unit 3

Lecture Information

  • Lecture Title: Cracking the (Assignment) Code

  • Course Code: PS21310

  • Lecturer: Dr. Victoria Wright

Week 10: MCQ Quiz

  • Options for students needing separate rooms during exams:

    • Complete MCQ in practical room.

    • Complete MCQ in a separate room with other students.

    • Complete MCQ in a separate room alone.

  • Deadline for choices: 31st October @ 12 noon

Assignment Learning Outcomes

  • Key Goals:

    • Collect quantitative data using appropriate tools, methods, or techniques.

    • Select and apply appropriate research designs.

    • Choose and apply appropriate analyses to address the research question.

    • Draw conclusions from statistical analyses.

    • Clearly communicate the results of statistical analyses.

    • Demonstrate ethical work practices.

Vevox Session Details

  • To participate in the Vevox session:

    • Go to vevox.app

    • Enter session ID: 117-789-980

    • Or scan the QR code provided.

Understanding Your PS21310 Style

  • Confusion Matrix Elements:

    • True Positive (TP): Correctly predicted positive observations (actual positive).

    • False Positive (FP): Incorrectly predicted positive observations (actual negative).

    • False Negative (FN): Incorrectly predicted negative observations (actual positive).

    • True Negative (TN): Correctly predicted negative observations (actual negative).

    • Metrics:

    • Accuracy = (TP + TN) / (TP + TN + FP + FN)

    • Precision = TP / (TP + FP)

    • Recall (Sensitivity) = TP / (TP + FN)

    • Specificity = TN / (TN + FP)

Mini Project Options

  • Choose ONE of the following options:

    • Option 1: Investigate the relationship between impulsivity, cognitive flexibility, and stimulus/response compatibility in undergraduate students.

    • Research Design: Use pseudo-experimental design.

    • Option 2: Investigate factors contributing to strong well-being among psychology students at Aberystwyth University.

    • Research Design: Use correlational design.

Mini Project Development

  • For both options:

    • Develop a hypothesis based on a focused literature review.

    • Apply either an ANOVA or regression analysis to data.

    • Investigate support for the hypothesis with the results.

    • Write up the findings as a research report.

Option 1: Background Information

  • Simon Task:

    • A classic methodological tool used for evaluating automatic processing, response conflict, inhibition, and cognitive control.

    • Developed by Simon & Rudell (1967) to explore how stimulus location affects response selection, independent of task relevance.

    • Participant instructions include:

    • Press A when the word "LEFT" is shown.

    • Press L when the word "RIGHT" is shown.

    • Stimulus congruency: Left/Right on their respective sides (congruent) and opposite sides (incongruent).

Impulsivity and Cognitive Flexibility Definitions

  • Impulsivity: The tendency of individuals to engage in spontaneous actions without regard for the consequences, linked with executive control.

  • Cognitive Flexibility: The capacity to adapt responses and switch between different thoughts, actions, or goals according to changing demands.

Option 1: Experimental Design

  • Factorial Designs:

    • Choose either impulsivity or cognitive flexibility as a grouping (between-subjects) factor.

    • All subjects will complete both congruent and incongruent trials (within-subjects).

    • Primary dependent variables (DVs) include:

    • Reaction Time (RT) – must be analyzed.

    • Accuracy – optional analysis.

Option 2: Importance of Well-being

  • Context:

    • Well-being is critical for undergraduate students who experience significant life transitions involving identity formation, heightened autonomy, and academic pressures.

    • These pressures may lead to vulnerability to stress, anxiety, and mental health issues.

    • Predicting well-being can aid in early identification of students at risk, facilitating timely support.

Predictors of Subjective Well-being

  • Key Factors:

    • Exercise: Strongly linked to improved mental health; enhances mood regulation, resilience to stress, and sleep quality.

    • Procrastination: Reflects challenges in self-regulation; chronic procrastinators may experience poorer well-being.

    • Emotional Intelligence (EI): Higher EI is associated with better stress management, healthier social relationships, greater life satisfaction, and academic engagement.

Option 2: Questionnaire Study Procedure

  • Participants will provide informed consent prior to completing questionnaires measuring:

    • Well-being (using the Oxford Happiness Scale; Hills & Argyle, 2002).

    • Exercise habits (using the Godin Leisure-Time Questionnaire; Godin, 2011).

    • Procrastination patterns (using the Procrastinatory Cognitions Inventory; Stainton et al., 2000).

    • Emotional intelligence (measured by the Emotional Intelligence Scale by Schutte et al., 1998).

Hypothesis Development and Testing

  • Constructing a Hypothesis: Hypotheses should go beyond stating that there will be a relationship.

    • Use the literature to forecast predictors with likely strongest relationships:

    • Example format: "Based on Smith et al. (Year) and Jones et al. (Year), Predictor 1 is expected to have the strongest correlation with well-being, followed by Predictor 2 and Predictor 3."

Example Hypotheses

  • Hypothesis 1: Exercise, Emotional Intelligence (EI), Procrastination -> Well-Being.

  • Hypothesis 2: Procrastination, Exercise, EI -> Well-Being.

Data Collection Specifics

  • Data will be collected during practical sessions in Week 4.

    • All students will act as both participants and researchers, collecting data for both projects (but will only write one report).

    • Data collection will utilize PsyToolkit, prepared in advance, with data collated and available by the end of Week 4.

Structure of the Research Report

  • Sections Include:

    • Title & Abstract

    • Introduction

    • Method (design, participants, materials, procedure, ethics, analysis)

    • Results

    • Discussion

    • References

    • Appendices & SPSS outputs.

Title and Abstract Guidelines

  • Title: Concise, maximum 15 words; avoid unnecessary phrasing.

    • Example: "Deficits in go/no-go task performance in male undergraduate high-risk alcohol users are driven by speeded responding to go stimuli."

  • Abstract: One paragraph summary (approx. 150 words) outlining:

    • Background context.

    • Study design and methodology, including participant numbers.

    • Key findings (no statistical details).

    • Interpretations and conclusions.

Title Evaluation Activity

  • Rate the quality of provided example titles on a scale of 1-5, from “Poor Title” to “Excellent Title”.

Abstract Evaluations and Results

  • Assess the effectiveness of two example abstracts. Correct identification of quality should prioritize clarity and informative content.

Introduction: Structuring and Goals

  • Aim to transition from broad context to a focused research question:

    • Establish relevance (theoretical/practical importance).

    • Review existing literature (critically, not generically).

    • Highlight research gaps.

    • Conclude with predictions to fill said gaps.

Literature Reviews: Synthesising Information

  • Unlike summarising, literature reviews should:

    • Begin broadly and then narrow focus.

    • Be logically organized (no subheadings necessary).

    • Present key themes and theoretical models.

    • Evaluate existing literature.

    • Formulate research questions or predictions effectively.

Method Section Detailing

  • Ensure detail sufficient for replication but exclude trivialities:

    • Use the past tense and third person.

    • Describe design based on chosen research method and analysis type (IVs, DVs).

    • Outline participant demographics (mean age, gender distribution).

Method Materials, Procedure, Ethics, Analysis

  • Materials: Equipment and tools employed in the study (e.g. software, questionnaires).

  • Procedure: Step-by-step tasks participants follow.

  • Ethics: Brief overview of ethical considerations and approvals.

  • Analysis Overview: Detail analysis strategies (e.g. mixed factorial ANOVA).

Results Section Overview

  • Pre-Processing Steps: Normality checks, handling outliers, and brief descriptions of methods used.

  • Report descriptive statistics (means and standard deviations) in table format.

  • Clearly present main statistical results following standard practices (do not directly copy SPSS outputs).

Discussion Section Overview

  • Paragraph 1: Restate study aims and initial hypotheses.

  • Discuss how results correlate to predictions and literature support or contradictions.

  • Elaborate on study limitations and suggest directions for further research.

  • Conclude with a summarizing statement.

Appendices and Supporting Documents

  • Include SPSS outputs to show evidence of analysis performed.

  • Full output with no edits in the appendices.

Timeline for Project Tasks

  • Week 4: Collect data; choose study options and conduct literature search.

  • Week 5-11: Progress through planned activities from ANOVA practices to report final submission in Week 11.

Literature Search Strategies with Primo

  • Access Tools: primo.aber.ac.uk; sign in for comprehensive search functionalities for books and journal articles.

  • Use filters for refined search results and save articles.

Referencing Guidelines

  • APA Style Resources:

    • Style guide: www.apastyle.org/index

    • EndNote for managing citations and bibliographies.

    • Librarian assistance for one-on-one help with referencing and plagiarism awareness.

Evaluation and Feedback

  • Review confidence levels in understanding the research report assignment through Vevox session prompts.

Q&A Session

  • Engage in Q&A to clarify any uncertainties regarding the mini research report assignment.