Writing Up Research

1
Writing Up Research

• February 24

2
Objectives by the end of this session you should
be able to

• Write an APA-style manuscript (provided you have
  something to say)
• Understand the process of creating and submitting
  a manuscript

3
Parts of a Manuscript

• Title
• Authors
• Abstract
• Introduction
• Method
• Results
• Discussion
• References
• Appendices

4
Title and Authors

• Describe findings (IV/DV, results if possible) or
  content/context
• E.g., Skirting The Competence Issue Effects Of
  Sex-based Preferential Selection On Task Choices
  Of Women And Men
• Authors
• Contributed, can understand whole manuscript
• Order (reverse alphabetical)

5
Abstract

• Last thing you write
• Includes all major sections
• Only thing most will see
• Spend time on it
• Get feedback on it
• 150 words (but depends on journal/outlet)

6
Introduction

• Hourglass v. vase
• Generally applying general theory to specific
  issue, start with specific issue
• Dont bury the lead
• 1st paragraph critical purpose by 2nd page for
  sure
• Make an argument
• Serial flow of ideas
• Address counter arguments
• Use to increase significance of research
• Give counter arguments
• End with hypotheses

7
Methods

• Design or overview if complex
• Participants (not subjects)
• Power analysis in proposal, not in paper
• Have collected demographics so can report
• Describe sampling procedure and incentive (e.g.,
  for course credit)
• Describe difference between desired sample and
  final sample
• Materials (or task or apparatus)
• Measures/manipulations
• May include questionnaire in appendix if new
• May include sample items
• Provide past reliability and validity evidence
• Procedure

8
Results

• Manipulation checks
• Means, SD, reliabilities
• Hypotheses tests
• Report effect sizes and confidence intervals
• Reporting actual p-values is gaining acceptance
• Post hoc tests (in terms of alternative
  explanations, unexpected interesting findings)
• All data (none in discussion)

9
Discussion

• Difficult to write
• Need perspective
• what were you trying to accomplish?
• Open what data supported (unless nothing)
• Most a too pessimistic
• Need to sell results without going beyond data or
  ignoring non-supporting evidence
• Relate to introduction
• Limitations
• Bring up a limitation and provided arguments as
  to why not likely
• Often need to include application relevance

10
Conclusion

• Like the presentation, end with a splash

11
References and Appendices

• Only reference if cited and cite only examples,
  not all possible references
• Appendices for
• questionnaires (if new)
• Analysis details (if complex and new)
• Special materials
• In general appendices are rare

12
Process

• Do study
• Seek presentation outlet
• Gives deadline
• Forces seeing the structure of the piece
• Pick journal
• Determines nature of audience and level expected
• Aim high

13
Some of the Top Most Impactful Psychology Journals
14
Keep it Simple

• Triangulate on one idea (necessary for the best)
• Outline !
• Make the argument in 5 sentences or less
• Add supporting material
• Make drafts (15 before done)!!
• Run it by colleagues!!!
• Dont wait until perfect

15
Submit

• Wait (3-6 months)
• Contact after 4 months if not heard
• Possible outcomes
• Accept (lt2)
• Accept with minor revisions
• Revise and resubmit (w/ or w/o enthusiasm)
• Reject (i.e., submit elsewhere after revision)

16
Revising

• Consider whether revision is worth it
• Must address every comment by each reviewer and
  the editor
• Maintain number scheme of reviewer (or add one if
  absent)
• Make change (resist temptation to justify old
  way)
• Tactfully defend old way, providing additional
  evidence where you can
• Add to ms. If you think others might make same
  mistake
• Take different tact

17
Revision

• Make changes to ms. revisit comments to
  reviewers
• Always treat reviewers and editor with respect
• Show response to colleagues to be sure nothing
  you say could be misinterpreted (particularly as
  offensive)

18
As reviewer

• Be constructive!! Even if the current paper is
  fatally flawed, your comments provide feedback
  for future work.
• Be nice! Put it down for a day, reread, make
  nicer.
• Guard against halo
• Most journal editors do not want you to put a
  recommendation in the comments to authors
• many provide separate sheet for the ratings of
  dimensions and acceptability
• Talk about what you know about. If you are not
  sure, qualify your comments or dont make them.
• Comment primarily on value of question and
  validity of interpretations (made or implied)
• Issues of clarity of writing, following format
  rules, etc. can be listed if few, e.g. if many
• 1 to 3 pages dont try to impress the editor
  with your acumen