Psychological Research Methodologies

www.psipak.
com [PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH METHODLOGIES]
PSYCHOLOGICAL
RESEARCH
METHODLOGIES
COMPILED BY
ANJUM MEHMOOD
Complied By Anjum Mehmood e-mail: psipak@yahoo.com Page 0

www.psipak.com [PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH METHODLOGIES]
Contents
Introduction 02
Think like a Scientist 03
Choose a Research Question 07
Generate a Research Hypothesis 11
Form Operational Definitions 16
Choose a Research Design 27
Evaluate the ethics 28
Collect Data 32
Analyze Data and Form Conclusions 36
Report Research Results 45
The Research Proposal and Report (APA Rules) 47
Glossary 54
References 58

Introduction
Do you ever "people-watch"? Do you ever wonder why people behave the way they do? Do you ever come up with
explanations for people's behavior?
If you answered "yes" to these questions, you have already taken the initial steps for conducting research in
psychology. That you are enrolled in a Research/Thesis course suggests you are interested in learning more about
why people think and behave the way they do.
But simply people-watching and coming up with our own explanations for people's behavior isn't research; it's not
scientific. In this " PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH METHODLOGIES " component of your psychology course, you will learn the
basic steps for conducting psychological research. As you learn about research, you will also learn how to evaluate
psychological research.
 http://www.studygs.net
Reports of psychological research are all around us-we learn about research findings in the news, in our magazines,
and on the Internet. Throughout this Student as Researcher guide, you'll find many websites for more information.
For example, for psychology news, try these websites:
 http://www.apa.org/monitor
 http://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/
 http://psych.hanover.edu/APS/exponnet.html
The public seems hungry to know more about psychology; after all, psychology is about us. Much of what we learn
from the media has direct relevance for our own lives. For example, we may learn about the effects of divorce on
children (http://mentalhelp.net), how to communicate with elderly relatives who have Alzheimer's
(http://www.alzheimers.org), learn how to forgive (http://www.forgiving.org), and so on. But how do we separate
the good research from the bad research? How do we know whether to accept what we read or hear as true? What
if scientists seem to disagree about research findings?
How we answer these questions depends on understanding the basic steps of the research process. Psychological
research, like all scientific research, uses the scientific method. Therefore, as we start these Students as Researcher
exercises, we will first answer the question, what is the scientific method? Research Example: Adjusting to College as
we work though the steps of the research process, we will illustrate the primary steps and decisions using a research
example. We think you will find this example interesting-it's about how students adjust to college, particularly the
emotional experiences associated with the transition to college. As you read about this research you will find tips for
improving your grades and health. We will report the research method and findings used by Dr. James Pennebaker
and Martha Francis in their study called, "Cognitive, Emotional, and Language Processes in Disclosure." The research
report was published in 1996 in a psychology journal called Cognition and Emotion. For more information about Dr.
Pennebaker, check out his website at
 http://homepage.psy.utexas.edu/homepage/faculty/pennebaker/pennebaker.html
For information about adjusting to college, check out these websites:

 http://www.studentadvantage.lycos.com
 http://www.aboutcollege.com/front.htm
Evaluating Research
This component of Student as Researcher asks you to think about research findings. During each step of the research
process, we must evaluate the evidence and decide whether to accept the conclusions that are presented. This is
true for when we review previous research findings, as well as when we generate our own research findings. This
“Evaluating Research" guide will give you questions to ask about research findings.
Step 1: Think Like a Scientist
 Take the Step

 Research Example
 Evaluate Research
The first step of the research process is to begin to think like a scientist. Psychology is a scientific discipline. Because
psychologists use the scientific method, they are similar to scientists in disciplines such as anthropology, biology,
chemistry, and sociology. What differs among these scientific disciplines is the content of researchers' investigations.
Psychologists study the mind and behavior, whereas anthropologists study evolution and culture, biologists study
cells, chemists study molecules, and sociologists study societies.
 What is the scientific method?

 What's so special about the scientific method?
 Why should I conduct psychological research?
 Does my research have to meet all four goals?
 What's the difference between basic and applied research?
 What is the scientific method?
A way to gain knowledge
The scientific method is a way of gaining knowledge. All people strive to gain knowledge, and there are many
different ways to gain knowledge. These ways of gaining knowledge are seen in the different academic departments
of universities, for example, philosophy, literature, arts, mathematics, and the sciences. As you continue your course
work and complete your degree, you will see that each of these disciplines has a unique method for gaining
knowledge about the world and the human condition.
What's so special about the scientific method?
Empirical approach, control attitude when scientists talk about the scientific method, they don't refer to a particular
technique or piece of equipment. Instead, the scientific method is a way of thinking and making decisions. Of course,
we all think and make decisions every day. What makes the scientific method so special? To answer this question,
we can compare the scientific method to our 'everyday' ways of thinking and making decisions.
Each day, you make judgments and decisions using your intuition what 'feels right' or what 'seems reasonable.'
Usually, this works fine for us but not for scientists. The scientific method uses an empirical approach for making
judgments and decisions. An empirical approach emphasizes direct observation and experimentation.

Observation and experimentation in science is systematic and controlled. In fact, control is the essential ingredient of
science. By having control over their observations, scientists isolate and study various factors one at a time. This is
why most scientific research, including psychological research, is done in laboratories.
Research labs provide an opportunity for psychologists to control and isolate the factors they think have important
effects on behavior and mental processes. In everyday life, our behavior is influenced by many different factors, all
operating together. Scientists try to 'tease apart' all these factors and study them one at a time. This is the essence
of controlled observation and experimentation.
In order to think like a scientist, you have to have ‘an attitude.' In our everyday life, we often accept explanations
and claims uncritically. In fact, we may become excited to read about new weight loss pills or tape recordings that
we play under our pillow at night to get better grades or earn more money. The scientific attitude, however, is one
of caution and skepticism.
Scientists recognize that there are no easy explanations or 'quick fixes.' Humans are complex — many factors
interact to influence behavior and mental processes. So, scientists are skeptical when they hear a claim. We should
withhold judgment until we can evaluate the evidence for the claim. And importantly, we should know what kind of
evidence is offered to support the claim. The best evidence comes from an empirical approach/systematic and
controlled observation and experimentation.
Several websites provide information about scientific skepticism. Try these:
 http://psg.com/~ted/bcskeptics/ratenq?Re3.3-Attitude.html
 http://www.psychology.org/links/Resources/Pseudoscience/
 http://www.apa.org/pubinfo
Why should I conduct psychological research?
Four research goals
We use the scientific method to meet four research goals:
 Description
 Prediction
 Understanding
 Create Change
1. Description: The first step of any scientific investigation is to describe fully the phenomenon we're interested in.
Therefore, the goal of descriptive research is to define, classify, or categorize events and their relationships in order
to describe mental processes and behavior.
Example: Psychologists who are interested in depression might describe symptoms of helplessness, such as failure to
initiate activities and pessimism regarding the future.
2. Prediction: Once events and behaviors have been described, we may seek to predict when these events occur.
Researchers identify correlations (relationships) among factors to predict mental processes and behaviors.

Example: Research that meets the prediction goal may examine the relationship between symptoms of depression
and helplessness. One relationship might be: As level of depression increases, individuals exhibit symptoms of
helplessness. Another factor, or variable, that may be related to helplessness concerns individuals' feelings that they
are unable to do things successfully. The relationship might be as follows: The more people believe they can't do
things successfully, the more likely they are to feel helpless.
3. Understanding: We understand an event or behavior when we can identify its cause(s). Understanding involves
more than description and prediction. Just because we observe a relationship between two variables, we can't say
one causes the other. More formally, this is stated as “correlation does not imply causation."
Researchers conduct experiments to identify causes of a phenomenon. Experiments are characterized by the high
degree of control required of the scientific method. Thus, by conducting controlled experiments psychologists infer
what causes a phenomenon.
Example: We might test the relationship between unsuccessful performance and helplessness. We could ask some
participants in an experiment to do problems that are unsolvable and ask other participants to do solvable problems.
We might then ask participants to estimate their success on future problems, and whether they want to do
additional problems. Suppose that participants who worked on unsolvable problems were more pessimistic about
their future performance and less willing to do additional tasks than participants who completed solvable problems.
Based on this experiment, we could infer that unsuccessful performance on a task causes individuals to become
helpless (i.e., pessimistic and less willing to initiate new tasks).
4. Create change: Psychologists work in a world in which people suffer from mental disorders, in which people are
victims of violence and aggression, and in which stereotypes and prejudices affect how people live and function (to
name but a few problems we face in society). Therefore, an important goal of psychology research is to apply
knowledge and research methods to change people's lives for the better.
Example: Clinical psychologists who treat depressed people could encourage them to attempt tasks that can be
mastered or easily achieved; research evidence suggests this may decrease their helplessness and pessimism.
Does my research have to meet all four goals?
No; research is cumulative.
It’s very difficult for a single research project to meet all four goals of psychological research. Instead, researchers
may focus on a single goal, or one or two goals. For example, when researchers investigate the causes of behavior,
they may also be able to describe a particular aspect of behavior and identify a predictive relationship. Psychological
research is cumulative. Our ability to describe, predict, understand, and create change depends on the many
research projects conducted by psychologists all over the world.
What's the difference between basic and applied research?
The lab vs. the "real world," understanding vs. creating change. As you read about psychologists isolating and
controlling behavior in research labs, you may have thought, "But this isn't what real life is like." And that's true; our
everyday life is complicated and "messy." In order for psychologists to isolate specific factors that influence
behavior, however, they do their research in a lab. This is called basic research. The goal of basic research is to test
theories about behavior and mental processes, and "basic researchers" often focus on the goal of understanding.

Applied research, in contrast, is more directly concerned with the goal of creating change. Psychologists who do
research in "the real world" apply the findings from basic research to improve people's lives. And, in turn, basic
researchers use the findings from applied research to refine their theories about behavior. Together, findings from
basic research and applied research help psychologists to describe people's behavior and mental processes, make
predictions about behavior, understand the causes of behavior, and create positive change in people's lives.
 What factors distinguish students who adjust well to college?

 What factors predict whether students will do well?
 Why do some students do better than others?
These are important questions. Our "everyday" thinking relies on intuition to answer them. Type in this space a few
factors you think may influence students' adjustment to college.
You may have thought of factors such as
 Having supportive friends and parents

 The difficulty of the classes
 Distance from home
 Whether the college environment is fun and active
 Many other factors
Our intuition tells us that these factors influence college adjustment, but to be scientific, we need to do more. When
we think like a scientist, we set aside our more everyday approach to decision making and gaining knowledge. A
scientific approach to these questions involves isolating important factors, such as support from friends and
observing the effects of this factor by itself.
Scientists are skeptical. They look at lists of factors that intuition suggests may be important, but they adopt a wait-
and-see attitude. What does the research evidence say about these factors? Is the evidence good? Is it based on
well-controlled observation and experimentation? As you begin to think like a scientist, you won't be satisfied with
people's opinions about psychological topics. You'll want to know what the research evidence says.
Why should we do research on college students' adjustment?
This question addresses the goals of psychological research.
Description: A first goal in conducting research in this area is to describe the characteristics of students who adjust
well to college and the characteristics of students who don't adjust well.
Prediction: We can also conduct research to predict which students will adjust well and those who won't adjust well.
Understanding: An important research goal concerns why some students adjust better to college than others. We
can try to identify what causes some students to adjust better than others.
Creating Change: When we can describe, predict, and understand college students' adjustment, we're in a position
to create change. We can intervene to improve students' adjustment to college.

Here are 10 questions that will help you to be skeptical about research findings. Ask yourself these questions when
you hear or read about psychological research:
• What is the source? For example, are the findings in a scientific publication, in the popular media (e.g., television,
magazines, Internet), or presented as part of cultural traditions or stereotypes? (Scientific publications are the best
source for research findings about mental processes and behavior.)
 Is the evidence based on testimonials (personal accounts) or research involving large samples?
 (Testimonials are not scientific.)
 Are the results coincidental-could they be due to unusual, chance events?
 Do the researchers encourage more controlled investigations? (Beware of those who dismiss the need for
more research.)
 Are the findings based on more than one study? Is the research evidence accumulating for phenomenon?
 Are there conflicting findings, or are conflicting findings ignored?
 Is the research controlled or scientific? (Beware of those who say that the findings disappear when
 Controlled studies are conducted.)
 Have the findings been verified with independent observers?
 Do explanations for findings appeal to forces outside the realm of science?
 Are causal explanations for a phenomenon offered, even when controlled research hasn't been conducted?
Step 2: Choose a Research Question
You probably have lots of questions about people's behavior and mental processes. As you learn more about
psychology, you may learn answers to your questions based on research that already has been conducted.
And, you may begin to ask new questions. Researchers in psychology are no different-they have many questions.
Often, the hardest step in the research process is choosing which question to answer!
The purpose of this section in Student as Researcher is to consider important resources available to us as we choose
our research questions: personal experiences, psychological research literature, and online resources.
 How can my personal experiences in psychology help me with research questions?

 How can past research help me to choose a research question?
 How do I search the psychological literature for information on my topic?
 What online resources are available for learning about psychological topics?
 How can my personal experiences in psychology help me with research questions?
Textbooks, participate in research projects, research teams
By now you've probably gained some exposure to the diverse topics covered by psychologists. A quick glance
through your Introductory Psychology textbook will reveal that researchers study topics in clinical, social,
neuropsychological, cognitive, health, developmental, and many other areas of psychology. To learn more about the
different areas of psychology, go to the websites of the American Psychological Association (APA) and the American
Psychological Society (APS):
 APA: http://www.apa.org/about/division.html
APS: http://www.psychologicalscience.org
Another way to learn about psychological research is to participate in research projects. You may be able to
participate in projects through your Psychology Department. Another fun option is to participate in research online.
There are a wide variety of opportunities; all you need to do is click on the projects that seem interesting to you. Try
these websites for participating in research:
 http://psych.hanover.edu/APS/exponnet.html
 http://www.socialpsychology.org/
 http://www.psych.upenn.edu/~baron/qs.html
 http://psychexps.olemiss.edu/
Perhaps the best way to learn about research in psychology is to become involved in conducting research.
Many professors conduct research and are eager to involve students on research teams. You may need only to ask.
You may also learn more about how psychologists conduct research in research methods and lab courses offered by
your Psychology Department.
How can past research help me to choose a research question?
Psychological literature: inconsistencies, suggestions
No matter how or where you begin to develop a research question, you will need to read about psychological
research that has already been conducted. In fact, reading psychological literature (e.g., books, research articles) can
provide many ideas for research.
As you read reports of psychological studies on a topic, you may note inconsistencies, contradictions, and limitations
of the research. New questions arise from the findings of research studies. Often, researchers suggest ideas for
future research at the conclusion of their research report. Thus, reading the psychological research literature is a
very important step of the research process.
How do I search the psychological literature for information on my topic?
Many resources are available to you to help you search the psychological literature. The first step is to learn what's
available. The American Psychological Association publishes abstracts from more than 1,000 national and
international periodicals in Psychological Abstracts.
Online resources for conducting searches of psychological literature are FirstSearch and InfoTrac 2000.
Electronic databases allow users to search for information using keywords and key phrases, subject words, authors'
names, titles of articles or books, and year. The most effective approach is to have intersecting keywords; that is,
both words must be present in the title or abstract before the computer wills ÏflagÓ an article.
This will allow you to find the research articles that are most relevant to your research topic. An example might
illustrate how to search for research articles. In Step 1: Think Like a Scientist, we used the example of the
relationship between depression and helplessness to describe the goals of psychological research. If we use
depression in a keyword search, the computerized search will identify thousands of research articles that have
examined some aspect of depression. However, if we use the terms depression and helplessness a more reasonable
number of articles will be located. By entering the key words, depression and helplessness and problem solving, your
search will be even more restricted. It's a good idea to search with several different keywords to make sure you
catch all the articles that are related to your topic. PsycINFO will provide the abstract of the research article and all

the information you need to locate the research article in your library. Other resources available at your library will
allow you to print out the full text of research articles. Finally, as you read each article, you will find the author refers
to additional research. The References section at the end of the article will provide the information you need to
locate the articles cited by the author.
You can learn more about using PsycINFO by going to the following APA website:
 http://www.apa.org/psycinfo/about
Be sure to click on demo to try a PsycINFO search, or go directly to the demo at:
 http://www.psycinfo.com/demo
PsycINFO is available for a subscription fee, but the demonstration is free. Your library probably subscribes to the
PsycINFO service, so you should do your literature searches there.
What online resources are available for learning more about psychological topics?
Psychology-related websites
There are many good resources online for learning about psychology. Presented below is a small list of websites you
can check out. Many of these sites have links to other sites.
General information about psychology (through APA site, with search engine):
 http://www.apa.org/psychnet/
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development:
 http://www.nichd.nih.gov/
American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry:
 http://www.aacap.org/info_families/index.htm
Mental health risk factors for adolescents:
 http://education.indiana.edu/cas/adol/mental.html
Youth development:
 http://www.cyfernet.mes.umn.edu/youthdev.html
Biological changes in adolescence:
 http://www.personal.psu.edu/faculty/n/x/nxd10/adolesce.htm
Federation of Behavioral, Psychological, and Cognitive Science:
 http://www.am.org/federation/
Neuropsychology, genes, science:

 http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/serendip
Ask Noah About Mental Health:
 http://www.noah-health.org/index.html
Information about psychological disorders:
 http://www.mhsource.com/disorders
Suicide awareness:
 http://www.save.org/
American Family Foundation website about cults:
 http://www.csj.org/index.html
National Clearinghouse for Alcohol and Drug Information:
 http://www.health.org/
Resources for Clinical Psychology:
 http://www.rider.edu/users/suler/tcp.html
Information about mental health (Knowledge Exchange Network):
 http://www.mentalhealth.org/
Comprehensive guide to mental health online:
 http://www.mentalhealth.net/
Stress management:
 http://www.psychwww.com/mtsite/
Using the Internet for therapy:
 http://netpsych.com/index.htm
National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH):
 http://www.nimh.nih.gov/
Websites for alcohol and drug additions:
 http://www.arg.org/
 http://www.niaaa.nih.gov/
 http://www.well.com/user/woa/
 http://www.support-group.com/
Emotional intelligence:
 http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~bump/Hu305/3/3/3/
The Personality Project:
 http://personality-project.org/personality.html
Behavioral and cognitive development research:
 http://www.mpipf-muenchen.mpg.de/BCD/bcd_e.htm
Explanations for criminal behavior:
 http://www.uaa.alaska.edu/just/just110/crime2.html
Psychology and law:
 http://www.unl.edu/ap-ls/
Sigmund Freud and the Freud Archives:
 http://plaza.interport.net/nypsan/freudarc.html
Step 2: Develop a Research Question
Dr. Pennebaker was most interested in students’ emotional adjustment to college. He wondered whether students'
emotional adjustment influences their grades and health.
Dr. Pennebaker has conducted many research studies on a diverse range of psychological topics, such as religious
conversion, lie detection, traumatic experiences, psychosomatic problems, and reasons for why therapy seems to
work. As he put together his findings from these topics, a theme emerged. Dr. Pennebaker noticed that people who
experience traumas often have later health problems. He also noted that people often felt better after they revealed
secrets (such as emotional traumas) in confessions, lie detection, and therapy.
Based on his personal experiences conducting research and reading the psychological literature, Dr. Pennebaker
developed the following research question:
If students express their emotional feelings about adjusting to college, will they be healthier and do better in school?
Searching the Psychological Literature
We can search the psychological literature to learn more about adjusting to college and about disclosing personal
information and health.
PsycINFO is the online search tool for psychological research. We used the following search terms in a keyword
search. The computer searched for these words in all fields (e.g., title, abstract).
1. College and adjust: We used these terms to find articles related to adjusting to college. By selecting the word
adjusts, the computer flagged words such as adjusting and adjustment. This search resulted in over 200 articles’ too
broad a search. As we scanned the titles, many of them were vision studies that examined eye adjustments with
college students as research participants. So, we tried again' but saved information for articles related to our topic.

2. College and emotion: We thought we might see whether we could look just at college students' emotions, but this
was even a broader search (over 3000 articles), not narrower. Many of the articles described studies of emotions
with college student samples.
3. College and adjust and emotion: We used this search to focus on college students’ emotional adjustment to
college. This resulted in only 3 articles- too narrow a search. One article was about a small sample of college
students' reactions to Rorschach inkblots at high altitudes. Not what we were looking for.
4. College and adjust and health: We thought this search might produce articles related to how college adjustment
related to students' health. This search produced fewer than 10 articles on a diverse set of topics (e.g., bulimia,
concussions, divorce). One of them was in Norwegian. Still, we did find some possibilities and saved the abstract and
reference information for these.
5. College adjustment and academic achievement: This was a different search because both of these phrases are
subject words, which are indexed. When an article is entered into a database, the main subjects addressed by the
article are identified. This produced over 20 articles, several of them relevant to our topic.
6. Many of them were in Dissertation Abstracts. This means that the research was conducted as a graduate
student's doctoral (Ph.D.) dissertation. Although the dissertation abstract is easily retrieved, the dissertation is not.
In our next searches we focused on some of the words identified as central to his research: 6. trauma and health:
This was a very broad search, resulting in over 1000 articles covering a wide range of topics. We tried to narrow this
search.
7. Trauma and health and disclosure: Pennebaker focused on the effects of revealing secrets-referred to as
"disclosure" in psychological literature. This resulted in over 600 articles; many of them were unpublished
dissertations.
8. Emotion and health and disclosure: This search allowed us to capture articles that addressed both the emotional
and health consequences of disclosure and resulted in 12 articles.
The "output" of computer searches is a list of the titles and authors of research articles and books. If the title
indicates the research might be related to your topic, you can click on the word "Abstract" to read the summary of
the research. Sometimes you'll find the article really isn't about your topic. If the article is related to your topic, you'll
find information about the year, journal, and pages of the article. Your library might have the journal available
online. If so, you might be able to print a copy of the article. If not online, you'll need to check whether your library
owns copies of the journal or request the article through an inter-library loan service.
It's important to remember that although computerized searches are helpful, you'll never find all the research
articles related to your topic using computerized searches. When you photocopy articles to read (or print them from
the online service), remember that the References section of articles is one of your most important resources. In
each research article, authors cite additional research studies. This is a very important way for you to identify past
research on your topic. So remember to keep the References section!
Step 2: Choose a Research Question
An important part of conducting research is searching the psychological literature for more information about a
topic. Ask yourself these questions as you evaluate research evidence presented in psychological literature (e.g.,
research articles).
 Does the researcher place his/her findings in the context of other research on the topic?
 Are the results of previous studies based on scientific, controlled research?
Step 3: Generate a Research Hypothesis
After choosing a research question, the next step is to formulate a research hypothesis (plural: hypotheses). A
research hypothesis is a tentative answer to the research question. That is, after reading reports of psychological
research, researchers predict in advance what they think the outcome of a research study will be. This may seem silly
at first-why try to answer the question beforehand? Why not simply conduct the study to learn the answer to the
research question?
Researchers form hypotheses “tentative answers for a research question “because the hypothesis will influence how
the research study is conducted. As you'll see in later sections of Student as Researcher, there are many methods
psychologists use to answer research questions. Which method a researcher chooses will depend on the hypothesis.
Psychologists use theories as they develop their research hypotheses. Therefore, in this section, we first address
theories, and then focus on how to develop a hypothesis.
 What are psychological theories?

 What is a research hypothesis?
 How can I come up with a research hypothesis?
 What are psychological theories?
Explanations for why people behave the way they do; coherent and logical frameworks that guide research Theories
are explanations about how nature works. Psychologists propose theories about the nature of behavior and mental
processes and reasons why people (and animals) behave the way they do. Some psychological theories attempt to
explain a wide range of human behavior. For example, Sigmund Freud tried to explain all of human development,
personality, and mental illness. More modern-day theorists may not try to explain such a broad array of phenomena,
but still tackle complex topics such as love (Sternberg, 1986) and cognition (Anderson, 1990, 1993).
Other theories are more limited in their scope-attempting to explain more specific behaviors and phenomena, such
as déjà vu experiences (Findler, 1998) and how we stick with a plan to change our behavior (theory of planned
behavior; Ajzen & Madden, 1986). As you might imagine, the more behavior a theory tries to explain, the more
complex the theory will be, and the more difficult it will be to test the theory. Therefore, most theories in psychology
tend to be modest in scope, attempting to explain only a limited range of behavior or mental processes.
A good theory has to accomplish several things. First, a theory needs to define and describe the events or
phenomena it seeks to explain, and predict when we can expect certain behaviors to occur. Finally, theories must
explain the causes of events described in the theory. These predictions and explanations are tested in research
studies.
The process of developing and testing theories follows these steps:
1. Theorists develop their ideas by reviewing all the research evidence for a particular phenomenon or behavior.
2. They attempt to organize this evidence into a coherent and logical framework that explains the phenomenon.
3. Using this theory, new ideas and hypotheses are developed to guide the next research projects in an area.

4. These new research studies help to refine the theory.
5. The end result is a greater understanding of human behavior and mental processes.
What is a research hypothesis?
Simpler, more tentative explanation that can be tested
A research hypothesis is simpler and more tentative than a theory. That is, any particular hypothesis may represent
only a small part of the theory.
Several criteria determine whether a hypothesis is testable (i.e., can be investigated in a research study). First, the
concepts addressed by the hypothesis must be clearly defined and measurable. Many of Freud's hypotheses are not
testable because there are no clear ways to define and measure important concepts in his theory, such as id, ego,
and superego.
Hypotheses cannot be tested if they are circular. A circular hypothesis occurs when an event itself becomes an
explanation for the event. We can find circular hypotheses on many talk shows and in our everyday conversations.
For example, to say "your 8-year-old son is distractible in school... because he has an attention deficit disorder" is
circular (Kimble, 1989). Because attention deficit disorders are defined by the inability to pay attention, this
hypothesis doesn't explain anything. It offers no more than saying, "Your son doesn't pay attention because he
doesn't pay attention." A good hypothesis avoids this type of circularity.
Finally, research hypotheses must refer to concepts that can be studied scientifically. To say that someone's behavior
is caused by the devil isn't a testable hypothesis because this hypothesis refers to a concept (the devil) that isn't in
the province of science. Science deals with what can be observed; this is the basis for empirical observation.
How can I come up with a research hypothesis?
Read psychological research, consider personal experiences, think of exceptions and inconsistencies there are many
ways to generate a research hypothesis. After reading reports of psychological research related to your research
question, you may consider whether your personal experiences match what is described by the theories and past
research. You may also "brainstorm" to think of "exceptions to the rule."
That is, a theory or past research may describe only specific situations; you may think of conditions in which the
theory may not apply. As you continue to read research articles, you will find inconsistencies or disagreements
among researchers.
In all of these situations, you may think of explanations for the discrepancies among previous research articles, and
why the theories and research may differ from your own experience. These explanations become fruitful research
hypotheses.
Our next step in understanding Pennebaker and Francis' (1996) research is to look at the theories that influenced
their thinking and the hypothesis they generated. Also, we will ask you to think of a hypothesis for this research.
 What theories guided Pennebaker's work on students' emotional adjustment to college?

 What hypothesis did Pennebaker and Francis test in their experiment?
 What hypothesis would you develop?

 What theories guided Pennebaker's work on students' emotional adjustment to college?
One theory comes from intuition. Popular wisdom tells us that we shouldn't keep our emotions and thoughts about
negative life events "bottled" within us, that it's good to "get things off our chest." In fact, the emotional release of
catharsis was one of Freud's therapeutic techniques and continues to be an important component of many modern-
day psychotherapies. Until recently, however, little research examined the psychological and physical health
consequences of directly confronting traumatic emotional experiences.
Pennebaker used "inhibition theory" to guide his work. He theorized that keeping thoughts and feelings about
painful experiences bottled up might take a physical toll-that is, it's hard on the body to keep these experiences
inside. According to inhibition theory, preventing (inhibiting) the expression of painful thoughts and feelings
increases autonomic nervous system (ANS) activity. Specifically, over activity of the sympathetic branch of the ANS
may lead to stress-related problems such as hypertension. Thus, inhibition was theorized to lead to prolonged
activation of the ANS, which, in turn, was theorized to have long-term negative health consequences.
Pennebaker and his colleagues conducted many research studies to test inhibition theory. In several of their
experiments, participants were assigned to one of two groups. One group of participants wrote about emotional
experiences they've had, and another group wrote about superficial topics. Results of these experiments indicated
that participants who wrote about emotional events had better health outcomes than participants who wrote about
superficial topics. Pennebaker concluded that disclosing emotional thoughts and feelings-rather than inhibiting
them-seemed to produce beneficial health outcomes.
This seems like the end of the story, doesn't it? But, it isn't. Some research results indicated that inhibition theory
couldn't fully explain research results. For example, students asked to dance expressively about emotional
experience did not experience the same benefits as students who danced expressively and wrote about their
experiences. The theory had to be refined.
Pennebaker and Francis proposed that an essential component of disclosing emotional thoughts and feelings is that
individuals try to understand the meaning and significance of their negative experiences. That is, it's not enough
simply to write about emotional events. Pennebaker's new theory suggested that cognitive changes-such as greater
understanding and meaning-associated with disclosing emotional topics are critical for beneficial outcomes. The
theory needed to be tested again.
 What hypothesis did Pennebaker and Francis test in their experiment?
Their hypothesis has two parts:
 Pennebaker and Francis predicted that college students who write about their emotional
experiences associated with starting college would have better health and academic outcomes than
students who don't write about adjusting to college.
 Cognitive changes that take place in students who write about their emotional experiences can
account for the beneficial outcomes.
What hypothesis would you develop?
A first step in developing a hypothesis is to see how ideas match your experience. Ask yourself these
Questions:

 Do you feel better after disclosing your emotional experiences?

 Do you keep a journal?
 Do you write letters or e-mail to people, telling them about your emotional experiences?
 Does writing about events help you to feel better? Why?
An important step in developing hypotheses is to know the findings from previous research. This was critical in
Pennebaker's work. He was able to see that expressing emotional experiences didn't always work (e.g., through
dance). There had to be something more to it. What's special about writing? One possible answers which
Pennebaker and Francis decided to test concerned cognitive changes.
As we started this section, we could have asked you different questions:
 Have you talked to anyone about adjusting to college?

 Does it matter who you talk to?
 Does talking to people about emotional experiences help?
These questions aren't about writing. Talking is a different way that people express their emotions, and it's a way
that people can experience changes in the way they think about an experience.
What hypothesis could you develop about the relationship between talking to others and college adjustment?
A central component of the research process is the hypothesis. Ask yourself these questions when you read or hear
about psychological research to evaluate the researcher's hypothesis:
 Does the researcher present a theory about the behavior or mental process that is investigated?
 Does the theory define and describe events, predict when specific phenomena or events should
occur, and explain the causes of events described in the theory?
 Is a research hypothesis presented?
 Is the hypothesis testable? That is, are the concepts clearly defined and measurable; does the
hypothesis avoid circularity; does the hypothesis refer to concepts that are scientific?
 Is the hypothesis very general or very specific? (Specific hypotheses provide better tests of theories.)
Step 4: Form Operational Definitions
Once researchers develop hypotheses, they are ready to begin identifying the specific methods for their study. The
next step involves forming operational definitions of the concepts to be investigated in the research.
 What is an operational definition?

 How do I decide what operational definition to use?
 What is a variable?
 How do I measure psychological concepts?
 How do I know whether I have good measures of my concepts?
 What is an operational definition?
Specific definition of a concept in a research study

An operational definition defines a concept solely in terms of the operations (or methods) used to produce and
measure it. For example, we might operationally define "anxiety “using a paper-and-pencil questionnaire designed
to measure symptoms of anxiety such as worry, sweaty palms, and heart palpitations. To operationally define
"stressful situation," we might ask people to give a speech in front of a large audience.
With these operational definitions, we might test the hypothesis that anxiety increases during stressful situations.
Not everyone may accept these definitions. For example, some may say that important symptoms of anxiety are
missing from our questionnaire. From a cross-cultural perspective, others may criticize our operational definition of
"stressful situation" because it may only apply to a small segment of the population. However, once we decide on a
particular operational definition for our study, no one can argue about the definition of the concept for our study.
Operational definitions help researchers to communicate about their concepts. An important question you should
ask as you read psychological research is, how did the researcher operationally define his/her concepts?
How do I decide what operational definition to use?
Previous research
As with forming research questions and hypotheses, we identify operational definitions by reading research articles
that examine the same concepts we intend to investigate. What measures have other researchers used? What are
the strengths and weaknesses of these measures? These are some of the questions researchers ask as they decide
the ways in which they will operationally define the concepts in their research.
In most cases, there's no need to "reinvent the wheel." Psychologists have studied a wide range of topics, and many
measures exist for many concepts. Most likely, you will be able to build on previous research by using the same
operational definitions employed by other researchers.
What is a variable?
A dimension or factor that varies
As you read about psychological research, you will find that researchers talk about "variables." A variable is a
dimension or factor that varies. For example, people naturally vary in the amount of anxiety they experience, and
situations vary in how stressful they are. Psychologists work with variables in two ways: They measure variables and
they manipulate (or control) variables. For example, by using an anxiety questionnaire as an operational definition
for anxiety, the researcher measures the extent to which people experience anxiety symptoms. By manipulating
whether participants make a speech or do not make a speech, the researcher controls whether people experience a
stressful situation. Participants in the two conditions of the research would vary-some would experience a stressful
situation and others would not.
How do I measure psychological concepts?
Psychological measurement, observer agreement, self-report scales
Scientists use both physical measurement and psychological measurement. Physical measurement involves
dimensions for which people agree on the standard and instruments for measurement-for example, length, weight,
and time. Psychology researchers, however, typically rely on psychological measurement. We don't have agreed-

upon standards and instruments for measuring psychological concepts such as beauty, aggression, personality, and
intelligence. How do we measure these concepts?
One way to measure psychological concepts is to have two or more observers rate a behavior or action using a rating
scale. For example, two observers may agree that a child's behavior warrants a score of "7" on a 1 to 10 scale of
aggressiveness. When observers agree we become more confident in our psychological measure of aggression.
Often, however, we're interested in measuring psychological concepts, such as mental processes, that cannot be
readily observed. To measure thoughts and feelings, for example, psychologists typically use self-report
questionnaires. A typical rating scale may ask respondents to report the extent to which they disagree or agree with
several statements using a 1 (Strongly Disagree) to 5 (Strongly Agree) rating scale. Self-report questionnaires are the
most frequently used measurement instruments in psychology.
How do I know whether I have good measures of my concepts?
Validity, reliability
Validity refers to the "truthfulness" of a measure; that is, does it measure what it is intended to measure?
Although validity may seem straightforward, a few examples will illustrate that validity isn't easily achieved,
particularly for complex concepts.
One example concerns the measurement of intelligence. Many psychologists have debated whether the most
frequently used measures of intelligence, which emphasize verbal and spatial ability, adequately assess all aspects of
intelligence. Do these tests assess creativity, emotional intelligence, social intelligence, and good-old common
sense? A more familiar example may be aptitude tests, such as the SAT. Does this test validly measure students'
readiness for college?
The reliability of a measure refers to its consistency. Researchers may refer to several different types of reliability.
For example, when observers agree about the aggressiveness of an action, we say they are reliable (i.e., they are
consistent in their observations). Measures are also reliable if they are consistent over time. If a person's intelligence
score doesn't change (relative to others'), we say the intelligence test is reliable.
Psychologists want to use valid and reliable measures of their concepts. You may see that if an invalid and unreliable
measure is used, it's hard to interpret the findings of a research study. This is because we wouldn't be able to know
whether the concept was defined truthfully and consistently. Because it's important to have good measures, many
researchers conduct psychological studies to develop valid and reliable measures of concepts. Many research
reports in the psychological literature describe the reliability and validity of psychological measures.
Recall Pennebaker and Francis' hypotheses:
Pennebaker and Francis predicted that college students who write about their emotional experiences associated with
starting college would have better health and academic outcomes than students who don't write about adjusting to
college.
Cognitive changes that take place in students who write about their emotional experiences can account for the
beneficial outcomes.

The next step is to define the concepts in the hypotheses. What, specifically, do we mean by emotional experiences
and better health and academic outcomes? What do we mean by cognitive changes?
Operational definition for writing about emotional experiences
 Operational definition for health outcomes

 Operational definition for academic outcomes
 Operational definition for cognitive change
Are these valid and reliable measures of health and academic outcomes and cognitive change?
Operational definition for writing about emotional experiences:
Pennebaker and Francis manipulated a variable to operationally define "writing about emotional experiences."
Some students were asked to "write about your very deepest thoughts and feelings about coming to college."
An important part of their research was to compare the outcomes for college students who wrote about emotional
experiences to outcomes for students who did not write about adjusting to college. Therefore, a second group of
students was asked to "describe in writing any particular object or event of your choosing...as objectively or
dispassionately as you can...without mentioning your emotions, opinions, or beliefs."
Participants wrote for 20 minutes on 3 consecutive days.
Operational definition for health outcomes
In order to see if emotional writing produces better health outcomes than superficial writing, Pennebaker and
Francis had to measure health outcomes. There are a number of ways researchers could assess health outcomes.
Pennebaker and Francis counted the number of times students went to the Student Health Center for illness during
the academic year (visits for allergy shots, routine checkups, and follow-up appointments were not counted).
Operational definition for academic outcomes
Again, there are a number of ways to measure academic outcomes. Pennebaker and Francis chose to measure
students' grade point average (GPA) for the fall semester in which they wrote and the subsequent spring semester.
Typically, when calculating a GPA, an A is assigned 4 points; a B is assigned 3 points, and so on. Each student's GPA
represents the average of these points across all of the student's classes.
Operational definition for academic outcomes
Again, there are a number of ways to measure academic outcomes. Pennebaker and Francis chose to measure
students' grade point average (GPA) for the fall semester in which they wrote and the subsequent spring semester.
Typically, when calculating a GPA, an A is assigned 4 points; a B is assigned 3 points, and so on. Each student's GPA
represents the average of these points across all of the student's classes.
Are these valid and reliable measures of health and academic outcomes, and cognitive change?
This question gets at whether the operational definitions truthfully and consistently measure the concepts. For
example, we could argue that not all students use the health center (e.g., some may use their doctor at home). Thus,
number of health center visits may not validly measure students' illnesses. With respect to reliability, we can ask
whether students' GPAs are consistent across semesters. Students' GPAs can vary for lots of reasons, including the
number of credits in the semester, the difficulty of the classes, and whether students are also working or
participating in other activities. All of these potential variables can influence the consistency (reliability) of GPAs.
Generally, researchers choose several operational definitions of their concepts in a single study. For example,
Pennebaker and Francis measured cognitive change in several different ways (e.g., increase in the number of insight
and cause words in students' essays). To the extent that the results for the different operational definitions agree,
we are more confident in the validity of our measures.
When you evaluate research evidence, you must identify the researcher's operational definitions. Ask yourself these
questions when evaluating research evidence:
 How did the researcher operationally define his/her concepts?

 Did the researcher provide a clear rationale for his/her operational definitions?
 Did the researcher use valid and reliable measures of his/her concepts?
Did the researcher use several measures of concepts? (Several measures are better than one measure.)
Step 5: Choose a Research Design
A research design is a plan for answering a research question, a plan for testing the hypothesis. Psychology
researchers typically rely on four main types of research designs: observational and correlation, experimental, quasi-
experimental, and single-case designs. The design researchers choose depends on the research question and
hypothesis, and ultimately, their goal for the research. In this section, we will cover each research design and provide
examples. As you'll see, this section provides more details than other sections. This is because choosing the research
design is one of the most important steps in the research process.
 What research design should I choose if I want to describe or predict people's behavior?
 How do I conduct an observational or correlation study?
 Can a study be both observational and correlation?
 What research design should I choose if I want to understand the causes of behavior?
 How do I "control" a variable?
 How do I know whether the variable has an effect?
Apology-present Condition
No-apology Condition
 How do I conduct an experimental research design?

 Should people participate in all conditions of my experiment?
 Because different people participate in each condition, could this explain any differences in the outcome?
 Isn't it possible that conditions of an experiment differ in other ways, besides the independent variable?
 What research design should I choose if I want to understand the causes of behavior or create change in the
"Real World"?
 How do quasi-experiments differ from "true" experiments'?
 How do I conduct a quasi-experiment?
 What research design should I use if I want to understand and treat the behavior of one person?
 How do I conduct a single-case research design?
 Can I make a claim that a treatment causes a client to improve?
What research design should I choose if I want to describe or predict people's behavior?
Observational research design, correlation research design
Two important goals of research in psychology are description and prediction. In observational research, researchers
attempt to describe fully all aspects of behavior in a situation. Correlation research goes one step further by
attempting to find predictive relationships (correlations) among the variables that are measured in the study. A
correlation exists when two variables are associated (co-vary), but the relationship may not be causal (i.e., one
variable does not cause the other).
These two types of studies are combined in this section because a key feature of both designs is that researchers
don't attempt to control or manipulate the participants' behavior. Instead, they simply measure and record behavior
and mental processes as they naturally occur. For this reason, these designs sometimes are called passive
observational studies (Kazdin, 1999).
 How do I conduct an observational or correlation study?

 Can a study be both observational and correlation?
How do I conduct an observational or correlation study?
Observe, measure variables
When researchers choose observational and correlation designs, they typically first select a sample of participants
and then observe and measure the variables of interest (as defined by operational definitions). Psychologists can
make observations either directly by watching and recording people's behavior or indirectly by checking records of
people's past behavior. Another form of observation occurs when individuals are asked to report their thoughts and
feelings on paper-and-pencil surveys (questionnaires) or during interviews.
Can a study be both observational and correlation?
Describe participants' responses and identify relationships among variables most research studies attempt to both
describe and predict behavior and mental processes by observing behavior directly and/or by asking participants to
complete surveys. When researchers gather information for several variables, they often look to see whether there
are relationships among the variables. An example may help to clarify this. In one study, researchers were interested
in finding out whether people notice significant changes in their environment (Simons & Levin, 1998). They had a
confederate "a person who helps the researcher create a research situation for observation" ask individuals on a
college campus for directions. Midway through the conversation, the confederate was replaced by a different
person. Simons and Levin observed and recorded their variable: whether people in their study noticed the change
(yes or no). Would you detect the change?
How did they accomplish this magic act? The confederate first approached a stranger on a campus sidewalk and
asked for directions to a campus building. As they talked, two additional confederates rudely walked between them
carrying a door. The unsuspecting research participant could see the door, but could not see the two people carrying
the door. As the door interrupted the conversation, the first confederate (who had asked for directions) switched
places with a person carrying the door. The new confederate then continued the conversation and noted whether
the research participant noticed the switch.

 To see a video of the change, go to

http://www.wjh.harvard.edu/~viscog/lab and check out the Demonstrations section.
Many people did not notice the change. So, we can describe people's behavior by saying that people often miss
important changes. Can we make a prediction too? To make a prediction, we need to observe a relationship
between two variables. Simons and Levin observed a second variable. Whether participants noted the change
depended on whether the confederate was similar to the participant or not similar (e.g., same age or different age).
People detected the change when the confederate was similar, but were less likely to detect the change when the
confederate was dissimilar. Based on these findings, we can predict when people will detect changes.
In sum, if your research question seeks to describe and/or predict an aspect of behavior or mental processes, you
should use an observational or correlation research design.
What research design should I choose if I want to understand the causes of behavior?
Experimental research design
Researchers choose an experimental design when they seek to understand the causes of psychological phenomena.
This requires a high degree of control over the variable of interest. That is, researchers must isolate the variable
they're interested in and assess behavior in a controlled setting. Experimental designs differ from passive
observational/correlation designs because the researcher actively controls important aspects of the research
situation.
 How do I "control" a variable?

 How do I know whether the variable has an effect?
 How do I conduct an experimental research design?
 Because different people participate in each condition, could this explain any differences in the outcome?
 Isn't it possible that conditions of an experiment differ in other ways, besides the independent variable?
How do I "control" a variable?
Compare at least two conditions
An important feature of experimental designs is that the researcher compares two (or more) conditions or groups.
In one condition, a "treatment" is present in the situation (called the "treatment" condition), and in another
condition, the treatment is absent (the "control" or "comparison" condition). The Pennebaker and Francis (1996)
experiment on college students' adjustment was an experiment with two conditions. The "emotional writing"
condition was the treatment condition, and the "superficial writing" condition was the comparison condition.
An additional example might help to illustrate what we mean by experimental control. This example comes from a
different area of research in psychology: How people respond when someone hurts or angers them. A victim's
natural response to an offense is to want revenge. What can be done to reduce retaliation and aggression following
an interpersonal injury? We might ask whether an offender's apology following a harmful action decreases the
likelihood that the victim will want revenge. Here's one possible sequence of events in this situation:
Offender hurts Victim wants Offender Victim's desire for revenge
A victim revenge apologizes decreases

After reviewing research literature on this topic, we may hypothesize that the presence of an apology, compared to
no apology, decreases the likelihood of victims' desire for revenge. To test this hypothesis, we may create two
hypothetical scenarios ("vignettes") to describe an offense. We could control whether the offender apologizes or
does not apologize in the scenario. The two scenarios would be identical, except for the presence or absence of an
apology. This would be the operational definition of apology in this experiment.
How do I know whether the variable has an effect?
Measure participants' responses in each condition
We could measure participants' desire for revenge in the hypothetical situation by asking them to respond to a
question, such as, "To what extent would you like something bad to happen to this person to make things even?"
Participants could rate their response on a 1 (not at all) to 10 (very much) rating scale; this rating would be the
operational definition of the variable, desire for revenge.
Click on either the apology-present condition or the no-apology condition to see the hypothetical situation, question,
and rating scale.
 Apology-Present Condition
 No-Apology Condition
Apology-Present Condition
Instructions: Imagine this event happened to you.
An acquaintance offers to drop off a paper to an instructor for one of your classes. You worked very hard on the
paper in order to pull up your grade for the course. A week later, when the instructor returns papers, he does not
return your paper to you. After the class, you ask the instructor about your paper. The instructor says that he never
received your paper and will not accept late papers. When you ask about it, your acquaintance says he/she ran into a
friend, went to get coffee, and forgot to take your paper to the instructor. In fact, this person then finds the
crumpled paper in his/her book bag and gives it back to you. This person apologizes over and over to you.
Imagine how you would feel in this situation as you answer this question:
To what extent would you like something bad to happen to this person to make things even?
1-----2-----3-----4-----5-----6-----7-----8-----9-----10
not at all very much
No-Apology Condition
Instructions: Imagine this event happened to you.
An acquaintance offers to drop off a paper to an instructor for one of your classes. You worked very hard on the
paper in order to pull up your grade for the course. A week later, when the instructor returns papers, he does not
return your paper to you. After the class, you ask the instructor about your paper. The instructor says that he never
received your paper and will not accept late papers. When you ask about it, your acquaintance says he/she ran into a
friend, went to get coffee, and forgot to take your paper to the instructor. In fact, this person then finds the
crumpled paper in his/her book bag and gives it back to you.

Imagine how you would feel in this situation as you answer this question:
To what extent would you like something bad to happen to this person to make things even?
1-----2-----3-----4-----5-----6-----7-----8-----9-----10
not at all very much
How do I conduct an experimental research design?
Manipulate an independent variable, measure a dependent variable
This hypothetical research study has two essential ingredients of an experiment: an independent variable and a
dependent variable. An independent variable is controlled, or manipulated, by the researcher. In this hypothetical
experiment, the variable we controlled is the presence or absence of an apology in the scenario. Researchers
measure dependent variables to determine the effect of the independent variable. In this hypothetical experiment,
the dependent variable is participants' rating on the revenge question. If the presence of an apology affects people's
desire for revenge, there should be a difference in participants' ratings in the two conditions.
Should people participate in all conditions of my experiment?
Independent groups design
Often, individuals participate in only one of the conditions. This is called an "independent groups design." In our
hypothetical experiment, one group of participants would read the apology-present scenario, and a separate group
of participants would read the no-apology scenario. We would calculate the mean (average) revenge rating for
participants in the apology group and the mean revenge rating for participants in the no-apology group. Suppose the
mean revenge rating for the no-apology group is 8.0 on the 10-point scale, and the mean revenge rating for the
apology group is 4.0. We would conclude that an apology, compared to no apology, causes people to have lower
desires for revenge.
Because different people participate in each condition, could this explain any differences in the outcome?
Random assignment to conditions creates equivalent groups, on average.
In order to make the causal inference that an apology causes people to desire less revenge, one important feature
must be present in the experiment. Participants must be randomly assigned to the conditions (i.e., the scenarios) of
the experiment. Random assignment means that a random procedure, such as a flip of a coin, determines which
condition each participant experiences. Because different groups of people participate in the different conditions of
the experiment, an alternative explanation for the outcome (i.e., mean revenge ratings of 4.0 and 8.0) is that the
people in the two groups differed in terms of whether they are naturally more vengeful or forgiving. That is, the
mean revenge ratings might differ because different people participated in the groups of the experiment, not
because of the presence or absence of an apology.
The solution to this potential problem, though, is random assignment. Random assignment creates equivalent
groups of participants, on average, before participants read the scenarios. Neither group is more vengeful or
forgiving; nor do the groups differ, on average, in terms of any other potentially important characteristics.

Therefore, we can rule out the alternative explanation that differences in revenge might be due to characteristics of
the people who participated in each group.
Isn't it possible that conditions of an experiment differ in other ways, besides the independent variable?
Holding conditions constant

A second feature that must present in the experiment in order to conclude that an apology causes people to have
lower desires for revenge is called holding conditions constant. Holding conditions constant means that the only
thing we allow to vary in the two conditions is the presence or absence of an apology. Everything else for the two
groups is the same. Remember that scientists seek to isolate the variables they think impact behavior. By
manipulating only whether an apology is present and holding all other potential variables constant, the researcher
can test whether apologies influence vengeful behavior. Thus, in our example, the two scenarios are exactly the
same except for one sentence about an apology.
The goal of experimental research is to understand the causes of people's behavior. When we manipulate an
independent variable, randomly assign participants to conditions, and hold conditions constant, we are in a position
to state that the independent variable causes any differences in the dependent variable. When we can confidently
make this causal inference, we say that an experiment has internal validity.
Experimental designs are the most powerful designs for identifying cause-and-effect relationships (causal inferences)
between variables. Thus, if your research question seeks to identify the causes of a relationship between variables,
you should use an experimental design.
What research design should I choose if I want to understand the causes of behavior or create change in the "real
world"?
Quasi-experimental designs
We've seen that control is an essential aspect of experimental research designs. Sometimes, however, researchers
cannot control all aspects of a situation, for example, when they conduct research in the "real world" rather than a
lab. When researchers seek to control some aspects of an experimental situation, but cannot control all important
aspects, they may conduct a quasi-experiment. Quasi means "almost"; therefore, quasi-experiments are "almost-
experiments."
 How do quasi-experiments differ from "true" experiments?

 How do I conduct a quasi-experiment?
How do quasi-experiments differ from "true" experiments?
No random assignment, unable to hold conditions constant
When researchers use a quasi-experimental design they seek to compare the effects of a treatment condition to a
control condition in which the treatment is not present-just like in a "true" experiment. However, in quasi-
experiments, researchers often are unable to assign participants randomly to the conditions. In addition, the
researcher may not be able to isolate the effects of the independent variable by holding conditions constant. Thus,
participants' behavior (as measured by the dependent variable) may be affected by factors other than the
independent variable.

Although quasi-experiments provide some information about variables, the cause-and-effect relationship (causal
inference) may not be clear. The benefit of quasi-experimental designs, however, is that they provide information
about variables in the real world. Often researchers conduct quasi-experiments with the goal of creating change.
Psychologists have a social responsibility to apply what they know to improve people's lives; quasi-experiments help
psychologists to meet this goal.
How do I conduct a quasi-experiment?
Assign entire groups to treatment vs. control conditions
An essential feature of an experiment is that the researcher compares at least two conditions. One group receives a
"treatment," and the other does not. In quasi-experimental designs, rather than randomly assigning individual
participants to treatment and control conditions, we might assign an entire group to receive a treatment and
withhold the treatment from another group.
For example, we might test the hypothesis that students who are allowed to choose the type of assignments they
complete in a course perform better than students who are not given a choice. The independent variable is whether
students are allowed choice. The dependent variable could be their final grade for the course. You may see that it
wouldn't be fair to allow some students in a class to choose their assignments and give other students in the class no
choice. Therefore, we might manipulate the independent variable using two different sections of the same course.
That is, students in one section of the course would be allowed to make choices and students in another section
would not make choices. We would hold constant that students have to do the same number of assignments.
Although this experiment includes an independent variable (choice) and a dependent variable (grade), we have no
control over many aspects of this experiment. Most importantly, students in the two sections are likely to be
different. Suppose one section meets at 8:00 a.m. and another section meet at 2:00 p.m. Students who enroll in an
8:00 class are likely to be different from students who select a 2:00 class. In addition, class discussions may differ
during the academic term, and the instructor may cover slightly different material. All of these potential variables
may influence the outcome “students" final grade in the course. Quasi-experiments provide some information about
variables, but the cause-and-effect relationship between choosing assignments and grades may not be clear at the
end of the study. Suppose students who are allowed to choose their assignments earn higher grades than students
who are not allowed a choice. Can we confidently say that our independent variable, assignment choice, caused this
difference in grades?
Researchers who conduct quasi-experiments often face difficult decisions about whether other variables, such as
time of day or material covered in the class, could have caused the different grade outcomes.
Thus, if in your research question you seek to examine the causal effect of an independent variable on a dependent
variable, but you cannot control other important variables in the research, you should use a quasi-experimental
design.
What research design should I use if I want to understand and treat the behavior of one person?
Single-case research design
In observational/correlation, experimental, and quasi-experimental designs, researchers focus on groups of

participants. Psychologists use these designs to identify "general laws" of behavior and describe how people behave
and think on average. As the name implies, the researcher who uses a single-case design focuses on a particular

individual. These designs are most frequently used in clinical psychology, in which the psychologist wishes to
describe, predict, understand, and treat the problems faced by a client.
 How do I conduct a single-case research design?

 Can I make a claim that a treatment causes a client to improve?
How do I conduct a single-case research design?
Observe behavior during baseline and treatment
Similar to quasi-experimental designs, single-case researchers frequently cannot control all the important variables
in the research. For example, suppose a psychologist works with a family to help treat a 6-year-old child's impulsive
behavior. The psychologist's research question might be whether a specific treatment helps the child to "stop and
think" before acting. The psychologist and family may first observe what the child's behavior is like without the
treatment; this is called baseline observation. The psychologist then begins treatment, with the hope of improving
the child's behavior and concluding that the treatment caused the improvement.
Can I make a claim that a treatment causes a client to improve?
Other explanations for improvement exist
Although it seems easy to determine a treatment's effectiveness, many alternative explanations can frustrate the
psychologist's efforts to claim that the treatment changed the impulsive behavior. For example, the child's teacher
may work with the child using a different treatment (e.g., rewarding thoughtful behavior), or the child may stop
behaving impulsively because other children stop playing with him or her. Any of these other "treatments," rather
than the psychologist's treatment, may cause the improved behavior. Single-case research designs require that the
psychologist control as many aspects of the treatment situation as possible in order to test the effectiveness of the
treatment. To summarize, if your research question seeks to describe, predict, understand, and/or treat the behavior
and mental processes of one individual, you should choose a single-case design.
Pennebaker and Francis (1996) used an experimental design to test their hypothesis that students who write about
their emotional experiences associated with adjusting to college would have better health and academic outcomes
than students who don't write about their experiences. The independent variable was type of writing. Pennebaker
and Francis used two conditions. The "treatment condition" was emotional writing, and the "control condition" was
superficial writing.- Click on the boxes for "Emotional Writing Condition" and "Superficial Writing Condition" to see
what students' experiences were like in this study. Emotional Writing Condition Superficial Writing Condition To
assess the effect of the independent variable, Pennebaker and Francis measured several dependent variables: health
outcome, academic outcome, and cognitive change. Thus, they recorded how many times each student in the
experiment visited the health center for illness during the academic year, student's GPA after the fall and spring
semesters, and their language use over the 3 days of writing (i.e., number of insight and causal words). Look at what
you wrote in one of the conditions. How many insight words did you use (e.g., realize, see, and understand)? How
many causal words did you use (e.g., because, why, reason, thus)?
Pennebaker and Francis measured how many of these words students used over the 3 days of writing.
Pennebaker and Francis hoped to infer that emotional writing causes students to be healthier and academically
more successful than superficial writing, and that these beneficial outcomes were related to cognitive changes. But
to do so, they had to rule out possible alternative explanations. One alternative explanation concerns the fact that
different students participated in each condition. The two groups of students may have differed naturally in their
health and academic ability and their tendency to search for meaning in the events that happen to them (among
other things). However, we can rule out these alternative explanations for any differences in outcomes because
Pennebaker and Francis randomly assigned participants to the conditions of the experiment. This makes the two
groups of student’s equivalent, on average, before they did any writing. Another alternative explanation concerns
holding conditions constant. Is it possible that students' experiences in the two conditions differed in ways other
than what they wrote? Any potential differences become alternative explanations for differences in outcome at the
end of the study.
To hold conditions constant, Pennebaker and Francis had participants in both conditions write on the same days of
the semester, for the same amount of time, in the same classroom. The experimenters conducting the study didn't
know which condition students were in, so there was no way a student could be treated differently. Because
Pennebaker and Francis conducted a controlled experiment, we can infer that emotional writing, compared to
superficial writing, caused the different outcomes in their experiment. Their experiment had internal validity.
Emotional Writing Condition
For all three writing days of this experiment, your task is to write about your very deepest thoughts and feelings
about coming to college. In your writing, try to let yourself go and to write continuously about your emotions and
thoughts related to leaving home, coming to college, and preparing for the future. You can write about leaving your
friends, family, or high school, or about adjusting to a new social and academic world here. You could also focus on
classes, your future, your parents' or your own expectations. The primary task, however, is for you to reflect on your
most basic thoughts and emotions about coming to college.
Superficial Writing Condition
For all three writing days of this experiment, your task is to describe in writing any particular object or event of your
choosing. In your writing, try to describe some object or event as objectively and as dispassionately as you can
without mentioning your emotions, opinions, or beliefs.
The research design is the most important choice a researcher makes. The design which is used determines the goals
that can be achieved by the research. Answer these questions as you read or hear about a research study:
 What type of research design was used (observational/correlation, experimental, quasi-

experimental, single-case)?
 Does the researcher's conclusion about the study match the goals accomplished by the research
design?
For example, if an observational/correlation was used, are the researcher's conclusions about description
and prediction, and not about understanding?
 Is the researcher cautious about making causal inferences?

 If an experimental design was used, did the researcher randomly assign participants to conditions
and hold conditions constant?
Step 6: Evaluate the Ethics

Before researchers can begin to collect data for a research project, they must first evaluate the study's risks
and benefits. In this section of Student as Researcher, we will discuss researchers' responsibilities, examine the
different ethical issues involved in psychological research, and consider how the ethics of research projects are
evaluated.
 What are my ethical responsibilities?

 Do people have to consent to be in my research?
 Is it ethical to deceive people about research?
 Is it ethical to use animals in research?
 Is my research project ethical?
What are my ethical responsibilities?
Protect participants from risk
When conducting psychological research, psychologists must protect the welfare of their research
participants. Sometimes this isn't easy; for example, a research project may involve administering severely
depressed individuals a drug that has unpleasant side effects. In any decision about research involving human and
animal subjects, researchers must decide whether the benefits of a study or procedure are greater than the risks. So,
for example, the potential benefit of a drug that reduces depression may outweigh the risk of side effects.
Determining whether research participants are "at risk" illustrates the difficulties associated with ethical
decision making. Life itself is risky. Simply showing up for a psychology experiment has a degree of risk. A research
project is described as having “minimal risk” when the harm or discomfort participants may experience is not greater
than what they may experience in their daily lives. When the possibility of risk or injury is greater than minimal,
researchers have a serious obligation to protect participants' welfare.
Psychologists often ask people to report their inner thoughts and feelings, sometimes about sensitive topics.
Participants may feel embarrassed if their responses were made public. Researchers are obligated to protect
participants from social risk by making sure participants' responses are confidential or anonymous. For more
information about ethics in research, try this site:
 http://www.apa.org/ethics/code.html
Do people have to consent to be in my research?
Informed consent
In most situations, researchers are required to gain individuals’ informed consent to participate in the
research. The key word here is informed. The researcher is obligated to explain the nature of the research,
participants' tasks in the research, and the risks and benefits of the research and explain to participants that they can
withdraw their consent at any time without negative consequences. It would be unethical for researchers to
withhold any information, such as potential risks, that could influence individuals' decision to participate in the
research.
Sample Informed Consent Form

I, [insert name of participant] , state that I am over 18 years of age and that I voluntarily agree to
participate in a research project conducted by [insert name of principal investigator, title, institutional affiliation].
The research is being conducted in order to [insert brief description of the goals of the research]. The specific task I
will perform requires [insert details of the research task, including information about the duration of participant's
involvement. Any possible discomfort to participant must also be described.] I acknowledge that [insert name of
principal investigator or research assistant] has explained the task to me fully, has informed me that I may withdraw
my participation at any time without prejudice or penalty, has offered to answer any questions that I might have
concerning the research procedure, and has assured me that any information that I give will be used for research
purposes only and will be kept confidential. [Explain procedures for protecting confidentiality of responses.]
I also acknowledge that the benefits derived from, or rewards given for, my participation have been fully
explained to me, as well as alternative methods, if available, for earning these rewards, and that I have been
promised, on completion of the research task, a brief description of the role my specific performance plays in the
project. [Specify here the exact nature of any commitments made by the researcher, such as the amount of money
to be paid to individuals for participation.
[Signature of researcher] [Signature of participant]
_______________________________ _______________________________
[Date] [Date]
Is it ethical to deceive people about research?
Deception, debriefing
One of the most controversial ethical issues in psychological research concerns deception. Deception occurs
when information is withheld from participants or when participants are intentionally misinformed about an aspect
of the research. Some people believe that research participants should never be deceived because ethical practice
requires that the relationship between researcher and participant be open and honest (e.g., Baumrind, 1985). In
addition, deception contradicts the ethical principle of informed consent. Despite these objections to deception, it is
still a widely used practice in psychological research. How can this be?
One goal of psychological research is to observe and describe people’s normal behavior. Sometimes it's
necessary to conceal the true nature of a research study so that participants behave as they normally would or act
according to the instructions provided by the researcher. A problem occurs, however, when deception is used too
often. Participants can become suspicious of psychologists' activities, and as a result, they may enter the research
situation with suspicion-and not act as they normally would! Thus, frequent use of deception can have an effect that
is opposite to what researchers hope to achieve.
When deception is used, the researcher must fully inform participants after the experiment the reasons for
deception, discuss any misconceptions about the research, and remove any harmful effects of the deception. This
information is provided in the debriefing. Debriefing is an oral and/or written explanation of the full purpose of the
research, the hypotheses, and the participant's role in the research. The goals of debriefing are to educate
participants about the research and, hopefully, to leave them with a positive feeling about their participation.
Is it ethical to use animals in research?
Protect humans from risk, protect animals' welfare

One other controversial ethical issue warrants our attention: research with animals.
Every year, millions of animals are tested in laboratory investigations aimed at answering a wide range of
research questions. Research with animals is often justified by the need to gain knowledge without putting humans
at risk. Most cures, drugs, vaccines, and therapies have been developed through research involving animals. In its
guidelines for the ethical conduct of research, the American Psychological Association advises that researchers who
work with animals have an ethical obligation to protect their welfare and treat them humanely. Federal and state
regulations also help to insure that the welfare of research animals is protected.
Is my research project ethical?
Ethical standards, Institutional Review Board (IRBs), Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC),
risk-benefit ratio The American Psychological Association (APA) developed its ethics code for individuals who
conduct research, teach, conduct therapy, or serve as administrators. The Ethics Code presents standards to guide
ethical behavior. The standards are general, and specific situational factors help determine how the standards
should apply. Often, more than one ethical standard can be applied to a research situation, and sometimes the
ethical standards can seem to contradict each other. Deciding what is ethical in a particular situation may not always
be easy. To help make ethical decisions, research proposals are reviewed by a committee of persons not involved in
the research before the research can begin. At institutions such as universities and hospitals, research proposals are
reviewed by Institutional Review Boards (IRBs). The members of these committees are charged with the task of
evaluating research projects to protect the rights and welfare of human research participants. A similar committee
exists for research involving animals: the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC).
Ethical decisions are made by reviewing both the risks and benefits of a research project. If the benefits of a
study are greater than the risks in this subjective risk/benefit ratio, the research is generally approved. Both IRBs and
IACUCs have the authority to approve, disapprove, and require modifications in a research study (e.g., to decrease
risks). Once IRB or IACUC approval is obtained, the proposed research can begin.
Before they began their research, an Institutional Review Board (IRB) evaluated the ethics of the Pennebaker
and Francis' (1996) emotional writing experiment. Here are some of the questions the IRB considered. What were
the risks and benefits of Pennebaker and Francis' experiment?
 Did Pennebaker and Francis deceive participants?

 How would you evaluate the ethics of this experiment?
 What were the risks and benefits of Pennebaker and Francis' experiment?
 What are the risks of emotional writing?
 What are the benefits?
Are there risks and benefits associated with superficial writing? These are some of the questions addressed
by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) that evaluated Pennebaker and Francis' research proposal. Obviously, one
risk associated with emotional writing is that students would become upset as they wrote about a traumatic
experience. To protect students from risk, Pennebaker and Francis informed participants of this potential risk before
they consented to participate (as part of the informed consent procedure). If students did feel upset, they were
encouraged to talk to the researcher or to counselors at the Student Counseling Service. Students in the superficial
writing condition faced boredom as they wrote about the same trivial subject each day. One way to look at this is
that boredom may not be more than the minimal risk associated with students' every day classroom experiences.
Participants also faced the possibility of social risk if their writing was made public in any way. Imagine what it would
be like to write about your difficulties adjusting to college, and then have your feelings and problems available to
others to read! To protect participants from this risk their writing was kept confidential and anonymous. They did
not put their name on their materials, but instead, were assigned a number. One benefit of students' participation,
at least in the emotional writing condition, is that findings from previous research studies suggested that they would
have better health and academic outcomes following emotional writing. Thus, participants would benefit directly.
Another direct benefit is that students in both conditions learned more about psychological research. Participants in
each condition also could benefit indirectly by contributing to psychology's understanding of disclosure, emotional
experiences, and adjustment to college.
Did Pennebaker and Francis deceive participants?
Pennebaker and Francis did not deceive participants about the research. They described the goal of the
research very generally-researchers don't inform participants of the specific hypothesis. They said the project was
about "writing and the college experience" (which is true). They described the specific tasks participants would be
asked to do; that is, they explained that students would be asked to write for 20 minutes after three consecutive
class periods. They explained some would write about emotional experiences associated with coming to college, and
others would be assigned to write about trivial topics. Pennebaker and Francis also received students' permission to
gain access to their health service and academic records. Finally, Pennebaker and Francis debriefed participants at
the end of the year about the full purpose of the study and the hypotheses. They had to wait because they didn't
want to influence students' visits to the health center. They were able to provide students with preliminary results
and encouraged students to discuss their perceptions and feelings about the experiment.
How would you evaluate the ethics of this experiment?
If you were a member of an IRB reviewing this proposal, how would you evaluate the risk/benefit ratio?
Would you approve the project, require modifications, or disapprove the research project?
Before research projects can begin, the ethics of the procedures must be evaluated. Thus, if you're reading
the results of a scientific study, it's safe to assume the study's ethics were evaluated. However, researchers
sometimes describe specific ethical issues in their research. Answer these questions about ethics as you read
research reports:
 Does the researcher address ethical issues associated with the research in his/her report?
 Was there any risk to participants in the research? How did the researcher reduce risk?
 What were the benefits to participants in the research? How does society benefit from the research?
 Was deception used in the study?
 Was deception justified?
 Could the research have been conducted without deception? Were participants debriefed after their
participation was over?
Step 7: Collect Data
As we've worked through the research process, you've seen that there are a lot of steps before researchers
even ask the first participant to complete a questionnaire! Much like the backstage of a theater, a lot of preliminary
work takes place before the show can go on. But once researchers identify their research question, hypotheses,

variables, operational definitions, and research design and have obtained IRB or IACUC approval, the show can go
on. This section of Student as Researcher will address the steps involved in collecting data from participants:
choosing a sample of participants, seeking permission, recording data, and preparing data for statistical analysis.
 How should I choose my research sample?

 Do I just ask people if they want to be in my research study?
 How do I record information about my research participants?
How should I choose my research sample?
Random samples, convenience samples
We've discussed how researchers seek to establish general laws of behavior and describe how people
respond on average. That is, rather than describing the behavior of one individual (as in single-case research
designs), most psychology researchers seek to apply their findings to a larger population. For example, a researcher
interested in the effects of spinal cord injury typically wants his or her research findings to apply to the entire
population of people who have a spinal cord injury. However, involving all people with spinal cord injuries in a
research project would be costly and time consuming. Thus, researchers rely on samples of participants to represent
the larger population.
"Sampling" refers to the procedures used to select a sample. One approach to sampling is random selection;
the outcome of this procedure is called a random sample. In a random sample, every member of the population has
an equal chance of being selected to be in the sample. In general, random selection results in samples that represent
the characteristics of the population. A second approach to sampling is convenience sampling. A convenience sample
is made up of people who are available and willing to participate in the research. The research projects conducted on
the Internet involve convenience samples because people have to be available (i.e., own a computer and have access
to the Internet) and willing to complete research online. As you might guess, convenience samples generally are less
representative of the population than random samples.
A common mistake which students make is to claim that a sample of research participants was selected
randomly. Most research is conducted with convenience samples. For example, a great deal of psychological
research is conducted with college student samples (you may be asked to participate in research projects as part of
your introductory psychology course). For researchers in Psychology Departments, college students are an available
and (usually) willing group of people for research studies.
Do I just ask people if they want to be in my research study?
Obtaining permission from authorities
We've seen that researchers must gain IRB or IACUC ethics approval before beginning their research with
human participants or animal subjects, respectively. In addition, researchers must seek permission from people in
authority to gain access to potential research participants. For example, researchers may be interested in effects of
breakfast programs on school performance, morale in corporations following layoffs, depression in patients
hospitalized for cancer surgery, or psychology students' opinions about ethnic diversity. In each case, administrators
at the school, corporation, hospital, and Psychology Department are responsible for the welfare of those entrusted
to their care.

In order to gain permission, researchers can expect to explain to authorities at the setting the study's
rationale and procedures, as well as ways in which participants will be protected from any risks.
How do I record information about my research participants?
Observation vs. self-report
"Recording" refers to the method for keeping track of participants’ thoughts, feelings, and/or behaviors.
Researchers don't rely on their memory, but instead, maintain a record of participants' responses. When you collect
data you will need to decide whether you will record data about participants (e.g., using checklists or rating scales)
or whether you will allow participants to report for them. The self-report method is used when participants provide
information about themselves, particularly information about their thoughts and feelings. You've probably already
gained experience with surveys and questionnaires-they are psychologists-most popular way of collecting data from
participants. This method most often involves distributing paper-and-pencil questionnaires to participants.
Remember that to protect students from social injury, all information you collect about people should be
confidential (no identifying information) or anonymous.
How do I prepare the data for analysis?
Statistical software, spreadsheets
Once you have your data from participants, you will need to organize the information for data analysis. The
most common way to analyze data involves computer software, such as SPSS, and entering data into a spreadsheet.
A spreadsheet is a chart (or table) with columns and rows. Each row in a spreadsheet represents a participant in the
study. If you have 20 participants in your study, you will have 20 rows in your spreadsheet. Each column in a
spreadsheet represents a different variable in your study. Each "cell “in the table contains the value for a particular
variable for a particular participant.
Subject Gender Condition Score

01 0 1 25
02 0 2 30
03 1 1 20
04 1 2 25
The first column in this sample spreadsheet, "subject," represents the number assigned to a participant (we
never identify participants by name). The second column identifies the participant's gender, female (0) or male (1).
Statistical packages analyze numbers rather than words, so we enter "codes" rather than the words female and
male. The third column, condition, identifies which of two conditions in an experiment the participant was in.
Condition 1 might be the "treatment" condition, and condition 2 might be the "control" condition. Finally, the
"score" column might represent participant's score on the measure of the dependent variable. Thus, the first
participant in this sample is a female, was in the treatment condition, and had a score of 25 on the dependent
variable.
In this section, we'll consider the characteristics of Pennebaker and Francis' (1996) sample and their
procedures for collecting data.
 What was Pennebaker and Francis' sample?

 What procedures did they have to follow to gain access to the participants?
 How did they collect and record the data?
What was Pennebaker and Francis' sample?
The research participants were students in Dr. Pennebaker's Introductory Psychology course at Southern
Methodist University (64 freshmen, 8 new transfer students). This is a convenience sample’ these students were
available to Pennebaker and Francis at their university and willing to participate in the research. You may see this
isn't a random sample. Not all college students had an opportunity to be in the sample.
What procedures did they have to follow to gain access to the participants?
This situation is a little different than most because the participants were students in the researcher's class.
This raises a special ethical issue. In this situation, students must be reassured that their grade would not be
negatively affected if they chose not to participate in the research project. Typically, when psychology students
participate in research, the Psychology Department has specific guidelines and procedures to follow. If you do a
research project with introductory psychology students-for example, with a "subject pool"-you need to learn and
follow the procedures required by your Psychology Department.
How did they collect and record the data?
Pennebaker and Francis used several different methods for collecting data. Participants' writing-either
emotional or superficial-represents the self-report method for collecting data. Their writing samples were then
analyzed using a computer program. To do this, they had to type all of the participants' essays. Information about
participants' language use (e.g., insight and causal words) was "collected" by the computer and recorded in the
computer output (i.e., the results of the analysis).
They also collected information from the university health center and registrar about students' health center
visits and grades, respectively. This is not self-report because students didn't provide this information themselves.
This method is called archival. That is, Pennebaker and Francis gained access to university archives and records.
A sample spreadsheet for their data follows. Note, however, that Pennebaker and Francis collected data for
many more variables than we've discussed.
Sample Spreadsheet
Subjects Writings Visits GPA Insight 1 Casual 1 Insight 2 Casual 2 Insight 3 Casual 3
01 1 2 3.8 1 1 1 2 4 3
02 1 0 3.6 0 0 1 2 3 4
03 1 1 3.3 1 0 1 2 3 3
04 2 2 3.5 0 0 0 0 0 0
05 2 2 3.4 0 0 0 1 1 0
06 2 4 3.0 1 1 0 1 2 1
>> AND SO ON <<
Each participant's data is represented in a row in the spreadsheet. The variables are identified in the column
titles, but they need some interpreting because their names are short descriptors.
• Subject: the number assigned to a participant

• Writing: which condition the participant was assigned, 1 = emotional, 2 = superficial
• Visits: how many visits to the health center for illness during the academic year
• GPA: students' GPA by the end of the spring semester
• Insight1: the number of insight words in the first day's essay
• Causal1: the number of causal words in the first day's essay
• Insight2: the number of insight words in the second day's essay
• Causal2: the number of causal words in the second day's essay
• Insight3: the number of insight words in the third day's essay
• Causal3: the number of causal words in the third day's essay
Was Pennebaker and Francis' hypothesis supported by these hypothetical data?
Research reports should describe the characteristics of the sample (i.e., who participated, the setting). These
questions will help you to evaluate the researcher's data collection:
 Does the researcher describe the characteristics of the sample?

 What type of sample was used, random sample or convenience sample?
 What population does the researcher wish to describe? Do the sample characteristics match the
population?
 How were data recorded (e.g., observers, self-report)? Are there any potential biases (e.g.,
participants trying to "look good" in their answers)?
Step 8: Analyze Data and Form Conclusions
Imagine that we've asked 200 people to complete a 50-item survey. What are we going to do with these
10,000 responses (called data)? The next step in a research project involves data analysis, in which we summarize
people's responses and determine whether the data support the hypothesis. In this section, we will review the three
stages of data analysis: check the data, summarize the data, and confirm what the data reveal.
 How do I check the data?

 How do I summarize the data?
 How do I know what the data reveal?
How do I check the data?
Errors, distribution of scores, outliers
In the first analysis stage, researchers become familiar with the data. At a basic level, this involves looking to
see if the numbers in the data make sense. Errors can occur if responses are not recorded correctly and if data are
entered incorrectly into computer statistical software for analysis. We also look at the distribution of scores. This
can be done by generating a frequency distribution (e.g., a stem-and-leaf display) for the dependent variable. When

examining the distribution of scores, we may discover "outliers." Outliers are data values that are very different from
the rest of the scores. Outliers sometimes occur if a participant did not follow instructions or if equipment in the
experiment did not function properly. When outliers are identified, we may decide to exclude the data from the
analyses.
How do I summarize the data?
Descriptive statistics; means, standard deviations, effect sizes
The second step of data analysis is to summarize participants' responses. Researchers rarely report the
responses for an individual participant; instead, they report how participants responded on average.
Descriptive statistics begin to answer the question, what happened in the research project?
Often, researchers measure their dependent variables using rating scales. Two common descriptive statistics
for these data are the mean and standard deviation. The mean represents the average score on a dependent
variable across all the participants in a group. The standard deviation tells us about the variability of participants'
scores’ approximately how far, on average, scores vary from a group mean. Another descriptive statistic is the effect
size. Measures of effect size tell us the strength of the relationship between two variables. For example, a
correlation coefficient represents the strength of the predictive relationship between two measured variables.
Another indicator of effect size is Cohen's d. This statistic tells us the strength of the relationship between a
manipulated independent variable and a measured dependent variable. Based on the effect size for their variables,
researchers decide whether the effect size in their study is small, medium, or large (Cohen, 1988).
How do I know what the data reveal?
Inferential statistics; confidence intervals, null hypothesis testing In the third stage of data analysis,
researchers decide what the data tell us about behavior and mental processes and decide whether the research
hypothesis is supported or not supported. At this stage, researchers use inferential statistics to try to rule out
whether the obtained results are simply "due to chance."
We generally use two types of inferential statistics, confidence intervals and null hypothesis testing.
Recall that we use samples of participants to represent a larger population. Statistically speaking, the mean
for our sample is an estimate of the mean score for a variable for the entire population. It's unlikely, however, that
the estimate from the sample will correspond exactly to the population value. A confidence interval gives us
information about the probable range of values in which we can expect the population value, given our sample
results.
Another approach to making decisions about results for a sample is called null hypothesis testing. In this
approach, we begin by assuming an independent variable has no effect on participants' behavior (the "null
hypothesis"). Under the null hypothesis, any difference between means for groups in an experiment is attributed to
chance factors. However, sometimes the difference between the means in an experiment seems too large to
attribute to chance. Null hypothesis testing is a procedure by which we examine the probability of obtaining the
difference between means in the experiment if the null hypothesis is true. Typically, computers are used to calculate
the statistics and probabilities. An outcome is said to be statistically significant when the difference between the
means in the experiment is larger than would be expected by chance if the null hypothesis were true. When an

outcome is statistically significant, we conclude that the independent variable caused a difference in participants'
scores on the dependent variable.
Before going through the steps for analyzing data, we will review the findings of Pennebaker and Francis'
Experiment.
 Did the results support their hypothesis?

 What did they conclude based on their findings?
Sample Data Analysis
Hypothetical Research Study
Three Stages of Data Analysis
Did the results support their hypothesis?
Pennebaker and Francis found that the average number of health center visits for illness in the two months
after writing was lower for the emotional-writing group than for the superficial-writing group. For GPA, results
indicated that the average second-semester GPA for the emotional-writing group (Mean = 3.08) was greater than
the average GPA for the superficial-writing group (Mean = 2.86). In both cases, the effect of writing was statistically
significant and represented a medium effect size. These findings supported their hypothesis that emotional writing
would have a beneficial outcome.
What did Pennebaker and Francis find for their measures of cognitive changes? Across the 3 days of writing,
students' essays in the emotional-writing condition comprised, on average, 3.39% insight words and 1.09%
causation words. In contrast, students' essays in the superficial-writing condition had 1.21% insight words and 0.64%
causation words. More importantly, insight and causal words increased over the 3 days for students in the emotional
writing condition. These findings supported their hypothesis.
What did they conclude based on their findings?
Pennebaker and Francis concluded that as students attempt to understand and find causal meaning when
writing about their college experiences, they are more likely to experience beneficial physical and psychological
health consequences and an improved grade point average.
We started this research example by stating you would find tips for adjusting to college. Based on
Pennebaker and Francis' findings, we can say that writing about your experience (for example, in a journal) may
improve your grades and health. You don't need to show anyone your writing; just write for yourself. Remember,
though, that an important ingredient is that you try to understand the causes of events and gain insight about your
experiences.
Some people experience traumas that may require more than simply writing about them. If you find that you
experience more distress as you write about events, you should consider talking with someone at the counseling
center at your university or college.
Sample Data Analysis

In what follows, we will "walk though" the steps of data analysis using hypothetical data. This section is long,
and provides many details that you might need only when you analyze your own data. Another source for learning
more about statistics can be found at the following website:
 http://www.mhhe.com//socscience/psychology/zech/student/olc/stats_primer.mhtml
Hypothetical Research Study
This hypothetical study is basically the same as Pennebaker and Francis's (1996) experiment. Suppose you
hypothesize that emotional writing is an effective intervention for dealing with stressful or traumatic events,
compared to superficial writing. You randomly assign participants to 3 days of consecutive writing in either the
emotional writing (treatment) group or superficial writing (control) group.
We'll propose a new dependent variable: participants' self-reported rating of "well-being" (1-10 scale)
assessed 1 month after the intervention.
Suppose we observe the following ratings for 10 participants in each group:
Emotional Writing: 8, 5, 7, 9, 6, 7, 6, 9, 6, 7
Superficial Writing: 7, 4, 5, 4, 5, 5, 6, 3, 7, 4
Using a spreadsheet (such as SPSS), the data would look like this:
Subject Writing Rating

01 1 8
02 1 5
03 1 7
04 1 9
05 1 6
06 1 7
07 1 6
08 1 9
09 1 6
10 1 7
11 2 7
12 2 4
13 2 5
14 2 4
15 2 5
16 2 5
17 2 6
18 2 3
19 2 7
20 2 4
Brief instructions for using SPSS to analyze data will be presented here. More detailed instructions can be
found in this Online Guide for SPSS:
 http://www.mhhe.com//socscience/psychology/zech/student/olc/spss.mhtml
Instructions for SPSS:

Open SPSS. You will see the "data window" spreadsheet. "Double-click" on the "var" (variable) in the top left
corner. Type "subject." Double click on "var" in the second column and type "writing." Double click on "var" in the
third column and type "rating," Enter the subject numbers by typing the numbers 1-20 in the first column (you will
see this matches the "case" label). Enter "1" for the emotional writing condition for the first 10 participants, and
enter "2" for the superficial writing condition for the last 10 participants. Finally, enter the values for the well-being
ratings in the third column.
1) Check the data. Do the numbers make sense? Are there any values that are out of range? Are there any
outliers?
In our example, all data are within the appropriate range (1-10). We can also examine the distribution using
stem-and-leaf displays:
Possible
Score Emotional Writing Superficial Writing

1
2
3 3
4 444
5 5 555
6 666 6
7 777 7
8 8
9 99
10
n = 10 n = 10
We can read this stem-and-leaf display as follows. In the emotional-writing condition, one participant's
rating was a 5, three had a rating of 6, three had a rating of 7, one participant's rating was an 8, and two participants’
ratings were a 9. There were 10 participants in the condition (n = 10). How would you describe the distribution of
scores in the superficial-writing condition?
There are three things we can see. First, the distribution of scores for each sample overlaps; however, the
scores for the emotional writing group tend to be higher than the scores for the superficial writing group (suggesting
our hypothesis that this treatment is effective may be supported). Second, there doesn't seem to be a problem with
outliers in either group' no score is dramatically different from other scores. Third, the scores seem to center around
a middle value within each group, with not too much variability.
Go to the "toolbar" at the top of the screen. Click on “Statistics," scroll down to "Descriptive," and click on
“Explore." The dependent variable is "rating" (select it by clicking on it and click on the arrow key to move it to the
dependent variable box). The factor is "writing." Click on it and then the arrow key to move it to the factor box. Click
on "plots" and make sure "stem-and-leaf" is selected. Click on "statistics" to make sure that "descriptive" is selected.
Then click on OK to run the analysis.

A new window will appear. This is called the "output” window-it has the results of your analyses. The
descriptive statistics will appear, as well as a stem-and-leaf plot. The stem-and-leaf will differ slightly in appearance
because it has a separate column for frequency. You should be able to see, however, that the same information is
provided.
2) Summarize the data. We can summarize the data numerically using measures of central tendency (e.g.,
mean or average), measures of variability (e.g., standard deviation), and measures of effect size (e.g., Cohen's d).
 Central Tendency
 Variability (dispersion)
 Effect size
 Central Tendency
The mean (M) is the average score, the median (Md) is the value that cuts the distribution of scores in half (5
scores below and 5 scores above the value), and the mode is the most frequent score.
The mean, median, and mode for the hypothetical data we've presented are as follows:
Emotional Writing Superficial Writing

Mean (M) = 7.0 5.0
Median (Md) = 7.33 5.33
Mode = 6,7 4,5
Variability (dispersion)
The range is the highest and lowest score. The variance and standard deviation are measures of how far scores are
away from the mean (average) score. Variance is the sum of the average deviations from the sample mean, squared,
and divided by n-1 ("n" is the number of participants in the group). Standard deviation is the square root of the
variance.
Emotional Writing Superficial Writing

Range = 5-9 3-7
Variance (s2) = 1.77 1.77
Standard deviation (SD) = 1.33 1.33
Note that the variability is the same for each sample-can you see why this is so in the stem-and-leaf display?
Effect size Measures of effect size indicate the strength of the relationship between the independent and
dependent variables. Cohen's d is defined as the mean difference between two groups in standard deviation units
(which makes effect sizes comparable across studies). It's calculated by obtaining the difference between two means
and dividing by the population standard deviation. The population standard deviation (_) can be defined using the
sample standard deviations (s) and sample sizes (n) for each group (1 and 2) to form a measure of "pooled"
variability:
where N = 20 (total number of participants) In our study, _= 1.26

Cohen's d, therefore equals (7-5) ÷1.26, or 1.59. Cohen offered guidelines for interpreting effect sizes: d = 20
is small, d = .50 is medium, d = .80 is large. Because our value for d exceeds that suggested for a large effect, we can
state that emotional writing, relative to superficial writing, has a large effect on well-being in these hypothetical
data.
No additional steps are needed here. Your output from your "Explore" analysis provides the mean and
standard deviation and other descriptive statistics. You can use the statistics from the output to calculate the values
for the population standard deviation using the formula presented above. The numerator in the formula for Cohen's
d is the difference between the two group means (7 - 5 = 2). The denominator is the population standard deviation.
3) Confirm what the data reveal. Descriptive statistics are rarely sufficient to allow us to make causal
inferences about what happened in the experiment. We need more information. The problem is that we typically
describe data from a sample, not an entire population. A population represents all the data of interest; a sample is
just part of those data. Most of the time, psychologists sample behavior and seek to make a conclusion about the
effect of an independent variable for the population based on the sample. The problem is that samples can differ
from the population simply by chance. When the results for a sample differ from what we'd observe if the entire
population was tested because of chance factors, we say the findings for the sample are unreliable.
To compound this problem, one sample can vary from another sample simply by chance. So, if we have an
experiment with two groups (e.g., our emotional writing group and our superficial writing group) and we observe
differences between the two groups on our dependent variable, how do we know that these two samples didn't
differ simply by chance? Asked another way, how do we know that the difference between our sample means is
reliable? These questions bring us to the third stage of data analysis, confirming what the data reveal.
At this point researchers typically use inferential statistics to draw conclusions based on their sample data
and to determine whether their hypotheses are supported. Inferential statistics provide a way to test whether the
differences in a dependent variable associated with various conditions of an experiment can be attributed to an
effect of the independent variable (and not to chance factors). In what follows, we first introduce you to
"confidence intervals," an approach for making inferences about the effects of independent variables that can be
used instead of, or in conjunction with, null hypothesis testing. Then, we will discuss the more common approach to
making inferences based on null hypothesis testing.
 Confidence Intervals
 Null Hypothesis Testing
Confidence intervals
Confidence intervals are based on the idea that data for a sample are used to describe the population from
which the data are drawn. A confidence interval tells us the range of values in which we can expect a population
value to be with a specified level of confidence (usually 95%). We cannot estimate the population value exactly
because of sampling error; the best we can do is estimate a range of probable values. The smaller the range of
values expressed in our confidence interval, the better is our estimate of the population value.

We have two sample means in our hypothetical experiment, one for the emotional-writing condition and
one for the superficial-writing condition. With two sample means, we can estimate the range of expected values for
the difference between the two population means based on the results of the experiment.
Confidence intervals tell us the likely range of possible effects for the independent variable. The .95
confidence interval for our hypothetical study is .75 to 3.25. That is, we can say with 95% confidence that this
interval contains the true difference between the population means represented by the emotional-writing condition
and the superficial-writing condition. The difference between population means could be as small as the lower
boundary of the interval (i.e., .75) or as large as the upper boundary of the interval (i.e., 3.25).
Although we don't know the "real" effect of the independent variable for the population (because we didn't
test the entire population), the evidence we have, based on the confidence interval, suggests strongly that there was
some effect of the independent variable. That is, the difference between emotional writing and superficial writing at
the population level is likely to fall within .75 and 3.25 points on the well-being rating scale.
Suppose, however, that the confidence interval includes zero (e.g., a range of values from 0 to 4). A "zero
difference" indicates there is no difference in well-being ratings for emotional writing and superficial writing at the
population level. When the confidence interval includes zero, the results of the independent variable are
inconclusive. We can't conclude that the independent variable, type of writing, did not have an effect because the
confidence interval goes all the way to 4. However, we also have to keep in mind that the independent variable
produces a zero difference we simply don't know.
Null hypothesis testing
As we've seen, descriptive statistics alone are not sufficient to determine if experimental and comparison
groups differ reliably on the dependent variable in a study. Based on descriptive statistics alone, we have no way of
knowing whether our group means are reliably different (i.e., not due to chance). Confidence intervals are one way
to draw conclusions about the effects of independent variables; a second, more common method is called null
hypothesis testing.
When researchers use null hypothesis testing, they begin by assuming the independent variable has no
effect; this is called the null hypothesis. For example, the null hypothesis for our writing experiment states that the
population means for emotional writing and superficial writing are not different. Under the null hypothesis, any
observed difference between sample means can be attributed to chance.
However, sometimes the difference between sample means is too large to be simply due to chance if we
assume the population means don't differ. Null hypothesis testing asks the question, how likely is the difference
between sample means observed in our experiment (e.g., 2.0), assuming there is no difference between the
population means. If the probability of obtaining the mean difference in our experiment is small, then we reject the
null hypothesis and conclude that the independent variable did have an effect of the dependent variable.
How do we know the probability of obtaining the mean difference observed in our experiment? Most often
we use inferential statistics such as the t test and Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), which provides the F test. The t-test
typically is used to compare whether two means are different (as in our example). Each value of t and F has a
probability value associated with it when the null hypothesis is assumed to be true. Once we calculate the value of
the statistic, we can obtain the probability of observing the mean difference in our experiment.

In our example, because we have two means we can calculate a t test. The difference between the two
means is 2.0 (7.0 - 5.0). The t statistic for the comparison between the two group means is 3.35, and the probability
value associated with this value is .004 (these values were obtained from output from the SPSS statistics program).
Does this value tell us that the mean difference of 2.0 is statistically significant?
We have two possible conclusions when we do null hypothesis testing: We either reject the null hypothesis
or we fail to reject the null hypothesis. Outcomes (i.e., observed differences between means) that lead us to reject
the null hypothesis are said to be statistically significant. A statistically significant outcome indicates that the
difference between means we observed in our experiment is larger than would be expected if by chance the null
hypothesis were true. We conclude that the independent variable caused the difference between means
(presuming, of course, that the experiment is internally valid).
A statistically significant outcome is one that has only a small likelihood of occurring if the null hypothesis is
true. That is, when we look at the results of our statistical test, the probability value associated with the statistic is
low. But just how small does this likelihood have to be? Although there is no definitive answer to this important
question, the consensus among members of the scientific community is that outcomes associated with probabilities
of less than 5 times out of 100 (or .05) are judged to be statistically significant.
The probability we choose to indicate an outcome is statistically significant is called the level of significance.
The level of significance is indicated by the Greek letter alpha ("). Thus, we speak of the .05 level of significance,
which we report as " = .05.
When we conduct an experiment and observe that the effect of the independent variable is not statistically
significant, we do not reject the null hypothesis. However, we do not accept the null hypothesis of no difference
either. The results are inconclusive (this is similar to a confidence interval that includes "zero"). There may have been
some factor in our experiment that prevented us from observing an effect of the independent variable (e.g., few
subjects, poor operationalization of the independent variable). To determine whether an outcome is statistically
significant we compare the obtained probability value with our level of significance, " = .05. In our example, because
our probability value (p = .004) is less than .05, we reject the null hypothesis. This allows us to state that the
observed mean difference of 2.0 is probably not due to chance. This outcome indicates the two means are reliably
different; that is, the independent variable had a reliable effect on the dependent variable. If our obtained
probability value had been greater than .05, we would fail to reject the null hypothesis. This would indicate that the
observed difference between means could be due to chance, and we would withhold judgment about the effect of
the independent variable (i.e., the results would be inconclusive).
There's no need to do anything more because in the previous step you computed a t test. The output of the t
test includes the value for t (3.35), and the probability associated with the statistic ("sig"), which is .004. We
conclude that the independent variable (type of writing) had a statistically significant effect on the dependent
variable (well-being rating) when the probability value in our output is less than .05. Probability values such as .04,
.03, .02, .01, .005, .000, and so on are regarded as statistically significant. Probability values such as .06, .10, .20, .30,
and so on are described as not statistically significant.
Researchers seldom report their procedures for checking the data, but often do report their summaries and
inferential statistics. These questions will help you to evaluate their statistical procedures:
 Does the researcher describe checking the data-for example, is the distribution of scores
described or outliers identified?
 Are appropriate summary statistics provided for all variables-for example, are the means,
standard deviations, and effect sizes reported?
 Does the researcher present inferential statistics, such as confidence intervals or results of
null hypothesis significance testing?
Step 9: Report Research Results
In order to make a convincing argument or claim about behavior, we need to do more than simply analyze
the data. A good argument requires a good story. A trial attorney, in order to win a case, not only points out the
facts of the case to the jury, but also weaves those facts into a coherent and logical story. If the evidence points to
the butler, then we want to know "why" the butler (and not the cook) might have done it. Thus, after the data are
analyzed, the next step is to construct a coherent story that explains the research findings and justifies the
conclusions. This research story is then reported at psychology conferences and in psychology journals.
The first resource is part of Psych Web, and the second is part of APA's own website:
 http://www.psychwww.com/resource/apacrib.htm
 http://www.apa.org/journals/acorner.html#pubmanual
Through the APA website you can also purchase a guide for writing APA reports called APA Style-Helper.
More information about this is available at
 http://www.apastyle.org/stylehelper/
Writing a Research Report

Sample APA-Format Paper
Sample Research Report
Rather than write a sample research report for our hypothetical example, we present a sample APA-format
report for a quasi-experiment. This manuscript describes the results of a study that examines whether learning
about research methods in psychology improves students' critical thinking skills (the answer is yes). Because this is a
report of an actual study, you will get a better idea of how to write about psychological research.
Things to note in the sample manuscript:
 One-inch margins should be used; the paper should be left-justified, and double-spaced
throughout.
 Do not use bold or italic font, use one font size throughout.
 One space between sentences.
 Always cite the authors when you present information from a source. Identify all authors
(last names only) when you cite a source, plus the year the study was published. If there are

three or more authors, you can use ‘et l.' after the first author's name when you cite the
source the second, third, etc. times.
 Use words to express numbers less than 10, unless associated with a unit of measurement
or in a series of numbers.
 Follow examples precisely when reporting statistics. The format is: statistic (degrees of
freedom) = calculated value for statistic, p = significance value. An example from our
hypothetical study is t(18) = 3.35, p = .004.
 List all references cited in alphabetical order using first author's last name.

The Research Proposal and Report

General
Style, layout, and page formatting
Outline of the chapters and sections
Chapter I - Introduction
Chapter II - Background
Chapter III - Methodology
Chapter IV - Results
General considerations
Research papers usually have five chapters with well-established sections in each chapter. Readers of the paper will
be looking for these chapters and sections so you should not deviate from the standard format unless you are
specifically requested to do so by the research sponsor.
Most research studies begin with a written proposal. Again, nearly all proposals follow the same format. In fact, the
proposal is identical to the first three chapters of the final paper except that it's written in future tense. In the
proposal, you might say something like "the researchers will secure the sample from ...", while in the final paper, it
would be changed to "the researchers secured the sample from ...". Once again, with the exception of tense, the
proposal becomes the first three chapters of the final research paper.
The most commonly used style for writing research reports is called "APA" and the rules are described in the
Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. Any library or bookstore will have it readily available.
The style guide contains hundreds of rules for grammar, layout, and syntax. This paper will cover the most important
ones.
Avoid the use of first person pronouns. Refer to yourself or the research team in third person. Instead of saying "I
will ..." or "We will ...", say something like "The researcher will ..." or "The research team will ...".
A suggestion: Never present a draft (rough) copy of your proposal, thesis, dissertation, or research paper...even if
asked. A paper that looks like a draft, will interpreted as such, and you can expect extensive and liberal
modifications. Take the time to put your paper in perfect APA format before showing it to anyone else. The payoff
will be great since it will then be perceived as a final paper, and there will be far fewer changes.
Style, layout, and page formatting
Title page
All text on the title page is centered vertically and horizontally. The title page has no page number and it is not
counted in any page numbering.
Page layout

Left margin: 1½"

Right margin: 1"
Top margin: 1"
Bottom margin: 1"
Page numbering
Pages are numbered at the top right. There should be 1" of white space from the top of the page number to the top
of the paper. Numeric page numbering begins with the first page of Chapter 1 (although a page number is not placed
on page 1).
Spacing and justification
All pages are single sided. Text is double-spaced, except for long quotations and the bibliography (which are single-
spaced). There is one blank line between a section heading and the text that follows it. Do not right-justify text. Use
ragged-right.
Font face and size
Any easily readable font is acceptable. The font should be 10 points or larger. Generally, the same font must be used
throughout the manuscript, except 1) tables and graphs may use a different font, and 2) chapter titles and section
headings may use a different font.
References
APA format should be used to cite references within the paper. If you name the author in your sentence, then follow
the authors name with the year in parentheses. For example:
Jones (2004) found that...
If you do not include the authors name as part of the text, then both the author's name and year are enclosed in
parentheses. For example:
One researcher (Jones, 2004) found that...
A complete bibliography is attached at the end of the paper. It is double spaced except single-spacing is used for a
multiple-line reference. The first line of each reference is indented.
Examples:
Bradburn, N. M., & Mason, W. M. (1964). The effect of question order on response. Journal of Marketing
Research 1 (4), 57-61.
Bradburn, N. M., & Miles, C. (1979). Vague quantifiers. Public Opinion Quarterly 43 (1), 92-101.

Outline of chapters and sections
TITLE PAGE
TABLE OF CONTENTS
CHAPTER I - Introduction
Introductory paragraphs
Statement of the problem
Purpose
Significance of the study
Research questions and/or hypotheses
CHAPTER II - Background
Literature review
Definition of terms
CHAPTER III - Method

Restate purpose and research questions or null hypotheses
Sample
Instrumentation (include copy in appendix)
Procedure and time frame
Analysis plan (state critical alpha level and type of statistical tests)
Validity and reliability
Assumptions
Scope and limitations
CHAPTER IV - Results
CHAPTER V - Conclusions and recommendations

Summary (of what you did and found)
Discussion (explanation of findings - why do you think you found what you did?)
Recommendations (based on your findings)
REFERENCES
APPENDIX
Chapter I - Introduction
Introductory paragraphs
Chapter I begins with a few short introductory paragraphs (a couple of pages at most). The primary goal of the
introductory paragraphs is to catch the attention of the readers and to get them "turned on" about the subject. It
sets the stage for the paper and puts your topic in perspective. The introduction often contains dramatic and general

statements about the need for the study. It uses dramatic illustrations or quotes to set the tone. When writing the
introduction, put yourself in your reader's position - would you continue reading?
Statement of the Problem
The statement of the problem is the focal point of your research. It is just one sentence (with several paragraphs of
elaboration).
You are looking for something wrong.

....or something that needs close attention
....or existing methods that no longer seem to be working.
Example of a problem statement:
"The frequency of job layoffs is creating fear, anxiety, and a loss of productivity in middle management workers."
While the problem statement itself is just one sentence, it is always accompanied by several paragraphs that
elaborate on the problem. Present persuasive arguments why the problem is important enough to study. Include the
opinions of others (politicians, futurists, other professionals). Explain how the problem relates to business, social or
political trends by presenting data that demonstrates the scope and depth of the problem. Try to give dramatic and
concrete illustrations of the problem. After writing this section, make sure you can easily identify the single sentence
that is the problem statement.
Purpose
The purpose is a single statement or paragraph that explains what the study intends to accomplish. A few typical
statements are:
The goal of this study is to...

... overcome the difficulty with ...
... discover what ...
... understand the causes or effects of ...
... refine our current understanding of ...
... provide a new interpretation of ...
... understand what makes ___ successful or unsuccessful
Significance of the Study
This section creates a perspective for looking at the problem. It points out how your study relates to the larger issues
and uses a persuasive rationale to justify the reason for your study. It makes the purpose worth pursuing. The
significance of the study answers the questions:
Why is your study important?

To whom is it important?
What benefit(s) will occur if your study is done?
Research Questions and/or Hypotheses and/or Null Hypotheses

Chapter I lists the research questions (although it is equally acceptable to present the hypotheses or null
hypotheses). No elaboration is included in this section. An example would be:
The research questions for this study will be:
1. What are the attitudes of...

2. Is there a significant difference between...
3. Is there a significant relationship between...
Chapter II - Background
Chapter II is a review of the literature. It is important because it shows what previous researchers have discovered. It
is usually quite long and primarily depends upon how much research has previously been done in the area you are
planning to investigate. If you are planning to explore a relatively new area, the literature review should cite similar
areas of study or studies that lead up to the current research. Never say that your area is so new that no research
exists. It is one of the key elements that proposal readers look at when deciding whether or not to approve a
proposal.
Chapter II should also contain a definition of terms section when appropriate. Include it if your paper uses special
terms that are unique to your field of inquiry or that might not be understood by the general reader. "Operational
definitions" (definitions that you have formulated for the study) should also be included. An example of an
operational definition is: "For the purpose of this research, improvement is operationally defined as posttest score
minus pretest score".
Chapter III - Methodology
The methodology section describes your basic research plan. It usually begins with a few short introductory
paragraphs that restate purpose and research questions. The phraseology should be identical to that used in Chapter
I. Keep the wording of your research questions consistent throughout the document.
Population and sampling
The basic research paradigm is:

1) Identify sample
The sampling procedure needs to be described in extensive detail. There are numerous sampling methods from
which to choose. Describe in minute detail, how you will select the sample. Use specific names, places, times, etc.
Don't omit any details. This is extremely important because the reader of the paper must decide if your sample will
sufficiently represent the population.
Instrumentation
If you are using a survey that was designed by someone else, state the source of the survey. Describe the theoretical

constructs that the survey is attempting to measure. Include a copy of the actual survey in the appendix and state
that a copy of the survey is in the appendix.
Procedure and time frame
State exactly when the research will begin and when it will end. Describe any special procedures that will be
followed (e.g., instructions that will be read to participants, presentation of an informed consent form, etc.).
Analysis plan
The analysis plan should be described in detail. Each research question will usually require its own analysis. Thus, the
research questions should be addressed one at a time followed by a description of the type of statistical tests that
will be performed to answer that research question. Be specific. State what variables will be included in the analyses
and identify the dependent and independent variables if such a relationship exists. Decision making criteria (e.g., the
critical alpha level) should also be stated, as well as the computer software that will be used.
Validity and reliability
If the survey you're using was designed by someone else, then describe the previous validity and reliability
assessments. When using an existing instrument, you'll want to perform the same reliability measurement as the
author of the instrument. If you've developed your own survey, then you must describe the steps you took to assess
its validity and a description of how you will measure its reliability.
Validity refers to the accuracy or truthfulness of a measurement. Are we measuring what we think we are? There are
no statistical tests to measure validity. All assessments of validity are subjective opinions based on the judgment of
the researcher. Nevertheless, there are at least three types of validity that should be addressed and you should state
what steps you took to assess validity.
Face validity refers to the likelihood that a question will be misunderstood or misinterpreted. Pre-testing a survey is
a good way to increase the likelihood of face validity. One method of establishing face validity is described here.
Content validity refers to whether an instrument provides adequate coverage of a topic. Expert opinions, literature
searches, and pretest open-ended questions help to establish content validity.
Construct validity refers to the theoretical foundations underlying a particular scale or measurement. It looks at the
underlying theories or constructs that explain a phenomenon. In other words, if you are using several survey items
to measure a more global construct (e.g., a subscale of a survey), then you should describe why you believe the
items comprise a construct. If a construct has been identified by previous researchers, then describe the criteria they
used to validate the construct. A technique known as confirmatory factor analysis is often used to explore how
individual survey items contribute to an overall construct measurement.
Reliability is synonymous with repeatability or stability. A measurement that yields consistent results over time is
said to be reliable. When a measurement is prone to random error, it lacks reliability.
There are three basic methods to test reliability: test-retest, equivalent form, and internal consistency. Most
research uses some form of internal consistency. When there is a scale of items all attempting to measure the same
construct, then we would expect a large degree of coherence in the way people answer those items. Various
statistical tests can measure the degree of coherence. Another way to test reliability is to ask the same question with
slightly different wording in different parts of the survey. The correlation between the items is a measure of their

reliability.
Assumptions
All research studies make assumptions. The most obvious is that the sample represents the population. Another
common assumptions are that an instrument has validity and is measuring the desired constructs. Still another is
that respondents will answer a survey truthfully. The important point is for the researcher to state specifically what
assumptions are being made.
Scope and limitations
All research studies also have limitations and a finite scope. Limitations are often imposed by time and budget
constraints. Precisely list the limitations of the study. Describe the extent to which you believe the limitations
degrade the quality of the research.
Chapter IV - Results
Description of the sample
Nearly all research collects various demographic information. It is important to report the descriptive statistics of the
sample because it lets the reader decide if the sample is truly representative of the population.
Analyses
The analyses section is cut and dry. It precisely follows the analysis plan laid out in Chapter III. Each research
question addressed individually. For each research question:
1) Restate the research question using the exact wording as in Chapter I

2) If the research question is testable, state the null hypothesis
3) State the type of statistical test(s) performed
4) Report the statistics and conclusions, followed by any appropriate table(s)
Numbers and tables are not self-evident. If you use tables or graphs, refer to them in the text and explain what they
say. An example is: "Table 4 shows a strong negative relationship between delivery time and customer satisfaction
(r=-.72, p=.03)". All tables and figures have a number and a descriptive heading. For example:
Table 4
The relationship between delivery time and customer satisfaction.
Avoid the use of trivial tables or graphs. If a graph or table does not add new information (i.e., information not
explained in the text), then don't include it.
Simply present the results. Do not attempt to explain the results in this chapter.

Chapter V - Conclusions and recommendations
Begin the final chapter with a few paragraphs summarizing what you did and found (i.e., the conclusions from
Chapter IV).
Discussion
Discuss the findings. Do your findings support existing theories? Explain why you think you found what you did.
Present plausible reasons why the results might have turned out the way they did.
Recommendations
Present recommendations based on your findings. Avoid the temptation to present recommendations based on your
own beliefs or biases that are not specifically supported by your data. Recommendations fall into two categories.
The first is recommendations to the study sponsor. What actions do you recommend they take based upon the data.
The second is recommendations to other researchers. There are almost always ways that a study could be improved
or refined. What would you change if you were to do your study over again? These are the recommendations to
other researchers.
References
List references in APA format alphabetically by author's last name
Appendix
Include a copy of any actual instruments. If used, include a copy of the informed consent form.
GLOSSARY
Applied Research
Applied research seeks knowledge that will modify or improve the present situation.
Archival
Source of evidence based on records or documents relating the activities of individuals, institutions, governments,
and other groups; used as an alternative to or in conjunction with other research methods.
Baseline
The first stage of a single-case experiment, in which a record is made of an individual's behavior prior to any
intervention.
Basic research
Basic research mainly seeks knowledge about nature simply for the sake of understanding it better and to test
theories.
Causal inference
Identification of the cause or causes of a phenomenon.
Confederate
Someone in the service of a researcher who is instructed to behave in a certain way in order to help produce an
experimental treatment.
Confidence intervals
Intervals that indicate the range of values in which we can expect a population value to fall with a specified degree
of confidence (e.g., .95).
Control Key
component of the scientific method whereby the effect of various factors possibly responsible for a phenomenon
are isolated.
Convenience sample
A sample of research participants that is selected because individuals are available and willing to participate in the
research project.
Correlation research
Research in which the goal is to identify predictive relationships among naturally occurring variables.
Debriefing
The process following a research session through which participants are informed about the rationale for the
research in which they participated, about the need for any deception, and about their specific contribution to the
research. Important goals of debriefing are to clear up any misconceptions and to leave participants with a positive
feeling toward psychological research.
Deception
Intentionally withholding information about significant aspects of a research project from a participant or presenting
misinformation about the research to participants.
Dependent variable
A measure of behavior used by a researcher to assess the effect (if any) of the independent variables.
Descriptive Statistics
Numerical measures of sample characteristics, such as the mean (average score) and standard deviation (degree of
dispersal around the mean).
Effect size
In index of the strength of the relationship between the independent variable and dependent variable.
Empirical approach
Approach to acquiring knowledge that emphasizes direct observation and experimentation as a way of answering
questions.
Experimental research design

A research study in which a treatment (intervention) is implemented with a high degree of control, permitting an

appropriate comparison (e.g., between treatment and control groups) such that an unambiguous decision can be
made concerning the effect of the treatment.
External Validity
The extent to which the results of a research study can be generalized to different populations, settings, and
conditions. Holding conditions constant A method for conducting a controlled experiment in which only the
independent variable is allowed to vary; all other potential factors are the same for participants in different
conditions of the experiment.
Hypothesis
A tentative explanation for a phenomenon.
Independent variable
A factor the researcher manipulates with at least two levels in order to determine the effect on behavior.
Inferential Statistics
Statistical procedure for testing whether the differences in a dependent variable that are associated with various
conditions of an experiment are reliable-that is, larger than would be expected on the basis of chance alone.
Informed consent
The explicitly expressed willingness to participate in a research project, based on clear understanding of the nature
of the research, of the consequences of not participating, and of all factors that might be expected to influence
willingness to participate.
Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC)

A committee that evaluates the risks and benefits of research proposals involving animal subjects.
Institutional Review Board (IRB)

A committee that evaluates the risks and benefits of proposals involving research with human participants.
Internal validity
The degree to which differences in performance can be attributed unambiguously to an effect of an independent
variable, as opposed to an effect of some other (uncontrolled) variable.
Mean
The average score in a distribution of scores; calculated by adding all of the scores and dividing by the number of
scores.
Minimal risk
A research participant is said to experience minimal risk when probability and magnitude of harm or discomfort
anticipated in the research are not greater than that ordinarily encountered in daily life or during the performance of
routine tests.
Null hypothesis testing

A statistical procedure in which, as the first step in statistical inference, the independent variable is assumed to have
had no effect.
Observational Research
Observation of naturally occurring behavior, with the goal of describing behavior.

Operational definition
A procedure whereby a concept is defined solely in terms of the operations used to produce and measure it.
Quasi-experiments
Procedures that resemble the characteristics of true experiments, for example, an intervention or a treatment is
used and a comparison is provided, but procedures lack the degree of control found in true experiments.
Random assignment
The most common technique for forming groups as part of an independent groups design; the goal is to establish
equivalent groups by balancing individual differences in the participants across the conditions of the experiment.
Random sample
A sample in which every member of the population has an equal chance of being selected for the research project.
Reliability
A measurement is reliable when it is consistent.
Replication
Repeating the exact procedures used in an experiment to determine whether the same results are obtained.
Risk/benefit ratio
The subjective evaluation of the risk of the proposed research relative to the benefit, both to the individual and to
society.
Scientific method
Approach to knowledge that emphasizes empirical rather than intuitive processes, testable hypotheses, systematic
and controlled observation of operationally defined phenomena, data collection using accurate and precise
instrumentation, valid and reliable measures, and objective reporting of results; scientists tend to be critical and,
most importantly, skeptical.
Standard deviation
A measure of variability or dispersion that indicates how far, on average, a score is from the mean.
Statistically significant
When the probability of an obtained difference in an experiment is smaller than would be expected if chance alone
were assumed to be responsible for the difference, the difference is statistically significant.
Theory
A logically organized set of propositions that defines events, describes relationships among events, and
explains the occurrence of these events; scientific theories guide research and organize empirical knowledge.
Validity
The "truthfulness" of a measure; a valid measure is one that measures what it claims to measure.
Variable
A condition (factor) that can vary, either quantitatively or qualitatively, along an observable dimension.
Researchers both measure and control variables.

References
Ajzen, I., & Madden, T. (1986). Prediction of goal-directed behavior: Attitudes, intentions, and
perceived behavioral control. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 22, 453-474.
Anderson, J. R. (1990). The adaptive character of thought. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Anderson, J. R. (1993). Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Baumrind, D. (1985). Research using intentional deception: Ethical issues revisited. American
Psychologist, 40, 165-174.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Findler, N. V. (1998). A model-based theory for deja vu and related psychological phenomena.
Computers in
Human Behavior, 14, 287-301.
Kazdin, A. E. (1999). Overview of research design issues in clinical psychology. In P. C. Kendall, J. N.
Butcher, & G. N. Holmbeck (Eds.), Handbook of research methods in clinical psychology (2nd ed.)
(pp. 3-30).
New York: Wiley.
Kimble, G. A. (1989). Psychology from the standpoint of a generalist. American Psychologist, 44, 491-
499.
Pennebaker, J. W., & Francis, M. E. (1996). Cognitive, emotional, and language processes in
disclosure.
Cognition and Emotion, 10, 601-626.
Simons, D. J., & Levin, D. T. (1998). Failure to detect changes to people during a real-world
interaction. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 5, 644-649.
Sternberg, R. J. (1986). A triangular theory of love. Psychological Review, 93, 119-135.

Psychological Research Methodologies

Transféré par

Informations du document

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Psychological Research Methodologies

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

www.psipak.

com [PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH METHODLOGIES]

Complied By Anjum Mehmood e-mail: psipak@yahoo.com Page 0

Think like a Scientist 03

Choose a Research Question 07

Generate a Research Hypothesis 11

Form Operational Definitions 16

Choose a Research Design 27

Evaluate the ethics 28

Analyze Data and Form Conclusions 36

Report Research Results 45

The Research Proposal and Report (APA Rules) 47

Complied By Anjum Mehmood e-mail: psipak@yahoo.com Page 1

For example, for psychology news, try these websites:

For information about adjusting to college, check out these websites:

Complied By Anjum Mehmood e-mail: psipak@yahoo.com Page 2

Step 1: Think Like a Scientist

 Take the Step

Step 1: Think Like a Scientist

 What is the scientific method?

A way to gain knowledge

What's so special about the scientific method?

Complied By Anjum Mehmood e-mail: psipak@yahoo.com Page 3

Several websites provide information about scientific skepticism. Try these:

Why should I conduct psychological research?

Four research goals

We use the scientific method to meet four research goals:

Complied By Anjum Mehmood e-mail: psipak@yahoo.com Page 4

Does my research have to meet all four goals?

No; research is cumulative.

What's the difference between basic and applied research?

Complied By Anjum Mehmood e-mail: psipak@yahoo.com Page 5

Step 1: Think Like a Scientist

 What factors distinguish students who adjust well to college?

You may have thought of factors such as

 Having supportive friends and parents

Why should we do research on college students' adjustment?

This question addresses the goals of psychological research.

Complied By Anjum Mehmood e-mail: psipak@yahoo.com Page 6

Step 1: Think Like a Scientist

Step 2: Choose a Research Question

 How can my personal experiences in psychology help me with research questions?

Textbooks, participate in research projects, research teams

How can past research help me to choose a research question?

Psychological literature: inconsistencies, suggestions

How do I search the psychological literature for information on my topic?

Complied By Anjum Mehmood e-mail: psipak@yahoo.com Page 8

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development:

American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry:

Mental health risk factors for adolescents:

Biological changes in adolescence:

Federation of Behavioral, Psychological, and Cognitive Science:

Neuropsychology, genes, science:

Complied By Anjum Mehmood e-mail: psipak@yahoo.com Page 9

Ask Noah About Mental Health:

Information about psychological disorders:

American Family Foundation website about cults:

National Clearinghouse for Alcohol and Drug Information:

Resources for Clinical Psychology:

Information about mental health (Knowledge Exchange Network):

Comprehensive guide to mental health online:

Using the Internet for therapy:

National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH):

Websites for alcohol and drug additions: