s ideas in your own words, but
it adds support to your theory. you must make a reference in your report
organised scepticism This is the attitude that indicating that this is what you have done.
you won’t believe what is said unless there is post hoc Latin for “after this”. In the context of
good evidence to back up the assertion. psychology, it usually refers to statistical
Organised scepticism is a fundamental procedures used after an experiment has been
property of good science – that it is the run and some overall statistical significance
evidence that counts, not the authority of the found. These procedures determine which of
scientist making the pronouncement. several factors contribute to the overall
significance.
paraphrasing Expressing someone else’s ideas primary source A primary source is a
in your own words. reference, such as a journal article or book,
participant A participant is someone who that you have actually read. Contrast with
takes part in a study. Until the APA 5th secondary source.
edition, participants were frequently problem (research problem) A research
referred to as subjects. However, the term problem is the question that you want to
participant is now used because it answer by running your study. In general
acknowledges the role of consent and terms, it is a situation where some of the
agency in participation. In the Particants components are known, and others need to be
section of a report, you need to describe discovered.
your participants, at least in general terms, proof, prove (evidence) Very loosely, proof is
so that your reader can decide how any demonstration that provides logical
representative your results are for whatever support for a belief. In the context of a research
group the reader is interested in. report, it is important to emphasise that you
placebo A treatment or preparation with no cannot prove anything! Your hypothesis can be
medicinal or pharmacological effects. It is supported if the observed facts are in agreement
used in studies of the effects of drugs to with the propositions in your hypothesis, or it
distinguish between real pharmacological can fail to be supported if the observed facts are
178
Glossar y
not in agreement with the hypothesis. Neither replicate, replication To replicate an

the hypothesis nor the theory from which it is experiment is to reproduce exactly the
derived can ever be proved. method of the earlier experiment on a new
sample of subjects. Because conclusions are
qualitative Qualitative refers to differences in drawn from experiments on the basis of
kind, so that apples are qualitatively different probability, replication is important. Repeated
from oranges. In psychological terms, similar findings add to the support for the
qualitative research might involve asking hypotheses made, and by inference to the
participants about their experiences of joy. theories that produce the hypotheses. It is
quantitative Something is quantitative if it is because replication is important to the
capable of being measured in quantities. To scientific method that the Method section
contrast quantitative with qualitative, your needs to be accurate enough for other
anxiety at being asked to recall the name of experimenters to be able to reproduce your
your 5th grade teacher is likely less (i.e., a 1 experiment exactly.
out of 5) than your anxiety if handling a large representative A “representative sample”
spider (i.e., possibly 5 out of 5!). means that the characteristics of the sample
questionnaire A questionnaire is any set of are sufficiently like those of the population
questions designed to be answered by a that you can make realistic judgments about
person, who is usually called a “respondent” the population on the basis of what you find
in this situation. Typically, the questions will about your sample.
deal broadly with a single area of interest or a research database(s) These provide an online
small number of such areas. and searchable index of research papers.
quotations This is where, in your report or research ethics Research ethics in the context
essay, you use the exact words from a of this text refers to the process of review
reference. It is important that they can be that is undertaken to ensure the project
recognised as the words of someone else and upholds the values and practices of ethical
that your reader can find the source of them. research including merit and respectfulness
(see https://www.nhmrc.gov.au/
random sample A sample is a subset of a guidelines-publications/e72)
population. The students in your psychology
class are a sample of the university population. sample A sample is a subset of a population.
However, they may not be representative of The students in your psychology class are a
that population. A random sample is a sample sample of the university population. However,
taken so that every member of the population they may not be representative of that
has an equal, independent probability of being population. See also random sample.
selected. scale, subscale In the sense in which you will
reference In the context of a research report, a most frequently encounter it, a scale is a
reference is any material to which you refer in collection of questionnaire items that measure
the body of the report. Typically, references some psychological construct. An example
will be journal articles or books, but in an would be an intelligence scale. A subscale is a
essay they could also be newspaper articles, subset of these items that measure some
government reports, or television programs. component of the overall variable, say the
See also primary source and secondary source. verbal ability subscale of an intelligence scale.
179
scientific method An approach to developing often used as a more general term than
knowledge through the process involving “experiment”, because a study does not
observation, data collection, and reporting. necessarily record or manipulate independent
secondary source A secondary source is a variables. A study may be an observation of
reference that you have not read yourself but behaviour or a collection of information by
has been referred to in something you did questionnaire, or it may be an experiment.
read. If you read in your textbook that Piaget subject See participant.
(1932) came to some conclusion, but you do survey A survey is a search for particular kinds
not have access to Piaget’s actual article, then of information. It generally refers to a study
any statement you make about what Piaget using questionnaires, interviews, or
said in that article must acknowledge where established scales, for example, intelligence or
you read it, namely in your textbook, not in aptitude scales.
Piaget’s original work.
self-report measures Self-report measures tables Used to summarise and compare
include questionnaires and rating scales that information, typically data. Columns are given
require the participant to report their views or headings to indicate the common information
evaluations. to be compared (e.g., mean and standard
significance level This is an arbitrary value, deviations, or questionnaire used), and the
which you use as a criterion for deciding rows are the individual instances being
whether your observed data are different compared (e.g., experimental condition,
enough from what you could expect if only journal article).
chance factors were operating to consider your theory A theory is a general principle or set of
data to be statistically significant. It is contentions advanced as an explanation for a
frequently set at 5%. If p is the probability of set of known facts or empirical findings. Good
the observed results or more extreme ones theories can be used to deduce many
happening by chance alone, then “p , .05” hypotheses in different areas of application,
shows that your data indicate a statistically which are then supported when tested
significant result. empirically.
statistic A statistic is a number derived from Turnitin Turnitin is an online teaching and
some mathematical manipulation of your data, learning tool used at many universities which
which summarises a characteristic of your is designed to identify word-for-word
sample, and theoretically reflects the similarity between students’ assignments as
population from which the sample was drawn. well as online texts, articles and websites.
An example is the mean of your sample. The
term “statistic” is also applied to the number variable A variable is some characteristic of
resulting from a statistical procedure. For people or things that can change, either
example, the number you obtain when within the person or between persons, things,
applying a t-test is a statistic. or situations. Variables can be as obvious as
study A psychological study is an investigation height or eye colour, or as complex as
into some aspect of the thought or behaviour intelligence, ability to cope, or marital
of people or, sometimes, other animals. It is satisfaction.
180
References
Albert, R. S. (1975). Toward a behavioral definition of genius. American Psychologist, 30, 140–151.
doi:10.1037/h0076861
American Psychological Association (2001). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association
(5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
American Psychological Association (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association
(6th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2015, August 8) Alcohol consumption. Retrieved from http://www.abs.gov.au/
ausstats/abs@.nsf/Lookup/by%20Subject/4364.0.55.001~2014-15~Main%20Features~Alcohol%20
consumption~25
Australian Psychological Society (2017). Code of ethics. Victoria, Australia: Author. Retrieved from http://
www.psychology.org.au
Australian Psychology Accreditation Council. (2014). APAC rules for accreditation. Melbourne, Australia:
Author. Retrieved from https://www.psychologycouncil.org.au/Assets/Files/2016_05%20APAC%20
RULES%20FOR%20ACCREDITATIONAmended%20AT%20edit%20formatted_June_2016.pdf
Bell, N. (2015) We are not amused. Failed humor in interaction. Retrieved from https://www.degruyter.com/
view/product/449175
Betts, K., Seitz, A., & Farquharson, K. (2006). Writing essays and research reports in the social sciences (3rd
ed.). South Melbourne, Victoria: Thomson.
Brewster, M. K. (2000). Entering and exiting the corporation: A developmental study of women executives
at mid-life. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences & Engineering, Vol. 60(9–B),
4877.
Broadbent, E. (2017). Interactions with robots: The truths we reveal about ourselves. Annual Review of
Psychology, 68, 627–652. doi:10.1146/annurev-psych-010416-043958
Burdess, N. (1991). The handbook of student skills. Sydney: Prentice-Hall.
Burdess, N. (2007). Good study. Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Australia.
Buzwell, S., Farrugia, M., & Williams, J. (2016). Students’ voice regarding important characteristics of
online and face-to-face higher education. Sensoria: A Journal of Mind, Brain, and Culture, 12, 38–49.
doi:dx.doi.org/10.7790/sa.v12i1.430
Cattell, R. B. (1965). The scientific analysis of personality. Baltimore: Penguin.
Corke, M., Bell, J., Goodhew, S. C., Smithson, M., & Edwards, M. (2016). Perceived time slows during
fleeting fun or fear. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 12, 1–7. doi:10.1080/17470218.20
16.1264000
Crone, D., & Williams, L. (2017). Crowdsourcing participants for psychological research in Australia: A test
of Microworkers. Australian Journal of Psychology, 69, 39–47. doi:10.1111/ajpy.12110
181
Denson, T. F. (2015). Four promising psychological interventions for reducing reactive aggression. Current
Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 3, 136–141. doi:10.1016/j.cobeha.2015.04.003
Edwards, A. L. (1957). The social desirability variable in personality research. New York: Dryden.
Eysenck, M. W. (2004). Psychology: An international perspective. New York: Psychology Press.
Fine, C. (2017). Testosterone Rex: Myths of sex, science, and society. New York: WW Norton & Co.
Forgas, J. (2017). Can sadness be good for you? Australian Psychologist, 52, 3–13. doi:10.1111/ap.12232
Forshaw, M. (2012). Critical thinking for psychology. West Sussex, UK: BPS Blackwell.
Freeman, H. R. (1992). Effect of instructor gender and gender role on student willingness to take a
psychology course. Teaching of Psychology, 19, 93–95. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1207/
s15328023top1902_7
Freud, S. (1953). The method of interpreting dreams: An analysis of a specimen dream. In J. Strachey (Ed.
& Trans.). The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud (Vol. 4, pp. 96–121).
Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books (Original work published 1900).
Gage, E., Coker, S., & Jobson, L. (2015). Cross-cultural differences in desirable and undesirable forms of
self-consistency and influence on symptoms of depression and anxiety. Journal of Cross-Cultural
Psychology, 46, 713–722. doi:10.1177/0022022115578475
Goodson, P. (2017). Becoming an academic writer. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Harris, R. (2015). Evaluating internet research sources. Retrieved from http://www.virtualsalt.com/evalu8it.
htm
Haviland, S. E., & Clark, H. H. (1974). What’ s new? Acquiring new information as a process in
comprehension. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 13, 512–521. doi:10.1016/S0022-
5371(74)80003-4
Haybron, D. (2011). Happiness. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Retrieved from
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ happiness/
Holland, E., Koval, P., Stratemeyer, M., Thomson, F., & Haslam, N. (2017). Sexual objectification in women’s
daily lives: A smartphone ecological momentary assessment study. British Journal of Social Psychology,
56, 314–333. doi:10.1111/bjso.12152
Hyde, T. S., & Jenkins, J. J. (1969). Differential effects of incidental tasks on the organization of recall of a
list of highly associated words. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 82, 472–481. doi:10.1037/h0028372
Keating C., Stephens, J., Thomas, N., Castle, D. J., & Rossell, S. L. (2016). Gender differences in weight-
related and non-weight-related appearance concerns in a community sample. Australian Journal of
Psychology, 68, 11–19. doi:10.1111/ajpy.12092
Keen, J., & Fitness, J. (in press). Can employers screen job applicants for potential white collar fraud
offenders? In S. Boag & N. Tiliopoulos (Eds.), Personality and individual differences: Theory, assessment,
and application. New York: Nova.
Kidder, L. H., & Judd, C. M. (1986). Research methods in social relations (5th ed.). New York: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston.
Kinoshita, S., de Wit, B., Aji, M., & Norris, D. (2017). Evidence accumulation in the integrated and primed
Stroop tasks. Memory and Cognition, 45, 824–836. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-017-0701-8
Knowles, S., Austin, D., Sivanesan, S., Tye-Din, J., Leung, C., Wilson, J., . . . Hebbard, G. (2017). Relations
between symptom severity, illness perceptions, visceral sensitivity, coping strategies and well-being in
irritable bowel syndrome guided by the common sense model of illness. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 22,
522–534. doi:10.1080/13548506.2016.1168932
182
References
Levine, M. P., Smolak, L., & Hayden, H. (1994). The relation of sociocultural factors to eating attitudes and
behaviors among middle school girls. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 14, 471–490. Retrieved from
https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431694014004004
Lewin, K. (1948). Resolving social conflicts. New York: Harper & Row.
Louis, W. R., Bastian, B., McKimmie, B., & Lee, A. J. (2016). Teaching psychology in Australia: Does class
attendance matter for performance?, 68, 47–51. doi:10.1111/ajpy.12088
Macrae, K. (1989). Psychology 1 course handbook. Melbourne, Australia: Department of Psychology, La
Trobe University.
March, E., & Grieve, R. (2016). Social-economic theory and short-term mate preferences: The effects of
gender roles and socioeconomic status. Australian Journal of Psychology, 68, 241–250. doi:10.1111/
ajpy.12102
Marriage equality facts at a glance (n.d.). Retrieved from http://www.australianmarriageequality.org/
get-informed/quick-facts/
Marshall, L. A., & Rowland, F. (2013). A guide to learning independently (5th ed.). Frenchs Forest, NSW:
Pearson Australia.
Martyna, W. (1978). What does ‘He’ mean? Journal of Communication, 28, 131–138.
doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1978.tb01576.x
Mathew, J., Dunning, C., Coats, C., & Whelan, T. (2014). The mediating influence of hope on
multidimensional perfectionism and depression. Personality and Individual Differences, 70, 67–71.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.06.008
Miller, N. (2017, May 20). UK migration squeeze hits Australians. The Age, p. 14.
Mizuno, H. (2017). Establishing and validating a measure of the Japanese concept of self. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Swinburne University of Technology, Melbourne, Australia.
Monash transition program. (2017). Retrieved from www.monash.edu.au/study/ parents/transition
Murray, G., Rawlings, D., Allen, N. B., & Trinder, J. (2003). NEO Five-Factor Inventory scores:
Psychometric properties in a community sample. Measurement & Evaluation in Counseling Development,
36, 140–149.
Murray, D. R., Murphy, S. C., von Hippel, W., Trivers, R., & Haselton, M. G. (2017). A preregistered study of
competing predictions suggests that men do overestimate women’s sexual intent. Psychological Science, 28,
253–255. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797616675474
Palmer J., & Gundlock, B. (2017). Dying of thirst. Good Weekend, pp. 14–19.
Partos, T. R., Cropper, S. J., & Rawlings, D. (2016). You don’t see what I see: Individual difference in the
perception of meaning from visual stimuli. PLoS One, 11, e0150615. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0150615
Patterson, R. W., & Patterson, R. M. (2017). Computers and productivity: Evidence from laptop use in the
college classroom. Economics of Education Review, 57, 66–79. doi:10.1016/j.econedurev.2017.02.004
Payne, Jason & Piquero, Alex. (2017). The concordance of self-reported and officially recorded criminal
onset: Results from a sample of Australian prisoners. Crime & Delinquency.
doi:10.1177/0011128716682440.
Piccoli, V., Fantoni, C., Foroni, F., Bianchi, M., & Carnaghi, A. (2017). Automatic female dehumanization
across the menstrual cycle. British Journal of Social Psychology, 56, 270–280. doi:10.1111/bjso.12178
Pierce, G. R., Sarason, B. R., & Sarason, I. G. (1992). General and specific support expectations and stress
as predictors of perceived supportiveness: An experimental study. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 63, 297–307. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.63.2.297
183
Platow, M. J., Haslam, A. S., Reicher, S. D., & Steffens, N. K. (2015). There is no leadership if no one
follows: Why leadership is necessarily a group process. International Coaching Psychology Review, 10,
20–37.
Pope, K. S. (1980). On love and loving. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Popper, K. R. (1959). The logic of scientific discovery. London, UK: Hutchinson & Co.
Prendergast, L. E., Leung, R. K., Toumbourou, J., Taft, A., McMorris, B. J., & Catalano, R. F. (2017).
Sexual behaviour in early adolescence: A cross-national comparison of Australian and United States
youth. Australian Journal of Psychology, 69, 3–11. doi:10.1111/ajpy.12118
Roberts, R. M., Neate, G. M., & Gierasch, A. (2016). Implicit attitudes towards people with visible
difference: findings from an Implicit Association Test. Psychology, Health & Medicine, 22, 352–358.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/13548506.2016.1163399
Robertson, S., Davies, M., & Winefield, H. (2015). Why weight for happiness? Correlates of BMI and SWB
in Australia. Obesity Research & Clinical Practice, 9, 609–612. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
orcp.2015.04.011
Schiraldi, G. R. (2001). The post-traumatic stress disorder sourcebook: A guide to healing, recovery, and growth
[Adobe Digital Editions version]. doi:10.1036/ 0071393722
Schul, Y., & Burnstein, E. (1990). Judging the typicality of an instance: Should the category be accessed
first? Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 964–974. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.58.6.964
Sebastian, P., Kaufmann, L. M., & de la Piedad Garcia, X. (2017, January). In the nose, not in the beholder:
Embodied cognition effects override individual differences. Embodied Cognition Preconference at the
Annual Meeting of the Society for Psychology and Social Psychology. San Antonio, Texas, United States.
Shell, M. D., Gazelle, H., & Faldowski, R. A. (2014). Anxious solitude and the middle school transition: a
diathesis 3 stress model of peer exclusion and victimization trajectories. Developmental Psychology, 50,
1569–1583. doi:10.1037/a0035528
Simpson, J. A., Rholes, W. S., & Nelligan, J. S. (1992). Support seeking and support giving within couples in
an anxiety-provoking situation: The role of attachment styles. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 62, 434–446. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.62.3.434
Skeffington, P. M., Rees, C. S., & Mazzucchelli, T. (2017). Trauma exposure and post-traumatic stress
disorder within fire and emergency services in Western Australia. Australian Journal of Psychology, 69,
20–28. doi:10.1111/ajpy.12120
Smith, R. A. (1995). Challenging your preconceptions: Thinking critically about psychology. Pacific Grove,
California: Brooks/Cole Publishing Company.
Sternberg, R. J. (2010). The psychologist’s companion: A guide to scientific writing for students and researchers
(5th ed.). New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511762024
Tearne, J. E., Robinson, M., Jacoby, P., Allen, K. L., Cunningham, N. K., Li, J., & Mclean, N. J. (2016). Older
maternal age is associated with depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms in young adult female
offspring. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 125, 1–10. doi:10.1037/abn0000119
Thielking, M., & Terjesen, M. D. (Eds.). (2017). Handbook of Australian school psychology: Integrating
international research, practice, and policy. Cham, Switzerland: Springer Nature.
Townsend, M. A. R., Moore, D. W., Tuck, B. F., & Wilton, K. M. (1990). Headings within multiple-choice
tests as facilitators of test performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 60, 153–160.
doi:10.1111/j.2044-8279.1990.tb00932.x
184
References
Trounson, J., Critchley, C., & Pfeifer, J. (2015). Australian attitudes toward asylum seekers: Roles of
dehumanization and Social Dominance Theory. Social Behavior and Personality, 43, 1641–1656.
doi:10.2224/sbp.2015.43.10.1641
Truss, L. (2003). Eats, shoots & leaves: The zero tolerance approach to punctuation. London: Profile Books.
Vaughan, G. M., & Hogg, M. A. (2017). Social psychology (7th ed.). Frenchs Forest, Australia: Pearson
Education.
von Hippel, W., Ronay, R., & Maddux, W. W. (2016). Of baboons and elephants: Inequality and the
evolution of immoral leadership. In J. P. Forgas, L. Jussim, & P. A. M. van Lange (Eds.) Social
psychology and morality (pp. 289–303). New York: Psychology Press.
Weier, M., & Lee, C. (2016). Stagnant or successful, carefree or anxious? Australian university students’
goals and beliefs about adulthood and their current well-being. Australian Journal of Psychology, 51,
422–430. doi:10.1111/ap.12169
Weinberg, M. K., Noble, J. M., & Hammond, T. G. (2016). Sleep well feel well: An investigation into the
protective value of sleep quality on subjective well-being. Australian Journal of Psychology, 68, 91–97.
doi:10.1111/ajpy.12098
Zinkiewicz, L., Curtis, A., Meurer, H., & Miller, P. (2016). Demographic risk factors for alcohol-related
aggression in and around licensed venues. Alcohol, 51, 196–200. doi:10.1093/alcalc/agv083
185
Index
Page numbers in bold indicate glossary entries

Page numbers in italics refer to tables and figures
abbreviations 23, 86 reference list 42–9 assumptions 17–18, 175

Latin 26 referencing within reports 34 Australian Psychological Society
Abstract section 4, 70–2 on statistics 90 14, 62
checklists for 110 on titles 68 Australian Psychology
citing 47 on writing style 22 Accreditation Council 34
in essays 113, 118, 119, 126 apostrophes 25 authority, illegitimate appeal to 18
examples of 71, 72 apparatus 82, 175 authors, order of 43
function of 70 appeal to popular belief 18
length of 70 Appendices 4, 105–6 backup copy 66, 106, 125
Academic Search Complete 12, figures and tables in 106 bar charts 87, 88
56, 57 format of 106 belief statements 21
accuracy 15 procedures in 86 Betts, K. 125
acknowledgment see citations questionnaires in 86, 87 bibliographic software 57
acronyms 23 statistics in 105 bibliography 105, 175
active voice 22, 175 whether to include 31 Body section of essays 113, 118,
ad hominem arguments 18 area of study, defining 74 121–2, 126
advice seeking 31–2 argument 18, 175 bold type 27
aims 55, 55, 175 articles books 44, 56
alphabetical order 38, 43 electronic 45–8 chapters in 44
American Psychological journal see journal articles eBooks 48
Association 14 magazine 49 textbooks 11, 14, 74
style manual see APA newspaper 11, 49 Burdess, N. 26, 121, 125
Publication Manual unpublished 46
analyses of variance (ANOVAs) 90 assignments see also essays; capitalisation of titles 44, 46,
analytical categories 108, 175 research reports 68, 97
annual periodicals 46 backup copy of 66, 106, 125 CARS checklist 15
APA Publication Manual 106 marks see marks chapters, in books 44
on abstract length 70 Pass requirements 64 checklists
on fonts 26–7, 31 physical presentation of CARS 15
in-text referencing 38 30–2, 110, 124–5 essays 126–7
on language-based bias Association for Psychological research reports 108–10
avoidance 81 Science 14 children, as participants 61
187
chronological order 38, 41, 43, ‘critically review’ preparation of 63

118, 121 (in essay topic) 116 writing style 27
citations 36–42, 175 cultural differences 104 distressed participants 61
classic works 39 doi (digital object identifier)
direct acknowledgment data 176 44, 45
37–8 data analysis 89 due dates 125 see also time
in essays 124 databases 12, 56, 57 management
examples of 40, 41 debriefing 86, 176
online titles 39 decimals 93 Eats, Shoots & Leaves (Truss) 24
plagiarism and 34, 35, 36 ‘define’ (in essay topic) 116–17 eBooks 48
quotations 42 definition of terms 74 edited books 44
relevance of sources 41–2 degrees of freedom 90, 176 effect sizes 91–2
repeat 38, 39 demographic variables 80, 82 electronic articles 45–8
secondary sources 39, 41 departmental studies 54–7 electronic books (eBooks) 48
classic works 39 dependent variables 58, 59, 176 empirical 176
clichés 72 ‘describe’ (in essay topic) encyclopaedias 48
code of ethics 62 116–17 endnote 57, 176
collaboration 8–9, 175 descriptive statistics 90, 176 equipment (apparatus) 81–2, 175
commas 24–5, 44 design 85–6, 176 error bars 98, 99
‘compare’ (in essay topic) 116 faults in 103 errors, typographical 28–30
comparisons between groups detective novel structure 119 essays
94 dictionaries 74 appendices 31
Conclusion section digital object identifier (doi) checklist for 126–7
essays 113, 118, 122, 44, 45 collaboration on 8–9
123, 126 direct acknowledgment 38 directive words for 114–17
research reports 104–5 directive words 114–17 further reading on 125–6
conclusions, unjustified 24 discipline 9 information gathering
conference papers 46 ‘discuss’ (in essay topic) 113, for 9–14
confidence intervals 91–2, 98 114, 116 length of 113, 122
confidentiality 61 discussion boards 31 physical presentation of 30–2,
consent 60 Discussion section 4, 100–5 124–5, 127
construct 175–6 checklists for 109, 126 preparation for 117–18, 122
contractions 25 conclusion 104–5 proofreading see proofreading
‘contrast’ (in essay topic) 116 in essays 113, 118, 121–2, reasons for writing 2–3
copying 176 see also plagiarism 126 redrafting 28–30, 64, 124–5
versus collaboration 8–9 evaluation of 20 references in 12–13, 113, 117,
correlational studies 59–60 hypotheses in 62, 100 124, 126 see also
correlations 90 implications of results 103 references
counterbalancing 89 interpretation of results 100–2 versus reports 3, 113
credibility 15–16 versus Introduction structure of 5, 113, 118–24
critical thinking 16–21 section 100 body 113, 118, 121–2, 126
‘critically evaluate’ (in essay limitations 103–4 conclusion 113, 118,
topic) 113–14 new references in 102–3 122–3, 123, 126
188
Index
introduction 113, 118, 119, gender imbalance 104 interaction effects 92

120–1, 122, 126 gender-neutral language 28, 29 internet see online resources
titles of 115 generic skills 3, 16, 177 interpretation of results 100–2
topic of 113–14 given-new principle 16 in-text referencing see citations
at university level 5 Good study (Burdess) 125 Introduction section 4, 72–7
writing process 112 Google Scholar 12, 56 area of study, defining 74
writing style 21–7 government reports 49 checklists for 109, 126
ethics see research ethics grades see marks versus Discussion section 100
ethics committee 58, 60 graphs 87–8, 88, 98, 98–9 in essays 113, 118, 119,
‘evaluate’ (in essay topic) 113–14 Greek letters 90 120–1, 122, 126
evidence (proof) 11, 176, 178–9 group work 8–9 hypotheses in 62, 77
‘examine’ (in essay topic) A guide to learning independently length of 22, 63, 122
116–17 (Marshall & Rowland) opening sentences 72, 73
experiment 10, 176 125 preparation of 63
explanation of findings 101–2 previous research in 74–6, 75
explicit measures see self-report headings introductory statements 89, 89
measures in Method section 79–80, 79 issue numbers 45
extension 65, 177 typeface for 27 italics 26, 44, 45
extraneous variable 86, highlighting 56–7, 118
103, 177 histograms 97–8 jargon 23, 76
hypotheses 17, 54, 177 journal articles
factor 177 aims and 55, 55 authors 43, 45–6
Farquharson, K. 125 in Discussion section 62, 100 databases of 12
feedback 107–8 examples of 78 electronic 45–7
figures 97–9, 177 identification of 62 evaluation of 12–13, 18–21
in appendices 106 in Introduction section 61, 76–7 format of 3, 31, 70
graphs 88, 88, 98, 98–9 multiple 90, 100 note-taking on 56–7
introductions to 97 specificity of 58–60 referencing 11, 45–7 see also
presentation of 98, 98–9 support for 92, 100 References
titles of 97, 97 versus research reports 3–4
findings, explanation of 101–2 illegitimate appeal to authority 18 titles of 45, 68, 69
first editions 44 implications of results 103 journalistic style 119
flowcharts for writing 52, 112 implicit measures 83, 84–5, 177
fluency of expression 22–3 inclusive language 28, 29 keywords 12
folders 32 incomplete sentences 23 knowledge 11
fonts 26–7, 31 independent variables 58–9,
format 58, 177 laboratory reports see research
appendices 106 index cards 117 reports
essays 4, 113, 118–24 inferential statistics 90, 177 language
journal articles 4, 31 information gathering 9–14 inclusive 28, 29
references 105 informed consent 60 word meanings 23–4
research reports 3–4, 68 in-press articles 46 language-based bias, avoidance
full stops (periods) 44 instructions for participants 86, 87 of 81
189
Latin abbreviations 26 Pass requirements 64 encyclopaedias 48

law of diminishing returns 64 reference lists and 105 evaluation of 15–16
lecturers relation to effort 30 journal articles 45–7
on appendices 31, 107 Marshall, L. A. 125 referencing 39, 124
on collaboration 8–9 Materials section 81–3, 83 textbook-linked 14
on essay topics 114, 116 matrix of variables 58–9, 58 open-access journals 46
feedback from 107–8 mature age students 114 opening sentences 72, 73
on opinion statements 119 mean 87, 90, 90 operationalisation 17, 58, 178
on plagiarism 34 meanings, confusing 23–4 opinion statement 119, 122
on presentation 30–2, measurement 177 order of references 38, 43
68–70, 119 scales 82, 83, 179 organised scepticism 178
on references 45, 74, 102, 124 subscales 82, 179 outlines
on research design 76, median 90 essays 118, 122
85–6, 103 Method section 4, 77–87 research reports 62–3
seeking advice from 31–2 checklist for 109
on statistical analysis 88, evaluation of 19–20, 54 page numbering 30–1, 70, 72
90, 92 function of 68, 77–9 paragraph structure 22–3, 122
studies run by 54–8, 60, 86 hypotheses in 62 paraphrasing 36, 178
on time management 65 preparation of 63 participants 79, 178
on writing style 22, 26, 70–2 subheadings in 79 consent by 60
length writing style 27 description of 80, 80
of abstracts 70 methodology 177–8 gender imbalance in 104
of essays 113, 122 discussion based on 101 instructions for 86, 88
of introductions 22, 63, 77, 122 flaws in 103–4 number of 80
of report sections 63, 76 Monash University tutorial 15 roles of 87
library resources 12, 56 multiple authors 44–5 students as 60
limitations 103–4 multiple hypotheses 90, 100 passive voice 22
linking sentences 122 Pass requirements 64
newspaper articles 11, 49 past tense 27
magazine articles 49 non-significant results 90, 97 peer review 12
main effects 92 note-taking periodicals 13, 46 see also
manipulation (experimental) for essays 117–18 journal articles
55, 59, 177 for references 56–7 periods (full stops) 44
margins 30–1 nuisance variable 86, 177 personal opinions 119, 122
marks 8 numbering personal pronouns 22,
appendices and 105–6 pages 30–1, 70, 72 28, 62
Discussion section and 103 tables 94 physical presentation 30–2, 110,
double-marking 66 numerals, versus words 92 124–5
essay topics and 113 placebo 178
feedback from 107–8 objectivity 21–2 plagiarism 9, 34–6, 178
inconsistent 108 online resources 13–14 avoiding 36
Introduction section and 72, databases 12 causes of 35
74, 76 discussion boards 31 checking for 36, 65–6, 125
190
Index
versus collaboration 8–9 qualitative 10, 179 research reports

defined 34 quantitative 96, 179 checklist for 108–10
planning quasi-experiments 10 collaboration on 8–9
essays 117–18, 122 questionnaires 61, 179 defined 3–4
research reports 62–3 in appendices 82 versus essays 3, 113
plural pronouns 28 as materials 82 examples of
popular belief, appeal to 18 quotation marks 25, 42 good 129–38, 151–63
postgraduate training 2 quotations 23, 42, 76, 179 poor 139–49, 165–74
post hoc procedures 90, 92, 178 further reading on 106–7
predictions see hypotheses radio programs 124 how to approach 53–4
preparation checklists 108–9, 126 random sample 179 how to begin 54–60
preparation for essays 117–18 reading-aloud test 23 information gathering for 9–14
presentation of assignments reality checks 16 versus journal articles 4
30–2, 110, 124–5, 127 reasonableness 15–16 physical presentation of
present tense 27 redrafting 28–30, 64, 104, 30–2, 110
previous research 124–5 proofreading see proofreading
in Discussion section 100 References 4, 11–12, 105, 179 reasons for writing 2–3
in Introduction section 74–6, 75 checklists for 110, 126 redrafting 28–30, 64, 104
primary sources 13, 178 for departmental studies 54–7 references for 11–12 see also
probability 90–1 in Discussion section 102–3 References
problem 178 in essays 113, 117, 124, 126 structure of 4, 68 see also
procedural problems 103 format of 42–9 specific report sections
Procedure section 86–7 in-text see citations writing process 52, 62–6,
pronouns 22, 28, 62 major 54 105, 108
proof (evidence) 11, 176, 178–9 note-taking for 56–7 writing style 21–7
proofreading 28–30, 36 number of 56, 124 Reserve section of library 12
choosing someone for 9, 29, order of 38, 43 Results section 4, 87–98
64–5 for self-designed studies checklist for 109
importance of 9 57–8 evaluation of 20
time management 64–5, 106 referencing 33–49 first reports 87–8
PsycARTICLES 12, 56, 57 relevance 12–13, 41–2, 76 function of 68
Psychclassics (website) 14, 105 replication 10, 179 see also hypotheses in 62
The Psychologist’s Companion previous research introductory statements 89, 89
(Sternberg) 107 reports see research reports statistics in see statistics
psychology, as a discipline 9 representative references 124 ‘review’ (in essay topic) 116
psychology organisations 14 representative sample 179 rewriting 29
psychometric properties 20, 82 republished books 48 Rowland, F. 125
PsycINFO 12, 56, 57 research, previous running heads 70
Publication Manual see APA in Discussion section 100
Publication Manual in Introduction section 74–6, 75 sample 20, 80, 179
punctuation 24–5, 43 research database 56, 179 scales 82, 83, 179
Purdue University, Online research ethics 60–2, 179 scepticism, organised 178
Writing Lab 106 research problem 178 scientific method 10–11, 17, 180
191
scientist/practitioner model 9 style tutors see lecturers

Scopus 12, 56, 57 journalistic 119 typing 30–1
search engines 14 writing 21–7 typographical errors 28–30
secondary sources 13, subjects see participants
39–41, 180 subscales 82, 179 undergraduate training 2
Seitz, A. 125 support 15–16 universities
self-report measures 20, 82, 180 survey 180 essay writing at 5
semi-interquartile ranges 90 library resources 12
sentences tables 88, 93–6, 180 student counselling 65
incomplete 23 in appendices 106 unjustified conclusions 24
linking paragraphs with 122 examples of 94–5, 95–6 unpublished articles 46
numerals starting 92–3 introductions to 93, 94 unpublished theses 48
opening 72, 73 presentation of 94–5 unrepresentative samples 19,
serif font 27, 31 titles of 94, 94 104, 116, 117
sexist language 28, 29 television programs 124 URLs 48
significance levels 90–1, 180 tense 27
slang 25 terms, definition of 74 variables 10, 180
social psychology 14 textbooks demographic 80, 82
Society for Personality and Social as references 11 dependent 59, 176
Psychology 14 term definitions in 74 extraneous (nuisance) 103, 177
spacing 30–1 websites associated with 14 independent 58–9, 177
spelling 26 theory 17, 180 matrix of 58
standard deviation 87–8, 90, 92 discussion based on 102 voice 22
statistics 87–92, 180 thesaurus 28 volume numbers 45
in Appendices 105 theses, unpublished 48
confidence intervals 91–2 time management 30, 65, 106 weak arguments 18
data analysis 89–90 essays 125 Web of Knowledge 12
descriptive 90, 176 extension 65, 177 Web of Science 12, 56
in Discussion section 100 proofreading 64, 106 websites 48 see also online
effect sizes 91–2 Title Page 4, 68–70 resources
inferential 90, 177 checklists for 110, 126 word limits 63–4, 68–70, 108, 122
presentation of see figures; for essays 113, 118, 119, 126 word meanings 23–4
graphs; tables example of 69 word-processing software 30
reporting 90, 91 titles words, versus numerals 92–3
significance levels 90–1, 180 capitalisation of 44, 68, 97 Writing essays and research
Sternberg, R. J. 107 of essays 115 reports in the social
straw man argument 18 of tables 94, 94 sciences (Betts, Seitz, &
student counselling of journal articles 45, 69, 70 Farquharson) 125
departments 65 topic of essay 113–14 writing process
studies 180 Truss, Lynne 24 essays 112
departmental 54–7 t-tests 90, 91 research reports 43, 52, 62–6,
self-designed 57, 76–7 Turnitin 36, 55–6, 107
study groups 8 65–6, 125, 180 writing style 21–7
192

How To Write Psychology Researc - Findlay, Bruce PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

How To Write Psychology Researc - Findlay, Bruce PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Copyright © Pearson Australia (a division of Pearson Australia Group Pty Ltd) 2019 — 9781488618437 — Findlay & Kaufmann/How to Write

Psychology Research Reports and Essays 8e

Senior Portfolio Manager: Stephen Heasley

Pearson Australia Group Pty Ltd ABN 40 004 245 943

1 Reasons for Writing Research Reports and Essays���������������������������� 1

2 Writing Research Reports and Essays – Getting Started ������������������� 7

4 Research Reports – How Do You Start? ������������������������������������������ 51

5 Sections of a Research Report ������������������������������������������������������ 67

6 Essays in Psychology ����������������������������������������������������������������� 111

Appendix A Sample of a Good Research Report�������������������������������������������������������129

Sabine Wingenfeld Hammond, PhD, FAPS

Introduction to Staff Members

Educator Resource – Test Bank

1.1 Why Write Reports and Essays?

1.2 What Is a Research Report?

taught in first- or second-year psychology, mostly as a result of more complex designs or

1.4 Chapter Summaries

and Essays – Getting Started

2.2 Information Gathering

What is a quality source? Different sorts of publications serve different purposes.

Australian Psychological Society: www.psychology.org.au

Happy searching – but don’t get carried away!

The standard of Reasonableness includes judgments of whether the article is fair,

2.4 Critical Thinking

Assumptions. It is common in psychological research to compare groups and look for

• replicate previous findings and/or support existing theories?

• presents a novel/insightful/critical/extensive/contemporary review of

• Is the sample appropriate (e.g., size, representativeness)?

Other methodological questions might include:

2.6 Writing Style

Abbreviations and acronyms. A matter of relevance to fluent expression is the use of

Concentrating on the cognitive, affective, and social dimensions . . . in a study by

. . . considered “normal” behaviour . . .

2.7 Using the Correct Tense

2.8 Inclusive Language

2.9 Proofreading and Redrafting

Figure 2.1. Examples of gender-neutral language.

Appendices. There are no consistent expectations about Appendices in undergraduate

3.2 In-text Referencing

Poor Better (without example)

Poor Better (with example)

How do you acknowledge another’s work? When summarising or paraphrasing a

can be characterised as an anger-based response to a provoking event (Denson, 2015)”.

Figure 3.2. Examples of references repeated within a paragraph.

Classic works. Occasionally you will come across a republication or retranslation of an

Secondary sources. It is sometimes necessary to refer to a secondary source; that is, a

Work by one Murray Murray Murray (Murray, (Murray,

Work by four Williams, Williams Williams (Williams, (Williams

Work by a National NIMH NIMH (National (NIMH,

Internet page, Teen Teen Teen (Teen (Teen

Figure 3.3. Examples of in-text citation of references.

Two or more works by different authors within the same parentheses:

Six or more authors:

Figure 3.4. More examples of in-text citation of references.

3.3 The Reference List

A specific chapter in an edited book

Journal article, one author

Journal article, two authors

Journal article, three to seven authors

More than seven authors

Article in an internet-only or open-access journal

Brewster, M. K. (2000). Entering and exiting the corporation: A developmental study of

3.3.3 Internet Sources

1 Reasons for Writing Research Reports and Essays�� 1

2 Writing Research Reports and Essays – Getting Started �� 7

4 Research Reports – How Do You Start? �� 51

5 Sections of a Research Report �� 67

6 Essays in Psychology �� 111

Appendix A Sample of a Good Research Report��129

Concentrating on the cognitive, affective, and social dimensions . . . in a study by

 . . . considered “normal” behaviour . . .