Transcript APA_Paper - NSCC NetID: Personal Web Space

Contents
and
Format
of
APA Papers
Who is your audience?
Your audience is a group of colleagues.
 Write your paper so that it could be
understood by students in a research
methods 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.

Basics

12 pt Times Roman OR 12 pt Courier

Double-space everything

1” margins on all sides

Do not justify lines
“Content” sections
• Abstract
• Introduction
• Methods
• Results
• Discussion
Order of Sections
•Title Page
•CONTENT SECTIONS
•References
•Tables, if any
•Figures, if any
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
What goes on the Title Page
 Title
 Name(s)
of author(s)
 Affiliation - e.g. North Seattle
Community College
 Running head
 Short Title/Page # (in header, on all
pages)
Title of the Paper
 10
to 12 words
 needs to summarize main idea
of paper (3 types)
 DESCRIPTIVE: Effect of Alcohol on Decision
Making
 NATURE OF QUESTION: Does Alcohol Affect
Decision Making?
 INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS: The
Interfering Effect of Alcohol on Decision Making
Other Title Page Items

Running head: abbreviated title, no more
than 50 characters, CAPITALIZED
 The words “Running head:” must precede and are
NOT capitalized
Short Title: 2-3 words, shorter than running
head, appears in header of each page
(except figures)
 Page number in upper right, 5 spaces from
short title, appears in header of each page

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
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.
Abstract
Gets its very own page
 Is not indented
 Does not need to be very long (no more than
150 words)
 Should include summary of:

 Goal of study
 Method
 Result
 Tie into theory
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
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?

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
Introduction- Mechanics & Style
Begins on a new page (page 3)
 The word “Introduction” never appears
 Title appears on top of first page
(centered)
 Remember to summarize, be careful not
to PLAGIARIZE
 Cite relevant research
 Create transitions between topics of
research.

Example: Method
Misinformation Effect 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.
Materials
Words and clues were chosen at random from the New York Times crossword puzzle. The
mask consisted of a row of ‘X’s 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
Method
Starts right after Introduction (not on a new
page)
 Uses appropriate details so that others can
replicate and evaluate the experiment.
 6 possible sub-sections: Participants,
Materials, Stimuli, Apparatus, Design, &
Procedures
 Sometimes sub-sections can be combined
e.g. Stimuli & Apparatus
 only use sub-headings relevant to your study

Results
Continues right after Method (not on own page)
 Overall

 If any data were removed and why

Descriptive Statistics (TREND)
 comparison of means to show trends in data
 Use at least one figure/table, refer to it here

Inferential Statistics (RELIABILITY)
 Tell the reader which test you used
 Give BOTH the test value and EXACT p-value
rounded to the nearest thousandth (when
possible)
Results Section...
summarizes results in English
 includes descriptive statistics
 uses figures and tables to get information
across
 starts with central findings and then moves on to
peripheral findings

Example: Statistics
the difference was significant, t(28) = 4.1, p < .001.
no difference was found, F(1, 28) = 4.3, p = .318.
Tables and Figures

Mention Figures and Tables in consecutive
order in text (Table 1, Table 2, Figure 1, etc)
 NOTE: Always capitalize them.
‘Figure 1 shows the means for…’, ‘Mean RT
was higher in the masked condition (see
Table 1)..’
 All the figures and tables should be attached
AFTER the REFERENCES
 all figures and tables NEED to be on
SEPARATE pages (will be at end of paper)
 Give titles, label & mark axes, indicate units

Example: Figures
Figure 1
Mean percent correct by condition
and ISI.
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Mean Percent
Correct
100
200
300
Control
Shock
400
ISI
500
600
700
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
.63
. 37
.63
Both First and Second .64
Questions
First Only
Second Only
.72
--
--
.72
--
.59
.42*
.59
.34
.05
.46
Both First and Second .57
___________________________________________________________
* 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.
Discussion


Continues after Results (not on own page)
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 and this is true

Connections between your results and your
hypotheses: What do the results tell you?
 Does your theory best fit the data?
 Do other people’s theory fit best?/Other related
findings?
 Do you have a new theory?
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 materials
 change conditions (e.g. within to between
subjects)
Future directions of inquiry?
 Use your artistic license

References
Alphabetical order by first author
 Chronological order for different papers
from one author
 Same author & same year: use a,b,c...
after year

Example: References
Don’t Forget 45
References
Bekerian, D. A., & Bowers, J. M. (1983). Eyewitness testimony: Were we misled?
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 9, 139145.
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.
In Text Citations

These cite the source of information in the
body of your paper and are a reference for
the reader to your References Page

The standard journal format permits you to
cite authors in two ways.
Citations: Format 1
Enclose their last names and the
year of publication in parentheses
Example:
Consent to perform a small favor
increases a respondent’s
susceptibility to perform a relatively
large favor (Freedman & Fraser,
1966).
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
Citations: When to use which
format?

Don’t 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, or
go into more detail on their study.
Citations
After citing authors in one paragraph,
you don’t need to give the date again in
the same paragraph
 More than 6 authors cite first author ‘et
al.’
 3-5 authors, cite all first, then
subsequently can cite first author ‘et al.’

Final Individual Paper is
due Friday, March 20 at the
beginning of class.