Social Psychology Experiment Review Assignment | Online Assignment

Find a Social Psychological experiment journal article and write a review. Please follow the instruction and the template. They are included in the files.

Psyc 390 Social Psychology

Experiment Review Instructions

Step 1: Find a Social Psychological experiment journal article that will benefit you personally and/or professionally.  Choose an article in the library e-journals.  Here are some good journals to search:

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology

Journal of Nonverbal Behavior

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology

Psychological Bulletin

Social Cognition

Journal of Applied Social Psychology

Social Psychology Quarterly

Basic and Applied Social Psychology

Journal of Social Psychology

ProQuest: https://search-proquest-com.udel.idm.oclc.org/

ProQuest tips: You can limit your searches to specific journals, add search terms such as “experiment”, “random”, etc.

Note: Your article must be related to Social Psychology, i.e., how people act in different circumstances; how behavior is interpreted or displayed; how our thoughts and feelings are influenced by others, etc.  Examples of studies that will not work for this assignment: Clinical treatment program evaluations, single-case studies, longitudinal studies, surveys, and almost everything related to clinical psychology, addiction, education, treatment programs, etc.

How to tell if your article is an experiment:

• Subjects must be placed into at least two different groups that receive different treatment/have different experiences.  If all subjects are treated the same way, you’re probably looking at a correlational study.  Note that this also applies if you have two dissimilar groups who are given the same personality test.  This is a common correlational design. TIP: Search for the word “random” in your article to determine if there was random assignment to groups.  If you don’t find random assignment to conditions, this should be a warning that your article may not be an experiment.
• You must be able to identify at least one Independent Variable with two or more levels and at least one Dependent Variable.  If you cannot, find another article.
• If you have any doubt that your article is an experiment, please find a different article.
• Note that if you fail to select an experiment you will not receive full credit.
• Note: If your article contains more than one experiment, choose only one for your paper.

More information: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experiment

Step 2: Complete each section of the template:

• 1. Citation: Copy/paste the Title, Author, Journal Name, Volume, Page Numbers, and Abstract.  Note that if the journal is does not have a volume number and is strictly online, use the citation suggested at the bottom of the page of the article.
  2. Independent & Dependent Variables: Put a lot of detail here.  Don’t just name the construct, describe exactly how it was displayed (IV) and measured (DV).  Describe both the measures/dimensions (intelligence, attractiveness, etc.) used rating scales (e.g., 1-7, etc.).

Step 3: Internal and External Validity Tests: Your task is to evaluate the internal and external validity of the experiment.  The goal is for you to learn how to differentiate good research from not-so-good.

Internal Validity Obstacles

1. Complex/Confounding Independent Variables (IVs): This can occur when the Independent Variable is made up of more than one level or components, any of which could’ve influenced the Dependent Variables (DVs).  For example, if all participants are exposed to the same three IVs (e.g., attractiveness, status, and age) presented at the same time, there is no way to tell which one or combination thereof was responsible for the results.  This obstacle can also exist when the researchers do not properly counterbalance their design, such as having two or more confederates but failing to evaluate whether subjects responded to them differently.  Note that if there are multiple IVs but each subject is only exposed to a single combination of IVs, this is considered a counterbalanced design and isn’t a probelm.  Also note that individual variation, such as a person having a bad day, some kind of traumatic history, etc. doesn’t count as Complex/Confounding, as these individual variations “wash out” with a large enough number of participants.
2. Testing: If a pre-test or measure is given prior to assessment of DV that can give subjects a hint about what the study is about, this obstacle may be present.  Note that if there isn’t any kind of pre-test/evaluation, then there can’t be a Testing effect.  Note that if subjects can figure out the study based upon the DV measure(s), this is not a Testing effect, but rather a Demand Characteristic.
3. History: If there is a long delay (over an hour) from point of random assignment to assessment of DV, there is the possibility that one of the groups could have a different experience. For example, if one group experienced something that provoked an emotional reaction of some sort, their results might be influenced by the event.  Examples: One group hears an argument, experiences a power outage, etc.
4. Maturation: Similar to History in that if the delay between random assignment to assessment of DV is great enough to allow for natural changes such as hunger, thirst, growing fatigued, etc., the results obtained may be influenced.
5. Experimenter Expectancy: If the person interacting with the subjects knows hypothesis being tested and could consciously or unconsciously influence the participants, this is a concern.  Note that if there is no contact between the participants and anyone affiliated with the study (such as an online experiment), then this obstacle isn’t present.  If there is direct contact, look for documentation that the experimenter/confederate was blind to the hypothesis being tested.
6. Demand Characteristics: This obstacle occurs when the subjects can figure out the nature of the study.  This is typically due to the instructions given, or perhaps the DVs being tested, especially if they’re presented very blatantly.  A good study leaves the participant wondering what was being tested, as the true meaning of the experiment is kept hidden.
7. Instrumentation: This obstacle can occur when there are changes in the instruments used.  Instrumentation includes things such as mechanical equipment, electronics, instructions/questionnaires given) that could influence results.  Anything that could require calibration (such as due to humidity, temperature, etc.) presents a potential problem.  The most common is when the experimenter makes changes to the DV questions or measures.
8. Selection Bias: This obstacle may be present when subjects in the experimental and control groups are not equivalent, e.g., the groups were obtained from different locations, socioeconomic groups, age groups, etc.. Note that groups do not need to have the same number of participants, or the same number of males/females

External Validity Obstacles

1. Non-Random Sampling: This obstacle is present when the participants do not represent the general population.  Studies that only utilize participants of a limited age range, geographic region, or educational level can only be generalized to those groups.  The most common problem is using students from a single college or university as participants.
2. Reactive Effects of Experimental Arrangements: This can occur then the experimental task or situation is so unusual or emotionally demanding that participants react more to the arrangement than experimental manipulation.
3. Multiple Treatment Interference: If the experiment requires sequential tasks, especially if the tasks are unrelated, the results can only be generalized to people who have been through the same sequence.
4. Social Desirability: This can occur when participants do not respond honestly for fear of looking bad, feeling embarrassed, or for fear of social consequences.  Examples: Studies on racism, sexism, agism, etc., but also can be present in studies in which subjects are asked to rate attractiveness, intelligence, etc.

Additional Reading:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internal_validity

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/External_validity

To receive full credit, you must complete all three sections for each test:

• Review the sample paper for formatting.  All information goes into the boxes of the template.  Failure to use the template will result in a loss of points.
• Copy and paste the information from the relevant sections of the research article you selected into the appropriate section of the template.  Most often this information will come from the METHOD section, though you may find important details in the RESULTS or DISCUSSION sections.  Do not leave this section blank or write “Not Applicable”.  If the obstacle isn’t present, copy/paste the portion of the method where it would appear, e.g., for History/Maturation, use the section that describes what happened to the subjects after random assignment to groups.  Note: Do not copy/paste the entire Method section for each obstacle.
• Indicate whether or not the obstacle is applicable by marking the appropriate Yes/No/Possibly box in some fashion (e.g., bold, highlight, mark with an “X”, etc.).
• Explain why the obstacle is/isn’t/possibly applicable: To ensure full credit, you must convey that you fully understand the obstacle being tested.  The best answers incorporate the definition of the obstacle into the response.  A one sentence answer will not fulfil this requirement.

Step 4: Explain how the authors could have improved their study.  You should incorporate what you’ve learned in the internal/external validity tests.  Very often experiments are lacking appropriate documentation, which is another area of potential improvement.  You may also identify deficits in their experimental design, or opportunities that weren’t investigated.  At least two paragraphs are expected.

Step 5: Explain how the study is personally useful or applicable to you in terms of your daily life, future career, etc.  There is an absolute wealth of information in Social Psychology journals.  In order to maximize this learning experience, you must find an experiment that will benefit you in some way.  This question is the main point of this exercise, so you’ll want to write a minimum of two paragraphs.

Step 6: When you are finished, post your paper in a MS-Word compatible or PDF format and a PDF of your journal article on Canvas.  Please note that a link or an abstract will not suffice:  You must post the entire article as an attachment.  It is your responsibility to ensure that your paper can be opened and is legible.  A score of zero is assigned if the paper cannot be opened or is illegible.

Your paper will be graded as follows:

You will lose points if your paper doesn’t follow the guidelines:

*If your study is not an experiment, you will likely lose several points due the fact that you will be unable to fully address the obstacles to internal/external validity.

* * * Please do not include this page with your report.  Thanks! * * *
Psyc 390 Social Psychology

Experiment Review

<Place your Name Here>

Article Title:

Author(s):

Journal Name:

Volume / Online Citation:

Page Numbers:

Abstract:

Study Number (if multiple studies):

Independent Variable(s):

Dependent Variable(s):

Total Number of Subjects:

Internal Validity Tests

1. Complex/Confounding Independent Variables

2. Testing

3. History

4. Maturation

5. Experimenter Expectancy

6. Demand Characteristics

7. Instrumentation

8. Selection Bias

External Validity Tests

1. Nonrandom sampling

2. Reactive effects of experimental arrangements:

3. Multiple Treatment Interference

4. Social Desirability

___________________________________________________________________________________________

How could they have improved upon this study?

How are the results of this study personally useful or applicable to you?