IV -------------------------------DV
            
                           Y variable--

Hypothesis and Operational Definitions --

 For the following hypothesis:  Identify and define the IV, DV, graph the relationship, state type of study.

1. Job stress is associated with absenteeism rates at work.
2. A pregnant woman's diet affects the birth weight of her baby.
3. Frequency of child abuse is related to the parents' ages when they married.
4. Frustration leads to aggression.
5. The size of a group is related to performance on a task.
6. Interpersonal attraction is related to attitude similarity
7. Intrinsic motivation enhances performance on a task
8. Fear appeals are related to attitude change.

Describe in words the nature of the relationship between each pair of variables as indicated by the value of the correlation coefficient.  Be sure to also graph the relationship.

1. r= -.30 between length of marriage and marital satisfaction
2. r= +.55 between parent and child intellignece test scores
3. r=+.67 between scores on a hyperactivity scale and an aggressiveness scale
4. r=+.55 between amount of studying and grade point average (GPA)
5. r=-1.13 between amount of ignorance and a person's  humor tolerance

* Type of relationship you would expect (linear, positive, etc.)
*Graph the relationship
*Specify IV, DV and their operational definitions
*What method would you use to test hypothesis?
*How you would carry out your study.

Hypothesis 1: The size of a meeting is related to the length of the meeting.
Hypothesis 2: Frequency of child abuse is related to the parents' ages when they married.
Hypothesis 3: Visual imagery improves memory.
Hypothesis 4: Exercise is related to levels of stress.
Hypothesis 5: Frustration leads to aggression.
Hypothesis 6: Interpersonal attraction is related to attitude similarity
Hypothesis 7: Fear appeals are related to attitude change.

•  APA pape sections -- Brief APA Template (chapter 3)
  

APA (2001) Publication manual of the American Psychological Association. (for sample paper in APA Writing Manual (pp. 306-316). Section ordering of APA paper and writing style (P. 287):  Title Page--NP (new page)  Abstract--NP Introduction--NP (use past- or present perfect-tense....did/ have done)   Method (use past tense..there were 54 participants)   Participants  Materials (or Apparatus)   Procedure  Results (use past tense--we found)   Discussion (use present tense--our findings suggest, imply, mean ...)  References (not bibliography)--NP Appendix (if more than two Appendix A, Apendix B)--NP Tables--NP  Figure Caption--NP Figures--NP Note: Paper should have 1-inch margins all around, be double spaced.  Short title p# Usually first two words of title  Running head: ALL CAPS (limit to 50 characters)  Title: Info on IV & DV (usually 12 words)  The Effect of Sexiness on Liking  Author(s): Fname Initial Lname       Luisito S. Borracho Affiliation (university; list department if it is not Psychology)  California State University, Bakersfield Abstract:  Include information on PURPOSE (To investigate sexiness), FOCUS (Teenagers in peergroup), METHOD (# participants; experiment; IV= sexy peers [c1=yes; c2=no]; DV=attractiveness), RESULTS (sexy teengers rated more attractive), CONCLUSIONS/ GENERALIZATIONS (sexiness can make you more desirable, possible to extrapolate to all ages, not just teenagers). Things to note: Use past tense and use numerals only, except if it starts a sentence. Limit abstract to 120 words.  Introduction (repeat title)  The Effect of Sexiness on Liking          Rarely is the literature review chronological; often it is a review of evidence for a theory. Inconsistencies, contradictions, possible confounds, alternative explanations not previously considered, can all serve as a blue print for your paper. Here you synthesized, integrate, and analyze previous literature, all with the end of justifying the current study. Use references that are  highly relevant, updated, and pertinent to the your topic. Use only primary sources (no second hard information). End this section with your hypotheses.  example:            Byrne (1961) found that similarity breeds attraction. However, other researchers have shown that it is not similarity that attracts us to others, but rather a repulsion to those we do not want to be with (Bernbaum, 1986). Both Byrne and Berbaum posit two conflicting theories that need to be emperically tested to settle (Aronson, Carlsmith, Brewer, & Gonzalez, 1979).           Given this literature review, in this study we tested two theories: (a) People who initially share similarities(Byrne, 1961), will in time come to like each other more. (b) People who initially share differences, will in time come to dislike each other more (e.g., repulsion; Bernbaum, 1986). Specifically, if people like each other at the start, then will in time like each other more; conversely, if people dislike each other at the start, then in time they will dislike each other more.  Method  Participants         Who are the participants, how were they recruited, and is there anything especial about them? This is important information that one needs to know about the participants. Especial characteristics of the participants can influence the conclusions of the study that can be inferred. For example, participants could significantly differ depending on whether they were volunteers/non-volunteers, students/non-students, ethnic/non-ethnic, and many other distinctions. What precautions were taken to ensure that ethics were observed to protect the participants' well being? Were APA ethical guidelines followed? Materials    or Apparatus         Were there any apparatus or materials used in the study. If apparatus were used, questions on how acceptable, appropriate, and use must be specified clearly. If materials were used, such as a questionnaire, standardized test, or scales, then their validities and reliabilities must also be given, if not, then these are possible confounds that can compromise the results.  Procedure         How was the study carried out, or what were the general procedures? This section precisely specifies how the study was done in such a manner that others can replicate it. How the participants were handled, randomly assigned or selected, what instructions were given, how were the IV’s and DV’s operationalized, and if manipulation checks were done, are all generally specified in this section. Special design considerations are also given here: Was it a single- or double-blind experiment, if order effects can make a difference, was there counter-balancing?  Were participants debriefed, dehoaxed, or desensitized? Were there any manipulation checks done? Results          Were appropriate analyses of the data done, do the numbers presented make sense, and have statistical assumptions been met? These are important questions to consider in going over the results. Pay special attention to statistical symbols and how you report them. It is here that you reference Figures or Tables, making sure to hightlight what it is that you want readers to focus on. Don't just tell readers to see the Figure or Table, explained what deserves attention. Discussion             Summarize the results in plain English. Are the conclusions solely the result of the manipulations? Was the method and approached used in the study the proper one to test the theory? If there are threats to the conclusions, were they considered, controlled for, or eliminated? How do the results of this study contribute to the previous literature? What alternative explanations can be ruled out and which cannot? What are the next steps to follow in this research? Make sure to tie your discussion to what you discussed in the introduction, in particular to the literature review. State limitations to the study as well as recommendations for future studies.  References Craft, J. (1999). My book rules. Bakersfield, CA: Publishing House. Gomez, S., & Borracho, L. (1999). The sexiness quotient: A descriptive study.          Journal of Sex Studies, 12, 150-180. Appendix If you use a survey, or intensive material that cannot be included in text, then put it here. (If more than one, use Appendix A, Apendix B etc.)  Table 1  Mean Ratings by Sexiness and Gender              Not Sexy*  Men            2.0  Women        4.5 ______________ *Note: Ratings ranged from 1"Low" to 5"High" Figure Caption Figure1. Sexiness ratings for teenagers and perceived attractiveness.                  Sexiness  MEN.......||||||||||||||||||||||||(2.0)  WOMEN.|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||(4.5)

The Questionnaire: (or operational renditions of your research design)

1. Participant Number _____
2. Your gender: 1. __Male; 2. __Female
3. Love is misery. 1. __Agree, 2. __Neutral, 3. __Disagree
4. Love is bliss:   1. __Agree, 2. __Neutral, 3. __Disagree
5. Age: (Optional) ___

Data Grid:
 

Coding Scheme in SPSS (also codebook--try to see the logic):

COMPLETE PROGRAM.

1. The Completed SPSS program  listed above.
   
2. Type of theory to guide your research:      (Gender differences exist)
3. Literature backround (from biology we know men/women different. Emotion expressions are different. etc).
4. A Hypothesis to test (If emotions are more allowed in women, then acceptability of crying higher for women)
5. Statistical test needed to answer question? (if checking for average differences use a t-test)
   
6. Write the results using APA format ( providing M, SD, and F or t statistic)
7. Provide a graph of the results.   (Can do a histrogram or a pie chart.)
   
8. Summarize Results (as you would for a Discussion section of APA paper)
   
9. Provide one implication of results
10. Provide one limitation of the results
11. Provide one alternative explanation for the results.
12. For your hypothesis tested here, explain how the following concepts are involved:
    
1. Internal Validity
2. Construct Validity
3. External Validity
4. Reliability
5. Effect Size
6. Statistical Type I errors
7. Moderator Variable
8. Applied aspects of this research
   

1. Dichotomous item:  Are you? __male  __ Female
2. Multiple choice: Who is your favorite professor? ___Vega, ___Luis,  __Dr. Vega, __Luigi.
3. Liker scale: Luigi is awsome? Agree 1....2.....3....4....5......6 Completely Agree
4. Semantic Differential: Professors are:   Boring..........................Thrilling
5. Visual continuum: Social Psy is     Exciting ...............................Terrific
6. Fill-in/complete the sentence   Love is _____________________________.
7. Check list: I'm typically (check all that apply)  __lonely, __sad, __happy, __depressed.

1. Avoid compound items -   Do you like sports and music....  ___Yes  ___No
     double-barrel questions.... what does a "yes" above mean? music or sports--hence why  a bad question..

2. On closed-ended include all categories-- Do you like heat: Y/N / it depends
3. Avoid vague questions -- Is the dessert accomodating?  Do you get angry?
4. Avoid confusing wording- I rarely feel depressed?
5. Allow respondents the opportunity not to answer--What is your age?(optional) ___
6. Avoid biased language-- sexist, homophobic, racial, religious, agism, any other ism.
7. Avoid threatening questions that might be avoided-- Are you racist? sexist?
8. Avoid order effects --  Primacy/recency effects.... First/last info being influential.
9. Avoid negative wording--   Are you not patriatic?
10. Respect cultural differences --- avoid stereotypes.... Are you catholic?  How many children do you have?
11. Justify each question asked---also make your survey interesting and informative if possible. People's time is valuable.
    

1. Acquiescence ---- increasing agreeability
2. Nay-saying --- Increasing disagreeability
3. social desirability --- Don't know (compromising issues)
4. faking bad - Asking men if they are virgins?
5. extremity --  Never, always,
6. Cop-out --- Don't know..... it depends, no answer.
7. Inconsistent fabrication--- have you seen bleseing beings?  Yes__  No___ (pseudo-opinion)
8. "Screw you" effect

/300a = * okay, could be better; good; ok for age; heart attack waiting to happen; * ; 
good; healthy; average, okay; *; stable; excellent; *; very good & well looked after; 
good; fair; okay as long as I eat right and take my pills; 
little overweight but active and healthy; obese and little exercise/bad shape; great; 
good; very good; *; not great; good; average; not as healthy as I should be; *; 
good for the most part; not great/ but good; semi healthy; fairly good; 
not perfect, just good; *; great, very healthy; good; moderate; good; good; 
pretty good; not great for medical reasons; good; /312L = fine; good but it could be better;
good; excellent; athletic-more than average coll student; excellent; alright; fair; 
*; good; good; good; good; good; fair; good; 

Some APA Examples:
Journal cite:
Wrong (W): Craft, Jeff. (1999). Effects of drinking. Journal of Psychology, 78(4), 1113-1119.
Right (R): Craft, J. (1999). Effects of drinking. Journal of Psychology, 78, 1113-1119.

Book cite:
W: Gomez, S. And Craft, J. (1999). The Book of Knowledge. Bakerfield, Calif: Publishing Press.
R: Gomez, S. & Craft, J. (1999). The book of knowledge. Bakerfield, CA: Publishing Press.

Seriation:
W: The procedure involved (1) deception, (2) dehoaxing, (3) interviews, and (4) dismissal.
R: The procedure involved (a) deception,(d) dehoaxing, (c) interviews, and (d) dismissal.

Sexist language:
W: Each professor was allowed to bring his wife.
R: Each professor was allowed to bring their spouse.

W: Several of the participants admitted to being homosexual to the question, "What is your sexual preference?"
R: Several of the participants admitted to being gay or lesbian to the question, "What is your sexual orientation?"

Capitalization and numbers
W: On day six of condition two each participant received the treatment. 6 participants were absent.
R: On day 6 of condition (C) 2 each participant received the treatment. Six participants were absent.

Referencing sources:
W: Vega & Craft (1999) showed the effect to be strong. Other researchers (Gomez and Morrow, 1999; Alfaro and Tonto, 1999) disagree, however. In their rebuttal, Vega & Craft (1999) countered with stronger evidence.

R: Vega and Craft (1999) showed the effect to be strong. Other researchers (Alfaro & Tonto, 1999; Gomez & Morrow, 1999) disagree, however. In their rebuttal, Vega and Craft countered with stronger evidence.

Reporting statistics:
W: The f test had 2, 48 df and it was 12.5555 for gender effects condition, with probability of .01. Total participants were 55, with 40 men. The mean for men was 3.4 (Stadev .011) and the mean for women was 3.1001 (Stadev .99). The correlations was positive .70, with probability of less than .050.
R: The condition for gender was statistically significant, F(2,48) = 12. 56, p < .001. Of all participants (N = 55), most were men (n = 40). Men (M = 3.40; SD = 0.01) performed higher than women (M = 3.10; SD = 1.00). Finally, the Pearson correlation was significant and positive (r (N = 55) = .70, p < .05).

Abbreviations; offensive language:
W: Participants took the Cybornated Test (CT), with men doing superior to the girls. Gays taking the Cybornated Test also did inferior to normal men.
R: Participants took the Cybornated Test (CT), with men scoring higher than women. Gays taking the CT scored lower than straight men.

2/13  -- Statistics and writing results---some logic

Statistics --- Correlation / Chi-square / t-test / 3 group experiment F-test

Correlation romantic gender.
Graphing - Scatterplot.  Interpretation of coefficient determine by coding of variables and level of measurement:
eg: r = .65    Romanticism (1-7 scale) gender (1=male; 2=female)
Results:   (unit of measurement will be correlation coefficients)
apa: The correlation between romanticism and gender was positive, r(27) = .65, p =  .005  (apa manual p. 128)
apa technical: A biserial correlation analysis showed that women were more romantic than men, r(27) =  .65, p = .005.
Note, however, that if coding was-- Romanticism (1-7 scale) gender (1=female; 2=male), then r = -.65, and you would write:
apa technical: A biserial correlation analysis showed that men were less romantic than women, r(27) = - .65, p = .005.

t-test groups= Cond/vars=romantic.
Graphing - barchart (to illustrate comparison of quantities) or a line graph (to illustrate trends).
eg:  Romanticism (1-7 scale) gender (C1=reads obituary; C2=reads love poem)
Results:  (unit of measurement will be M and SD )
apa: Using a one-tailed t-test, a significant difference was found between the two conditions,  t(29) = 2.65, p =  .001  (apa manual p. 138)
apa technical: Using a one-tailed t-test, partcipants who read a love poem (C2) scored higher (M = 5.35; SD = .90) on the romanticism scale than participants who read an obituary (C2: M = 3.28; SD = 1.00), with the difference statistically significant, t(29) = 2.65, p =  .001

Value labels gift 1'Gives gift' 2'No gift given'.
crosstabs gender gift/cell count row/stats=chisq.
Graphing - barchart (but ordinate, or y axis, displays percentage--remember that percentage for only one group are display, the other is inferred).
eg: Gender (1'male' 2'female') Gift (1'gives gift' 2'no gift given')
Results:  (unit of measurement will be percentages)--remember expected values are what you would get by chance, observed values are your actual outcomes.
apa: Using a chi-square analysis, the results showed as strong relationship between the dichotomous variables of gender and gift giving,  χ²(1, N =  100) = 9.52, p = .002.  (apa manual p. 139)
apa technical: Using a chi-square analysis, the results showed that men were more likely to give a gift (n = 25, 100%) than women  (n =5, 20%), with the relationship statistically signficant χ²(1, N =  100) = 9.52, p = .002.  Alternatively,
Using a chi-square analysis, the results showed that women are more likely to not give a gift (n =20, 80%) than men  (n = 0, 0%), with the relationship statistically signficant χ²(1, N =  100) = 9.52, p = .002.

/300a = * okay, could be better; good; ok for age; heart attack waiting to happen; * ; 
good; healthy; average, okay; *; stable; excellent; *; very good & well looked after; 
good; fair; okay as long as I eat right and take my pills; 
little overweight but active and healthy; obese and little exercise/bad shape; great; 
good; very good; *; not great; good; average; not as healthy as I should be; *; 
good for the most part; not great/ but good; semi healthy; fairly good; 
not perfect, just good; *; great, very healthy; good; moderate; good; good; 
pretty good; not great for medical reasons; good; /312L = fine; good but it could be better;
good; excellent; athletic-more than average coll student; excellent; alright; fair; 
*; good; good; good; good; good; fair; good;