What to turn in:
For this assignment, you will turn in two separate sections, however one will be quite short. Neither of these sections will be at all similar to traditional or “real life” proposals – see the ‘details’ sections for more information.
For the Data Analysis Plan section, which is the Proposal (future tense) version of a Results (past tense) section. Your final paper is a proposal, so it is and always will be future tense. For this section, you will write only a few sentences. First, you will note what exactly you’re testing – the hypothesis (or multiple hypotheses if you have multiple variables or multiple time points). You will then note what statistical analysis you will be using in order to test your specific dependent variable, with your specific independent variable, for your specific hypothesis. If you have more than one time-point, or more than one measure that you are using, then you need to do this multiple times.
Because some of you have done stats and some of you haven’t, we’ll keep it simple – walk through the stats decision tree
Actions
, and determine which test you will run using that resource. Then, for your paper, you will defend your choice by walking through (using formal terms) what you chose at every level of the decision tree to come to your decision.
Lastly in this section, you want to note what results will be considered significant (p value).

For the discussion section, you will want to describe two methodological strengths and two methodological weaknesses of your study. The study strengths might be reasons why you chose that study design, or reasons why your population or your procedure has improved upon the existing literature. The weaknesses should be very similar to what you have seen as “limitations” in the studies you have read. Remember that no study is perfect, and sometimes when you make a study design choice, you have to make one thing weak to make another thing strong. Find these strengths and weaknesses, and use the correct terminology to prove your applied understanding of the material.
Why you are doing this:
There are several reasons why we aren’t writing traditional data analysis or discussion sections. Ultimately, they revolve around how you can best prove understanding of the material and meeting the goals of the class while least double-dipping or wasting time.
For the data analysis plan, most students who take this class are required to take statistics in at lest one other course, but also there simply isn’t time to teach you statistics in a way that will stick. So instead of teaching you statistics in a meaningful way, we’re sticking to the goals of the class, which is to prove applied understanding of the material. If you know all of the details of the concepts, you will always be able to determine what statistical analyses to use by using different statistical analysis tutorials or to ask for statistical help. If you don’t know what these methods terms mean though, and basically which terms matter when you’re looking at which statistical test you want or how to run it (which is really all we will focus on), then you really won’t be able to ask for or understand help. So this assumes that you’ll learn the details elsewhere, but teaches you how to fish in a sense.
As for the discussion section, there are elements of what you will be writing here that are generally found in regular discussion sections, but they are never really found in this way. Basically this section is almost like a quiz, where you write the questions and the answers. And in doing so, you’re again really strengthening your understanding of the material in an entirely new way that will take a much deeper hold than even just designing the study. Now that you’ve designed the best study you can think of, it will help you to understand the ins- and outs- of methods to look at it critically and knowing that some things are great about it and something things simply are not.
Details:
Ultimately, the first two sections (introduction and method) look the same for the vast majority of purposes – for research reports and for proposals for nearly all settings. However, in the “real world,” there first we have the split from results sections to data analysis plans when you go from a report to a proposal. Then there’s the fact that both data analysis plans and discussion sections can look very different for all different settings – and sometimes they aren’t even included – based on the purpose of the proposal. Really, proposals just aren’t as formalized overall, although they may be formal within a setting. So for us, we’re going to use this opportunity to make them useful instead of busywork. These will basically double as applied quizzes for the course, but using content that you can bring forward with you as you go that can help you in the future to apply this information.
Your Data Analysis Plan section really should be just a few sentences. The difficult part here will be ensuring that you have a full and proper understanding of the terms as they are applied in real life, not just as they are defined. Then, if you look at the cheat sheet, you should be able to determine the appropriate statistical analysis for your study. More importantly, you should be able to describe *why* you chose that analysis. Lastly just tack on what results will be considered significance (p value). And that’s it. It might feel wrong to leave this section so short, but it is not wrong; just a few sentences is exactly right.
For the discussion section, this too doesn’t need to be too long, but it should be exactly as long as it needs to be. It should start with a re-statement of your hypothesis or your research plan, to remind the reader what it is you set out to do. Then, you want to set up two things that your study did well. This should be set up not in a bullet-point way, but written in a scientific tone like your introduction; you should be pointing out how you have overcome something that other studies have missed or not been able to do. Do keep in mind what you’ve been able to do because your study is hypothetical – this likely will help you here.
On the other hand, you might have had to add some issues due to the course requirements that are clear weaknesses. For example: ethics. For any individuals who did end up making something experimental in that 80s movie way that really should only have been studied in a correlational way due to ethics, this is the section where you need to show me that you understand the difference. Not just through saying that “ethics” is the limitation or weakness – this is not specific enough. You need to say which specific concept within the ethics framework you have violated in your study. Say it by the proper name.
And for each one of these, you don’t want to just name them and then move on. You don’t want to say “My study had ___ validity, which was a strength,” and then move on to the second strength. Instead, you need to spend at least a couple sentences talking about that strength (or weakness). Talk about how you know it’s a strength or weakness, what it means, how it applies in this case, and if it’s a weakness – either why you chose it anyway, or what you would do differently in the next study.
As always, be sure to check out the rubric for more details!
Rubric
Data Analysis Plan & Discussion
Data Analysis Plan & Discussion
Criteria Ratings Pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeHypothesis is re-stated in the data analysis section [.5]
Usually stated as “In order to test the hypothesis___, we will run ___.” 0.5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeIt is stated what analysis you will use for your DV (and for any other variable you might have measured, other than demographics). [1]. Analysis formal name is used [1].
Note that it is HIGHLY recommended that you only use your one dependent variable. If not, you will need to do basically several analytic plans, and several hypotheses – one to account for each variables measured. (-1 point for each variable not planned for here, but note there will be more points available to lose on the final paper) 2 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeThe analysis that you will be using is has been defended. The defense is specific to your measured variable [1], and accounts for whether your measured variable is categorical/continuous [1], whether your independent variable is continuous or categorical [1], how many independent variables there are [1], and how many levels of the independent variable there are [1].
Use specific terms from the course 5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSignificance value (P-value) statement is listed and is consistent with expectations. [.5] 0.5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStrength 1: What is one element of of your study/methodology that is a strength [1] and what is the formal/ proper name for this concept [1]? Why did you choose this element, or how did it improve from what came before? [1] What does this concept mean and/or how does it apply in this study? [1] 4 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeStrength 2: What is one element of of your study/methodology that is a strength [1] and what is the formal/ proper name for this concept [1]? Why did you choose this element, or how did it improve from what came before? [1] What does this concept mean and/or how does it apply in this study? [1] 4 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWeakness/Limitation 1: What is one element of of your study/methodology that is a limitation [1] and what is the formal/ proper name for this concept [1]? Why did you choose this element, even though it’s a limitation? [1] What does this concept mean and/or how does it apply in this study? [1] How would you recommend that the next study improve this limitation? [1] 5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWeakness/Limitation 2: What is one element of of your study/methodology that is a limitation [1] and what is the formal/ proper name for this concept [1]? Why did you choose this element, even though it’s a limitation? [1] What does this concept mean and/or how does it apply in this study? [1] How would you recommend that the next study improve this limitation? [1] 5 pts
This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting Clarity & Tone: Sentences and paragraphs apply the tips and practice from the Scientific Writing for Psychology textbook. In addition, issues of grammar and spelling (skills learned in prerequisite classes) are not egregious to the point that they interfere with clarity/readability. Scientific tone, including avoiding quotes unless necessary (no more than 1 per introduction), avoiding use of questions as literary tool, etc. [Subjective Grading] 4 pts
Total Points: 30