Assignment Brief Psy002-1: Assessment 3 Qualitative Report TYPE Essay WORD LENGTH 2,500 words for the whole report TITLE Make your own title OVERVIEW This report allows you to relate the contents of...

TYPE

Essay

WORD LENGTH

2,500 words for the whole report

TITLE

Make your own title

OVERVIEW

This report allows you to relate the contents of the course, such as self-affirmation discussed in Foundations to Psychology to research methods and analysis discussed in the Introduction to Research Methods unit.

GENERAL CRITERIA

ABSTRACT

Summary of all other sections.

INTRODUCTION

Describe the theoretical underpinnings of self-affirmation theory in the context of self-enhancement. Include details of, empirical studies and reviews that have previously explored this theory. You can use both qualitative and quantitative research to form your rational for this study. End your introduction with a research question (see tutorial slides).

Research Question: Who self-affirms more on Twitter, celebrities or politicians?

METHOD SECTION

Provide enough information of the research design, who the participants were, what materials were used, and how the study was conducted.

You report should include the following subsections:

· Design

· Participants

· Materials

· Procedure

RESULTS

The type of content analysis used should be explained, and a summary of codes provided (what they are and what they mean), including examples from the data of each code. Frequency counts of the codes should be reported with supporting illustrative statistics (a table is optional). Further statistical analysis is not required.

DISCUSSION

Begin by providing an answer to the research question. Relate this study and its findings back to previous studies, theories, etc. Include evaluation of previous studies, theories, and present study. Include ideas for future studies. Provide an overall conclusion to the study. This should just be a paragraph or two long.

ADVICE

To start writing this report read about self-affirmation theory (Hint: Steele, 1988). Make sure you attend every tutorial as we will go over different sections of the report in the tutorials.

Please read the Assessment section on BREO for detailed information.

Then start to read more broadly. Look for specific journal articles from academic sources, NOT Wikipedia or similar sources.

Write in your own words.

Most typical comments from previous years:

· The abstract is missing.

· The introduction is often too similar to previous sources.

· No evidence that any research has been carried out to write the report, students do not always find journals beyond those given.

· The method section sometimes sounds like a shopping list rather written in prose.

· In-text references aren’t in the Reference section and vice versa.

· Too many quotes.

· Quotes don’t go with the themes.

· Not enough links between current study and previous theories, empirical studies or new ideas for research.

FEEDBACK

You will receive feedback based on the University’s 2Q system. That is, there will be comments about the extent to which you met the criteria for the report and what you could do to improve.

At the same time, there will be a detailed indication on the Turnitin Grademark rubric about how well you have done in each part of the essay based on the general criteria above. The rubric is for guidance and feedback –
it does NOT indicate accurately what your overall grade will be.
The rubric contains typical comments and ways to improve so the contents of a particular highlighted box and may not directly apply to what you have written. The 2Q comments should make that clear.

SUPPORT

You have the opportunity to ask questions in tutorials. Staff have Office Hours to provide students with support and clarification of feedback. If you have queries about the assignments please make use of them.

SUBMISSION

Submission is in electronic format only. You do NOT need to submit a hard copy. Only the electronic version will be marked.

SUBMISSION DATE

04/05/18 on BREO before 10:00am

FEEDBACK RETURN DATE

01/06/18

F

E

D

C

B

A

ABSTRACT

Explains what you did, why you did it, what you expected to find, what you found, what it means. Grade depends on how clearly and completely you summarise the study.

There is no Abstract.

Several important aspects of the study are missing or very poorly expressed. You need to say what you did, why you did it, what you expected to find, what you found, what it means.

The Abstract provides a vague or unclear summary. You need to say much more clearly what you did, why you did it, what you expected to find, what you found, what it means.

You give a reasonable summary of the study but some parts could be better expressed.

You give a good summary of the study. You could work on making it more polished.

An excellent Abstract - it covers all the important aspects clearly and succinctly.

INTRODUCTION

Should contain a critical evaluation of relevant theories and previous research. Aim and rationale of current study should be clearly presented. This section should be clear, well-structured, and have appropriate hypotheses stated.

No evidence of understanding OR irrelevant OR is so unclear as to mask evidence of any understanding.

Mostly made up of material that is not obviously relevant or made relevant; relevant material may be missing; and/or there is little evidence of understanding.

Presents a basic overview of the background with no real critical analysis. You need to link past research and theory to the current study so the rationale and hypothesis or aims are clear.

The Introduction is generally fine and there is evidence that the topic has been understood. Make sure there are no irrelevant parts and try to include greater critical analysis of the material.

The Introduction is generally accurate, well researched and relevant showing the topic has been understood. To improve you need more of a critique or look into some of the background in greater depth.

An excellent Introduction showing clarity of argument and critical analysis.

F

E

D

C

B

A

METHOD

Research design must be identified and justified; variables described (IVs and DVs). Relevant details of participants required. Materials and Apparatus to include relevant details. Procedure should be clear and sufficiently detailed to enable replication.

There is no Method section.

Much of the Method is missing making the study non-replicable.

The Method is broadly comprehensible but much detail is missing.

The Method covers the main areas adequately. More detail is needed in some parts to make it more replicable.

Generally good Method section: it is clear and with appropriate content to all the sections, Some attention to clarity would improve it.

Excellent Method section. Clear and succinct.

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

Findings should begin with an explanation of the data analysis process.

No Results section or themes or quotes.

Poorly presented themes and quotes. Themes do not support interviews transcripts.

Get help on structuring a Results section or interpreting the results.

Some relevant themes and discussion. Could have presented the findings more clearly an/or relate the findings to more previous research. Get help on structuring a Results section.

The findings section covers the basic information with some glitches. See the comments for more details on how to improve.

A good findings and discussion section. Some parts may need some tidying to improve the grade.

An excellent findings and discussion section covering all the main criteria well and succinctly.

F

E

D

C

B

A

CONCLUSION

Should begin with relation of the findings and research hypothesis.

Methodology and suggestions for future research should normally be discussed.

There is no clear conclusion.

There is little that constitutes a conclusion. No real answer to what the findings mean. To improve, relate the results to the research questions and previously mentioned research.

Weak conclusion. May contain some misconceptions. Make sure it relates fully to your research questions.

Conclusion relates the findings to the research questions but there may be misconceptions or irrelevancies.

A good conclusion. The findings make sense in terms of the research questions and previous research. Some parts could be better expressed or dealt with more fully for a higher grade.

An excellent conclusion. You draw together conflicts and diverse material to present a unified conclusion.

CITATIONS AND REFERENCES.

You should include citations for all information. Each citation should have a corresponding reference in the reference section. The Reference section should not have references that were not cited in the text.

Very poor referencing or Citations and References have been almost entirely omitted. See:

You have included some citations and referencing but you either have a lot of information with no citations or have not used APA formatting correctly.

Your referencing needs improving. See

Your referencing is generally fine but there are some glitches.

Your referencing is generally good with few errors although there are some minor ones. You demonstrate a range of background reading.

Well done. You have used a range of relevant primary sources and your referencing is excellent.