Evaluating Research and Reflecting on Findings

Question 1

discussion

Answer 1

• Summarise what was accomplished in the study
• Interpret your results
• Assess the scientific significance
• Explain what they mean in terms of the research question (hypothesis)
• Discuss wider implications of results
• Propose what research needs to be done next
• It should relate back to research & concepts you have discussed in the introduction
• Discussion - structure
• ͏Briefly remind the reader about the aims of your study & state the key findings in relation to the research question (non-numerical).

Question 2

Can I include new literature in the Discussion?

Answer 2

• A commonly asked question is whether you can introduce new literature in the Discussion (literature that was not included in the Introduction).
• The simple answer is ‘Yes’, BUT:
• Make sure you also relate back to the key literature you introduced in the Introduction (don’t just include new literature and ignore everything you presented in the Introduction!).
• If your Discussion contains really relevant literature that is key to your Research Question, then the marker will probably wonder why it was not in the Introduction too.
• Usually you want to include new literature in the Discussion if your study has found unexpected results.

Question 3

common mistakes

Answer 3

• Including numbers and stats from the results section
• Limited or no discussion of results
• Far too much on critique of design and methods
• no conclusion

Question 4

Identifying potential limitations….

Answer 4

• It enhances the reader’s understanding of your findings.
• It shows that you can critically evaluate your work.
• It can also provide avenues for future research.
• Although, we try to overcome potential limitations prior to carrying out the research, some issues are inevitably more difficult to overcome.

Question 5

Chasan-Taber (2014) propose a 4 step approach for discussing limitations in a report:

Answer 5

Step 1: Identify the limitation.
Step 2: Describe the impact on your findings.
Step 3: Discuss alternative approaches.
Step 4: Describe methods to minimize limitation

Question 6

if different participants took part in the different experimental conditions, the results could be due to individual differences

Answer 6

• This should not be a problem if you randomly allocate participants to conditions.
• Additionally, you could have used a within-subjects design.
• If you did not, instead of just stating the sentence above, you could have justified why a between groups design was used.

Question 7

If participants completed all the different experimental conditions, improvements in task performance could be due to practice effects, rather than the experimental manipulation itself

Answer 7

• If practice effects are likely to be an issue, a between-subjects design is usually better.
• Within-subjects design
(also known as repeated measures design)
• Compare same participants in both conditions

Advantages:
• Each participant acts as their own control
• Effect of individual differences is reduced
• Fewer participants needed

Disadvantages:
• One condition may contaminate the other – order effects
• Participants may get bored or fatigued
• Solution:
• Counterbalancing – ABBA counterbalancing technique

Question 8

between-subjects design

Answer 8

• Different participants take part in different experimental conditions

Advantages:
• Avoids one condition contaminating the other condition
• Process is quicker for the participants (less likely to get bored or drop out)

Disadvantages:
• Individual differences have greater effect
• Solution:
• Randomly allocate participants to groups
• Or, if we know a particular variable may influence the result, a matched pair design may be used.

Question 9

When should we use a between subjects design?

Answer 9

• If order or practice effects are likely
• If IVs are not amenable to repeated measurements
• If DVs may be affected by repeated exposure of participants to conditions
As participants completed all the different experimental conditions, they may have been able to guess the aim of the study. Subsequently, any differences found across conditions could have been due to demand characteristics
This could have been resolved by (1) using a between subjects design, or by (2) employing a certain level of deception to conceal your true aims.

Question 10

Demand characteristics

Answer 10

• Refers to when a participant behaves in a certain way, which does not reflect their true behaviour
• Typically, occurs when:
• Participants form an expectation about the true purpose of the study
• The experimenter behaves in a certain way which influences the participants’ behaviour
• Solution:
• Employ a certain level of deception
• Double blind studies

Question 11

Ceiling effects:

Answer 11

Unable to detect any possible effects because the upper range is restricted, i.e., could happen if the task is too easy

Question 12

Floor effects:

Answer 12

Unable to detect any possible effects because the lower range is restricted, i.e., could happen if the task is too hard

Question 13

solution to floor or ceiling effects

Answer 13

• Consult the existing literature to see what they have done.
• Carry out a pilot experiment before the actual one.