RESEARCH REPORTS

Written communication of research• Science as a social activity• Writing . . .

– as thinking– as a tool to focus your thinking– as hard work

WRITING REQUIRES ATTENTION

Cognitive Effort during writing(Kellogg, 1994)

0 100 200 300 400 500

Writing (planning)

Writing (translating)

Writing (reviewing)

Learning (incidental)

Learning (intentional)

Reading (easy)

Reading (difficult)

Chess (novice)

Chess (expert)

Probe RT cost (ms)

THE STRUCTURE OFA RESEARCH REPORT

• Title Page• Abstract• Body of Report

– Introduction– Method– Results– Discussion

• References• Tables and Figures

THE FRONT END

Title• Indicates main idea, independent and

dependent variables• 10-12 words maximum

Abstract• Summarizes the whole report• Usually a sentence for each section• Avoid details of method• 100 – 150 words maximum

THE BODY of the REPORT

Introduction• Overviews the problem or question• Provides background on prior work• Outlines the “design” and its purpose• Describes main hypotheses

[so: reader knows what you did and why]

BODY of the REPORT (cont’d)

Method• Describes what was done, how it was done• Focus on circumstances that could

influence the results• Usual subheadings:

– Participants– Apparatus and/or materials– Procedure

[ so: reader could “replicate” your experiment]

BODY of the REPORT (cont’d)

Results• Describes how data was “reduced”• Verbally states pattern of results in the

context of hypotheses– Uses tables or figures to help represent pattern

• Assesses reliability with inferential stats

[so: reader knows what happened]

BODY of the REPORT (cont’d)

Discussion• Reviews results in context of hypotheses• Explains how results add to what was

known• Acknowledges any limits or shortcomings• Notes practical or broader implications

[so: reader knows what we’ve learned]

THE REAR END

References• To prior work specifically cited in the body

of the report• Arranged alphabetically, etc.

Author note(s) & footnotes

Table(s)

Figure caption(s)

Figure(s)

THE STYLE OF SCIENCE WRITING• Transparent prose

– vs. prose style as content

• Paraphrased citations– vs. direct quotes

• Common structure and format– vs. ideosyncratic structure

• Few, short footnotes– vs. many, discursive notes

• Dispassionate, no ad hominem stuff– vs. when personalities, passions play a role

• Hedging conclusions– vs. conclusions as truth

STERNBERG’S TIPS

What you say:• Start strong, engage interest• Do what you say you’ll do• Keep the lit review short, focused and

balanced• Explain what your results mean• Consider alternative explanations• End strongly with a take-home message

STERNBERG’S TIPS (cont’d)

How you say it:• Write clear, concise and readable sentences• Aim for logical flow and organization• Provide “advanced organizers” when needed• Use analogies and concrete examples• Don’t assume people will “know what you

mean”• Tell a good story• Write for a slightly broader audience• Avoid autobiography

ORAL PRESENTATIONS OF RESEARCH IN PSYCHOLOGY

Why have oral presentations?• Rapid communication of results

– (but cf. Internet)

• More efficient communication • Social bonding and interactions• An excuse to travel

ORAL PRESENTATIONS (contd)

Types of presentations• Colloquia & “job talks

– 50 minutes

• Seminars & workshops – one to three hours

• Conference papers – 10 to 20 minutes

ORAL PRESENTATIONS (contd)

Elements of a good presentation • Have a plan, stick to it, and tell what it is• Same basic organization as a written

report • Be painfully clear, redundant when

necessary• Simplify and stress important elements • Know and relate your “take-home

message”

ORAL PRESENTATIONS (contd)

Some notes on style • Be relaxed, but don’t overuse humor• Read if you must, but write as you talk• Try to tell a good story• Use visual aids as aids• Control the dialogue• Watch the time!