study two methods results discussion

PAPER IV: STUDY TWO METHODS, RESULTS, DISCUSSION

Purpose of Paper IV: Study Two Methods, Results, and Discussion

1). Psychological Purpose

The psychological purpose behind Paper IV is to make sure you can summarize what you

did in your second study, how you did it, and what you found. This is similar to Paper II,

but you will include information related to your second independent variable in Paper IV.

For the results section in Paper IV, you will provide information about your participants,

materials, and procedure. Your participant section goes first, and it includes descriptive

statistics about your sample (means and standard deviations for age and percentages of

gender and race/ethnicity). This is a new sample of participants, so you cannot use Paper

II for this information. Make it NEW! Your materials and procedure sections include

information about what you did and how you did it. You should once again write this

section for an audience who is unfamiliar with your newer study two variables, but you

can actually summarize or refer back to study one variables if and when they carry over

from study one to study two. In the end, just remember that you must educate your reader

about your materials and procedure, giving enough detail so they could replicate study

two on their own. Your Paper IV Methods section will thus look a lot like your Paper II,

but in Paper IV you will describe BOTH independent variables as well as important

dependent variables (especially any new ones you added). I suggest reviewing your Paper

II feedback to see if you need more clarity in your methods descriptions, but make sure

that your reader is clear about the mechanics of your new 2 X 2 factorial design.

You will also write a new Results section. Since you now have two independent variables

and potentially new dependent variables, you will not be able to reuse ANY content from

Paper II. Rather, you will write a more complicated results section focusing on a 2 X 2

factorial design here.

Your Discussion section for Paper IV will be a short summary of what you found in that

study. Similar to Paper II, you can make some educated guesses about what you found

and why you found it, but keep the focus on study two only (in Paper V due at the end of

the semester, you will include a more advanced discussion section that looks at both

study one and study two, so keep the Paper IV discussion focused only on study two).

2). APA Formatting Purpose

The second purpose of Paper IV is to again teach you proper American Psychological

Association (APA) formatting for methods and results. In the instructions below, I tell

you how to format your paper using APA style, but this time with a focus on your 2 X 2

factorial ANOVAs. Once again, there are a lot of specific requirements in APA papers

(as specific as what to italicize), so pay attention to the instructions below as well as

Chapter 14 in your textbook!

3). Writing Purpose

PAPER IV: STUDY TWO METHODS, RESULTS, DISCUSSION

3

Paper IV is intended to help you figure out how to update a Methods, Results and

Discussion section using a 2 X 2 factorial design. This is more complicated than the One

Way ANOVA you used in Paper II, but you should still be able to clearly and succinctly

tell you readers what you did, how you did it, and what you found. Similar to Paper III,

we will give you feedback and help in this paper. You will then be able to revise it for

your final paper in the course (Paper V). Thus doing a good job on Paper IV will mean

fewer revisions for the final paper.

Note: The plagiarism limit is higher in this paper (up to 65%) since your classmates are doing the

same study two design and will have similar results. Don’t go higher than that, though! 65% is

the maximum allowed!

PAPER IV: STUDY TWO METHODS, RESULTS, DISCUSSION

4

Methods

This paper should be fairly easy for you! It is essentially a replication of your Paper II: Methods

and Results (Study One) paper, except here you will extend that paper to include your second

independent variable as well as any dependent variables you may have created. You will also use

a more complex data analysis process now that you have a 2 X 2 factorial design. Keep in mind

that Study Two is different from Study One. It may use some of the same materials, but your

descriptions in the methods section should be specific to your Study Two idea. If you reuse some

of the same variables, please refer to study one (I encourage it! No need to repeat yourself if you

are using identical materials), but if the elements are new make sure to FULLY describe them.

The results themselves will be

completely

different, as now that section will take into account

two independent variables, and your brief discussion will similarly be new. Below are some of

the points to cover in this paper. I will highlight in purple the new components you should pay

attention to for this paper.

1. Title Page: I expect the following format (

1 point

):

a. Use your headers and title information from your prior Paper III: Literature

review. See prior instructions for more info about the title page!

2. Methods Section: I expect the following format (

10 points

):

a. Write

Method

at the front of this section, make it bold, and center it.

b. The participants section comes next. The word

Participants

is bolded and left

justified. In this section …

i. As in Paper II, tell me who your participants were (college students,

family members, friends) and how many there were. If the number starts a

sentence, then spell out the number. “Two-hundred and five participants

…”. If it is mid-sentence, then you can use numerals. “There were 205

participants in this study.” Make sure this is for your NEW SAMPLE.

This sample will differ from Paper II, so you will have to provide all new

demographic data.

ii. Provide frequencies and descriptive statistics for the most relevant

demographic characteristics.

1. For some variables, like ethnicity and gender, you only need to

provide frequency information (the number of participants who fit

that category). “There were 100 men (49%) and 105 women (51%)

in the study.” Or “The sample was 49% male (

N

= 100) and 51%

female (

N

= 105).”

2. Other variables, like age, are continuous variables (rather than

categorical), so use descriptive statistics here (the range, mean, and

the standard deviation). “Participants ranged from 18 to 77 (

M

=

24,

SD

= 3.50).” or “The average age of participants was 24 (

SD

=

3.50).” By now you should be able to find these on your own, but I

will give you a hint: run frequencies and descriptives to get

demographic data

c.

Materials and Procedure

PAPER IV: STUDY TWO METHODS, RESULTS, DISCUSSION

5

i. For this section, things are again very flexible. Some studies include the

Materials and Procedure in the same section while others break them up

into two sections

1. It is a matter of choice which you choose. For me, the more

complex the design, the better it is to split them up. In one section I

will describe what the materials are; in the next I describe what

participants did with those materials (the procedure)

2. Your Paper IV: Study Two Methods, Results, and Discussion is

simple enough that I recommend combining them into one overall

Materials and Procedure section. Here, you can refer back to your

methods section from Paper II. (“We used the same photo

manipulation as in study one, but here we included only the Selfie

and Groupie conditions”).

ii. Again, the words

Materials and

Procedure

is flush left. In this section …

1. Provide information about your materials and your procedure.

a. I suggest starting with your procedure. Tell your reader

what your participants did in the order participants did

them. Be specific. Assuming your study is similar to study

one, I have the following recommendations (though your

study may differ, so take these only as recommendations!):

i. First, talk about informed consent.

ii. Second, talk about the different versions of the

hindsight bias studies. Provide enough detail so that

your readers know how the conditions differ.

Imagine I need to replicate your design – give me

enough detail so I can do so. Also fully describe

your new independent variable for study two. For

example, my additional IV may be whether

participants are forewarned or not. I need to fully

describe that new independent variable in the

methods for this second study

1. Study two looks selfies verses groupies as

two levels of one IV. However, we also

looked at Forewarning versus No

Forewarning as a second IV. This involves

four cells: 1) Forewarning with selfies, 2)

Forewarning with groupies, 3) No

forewarning with selfies, and 4) No

forewarning with groupies

iii. Third, talk about your dependent variables (that is,

your survey questions. For these DVs, once again

provide enough detail so I know exactly what

questions you asked. For example, “Participants

provided their gender, age, and race”. For other

dependent variables, tell me how the responses were

recorded (yes/no, true/false, a scale of 1 to 9, etc.).

If you used a scale, note the endpoints. That is, does

a 1 mean it is high or is it low? “Participants were

PAPER IV: STUDY TWO METHODS, RESULTS, DISCUSSION

6

asked, ‘How surprising was the outcome?’, and they

responded on a scale from 1 (unsurprising) to 10

(surprising).’” Highlight any new DVs you created

for this study. For example, I may ask a

manipulation check question asking if they were

forewarned (“Did you read a warning that seeing

selfies might impact impressions? Pick one.”)

iv. Fourth, make sure to highlight which DVs you

analyzed. If there are DVs participants completed

but you did not analyze it, feel free to say those

DVs were not analyzed.

v. Finally, mention debriefing

d. There is no set minimum or maximum on the length of the methods section, but I

would expect at least a page or two as you detail your materials and procedure.

Missing important aspects of your IVs and DVs or presenting them in a confused

manner will lower your score in this section

e. Once again, make the new information VERY specific so that someone unfamiliar

with your study could recreate your survey. If they can’t, you won’t do well!

3. Results Section: I expect the following format (

10 points

):

a. The results are the hardest part of this paper, so again, pay close attention to your

lab presentation and book

b. First, write

Results

at the top of this section and center it boldface. This section

comes directly at the end of the methods section, so the results section DOES

NOT start on its own page.

c. For this assignment, include statistics about the most important variables in your

study. For Paper IV: Study Two Methods, Results, and Discussion, your study

design should be more complex than your study one. You are dealing with a

factorial design now (more than one IV), such as a 2 X 2 or 2 X 3. Let me walk

you through some of the guidelines for a 2 X 2 design.

i. First, run manipulation checks using at least one of your dependent

variables (a dependent variable that assesses whether the independent

variable manipulation worked). This analysis will differ depending on

whether your dependent variable

1. Nominal (categorical) dependent variable: IF you have a nominal

DV (“Did you see selfies or groupies?” or “Did you see a warning

or no warning?”), you can run a chi square test.

2. Interval / ratio dependent variable: IF you have interval or ratio

dependent variable (they have scales ranging from low to high),

you can run a t-Test manipulation check (if you only have two

levels to the IV) or an ANOVA (if you have three or more levels).

For example, if I manipulated anger by giving half of the

participants a hard time about their intelligence before they read

looked at the Instagram photos, I might ask “On a scale of 1 to 9,

how angry were you?” and then run a

t

-Test on the dependent

variable anger to see if my manipulation did in fact work. That is,

given two levels for my independent variable (angry versus

control), they should rate themselves as more angry in the

PAPER IV: STUDY TWO METHODS, RESULTS, DISCUSSION

7

condition where I questioned their intelligence compared to a

control condition

3. Note: I suspect you will have a nominal manipulation check

question, so the chi square will be more likely. Also note that the

manipulation check may have nothing to do with Emma Wood

impressions – it might be simply recall of the type of photos or

recall of a warning. No need to mention Emma impressions!

ii. Second, run two 2 X 2 ANOVAs. Recall that this is univariate analysis of

variance, but rather than focusing on one independent variable (like the

One Way ANOVA), a 2 X 2 ANOVA looks at two different independent

variables within the same test. YOUR job is to run two different 2 X 2

ANOVAs. Your first 2 X 2 ANOVA will focus on a dependent variable of

your choice while the second 2 X 2 ANOVA will look at a different

dependent variable. For EACH factorial ANOVAs, you will report at least

three

F

tests (an

F

for the main effect of IV #1, an

F

for the main effect of

IV #2, and an

F

for the interaction. If your interaction is significant, then

you may actually report additional

F

tests for each DV with the simple

effects tests! I know this gets complex, so let’s break it down a bit and

focus on just one 2 X 2 ANOVA. This test will yield two main effects and

one interaction…

1. There will be a main effect in the ANOVA table for the first IV.

Provide the degrees of freedom,

F

value, and

p

value. Regardless

of whether it is significant, I want you to provide the means and

standard deviation for both levels of the IV. For example (and

ONLY as an example, since YOUR study independent variables

will differ and I don’t know what your lab chose), imagine your

first IV is “Warning”. Your main effect write up for this

EXAMPLE of warning will look like this …

a. “Using forewarning (warned versus not warned) and

condition (selfie versus groupie) as our IVs and the rating

of “Emma seems selfish” as our DV, there was no main

effect for forewarning,

F

(1, 189) = 1.97,

p

> .05.

Participants did not differ in their selfishness ratings of

Emma in the warned (

M

= 2.35,

SD

= 1.21) versus not

warned (

M

= 2.21,

SD

= 0.87) conditions.”

Photo

Selfie (

M

= 5.56)

Groupie (

M

= 3.24)

2. There will be a main effect in the ANOVA table for the second IV.

Again, provide the

F

test. Regardless of significance, give the

means and standard deviations for both levels of the IV. (This

comes in the same paragraph as the main effect for warning)

a. “There was, however, a significant photo condition main

effect,

F

( 1, 189) = 3.42,

p

< .05. Participants rated Emma

as more selfish in the selfie condition (

M

= 5.56,

SD

=

1.21) than the groupie condition (

M

= 3.24,

SD

= 0.89).”

PAPER IV: STUDY TWO METHODS, RESULTS, DISCUSSION

8

Photo

Selfie (

M

= 5.56)

Groupie (

M

= 3.24)

3. Finally, there will be an interaction for IV 1 X IV 2. Provide the

F

test again.

a. Interaction (either significant or not!). That is:

i. “The interaction was not significant,

F

(1, 187) =

1.22, p > .05.”

ii. “The main effects were qualified by a significant

Warning X Condition interaction,

F

(1, 187) = 6.61,

p

< .05.”

b. IF the interaction is not significant (e.g.

p

> .05), then just

list the means and tell me they don’t differ. “This implies

that participants in the selfie in the unwarned condition (

M

= 5.76,

SD

= 1.27), the selfie warned condition (

M

= 2.21,

SD

= 1.90), the groupie unwarned condition (

M

= 2.72,

SD

= 2.87), and the groupie warned condition (

M

= 2.78,

SD

=

3.45) did not differ from each other.”

c. However, IF there is a significant interaction, there are four

more

F

tests you need to run (“simple effects” tests). This

one gets complicated, but I’ll show you an example write-

up (normally, this can all go in the same paragraph):

i. First, simple effects showed that selfie participants

saw Emma as more selfish in the unwarned

condition (

M

= 5.76,

SD

= 1.27) than participant in

the warned condition (

M

= 2.21,

SD

= 1.90),

F

(2,

95) = 6.24,

p

< .05.

ii. Second, simple effects showed that groupie

participants did not differ in their ratings of Emma’s

selfishness in the warning condition (

M

= 2.78,

SD

= 3.45) and no warning condition (

M

= 2.72,

SD

=

2.87),

F

(2, 93) = 1.13,

p

> .05.

iii. Third, for participants who were warned, simple

effect tests showed that participants did not differ in

ratings of Emma’s selfishness between the selfie

prime condition (

M

= 2.76,

SD

= 1.27) and groupie

prime condition (

M

= 2.78,

SD

= 3.45),

F

(2, 95) =

1.31,

p

> .05.

iv. Fourth, for participants in the no warning condition,

simple effect tests showed that participants thought

Emma was more selfish in the selfie prime

condition (

M

= 5.21,

SD

= 1.90) than the groupie

prime condition (

M

= 2.72,

SD

= 2.87),

F

(2, 95) =

3.11,

p

< .05.

Warning

Type of Photo

Selfie

Groupie

PAPER IV: STUDY TWO METHODS, RESULTS, DISCUSSION

9

Warned

Selfie Warned (

M

= 2.21)

Groupie Warned (

M

= 2.78)

Not Warned

Selfie Not warned (

M

= 5.76)

Groupie Not Warned (

M

= 2.72)

v. In general, this shows that participants rated Emma

as more selfish in the selfie condition, but only

when not warned about the effects of selfies on

impressions of Instagram users.

4. Again, the warning is an EXAMPLE here. Your second

independent variable will differ.

iii. Please note that you might run a lot of statistical tests for one DV (like the

original

F

test followed-up with simple effects tests). This still only counts

as one DV. You need to look at three DVs total (one for the manipulation

check and then two additional Emma impression DVs), so you might have

as many as 11 or so statistical tests in this section.

d. Like the methods section, there is no page minimum or maximum for the results

section, though I would expect it to be at least a paragraph or two for each

dependent variable

4. Discussion Section (

2 points

)

a. In a short paragraph or two, write a brief discussion of your results. Tell me if you

did or did not support your hypotheses. In this section, do NOT go into detail

about the statistics. If I need that information, I’ll just look at your results section.

Here, I just want a plain English summary of what you found. Something like …

i. Overall, these results indicate that warning participants about the impact

of selfies decreases participants’ perceptions of selfie after being exposed

to such photos, especially when compared to not warning them.

5. References are not required for this paper

6. Appendices: Study Two

(4 points)

a. I want to make sure you are including the correct numbers in your results section,

so I want you to include all relevant SPSS tables for each of your analyses in a

series of appendices. You can include these as appendices A, B, C, and D for

study two, but I actually recommend naming them E, F, G, and H since you have

A, B, C, and D from study one already. That way, when you get to Paper V,

you’ll have all eight appendices in alphabetical order A through H

i. Appendix E: Demographic Information Study Two

ii. Appendix F: Chi Square (or other Manipulation Check)

1. Make sure to include a table for your manipulation check. If you

do a chi square for a nominal variable, this will include the cross-

tabulation table and the chi square table. Or, if you do a

t

-Test or

ANOVA, this will include the descriptive statistics as well as the

t

–

Test table itself (or the ANOVA table itself)

iii. Appendix G: first dependent variable (First 2 X 2 ANOVA)

1. Make sure to include your descriptive statistics table and your

Tests of Between Subject Effects table. If your interaction is not

significant, you’re done. If it is significant, normally you would

run simple effects follow up tests. You still need to run them, but

for purposes of this appendix all I need to see is the original

ANOVA table and the original descriptive table.

PAPER IV: STUDY TWO METHODS, RESULTS, DISCUSSION

10

iv. Appendix H: Second dependent variable (Second 2 X 2 ANOVA)

1. This is the same as the second dependent variable above, but for a

different dependent variable

b.

In the end, I expect four appendices for study two (one for demographics, one for

a chi square/

t

-Test and one for each 2 X 2 ANOVA).

c.

Appendices will come at the end of the paper

7. Overall writing quality

(3 points)

a. Make sure you check your paper for proper spelling and grammar. The FIU

writing center is available if you want someone to look over your paper (an extra

eye is always good!) and give you advice. I highly recommend them, as writing

quality will become even more important on future papers.

Other Guidelines for Paper IV: Study Two Methods, Results, and

Discussion



1). Page size is 8 1/2 X 11” with all 4 margins set at one inch on all sides. You must use a

Times New Roman 12-point font and double space all sentences/paragraphs in the paper.



2). PLEASE use a spell checker to avoid unnecessary errors. Proofread everything you

write. I actually recommend reading some sentences aloud to see if they flow well, or

getting family or friends to read your work.



Below is a write up for the significant interaction for the 2 X 2 ANOVA. Here, I just put

it all in one paragraph, as it would appear in a results section (double space YOUR

section, though). Notice there are 7

F

tests for this significant 2 X 2 interaction.

Using forewarning (warned versus not warned) and photo condition (selfie versus groupie) as

our IVs and ratings of “Emma is selfish” as our DV, there was no main effect for warning,

F

(1,

189) = 1.97,

p

> .05. Participants did not differ in their ratings of Emma’s selfishness in the

warned (

M

= 2.35,

SD

= 1.21) versus not warned (

M

= 2.21,

SD

= 0.87) conditions. There was,

however, a significant main effect for photo condition,

F

( 1, 189) = 3.42,

p

< .05. Participants

rated the sentence “Emma is selfish” higher in the selfie condition (

M

= 5.56,

SD

= 1.21) than in

the groupie condition (

M

= 3.24,

SD

= 0.89). The main effect was qualified by a warning X

photo condition interaction,

F

(1, 187) = 6.61,

p

< .05. First, simple effects showed that selfie

participants rated Emma as more selfish in the unwarned condition (

M

= 5.76,

SD

= 1.27) than

selfie participants in the warned condition (

M

= 2.21,

SD

= 1.90),

F

(2, 95) = 6.24,

p

< .05.

Second, simple effects showed that groupie participants did not differ in their ratings of Emma’s

selfishness in the warning condition (

M

= 2.78,

SD

= 3.45) and no warning condition (

M

= 2.72,

SD

= 2.87),

F

(2, 93) = 1.13,

p

> .05. Third, for participants who were warned, simple effect tests

showed that participants did not differ in their ratings of Emma’s selfishness in the selfie

condition (

M

= 2.76,

SD

= 1.27) and groupie conditions (

M

= 2.78,

SD

= 3.45),

F

(2, 95) = 1.31,

p

> .05. Fourth, for participants in the no warning condition, simple effect tests showed that

participants rated Emma as more selfish in the selfie condition (

M

= 5.21,

SD

= 1.90) than in the

groupie condition (

M

= 2.72,

SD

= 2.87),

F

(2, 95) = 3.11,

p

< .05. In general, this shows that

participants rated Emma as more selfish when primed with selfies and not warned about the

effects of selfies than in all other conditions.



Finally, go look at the supporting documents for this paper. There is a checklist, a grade

rubric, and an example paper. All will give you more information about what we are

PAPER IV: STUDY TWO METHODS, RESULTS, DISCUSSION

11

specifically looking for as well as a visual example of how to put it all together. Good

luck!