1951271
| Question | Answer |
| Report Writing: Abstract Section | 150-200 words Brief summary of study - method and results |
| Report Writing: Consent Forms | 1. Curtsey 2. Background 3. Contact Details for Questions 4. Sign & Date |
| Report Writing: Introduction | Definitions Background/Previous Studies Aim Experimental/Null Hypotheses |
| Report Writing: Methodology | Participants Sampling Method Design Apparatus (Operationalised) Variables Ethics Procedure |
| Report Writing: Results Section | Descriptive Statistics Graphical Analysis Interpretation of Results Discussion (inc. hypotheses/aim, comparison to previous research and limitations and ways to solve these) |
| Report Writing: Debrief Form | 1. Courtesy 2. True aims of the Study 3. Ethics 4. Contact Details 5. Sign and Date |
| Report Writing: Sections of a Report | TAIM RaDAR Title Abstract Introduction Methodology Results Discussion Appendix References |
| Features of Science | Falsifiable Reliable Reductionist Objective General Nomothetic Laws |
| Popper's Hypothetico-Deductive Model | Scientific Theories must be tested and proven false. Scientists test their theories and try to find disproof. Only when we find counter-evidence can we be certain a theory isn't true & needs to be revised. This is a scientific knowledge progress. |
| Popper's Hypothetico-Deductive Model: Aim of Research | Even if the hypothesis is consistenly supported by empirical findings, it is still not certain that the theory is true. There could always be disproof or an exception. AIM: to create and test as many hypotheses as possible so we can be more confident and the theory can develop into general laws |
| What is an... Academic Journal? | Published scholarly, peer-reviewed articles written by experts in order to distribute knowledge, not make money. |
| Examples of Psychological Journals | British Journal of Psychology Journal of Social and Personal Relationships |
| What is... Peer Review? | The process of subjecting a piece of research to independent scrutiny by other psychologists working in a similar field who consider the research in terms of its validity, significance and originality. |
| Pros of Peer Review | Ensures High Quality Ensures Research is Valid and Conducted Scientifically (Like Quality Control) |
| Process of Peer Review | 1. Submitted and scrutinised by a 1-3 referees (psychologists working in the same field) 2. Referees will/will not recommend the article based on whether there are suitable research methods used 3. Peer Review has 3 purposes: to allocate funding, publication of research and to assess the research rating of uni departments 4. Manuscript is sent to a journal |
| Uses of Peer Review in the Scientific Process | 1) Authors and researchers don't spot every mistake, so showing the work to others increases the probability of weaknesses being identified and addressed 2) Helps prevent dissemination of irrelevant finding, unwarranted claims and unacceptable interpretations, personal views and deliberate fraud 3) Judges the quality & significance of the research in a wider context 4) Research can be taken seriously because it's independently scrutinised |
| Problems with Peer Review | 1) Resistance to Change 2) Competition 3) The "file-drawer" Problem 4) Gender Bias 5) Institution Bias |
Want to create your own Flashcards for free with GoConqr? Learn more.