Introduction to research methods in psychology/IRMP103/Writing a Research Report in APA Style



Good scientific writing strives to be precise, concise, comprehensible, and engaging. This tension between precision and concision, on the one hand, and comprehensibility and engagement, on the other, is what makes scientific writing difficult. When done well, it is also what makes reading scientific articles a pleasure. A report should have the following components:

{| class="wikitable"

Title
The Title of a research report is critical. It is typically the first aspect of a research report that another researcher directly encounters. The decision to read your paper (or not) may be determined by your title. An ideal title will summarize what was manipulated, measured, and found.

Consider that you have just completed a series of experiments where you investigated the relationship between the number of countries that people have travelled to and their level of prejudice against different minority groups. A possible title would be "The Relationship Between Travel and Prejudice." This is not a very good title because it lacks detail. For example, based on this title the reader would not know what you meant by travel and what kind of prejudice was investigated. A better alternative would be "More Travel Experience Predicts Less Prejudice Against Ethnic Minorities." This title provides more information about the specific variables measured as well as the general results.

A good title quickly entices the potential reader without being vague or obscure. Many journals place limits on the length of many parts of an article, including the title.

Abstract
The Abstract is a brief summary of the study. It states the problem addressed by the research, the procedure used to investigate the problem, the results, and the implications, both theoretical and practical. The first one or two sentences should provide a basic introduction followed by two or three more sentences that provide more detailed background. One sentence should clearly state the problem being addressed by the research. This is followed by the results which, typically, should be written in the past tense. It's a good idea to then write a couple of sentences that put the results into a general context. Are the results what were expected, surprising, or perhaps a combination of both?

Introduction
The Introduction has two primary purposes. First, it relates the author’s study to the existing research literature. Second, it introduces the procedures and hypotheses employed in the research report.

To place your research within the scientific literature requires that you complete a literature search (as described in Unit 1). There are several ways you can do this. You might focus on either of your chosen variables. For example, you might describe literature that demonstrates the relationship between travel experience and a wide range of behaviours. Alternatively, you may focus on prejudice, if this is your primary focus of your study. To do this, you would cite in your Introduction research that describes how prejudice is affected (or reduced, to be even more specific) by several factors. Usually, an Introduction starts out general and then becomes more specific. For example, if you decided to focus on prejudice reduction, you might first cite literature that shows that prejudice is influenced by a variety of factors. Then you would cite research that shows how prejudice is related to variables more closely related to travel experience (e.g., contact with members of other ethnic groups).

Recall from Unit 1 that the final paragraph of the Introduction usually summarizes your procedure and hypotheses.

Method
The Method section must describe all aspects of your research design in sufficient detail that another researcher could replicate your procedure and expect to get the same results. Imagine a recipe for making cookies. If the recipe specifies the ingredients but omits the amounts, or specifies that you must bake the cookies for twenty minutes but omits the temperature, your chances of making the same cookies as the recipe’s author are slim. A rule of thumb is that if there is a detail of your method that you are unsure of whether or not to include, do include it. For example, if participants were required to view a crime scene on a television, the size, height, and model of the television should be specified as well as the distance from the television to the viewer. Many times there are details that seem unimportant at the time but later turn out to be critical in explaining the differences in the results across studies.

Results
Following the description of the methods used to conduct the experiment, the findings from the study are reported. First, the results are described. Tables and figures are often used to summarize and display the results so that the findings are more easily understood. The individual scores of research subjects, referred to as the raw scores, are rarely reported. Instead, descriptive statistics, such as group averages, are given.

Following this description, descriptive statistics of the results are reported. For example, a Results section may include the statement “The self‐reported level of happiness for the experimental group (M = 6.31) was higher than the control group (M = 4.21).” Remember that the letters and numbers involved in the description of the results follow a common format and are informative. In this case, the letter M denotes the measure of central tendency known as the mean. Please note that you are not expected to conduct inferential statistical analyses on your data. You should, however, provide descriptive statistics for central tendency (e.g., means) and variability (e.g., standard deviations) along with appropriate graphical representations of your results (e.g., bar graphs).

Discussion
Once a researcher has analyzed and described the results of an experiment, the next obligation is to draw appropriate conclusions from those findings. This obligation is met in the Discussion section of an article. Typically, these conclusions are guided by the study's hypotheses. At a minimum, the investigator states whether the hypotheses were confirmed or not by the results.

Research projects in psychology rarely yield straightforward, unqualified conclusions. More typically, conclusions are conditional. Thus, part of the Discussion involves the consideration of factors that may limit or threaten the validity of the conclusions. For example, correlational studies and quasi‐experimental designs are always confounded. Therefore, several possible explanations may account for the results. Even the results of an experiment are almost always attributable to more than one explanation. To address this, the authors will, typically, first acknowledge the alternative explanations. Then, using converging evidence from other studies, the authors argue why one of the alternative explanations is favoured. Additionally, when the authors acknowledge limitations and problems in their studies, they often describe how these concerns can be overcome in future work.

Another part of the Discussion considers the practical and theoretical implications of the conclusions. The principal reason psychologists conduct research is to gain knowledge and enhance our understanding of the mind and behaviour. When research findings also have practical implications, this benefit usually takes place in a different setting than that in which the study was conducted. Limitations on generalizing beyond these settings thus also constitute limitations on the practical usefulness of research findings. A similar argument applies to generalizing beyond particular samples and beyond particular operational definitions.

Appendix
Include in the Appendix all the tables and/or graphs that summarize your data.
 * }

Additional Suggestions
Write for an interested reader who is familiar with psychological research in general, but ignorant of your particular project. As you are preparing your report, keep this reader in mind.

As you write your report, please refer to the Marking Guide provided with Practice Assignment 4.

You may also find the Harvard University's "" and Josh Pasek's "" to be useful resources.