Alternative Lab Report Marking Guide
Mind, Brain & Behaviour 2 (PSYC10004)
1
Context
Students who are repeating MBB2 and previously
submitted the standard assignment must complete
this alternative lab report.
Students who are
repeating MBB2 but did not previously prepare and
submit the standard assignment should instead
complete the standard assignment as usual.
This alternative lab report has been designed to
support students in submitting unique work,
decrease the risk of self-plagiarism, and to support
new learning, while allowing students to take
advantage of the standard assignments’ supporting
resources, readings, and supporting activity in
practical classes.
Special cautionary note: Your assignment must
contain completely original work.
You must not
re-use any content from any MBB2 assignment
you have submitted previously. Your assignment
will be searched by Turnitin for reused content.
If a problem is identified, it may result in formal academic penalty.
If you have any
questions about which assignment you should complete, please contact Associate Subject
Coordinator Beth Hobern ([email protected])
Alternative Lab Report Task
Your task for this alternative assignment is to write a lab report describing an imagined study
(described below) that aims to test if an online education and contact-based intervention is
effective in reducing stereotypes of dangerousness about people living with schizophrenia.
Background Setting
The National Mental Health Commission (NMHC) is currently developing Australia’s new National
Stigma and Discrimination Reduction Strategy.
Preliminary work on development of the strategy
has focussed on identifying what the core issues are in Australia as regards public stigma about
mental ill-health.
One core problem identified is that people living with complex disorders like
schizophrenia are commonly stereotyped as being dangerous. This stereotype is incorrect –
people living with schizophrenia are not inherently violent and in fact, they are more likely to be
victims of violent crime than perpetrators.
Stereotyping individuals with schizophrenia as
dangerous leads members of the public to fear them and in turn, to socially exclude them.
I would
like you to imagine that you are a research psychologist working for LIVIN.
LIVIN is an Australian
organisation that delivers school based and workplace programs to educate people and reduce
stigma about mental ill-health. Imagine further that the NMHC has called upon you to trial (test) an
This assignment is worth 40% of the
total mark for Mind, Brain &
Behaviour 2 (PSYC10004).
The word limit is 1500 words.
Due 6 September 2024 at 8am.
Penalties will be applied for
assignments submitted late without
extension.
Penalties are also
applied for assignments that breach
the word count policy. Students
should refer to the Years 1-3
Psychology Student Manual
available on Canvas for the details of
the word count and late penalty
policies.
2
online intervention that is intended to reduce the stereotyping of individuals living with
schizophrenia as dangerous.
If your intervention trial is successful, then the NMHC will scale-up
your online intervention and implement it in secondary schools across the nation.
Your hypothetical LIVIN intervention.
Imagine that you design a new online LIVIN intervention
that aims to reduce stereotyping of individuals living with schizophrenia as dangerous.
The
intervention you design includes elements of both education and contact. Psychoeducation and
contact interventions are popular approaches to reducing stigma about mental ill-health.
Psychoeducation refers to education about mental health and illness, its causes, treatments and
recovery.
It is theorised that psychoeducation can decrease stigma by correcting harmful and
misled stereotypes about mental illness through the provision of correct information.
Contact
interventions involve having contact with someone living with mental health issues either face-to- face, or remotely through online, tv or radio.
The theorised mechanism of change is that the
positive experience of observing or interacting with someone with lived experience of mental ill- health again challenges myths and stereotypes, and cultivates empathy.
A helpful note on stereotyping and formation impressions of other people
When considering stereotyping as a core mechanism involved in public stigmatisation of mental ill- health, it is important to recognise that this process is a natural and unavoidable social
psychological heuristic function.
Stereotyping provides individuals with an efficient means to form
impressions and expectations of others, and to support social decision making in the face of the
ongoing precession of people that we encounter in everyday life.
The process of impression formation and stereotyping commences with observation of a social
stimulus – another person and their characteristic features both remarkable and not.
Categorisation of the target follows, whereby impression formation focusses on the categories to
which a target belongs rather than on that target’s unique attributes.
Categorisation leads to
stereotype activation, which is not necessarily automatic, and can be moderated by factors such as
available attentional resources, motivational biases, and situational context.
This stereotype
activation is thought to subsequently affect perception of individuals at the characterisation phase
of impression formation, wherein activated stereotyped can influence our appraisal of a target’s
characteristics and behaviour in self-fulfilling ways, and may influence what information about the
target is prospectively attended to and encoded such that stereotypes are confirmed. Stereotypes
may be subsequently corrected and updated in the presence of disconfirming evidence.
Imagine that your new LIVIN intervention provides detailed, disconfirming psychoeducation in
terms of theory, evidence and statistics that demonstrate that people living with schizophrenia are
not inherently dangerous or violent and are more likely to be victims of violence that perpetrators.
The presenters of this information in your intervention are PhD-qualified experts in the field.
Likewise, imagine that the contact aspect of your new online intervention provides viewers with an
opportunity to observe videos of people living with schizophrenia telling their stories.
Observing
these people with lived experience demonstrates that they are clearly not dangerous.
The videos
are filmed in a professional studio and the final production is very high quality.
The overall visual
design of the intervention has also been professionally designed to provide a very impressive
experience.
3
The Elaboration Likelihood Model of Persuasion
Your new LIVIN intervention aims to change people’s attitudes about schizophrenia. One social
psychological theory, the Elaboration Likelihood Model (Cacioppo et al., 1986), suggests that
your intervention may change people’s attitudes about schizophrenia being a dangerous condition
in two ways: the central and the peripheral route.
In brief, through the central route, individuals’
attitudes may be changed by consideration of the convincing, logical information presented in your
intervention, such as facts and figures about what schizophrenia is, and how people living with the
condition are not inherently dangerous.
Through the peripheral route, your intervention may work
not because of the logical information presented but by other positive aspects of the intervention,
such as the fact that it is visually appealing, professionally produced, and that accounts of
schizophrenia were presented by experts either through profession or through lived experience.
If
you find that your trial does work, then Elaboration Likelihood Model of persuasion can explain how
it may work.
You should summarise this theoretical approach to explaining the intervention effect
to be tested in your introduction and then also explain the implications of your results for the
Elaboration Likelihood Model in your discussion.
Your intervention trial
Your intervention trial aims to address the following research question: Is an online hybrid
educational and contact-based intervention effective in reducing stereotypes of
dangerousness about schizophrenia?
Imagine that to test your new LIVIN online contact and educational intervention, you recruit a
sample of people from the public.
In total, 772 participants join your study.
You decide to measure
their level of endorsement of dangerousness stereotypes by using an adapted version of a
questionnaire called the ‘Dangerousness Scale’ (Penn et al, 1994).
You can see a copy of the
original scale below in Figure 1. For your trial, you adapt the survey wording to correspond to
schizophrenia specifically rather than mental illness generally and the adapted version of the
survey is provided below.
In conducting your trial, you firstly ask participants to complete this scale before they complete
your intervention.
Secondly, participants undertake and complete the intervention.
Thirdly, you
asked participants to complete the Dangerousness Scale again directly after completing the
intervention. Because you’re a clever psychologist, you know that you can draw inferences about
the effectiveness of your LIVIN online psychoeducation and contact trial by comparing the mean
(average) pre-intervention (before) and post-intervention (after) scores for your participants.
Practically, you will do this by observing if the post-intervention mean score is lower than the pre- intervention mean score.
If it is, this means that the degree to which participants stereotype
schizophrenia as violent has reduced after the intervention. Such a finding would suggest that the
intervention is effective.
Any other pattern of results would not suggest the intervention is effective.
You should make and present a bar chart in Microsoft Excel or another similar program based
upon the pre-intervention and post-intervention group mean scores presented in Table 1. In
addition to Table 1, you can see the accompanying spreadsheet for further details but my (Chris)
strong advice is not to get distracted by all the data in that spreadsheet.
It is the pre-intervention
and post-intervention means scores that are important.
4
Table 1.
Mean pre-intervention and post-intervention scores on the Dangerousness Scale for your
N = 772 participants.
Mean
Dangerousness Scale Pre 22.67
Post 20.79
Figure 1. Dangerousness Scale (Penn et al., 1994)
Figure 1 above shows the original Dangerousness Scale, just for your reference.
Your adapted
version of the dangerousness scale used the same scaled response options but the questions
were adapted to be specifically reference schizophrenia as follows:
1. If a group of people with schizophrenia lived nearby, I would not allow my children to go to the
movie theatre alone.
2. If a person with schizophrenia applied for a teaching position at a grade school and was
qualified for the job, I would recommend hiring them.
3. One important thing about people with schizophrenia is that you cannot tell what they will do
from one minute to the next.
4. If I know a person has schizophrenia, I will be less likely to trust them.
5. The main purpose of mental hospitals should be to protect the public from people with
schizophrenia.
5
6. If a person with schizophrenia lived nearby, I would not hesitate to allow young children under
my care on the sidewalk.
7. Although some people with schizophrenia may seem alright, it is dangerous to forget for a
moment that they are mentally ill.
8. There should be a law forbidding people with schizophrenia the right to obtain a hunting license.
Starting Reading
The core starting readings for this assignment are:
1. Penn, D. L., Guynan, K., Daily, T., Spaulding, W. D., Garbin, C. P., & Sullivan, M. (1994).
Dispelling the stigma of schizophrenia: What sort of information is best? Schizophrenia Bulletin,
20(3), 567–578. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/20.3.567
Note: This paper is the original from which the Dangerousness Scale comes
2. Penn, D. L., Kommana, S., Mansfield, M., & Link, B. G. (1999). Dispelling the stigma of
schizophrenia: II. The impact of information on dangerousness. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 25(3), 437– 446. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.schbul.a033391
Note: A seminal paper on educational intervention to reduce dangerousness stereotyping of
individuals with schizophrenia.
3. Cacioppo, J. T., Petty, R. E., Kao, C. F., & Rodriguez, R. (1986). Central and peripheral routes
to persuasion: An individual difference perspective. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
51(5), 1032–1043. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.51.5.1032
Note: A seminal paper on the Elaboration Liklihood Model of persuasion and attitude change.
4. Kosyluk, K. A., Al-Khouja, M., Bink, A., Buchholz, B., Ellefson, S., Fokuo, K., ... & Powell, K.
(2016). Challenging the stigma of mental illness among college students. Journal of Adolescent
Health, 59(3), 325-331.
Note: This is of course the standard starting reading.
You have probably already read it.
It is a
good starting reading to get thinking about intervening for stigma about mental ill-health.
5. Thornicroft, G., Sunkel, C., Alikhon Aliev, A., Baker, S., Brohan, E., el Chammay, R., Davies, K.,
Demissie, M., Duncan, J., Fekadu, W., Gronholm, P. C., Guerrero, Z., Gurung, D., Habtamu, K.,
Hanlon, C., Heim, E., Henderson, C., Hijazi, Z., Hoffman, C., … Winkler, P. (2022). The Lancet
Commission on ending stigma and discrimination in mental health. In The Lancet (Vol. 400, Issue
10361, pp. 1438–1480). Elsevier B.V. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(22)01470-2
6
Note: ‘The Lancet Commission on ending stigma and discrimination in mental health’ is perhaps
the most important recent global work on stigma. This article provides a comprehensive but simple
and accessible account of what stigma is and how to combat it.
In doing so, it draws exhaustively
on evidence from across the globe.
This is essential reading for your assignment.
In particular,
you should read carefully the sections on public stigma and on trials of psychoeducation and
contact interventions to address these problems.
In these sections, you will find numerous
citations of articles that will be useful for your lab report.
You can refer to the full reference list at
the end of the paper to find the details of articles of interest, and then proceed to access them
through the library website.
Notes on writing a lab report
We will give you plenty of support as you commence on your lab report writing journey.
Indeed,
the first practical class will very much focus on exploring the lab report and getting started.
There
are also a suite of
instructional modules on how to write a lab report that I have provided on
Canvas.
This paper shares many of the features of a lab report and you will see that I have made
some basic commentary to draw your attention to certain aspects of the report, its structure and
style.
There is a very specific way to write a lab report.
In many respects, this makes your task easier
than it may be if you had to start from scratch with no framework.
Lab reports have specific
sections, each of which are dedicated to doing a certain thing.
Learning to write in this formulaic
way can be uncomfortable at first and particularly so if you have a creative writing background.
The marking criteria provided below will be a useful guide, however, and you should refer to them
to inform your approach.
Let’s look at the basic format of a lab report…
1. Title.
The title of the report should be focused and succinct. Ensure that the title captures the
main topic by including only essential terms, such as the variables of study.
* Abstract. The abstract is a summary of the entire report. It provides a preview of the report and
can encourage the reader to go on to read the entire report. There is no abstract required for
your MBB2 lab report. I want you to leave this out. I mention this here just so that you know it is a
thing that is sometimes required, but that I am not asking you to do it. So, nada, zilch, zero,
absence of …no abstract, please.
2. Introduction.
This is where you will introduce your topic and establish its importance.
You will
introduce the theoretical foundation for your work (the Elaboration Likelihood Model) and provide a
literature review that describes relevant previous work such as that of Penn et al (1999) and
others. In doing so, you will be building a case for the current study. At the end of the introduction,
you will formally state your aim and hypothesis for the study.
Note that for this assignment, you
should state one hypothesis only.
This hypothesis should be a prediction about what you think will
happen to the level of dangerousness stereotyping use in your sample after they have completed
your new LIVIN trial in comparison to the baseline measurement taken before the intervention.
3. Method. We will provide you with the method section for your lab report for your interest
only.
This means that there is nothing you need to do in this respect – there is no method
7
section required for this report - and therefore, there are no marks to be obtained for a
method section.
Under other circumstances, the method section is where you describe the
demographic characteristics of the sample of participants who were involved in the study, and go
on to describe the survey that was used and the procedure that was undertaken. You can also
describe how analysis of the data was approached.
One thing that you will be able to do is consider the method section that is provided to you in the
interpretation of your findings that you write up in your discussion section.
For example, you may
write about your thoughts on the demographic makeup of our sample and its implications for
generalizability and comparison to previous research.
4. Results.
In the results section, you will simply report the findings of the study.
That’s it.
No
more.
This can feel uncomfortable in that you are not providing interpretation at the point of
reporting the results.
Don’t worry though, you will have your opportunity to interpret the results in
good time.
5. Discussion.
Your discussion section should open by reorienting the reader to the aim of the
study and providing an explicit statement of support (or not) for the hypothesis based on your
findings.
You would then move on to interpret the current findings in relation to the previous
literature that you covered in the literature review section of your introduction.
You could talk about
whether or not your findings were in line with previous ones.
If they are not in line, then you could
try to account for why this may be.
You could also relate your findings to the Elaboration
Likelihood Model theory that you introduced in the introduction.
You would go on to acknowledge
limitations of your study in a measured way, and wind up by summarizing your study and providing
logical suggestions for future directions in this avenue of research.
6. References.
You will need to provide a full reference list that acknowledges each cited paper in
the lab report.
Speaking of referencing and citation, always make sure you are giving credit where
it is due.
See my video on this in the Assignment section of Canvas.
Submission of work
The MSPS Undergraduate and Graduate Diploma Student Manual (https://go.unimelb.edu.au/45pi)
details assessment policies and procedures. It includes information about extensions, word counts,
late penalties, and submission requirements. Please read this document carefully. Additionally, if
you have not already done so, visit the University academic integrity website to learn about your
responsibilities in maintaining academic integrity (https://go.unimelb.edu.au/8nw6).
Please also
visit our Academic Integrity module on Canvas to learn about how to avoid plagiarism.
The
University of Melbourne treats plagiarism and the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in the creation of
assignments as academic misconduct.
The University has invested in plagiarism and AI detection
software in Canvas.
It is therefore in your best interest to develop yourself scholastically in an
authentic way through this assignment and avoid plagiarism and AI altogether. L A B
R E P O R T
M A R K I N G
G U I D E
8
Assessment Criteria
A. Title
Weight
A1. Title Content • Clearly and concisely outlines the main topic of the research,
including the relationship between key variables.
5%
B. Introduction
Weight
B1. Opening • Opens by introducing the problem under investigation and
outlining its importance.
5%
B2. Literature Review
(Relevance and
Understanding)
• Provides a succinct and focused review of literature relevant to
the problem.
• Summarises key background information accurately and in
appropriate detail.
8%
B3. Literature Review
(Rationale)
• Develops a cogent rationale by critically evaluating the literature
and explaining how the current study builds on prior research.
7%
B4. Aims and Hypotheses • Outlines the purpose and scope of the study and generates
specific hypotheses for testing.
5%
C. Method
Weight
f
• The Method details will be provided by Dr Groot after final data is
obtained.
0%
D. Results
Weight
D1. Statistical
Information and
Presentation
• Describes the results of visual analysis appropriately and presents
statistical and mathematical information accurately and in
correct APA Style format.
• Presents results in an organised manner, following the structure
set by the study’s design and the order of the aims and
hypotheses.
• Avoids making interpretive comments that are better suited for
the Discussion (e.g., interpreting what the result means for the
hypotheses stated in the Introduction).
10%
D2. Tables and Figures • Presents at least one table or figure which is referred to and
described appropriately in text.
• Tables/figures conform to the requirements of APA Style.
• Each table/figure serves a purpose and does not merely duplicate
information contained in the text or in another table or figure.
10%
E. Discussion
Weight
E1. Hypotheses • Opens with a clear statement summarising the aims and
hypotheses and indicating whether the hypotheses were
supported or not.
10%
E2. Interpretation • Considers how the study’s findings are similar to or different from
relevant prior work.
• Considers what the results mean for the problem under
investigation, particularly with regard to the specific issues raised
in the Introduction.
• Reflects on how the study advances scholarship in the field
without overstating the importance of the study and its findings.
15%
E3. Future Directions • Suggests future directions informed by issues that remain
unresolved, new questions that have arisen as a consequence of
5%
L A B
R E P O R T
M A R K I N G
G U I D E
9
the study’s findings, or limitations in the design of the study that
may need to be addressed in future work.
E4. Conclusions • Concludes by briefly returning to a discussion of why the problem
is important and how the findings relate to the overarching issues
motivating the research.
2%
F. Writing/Presentation
Weight
F1. Written Expression • Demonstrates clarity and conciseness in written expression.
• Demonstrates continuity and flow within and across all sections
of the report.
• Exhibits a professional tone suitable for academic writing.
• Word choice is appropriate and sentences are well-constructed,
with no errors in spelling, grammar, or usage.
• Contains an appropriate amount of original material.
8%
F2. Report Formatting • Adheres to APA Style formatting requirements (e.g., with regard to
page numbers, headings, line spacing, and paragraph alignment
and indentation).
5%
F3. Referencing • Works are cited appropriately in-text and in the reference list,
following the requirements of APA Style.
5%
L A B
R E P O R T
M A R K I N G
G U I D E
10
Assessment and Feedback
Your work will be evaluated according to the
assessment criteria, with the table below used as a
guide for marking. Your tutor will also provide
feedback on your report, with the aim of offering
practical guidance that you can use to enhance your
lab report writing in the future.
Grade Range Example Descriptor
H1 80–100 Excellent performance;
shows a high to very high
level of proficiency.
H2A 75–79 Very good performance;
shows a high level of
proficiency.
H2B 70–74 Good performance; shows
a sound level of
proficiency.
H3 65–69 Competent performance;
shows a fair level of
proficiency.
P 50–64 Satisfactory performance;
shows an acceptable or
adequate level of
proficiency.
N 0–49 Unsatisfactory
performance; shows an
inadequate level of
proficiency.
Understanding the Criteria
Title and Abstract
The title of the report should be focused and
succinct; include only essential terms and avoid
using abbreviations and phrases that serve little to
no purpose (e.g., “a study of”).
Introduction
Opening
The opening should give the reader an understanding
of the broader context for the research topic, setting
the stage for the more detailed review that follows. It
should attempt to engage the reader and capture
their interest by outlining the importance of the
topic. In terms of length, the opening is usually only
one paragraph. As with other parts of the report,
conciseness is a virtue; it is better to have a short
opening that quickly captures the reader’s interest
than a long, elaborate opening that fails to do so.
Literature Review
There are two aspects to the literature review that
draw the attention of assessors. The first (B2) focuses
on whether you have selected relevant literature for
your review, whether that literature is discussed in
appropriate detail, and whether you understand the
key ideas under consideration.
The second aspect is the rationale (B3), which is
central to the purpose of the Introduction. Your task
is not merely to describe what has come before, but
to evaluate it and to build an argument for your
study. Assessors will have this question in mind when
reading through your Introduction: Is it clear why
further research is warranted and why the current
investigation will be valuable in advancing our
understanding of the problem?
Building a compelling rationale can be tricky and
there is no single recipe for how to do it; it depends
on the study and on the problem that study seeks to
address. One very common approach is to identify
gaps in our knowledge or barriers faced in previous
research, and then to argue that the current
investigation will address these. Importantly, the
rationale should guide the reader toward the specific
aims and hypotheses of your study. Thus, to develop
a cogent rationale you’ll need to think carefully
about what the study is trying to accomplish and how
it fits with prior research as you work through your
literature review.
Aims and Hypotheses
The Introduction ends with a statement of the
study’s aims and hypotheses. These should follow
logically from the rationale, meaning that by the end
of the Introduction, it should be clear to the reader
how your aims and hypotheses were derived. Your
hypotheses must also be specific and testable,
meaning that you need to articulate clear
expectations for the results of the study.
Method
The method section should provide sufficient
information about how the study was conducted to
L A B
R E P O R T
M A R K I N G
G U I D E
11
inform a replication.
The Method comprises the
following sections.
Participants
This section describes the sample of people who
participated in the study.
This should include the
details of the total number of participants and a
breakdown of major demographic characteristics
such as gender identity and age.
The source of the
sample should be acknowledged.
For example, if the
sample participants were recruited from the first- year psychology program at the University of
Melbourne, then you should say that.
Materials and Measures
This section describes the tools used to conduct the
study being reported.
For example, if you used a
certain questionnaire, then you should name and
describe that questionnaire.
Procedure and Design.
In terms of procedure, one would describe the steps
taken by participants throughout the study.
For
example, if participants completed an online
questionnaire, then you would say that here.
In the
design section, you would go on to describe the
nature of the research design and of the analysis
applied to the data.
For example, if your study
involved a repeated measures design, where
participants completed a survey both before and
after an intervention, and then these data on average
were compared, you would say that here.
Results
In this section, you need to report the results of the
analyses we performed, including all relevant
statistical information. In practice, this means
correctly reporting the appropriate descriptive and
inferential statistics, either in text or in a suitable
table or figure.
When presenting this information, observe the
conventions of APA Style with regard to rounding,
leading zeros, spacing, the proper use of statistical
symbols and abbreviations, and so on. Describe the
results of each analysis clearly in prose, but avoid
discussing whether the findings lend support to the
hypotheses and other theoretical implications—such
material is better placed in the Discussion. Think
carefully about how best to organise the Results
section. It is useful to closely follow the structure
already laid out in earlier sections of the report.
If you are required to include a table and/or a figure,
ensure that it serves a purpose and does not merely
duplicate information presented elsewhere. Ensure
that all tables and figures are formatted correctly and
refer to each table and figure in text by its designated
number only (e.g., Table 1). Do not refer to tables and
figures by their position relative to the text (e.g.,
“above” or “below”). Finally, present the table and/or
figure after it has first been referred to in text.
Discussion
Hypotheses
Begin the Discussion by reminding the reader of the
study’s aims; then, summarise the hypotheses and
state whether they were supported or not.
Interpretation
The next crucial step in the Discussion is to compare
your findings to that of relevant prior work. Are your
findings congruent with those reported previously?
In what way do your findings differ and why? In this
part of the report, you must also consider what the
results mean for the problem under investigation;
that is, you need to discuss the implications of the
findings as they relate to the key issues you identified
in the Introduction. In that section, you would have
articulated your empirical expectations (hypotheses)
and clearly explained why they are justified. Those
expectations were either supported or not supported
by the results. Whatever the case may be, this has
implications for how we think about the research
topic, which need to be explored thoroughly in the
Discussion. As you work through this part of the
report, consider how the findings of the current
investigation add to the literature and advance our
understanding of the problem. Be careful not to
overstate the significance of your scholarly
contributions though—progress in science often
proceeds in small steps and your study is likely only
one such step.
Future Directions
Having interpreted the findings, you should then
consider directions for future research on the topic. It
L A B
R E P O R T
M A R K I N G
G U I D E
12
is highly unlikely that that your study was executed
perfectly and that there are no further questions to
answer with regard to the problem. Thus, in
suggesting future directions, you should think about
limitations in your study’s design, issues that remain
unresolved, and new questions that may have arisen
from your findings. Importantly, each point needs to
be argued for and justified; it is not sufficient to
simply claim that a certain facet of the study is a
limitation without explaining why it constitutes a
limitation and, ideally, how future work may
overcome it. The goal is not to discredit your work by
trying to find as many flaws as possible, but to show
that you have given consideration to how certain
factors may limit the scope of your interpretation and
to reflect on how future research may usefully build
on your work.
Conclusion
In the final paragraph of the report, you should
conclude by briefly returning to a discussion of why
the problem is important and how the findings relate
to the overarching issues motivating the research.
This part of the Discussion is similar to the opening
paragraph of the Introduction: It should attempt to
show the reader that the study’s findings shed light
on a problem that is interesting and important.
Writing and Presentation
As indicated in the Melbourne School of
Psychological Sciences Student Manual, you are
required to use APA Style in all work submitted for
assessment. APA Style is described in detail in the
Publication Manual of the American Psychological
Association, which provides extensive guidance on
written expression, formatting, and referencing. You
can find further information on the associated
website (https://apastyle.apa.org/).
Resources
American Psychological Association. (2020).
Publication manual of the American Psychological
Association (7th ed.).
https://doi.org/10.1037/0000165-000
Baldwin, S. A. (2018). Writing your psychology
research paper. American Psychological
Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000045-000
Beins, B. C., & Beins, A. M. (2012). Effective writing in
psychology: Papers, posters, and presentations
(2nd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
Kail, R. V. (2019). Scientific writing for psychology:
Lessons in clarity and style (2nd ed.). Sage.
51作业君版权所有
