ANOVAPart II Abigails behavior was wrong Sum of Squar.docx

ANOVA
Part II: Abigail's behavior was wrong
Sum of Squares
df
Mean Square
F
Sig.
Between Groups
9.434
2
4.717
5.811
.004
Within Groups
107.970
133
.812
Total
117.404
135
Descriptives

N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Std. Error
95% Confidence Interval for Mean
Minimum
Maximum
Lower Bound
Upper Bound
Support
46
3.3261
.73195
.10792
3.1087
3.5434
2.00
6.00
Oppose
41
3.9512
.94740
.14796
3.6522
4.2503
1.00
6.00
Mixed

49
3.7959
.99957
.14280
3.5088
4.0830
2.00
6.00
Total
136
3.6838
.93256
.07997
3.5257
3.8420
1.00
6.00
Post Hoc Tests
Multiple Comparisons
Dependent Variable: Part II: Abigail's behavior was wrong
Tukey HSD
(I) Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed)
(J) Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed)
Mean Difference (I-J)
Std. Error
Sig.
95% Confidence Interval

Lower Bound
Upper Bound
Support
Oppose
-.62513*
.19352
.004
-1.0838
-.1665
Mixed
-.46983*
.18497
.033
-.9083
-.0314
Oppose
Support
.62513*
.19352
.004
.1665
1.0838
Mixed
.15530
.19070
.695
-.2967
.6073
Mixed
Support

.46983*
.18497
.033
.0314
.9083
Oppose
-.15530
.19070
.695
-.6073
.2967
*. The mean difference is significant at the 0.05 level.
Homogeneous Subsets
Tukey HSDa,b
Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed)
N
Subset for alpha = 0.05
1
2
Support
46
3.3261
Mixed
49

3.7959
Oppose
41
3.9512
Sig.
1.000
.692
Means for groups in homogeneous subsets are displayed.
a. Uses Harmonic Mean Sample Size = 45.087.
b. The group sizes are unequal. The harmonic mean of the group
sizes is used. Type I error levels are not guaranteed.
ONEWAY PartIIIKeepSilentAbigail BY IVCondition
/STATISTICS DESCRIPTIVES
/MISSING ANALYSIS
/POSTHOC=TUKEY ALPHA(0.05).
Frequencies
Statistics
Race
N
Valid
140
Missing
0

Race
Frequency
Percent
Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Caucasian
36
25.7
25.7
25.7
Hispanic
56
40.0
40.0
65.7
Native Indian
3
2.1
2.1
67.9
African American
24
17.1
17.1
85.0
Asian American
9
6.4
6.4
91.4

Other
12
8.6
8.6
100.0
Total
140
100.0
100.0
FREQUENCIES VARIABLES=PartIVGender
/ORDER=ANALYSIS.
Frequencies
Statistics
Gender (1 = M, 2 = F)
N
Valid
135
Missing
5
Gender (1 = M, 2 = F)
Frequency
Percent

Valid Percent
Cumulative Percent
Valid
Male
62
44.3
45.9
45.9
Female
73
52.1
54.1
100.0
Total
135
96.4
100.0
Missing
System
5
3.6
Total
140
100.0
DESCRIPTIVES VARIABLES=IVCondition
/STATISTICS=MEAN STDDEV MIN MAX

Descriptive Statistics
N
Minimum
Maximum
Mean
Std. Deviation
140
1.00
3.00
2.0214
.82643
Valid N (listwise)
140
Case Processing Summary
Cases
Valid
Missing
Total
N
Percent
N
Percent
N
Percent
Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) * Attention

Check (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed)
136
97.1%
4
2.9%
140
100.0%
Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) * Attention
Check (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed) Crosstabulation
Attention Check (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed)
Total
Feedback supported her behavior
Feedback opposed her behavior
Feedback was mixed
Support
Count
37
1
7
45
% within Condition (1 = Support, 2 = Oppose, 3 = Mixed)
82.2%
2.2%
15.6%
100.0%
Oppose
Count

1
35
7
43
2.3%
81.4%
16.3%
100.0%
Mixed
Count
5
4
39
48
10.4%
8.3%
81.3%
100.0%
Total
Count
43
40
53
136
31.6%
29.4%
39.0%

100.0%
Chi-Square Tests
Value
df
Asymptotic Significance (2-sided)
Pearson Chi-Square
147.039a
4
.000
Likelihood Ratio
142.630
4
.000
Linear-by-Linear Association
62.028
1
.000
N of Valid Cases
136
a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum
expected count is 12.65.
Symmetric Measures
Value
Approximate Significance
Nominal by Nominal
Phi
1.040

.000
Cramer's V
.735
.000
N of Valid Cases
136
T-TEST GROUPS=IVCondition(1 2)
/MISSING=ANALYSIS
/VARIABLES=PartIIISameAdvice
/CRITERIA=CI(.95).
T-Test
Group Statistics
N
Mean
Std. Deviation
Std. Error Mean
Part III: I would give Abigail the same advice that her friends
gave her
Support
46
4.3478
.70608

.10411
Oppose
45
4.4000
.78044
.11634
Independent Samples Test
Levene's Test for Equality of Variances
t-test for Equality of Means
F
Sig.
t
df
Sig. (2-tailed)

Part III: I would give Abigail the same advice that her friends
gave her
Equal variances assumed
.759
.386
-.335
89
.739
Equal variances not assumed
-.334
87.697
.739
Manuscript Structure and Content
{

Reporting standards provide a degree of comprehensiveness in
the information that is routinely included in reports of empirical
investigations
Uniform reporting standards make it easier to generalize across
fields.
Reporting standards are based on the research design and
implementation of the study being reported, not on the topical
focus of the study or the particular journal that might serve as
the vehicle for its publication.
Manuscript Structure and Content
It should summarize the main idea of the manuscript.
Fully explanatory when it stands alone
A good title is easily shorten to the running head
Avoid words that serve no useful purpose; they increase length
and can mislead indexers.
Avoid using abbreviations
Typed upper and lowercase letters, centered between the left
and right margins, and positioned in the upper half of the page.
Title
Name
First Name, Middle initial, last name
Bottom Line use the same format of publication throughout your
career

Institutional Affiliation
The location where the author or authors were when the
research was conducted.
When an author has no institutional affiliation, list the city and
state of residence below the author’s name.
Names of the authors should appear in order of their
contributions centered between the die margins.
Author’s Name
First Paragraph: Complete Departmental affiliation
Changes of affiliation (if any)
Third paragraph:
Acknowledgments
Special Circumstances
Fourth Paragraph: Person to contact
Author Note
Explore the importance of the problem

Why is this problem a topic of study?
Describe relevant scholarship
What other literature is important or related to this topic of
study
State hypotheses and their correspondence to research design
How do you plan on solving the problem
Introduction
The Method section describes HOW the study was conducted.
Identify subsections
Divide your work into various subsections
Participant (subject) characteristics
Who are you conduction your study on
Sampling Procedures
Sample size, power, and precision
Measures and covariates
Research design
Experimental manipulations or interventions
Method
Summarize collected data and the analysis performed on those
data relevant to the disclosure that is to follow.
Recruitment
Statistics and data analysis
Ancillary analyses
Participant flow

Intervention or manipulation fidelity
Baseline data
Statistics and data analysis
Adverse events
Results
Examine, interpret, and qualify the results and draw inferences
and conclusions from them.
What is the theoretical, clinical, or practical significance of the
outcomes, and what is the basis for these interpretations?
Discussion
Mechanics and Style
Commas
Between Elements (including before and and or) in a series of
three or more items.
To set off a nonessential or nonrestrictive clause, that is, a
clause that embellishes a sentence but if removed would leave
the grammatical structure and meaning of the sentence intact.
(Think Appositives)
To separate two independent clauses joined by a conjunction.

To set off the year in exact dates.
To set off the year in parenthetical reference citations.
To separate groups of three digits in most numbers of 1,000 or
more
Do Not Use Commas
Before an essential or restrictive clause, that is, a clause that
limits or defines the material it modifies. Removal of such a
clause from the sentence would alter the intended meaning.
Between the two parts of a compound predicate.
To separate parts of measurement.
Semicolons
To separate two independent clauses that are not joined by a
conjunction.
To separate elements in a series that already contain commas.
Colon
Between a grammatically complete introductory clause (one that
could stand as a sentence) and a final phrase or clause that
illustrates, extends, or amplifies the preceding thought. If the
clause that illustrates, extends, or amplifies the preceding
thought. If the clause following the colon is a complete
sentence, it begins with a capital letter.
In ratios and proportions.
In references between place of publication and publisher.
Do not use a colon after and introduction that is not an
independent clause or complete sentence.
Quotation Marks
To introduce a word or phrase used as an iconic comment, as

slang, or as an invented or coined expression. Use quotation
marks the first time the word or phrase is used; thereafter, do
not use question marks.
To set off the title of an article or chapter in a periodical or
book when the title is mentioned in text.
To reproduce material from a test item or verbatim instructions
to participants.
Do Not Use Double Quotation Marks
To identify the anchors of a scale. Instead, italicize them.
To cite a letter, word, phrase, or sentence as a linguistic
example. Instead, italicize the term.
To introduce a technical or key term. Instead, italicize the term.
To hedge. Do not use any punctuation with such expressions.
Brackets
To enclose the values that are the limits of a confidence
interval.
To enclose material inserted in a quotation by some person
other than the original writer.
To enclose parenthetical material that is already within
parentheses.
Do not use brackets to set off statistics that already include
parentheses.
Hyphenation
Hyphen
An em dash is longer than a hyphen or an en dash and is sued to
set off an element added to amplify or to digress from the main
clause.
An en dash is longer and thinner than a hyphen yet shorter than
an em dash and is used between words of equal weight in a
compound adjective.

Hyphenation
A compound with a participle when it precedes the term it
modifies.
A phrase used an adjective when it precedes the term it
modifies.
An adjective-and-noun compound when it precedes the term it
modifies.
A fraction used as an adjective.
Do Not Hyphenate
A compound including an adverb ending in ly.
A compound including a comparative or superlative adjective.
Chemical terms.
Foreign phrases used as adjectives or adverbs.
A modifier including a letter or numeral as the second element.
Common fractions used as nouns.
Italics
Titles of books, periodicals, films, videos, TV shows, and
microfilm publications.
Genera, species, and varieties.
Introduction of a new, technical, or key term or label (after a
term has been used once, do not italicize it).
A letter, word, or phrase cited as a linguistic example.
Words that can be misread.
Letters used as statistical symbols or algebraic variables.
Some test scores and scales.
Periodical volume numbers in reference lists
Anchors of a scale.
Do Not Use Italics

Chemical terms.
Trigonometric terms.
Nonstatistical subscripts to statistical symbols or mathematical
expressions.
Greek letters.
Mere emphasis.
Letters used as abbreviations.
Abbreviations
Use
If it is conventional and if the reader is more familiar with the
abbreviation than with the complete form.
If considerable space can be saved and cumbersome repetition
avoided.
Write out all abbreviations on their first appearance
Number Expressed in Numerals
Numbers 10 and above
Numbers in the abstract of a paper or in a graphical display
within a paper.
Numbers that immediately precede a unit or measurement.
Numbers that represent statistical or mathematical functions,
fractional or decimal quantities, percentages, ratios, and
percentiles and quartiles.
Numbers that represent time, dates, ages, scores and points on a
scale, exact sums of money, and numerals as numerals.
Numbers that denote a specific place in a numbered series, parts
of books and tables, and each number in a list of four of more
numbers.

Numbers Expressed in Words
Any number that begins a sentence, title, or text heading.
Common fractions.
Universally accepted usage.
Numbers
Do not change Roman numerals for Arabic numerals.
Do not use commas in: page numbers, binary numbers, serial
numbers, degrees of temperature, acoustic frequency
designations, and degrees of freedom.
To pluralize numbers use s or es without an apostrophe.
The Big Idea
Topic/Problem________________________________________
_____________________________
Main persuasive argument
_____________________________________________________
______
Next persuasive argument
_____________________________________________________
______

Next persuasive argument
_____________________________________________________
______
Call to action
_____________________________________________________
________________
_____________________________________________________
____________________________
Main persuasive argument _________________
_______________________________________
Quote __________________________________
_______________________________________
Further evidence _________________________
_______________________________________
Quote __________________________________
_______________________________________
_______________________________________
Next persuasive argument ________________
_____________________________________
Quote ________________________________
_____________________________________
Further evidence _______________________
_____________________________________
Quote ________________________________
_____________________________________
Next persuasive argument __________________
_______________________________________
Quote __________________________________
_______________________________________
Further evidence _________________________

_______________________________________
Quote __________________________________
_______________________________________
Possible solution to the problem
_____________________________________________________
__
_____________________________________________________
____________________________
_____________________________________________________
____________________________
_____________________________________________________
____________________________
Evidence to support solution
_____________________________________________________
_____
_____________________________________________________
____________________________
_____________________________________________________
____________________________
Quote
_____________________________________________________
_______________________
_____________________________________________________
____________________________
_____________________________________________________
____________________________
Topic/Problem supporting evidence
_____________________________________
Quote ________________________________
_____________________________________
Further evidence _______________________
_____________________________________
Quote ________________________________
_____________________________________

_____________________________________
Persuasive Essay
Your Persuasive Essay
It must be 500 – 750 words.
You must choose your stance of an affirmative or a negative.
The topic will be given at the end of this PowerPoint.
You must use at least 3 credible articles to support your stance.
3 to 5 articles.
Organizing your Essay
Strong Argument 1
Strong Argument 2
Counter Argument
Rebuttal
Conclusion

Formatting your Essay
Title page
Running head belongs on the top left.
Page number belongs on the top right.
Title and name belong in the middle
“Why I’m always right about everything”
by Michael Rawls
Your Prompt
Are sports and other extracurricular activities important for
High School students?
Should private schools be funded by the Federal, State, and
Local Government?
Should Teaching Credentials be a mandatory requirement for
allowing teachers to teach?

Persuasive Essay Prompt
A persuasive essay requires you to respond to a prompt in
a way that persuades the reader that your stance is the correct
one. Unlike the academic summary in which you focused on the
article, for your persuasive essay you are going to focus on the
topic. The point of this paper is to convince your reader that a
particular stance is correct. As always you have to stay away
from using first person pronouns. As usual this is not an opinion
piece; your opinion is not important here. Make a claim and
provide evidence for that claim. Focus on the facts and help the
reader come to the correct scientific conclusion.
Guidelines
· The Persuasive Essay for this class must be 500-750 words.
· Your thesis statement must be clear and concise.
· You must support any claims that you make with plenty of
evidence
· Evidential support (whether factual, logical, statistical, or
anecdotal).
· Use 3 to 5 articles. Cite their arguments in your essay and
write them on your reference page.
· Grammar, punctuation, and content must be on par with
university standards.
· The only thing that you need other than your paper is your
peer review worksheet.
· You have graphic organizers to help you organize your
information, but use of these is not mandatory.
· 1st Draft: Feb 7
· 2nd Draft: Feb 26
Study Set-Up
Main Theme and Three Level Independent Variable: Morally
ambiguous situation presented via a Facebook post with the
female user asking for her friends’ opinions regarding her
actions. In some, there is 100% consensus favorable to what she
did; in another there is 100% consensus unfavorable to what she
did; in the last there is a mixture of positive and negative

feedback.
Moral Dilemma: The user relates a story that the instructor
handed out exams in class in a class where she was really
struggling with the content, but must have included the answer
key in the version she got. She didn’t say anything, and simply
copied down the correct answers (though she missed a few so it
wasn’t so obvious she was cheating). She still got the highest
grade by far in the class. The instructor curves the scores, so
she knows that her benefit hurt other students. She feels bad
about it, and wants to know if students think she is a terrible
person and whether she should tell the instructor what
happened.
Dependent variables:
1. Warm-Cold Scale
2. Accepting / Rejecting what she did
3. Self-Ratings
Abigail’s Post
So, I did something ... well, something I'm kind of embarrassed
about. I've been having a hard time in my statistics class, and I
knew I was going to fail the exam. I studied for it so hard, too!
Well, the prof handed out the exam, and he must have made a
mistake, because when I got my test, it turned out it was (wait
for it!) ... the answer key. I know, I know. I should have turned
it in, but I REALLY needed to pass the exam. I used the answer
key, and got the best score on the exam. Turns out the rest of
the class did really bad, and the prof said he had planned to
curve the grade. However, since someone got a perfect score,
there was no curve needed. I'm sure if I'd done worse, the curve
would have brought some other student scores up. So am I a bad
person? Should I tell the prof what happened. I don't know.
Help!
Positive Feedback (Consensus)

1. Wow, Abigail, sounds like you really lucked out there. Take
the grade. You “earned” it!
2. I agree. You got lucky! Incredibly lucky! I’d probably take
the grade, too. I’ve taken that class, and it is impossibly hard.
Anything you can do to make it a bit easier on yourself is worth
it.
3. Listen, it’s not like you intended to cheat going into the
exam. The prof should have checked to make sure he was only
handing out blank exams. His mistake – your big break! Take
the grade
4. Yeah, I’m of the same opinion. Don’t look a gift horse in the
mouth! Take the win
5. You know that if you didn’t get the answer key, another
student would have and then THEY would have the highest
grade and you’d lose out in the curve. Don’t feel too bad
6. I’ve read the other comments on your wall, Abigail, and I
think they gave you some good advice. If you go to the prof
now, you might get in real trouble, and it’s not like you went in
planning to use the answer key.
7. What can I say that hasn’t already been said? Their loss –
your gain!
8. If it were me, I’d tell the prof … NOT! Don’t be crazy, Abby.
You might blow the next exam, so it will all even out in the end
Negative Feedback (Consensus)
1. Wow, Abigail, though it sounds like you really lucked out
there, you can’t take the grade. You didn’t really “earn” it!
2. I agree. You got lucky! Dishonorably lucky. I’d never take
the grade. I’ve taken that class, and it is impossibly hard, but
taking the easy way out isn’t worth it.
handing out blank exams. His mistake – but your integrity.
Don’t take the grade
4. Yeah, I’m of the same opinion. Look this gift horse in the
mouth! It’s a loser

grade and you’d lose out in the curve. How would you feel
then?
think they gave you some good advice. If you don’t go to the
prof now, you might get in real trouble later. Just tell him it’s
not like you went in planning to use the answer key.
7. What can I say that hasn’t already been said? The whole class
lost – only you gained.
8. If it were me, I’d tell the prof … DEFINITELY! Don’t be
crazy, Abby. You might ace the next exam, so it will all even
out in the end if you tell
Middling Feedback (No Consensus)
1. Wow, Abigail, though it sounds like you really lucked out
there, you can’t take the grade. You didn’t really “earn” it!
2. I disagree. You got lucky! Incredibly lucky! I’d probably
take the grade, too. I’ve taken that class, and it is impossibly
hard. Anything you can do to make it a bit easier on yourself is
worth it.
handing out blank exams. His mistake – but your integrity.
Don’t take the grade
4. Yeah, I’m of the same opinion. Look this gift horse in the
mouth! It’s a loser
grade and you’d lose out in the curve. Don’t feel too bad
think they gave you some good advice. If you go to the prof
now, you might get in real trouble, and it’s not like you went in
planning to use the answer key.
7. What can I say that hasn’t already been said? The whole class
lost – only you gained.

8. If it were me, I’d tell the prof … NOT! Don’t be crazy, Abby.
You might blow the next exam, so it will all even out in the end
https://www.classtools.net/FB/1461-xvmsXS
Research Study – Florida International University – Spring,
2020
Part I: Imagine you saw the following Facebook Page. Carefully
read EVERYTHING on this page, as we will ask you about your
impressions of Abigail Foster (the Facebook owner) on the next
page of this survey.
Abigail Foster
Part II: Without looking back, please rate your impressions of
Abigail Foster’s test-taking behavior below
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
1
2
3
4
5
6
1. Abigail’s behavior was wrong

2. Abigail’s behavior was understandable
3. Abigail’s behavior was reasonable
4. Abigail’s behavior was unethical
5. Abigail’s behavior was immoral
6. Abigail’s behavior was appropriate
7. Abigail’s behavior was unacceptable

Part III: Without looking back, please rate how YOU would
advise Abigail, rate how YOU would respond if you mistakenly
received the answer key from the professor, and then generally
rate Abigail
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
1
2
3
4
5
6
1. I would advise Abigail to keep silent
2. I would try to comfort Abigail
3. I would give Abigail the same advice that her friends gave

her
4. If I received the answers, I would keep silent
5. If I received the answers, I would confess
6. Abigail seems warm
7. Abigail seems good-natured
8. Abigail seems confident

9. Abigail seems competitive
10. Abigail seems sincere
11. Abigail seems moral
12. Abigail seems competent
Part IV: Please provide the following demographic information.
Note: you can leave blank any question you feel uncomfortable

answering.
1. What is your gender (Mark one with an X)? _____
Male _____ Female
2. What is your age? __________
3. What is your race/ethnicity? (Mark one with an X):
___ Caucasian ___ Hispanic American ____ Native Indian
___ African American
___ Asian American Other: __________________ (Please
Indicate)
4. Is English your first language? (Mark one with an X):
_____ Yes _____ No
If no, what is your first language? __________________
5. Are you a student at FIU (Mark one with an X):
_____ Yes ______ No
6. What is your relationship status? _____ Single / No
Relationship _____ In a relationship
Part V: Without looking back, what general feedback did
Abigail’s friends give her? (Mark one with an X)
___ The feedback supported her behavior ___ The feedback
opposed her behavior ___ Feedback was mixed
SC
2020
Abigail Foster
Strongly Disagree

Strongly Agree
1
2
3
4
5
6

rate Abigail
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
1
2
3
4
5
6

her

answering.
Male _____ Female
Indicate)
_____ Yes _____ No
_____ Yes ______ No

OC
2020
Abigail Foster
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
1
2
3
4
5
6

rate Abigail
Strongly Disagree
Strongly Agree
1
2
3
4
5
6
her

answering.
Male _____ Female

Indicate)
_____ Yes _____ No
_____ Yes ______ No
OC
Running head: COUNTERFACTUAL THINKING 1
4
COUNTERFACTUAL THINKING: APPOINTING BLAME
11
COUNTERFACTUAL THINKING
Comment by Ryan Winter: Do you know how to enter a
header? Click on the “Insert” menu at the top of word, click on
“Header”, and then type in the header whatever you want. There
is even a box that you can check that allows you to have a
different header on the first page than subsequent pages.

Counterfactual Thinking: Appointing Blame Comment by
Ryan Winter: The title page here is essentially the same one
from Paper I. It has the title (in APA format), author name, and
university affiliation.
Want my advice? If you did well on the Paper I title page, reuse
it!
Former Student
Florida International University

Methods Comment by Ryan Winter: The word Method here is
centered and bolded, as is recommended by the APA
Participants Comment by Ryan Winter: Participant (also
bolded) is flush left
One hundred and twenty six students from Florida
International University were randomly selected to participate
in our study. Of these 126 participants, 37% (n = 47) were male
and 63% (n = 79) were female. Ages ranged from a minimum of
17 to a maximum of 58 with an average of 22.32 years (SD =
6.30). Our sample population consisted of 68.3% Hispanic
Americans (n = 86), 8.7% African Americans (n = 11), 19%
Caucasians (n = 24), 1.6% Asians (n = 2), and 2.4% who did not
specify their ethnicity (n = 3). See Appendix A. Comment by
Ryan Winter: When a number starts a sentence, spell out the
number Comment by Ryan Winter: Note the mean and
standard deviation here, which is helpful for knowing about the
makeup of the sample. The mean, of course, is the average
Comment by Ryan Winter: Make sure to provide your
demographics charts in your appendix. I expect to see one for
gender, one for age, and one for ethnicity
Materials and Procedure Comment by Ryan Winter: Also
bolded and flush left. You will notice that this author combined
materials and procedures, which was good for this simple study.
She could have separated them, though, and talked about the
taxi scenario and questionnaires in a “materials” section and the
procedure separately in the “procedure” section. I like this
combined choice, though, for this design.
In accordance with the standardized guidelines for
informed consent, prospective participants were notified of the
potential risks and benefits of participating in the study before
being introduced to the research material. If the student verbally
agreed to participate, he or she was given one of three different

documents, each of which consisted of four parts or sections. In
part one of the study, the participant read a short scenario
concerning a paraplegic couple, Tina and Eugene, who
requested a taxi for a night out with friends. Each of the three
documents depicted the same initial situation with alternate
conditions (changeable, unchangeable, or neutral) that
ultimately led to different outcomes of events. Comment by
Ryan Winter: Noting the IV helps a lot. You can tell the author
knows what his IV is. There is only one, with three levels
In the changeable condition, the taxi driver arrived to pick
up the couple, only to promptly decline their fare upon seeing
that they were both paraplegic. Without enough time to call for
another taxi, Tina and Eugene decided to take Tina’s car, which
was handicap equipped. In order to reach their destination, they
had to cross a bridge that had been weakened the night before
due to a severe storm. The damaged bridge collapsed mere
minutes before the couple reached it. Unable to see the missing
portion of the bridge in the night, Tina and Eugene drove off the
road, into the river below, and drowned. The taxi driver, who
had left 15 minutes earlier, managed to make it safely across,
before the collapse. In the unchangeable condition, the situation
remained mostly the same with the exception that the taxi driver
arrived at the bridge after it had collapsed and plummeted into
the water as well. He managed to make it out of the car and
swim to safety, but Tina and Eugene drowned. In the neutral
condition, the taxi arrived to pick up the couple but promptly
refused their fare as soon as he realized that they were both
paraplegic. In this condition, the taxi driver did eventually
agree to take Tina and Eugene to their destination downtown,
albeit after much argument. Due to the recently collapsed
bridge, the taxi driver drove his passengers and himself off the
road and into the river below. He barely managed to make it out
of the car before drowning. Tina and Eugene’s outcome
remained the same. Comment by Ryan Winter: Notice how
thorough the description of the scenario is here. If you wanted
to replicate this study, you would know exactly what to do

because the author tells you exactly what she did. Make sure the
description of your IV is equally clear.
After reading one of the scenarios described above, the
participant continued on to the remainder of the study, which
was composed of a series of open, partially open, and close-
ended questions. In part two, the student participating in the
study was asked to procure as many ‘If Only’ statements as
possible, meaning that they had to list all the factors they could
think of that could have possibly changed the outcome of the
event. In part three, the participant was presented with a series
of questions about their thoughts regarding the specific
situation they read about. After reading each question, the
participant was asked to record his or her response in a scale of
one to nine. These questions included how avoidable they
thought the accident was (1 = not at all avoidable, 9 = very
avoidable), the causal role of the taxi driver in the couple’s
death (1 = not at all causal, 9 = the most important cause), their
thoughts on how much control the taxi driver had (1 = no
control, 9 = complete control), the negligence of the taxi driver
(1 = not at all negligent, 9 = completely negligent), how much
money for damages the taxi driver was responsible for (1 = no
money, 9 = as much as possible), the foreseeability of the
couple’s death (1 = not at all foreseeable, 9 = completely
foreseeable), and how much blame the taxi driver deserved for
the event (1 = no blame at all, 9 = total blame). The last
question of part three was a yes or no question that asked the
participant whether the taxi driver agreed to drive the couple or
not. This final question served as an attention check, which
informed us if the participant was actually attentive to the study
and allowed us to exclude potentially misrepresentative
responses form our data. Part four asked for the participant’s
demographic information, including gender, age, ethnicity, their
first language, and whether they were a student at Florida
International University. Concluding the study, the participant
was debriefed on his or her contribution to the study as well as
our insights on counterfactual thinking and our main hypothesis.

Comment by Ryan Winter: You know exactly what the
DVs are here, and you know the range for each scale. This is
VERY important. If you tell me the scale was 1 to 9 but that is
it, I won’t know if 1 is a good score or a bad score. Does 9
mean they could avoid it or they could not avoid it? I need to
see both the scale AND the labels for the DV to make sense
Comment by Ryan Winter: You can see her procedure,
right! Very clear, very step-by-step
Although we had several dependent variables, our primary focus
involved the perceived blameworthiness of the taxi driver, the
number of ‘If Only’ statements the participants could create,
and the manipulation check regarding whether the driver agreed
to take the couple. We hypothesized that participants would find
the taxi driver more blameworthy for the couple’s death in the
changeable condition, since he refused to drive Tina and Eugene
while safely passing over the bridge himself. We also predicted
that the participants in the changeable condition would generate
more counterfactual (‘If Only’) statements than in the
unchangeable or neutral conditions.
Results Comment by Ryan Winter: Results is centered and
bold. The results section comes right after the methods – there
is no page break
Using survey condition (changeable vs. unchangeable vs.
neutral) as our independent variable and whether participants
recalled whether the taxi driver picked up the paraplegic couple
as the dependent variable, we ran a manipulation check in which
we saw a significant effect, X2(2) = 93.95, p < .001.
Participants in the changeable and unchangeable conditions
correctly said the taxi did not pick up the couple (95.2% and
90.5%, respectively) while few participants in the neutral
condition said the driver picked up the couple (4.8%). Phi
showed a large effect. This indicates that participants did pay
attention to whether the taxi driver picked up the couple. See
Appendix B. Comment by Ryan Winter: The chi square here
is useful for data that is nominal in nature (that is, there is no
numerical difference between factors). Here, they either read

about a taxi picking up the couple or they didn’t. We cannot
look at a mean or average value here (what is the average
between yes and no?), so the chi square looks at the number of
people who say yes and the number who say no. Here, we want
the participants in some conditions to say yes (if the taxi picked
up the couple) and no (if he didn’t pick them up) Comment by
Ryan Winter: I’ll need to see the tables for the crosstabs in the
appendix as well. Include both the crosstabs table and the chi
square table and make sure the numbers in the paragraph align
with the numbers in the table
For our main analysis, our first One-Way ANOVA test revealed
significant differences among our independent variable, the
scenario conditions (changeable, unchangeable, or neutral) and
our dependent variable, perceived blameworthiness of the taxi
driver, F(2, 122) = 3.55, p = .032. A subsequent Tukey post hoc
test supported our hypothesis by demonstrating that participants
were more likely to blame the taxi driver in the changeable
condition (M = 4.51, SD = 2.06) than in the unchangeable
condition (M = 3.38, SD = 2.14).. However, there were no
significant difference for perceived blame between the neutral
condition (M = 4.36, SD = 2.11) and either the changeable or
unchangeable conditions. These results indicate that in
situations where the outcome is perceived as mutable
(changeable), individuals are more likely to assign blame to the
actor who could have acted differently (unchangeable). See
Appendix C. Comment by Ryan Winter: A One Way ANOVA
is appropriate here since there are three levels to the single IV
and the DV is on an interval scale (it ranges from 1 to 9)
Comment by Ryan Winter: The student here provided an
exact p value. This is acceptable, though you can also use p <
.05, p > .05, or p < .01 where appropriate Comment by
Ryan Winter: As you can see, this student did find significance,
so she ran post hoc tests on the ANOVA using Tukey. But what
if there was no significance,? Well, look what happens in the
next ANOVA!

Comment by Ryan Winter: For this appendix, include the
descriptives, ANOVA, and post hoc tables from SPSS
We were also interested in the number of ‘If Only’ statements
generated for each condition. We ran a One-Way ANOVA test
using the different conditions (changeable, unchangeable, or
neutral) as our independent variable, and the number of
counterfactuals produced as our dependent variable. The results
revealed that the relationship between condition and number of
‘If Only’ statements produced was not significant, F(2, 123) =
1.79, p = .171. Our initial prediction that participants would
develop more counterfactuals in the changeable condition was
not supported since the number of counterfactuals generated in
the changeable condition (M = 5.41, SD = 2.21), the
unchangeable condition (M = 4.57, SD = 2.04), and the neutral
condition (M = 4.88, SD = 1.85) did not differ. Since the p-
value for the ANOVA test was not significant, there was no
need to run post hoc tests. See Appendix D. Comment by
Ryan Winter: So this student ran a second ANOVA, which I
think is best. But since the dependent variable used here was
scaled (confidence, which is on a 1 to 9 scale), the student
could have just as easily run a t-Test focusing on only two
levels of the IV. Let me show you what that might look like.
“We ran a t-Test looking only at the changeable and
unchangeable conditions as our independent variable and
number of If Only statements generated as our dependent
variable. The t-Test was not significant, t(72) = 1.76, p > .05.
Participants did not generate any more counterfactuals in the
changeable condition (M = 5.56, SD = 2.76) than in the
unchangeable condition (M = 4.36, SD = 2.06).”
I could do something similar comparing the changeable and
neutral conditions with a t-Test or comparing the neutral and
unchangeable conditions, but running three t-Tests is a lot.
Much easier to do it with one ANOVA, which looks at all three
comparisons at the same time! Comment by Ryan Winter: Even

though the ANOVA was not significant, I’d still like you to
provide the means and standard deviations for the analysis
Finally, we ran an independent samples t-Test with the
changeable and unchangeable conditions only and “How
avoidable was the accident” as the dependent variable, which
was significant, t(82) = 2.71, p < .01. Participants thought the
accident was more avoidable in the changeable condition (M =
5.31, SD = 1.77) than in the unchangeable condition (M = 4.21,
SD = 1.85). See Appendix E. Comment by Ryan Winter: Please
note that some studies will include a t-Test and some will not. I
am providing a t-Test analysis here to give you an example of
how to write up a t-Test in your paper, but you may or may not
use a t-Test in your own study analysis
Discussion Comment by Ryan Winter: Your discussion does
not need to be extensive, but I do want you to note whether you
supported or did not support your hypothesis and provide some
possible reasons for your findings. You can make some
educated guesses about what might be going on, but make them
reasonable!
We predicted that participants would place more blame on an
actor whose behavior led to an undesirable outcome (death)
when that actor could have acted differently primarily because
these participants would generate more “If Only” counterfactual
statements that would lead them to see the outcome could have
been avoided. Conversely, we predicted that participants who
read about an undesirable outcome that could not have been
avoided would assign less blame to the actor and would think of
fewer counterfactual “If Only” statements. Results partially
supported these predictions, as we did find more blame for in
the changeable condition compared to the unchangeable (though
neither differed from the neutral condition), and they thought
the accident was more avoidable in the changeable condition
than in the unchangeable condition. However, the number of
counterfactual statements that participants generated did not
differ among our three conditions. It could be that participants

were unfamiliar with the counterfactual task, which requires
some deep thinking, though on a more unconscious level they
could have seen the changeable condition as evidencing more
elements of blame. This begs the question: what if participants
were forced to think deeper? This is the focus of our second
study. Comment by Ryan Winter: This question here is
actually a lead-in to the student’s next study. Your own
methods, results, and discussion paper can end here, but keep in
mind that your final paper is only halfway done right now! In
Paper III, IV, and V, you will help design a follow-up study to
your first study, so as you write this paper try to think about
what you would do differently and what you might add in a
follow-up study.
Appendix A – Demographics – Study One Comment by
Ryan Winter: Don’t forget to add your appendices to the paper.
I need to see one for each analysis (demographics, the chi
square, your first DV ANOVA, and your second DV ANOVA).
Make sure they are properly labeled and that the numbers in
your tables align with the numbers in your results section
Also note that normally you would not submit SPSS tables to a
journal. You can submit tables and figures, but not SPSS tables.
For this class, though, I want to make sure you did the
interpretation correctly and looked at the right tables, so I want
you to include the actual SPSS output in a series of appendices.
Comment by Ryan Winter: To add these charts, simply go
into your SPSS output. You can right-click on the table and then
copy it. Then just paste it into your appendix!
Alternatively, you can use the “Snipping tool” function
available on most computers. (Do a search for it!). This allows
you to draw a virtual box around text and then copy it like a
picture. Then just paste the picture into the appendix
Finally, your last option is to do the work by hand. Insert a

table with rows and columns and transfer over the information.
This is the hard way, though. Both of the options above took me
less than a minute. Recreating a table manually will take a much
longer time!
Appendix B – Crosstabs and Chi Square – Study One
Appendix C – ANOVA Blame – Study One Comment by
Ryan Winter: Make sure to give a good description of YOUR
dependent variable. In this paper, she looked at blame as a DV,
so she put that word here. Use YOUR dependent variable in the
description
Appendix D – ANOVA Number of Counterfactuals – Study One
Appendix E – t-Test “Was the accident avoidable?” – Study One
Comment by Ryan Winter: Note that you may not run a t-
Test in your study. If you do, make sure to include both the
group statistics and the independent samples t-Test tables!
Checklist – Paper II: Study One Methods, Results, and
Discussion
Use the check sheet below to make sure your paper is the best it

can be! Make sure you answer “Yes” to all questions before
submitting your paper! The first two sections duplicate the
Paper I checklist, but those elements in purple are unique to you
Methods / Results / Discussion Paper II
General Paper Format (This section is identical to the Paper I
Checklist)
Yes
No
1. Is everything in your paper (including headers, the main body
of your mini-literature review, and your references) in 12 point
Times New Roman font?
2. Is everything in your paper double spaced, including
references (here I mean the spacing above and below each line,
not the spaces following a period)?
3. Do you have one inch margins on all sides of the paper (one
inch from the top of the page, one inch from the bottom, and
one inch from each side)
4. Are the first lines of all paragraphs indented another ½ inch
(or 1 ½ inches from the page edge)?
5. Are your paragraphs aligned left? (That is, text should be
flush left, with lines lining up on the left of the page, but text
should NOT line up on the right side of the page – it should
look ragged)

6. Do you need help figuring out how to configure a word
document in APA format (inserting headers, page numbers,
proper indents, etc.)? If YES or NO, I highly recommend
watching this video which walks you through setting up an APA
formatted paper!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pbUoNa5tyY
Title page (This section is nearly identical to the Paper I
Checklist)
Yes
No
Header
1. Do you have the phrase “Running head” in your header (with
a lower case h)?
2. Is the rest of your Running head title in ALL CAPS?
3. Is your Running head in 12 point Times New Roman font?
4. Do you have a page number that is flush right (also in 12
point Times New Roman font)?
5. Is your header 50 characters or less (including spaces and
punctuation)?
Title / Name / Institution
1. Is your title 12 words or less (as recommended by the APA)?

2. Does your title describe your general paper theme (while
avoiding something blank like “Paper Two: Methods Results,
and Discussion”)? Note that your header and title can differ!
3. Do all title words with three letters or more start with a
capital letter?
4. Are your name and institution correct?
5. Are your title, name, and institution elements centered and in
12 point Times New Roman font?
Methods Section (New Information in this section)
Yes
No
Header
1. Is your header title present and identical to your header title
on the title page?
2. Is your header title in ALL CAPS and 12 point Times New
Roman font?
3. Does your header on this second page omit the phrase
“Running head”
4. Do you have a page number starting on page 2
Yes

No
Title for the methods section
1. Is the word “Methods” centered and in bold at the top of your
methods page?
Participants
1. Do you have the word “Participants” flush left and in bold,
right below the word “Methods”?
2. Did you list out your demographic characteristics, including
gender, age, and ethnicity / race?
3. Did you provide the descriptive statistics for (means and
standard deviations) for age and italicize the letters M and SD?
4. Did you provide frequencies for gender and ethnicity/race
and italicize the N?
5. Did you refer readers to Appendix for the full listing of
demographic tables?
Materials and Procedure
1. Did you mention informed consent?

2. Did you discuss any instructions the participant may have
read?
3. Did you thoroughly describe any stimulus material that might
have occurred before your actual independent variables (and
photos, descriptions, profiles, questions, puzzles, etc.) that are a
part of your study?
4. Did you thoroughly describe your independent variable (IV)
in enough depth and detail that another researcher could
recreate your materials?
5. Did you give your IV a name that matches up with the name
you refer to in the results section?
6. Did you describe all of your most relevant dependent
variables, noting the scales you used (e.g. “Yes / No”, “A scale
ranging from 1 (not at all likely) to 9 (very likely))” for EACH
of your DVs?
7. Did you fully describe what participants went through in the
study, noting the order in which they received study materials
(e.g. first informed consent, then IVs, DVs, and debriefing)?
8. Did you fully describe your attention check (manipulation
check) with enough detail that a reader unfamiliar with your
study could recreate it, and did you include the scale for that
attention check question?

9. Did you use the past tense when describing your methods
(seeing how you already collected the data, and therefore do not
discuss what participants will do)?
Results Section (New Information in this section)
Yes
No
1. Do you have the word “Results” centered and in bold,
immediately following the methods section?
2. Was the first dependent variable you looked at your
manipulation check question, and did you make sure you
analyzed the correct DV?
3. Did you analyze at least two different dependent variables for
your other two analyses?
a. Note: using a t-Test to analyze a question Like #3) and an
ANOVA to once again analyze question #3 does NOT count as
two different DVs. It is the same DV analyzed twice. Make sure
to look at two different DVs
4. Did you mention both the IV and the DV by name when
talking about your analysis?
5. Did you include means and standard deviations within
parentheses for each level of your independent variable?
6. Did you italicize the letters F, t, p, M, SD, and X2 (where

appropriate)?
7. Did you round ALL numbers to two decimal places (with the
exception of the p value, which can go as low as p < .001 or p =
.001).
Discussion Section (New Information in this section)
Yes
No
1. Do you have the word “Discussion” centered and in bold,
immediately following the results section?
2. Did you remind your reader of your hypothesis?
3. Did you mention whether you supported or did not support
your hypothesis?
Appendix Section – Study One (New Information in this
section)
Yes
No
1. Do you have the word “Appendix” centered on each
Appendix page, followed by a description of the appendix
content, immediately following the results section?
2. In Appendix A (Demographics), do you have SPSS tables for

gender, ethnicity, and age? (Note: Age might be in a general
“statistics” table, but you should have specific frequency tables
for both gender and ethnicity)
3. In Appendix B (Chi Square), do you have the crosstabs table
(with percentages) plus the chi square test (with Pearson)?
4. In Appendix C (ANOVA), do you have the descriptives table,
the ANOVA table, and the post hoc table for your first
dependent variable?
5. In Appendix D (ANOVA or t-Test), do you have the
descriptives table, ANOVA (or t-Test) table, and post hoc table
(for the ANOVA) for your second dependent variable?
6. Do the analyses in Appendix C and D focus on DIFFERENT
dependent variables? (Make sure you answer YES on this one!)
Writing Quality
Yes
No
1. Did you proofread your paper, go to the writing center, go to
the research methods help center, or use the Pearson writer to
make sure your paper flows well?
2. Did you use the past tense (which is recommended, since
your papers in this class will reflect work you already did rather
than work you will do)?
3. Did you use a scientific / objective terms like “people”,

“participants”. “users”, “readers”, etc. (as opposed to subjective
words like “you”, “we”, “me”, “I”, or “us”, etc.)?
Running head: METHODS, RESULTS DISCUSSION
INSTRUCTIONS 1
PAPER II: METHODS AND RESULTS INSTRUCTIONS
9
Instructions for Paper II: Study One Methods, Results, and
Discussion (Worth 35 Points)
Ryan J. Winter
Florida International University
Purpose of Paper II: Study One Methods, Results, and
Discussion
1). Psychological Purpose
The psychological purpose behind Paper II is to make sure you
can tell your reader what you did on your study, how you did it,
and what you found. By now you have read several empirical
studies in psychology, and you should be familiar with the
Methods, Results, and Discussion sections. Now is your chance
to write Methods, Results and Discussion!
Like those prior studies you looked at in Paper I, you will
provide information about your participants, materials, and
procedure in your Methods section. Your participant section

goes first, and it includes descriptive statistics about your
sample (means and standard deviations for age as well as
percentages for gender and race/ethnicity). Your materials and
procedure sections include information about what you did and
how you did it. You should write this section for an audience
who is unfamiliar with your specific study, but assume that they
do know research methods. Thus educate your reader about your
materials and procedure, giving enough detail so they could
replicate the study. This includes explicitly describing your
independent and dependent variables and talking about how you
presented those variables to your participants. My suggestion is
to look over the articles you summarized in Paper I and see how
they wrote their Methods. This will give you a good idea
regarding the level of depth and detail you need in your own
Methods section.
Your Results section follows. The purpose of this section is to
make sure you can show how you analyzed the data and describe
what you found. You will have a lot of help in this section from
your lab instructors.
Finally, I want you to include a short description of your
findings. Tell me if you supported or did not support your
hypotheses and explain why you got those results (you can
actually speculate here if you like, but make it an “educated”
speculation!)
2). APA Formatting Purpose
The second purpose of Paper II: Methods, Results and
Discussion is to once again teach you proper American
Psychological Association (APA) formatting for these sections.
In the pages below, I will tell you how to format your paper
using APA style. There are a lot of very specific requirements
in APA papers (as specific as what to italicize), so pay attention
to the instructions below as well as Chapter 14 in your
textbook!
3). Writing Purpose
Finally, this paper is intended to help you figure out how to
write a Methods, Results, and Discussion section. Many

students find statistics daunting, but my hope here is that
writing this paper will help you understand both the logic and
format of statistics in results sections. We will once again give
you a lot of feedback and help in this paper, which you help you
when you write Papers IV and V later in the course. Make sure
that you write this for an audience familiar with APA methods
and results, but also for someone who needs you to tell them
what you found.
Note: The plagiarism limit is higher in this paper (up to 65%)
since your classmates are doing the same design. Don’t go
higher than that, though! 65% is the maximum allowed!
Note: You do NOT need to include your literature review /
hypotheses in Paper II, as Paper II focuses just on your
methods, results, and discussion. However, you’ll include those
Paper I components later in Paper III, so do keep them handy!
Sorry for the length of the instructions! They are long, but take
it one section at a time and you will get all of the content you
need for your paper. It also increases your chances of getting a
great grade!
Methods
1. Title Page: I expect the following format (1 point):
a. The title page for your Paper II is identical to the one you
used for Paper I: Literature Review Study One. For proper APA
formatting, either copy your title page from Paper I or review
the title page instructions I gave you in Paper I. You can change
your title if you like, but make sure it helps to describe your

study (much like a title in PsycInfo describes what the authors
did in their paper)
2. Abstract?
a. You DO NOT need an abstract for Paper II: Methods, Results,
and Discussion (Study One). You cannot write it until you run
both study one and two, so omit it for now
3. Methods Section: I expect the following format (15 points):
a. For this paper, the methods section starts on page 2.
b. Write Method at the top of this page, make it bold, and center
it (see the top of this page as an example!)
c. The participants section comes next. The word Participants is
bolded and left justified. In this section …
i. Tell me who your participants were (college students, family
members, friends?) and how many there were.
1. Note: If a number starts a sentence, then spell out the
number. That is, “Two-hundred and five participants
participated in this study.”
2. If a number is mid-sentence, you can use numerals. “There
were 205 participants in this study.”
3. But keep numbers consistent. If you spell out a number at the
start of the sentence, carry that through and spell out other
numbers in the sentence.
4. For statistics, always use numbers (for the mean, SD, %, etc.)
ii. Provide frequencies and descriptive statistics for relevant
demographics.
1. For some variables—like ethnicity and gender—you only
need to provide frequency information (the number of
participants who fit that category). “There were 100 men (49%)
and 105 women (51%) in the study.” Or “The sample was 49%
male (N = 100) and 51% female (N = 105).”
2. Other variables—like age—are continuous (rather than
categorical), so use descriptive statistics here (the range, mean,
and the standard deviation). “Participants ranged in age from 18
to 77 (M = 24, SD = 3.50).” or “The average age of participants
was 24 (SD = 3.50).” Your TA can help you find the mean and
standard deviation for this assignment, though information is

also available in a lab powerpoint.
3. Make sure to italicize the N, M, and SD (the letters, not the
numbers)
d. Materials and Procedure
i. For this section, things are flexible. Some studies include
Materials and Procedure in the same section while others break
them up into two sections. This is a matter of choice.
1. In general, the more complex the design, the better it is to
split up the methods and results. In one section, the author may
describe the materials; in the next, they describe what
participants did with those materials (the procedure). This is
one option for you. However …
2. However, your “Paper II: Methods, Results and Discussion
(Study One)” is simple enough that I strongly recommend
combining them into one overall Materials and Procedure
section.
ii. Again, the words Materials andProcedure are flush left. In
this section …
1. Provide information about your materials and your procedure.
a. I suggest starting with your procedure. Tell your reader what
your participants did in the order that participants did them. Be
specific here. I have the following recommendations:
i. First, talk about the oral informed consent procedure.
ii. Second, talk about the three versions of the Facebook
Consensus study questionnaire. Provide enough detail so that
your readers know how the three conditions differ. Imagine I do
not know what you did, but I need to able to replicate your
design. YOU need to give me enough detail so I can do so.
(Hint: Copy and paste the various questions or refer the reader
to an appendix that has those materials!)
1. I want to stress that – pretend I have no idea what you did,
but I want to repeat your design and procedures. That means
you need to be VERY clear and detailed about what you did and
how you did it.
2. At the end of the semester (for Paper V), someone other than
your instructor / TA may grade your paper. They may know

NOTHING about Consensus or Conformity, though they do
know methods. Thus go into painstaking detail about what
EACH section of the survey page looked like, including the
participant instructions and the pictures
iii. Third, talk about your dependent variables (that is, your
survey questions. For these dependent variables, once again
provide enough detail so I know exactly what questions you
asked. For example, “Participants provided their gender, age,
and race”. For other dependent variables, tell me how the
responses were recorded (yes/no, true/false, a scale of 1 to 6,
etc.). If you used a scale, note the endpoints. That is, does a 1
mean it is high or is it low? “Participants were asked, ‘How
frustrating was this task?’, and they responded on a scale from 1
(very frustrating) to 9 (not at all frustrating).’” Your study has a
few really important DVs (including several DVs about
participant impressions of Abigail and her cheating behavior as
well as whether the participant agrees with the advice of
Abigail’s friends. For these DVs, you again need to tell me what
they are specifically!
iv. Fourth, make sure to highlight which specific DVs you
analyzed. If there are DVs participants completed but you did
not analyze it, feel free to say those that participants completed
them but since they were not analyzed, they are not discussed
further.
v. Fifth, make sure to be specific about your attention /
manipulation check question!
vi. Finally, mention debriefing
e. There is no set minimum or maximum on the length of the
methods section, but I would expect at least a page or two
(though probably more. After all, your own research script took
up several pages – you should provide a similar level of depth
and detail in your methods section!). Missing important aspects
of your IVs and DVs or presenting them in a confused manner
will lower your score in this section.
f. Remember, make sure that another researcher can replicate
your study based on your methods section. If they can’t, then

you may not have enough detail!
4. Results Section: I expect the following format (10 points):
a. The results are the hardest part of this paper, and your lab
powerpoints will help you with this part of the paper (also refer
to the crash course statistics quizzes, which walk you through
similar analyses!).
b. First, write Results at the top of this section, center it, and
use boldface. This section comes directly at the end of the
methods section, so the results section DOES NOT start on its
own page.
c. For this assignment, include statistics about the most
important variables in your study, including your IV (Condition
– Support, Oppose, and Mixed) and the DVs you feel are most
important to your hypotheses. There are several important DVs
in your survey, including all of those in Part II (regarding
cheating) and the first three DVs in Part III, especially Part III
Question #3. All of these variables really focus on your
predictions. Note that some instructors may not do this
Facebook Consensus study at all, but the results section should
follow the same guidelines regardless of your study topic.
d. More specifically, you must run at least three different
analyses on three different dependent variables. One must be a
chi square for the question asking participants which to recall
how well Pat did in his job interview (our manipulation check,
which looks at the three options for the nominal variable in Part
V). One analysis must be a One Way ANOVA (I recommend
looking at any of the statements in Part II). The third analysis
should be a t-Test on Part III Question #3. Why? Because the
mixed condition makes this question tough for participants to
answer (the question asks if they would give the same advice as
Abigail’s friends, but because the mixed condition mixes
oppositional and supportive comments, it is tough to know what
the “same advice” would involve. A t-Test just looking at the
two consensus groups is best here). Of course, you can run
ANOVA’s or t-Tests on virtually all of the Part II and Part III
Questions, but you cannot look at the same DV with both a t-

Test and an ANOVA. We count the number of DVs that you
analyze – NOT the number of statistical tests you run!
i. Chi square: Your first analysis will be a chi square, which
you use if your DV is categorical (yes / no; yes / no / maybe;
male / female, or ... in our case, we have our “Feedback”
question in Part V (The feedback supported Abigail’s behavior;
opposed it; was mixed). So let’s discuss the chi square, which
doesn’t look at means but rather counts how many responses
there are compared to how many you would expect.
1. Consider the DV in Part V of your questionnaire – “Without
looking back, what general feedback did Abigail’s friends give
her? (Mark one with an X)” The options were supported,
opposed, or mixed. Here, you can run a chi square looking at
the frequencies of the three answer options
2. We are interested in the chi square (χ2) and p value. We also
provide percentages for each of our groups (rather than means
and SD).
a. “Using Facebook consensus condition as our independent
variable (support, oppose, or mixed) and recall of the feedback
Abigail’s friends gave her as the dependent variable, we saw a
significant effect, χ2(4) = 68.49, p < .001. Most participants in
the “support” condition recalled “supporting” feedback (98%);
most participants in the “oppose” condition recalled a
“oppositional” feedback (96%); and most participants in mixed
condition recalled an “mixed” feedback (90%). This indicates
that participants saw our manipulation as intended.”
b. Alternatively, you can just look at correct versus incorrect
responses. This is a bit trickier to run in SPSS, since you need
to add up ALL those who correctly remembered the correct
feedback (those in the support condition who recalled
“supportive feedback” + those in the oppose condition who
recalled “oppositional feedback” + those in the mixed condition
who recalled “mixed feedback”) and compare them to ALL the
people who were incorrect in their recall. In this instance, you
wouldn’t want the chi square to be significant. That is, you
might conclude that χ2(4) = 1.49, p > .05, indicating that there

was no difference between those who got the manipulation
check question correct across the three different conditions. (In
other words, participants weren’t more correct in one condition
compared to another). My advice is to go with the chi square in
a. above
c. Make sure to italicize the χ and p
ii. ANOVA: Since you have a condition independent variable
with three levels (e.g. Support, Oppose, or Mixed), the most
appropriate test is a One-Way ANOVA if your DV is scaled
(like a 0 to 5 scale or a 1 to 6 scale). Your lab and lecture
powerpoints show you how to conduct an ANOVA, but there are
some guidelines I want to give you about how to write your
results. Below, I am going to walk you through one analysis
specific to this paper. However, keep in mind that you can run
ANOVAs on several different DVs.
1. First, there are several dependent variables to choose from.
For my example analysis below, I want to focus on Part II in
your survey (cheating impressions). Since each of these seven
questions are scaled variables that range from 1 to 6, each uses
an interval scale, which is perfect for an ANOVA.
2. Second, given that this study has one IV with three levels and
we will look at one DV at a time, a One-Way ANOVA is the
best test to use to see if there are significant differences among
the three IV levels for that one DV. We look first at the
ANOVA table (or F table) and focus on the between subject
factor. We note the degrees of freedom, the F value itself, and
the p value. (We’ll get into two-way ANOVAs later in this
course, but here we only have one independent variable, so it is
a one-way ANOVA. Yes, we have three levels to our IV, but it
is still only one IV).
3. If the p value is significant (less than .05), we have one more
step to take. Since this is a three level IV, we need to compare
mean A to mean B, mean A to mean C, and mean B to mean C.
We do this using a post hoc test (try using Tukey!). That will
tell us which of the means differ significantly. You then write
up the results. For example, let’s say I ran an ANOVA on the

dependent variable “Abigail’s behavior was wrong”. My write
up would look like this (though note: I completely made up the
data below, so don’t copy the numbers!) …
a. “Using consensus condition (support v. oppose v. mixed) as
our independent variable and ratings of “Abigail’s behavior was
wrong” as the dependent variable, we found a significant
condition effect, F(2, 203) = 4.32, p < .05. Tukey post hoc tests
showed that participants felt the cheating was less wrong in the
support condition (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21) than participants in
both the oppose (M = 4.24, SD = 0.89) and mixed (M = 4.23,
SD = 0.77) conditions. The oppose and mixed conditions,
however, did not differ from each other. This supports our
prediction that participants exposed to unanimously supportive
friend comments would similarly support Abigail, while any
opposition (whether unanimous or not) would make her
behavior seem more wrong.”
i. Note there are lots of possible outcomes. The one above
essentially says that condition S (support) differed from O
(oppose) and M (mixed), but that O and M did not differ from
each other (In other words, S ≠ O = M). However, we might also
find that NONE of the three conditions differ from each other,
so they are all equal (S = O = M) or we might find that ALL
conditions differ from each other (S ≠ O ≠ M), so they all differ
ii. As an example for this latter (S ≠ O ≠ M), I would predict no
differences between the three conditions for the dependent
variable “Abigail’s behavior was wrong”
b. Make sure to italicize the F, p, M, and SD (as in the example)
c. Pretty simple, right! I suggest running an ANOVA on any of
the statements in Part II (though I suggest doing more than one
ANOVA here – the practice will help you, so look at multiple
Part II DVs!)
d. You could run a t-Test on one of those Part II dependent
variables as well, but for this semester’s study on consensus, I
actually want you to run a t-Test on Part III Question #3. Here’s
how:
iii. t-Test: If you have only two levels to your IV (e.g. Support

and Oppose only), things are even more simple.
1. Here, you will run a t-Test (a t-Test looks at differences
between only two groups). Again, your lab presentations tell
you how to run this, but you can do it on your own as well (you
can even run this if your study originally has three levels to the
IV – when you go into the t-Test menu in SPSS, choose “define
groups” and select 1 and 2 (Support = 1 and Oppose = 2). This
will let you look at two of the groups! You could also select “2
and 3” or “1 and 3” where the Mixed condition = 3).
2. Rather than an F value, we will look at the t value in the t-
Test data output. Here, we have one number for the degree of
freedom, we have the t value, and we have the p value.
3. The nice thing about a t-Test is that since you only have two
groups, you do not need a post hoc test like Tukey (you only
need that if you have to compare three means. Here, we only
have two means, so we can just look at them and see which one
is higher and which is lower when our t-Test is significant).
Then just write it up …
a. “Using consensus condition (support v. oppose) as our
independent variable and ratings of “I would give Abigail the
same advice that her friends gave her” as our dependent
variable, we failed to find a significant condition effect, t(203)
= 1.12, p > .05. Participants in both the support condition (M =
4.56, SD = 1.21) and participants in the oppose condition (M =
4.24, SD = 0.89). said they would give Abigail the same advice
that her friends gave her. This indicates that participants do pay
attention to consensus and feel fine conforming their own
beliefs in line with that consensus”
b. Repeat for other dependent variables
c. Make sure to italicize the t, p, M , and SD (as in the example)
iv. Statistics order recommendation: For this paper, start your
results section with the chi square (your manipulation check).
Then talk about your main analyses (Any question from Part II
followed by the analysis of the Part III Question #3 dependent
variable). Make sure the analyses line up with your hypotheses.
e. There is no page minimum or maximum for the results

section, though I would expect it to be at least a paragraph or
two for each dependent variable
5. Appendices (4 points)
a. I want to make sure you are including the correct numbers in
your results section, so I want you to include all relevant SPSS
tables for each of your analyses in a series of appendices.
i. Appendix A: Include your tables for age, gender, and
ethnicity.
ii. Appendix B: Include your tables for your chi square and the
crosstabs
iii. Appendix C: Include your tables for your first dependent
variable (This must be an ANOVA table, the descriptive
statistics table for that ANOVA, and the post hoc test whether it
is significant or not)
iv. Appendix D: Include your tables for you second dependent
variable (You should include t-Test tables here. This would
involve both the descriptives for the t-Test and the t-Test output
itself
v. Appendix E: (If applicable)
b. Hint: The best way to get these tables is to copy them
directly from SPSS. In the SPSS output, right click on the table,
copy it, and then paste it into your appendix. Another
alternative is to use a “snipping” tool (search “snipping tool” in
Microsoft Word to find it). You can highlight an area on any
computer page and save it as a picture. Copy the picture and
paste it into your appendix. Easy!
i. I’m not worried if your table is not all on the same line. If it
spills over into the next page, that is fine. I just need to see the
full table
c. Make sure to give a proper name to the appendix (e.g.
Appendix A – Study One Demographics)
6. Discussion Study One (2 points)
a. In this section, tell me about your findings and if they did or
did not support your results. It might help to refer back to your
hypotheses “We expected to find A but instead found B” or “We
expected to find A and results supported this hypothesis.”

Explain using plain English why you think your study turned
out the way it did.
b. IMPORTANT – Do NOT give me statistics again here. I can
find those in your results section. Here, all I want is a plain
English summary of your findings.
c. Also, don’t give me results for a DV if you did not run an
analysis on that DV. Only tell me about the results you actually
looked at in the results section.
d. There is no length requirement for this section, but I
recommend at least four or five sentences
7. Overall writing quality (3 points)
a. Make sure you check your paper for proper spelling and
grammar. The FIU writing center is available if you want
someone to look over your paper (an extra eye is always good!)
and give you advice. I highly recommend them, as writing
quality will become even more important on future papers. I
also recommend visiting the FIU Research Methods Help Center
if you need additional guidance with writing or statistical
analyses. Also, remember to upload this paper through the
Pearson writer before uploading to Canvas!
b. Make sure to use the past tense throughout your paper. You
already did the paper, so don’t tell me what participants are
going to do. Tell me what they did!
Other Guidelines for Paper II – Methods and Results (Study
One)
1. 1). Page size is 8 1/2 X 11” with all 4 margins should be one
inch. You must use a 12-point font in Times New Roman.
1. 2). PLEASE use a spell checker and/or Pearson Writer to
avoid unnecessary errors. Proofread everything you write. I
actually recommend reading some sentences aloud to see if they
flow well, or getting family or friends to read your work.
1. Use the Paper II Checklist on the next page before you turn
in your paper to make sure it is the best paper you can write!
1. Finally, go look at the supporting documents for this paper.

Like Paper I, there is a checklist, a grade rubric, and an example
paper for Paper II. All will give you more information about
what we are specifically looking for as well as a visual example
of how to put it all together in your paper. Good luck!

ANOVAPart II Abigails behavior was wrong Sum of Squar.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to ANOVAPart II Abigails behavior was wrong Sum of Squar.docx

Similar to ANOVAPart II Abigails behavior was wrong Sum of Squar.docx (19)

More from festockton

More from festockton (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

ANOVAPart II Abigails behavior was wrong Sum of Squar.docx