psychology experiment review

How to tell if your article is an experiment:

• Subjects must be placed into at least two different groups that receive different treatment.  If all subjects are treated the same way, you’re probably looking at a Correlational study.  Note that this also applies if you have two dissimilar groups who are given the same personality test.  This is a common Correlational design. TIP: Search for the word “random” in your article to determine if there was random assignment to groups.
• You must be able to identify at least one Independent and Dependent Variable.  If you cannot, find another article.
• If you have ANY DOUBT whether your article is appropriate, send me an e-mail with the PDF of the article attached.  I can review it quickly and tell you whether or not you have selected an experiment.  Note that if you fail to select an experiment you will not receive full credit.

Step 2: Complete each section of the template:

• 1. Citation: Copy/paste the Title, Author, Journal Name, Volume, Page Numbers, and Abstract.
  2. Independent & Dependent Variables: Put a lot of detail here.  Don’t just name the construct, describe exactly how it was displayed (IV) and measured (DV).  Describe the measures used, scales (e.g., 1-7, etc.), and rating systems.

Step 3: Internal and External Validity Tests.  To receive full credit, you must complete all three sections for each test:

• Copy and paste the information from the relevant sections of the research article you selected into the appropriate section.  Most often this information will come from the METHOD section, though you may find important details in the RESULTS or DISCUSSION sections.  Do not leave this section blank or write “Not Applicable”.  If the obstacle isn’t present, copy/paste the portion of the method where it would appear, e.g., for History/Maturation, use the section that describes what happened to the subjects after random assignment to groups.  Note: Do not copy/paste the entire Method section for each obstacle.
• Indicate whether or not the obstacle is applicable by marking the appropriate Yes/No box in some fashion (e.g., bold, highlight, mark with an “X”, etc.)
• If the obstacle is applicable, describe why this is so.  If the obstacle is not applicable, indicate this and describe why it is not applicable or what WOULD have made the obstacle present.  E.g., “The obstacle is not applicable because they used random sampling.”  Please note that you’ll need to write enough to demonstrate that you fully understand the obstacle.  One sentence answers generally do not fulfil this requirement.
• Additional Reading:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_validity

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/External_validity

Step 4: Explain how the authors could have improved their study.  You should incorporate what you’ve learned in the internal/external validity tests.  Very often experiments are lacking appropriate documentation, which is another area of potential improvement.  You may also identify deficits in their experimental design.

Step 5: Explain how the study is personally useful or applicable to you.  There is a wealth of information in Social Psychology journals.  In order to maximize this learning experience, you must find an experiment that will benefit you in some way.

Step 6: When you are finished, post your paper in a MS-Word compatible or PDF format and a PDF of your journal article on Sakai: https://sakai.udel.edu/portal  Please note that a link or an abstract will not suffice.  You must post the entire article as an attachment.

Your paper will be graded as follows:

You will lose points if your paper doesn’t follow the guidelines: