Tutorial 8

Assignment 2: Results and Discussion

 Assignment 2:
Overall Report Structure
You will write a 1500-1800 word Research Report

Include these sections: DO NOT INCLUDE

Abstract section.
1. Introduction – 45 points
Method Section
2. Discussion – 55 Points Results section.

3. References - Penalised if Title page.

Table of contents.
omitted or incorrect.

Number of marks per section DOES NOT necessarily

reflect how many words to use in that section.

 Research Report:
What to put in the Introduction
45 points Introduction
4 marks Terms and Concepts explained
9 marks Review of first paper
9 marks Review of second paper
9 marks Rationale
2 marks Aims
4 marks Preview of Study
8 marks Hypotheses
Introduction

Think of the intro as having two important

components.
PART 1:
The ‘what and why’ part: What are we talking
about and why are we doing a new study?
 Introduction
The ‘what and why’ part.
Tell people why you’re doing the research (and gain their interest):
 Introduce your topic.
 Introduce key concepts and terms.
 Literature review - describe relevant research.

 Introducing concepts and terms and reviewing research can be done concurrently in a
way that flows and makes each point clear.

 With the above components you should build a rationale for your study in your
literature review – it should be clear why you did what you did:
 so that when the reader finally reads the hypotheses at the end of the introduction they should

understand the evidence/reasoning that led you to make those predictions/hypotheses

 Introduction
45 points Introduction
4 marks Terms and Concepts explained
9 marks Review of first paper
9 marks Review of second paper
9 marks Rationale
2 marks Aims
4 marks Preview of Study
8 marks Hypotheses
 Introduction
Explaining Concepts / Terms
Explain any key concepts that wouldn’t be clear to a friend doing second-
year Psychology but who hasn’t done the tutorials/readings on this specific
assignment.
 So, for example, you don’t have to explain what a within-participants
variable is.
 But you do have make clear what multisensory integration is, what
crossmodal correspondence is, and so on.
 Do this when it makes sense in your introduction – do not just list a ton of definitions consecutively.
 If you give labels to experimental conditions (e.g., pitch/elevation congruent trials)
you do have to make sure your reader knows what the labels mean.
 Introduction
Key Concepts / Terms
Concepts and terms

As part of building your rationale, make sure that you introduce and define the

following important essential concepts in a meaningful way:

1. Multisensory integration (no citation needed, general knowledge)

2. Crossmodal correspondence (Citation required)

3. Congruent/ incongruent (no citation needed)

4. Top down and low level processing (Citation required)

You may also want to explain other concepts and ideas that you find useful and

relevant to building your rationale.

 Introduction
45 points Introduction
4 marks Terms and Concepts explained
9 marks Review of first paper
9 marks Review of second paper
9 marks Rationale
2 marks Aims
4 marks Preview of Study
8 marks Hypotheses
 Introduction
Reviewing the literature (1)
Need to make clear:
1. What others have done (i.e., methodology)
2. What others have found (i.e., results based on their analysis of the data)
3. Most importantly: How reviewing this paper is relevant to the current study
 For example:
▪ something in their study that informs or constrains the design, theory, methodology, etc. of the current study
▪ something in their study we don’t know yet (perhaps they recommended as a potential direction for future research)
▪ a gap you’ve identified in their study that the current study can potentially address

 USUALLY because it hasn’t been investigated yet and would contribute meaningfully to our understanding,
AND/OR
 SOMETIMES because previous investigations were flawed in some way.
 Doing the above requires critical analysis.

 Do not tell the reader what they hypothesised (i.e. what they thought/predicted would happen), tell the
reader what they actually found (i.e., their results, specifically their data/evidence) and the methods
they used to acquire the data.
 Introduction
Reviewing the literature (2)
You must review the two papers set for the assignment

You must review in an appropriate level of detail.

 We don’t need to know everything about every reading, but we need to

know what is relevant to your experiment.

 Judging what is important to review is an important skill to develop.

 You do not have space to review in graphic detail all of the experiments in the papers on
your reading list. You must summarise the most important aspects of their methodology
and results.
Introduction
Reviewing the literature (3)
For this lab report we have set the following rules:

 Review the methodology and findings of the TWO experimental papers

on your reading list:
 Zeljko, Kritikos & Grove, 2019
 Evans & Treisman, 2010

 Not necessarily EVERY experiment they do in each paper – choose what is

important for developing our rationale.

 Youcan use the Spence (2011) literature review paper for background
concepts that you need to understand and cite.

THERE ARE NO BONUS MARKS FOR USING PAPERS OTHER THAN

THE ONES IN THE LIST.
 How to review a paper
 Firstly,download the paper
 Then read it in full
 Make sure you understand it
 Be critical: note anything you notice
 Identify the components of experimental research (e.g.,
rationale, aims, hypotheses, etc.)
 Summarise key elements briefly

We are going to be reviewing the following

paper:
 McGurk, H & Macdonald, J. (1976). Hearing lips and
seeing voices. Nature, 264, 746-748.
 How to review a paper
 We will work through this paper in class
 This should give you the basic idea of how to
address the reviews for your assignment
 HOWEVER, there is a different level of detail
required in the assignment. It is up to you to
judge how much detail is necessary when
writing your lab report
 Introduction

 Break into small groups (2-4 people)

 Identify the following

 The rationale of the study
▪ What led them to ask the question?
 The aim/s of the study
▪ What is the question?
 The hypothesis/ hypotheses
▪ What are the predictions? IV’s and DV’s?
 Rationale

 Typically verbal communication happens

where we can also see the speaker
 HOWEVER, the perception of speech is
regarded as a auditory process.
 Previous observations have shown that
visual input can affect speech perception
 To confirm the original observation and
provide a generalization outside of the original
sample.
 Aims

 To
investigate the effect of visual input on
auditory speech perceptions.
 Hypotheses

 In the auditory only condition there would

be no significant effect of the
auditory/visual pairings on the number of
errors made in identification of the
auditory syllable.
 In the audio-visual condition, viewing the
audio-visual input would lead to
significantly more errors in identifying the
auditory syllable
 Method

 In your groups identify the following:

 IV’s (and levels), the DV
 Procedure/ Stimuli/ Set up
 IV’s and DV’s

 IV’s
 Audio condition
▪ Audio only
▪ (1) Ba voice/ Ga lips, (2) Ga voice/ Ba lips, (3) Pa voice/ Ka
lips, (4) Ka voice/ Pa lips
▪ Audio-Visual
▪ (1) Ba voice/ Ga lips, (2) Ga voice/ Ba lips, (3) Pa voice/ Ka
lips, (4) Ka voice/ Pa lips
 DV
 Correct identification of auditory syllable
 Procedure

 Stimuli
 4 A/V recordings
 Set up/ Apparatus
 19 inch television monitor
 Procedure
 A/V condition: Participants watched the content facing the screen
and were asked to repeat what the model said
 Audio condition: Participants turned away from the screen and
were asked to repeat what the model said
 Every subject responded to all 4 recordings in both
conditions with a different sequence which was
counterbalanced across participants
 Results

 In your groups identify the following:

 Results for the audio only condition (Adult

participants only?)

 Resultsfor the audio visual condition

(Adult participants only?)
 Audio only condition

 High accuracy across all age groups

 91% (preschool)
 97 % (school aged)
 99 % (adults)
 Errors were not systematic (not based on any
of the particular A-V pairings)
 Audio-Visual condition
 There was a large amount of error in correctly
identifying the audio syllable.

 Replication of previous findings of the ba/ga becoming

fused into “da” with adults (98% of responses)

 Generalisable to new pairings with pa/ka being reported as

“ta” by 81% of adults.

 When given in the opposite direction (ga/ba and ka/pa)

most adults report a combination of the two sounds rather
than a new sound.
Conclusions/ findings

 In your groups:
 Give a general overview of the findings
 What was the conclusion drawn from the
results?
 Conclusions/ findings
 Both hypotheses are supported. There is a significant
effect of visual information on auditory speech
perception, such that visual input can affect the
perceived sound.

 The differences seen in whether fused or combinations

were heard could be related to whether the pairings
have visual and auditory waveform similarities, thus
resulting in a fused response, or have no shared
features resulting in the combination responses.
 Introduction
45 points Introduction
4 marks Terms and Concepts explained
9 marks Review of first paper
9 marks Review of second paper
9 marks Rationale
2 marks Aims
4 marks Preview of Study
8 marks Hypotheses
Rationale
The rationale is probably the hardest part of the introduction but we
allocate a large number of points to it.

It is very important your reader is able to tell:

why you are doing your study
and
how the literature and concepts you review inform your motivation
to do the study.

When the reader finishes reading your introduction (ending with

your hypotheses) they should clearly understand the
reasoning/argument that led you to make the predictions in your
hypotheses, based on your review of the relevant theory/concepts
and data/evidence in the literature
Introduction
The ‘our study’ part.

PART 2:
The ‘our study’ part: Specific aims of your study, simple ‘preview’
of the method, specific hypotheses.

Once people know what you’re talking about and why we are doing
a new study on it, you can now:
1. Explain your specific aims.
2. Briefly explain your experiment.
3. Clearly state your hypotheses.
 Introduction
45 points Introduction
4 marks Terms and Concepts explained
9 marks Review of first paper
9 marks Review of second paper
9 marks Rationale
2 marks Aims
4 marks Preview of Study
8 marks Hypotheses
Rationale leads to these aims…

Aim: To replicate the indirect elevation/pitch

CMC effects reported in Evans & Treisman
(2010) using the SDT paradigm used by
Zeljko et al. (2019)

PLEASE NOTE
a) It is important to express these as INDIVIDUAL
aims in your report.

b) You must express these in YOUR OWN WORDS

in your report to demonstrate your understanding.
 Introduction
45 points Introduction
4 marks Terms and Concepts explained
9 marks Review of first paper
9 marks Review of second paper
9 marks Rationale
2 marks Aims
4 marks Preview of Study
8 marks Hypotheses
Preview of the current study
 For your assignment you must provide a
preview of the study in the introduction
 Provide enough information so that the reader can
grasp the meaning of the terms used in the upcoming
hypotheses (e.g. congruent CMC condition)
 It must appropriately cover the following:
 Outline of the main task/paradigm
 How the IVs (and their levels) are manipulated in the
context of the task
 How the DV is measured in the context of the task
 Introduction
45 points Introduction
4 marks Terms and Concepts explained
9 marks Review of first paper
9 marks Review of second paper
9 marks Rationale
2 marks Aims
4 marks Preview of Study
8 marks Hypotheses
How to write a hypothesis
 You will write the hypothesis/es for your report.
 Hypotheses must be clear and concise
 State each hypothesis explicitly and separately

 State each hypothesis in terms of:

 The relevant IV/IVs and levels
 The relevant DV
 Predict a SIGNIFICANT/NONSIGNIFICANT
difference/effect
 The direction of the predicted effect/difference
 PSYC2020 Neuroscience for Psychologists

Methodology of the Experiment

You DO NOT write a methods section

 Method Worksheet

 Workthrough a fill in the blanks method

worksheet so that you understand the
methods used in our experiment

 The answers to the method worksheet are

available on BlackBoard for download

 See your tutor at the end of class if you need

assistance understanding the details in the
method worksheet
PSYC2020 Neuroscience for Psychologists

Results of the Experiment

You DO NOT write a results section

Results

REMINDER

The upcoming slide is INSTEAD OF your results section.

You DO NOT write a Results section.

You should assume that the reader knows exactly what

is in the results we provide you in these slides.

This is to keep the lab report manageable at a second-

year level.
 Results of our Study

Incongruent: d’ = 1.45

Congruent: d’ = 1.43

Not significant
Results

We’ll run through the graph/data and

explain it to you.

Remember – ONLY IF there is a significant

difference between conditions, we can be
confident that there was a real difference in
the experiment and can interpret what might
have caused it. Do not interpret
nonsignificant differences as meaningful!
Results
Significant Differences &
Experimental Power

Remember – ONLY WHEN there is a significant difference

between conditions we can be confident that there was a real
difference and can interpret what might have caused it.

In this experiment we had very high experimental power.

This means that if there were even small effects to find in the sample
of people we collected, those effects would be significant in the
results. Nonsignificant results are extremely unlikely to be due to
having too few participants.

Please note: THIS IS NOT ALWAYS TRUE – some experiments

have lower experimental power, and in these experiments it could be
fairly likely to get a ‘false negative’.
PSYC2020 Neuroscience for Psychologists

How to write the Discussion section

 Discussion
55 points Discussion
2 marks Re-state aims
4 marks Summary of hypothesis/es
20 marks Implications for results
5 marks Critical Analysis-Strength of study
5 marks Critical Analysis- Limitation of study
17 marks Future research proposal
2 marks Conclusion
Discussion
Key components.

1. Restate the aims briefly.

2. Summarise each result WITHOUT statistics or numbers with
reference to the relevant hypothesis.
3. Discuss what the results for EACH hypothesis means.
4. Critically analyse our study - Strengths & Limitations.
5. Suggest the a study following on from ours using fMRI, TMS,
or EEG.
6. Conclude by briefly restating the main findings and what they
mean.
 Restating the aims

Restate the aims briefly.

You should already have stated the aims in

the introduction. Here you are briefly
reminding the reader of the overall purpose
of the study.
 Discussion
55 points Discussion
2 marks Re-state aims
4 marks Summary of hypotheses
20 marks Implications for results
5 marks Critical Analysis-Strength of study
5 marks Critical Analysis- Limitation of study
17 marks Future research proposal
2 marks Conclusion
Relating Results to Hypotheses

Make clear:
 what was originally hypothesised
 what the results show
 if the results support the hypothesis or not

Please say whether there was a SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE or NO

SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE.

For example,

“Participants showed significantly faster response times after eating caffeine

pills compared with sedatives.”

OR

“There was no significant difference in response time for the Double Shot
Soy Latte condition compared with the Double Shot Dairy Latte condition.”
 Recap of Results -
Hypothesis supported??

Incongruent: d’ = 1.45

Congruent: d’ = 1.43

Not significant
 Discussion

55 points Discussion

2 marks Re-state aims

4 marks Summary of hypotheses
20 marks Implications for results
5 marks Critical Analysis-Strength of study
5 marks Critical Analysis- Limitation of study
17 marks Future research proposal
2 marks Conclusion
Implications of our findings.

Here is the place to show that you can go beyond

just repeating hypotheses and results.

You need to talk about what the results mean.

This will work a bit differently depending on what

aims the hypothesis or hypotheses relate to.

Aim: To replicate the indirect elevation/pitch CMC

effects reported in Evans & Treisman (2010) using
the SDT paradigm used by Zeljko et al. (2019)
Implications of your hypotheses

 This will be the crux of your discussion. It

will have the most marks to it.
 This shows that
 You understand the results
 You can relate them to the hypotheses and
aims
 You can relate them back to the literature
 You can relate them back to the theory
underlying the question.
 Discussion
55 points Discussion
2 marks Re-state aims
4 marks Summary of hypotheses
20 marks Implications for results
5 marks Critical Analysis-Strength of study
5 marks Critical Analysis- Limitation of study
17 marks Future research proposal
2 marks Conclusion
Critical Analysis
Strength of the Study
Describe ONE strength of our study.

 Pick the one you think is most interesting.

 Don’tpick something that should always be

done anyway as standard procedure (e.g.,
recruiting plenty of participants, using
randomisation where appropriate).

 Describe why it helped – how did it help us test

our predictions and get clear results?
Critical Analysis
Limitation of the Study
Describe ONE limitation of the study.

 Pickthe one that you think is the most important relative to testing
our hypotheses and meeting our aims.

 Don’t pick something that doesn’t really matter.

 Explain why it limits the conclusions we can draw from the results.

 Limitations
are not necessarily bad things like confounds, but they do
include bad things.
 Some things can be not really bad but still place limits on the conclusions we
can draw.
 Some studies have no ‘really bad’ things – we TRY to be good scientists after
all!
 It is up to you to decide what to talk about.
Common errors in limitation…

Do NOT mention anything about the participant pool

ZERO MARKS if you say we had too few participants

because we had HEAPS AND HEAPS!!

ZERO MARKS if you say ‘we didn’t have enough men’

because we had plenty in the sample.

ZERO MARKS if you say ‘we only tested university students’

– the point of our study isn’t to do a cross-cultural study or
an aging population study or a developmental study.

Think of something more interesting and relevant.

 Discussion

55 points Discussion
2 marks Re-state aims
4 marks Summary of hypotheses
20 marks Implications for results
5 marks Critical Analysis-Strength of study
5 marks Critical Analysis- Limitation of study
17 marks Future research proposal
2 marks Conclusion
 Future research proposal
outline!
We’re specifically asking you to suggest ONE follow-up experiment to
ours using either:

 fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging)

 EEG (electroencephalography)
 TMS (transcranial magnetic stimulation)

This gives you a chance to demonstrate your understanding of these

advanced neuroscience methods.

Try to find a suggestion that:

 Would be plausible and effective based on the info we’ve given you
about these methods in the course
 Would use the method to find something that clearly adds to our
knowledge of the phenomenon
 Future research proposal
outline!
You are proposing a follow up study.
Why are you doing it?
 What specific question are you trying to
answer
 How will you run the study?
 Technology?
 Brain areas? Why?
 What are your hypotheses/predictions for this
GIVEN our results.
 Future research proposal
outline!
The material from the methodology lecture
will be essential to make sure you
understand the method you suggest for the
future study.

The multisensory integration lecture will be

very helpful – it might give you ideas.
 Discussion
55 points Discussion
2 marks Re-state aims
4 marks Summary of hypotheses
20 marks Implications for results
5 marks Critical Analysis-Strength of study
5 marks Critical Analysis- Limitation of study
17 marks Future research proposal
2 marks Conclusion
Concluding comments

Keep your restatement of the findings and

implications very brief while still conveying
what we found.

 One to two short sentences is plenty.

Reminder!

We mean ONE of EACH!

ONE strength
ONE limitation
ONE detailed suggestion for future research

If you include more than one of each, we will grade you

based on ONLY the WORST one you provided and
IGNORE the others.

PICK YOUR BEST IDEA FOR EACH ONE.

Intro & Discussion…
How many words each??

For the discussion, what is important is how well you

convey your insight into the results and the experimental
methodology, not how many words you use to do it.

So, depending on how you write it, a high-scoring

discussion may be shorter than intro.

The discussion is usually the hardest to write and where

people show their critical analysis and original thought,
which is why it is worth so many marks.
Detailed Marking Criteria

In the Assignment 2 folder under the

Assessments tab.
Rationale and Hypotheses
feedback
Ican check dot points of your rationale
and hypotheses today.