chapter 2 research ideas

Let's try...

What is paper about? What are hypotheses? Where are they? What is the structure of the intro? What do you notice about the method? What do you notice about the results? Discussion what the is the purpose? Look for limitations?

common source of general research topics

- personal interests and curiosities -casual observation -practical problems or questions -vague and fleeting thoughts -reading reports and other's observations -behavioral theories

Literature search • Why?

Each article is a sentence in the conversation • A brick in the building • A patch in the quilt Look at reference section!

abstract

brief summary of the publication, usually about 100 words.

pick a topic you are interested . several different ways to define an interest area:

-a general topic -a particular population -a particular behavior key is to pick something that interests you

combine or contrast existing results

-it is possible to find a new research idea by combining two (or more) existing results. -nother possibility is that two research results seem to contradict each other. In this case, you could look for factors that differentiate the two studies and might be responsible for the different results.

common mistakes in choosing a research topic

-topic does not interest the student -inadequate literature on the topic;difficult to develop a research project,topic may not lend itself to scientific investigation, may appear there is no material on your topic bc you're not using correct search terms, may appear there is no research bc you're using the wrong database. -topic is too easy or safe -the topic is too difficult -the topic is too broad -sticking with the first topic that comes to mind

keep an open mind, best strategy for finding a research topic is to begin with a general topic and let background reading guide you to a more specific idea. you need not start with a specific research idea because you may find

-your specific question has been answered or you have difficulty finding information that is relevant to your preconceived notion - do not have the necessary equipment, time, or participants to test your idea

the basic framework is established in the statement of the hypothesis. Therefore, it is essential that you develop a good hypothesis. The following four elements are considered to be important characteristics of a good hypothesis.

1. logical- A good hypothesis is usually founded in established theories or developed from the results of previous research. Specifically, a good hypothesis should be the logical conclusion of a logical argument. Consider the following example: Premise 1: Academic success is highly valued and respected in society (at least by parents and teachers). Premise 2: Being valued and respected by others contributes to high self-esteem. Conclusion (hypothesis): For a specific group of students, higher levels of academic success will be related to higher levels of self-esteem. In this argument, we assume that the two premise statements are facts or knowledge that has been demonstrated and reported in the scientific literature. Typically, these facts would be obtained from extensive library research. Library research acquaints you with the relevant knowledge that already exists: What other researchers have already done and what they have found. By knowing the basic facts, theories, predictions, and methods that makeup the knowledge base for a specific topic area, you gain a clearer picture of exactly which variables are being studied and exactly which relationships are likely to exist. The logical argument provides a rationale or justification for your hypothesis and establishes a con- nection between your research and the research results that have been obtained by others. Testable In addition to being logical, a good hypothesis must be testable; that is, it must be pos- sible to observe and measure all of the variables involved. In particular, the hypothesis must involve real situations, real events, and real individuals. You cannot test a hypothesis that refers to imaginary events or hypothetical situations. For example, you could debate what might have happened if John F. Kennedy had not been assassinated. However, this proposition does not lead to a testable hypothesis. It cannot be observed and, therefore, is inappropriate as scientific hypotheses. Refutable One characteristic of a testable hypothesis is that it must be refutable; that is, it must be possible to obtain research results that are contrary to the hypothesis. For example, if the hypothesis states that the treatment will cause an increase in scores, it must be possible for the data to show no increase. A refutable hypothesis, often called a falsifiable hypoth- esis, is a critical component of the research process. Remember, the scientific method requires an objective and public demonstration. A non-refutable hypothesis, one that can- not be demonstrated to be false, is inappropriate for the scientific method. For example, people occasionally claim to have miraculous or magical powers. However, they often add the stipulation that these powers can be seen only in the presence of true believers. When the miracles fail to occur under the watchful eye of scientists, the people simply state that the scientists are nonbelievers. Thus, it is impossible to prove that the claims are false. The result is a claim (or hypothesis) that cannot be refuted.Consider the following hypotheses that are not testable or refutable: Hypothesis: The more sins a man commits, the less likely he is to get into heaven. Hypothesis: If old dogs could talk, they would spend most of their time reminiscing about things they had smelled during their lives. Hypothesis: If people could fly, there would be substantially fewer cases of depression. Hypothesis: The human mind emits thought waves that influence other people, but that cannot be measured or recorded in any way. Although you may find these hypotheses interesting, they cannot be tested or shown to be false and, therefore, are unsuitable for scientific research. In general, hypotheses that deal with moral or religious issues, value judgments, or hypothetical situations are untest- able or non-refutable. However, this does not mean that religion, morals, or human values are off-limits for scientific research. You could, for example, compare personality charac- teristics or family backgrounds for religious and nonreligious people, or you could look for behavioral differences between pro-life individuals and pro-choice individuals. Nearly any topic can be studied scientifically if you take care to develop testable and refutable hypotheses. Positive A final characteristic of a testable hypothesis is that it must make a positive statement about the existence of something, usually the existence of a relationship, the existence of a difference, or the existence of a treatment effect. The following are examples of such hypotheses: Hypothesis 1. For high school students, there is a relationship between intelligence and creativity. Hypothesis 2. There is a difference between the verbal skills of 3-year-old girls and those of 3-year-old boys. Hypothesis 3. The new therapy technique will produce significant improvement for severely depressed patients. On the other hand, a prediction that denies existence is untestable. The following are examples of untestable predictions: Hypothesis 4. For adults, there is no relationship between age and memory ability. Hypothesis 5. There is no difference between the problem-solving strategies used by females and those used by males. Hypothesis 6. The new training procedure has no effect on students' self-esteem. The reason that a testable hypothesis must make a positive statement affirming exis- tence is based on the scientific process that is used to test the prediction. Specifically, the basic nature of science is to assume that something does not exist until there is enough evidence to demonstrate that it actually does exist. Suppose, for example, that I would like to test the hypothesis that there is a relationship between creativity and intelligence. In this case, I begin with the assumption that a relationship does not exist, and the goal for my research study is to gather enough evidence (data) to provide a convincing demonstration that a relationship does exist. You may recognize this process as the same system used in jury trials: The jury assumes that a defendant is innocent and the prosecution attempts to present enough evidence to prove that the defendant is guilty. The key problem with this system occurs when you fail to obtain convincing evidence. In a jury trial, if the prosecu- tion fails to produce enough evidence, the verdict is not guilty. Notice that the defendant has not been proved innocent; there simply is not enough evidence to say that the defen- dant is guilty. Similarly, if we fail to find a relationship in a research study, we cannot conclude that the relationship does not exist; we simply conclude that we failed to find convincing evidence. Thus, the research process is structured to test for the existence of treatment effects, relationships, and differences; it is not structured to test a prediction that denies exis- tence. For example, suppose I begin with a hypothesis stating that there is no relationship between creativity and IQ. (Note that this hypothesis denies existence and, therefore, is not testable.) If I do a research study that fails to find a relationship, have I proved that the hypothesis is correct? It should be clear that I have not proved anything; I have simply failed to find any evidence. Specifically, I cannot conclude that something does not exist simply because I failed to find it. As a result, a hypothesis that denies the existence of a relationship cannot be tested in a research study and, therefore, is not a good foundation for a study.

Anatomy of an article

Abstract Intro Method Results Discussion

Scientific Method

DEFINITION: Body of techniques for investigating phenomena, acquiring new knowledge, or correcting and integrating previous knowledge. - Systematic - Observable, Empirical, and Measurable evidence - Formulation and testing of hypothesis

how to conduct a literature search

One of the best places to start is with a recently published secondary source, such as a textbook, in a content area appropriate for your idea (perhaps a developmental psychology or social psychology textbook). Use the chapter headings and subheadings in the text to help focus your search on a more narrowly defined area. In addition, make notes of the following items, each of which can serve as an excellent starting point when you begin to search for primary sources (empirical journal articles) relevant to your topic: Subject words: Make a list of the correct terms, or subject words, used to identify and describe the variables in the study and the characteristics of the participants. Researchers often develop a specific set of terms to describe a topic area, and it is much easier to locate related research articles if you use the correct terms. Most databases have a thesaurus or similar feature that will translate a common term such as foster homes into the accepted term foster care. Author names: Commonly, a small group of individual researchers is responsible for much of the work being done in a specific area. If you repeatedly encounter the same names, make a note of these individuals as the current leading researchers in the area. As you develop your list of subject words and author names, keep in mind that any single secondary source is necessarily incomplete and probably selective. Thus, it is wise to repeat the list-making process with two or three different sources, and then combine your lists. When you finish, you should have an excellent set of leads to help you move into the primary source literature.

There are no absolute criteria for determining whether an article is relevant or should be discarded; you must make your own decisions. However, here are some suggestions to help make the selection/weeding process more efficient:

Use the title of the article as your first basis for screening. Based only on the titles, you probably can discard about 90% of the articles as not directly relevant or interesting. Use the abstract of the article as your second screening device. If the title sounds interesting, read the abstract to determine whether the article itself is really relevant. Many of the articles that seemed interesting (from the title) get thrown out at this stage. You can find an abstract either in PsycINFO or at the beginning of the article itself. If you are still interested after looking at the title and the abstract, look for a full-text version of the article, or request an interlibrary loan if full text is not available on your library's system. Once you find the article, first skim it, looking specifically at the introductory paragraphs and the discussion section. If it still looks relevant, then read the article carefully and/or make a copy for your personal use. The process of reading and understanding a research article is discussed in more detail Section 2.3. Use the references from the articles that you have already found to expand your litera- ture search. Although the list of references will contain "old" research studies published years earlier, they may introduce new author names or subject words for your search.

Most ideas for new research studies begin with

careful reading of past studies. First, you should notice that it is customary for a research article to be arranged into standard, distinct sections. The first column of Table 2.2 lists the sections in order and the content of each section is summarized in the second column. Ideas for new research are most likely to come from the introduction, the discussion, and the references.

In general, research is not static. Instead, it is

constantly developing and growing as new studies spring from past results. New research ideas usually come from recognizing the direction in which an area of research is moving and then going with the flow.

If you read critically and question each section of a research report, then you may discover a modification or an extension that will

convert the current study into a new research idea. The third column of Table 2.2 lists some questions you can ask while criti- cally reading a research report. For example, would a result that is reported for 8-year-old boys also be obtained if adolescents were used as participants? If a study demonstrates that a treatment is effective under specific circumstances, it is perfectly legitimate to ask whether the treatment would still be effective if the circumstances were changed

you will generate multiple ideas from reading articles but will throw most away, your goal is to

develop on research question and to find the background information that is directly relevant to that question. Other ideas and background info may be appropriate for other research but at this stage will complicate the study you are planning. disregard irrelevant items and focus on one question at a time

The goal of a literature search is to find an idea for a research study. The idea typically involves a general statement about the relationship between two variables.Eventually, the results from an empirical research study will either provide support for the hypothesis or will refute the hypothesis. Because the hypothesis identifies the specific variables involved and describes how they are related, it forms the foundation for the research study. Conducting the study provides an

empirical test of the hypothesis. The results of the study will either provide support for the hypothesis or will refute the hypothesis.

If you are considering changing the participants or a variable in an existing study, then it is usually a good idea to

expand your literature search to include the new subject terms. Suppose, for example, you used the search terms competition and games to find an interesting article on competitive behavior for 8-year-old boys. If you are thinking about modifying the study by using adolescents, you could add adolescents as a new search term (along with your original two terms) to see if there is additional research that might help you develop your idea.

read critical and ask questions while you read: why did they do that? is that result consistent with what i see in my own life? how would this prediction apply to a different situation. these questions expanding and challenging current knowledge can lead to

good research ideas...as you move through the project maintain flexibility, you may discover a new journal article that can cause you to refine you original plan

applied research

intended to answer practical questions or solve practical problems, can sometimes overlap with basic

basic research

intended to answer theoretical questions or gather knowledge simply for the sake of knowledge are classified as basic research, can sometimes overlap with applied

do your homework, once you identify a research topic collecting background info is the next step

involves - reading books, journal articles to make yourself more familiar with the topic: what is known already, what research has been done? and what questions remain 1. you do not need to know everything about the topic, just enough to gain a solid understanding of the current knowledge in the area 2. you will narrow your research topic from general to specific.

secondary source

is a description or summary of another person's work. A secondary source is written by someone who did not participate in the research or observations being discussed. Secondary sources can provide concise summaries of past research. A textbook, for example, often summarizes 10 years of research, citing several important studies, in a few paragraphs. A meta-analysis, for example, provides a great overview of an area by combining the results from a number of studies. Individual research reports that fill 10-15 pages in journals are often summarized in one or two sentences in secondary sources. Thus, secondary sources can save you hours of library research. However, you should be aware that secondary sources are always incomplete and can be biased or simply inaccurate. In a secondary source, the author has selected only bits and pieces of the orig- inal study; the selected parts might have been taken out of context and reshaped to fit a theme quite different from what the original authors intended. In general, secondary sources tell only part of the truth and can, in fact, distort the truth. Some examples of secondary sources are (1) books and textbooks in which the author describes and summarizes past research, (2) review articles or meta-analyses, (3) the introductory section of research reports, in which previous research is presented as a foundation for the current study, and (4) newspa- per and magazine articles that report on previous research.

a primary source

is a firsthand report of observations or research results writ- ten by the individual(s) who actually conducted the research and made the observations. -Typically, a primary source is a research report, published in a scientific journal or periodical, in which the authors describe their own research study, including why the research was done, how the study was conducted, what results were found, and how those results were interpreted. Some examples of primary sources include (1) empirical journal articles, (2) theses and dissertations, and (3) conference presenta- tions of research results

A meta-analysis

is a review and statistical analysis of past research in a specific area that is intended to determine the consistency and robustness of the research results.

testable hypothesis

is one for which all of the variables, events, and individu- als can be defined and observed.

refutable hypothesis

is one that can be demonstrated to be false. That is, it is possible for the outcome to be different from the prediction.

The easiest way to find new research ideas is

look for them as explicit statements in the journal articles you already have. Near the end of the discussion section of most research reports is a set of suggestions for future research. In most cases, a research study actually generates more questions than it answers. The authors who are reporting their research results usually point out the questions that remain unanswered. You can certainly use these suggestions as ideas for your own research. Instead of specifically making suggestions for future research, authors occasionally point out limitations or problems with their own study. If you can design a new study that fixes the problems, you have found a new research idea.

Please note that we are not suggesting that you can create good research ideas by simply changing variables randomly. There should be some reason, based on logic or other research results, to expect that changing circumstances might change results. If it is reasonable to

modify the characteristics of the participants or use an alternate definition or procedure for mea- suring the variables, then you have created a modified study for your own research.

Ultimately, your goal in conducting a literature search is

o find a set of published research reports that define the current state of knowledge in an area and to identify an unanswered question—that is, a gap in that knowledge base—that your study will attempt to fill. Eventually, you will complete your research study and write your own research report. The research report begins with an introduction that summarizes past research (from your literature search) and provides a logical justification for your study. Thus, the purpose of your literature review is to provide the elements needed for an introduction to your own research study. Specifically, you need to find a set of research articles that can be organized into a logical argument supporting and justifying the research you propose to do

psychinfo, psych articles, Eric, medline

psycinFo®-is the American Psychological Association's (APA) renowned resource for abstracts of scholarly journal articles, book chapters, books, and dissertations. It is the largest resource devoted to peer-reviewed literature in behavioral science and mental health, and contains over 4 million citations and summaries dating as far back as the 1600s, with one of the highest DOI matching rates in the publishing industry. Ninety-nine percent of its content is peer-reviewed. Included is information on the psychological aspects of related fields such as medicine, psychiatry, nursing, sociology, education, pharmacology, technology, linguistics, anthropology, business, law and others. Journal coverage, which spans from the 1800s to the present, includes international material selected from around 2,500 periodicals in dozens of languages. PsycINFO-is indexed with controlled vocabulary from APA's Thesaurus of Psychological Index Terms®. psycarticles® from the American Psychological Association (APA), is a definitive source of full-text, peer-reviewed scholarly and scientific articles in psychology. It contains more than 197,000 articles from more than 110 journals published by the American Psychological Association (APA) and from allied organizations including the Canadian Psychological Association and the Hogrefe Publishing Group. It includes all journal articles, book reviews, letters to the editor, and errata from each journal. Coverage spans 1894 to present; nearly all APA journals go back to Volume 1, Issue 1.PsycARTICLES is indexed with controlled vocabulary from APA's Thesaurus of Psychological Index Terms®. eric the Education Resources Information Center, provides access to education literature and resources. The database provides access to information from journals included in the Current Index of Journals in Education and Resources in Education Index. The database contains more than 1.5 million records and links to more than 336,000 full-text documents dating back to 1966. MeDline-with Full text provides the authoritative medical information on medicine, nursing, dentistry, veterinary medicine, the health care system, and pre-clinical sciences found on MEDLINE, plus the database provides full text for more than 1,470 journals indexed in MEDLINE. Of those, nearly 1,450 have cover-to-cover indexing in MEDLINE. And of those, 558 are not found with full text in any version of Academic Search, Health Source or Biomedical Reference Collection.

section and contents=critical Eval questions intro: literature review, hypothesis or purpose for study, specific prediction from hypothesis method: participants and procedure results: statistics (despricptive and inferential) discussion: results related to hypothesis, justified conclusions, alternative explanations, applications, limits to generalization references: list of items cited method: participants, procedure results:

section: content :critical evaluation Questions Introduction:Literature review, Hypothesis or purpose for study, Specific prediction from hypothesis questions: Is the review complete and up to date?Are relevant or related topics not covered?Is the hypothesis clearly stated?Is the hypothesis directly related to the reviewed literature?Does the predicted outcome logically follow from the hypothesis? Can other specific predictions be made? Method:Participants, Procedure questions: Are the participants representative of the population being considered?If participants were restricted (e.g., males only), is it justified? Would different participants produce different results?Are there alternative ways to define and measure the variables? Could alternative procedures be used? Results:Statistics(descriptive and inferential) questions: Were the appropriate statistics used?Exactly what is significant and what is not?Are the effects large enough to be meaningful? Discussion:Results related to hypothesis, Justified conclusions,Alternative explanations,Applications, Limits to generalization questions: Do the results really support (or refute) the hypothesis? Are the conclusions justified by the results?Are alternative conclusions/explanations possible? Would other variables affect the results? Do the results have real-world applications?Is there reason to suspect that the same results would not occur outside the lab?Would the same results be expected with different participants or under different circumstances? References:List of items cited questions: Is the list of references current and complete?

Structure of a research article

structure of research article is the hour glass

If you question each element as you are reading an article, you should finish with a good understanding of the study and you probably will generate some ideas for a new research study. As you read each section, it is wise to take notes for future reference. Be sure to get a complete reference for the article. This includes t

the author name(s), the year of publication, the title, and the source of the article. If the source is a print journal, get the name of the journal as well as the volume number and the page numbers. If the article is from an elec- tronic source, you also should note the digital object identifier (DOI), which is a unique code that provides continuous access to the article. This information will be necessary for you and others to locate the article in the future and will appear in the list of references that goes in your research report. Second, it is best to summarize and describe the important aspects of the article in your own words. Avoid copying specific phrases or sentences used by the authors. By using your own words during note taking you are less likely to unintentionally plagiarize by incorporating words or ideas from other people into the research report that you write.

psycinfo vs psycharticles

the distinction between a full-text database PsycARTICLES and the not-full-text database PsycINFO. For example, PsycARTICLES contains about 197,000 items selected from 110 journals. By comparison, PsycINFO con- tains over 4 million items selected from nearly 2,500 periodicals. Clearly, the full-text database contains only a small fraction of the psychology publications that are contained in PsycINFO. If you are conducting a literature search using PsycARTICLES, you prob- ably will not find many relevant publications simply because they are not included in the database. Therefore, we generally recommend that students use a database that is not full text to obtain more complete coverage of a topic area. The advantage of searching the literature using a database like PsycINFO is that all the references in the database are selected from reputable scientific publications, and most have been edited and reviewed by professional psychologists to ensure that they are legiti- mate and accurate contributions. This kind of professional screening does not usually exist on the Internet. For example, if you enter the subject word amnesia in PsycINFO, you will get a set of reputable scientific references. If you use the same subject word for an Internet search, you could obtain anybody's site with absolutely no guarantees about the quality or validity of the information. (One notable exception at the time of this writing is conduct- ing a search with Google Scholar, which does a good job of screening out the nonscientific items that normally clutter an Internet search.)