Lecture Notes: Research Questions, Literature Reviews, and Database Searching
Recap of Last Class: Research Process & Hypotheses
Three main types of research questions:
Descriptive: asks if something happens or how often; does not address connections or causes.
Example: Do students in my ADN class answer questions? Do students in my 10:00 class answer questions?
Correlational: examines whether two variables are related or co-occur; looks for connections or associations.
Example: Are students more likely to answer questions in my 8AM class versus my 10AM class?
Causal (experimental): tests whether one factor causes another; establishes cause-and-effect.
Example: Do energy drinks/coffee cause students to answer more in a given class?
How questions arise:
From everyday experiences, curiosity, or real-world problems.
They can also stem from testing a theory or explanation.
Literature reviews:
A literature review collects existing research on a topic to assess what’s known, what isn’t, what works, and what’s missing.
Replication is important: more replicated studies increase confidence in results; if replication fails, explore why (method differences, sample differences, procedure issues).
Transition to today’s topic: how to conduct a literature review and locate reliable, peer-reviewed sources.
What Makes a Source Reliable? Peer Review & Publication Process
Peer-reviewed sources: articles vetted by field experts before publication; experts may request additional explanations of methods, statistics, or data.
Review process characteristics:
Typically involves multiple reviewers and is often blind (double-blind or single-blind).
Objective: ensure sound methods, valid results, and contribution to knowledge.
It is a lengthy process: initial review → author revisions → resubmission → potential multiple rounds.
Why peer review matters:
It boosts reader confidence in the trustworthiness of results.
It helps prevent publishing inaccurate or misleading conclusions.
Costs & incentives:
Financial costs of publishing are not the focus here; the heavier cost is time (months to years for some reviews).
Peer reviewers typically contribute without payment; reviewing can be a credential on a CV.
Some publishers offer minor incentives (e.g., books) for reviewing, though this is not universal.
Undergraduate journals and peer review exist and provide practice in reviewing.
Purpose of the process for students: develop skills in giving unbiased feedback and handling feedback when you’re the author.
Variables & How They Shape Your Literature Search
A variable is any attribute you plan to measure or compare (e.g., gender, sport, age group).
Defining clear variables helps you specify search terms and narrow results.
Example considerations:
If researching face recognition, clarify what kind of faces (human, robot, animal) and who is recognizing (babies, adults).
The more specific your variables, the more precise your search terms and search results will be.
Databases for Peer-Reviewed Psychology Research
Core databases recommended:
PsycINFO (primary database for psychology articles)
EBSCOhost (a broad platform hosting multiple databases, including PsycINFO)
UNT library also provides a psychology database aggregator but focus is on PsycINFO and related sources.
Practical tips when using databases:
Bookmark the UNT a to z databases page for quick access.
Use the “Linked Full Text” option to ensure access to full articles and avoid paywalls.
Always look for the label “peer-reviewed journal” to confirm a source’s credibility.
Limit searches by publication date when required by course guidelines (e.g., past 5 years).
If initial searches yield too many results, broaden terms; if too few, add synonyms or related terms.
Accessing articles:
If you see a paywall, do not pay; instead search the article title in Google Scholar or another database to locate a free version or UNT access.
Google Scholar is a last resort for free access if the article isn’t available through the library databases.
Important caution:
Not all search engines return peer-reviewed results; databases curated by libraries are preferred for credible, peer-reviewed content.
Books and reviews can be useful, but for primary research, prioritize journal articles.
How to Conduct a Literature Search: a Step-by-Step Walkthrough
Start with a topic and identify key terms (variables, population, context).
Build a search query by combining terms (e.g., emotional support animals AND children AND bonding).
Use advanced options to narrow results: set linked full text, limit to peer-reviewed journals, constrain publication dates.
Review abstracts to assess relevance before downloading full texts.
Examine keywords, abstract, and methods to determine suitability.
If the article looks relevant, locate the full text:
Look for an access button (PDF or full text).
If only a “get access” option appears, it may be paywalled; use Google Scholar or UNT access to locate a free version.
If a search yields too many results, refine terms or remove one of the keywords; if too few, broaden with related terms (e.g., frustration, aggression).
When an article is found, note down useful keywords from the article for future searches.
Save and organize sources; consider building a personal literature database as you accumulate articles.
Practical Demonstration: Search Scenarios Mentioned in Class
Example 1: Emotional support animals and child psychology
Start with: emotional support animals AND children AND bonding
Use linked full text to ensure open copies; adjust terms if only one result appears.
If results explode, prune terms and adjust keywords.
Example 2: Alcoholism and related outcomes
Initial broad search (e.g., alcoholism) may yield tens of thousands of results; narrow using more specific terms (e.g., alcoholism AND children AND frustration OR aggression).
Check each article’s abstract and keywords to guide further searches.
Example 3: Article access flow
Open an article, inspect keywords and abstract, determine if it’s peer-reviewed, check for a direct PDF or a link to full text.
If “find full text” leads to a paywall, try Google Scholar for a free version or “UNT access” link.
Emphasize the workflow: start broad, then refine, check abstract, check full text access, and never pay for restricted content if alternatives exist.
Article Types: Primary vs Secondary, Journal Articles, Reviews
Journal article (primary source): report written by the researchers who conducted the study; describes the research question, methods, results, and conclusions; can cover one study or a series of related studies; undergoes peer review.
Review article (secondary source): summarizes and synthesizes a body of literature; can be a literature review or a meta-analysis; may not present new primary data.
What you should focus on for coursework: primary journal articles for original data, and be mindful of reviews and meta-analyses as supplementary context.
Why the distinction matters:
Primary sources provide direct information about methods and results.
Secondary sources can introduce interpretation biases and may omit details necessary for replication.
Distinguishing Journal Articles, Reviews, and Meta-Analyses
Article vs Review distinction:
Article: report of a single study or a coordinated set of experiments; primary data.
Review: collects, compares, and synthesizes multiple studies; may include meta-analytic synthesis.
Meta-analyses: a type of review that quantitatively combines results from multiple studies to identify overall patterns and effect sizes.
In coursework, verify that you’re using primary sources for direct methods and results, and use reviews to understand broader context when appropriate.
Journal Articles: Primary Source Details
A journal article is a primary source that presents original research conducted by the authors.
It provides:
Research question(s)
Methods (participants, design, procedures, statistics)
Results (data, statistics, figures, tables)
Discussion (interpretation, limitations, implications)
Because it is the work of the researchers, it offers granular detail necessary for replication and critical appraisal.
When in doubt, cite the journal article itself rather than a secondary summary.
Why Keep to Primary Sources for Research Design
Primary sources deliver the raw details necessary to evaluate a study’s validity and replicability.
Secondary sources can introduce bias or omit critical details; they are helpful for context but should not replace primary reports when designing your own research.
Mistakes can happen in any study; journals allow corrections or retractions, preserving the scientific record.
Quick Takeaways & Practical Advice
Always use library databases (PsycINFO, EBSCOhost) as your first stop for credible, peer-reviewed sources.
Bookmark the UNT a to z databases page; use PsycINFO as your main portal; explore related databases within the library system.
Do not pay for articles; use library access or free versions found via Google Scholar as a last resort.
Clearly define variables to sharpen your literature search and reduce irrelevant results.
Distinguish between primary (journal articles) and secondary sources (reviews, meta-analyses, popular media).
Recognize the peer-review process as a means to improve quality, not a guaranteed perfection; understand it takes time and can involve multiple rounds of revisions.
Be mindful of potential biases in peer review (e.g., conflicts of interest) and the limitations of any single study; strive for replication and triangulation across multiple sources.
Formulas & Key Numbers (Examples to Remember)
Display of extra credit in gradebook may exceed 100%:
This reflects the course’s policy that extra credit can push the visible percentage above 100% but the actual course grade conceptually remains capped by the 100% base.
Metaphors & Practical Scenarios Mentioned
Replication in science: more replicated results give us higher confidence; if replication fails, investigate why (differences in sample, methods, or context).
Snowflake metaphor: no two studies are exactly identical; replication helps determine which aspects truly generalize across contexts.
Booking appointments via calendar tools as a streamlined model of efficient communication: reduces back-and-forth emails and speeds up access to help.
Questions to Consider (Self-Check)
Do you clearly distinguish descriptive, correlational, and causal research questions in your own study plans?
Can you identify the variables in a proposed study and explain how they would be measured and analyzed?
Are you using peer-reviewed sources from library databases, and are you checking whether sources are primary vs secondary?
Do you have a plan for locating full texts without paying, using linked full text filters and Google Scholar as a fallback?
Have you considered how to interpret replication results and the potential reasons for non-replication in your literature review?