Nonexperimental Article Annotated Bibliography Part I

Nonexperimental Article Annotated Bibliography Part I:

Find at least TWO research articles that are nonexperimental in nature: observational, correlational, quasi-experimental, archival, field studies, phenomenological, case studies, or survey designs with descriptive statistics. These articles should be original research, not reviews or meta-analyses. Create an annotated bibliography for the articles. The annotation should include a brief summary of the article, an evaluation of the quality of the source, and a statement of the relevancy for the final research proposal. Check out the following websites and posted announcements for resources related to annotated bibliographies, and an example is provided below. • https://guides.rasmussen.edu/apa/annotatedbib • https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/common_writing_assignments/annotated_ bibliographies/annotated_bibliography_samples.html • https://guides.library.cornell.edu/annotatedbibliography Reference Lilienfeld, S. O., Sauvigné, K. C., Lynn, S. J., Cautin, R. L., Latzman, R. D., & Waldman, I. D. (2015). Fifty psychological and psychiatric terms to avoid: A list of inaccurate, misleading, misused, ambiguous, and logically confused words and phrases. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 1100. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01100 Annotation Lilienfeld et al. collect a list of 50 psychological terms that are often misunderstood or misused. They categorize terms into several categories, including inaccurate/misleading, misused, ambiguous, oxymorons (a term containing contradictory terms), and pleonasms (a term containing 2 or more terms that are redundant). Understanding these words and phrases and their proper definitions and uses is helpful for psychology students, practitioners, and the general public, as it promotes clarity in creating and digesting research. *This source comes from a reliable, peerreviewed, and respected journal of psychological research. The authors are considered experts in the field and provide a statement indicating no conflict of interest, indicating an objective source. *This source is closely related to the primary hypothesis of my research proposal and will help support the foundational section of the literature review. Nonexperimental Article Annotated Bibliography After completing the bibliography, answer the following questions using between 100 – 150 words per question. 1. In terms of results/conclusions, what do the articles have in common? 2. How do the articles support your topic/argument? Part II: Find at least TWO research articles that are experimental in nature: two group experimental design, multi group design, factorial design, pre-test/post-test, between subjects, within subjects, reversal design, etc. These articles should be original research, not reviews or meta-analyses. Create an annotated bibliography for the articles. The annotation should include a brief summary of the article, an evaluation of the quality of the source, and a statement of the relevancy for the final research proposal. Check out the following websites and posted announcements for resources related to annotated bibliographies: • https://guides.rasmussen.edu/apa/annotatedbib • https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/common_writing_assignments/annotated_ bibliographies/annotated_bibliography_samples.html • https://guides.library.cornell.edu/annotatedbibliography Reference Annotation After completing the bibliography, answer the following questions using between 100 – 150 words per question. 1. In terms of results/conclusions, what do the articles have in common? 2. How do the articles support your topic/argument? Honors Addendum PSY-452: Experimental Psychology Honors Competency Alignment The following checked competencies align to the readings, supplemental materials, and assignments below that are differentiated for honors students enrolled in this course. ☒ Make ethically sound decisions that are supported with logic and aligned with contemporaries in various disciplines. ☐ Exhibit the qualities of great leaders who are able to inspire, motivate, and change or improve the conditions within their sphere of influence. ☐ Integrate theory from the classroom to serve within various discipline-specific settings. ☒ Use evidence and research for the purposes of making data-based decisions that are supported by literature from relevant fields of study. ☒ Critically evaluate the quality of evidence and consider all sides to an issue before formulating a position. ☐ Consider the perspectives of diverse cultures, traditions, and worldviews when interacting with people, texts, and ideas. © 2022. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved. Honors Requirements Topic #2 Assignments: Topic Proposal and Operational Definitions Honors Students: This assignment is included in the score of the Final Benchmark Assignment. The ultimate goal of this class is to create an original research proposal in the field of psychology. Your research study can be anything you want, as long as it has something to do with psychology! The goal of this assignment is to finalize a research topic, think of research questions related to that topic, and then identify the key variables of those questions. The answers to the following questions should be 400-700 words in total. 1. Research Topic: Describe the general topic of interest in one to two sentences. 2. Research Questions: Write three to five questions related to this topic that are most interesting to you? 3. Key Variables and Operational Definitions: What are the main variables of interest in your research questions? Which variables do you want to focus on for the research project? After you’ve identified the variables, create operational definitions for each variable. 4. Develop you Hypothesis: What is your prediction or educated guess for your research? How do you think the key variables are related? 5. Address the possibility of bias in research. Knowing that everyone has bias, consider some of your own potential biases and how they may impact your research design. Find a scholarly resource on how to mitigate bias. Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. 2 This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the Topic Proposal and Operational Definitions rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance. Topic # 3 Assignments: Annotated Bibilography Complete the attached “Annotated Bibliography” worksheet, then synthesize the articles. The common themes may be clear. Describe if any, differences in the research. Consider how the differences may be related to different avenues available, to research the topic. In your own words describe the differences and why your proposal may need to be narrowed in focus and scope and the difficulties you may face if the study is to broad. Your summary should be 100 – 250 words in total. Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the Annotated Bibliography rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion. You are required to submit this assignment to LopesWrite. A link to the LopesWrite technical support articles is located in Class Resources if you need assistance. 3

• Grid View

		Excellent	Good	Fair	Poor
Main Posting		45 (45%) – 50 (50%)  Answers all parts of the discussion question(s) expectations with reflective critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module and current credible sources. Struggling to Meet Your Deadline? Get your assignment on Nonexperimental Article Annotated Bibliography Part I done on time by medical experts. Don’t wait – ORDER NOW! Meet my deadline   Supported by at least three current, credible sources.   Written clearly and concisely with no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.	40 (40%) – 44 (44%)  Responds to the discussion question(s) and is reflective with critical analysis and synthesis of knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.   At least 75% of post has exceptional depth and breadth.   Supported by at least three credible sources.   Written clearly and concisely with one or no grammatical or spelling errors and fully adheres to current APA manual writing rules and style.	35 (35%) – 39 (39%)  Responds to some of the discussion question(s).   One or two criteria are not addressed or are superficially addressed.   Is somewhat lacking reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.   Somewhat represents knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.   Post is cited with two credible sources.   Written somewhat concisely; may contain more than two spelling or grammatical errors.   Contains some APA formatting errors.	0 (0%) – 34 (34%)  Does not respond to the discussion question(s) adequately.   Lacks depth or superficially addresses criteria.   Lacks reflection and critical analysis and synthesis.   Does not represent knowledge gained from the course readings for the module.   Contains only one or no credible sources.   Not written clearly or concisely.   Contains more than two spelling or grammatical errors.   Does not adhere to current APA manual writing rules and style.
Main Post: Timeliness		10 (10%) – 10 (10%)  Posts main post by day 3.	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)  Does not post by day 3.
First Response		17 (17%) – 18 (18%)  Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.   Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.   Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.   Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.   Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.   Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.   Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	15 (15%) – 16 (16%)  Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.   Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.   Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.   Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.   Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	13 (13%) – 14 (14%)  Response is on topic and may have some depth.   Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.   Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.   Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.	0 (0%) – 12 (12%)  Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.   Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.   Responses to faculty questions are missing.   No credible sources are cited.
Second Response		16 (16%) – 17 (17%)  Response exhibits synthesis, critical thinking, and application to practice settings.   Responds fully to questions posed by faculty.   Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by at least two scholarly sources.   Demonstrates synthesis and understanding of learning objectives.   Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.   Responses to faculty questions are fully answered, if posed.   Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	14 (14%) – 15 (15%)  Response exhibits critical thinking and application to practice settings.   Communication is professional and respectful to colleagues.   Responses to faculty questions are answered, if posed.   Provides clear, concise opinions and ideas that are supported by two or more credible sources.   Response is effectively written in standard, edited English.	12 (12%) – 13 (13%)  Response is on topic and may have some depth.   Responses posted in the discussion may lack effective professional communication.   Responses to faculty questions are somewhat answered, if posed.   Response may lack clear, concise opinions and ideas, and a few or no credible sources are cited.	0 (0%) – 11 (11%)  Response may not be on topic and lacks depth.   Responses posted in the discussion lack effective professional communication.   Responses to faculty questions are missing.   No credible sources are cited.
Participation		5 (5%) – 5 (5%)  Meets requirements for participation by posting on three different days.	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)	0 (0%) – 0 (0%)  Does not meet requirements for participation by posting on 3 different days.
Total Points: 100