Contents and Format of APA Papers

1
Contents andFormatofAPA Papers
2
Assigned Readings About Writing

• Writing an Empirical Journal Article
• Daryl Bem
• How to Write a Psychology Lab Report
• Writing center
• The Science of Scientific Writing
• Gopen and Swan
• APA manual

3
Who is your audience?

• Your audience is a group of colleagues.
• Write your paper so that it could be understood
  by students in a human performance lab class at
  another university.
• They will not have the exact background
  information that you do.
• But, with sufficient explanation, they should be
  able to understand what you did and why.

4
Content sections

• Abstract
• Introduction
• Methods
• Results
• Discussion

5
Format Sections

• (Title)
• CONTENT SECTIONS
• (References)
• (Tables, if any)
• (Figure captions, if any)
• (Figures, if any)

6
What goes on the Title Page

• Title
• Name(s) of author(s)
• Affiliation - e.g. University of Washington
• Running Head
• Short Title
• NOTHING ELSE

7
Title of the Paper

• 10 to 12 words
• needs to summarize main idea of paper (3 types)
• DESCRIPTIVE Effect of Masking on Identification
  of Briefly-Presented Stimuli
• NATURE OF QUESTION Does Masking Affect Iconic
  Memory?
• INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS The Interfering Effect
  of Masking on Iconic Memory

8
Other Title Page Items

• Running head abbreviated title, no more than 50
  characters
• Short Title first 3 or 4 words of actual title,
  appears in header of each page
• (except figures)
• Page number in upper right, 5 spaces from short
  title, appears in header of each page

9
Example Title Page 1

• Deterrence of Marijuana Use 1
• Running head DETERRENCE OF ADOLESCENT MARIJUANA
  USE
• Legal and Social Factors in the Deterrence
• of Adolescent Marijuana Use
• David G. Peck
• Shippensburg State College

10
Example Title Page 2

• Memory Impairment 1
• Running head RESISTANCE TO MEMORY IMPAIRMENT
• Similarity of Encoding Context and Resistance to
  Memory Impairment Following Misinformation
• Laura L. Bowman and Maria S. Zaragoza
• Kent State University

11
Abstract

• Does not need to be very long
• APA 120 words maximum
• Does not need to have too much detail
• Shorter is better
• Should include summary of
• Goal of experiment
• Method
• Result
• Tie into theory
• The last thing you write

12
Example Abstract

• Mode and Misinformation 2
• Abstract
• Information presented after an event is often
  remembered as part of that event. Several
  theories involving processes such as encoding,
  storage, and retrieval have been proposed to
  explain this phenomenon. Paivio (1986) has
  hypothesized that linguistic and sensory
  information are processed in separate
  sub-systems. Thus, whether or not the post-event
  information is processed by the same subsystem as
  the original information might determine whether
  the post-event information is remembered as part
  of the original event. In this experiment the
  mode (either verbal or pictorial) of presentation
  of both the original and post-event information
  was varied. The post-event information was more
  likely to be remembered as part of the original
  event when the post-event information was
  presented in the same mode as the original event
  than when the modes were different.

13
The Body of the Paper...
can be described as an hourglass

• Broad general statements
• Progressively narrows to specifics of study
• Broadens out to general considerations

14
Introduction answers the following questions.

• What is the point of the study?
• What are the theoretical hypotheses, and how were
  they derived?
• What are the theoretical implications of the
  study, and how does the study relate to previous
  work in the area?
• How do the hypothesis and the experimental design
  relate to the problem?

15
Introduction broad to specific

• Lay out general topic
• Define specific example that interests you
• Explain your ideas and hypotheses at a
  conceptual/theoretical level
• Explain related research
• Brief descriptions of the methods you will use
• Specific predictions using operationalizations

16
Example Introduction

• Misinformation and Event Form 3
• Memory of Original Event and Post-Event
  Information
• Presented in Verbal or Pictorial Form
• Information about events often comes from
  sources other than the events themselves. When
  remembering an event, people will often combine
  memories from the original event with memories
  from other sources. This is useful because it
  allows information from various sources to be
  used to form a more complete description of the
  event. However, it can also lead to confusion
  and inaccurate memories. For example, if there
  are two sources of memories of the same event,
  then one source may contribute information about
  a particular episode in the event that conflicts
  with information from the other source. Several
  effects of conflicting information from different
  sources on the recall of an event are possible.
  One possibility is that newly encoded information
  may replace the older memories causing the old
  information to be lost. If that were the case,
  then the person would remember the new
  information only and could not recall the
  original information. Another possibility is
  that information from both sources is stored in
  memory, and either may be recalled. If this is
  the case, then whether one or the other of the
  memories is recalled could depend on

17
Summarizing Previous Research

• Be sure to address the following
• Theory
• Specific Hypothesis
• Paradigm they used
• Findings
• Interpretation
• Delicate balance enough, but not too much detail

18
Introduction- Mechanics Style

• The word introduction never appears
• Title appears on top of first page (centered)
• Remember to summarize, be careful not to
  PLAGIARIZE
• Cite relevant research
• Make it sound like everyone is interested in your
  topic, even if you are the only one who cares.

19
Method

• Put in appropriate details so that others can
  replicate and evaluate your experiment.
• 5 sub-sections Participants, Stimuli, Apparatus,
  Design, Procedures
• Sometimes sub-sections can be combined e.g.
  Stimuli Apparatus
• only use sub-headings relevant to your study

20
Example Method

• Misinformation and Event Form 14
• the person would remember the new information
  only and could not recall the original
  information.
• Method
• Participants
• Thirty University of Washington students
  participated as a course requirement. The mean
  participant height was 177 cm, four participants
  were over 185 cm tall, and the maximum
  participant height was 194 cm. All participants
  were responsive to a 30 volt electric shock.
• Stimuli
• Words and clues were chosen at random from
  the New York Times crossword puzzle. The mask
  consisted of a row of Xs the same size as the
  word they mask. All words were presented in
  white with a black background. Clues were given
  on a typed page. There was one clue per page.
• Apparatus
• A Digital Equipment Corporation PDP-11/23
  computer controlled the presentation of all
  computer generated displays. The CRT was a
  Hewlett Packard 1310A with a fast white P4
  phosphor. Electric shocks were generated using a
  model 1994 Orwell 1000 generator with .5 cm
  contacts and a

21
Participants

• Include relevant information about Participants
  age, gender, race/ethnicity, how selected,
  payments, course requirement, extra credit, etc.
• Spell out the whole name University of Washington

22
Stimuli

• What they were (e.g. words, two syllable words,
  high frequency words, 294 word text...)
• How they were chosen

23
Apparatus

• What type of computers, monitor, slide projector,
  VCR,....
• Sometimes Apparatus Materials

24
Design

• between-subjects, within-subjects or mixed
• IVs DVs

25
Design Terminology

• Example of 2-way factorial design
• A 2 (masking condition mask, no mask) x 2
  (light level dim, bright) factorial design was
  used. Masking condition was a within subjects
  factor and light level was a between-subjects
  factor.

26
Procedures

• The details of how you ran your experiment
• Include the actual instructions that you gave to
  Participants
• Describe steps in chronological order
• (block diagram)

27
Results

• Overall
• summary statement of the results
• Not an evaluation. e.g. Dont say the results
  are consistent with our prediction.... etc.
• Descriptive Statistics (TRENDS)
• comparison of means to show trends in data
• often best to use graphs
• Inferential Statistics (RELIABILITIES)
• Use inferential statistics to show reliability of
  trends
• Give BOTH the test value and EXACT p-value
  rounded to the nearest thousandth (when possible)

28
Results Section...

• summarizes results in English
• includes descriptive statistics
• uses graphs and tables to get information across
• starts with central findings and then moves on to
  peripheral findings
• doesnt include descriptions of statistical
  computations
• follows Bems format for results

29
Bems format

• Remind us of the conceptual hypothesis or
  question you are asking
• Remind us of the operations performed and
  behaviors measured
• Tell us the answer immediately and in English
• Now, speak to us in numbers
• Next, elaborate or qualify the overall conclusion
  if necessary.
• End each section of the results with a summary of
  where things stand.

30
Example Statistics

• test, t(28) 4.1, p lt .001. The

reliable, F(1, 28) 16.8, p lt .001.
31
Tables and Figures in results

• Mention Figures and Tables in consecutive order
  in text (Table 1, Table 2, Figure 1, etc)
• All the graphs should be attached AFTER the
  REFERENCES
• all graphs NEED to be on SEPARATE pages
• Give titles, label mark axes, indicate units

32
Example Figures
33
Example Tables

• Table 3
• Proportion of items recognized by source,
  conflict condition, and type of presentation
  (slide or questions).
• __________________________________________________
  _________
• Recognized
• _____________________
• Items presented First Second Both
  Average
• __________________________________________________
  _________
• Slides
• First Only .72 -- --
  .72
• Second Only -- .68 .49
  .68
• Both First and Second .64 .63 .37
  .63
• Questions
• First Only .72 -- --
  .72
• Second Only -- .59 .42
  .59
• Both First and Second .57 .34 .05
  .46
• _________________________________________________
  __________
• Values that appear in the 'Second Only' row and
  the 'Both' column are estimates of mean number of
  cases in which both the first and the second
  items would be recognized using first and second
  only conditions as estimators and assuming
  independence.

34
Discussion

• Refer back to your results and give evaluations
  such as
• the results are consistent with the hypothesis
  that.
• there was a trend in the direction of - if the
  differences were not significant
• Connections between your results and your
  hypotheses What do the results tell you?
• Does your theory best fit the data?
• Do other peoples theory fit best?
• Do you have a new theory?

35
Discussion can include suggestions and
improvements

• What should be done to get further support for
  your theory.
• What could be changed to improve your experiment?
• improve your stimuli
• change conditions (e.g. within to between
  subjects)
• for all your papers
• Dont say by running more subjects.
• But it is OK to say running different subjects
  when you give a reason

36
References

• Alphabetical order by first author
• Chronological order for different papers from one
  author
• Same author same year use a,b,c... after year

37
Example References

• Dont Forget 45
• References
• Bekerian, D. A., Bowers, J. M. (1983).
  Eyewitness testimony Were we misled? Journal of
  Experimental Psychology Learning, Memory, and
  Cognition, 9, 139-145.
• Belli, R. F. (1989). Influences of misleading
  postevent information Misinformation
  interference and acceptance. Journal of
  Experimental Psychology General, 118, 72-85.
• Christiaansen, R. E., Ochalek, K. (1983).
  Editing misleading information from memory
  Evidence for the coexistence of the original and
  postevent information. Memory Cognition, 11,
  467-475.
• Gibling, F., Davies, G. (1988). Reinstatement
  of context following exposure to post-event
  information. British Journal of Psychology,
  79(1), 129-141.
• Lindsay, S. D. (1990). Misleading suggestions
  can impair eyewitnesses' ability to remember
  event details. Journal of Experimental
  Psychology Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 16,
  1077-1083.
• Manning, C. G. Pate, J. L. (1992). Memory of
  original and post-event information presented in
  verbal or pictorial form. Unpublished thesis.
  Georgia State University, Atlanta, GA.

38
Citations

• The standard journal format permits you to cite
  authors in two ways.

39
Citations Format 1

• Enclose their last names and the year of
  publication in parentheses
• Example
• Consent to perform a small favor increases a
  respondents susceptibility to perform a
  relatively large favor (Freedman Fraser, 1966).

40
Citations Format 2

• By using their names in the sentence itself
• Example
• Despite empirical evidence suggesting other
  dimensions, Brown and Levinson (1984) persist in
  their claim that power, social distance, and
  imposition are the only dimensions affecting
  politeness

41
Citations When to use which format?

• Dont just randomly alternate between them.
• In general, the first format is the most common
  and appropriate. The second format is used when
  you want to focus specifically on the authors or
  researcher.

42
Paper Due Dates

• Feb 18 Draft of Introduction
• Feb 25 Draft of Discussion
• Mar 2 Complete Paper Draft
• (one copy for each group member
• Mar 4 Title and Abstract (group)
• Mar 11 Final Paper (complete)