Research Paper and Poster Session Guidelines
Introduction and Literature Review Requirements
The State of Literature: The introduction must provide a comprehensive overview of current research within the field. This involves detailing what findings have been established by previous researchers.
Narrowing the Focus: Research should move from general concepts to specific investigations. An example provided is narrowing a study from "soft drinks in general" to a specific brand like Pepsi and its relation to test performance.
Citing Previous Work: Past research suggests that consuming soft drinks might lead to better performance compared to consuming water. For instance, participants who consume Pepsi before taking their SAPs (scholastic assessments) have been noted to score better than those who consume water.
Identifying Gaps: You must clearly articulate why the current study is unique and how it adds to existing literature.
Example of a gap statement: "To date, no research has examined whether Pepsi's boosting effects are unique to the brand or applicable to similar drinks."
Formulating the Research Question: The research question must directly address the identified gap. For example, by examining Coke (a brand similar to Pepsi), researchers can determine if effects are brand-specific.
Implications of Findings: If no difference is found between brands, it suggests the effect is not unique to Pepsi. If a difference is found, it indicates a specific ingredient or factor in Pepsi is driving the results.
Formatting and Rubric Guidelines
Structure: Psychological papers follow a highly formulaic structure. Adhering to this specific structure is essential for achieving a good grade.
Page Limits: The paper has a limit of pages.
The Abstract: The abstract is not included in the page count. It must stay within the specified word limit and provide a concise summary of the entire study at a glance.
The Introduction Rubric: Grades are based on the progression from general to specific information and the detailed description of at least two prior studies.
Study Selection: Citing more papers is not inherently better; it is more important to describe two chosen studies in depth, focusing on their purpose and their relation to the current study.
Hypothesis Formulation: The hypothesis must be explicitly stated (e.g., "We hypothesize that…").
Rubric Detail for Hypotheses: To receive full marks, you must mention both levels of the Independent Variable (IV) and the Dependent Variable (DV) in very clear terms.
Incorrect Example: "We predict the experimental group will do better than the control group" (This is considered meaningless/vague).
Correct Example: "Participants who drink Coke will do significantly better on their SAPs than participants who drink water."
The Methods Section: Documenting the Study
Participants: Describe the participants in prose. Include demographics and context:
Identification: Second-year psychology students at UBC enrolled in an introductory research methods class.
Incentives/Requirements: Mention if they received course credit or if participation was a mandatory course requirement.
Demographics: The average age is typically between or years old.
Materials: Only include relevant information.
Irrelevant Information: Brands of pencils, paper type, or the brand of laptop used.
Relevant Information: Names of established measures used in the literature (properly cited) or descriptions of self-created materials.
Example of Material Description: A package where the first page contains job descriptions/instructions, followed by a dossier or resumes of three individuals.
Procedure (The Replication Standard): The procedure should be written as an instruction manual. The goal is for a student in a different section to be able to take your paper and materials and run the exact same study successfully.
Details must follow the exact chronological order of the study (e.g., what happened specifically on the day the data was collected).
Independent Variable (IV) Manipulation: Provide a complete description of the two groups. Explain how you ensured the groups were the same and how you introduced the manipulation that made them different.
Dependent Variable (DV) Measurement: Explicitly describe how the outcome or dependent variable was measured.
Controls: This is a mandatory section often skipped by students. You must discuss the variables you controlled for that were not part of your primary IV but were carefully considered by the group to ensure study validity.
The Results Section: Data and Calculation
Data Processing: Explain the "magic" used to turn raw measurements into processable numerical data. The description should be detailed enough that someone with your Excel sheet could recreate your graphs.
Statistical Reporting: Include measures of central tendency () and variability ().
Precision: All numbers must be rounded to the correct decimal places.
Structuring results: Provide comparisons in one or two full sentences.
Graphical Representation: Graphs must have proper labels and fulfill all checklist requirements.
Avoid: Plotting data from every individual participant.
Recommended: Use a bar graph to compare the specific groups (e.g., one bar for experimental, one for control).
Advanced Plots: While not required, students with numeric data may use more complex visualizations like a "box plot" or an "ion plot."
The Discussion Section: Interpretation and Implications
Summarizing and Interpreting: Start by summarizing the results and interpreting what they mean. Explicitly state whether the results supported or did not support the hypothesis.
Connection to Past Work: Circle back to the two primary papers cited in the introduction.
Example: If Pepsi performed slightly better than Coke, you might suggest whether the effect is a "general pop boosting effect" or something specific to Pepsi.
Limitations: This is the section to be honest about experimental flaws. You can discuss procedural errors or disagreements within the group (e.g., "I told them this would be a problem, and it was"). Applying class concepts to critique your own work is highly valued.
Future Research: Propose concrete ideas for future studies, often based on the limitations discovered.
The Value of Null Results: Even if you find no significant difference (null results), the work is still valuable because it narrows down the field of research and stops the presumption of a certain path.
Rubric Language and Academic Integrity
Terminology: Students must use explicit terminology from the rubric. Terms like "supported" or "not supported" must be used clearly so the instructor can award marks based on the specific criteria.
Hypothesis Consistency: Do not change your original hypothesis in the discussion section to match your findings. The grade is not based on whether your hypothesis was correct.
Generalizability (External Validity): Avoid calling limited population samples (like university students) a threat to validity unless you can provide a concrete, logical explanation for why that specific population would react differently than the general population.
Weak Example: "Our results don't generalize because we only tested university students."
Strong Example (Coke vs. Pepsi): "High school students might be more habituated to sugary drinks than the general population, which could comfort them during tests. A population that has never consumed 'pop' before might not show the same results."
Speculation: Students are encouraged to speculate and find past research to support why certain biases (like age bias) might not generalize across different age groups (e.g., year olds).
Grading Note: A statement on generalizability without a logical explanation will likely result in a partial score (e.g., or ).
The Poster Session
Materials: Use a physical board, such as a trifold or a piece of cardboard. Trifolds are recommended as they stand up more easily.
Content: Include the abstract, introduction, and methods. Do not use large blocks of text. Copy-pasting the paper is prohibited.
Format: Information should be in bullet-point or slide format, similar to physical presentation slides, so they can be easily scanned by viewers.
Presentation (Science Fair Style): A "science fair" format will be used. Some students remain at the poster to answer questions while others rotate to judge.
Grading: Final grades are a combination of peer evaluations and the instructor's assessment.
Instructor Attendance: The instructor will visit each poster at least twice to account for variation in performance and public speaking comfort levels.
Timeline Advice: It is highly recommended to complete the poster the day before. Assembling it an hour before the session often leads to panic, delays, and poor quality in case of transport issues or teammate absences.
Questions & Discussion
Question regarding text blocks: A student asked if the abstract and discussion should be summarized on the poster.
Response: Yes, everything should be summarized/bulleted. Avoid copying and pasting paragraphs from the paper.
Question regarding age bias and generalizability: A student asked if age-related bias is relevant to include as a generalizability concern.
Response: It is relevant if an explanation is provided. Since different groups have different biases, it is too soon to conclude that results found in one group would generalize to a very different group, like six-year-olds.