[SOLVED] Autobiographical Memory

Research Proposal or Literature Review
PSYCH 242: Autobiographical Memory, Identity and Emotion
In-class Brainstorming:
Annotated Bibliography
Final Paper (Seniors: noon by Sunday 5/8; All others: noon on Monday, 5/9)
For your final paper, you will write a research proposal for which you will craft literature review, design a study, and a predict your results. Alternatively, you can complete a literature review in which you integrate readings to come to a new understanding of a specific faced of autobiographical memory. This paper will be in APA
format and 7-10 pages long (plus title page and reference list).
You may choose your topic from any question related to autobiographical memory, including behavioral findings, imaging results, and/or developmental patterns. Your paper can be based on ideas and topics that we have discussed in the course or raise questions that we have not discussed in relation autobiographical memory, emotion,
and identity. When proposing your topic, keep in mind that you should propose 1) an experiment (a study in which you manipulate an independent variable, and observe the effect of this manipulation on a dependent variable) OR 2) a correlational study in which you measure two or more variables and see if they are related. If you opt to develop a
literature review, you should include a minimum of six sources that will allow you to explore a specific topic and integrate the information in a new way.
On April 20, you are required to submit your topic and annotated bibliography (20
points). For your annotated bibliography, you should provide a brief summary of the
article and describe how the references are connected to your proposal.Be sure that
you have access (or have arranged access) to these articles. If you want more
feedback, you can submit a more developed outline or draft of the paper. You could also
provide an overview or your paper if you would like me to comment on that.
The topic and annotated bibliography will be graded on:
Description of topic (+4): At minimum, please include a one-sentence description of
memory the memory task and a potential hypothesis (or the thesis you will explore for a
literature review.
Annotated bibliography (+4 per source; 16 points max but you can provide additional
sources): At minimum, please include four references (in APA style) with a two- to foursentence summary and explanation of how each source will support the argument in your
paper. If you want more feedback, you can submit a more developed outline or draft of the
paper. You could also provide an overview or your study if you would like me to comment
on that.
Note: I have provided specific guidelines for the research proposal below. If you elect to
write a literature review, you will include more sources and provide an integration of
them rather than suggest a method. The “literature review” section below will be worth
30 points. You will include a Conclusion and Implications section rather than
predictions. (Additional guidelines will be provided on the Moodle.)
The final paper (50 points) is due on May 9 (or May 8 for seniors) by 12 p.m.
Your final proposal should include the following:
• A title page (2 points)
o Title, running head, header, page number
• An abstract (4 points)
o Include information about the hypothesis and method
o 100-150 words
• A literature review (20 points)
o Include a minimum of 5 articles (At least three of these should be sources that
you locate on your own; you can use one or two papers from our class reading
list)
o Provide a background of research on your topic
§ What’s the big issue?
§ Why is it important?
§ What do we know from existing literature?
§ What’s missing? What don’t we know? What’s unclear?
o Purpose of the study (gap in the literature)
o Hypothesis(es) of your proposed study
• Method (8 points)
o How many participants would be included? What is their age? How will they be
selected?
o Describe your procedure in enough detail that the reader would have an idea
about how to actually do the experiment
o Discuss your measures
o Provide operational definitions of your variables (How will your variables be
measured/assessed?)
• Conclusions and Predictions (8 points)
o What results would you predict?
o What types of comparisons or relations would you need to look at to determine
whether your predictions are correct? (How would you know if your hypothesis
was
supported?)
o What are limitations of your study proposal?
o What are the implications of the research?
• References (4 points)
o APA format (no errors)
o At least 5 references from professional journals
Writing Quality (4 points)
Rubric for final paper: Research proposal (PSYCH 242: Autobiographical Memory):
Low High
Title Page
(2 points)
Not included;
incomplete
Includes title of paper, name, and running head;
follows assigned format
Abstract
(4 points)
Not included; incomplete;
does not orient the reader to
the motivation or key
aspects of the study design
Follows APA style; includes goals of study,
hypothesis, key aspects of study design and
predictions. 100-150 words.
Literature review (13 points)—Expectation for page count (7-10 pages) starts here
Please start the paper with your title (rather than “Literature Review”
The motivating
question (“big
issue”) and
importance
(3 points)
Not clearly introduced or
explained; significance of
research is unaddressed
Importance of the question in the larger context
of research is discussed; primary questions are
clearly presented
Summary of
methodology and
results
(10 points)
Key points in methodology
are not discussed; or TOO
much information is
provided; the goals of the
studies that are included are
not evident; sources are not
sufficient to motivate the
work
An appropriate number of sources is discussed
(a minimum of five articles). An overview of the
goals, methodology and importance of previous
research is presented; includes key comparisons
and a summary of the procedure as appropriate.
This is not necessary for every source, but for
the most central studies you include.
NOTE: If you are critiquing the methodology of
the previous work, this will require a finer level
of detail in the introduction
Motivating and introducing your proposal (7 points)
Foundational
nature of previous
work for your
study/ Motivating
your question
(3 points)
No clear connection (or
identification of missing
links) is discussed. Not
apparent how the proposed
study is building off of the
previous work
The rationale for the proposed study is clearly
stated. This may be methodological or
theoretical. Strong motivation for the present
work in terms of questions that it will address,
methodological issues it will remedy, etc.
Explicitly addresses the question of why the
study would be important.
Hypothesis/
research question
(4 points)
No mention of the research
question (exploratory or
specific prediction) is made.
No apparent links to
previous work. No discussion
of how your proposed study
would fill the gaps in the
research literature.
Research question is clearly stated and builds off
issues discussed when framing existing work.
Predictions are clearly stated (or you can
describe the work as exploratory….but should
still say why this is important). If making
comparisons between ages or conditions,
should discuss why these are important.
Method (8 points)
Organization of
method section
(1 points)
Missing one or more
sections of the method
Method section includes all appropriate
sections: participants, stimuli, methods (You can
follow the organization of any of the articles
that we have read for class.)
Presentation of
method
(3 points)
No specific details are
provided
Methods are described at an appropriate level
of detail so that the study could be replicated
(e.g., more detailed than your presentation of
the initial study from which you are motivating
your ideas). Age group of participants is included
and motivated.
Variables
(3 points)
No identification of
variables as
independent/dependent or
predictor/outcome
Explicit mention of how different variables will
be used: What are the independent/dependent
variables (or which will be correlated)? How will
variables be scored?
Coherence with
introduction
(1 points)
No or weak connection
between the questions
raised in the introduction
and the methodological
approach
Methodology is strongly linked to the
introduction and overview of the previous work.
There is coherence between the variables that
are used and the questions discussed in the first
part of the paper. (Although the specific will be
more fully developed in the methods section,
there should be any surprises.)
Predictions/Interpretations (8 points)
General plan for
“analyses”
(2 points)
No plan is discussed for
how to deal with the
variables. No mention of
how hypothesis (or
explorations) will be tested.
Although you are not expected to run statistics or
know how to do statistics, you should have a
basic understanding of what comparisons (or
relations) would be important. What types of
patterns would you look for if you completed the
study?
Interpretation
(4 points)
No or weak discussion of
how you would interpret
the comparisons/relations
Clear overview of what types of patterns would
support your hypothesis (or disconfirm). How
would you interpret different patterns of
findings? If you are proposing an exploratory
study with no specific predictions or if you have a
“directional” hypothesis, present different
possibilities such as when you would have the
predicted patterns, unpredicted patterns, and no
patterns. What would you conclude from each of
these?
Implications
(2 points)
No concluding remarks
about potential implications
The implications of the findings and how they
contribute to the existing literature are
presented. What would we know that we did not
of your study if it were to
be carried out
know from the initial study from which you based
your follow up?
1 2-3 4
Writing
Quality
(4 points)
Spelling and grammatical
errors appear throughout
(e.g., typos, run-on
sentences, missing words,
plural/singular mismatch,
verb tense agreement
errors, passive voice;
conciseness). Writing quality
interferes with ability of the
reader to follow the
argument.
A few to several
grammatical or spelling
errors; writing is generally
easy but there may be
sentences that are unclear
or points that are hard to
follow.
No grammatical or
spelling errors; writing
is cohesive and easy to
follow; strong
organization
throughout
Citations &
References
(4 points)
Too few sources are
included; missing references
or lack of in-text citations.
Includes appropriate
number of sources with
key aspects of APA
(authors’ names, year,
article title, journal title,
volume, and page
numbers). Some
formatting issues
Appropriate number of
sources is included; no
errors in APA style;
APA in-text citation
style is correct
(see moodle link to
OWL at Purdue)
Rubric for the Literature Review
Goal
Title Page
(2 points)
Includes title of paper, name, and running head; follows assigned format
Abstract
(4 points)
Follows APA style; includes goals of study, hypothesis, key aspects of study
design and predictions. 100-150 words.
Note: Expectations for page count (7-10 pages) start here through the conclusion
Please start the paper with your title (rather than “Literature Review”
You may use headings to help you organize your paper and highlight how you are building your argument.
Discussion of the literature (28 points)
Motivating
question
(“big issue”)
and
importance
(3 points)
Importance of the question in the larger context of research is discussed;
primary questions that you will explore are clearly presented
Thesis
statement
(3 points)
A short statement (1-2 sentences) summarizing the main pint that you will
make.
Sources
(3 points)
An appropriate number of sources is discussed (a minimum of six articles). At least 5 sources should be from academic journals; you should locate a minimum of three sources independently.
Summary of
methodology,
results, and
implications
of previous
research
(14 points)
An overview of the goals, methodology and importance of previous research is
presented; includes key comparisons and a summary of the procedure as
appropriate. [Please note: This level of detail is not necessary for every source,
but should be included for the most central studies
NOTE: If you are critiquing the methodology of the previous work, this will
require a finer level of detail.
Organizing
your
argument
(5 points)
Within your paper, it should be apparent how you are integrating sources to
develop a coherent story. Make connections between source, how they relate,
and how they support your thesis.
Conclusion (8 points)
Note: Please include a “Conclusions” heading to mark this section of the paper.
Statement of
key points
(3 points)
Restate your thesis. Briefly summarize the points that support your claims
Limitations
and areas for
future
research
(3 points)
Discuss any points of conflict between sources and how you resolved them.
What are the limitations of research? What are additional questions that
should be considered in future research?
Conclusions
(2 points)
State your conclusion and implications (real-world or theoretical significant)
of the research you explored.
Writing
Quality
(4 points)
No grammatical or spelling errors; writing is cohesive and easy to follow;
strong organization throughout
Citations &
References
(4 points)
No errors in APA style; APA in-text citation style is correct
(see moodle link to OWL at Purdue) Autobiographical Memory Autobiographical Memory Autobiographical Memory Autobiographical Memory Autobiographical Memory