semester 2: week 1: intro feedback

Notes

  • Discuss introduction feedback

    • Generally good standard of introduction drafts.

    • Provided good justification to the research topic and a good overview of the existing literature 

    • Some of you have noted in your feedback action plan that you didn’t feel like you covered enough literature as the area was limited. Generally, key literature was covered and if there were any additional studies to add I mentioned these in a comment 

    • Stronger pieces of work also incorporated critical evaluation and clearly identified limitations of past cue-reactivity research (e.g., papers included Caballeria et al 2022 review) and linked these to the rationale for the current study. 

      • discuss studies in more depth, outline methods and results, critical eval to link to study and rationale

    • Less strong pieces of work didn’t cover all key areas of research or covered these more without sufficient depth (see individual comments)

    • Remember to connect your paragraphs/points to each other throughout your writing 

      • Don’t rely on subheadings to connect the paragraphs, justify how the last thing relates to the next point your making, you can mention this connection in the first few sentences of the next paragraph

    • Inclusion of the MSc project in intro- advise against because we are preparing this for publication atm and there was some errors in initial analyses so the results have changed

      • don’t use the conclusion reached there

Intros: 2:1 → first

Discuss changes made to the survey in December

  • Discuss project progress and next steps

    • Stop data collection on survey and download the data from Qualtrics

    • Start preparing data for analysis (Merve to share data preparation guidance)

    • Prepare a plan of descriptive and inferential statistics for the next tutorial 

Tutorials this semester: 4 in total

  • From next tutorial onwards we will start analysing data 

  • Aim for results drafts around Week 3-4 depending on progress 

Statistics support: 

  • Statistics helpdesks from Weeks 3-5 for additional statistics help

  • Merve to share Laerd statistics enhanced guidance too

Poster conference

  • Can work as a group or individually 

  • Happy to give guidance/feedback on poster (can share some examples of posters too)

  • Participation will contribute to the academic approach mark 

  • Submit poster by 9th of March 2026 (5pm) by emailing a PDF of it to Dr Nicola Dimelow (nicola.dimelow@sheffield.ac.uk)

  • Poster conference 25th of March 2026

Write up period 

  • Supervision period ends on 5pm on Friday 27th March 2026

  • You will receive feedback on all drafts by this date, provided you submit them by agreed deadlines

  • From this date to the submission deadline (20th of April) is designated to be the write up period. Any general questions can be directed to PSY346 Module Organiser via the Q&A sheet.


Intros: 2:1 → first

Plan analysis:

descriptive analysis

  • demographics

  • drinking frequency

  • there is no difference between these in all four conditions

  • to compare the means we have to do a one-way ANOVA

    • for baseline craving score, base line audit score, age

  • to compare categorical variables like gender or drink liking

    • chai square

    • number in each group and percentage

inferential analysis

  • One way ANCOVA: baseline measure DAQ

  • post hoc comparisons

    • to find out where the differences are between the two conditions