Assignment #1: Critical Analysis of Psychological Research
Part II: Individual Analysis
Reading and reviewing psychological research is another important step in developing critical thinking skills. By evaluating two articles you can compare and contrast how different researchers design studies to test the same overall question. You will also demonstrate your understanding of basic research terminology. After reading the two articles and reviewing the various terminology (tutorial) involved in psychological research (video) respond to the following questions in your own words. Be sure to number your responses and write in complete sentences. See the writing guidelines for complete formatting and style issues. Concise and clear assignments should be no longer than three pages.
(A) Rauscher et al (1993)
Fred and Bill did a literature review and one of the research reports they found was from Nature (Rauscher, F.H., et al., 1993, “Music and spatial task performance,” Nature 365: 611). Read the report and respond to the following:
CLICK ON THE LINK AND AFTER READING IT ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS BELOW:
http://www.uwosh.edu/psychology/rauscher/Nature93.pdf
Identify the operational definition(s) for the independent variable(s).
Identify the operational definition(s) for the dependent variable(s).
Was this a between or within subjects study?
What aspects of the study did the researchers control? What aspects did they fail to control?
What were their reported results (what did they find)?
What conclusions did the researchers reach based on their results (how did they interpret their results, what did it mean)?
Based on the design and results of this study, do you believe that the researchers are justified in reaching these conclusions? Why or why not?
Now look at the study that you and your group designed. Did you control for any of the problems present in the Rauscher et al. study? If so, what? If not, how was your study different?
(B) Steele et al (1999)
Fred and Bill found another report in the journal Psychological Science (Steele, K.M., et al., 1999, “The mystery of the Mozart Effect: Failure to replicate,” Psychological Science 10(4): 366–369). Read the report and respond to the questions below:
CLICK THE LINK AND AFTER READING THE ARTICLE SIMPLE ANSWER THE QUESTION BELOW AND SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS.
http://www1.appstate.edu/~kms/documents/Mozart_PS.pdf
Identify the operational definition(s) for the independent variable(s).
Identify the operational definition(s) for the dependent variable(s).
Was this a between or within subjects study?
What aspects of the study did the researchers control? What aspects did they fail to control?
What were the results of the study (what did they find)?
What conclusions do the researchers reach (how did they interpret their results, what did it mean)?
Based on the design and results of this study, do you believe that the researchers are justified in reaching these conclusions? Why or why not?
This article was published in a journal that allows for longer articles, so more information was provided for the reader. As far as research methodology is concerned, in what ways was this study an improvement upon the Rauscher et al (1993) study? Why was this an improvement?
For a podcast discussion of the controversy of the Mozart Effect with Michael Britt and author Kenneth Steele, check out episode 59 of the Psych Files.
Case study materials by Lisa A. Hager of Spring Hill College, modified with permission from the National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science, University at Buffalo, State University of New York.
Part II: Individual Analysis
Reading and reviewing psychological research is another important step in developing critical thinking skills. By evaluating two articles you can compare and contrast how different researchers design studies to test the same overall question. You will also demonstrate your understanding of basic research terminology. After reading the two articles and reviewing the various terminology (tutorial) involved in psychological research (video) respond to the following questions in your own words. Be sure to number your responses and write in complete sentences. See the writing guidelines for complete formatting and style issues. Concise and clear assignments should be no longer than three pages.
(A) Rauscher et al (1993)
Fred and Bill did a literature review and one of the research reports they found was from Nature (Rauscher, F.H., et al., 1993, “Music and spatial task performance,” Nature 365: 611). Read the report and respond to the following:
CLICK ON THE LINK AND AFTER READING IT ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS BELOW:
http://www.uwosh.edu/psychology/rauscher/Nature93.pdf
Identify the operational definition(s) for the independent variable(s).
Identify the operational definition(s) for the dependent variable(s).
Was this a between or within subjects study?
What aspects of the study did the researchers control? What aspects did they fail to control?
What were their reported results (what did they find)?
What conclusions did the researchers reach based on their results (how did they interpret their results, what did it mean)?
Based on the design and results of this study, do you believe that the researchers are justified in reaching these conclusions? Why or why not?
Now look at the study that you and your group designed. Did you control for any of the problems present in the Rauscher et al. study? If so, what? If not, how was your study different?
(B) Steele et al (1999)
Fred and Bill found another report in the journal Psychological Science (Steele, K.M., et al., 1999, “The mystery of the Mozart Effect: Failure to replicate,” Psychological Science 10(4): 366–369). Read the report and respond to the questions below:
CLICK THE LINK AND AFTER READING THE ARTICLE SIMPLE ANSWER THE QUESTION BELOW AND SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS.
http://www1.appstate.edu/~kms/documents/Mozart_PS.pdf
Identify the operational definition(s) for the independent variable(s).
Identify the operational definition(s) for the dependent variable(s).
Was this a between or within subjects study?
What aspects of the study did the researchers control? What aspects did they fail to control?
What were the results of the study (what did they find)?
What conclusions do the researchers reach (how did they interpret their results, what did it mean)?
Based on the design and results of this study, do you believe that the researchers are justified in reaching these conclusions? Why or why not?
This article was published in a journal that allows for longer articles, so more information was provided for the reader. As far as research methodology is concerned, in what ways was this study an improvement upon the Rauscher et al (1993) study? Why was this an improvement?
For a podcast discussion of the controversy of the Mozart Effect with Michael Britt and author Kenneth Steele, check out episode 59 of the Psych Files.
Case study materials by Lisa A. Hager of Spring Hill College, modified with permission from the National Center for Case Study Teaching in Science, University at Buffalo, State University of New York.