Research & Analysis 2010 Handbook v3

TE TARI PUTAIAO-A-IWI
285104
RESEARCH & ANALYSIS

BACHELOR OF ARTS
SEMESTER 1 2010
CRISTINA PARRA
Should we let truth get in the way of a good story?
Copyright © 2010 Auckland University of Technology. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be
reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical,
including photocopying, recording or otherwise without prior written permission of the Auckland University of
Technology
285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

285104 THE PAPER
PRESCRIPTOR:
Equips students with a range of research skills. Provides an understanding of library and
Internet research processes. Develops the ability to access basic social data that includes
accessing and down-loading electronic databases. Introduces basic statistical concepts to
facilitate the interpretation of social data. Develops data presentation skills. Introduces
fundamental research concepts to enable students to develop critical thinking and analytical
skills.
ON COMPLETION OF THIS PAPER, SUCCESSFUL STUDENTS WILL BE ABLE TO:
Tested partly in
Conduct a basic literature search using library and internet; Assign1
Access data bases; Assign1
Access research-based material and reports; Assign1
Interpret basic statistical reports; Assign2
Present data in appropriate form, e.g. tables, charts, graphs; Assign2
Critically analyse research reports and research-based material; Assign1, Quizzes
Recognise and reproduce the key elements of academic writing; Assign1, Assign2
Write a report using correct format and referencing; and Assign2
Complete a full literature review Assign1
Summary of Goals To achieve this goal you will need:

To critically analyse research To learn the scientific AND the ethical criteria used to
assess research in academic settings
To learn the differences between aims and methods of
‘quantitative’ and ‘qualitative’ research
To acquire basic statistical To learn to use descriptive statistics, including
concepts
• Choosing the right descriptive statistics for the level
of measurement, which implies learning
• Measurement theory
• Concepts of validity and reliability
To learn the basics of academic To learn the structure, purpose and style of literature
writing reviews, research reports and research essays
To learn proper referencing:
• To avoid plagiarism and unsupported claims
• To apply APA referencing style
To do a literature review To learn strategies for searching electronic databases
To learn to judge the quality of publications found
To apply the scientific and ethical criteria you have
learned

WHAT YOU WILL NEED TO DO TO COMPLETE THIS PAPER
ATTEND ALL LECTURES AND TUTORIALS AND STUDY:

Lectures are held Thu 10-12. See your personal timetable on Arion for tutorial times and
venues. You will need an additional EIGHT hours each week to keep up with readings and to
do the quizzes and assignments.
You will also need to attend one whole Saturday in May for Assignment 2.
COMPLETE ALL ASSIGNMENTS

1. Quizzes A minimum 6 of the 10 weekly online quizzes (6 x 5%)
2. Assignment 1 Evaluation of a research report (40%) due Friday 23 April 10 AM
3. Assignment 2 Lab report of Data collection and analysis (30%)
Note: Assign 2 will be done in one day, a Saturday in May – either May
8, 15 or 22. You will be asked to sign up for one of these dates at the
1st lecture. Regardless of which Saturday you attend, your report will be
due on the 28 May at 4 PM
READ THE TEXTBOOK - AND ANY OTHER ASSIGNED READINGS:

McIntyre, L. J. (2005). Need to know: Social science research methods. McGraw Hill.
This textbook will be useful to you also for any future research projects, when you need to
remind yourself of all the useful things learned in this paper. It is available to purchase from
the bookshop on campus, and has been put on course reserve at the Library. Additional
readings will be put on AUTOnline
Detailed instructions for each assignment can be found from page 7 onwards.
WHO’S WHO AND WHERE TO GET HOLD OF THEM
Paper coordinator and lecturer Cristina Parra, obtained her MSc (Psychology) and PhD
(Clinical Psychology) from Uppsala University in Sweden. The focus of her PhD was social
anxiety, which led her to theories about social defence systems, the establishment of social
hierarchies and social identity development. Her current research interests include the
resolution of culture conflict in second-generation immigrants, and the development of ethnic
and national identities. She taught at the University of Auckland for several years and worked
as Clinical Trials Manager for a biotech company before coming to AUT
Room: WT1440, AUT Tower
E-mail: cristina.parra@aut.ac.nz
Phone: 921 9999 ext 8578
Office hours: Wed and Thu, 12-1 PM

Tutor Jeanie Benson is currently completing her PhD Intercultural mirrors: East and South
East Asian international students reflect on life in Aotearoa/New Zealand as they sojourn at
university. She has also completed and published a range of media studies in Aotearoa/New
Zealand on Asian representation in the press and the many associations in mainstream
media with gambling, corruption and crime. One of her special interests is in qualitative
research methods and research partnerships. She is an experienced tutor, will help students
get the best from this course, and she is looking forward to meeting and working with you.
Please feel free to email her with your questions.
Room: WT1435
E-mail: jeanie.benson@aut.ac.nz
Phone: 921 9999 ext. 8314
Office hours: TBA
LECTURE AND T UTORIAL TIMETABLE – PLUS READINGS
Lecture topics and readings Tutorial activities Quiz

WEEK Introduction to paper and assignments. What TUTORIAL 1
1 science is and why you need to know Discuss: How is knowledge different
The scientific enterprise – making up your from “just beliefs”? Why do we not
4/3 mind – objectivity, inter-subjectivity teach Mäori science alongside
Readings: Ch 1 & 2 Western science? Who gets to
decide and why?
WEEK Categories vs. variables (qualities vs. TUTORIAL 2 Q1

2 quantities) levels of measurement Review Ch 1, 2 & 4
Ch2
Validity and reliability of operational
11/3 definitions, hypotheses
Formulate operational definitions
and hypotheses about relationships
Reading: Ch 4 between variables
WEEK Ethics1 – basic requirements TUTORIAL 3 IN LAB Q2

3 Reading: Ch 5 Find the research report to evaluate
Ch4
for Assignment 1. Find good
18/3 Information literacy, literature search background articles. Save literature
strategies. Judging publications and authors
search history. Start / use personal
Instructions Assignment 1 & Turnitin Endnote library with APA
referencing Turnitin
WEEK Sampling TUTORIAL 4 Q3

4 Elements of research design 1 Revision chapters 5 to 7
Ch5
25/3 Types of research, research design, threats Demo of database downloads
to validity (construct & content validity) Assignment 1 – everybody on
Readings: Ch 6 & 7 track?
WEEK Elements of research design 2 TUTORIAL 5 (and last one!) Q4

5 Methods of data collection – direct vs
Ch6
indirect, structured vs unstructured,
1/4 Experiments – internal vs external validity
Readings: Ch 7 & 8
BREAK 2-16 April

LECTURE AND T UTORIAL TIMETABLE – PLUS READINGS CONTINUED
WEEK Survey research No tutorials this week Q5

6 Readings: Ch 9 & 10
Ch7
22/4
Assign 1 (40%) Evaluation of Research Report - due Fri 23 April 10 AM
WEEK How to write a literature review, logic of APA No tutorials this week Q6
7 referencing style
Ch9
29/4
WEEK Levels of measurement (again), descriptive No tutorials this week Q7
8 stats. Tables and graphs First Saturday Assignment 2
Ch10
Unobtrusive research & Coding sheets. How 8 May
6/5 to write a research report
Reading: Ch 11
Instructions Assignment 2
WEEK Ethics 2 – who benefits? No tutorials this week Q8

9 Emancipatory research, action research, Second Saturday Assignment 2
Ch11
indigenous knowledge, intellectual property 15 May
13/5
WEEK Qualitative research 1: Overview of No tutorials this week Q9

10 qualitative approach, strategies and issues Second Saturday Assignment 2
Stats
Reading: Ch12 22 May
20/5
Assignment 2 (30%) Research reports due 28 May at 4 PM
WEEK Qualitative research 2: General No tutorials this week LAST

11 methodological guidelines, credibility,
transferability, dependability, authenticity Q10
27/5 Ch12
WEEK Qualitative research 3: focus groups, film No tutorials this week
12 analysis
3/6

ASSIGNMENT 1 EVALUATION OF RESEARCH ARTICLE (MINI-LITERATURE REVIEW)
Your task for this assignment: Write an evaluation of one research report published in
a peer-reviewed journal preferably in the subject area of your major (e.g. marketing,
public relations, management, criminology, psychology, sociology, political science)
according to scientific and ethical criteria taught in this paper. To give more
background and to allow for comparison, read and make reference to at least two
more academic publications about the same topic as the article evaluated.
This assignment will contribute 40% towards your final mark for this paper, and it is due
Friday 23 April at 4 pm.
Your literature search history (listing the terms you searched on, in the order you used
them, and the number of hits you got on each) must be provided in an appendix. In your
search history you will need to demonstrate choice of relevant key words and appropriate use
of advanced search techniques.
Articles chosen must be available online to marker. It is expected that you will need several
hours to find suitable reports for this task, so do start this assignment on week 4 at the latest.
A suitable report to evaluate otherwise is one you actually want to read in depth (!),
addressing a research question you actually care about (!!) – and which is not too long
- between four and ten pages.
How do you know for sure it is a research report? It will have a Methods section.
You have to submit to Turnitin within 48 hours of handing in your hardcopy, or your
assignment will not be marked at all.
This assignment should not be longer than 2000-2100 words (i.e. less than four pages)
MORE DETAILED INSTRUCTIONS:

Start with a paragraph introducing reader to topic and/or research question, and justifying it.
Reader needs to know what the issue is, and why anyone would bother doing research on it.
Ideas on how to justify your choice of topic can be gathered from the introductions to the
articles you have read – but do not forget to acknowledge these as your sources.
Second paragraph should be a short description of the article you are about to evaluate. The
emphasis here is on accuracy: you need to show that you have understood correctly what
you are about to evaluate. Describe both what the author(s) looked at and how, in addition to
what they found. So, make sure you identify the variables and their operational definitions,
and describe the design of the study, as well as the findings.
The bulk of your assignment should follow, in the form of at least three points (suitably
presented in separate paragraphs) you want to make about the report you read. The three
aspects you will need to look at (preferably in comparison to the other two articles you have
read and based on your textbook) are the validity of operational definitions, their reliability
(data collection methods in particular), and the ethics of the research. You do not have to
point out things that have been done badly (you may not find any, there is a reason the
research got published), you can also highlight particularly good things. Just remember that
‘good’ and ‘bad’ for the purposes of this assignment mean ethically and/or scientifically
good/bad.
• The basic validity question: Are the researchers looking at / measuring what they claim to
be looking at/ measuring? And is that really what they should be looking at in order to get
at what they need to know? Is their operational definition valid?

• The basic reliability question: If someone else was to look at this / measure this in the
same way (using the same data collection instrument), would they get the same results,
find the same thing?
• The basic ethics question: Does the knowledge to be gained by this research make the
risks and costs involved worthwhile?
Finish with a conclusion, based on your evaluation, specifying whether more research needs
to be done on this topic/question, or if the report evaluated provided a satisfactory (however
temporary) answer that other researchers can take as a starting point to expand research in
other directions .
You are not expected to provide a true state-of-the-art review of all relevant research to justify
further research which would need to be done for real. However, you are expected to draw
your conclusions from the evaluation you have just provided, and not just pull them out of the
hat. You will be expressing your opinions, but these opinions need to be presented in a
structured manner, and to result from the application of scientific and ethical criteria
which are relevant – just saying that in your personal opinion a piece of research is no good
does not constitute a critical analysis.
WHY YOU SHOULD BOTHER WITH THIS ASSIGNMENT (OR WHY IT IS WORTH 40%)
Assignment 1 contributes to your achievement of the following learning outcomes:
• Conduct a basic literature search using library and internet
• Access data bases
• Access research-based material and reports
• Critically analyse research reports and research-based material
• Recognise and reproduce the key elements of academic writing
• Complete a full literature review.
ALLOCATION OF MARKS
These guidelines below are mainly for the benefit of the marker. To ensure you get good
marks, make sure you read instructions above carefully and comply with them fully
Area Max. obtainable
Intro and Description 10
Validity 20
Reliability 20
Ethics 20
Conclusion 15
Search history 15
Every quote unacknowledged as such will incur a 5% penalty 1

Every unsupported non-obvious factual claim will incur a 3% penalty
1
If you quote without even acknowledging the source you will be committing plagiarism – see penalties for it
under the relevant section

ASSIGNMENT 2 – DATA COLLECTION, DATA ANALYSIS AND REPORT
Your task for this assignment: To produce a report on the study described here below.
Your individual report will be due on 28 May at 4 PM
You will be doing a quantitative content analysis of text, which is a type of unobtrusive
study. Remind yourself of what this is and look at examples of coding sheets on pages 121
and 197-200 in McIntyre (your textbook).
Aim of study: To produce a valid and reliable answer to a research question about Debate
(e.g. Is it a racist/ sexist/ elitist/ publication?). Scales will be designed by the students at
different levels of measurement and then applied to a representative sample of issues of
Debate.
Students will work collaboratively on the design of the scales and on data collection, but will
report on the data individually.
Numbers below assume a split of each class into six groups.
SEQUENCE OF TASKS
1) Design scales (in groups): Browse through a few issues of Debate and ask yourselves as
a group what you like (or dislike) about those issues. Choose an apparent characteristic of
Debate the real extent of which you would like to establish (e.g. Debate “consistently informs
about issues relevant to students” or “it does not tell you enough about social events”, or “it is
a really sexist magazine”). Your task is then to work on the definition of that characteristic of
Debate so as to define it operationally - define it so that it can be measured - with three
different scales, one at each of nominal, ordinal and interval/ratio levels of measurement.
Aim to measure different aspects of your construct with each scale, so that together they
provide higher content validity.
Your scales will need to be used by the other groups as well, so the scales need to be very
clear. Each step on each scale will need to be defined so that other groups can use it the way
you meant it to be used e.g. how can you define “cool” so that other groups will classify (or
rate) a certain graphic the same way you do? Note: if a characteristic (like “coolness”) proves
too hard to define operationally, choose a different one – you have only one hour to complete
this step
Altogether the class will thus propose 18 different scales measuring six different
dimensions at each of three levels of measurement, all of which will be used for data
collection by groups, see below.
Groups will need to produce different scales – Tutors to ensure different groups
formulate different research questions
2) Pilot scales (in groups): Maximize the validity and inter-rater reliability of your group’s
scales by pre-testing them. Each scale is to be applied to the same issue of Debate
independently by two different group members. This should be done to a minimum of four
different issues. The data obtained should then be compared and any differences between
raters discussed (e.g. “why are you calling that a 2? I think it is a 3”) until criteria are
established that will allow the raters to agree on a rating. If you cannot agree your scale will
be deemed unreliable, and by definition also invalid. Write these inter-subjective (agreed
upon) criteria down for each scale. Note: No scale should take more than 3 min to apply.
The issues of Debate used for the pilot cannot be part of the sample in the actual study.

3) Gain buy-in from class and tutor approval for your group’s scales (whole class):
Each group is to present their three scales to the whole class. You will need (a) to explain
what you are measuring, why it is relevant, and why each scale is at that level of
measurement with that number of steps, (b) to demonstrate how to use your scales (do this
on a pilot issue). All 18 scales have to be used by all groups without modification, so groups
need to make sure they understand the operational definition of each step on each scale, and
will be able to use the scale as intended. Groups also have to propose a label for the
construct their scales are measuring, which will then have the suffix NOM, ORD or RAT
attached to show level of measurement
Scales will not be perfectly valid or reliable but this will give you material for Discussion. If a
group totally fails to produce good enough scales, its members will be allowed to use other
groups’ scales, but their individual reports will incur a 20% penalty.
4) Define sample (whole class but only if previous step is finished before 11.30): Whole class
needs to agree on a sample of at least 12 issues that would be representative of Debate.
For this they should establish the parameters of the ‘population’ available to them and
(preferably) do a stratified sampling (e.g. by year of publication, or by editor). If there is no
time to do this (most likely), you will be given a sample.
5) Design the coding sheet (in groups) that will make it easy to record the values assigned
to each issue on each of the 18 scales, while minimising coding errors. The sheet needs to
record information about the rater of each scale and the issue of Debate being coded, as well
as scores on all the scales. Each group needs to produce their own coding sheet for all 18
scales, according to questionnaire design guidelines, and keeping in mind ease of data entry
and analysis as well (since order of variables on spreadsheet should be same as on coding
sheet). Tutor will make 12 copies of coding sheet per group, IF files are e-mailed before 1
PM.
6) Data collection (in groups): All 12+ issues in the sample will need to be rated on all 18
scales by each group. Each student will be allocated three (or four) scales, one at each level,
which they will apply to all (12) issues in the sample to ensure consistency in rating. Make
sure that the coding sheet dedicated to a specific issue of Debate stays with the issue until all
raters have used it. Tutor is to make sure there are no bottlenecks and that the issues in the
sample get to circulate within and between groups.
7) Data entry (in groups): On your (Excel) spreadsheet you will need one column for each
scale. Write the name of the scale on the top cell of each column (i.e. the first row). All groups
MUST use the same name for a given scale (see above). The first column on the
spreadsheet should be the Debate issue identifier, the second column is to identify the rater
(by his/her initials) and then the scales should follow in the order you have them in your
coding sheet (to minimise data entry errors). Each row will then be a case, and contain the
values on each variable for one issue of Debate.
All the data from a single issue (i.e. from a single coding sheet) should be on ONE row. Each
group should have one data point per issue per scale on their spreadsheet. Groups will need
to email their spreadsheet with raw data to tutor before 3 PM.
8) Data analysis (whole class): Tutor will pick three scales, one at each level, and remind
class of best applicable descriptive statistics.
9) Debrief (whole class): Do you think valid and reliable data on Debate will be produced by
this exercise? Why? Why not?
10) Writing up of report (INDIVIDUALLY): See instructions on how to write a report below
WHILE DOING ALL OF THE ABOVE…

You should reflect and write down comments on each scale as you are developing
and using them - this will be the basis for your Discussion. Does the level of

measurement affect ease of application? Does it affect inter-rater agreement? Are
nominal scale scores easier to agree on than ordinal or interval ones? Do scales have
enough definition? Are there too many steps? Or too few steps and things get lumped
together that should not be? Are categories in nominal scales comprehensive and
mutually exclusive?
Reflect also on the benefits and difficulties of collaborative research
HOW TO WRITE A RESEARCH REPORT (GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS)

A research report will typically include the eight sections described below: Cover page,
Abstract, Introduction, Method, Results, Discussion, References, and Appendices. Compare
with the research report you evaluated for Assignment 1 to see if this is true.
Please note that each section has a clear, well defined function. The answer to what should
go where will be clear to you if you understand what each section is meant to do.
Specific instructions for this assignment follow below, but do read these general
instructions first. Why? Because otherwise you will not understand the specific ones, and
because the sections of a report also make up a recipe for how to carry out a research
project, even at level 7, so it has got to be good for you!
SECTIONS OF A RESEARCH REPORT
Cover page
Give your report an interesting title (in title case) enticing reader to read on, while capturing
the aims of the study you are reporting on. Write your name and institutional affiliation (BA
xxxx Programme, AUT University) below.
Abstract
A single paragraph of no more than 150 words providing a complete summary of your report:
What the aim of the research was, how it was done (on whom), what was found, and
implications of findings (theoretical and/or practical). The Abstract should be the only thing on
the first page of your report, under the heading Abstract (centred on the page).
Introduction
The Introduction section is never labelled “Introduction”, its heading is actually the title
of the report (again) but without your name underneath.
The introduction justifies your choices. The reader needs to know why the research was
done (justify research question), the basics of how it was done (operational definitions) and
what the expected findings (the hypotheses) were. A good basic sequence for an
Introduction section is as follows
1. Specify the ‘real life’ issue your research relates to (e.g. criminalisation of prostitution,
smacking your children, schizophrenia) and formulate a research question
2. Review (all) relevant research (like you did for Assignment 1) in the literature that
might answer your research question. This sub-section should make up about half of
your Introduction.
3. Summarise the theories and studies you have covered, and evaluate, pointing out
how they fail to answer your research question, thus justifying your research
4. Describe the aim of your study, the research design and hypotheses. This should be
the last paragraph before the Methods section. When formulating the hypotheses, use
the operational definition of variables being studied e.g. “average number of swear
words per letter to editor”, rather than “tone of letters to the editor”.

Method
This section follows immediately after the Introduction (do not put in a page break) and tells
the reader all they need to know (no more, no less) in order to carry out your study
themselves, should they wish to replicate your findings.
This section should only describe what was actually done - any lengthy arguments as to why
it was done this particular way should have been done in the Introduction, and any discussion
on how it should have been done better should definitely be left for the Discussion section.
It should be labelled Method (centred), and it should be divided into the following sub-sections
(describing who, with what, and how):
Participants: Specify the number of participants, their sex, age, and any other
characteristic that led to their being included in your sample (e.g. their ethnic
affiliation, their university major, their urge to do the cha-cha every morning at 3 am)
or that may have had an impact on your findings. Describe how the sampling was
done, if any. If anybody dropped off or had to be excluded from the sample you
mention and explain it here too
Materials: any scales used to measure, any stimuli participants were exposed to (such
as pictures or movies or annoying confederates), any equipment you used – all the
things that you as a researcher had to provide or create to make the study possible
Procedure: here you describe in chronological order all that happened to participants
in the study, including how they were assigned to groups (if applicable), what their
tasks were, if any, and the instructions they were given
Results
This section follows immediately after the Introduction (do not put in a page break) and gives
the reader a description (in words!!) of what you found. You should only report on actual
findings in this section. Do not include interpretations or explanations for (lack of) findings –
save those for the Discussion section (next).
Tables and graphs should be used where necessary to clarify and support the text, but should
never replace it. Tables are numbered sequentially across the report, and independently of
figures which should have their own numbering sequence.
Discussion
This section should start with a summary of the findings, relating them back to theory. It
should address the following questions: Were the findings what theory predicted? Did you find
support for your hypothesis? Any practical implications of your findings? Any directions to be
derived for future research? How would you do this better next time?
References
Please see pages 17 onwards, or the last page of this handbook if you are in a hurry, but do
not neglect formatting APA-style because you will be penalised
Appendices
These should be numbered separately and independently of body of text, by hand if
necessary. You will typically append documents which are useful to reader as evidence or Cristina Parra 14/7/09 6:10 AM
support for claims you make in the text, but which if included would seriously disrupt the flow Formatted: Bullets and Numbering
of the text.

SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO WRITE THE RESEARCH REPORT FOR ASSIGN 2
General guideline: Assume that the reader of your report was not there and knows nothing
about what you did. Pretend you are trying to get your grandmother to understand exactly
what you did.
Cover page and Abstract as per instructions above.
For the Introduction, tell it as it is: This report is not theoretically motivated; it is the outcome
of a teaching exercise for a compulsory paper in your degree. Do however say something
about the object of study, i.e. Debate (what it is, who publishes it, how often, etc.) AND most
importantly, argue the choice of your group’s dimension and scales to measure it, and where
the other 15 scales came from that you are reporting on.
Method section as per above, just keeping in mind that your ‘participants’ are actually the
issues of Debate – so you need to describe the sample (and sampling) of Debate issues. Call
them Data Sources instead of Participants. The Materials sub-section should describe all the
scales (organise them by dimension measured) and how they were all constructed (hopefully
the instructions above will have been followed). If a scale proved impossible to use,
altogether or on certain issues (e.g. it rated graphics and there were no graphics in those
issues), it must still be described, and the reasons it could not be used explained.
Results section should reflect patterns in the data in its organisation (clearly positive data,
clearly negative data, scales that support neither notion). If no patterns are obvious, then
organise by dimension measured. Provide appropriate descriptive statistics for each scale,
and use tables and graphs to summarise. Include one graph with central tendency measures
for all the ordinal scales (medians) and one for all the interval/ratio scales (means).
Do report on ALL the data, do not exclude data just because you do not like it, or it does not
look right. Otherwise follow instructions above for this section.
In the Discussion section you need to provide your own conclusion regarding the quality of
Debate and whether it should continue to be published BASED ON THE RESULTS you just
presented. If your Results do not point in any clear direction, then you need to offer some
explanation as to why that is. It will be something about the sample, the scales, the procedure
or both. Was it lack of reliability? Lack of validity? (see above under “While doing all of the
above”). You need to answer the questions specified on the previous page for this section.
Reference list (if any) should be formatted strictly according to APA style. Cristina Parra 14/7/09 6:15 AM
Formatted: English (US)
MORE (!) DETAILED INSTRUCTIONS WILL BE GIVEN TO YOU IN LECTURES AND TUTORIALS.

ASSIGNMENT SUBMISSION – GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
On the due date, assignments will need to be submitted BOTH in hardcopy and in electronic
form (see specific instructions below).
A time extension for submitting an assignment may be granted in cases of sickness,
bereavement or serious personal crisis. Reasons that amount to inefficient time management
are not grounds for an extension being granted. You must store copies of your written
assignments (and of your data files) on your personal H: drive on the AUT server. Computer
crashes or loss of memory sticks or any other external memory devices will not be considered
grounds for extensions. No extensions will be granted for quizzes.
Applications for extensions should be handed in to Cristina BEFORE THE DUE DATE, on
the yellow form to be found on top of the Assignment Boxes, and put under her door if she is
not in her office (WT1404). Only applications accompanied by medical certificates will be
considered after the due date.
Late assignments will be penalised with 5% of obtained marks per day of delay. If an extra
day of work on your assignment will ensure you do not get the heavier penalties for lack of
compliance with instructions or guidelines, then this is an option you should consider – but
more than one extra day is not advisable.
You should expect your assignment to be marked within two weeks of handing it in. Please
make sure to get your marked assignments back from your tutor to benefit from useful
feedback provided on them.
HARDCOPY SUBMISSION – ASSIGNMENT BOX

Assignments need to be neatly typed and spell-checked. Marks will be deducted for obvious
negligence in this respect. For body text, prefer Arial 11 pt font, 1.5 line spacing, a left margin
of 2 cm, and a right margin of 3 cm (for tutor’s comments). Font size for headings should not
exceed 16 pt. In the footer insert your name, course code and a ‘page number’ field.
Place your finished assignment in the Assignment Box labelled with the paper name to be
found in the foyer on level 8 of the AUT Tower (WT)
ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION TO TURNITIN

In order to protect the integrity of students’ individual work and the value of their qualification,
AUT is now using ‘Turnitin’ - a software programme that detects copying and potential
plagiarism. The purpose is to ensure that students get credit for work that is their own, and
that no credit is given for work which is someone else’s.
Students will need to register as users with Turnitin in order to be able to submit assignments
(you will have done this already if you took Intro to Psych A in Sem 1). Full instructions on
how to register as a user and how to submit assignments via the Turnitin web site can be
found in the document named ‘Turnitin students’ to be found on AUTOnline. The procedure is
similar in complexity to attaching documents to an e-mail. Please submit to Turnitin at the
time of printing.
The Turnitin paper id for this paper 3108185 and the password is research
PLEASE NOTE: You will need to submit your assignments to Turnitin within TWO
days of your hard copy being submitted
OR YOUR ASSIGNMENT WILL NOT BE MARKED.

REFERENCING AND GOOD ACADEMIC WRITING
PLAGIARISM WILL NOT BE TOLERATED

Unless you can show that an idea or observation has originated with you, any non-obvious
substantial claim you make in an assignment needs to be derived from established theory or
supported by research.
Such claims if unsupported – made without explicit reference to somebody else’s research or
theory – are claims to originality. If the unsupported claims you make have not originated with
you but with someone else, you will be committing plagiarism. Significant plagiarism will be
reported to the Disciplinary Committee.
DO NOT CUT AND PASTE from other people’s writing without

identifying those sections as QUOTES.
You must use APA referencing style in all your assignments. Comprehensive guidance from
the AUT Library on APA style can be found on http://aut.ac.nz.libguides.com/APA6th , and a
quick guide is available on pages 18-19 of this handbook. Marks will be deducted for obvious
disregard for APA style formatting guidelines. Use of EndNote for construction of Reference
lists is encouraged – software is available on AUT computers.
One very important principle guiding good academic writing is to Cristina Parra 14/7/09 6:14 AM
Deleted: You must use APA referencing style
AVOID UNSUPPORTED CLAIMS in your assignments. Use of EndNote for
construction of Reference lists is encouraged.
Claims in scholarly writing that need support can basically be one of two types: Guidance from AUT Library on both APA style
and EndNote can be found in
 You state a fact (Ex. Teenage pregnancies increase as fear of AIDS decreases) - http://www.aut.ac.nz/library/training_and_help/e
factual claims are validated by how well they describe reality, so they need to be ndnote.shtml. Marks will be deducted for
obvious disregard for APA style formatting
supported empirically (by observations) guidelines.
 You offer a definition (operational or otherwise) for a concept or construct (ex. in this
report, I will use the term premature birth rather than spontaneous abortion for babies
born after the 23rd week of gestation) - definitions are validated by how well they link to
and fit existing theory. Established theory should be used whenever possible to
support your definitions - but as long as you tell the reader exactly how you are going
to use terms you know could be given different meanings, you are giving the reader
what he/she needs, in order to know whether he/she agrees or disagrees with you
Factual claims should always be supported, either by empirical evidence you have gathered
yourself or by published reports on empirical evidence gathered by somebody else, preferably
published in a scientific/ scholarly journal. These reports should be the original reports
written by whoever actually carried out the research2 (you should always aim to use primary
rather than secondary sources) – otherwise you will be one step further removed from the
empirical evidence and there will be one more chance for the account to become distorted
You are responsible for the quality of your writing – you must critically assess the sources
you use to support your claims. Never take facts as read. This means you must read the
reports first hand, and not rely on somebody else’s account (known as ‘second-hand
referencing’). Do whatever you can to lay your hands on a copy of the original report – if the
2
A simple way to recognise such first-hand research reports is to look for any ‘Methods’ and ‘Results’ sections

report is good, published in a good journal, and therefore likely to be part of one of the
databases AUT subscribes to, it should be available for you to download. Read the full report
and then ask yourself: Why should I believe any of this? Relevant things to look out for in
any report (these things will be easier to assess the more you read about the topic in
scholarly journals):
 The journal it was published in – at the very least it should be peer-reviewed and
reasonably established. The volume number for the report will tell you roughly how
many years the journal has been published. Until you have become an expert in the
area, it is safer to stick to well-established journals (volume numbers >10), because
they are able to recruit real experts for their editorial boards – these are the people
who decide which articles are good-enough to publish
 The first author of the report, the one who actually wrote it – how much have they
published in the area? When did they start publishing? Are they the ones who started
this line of research, or did they jump on the bandwagon? Do a quick search by name
of author. In Ovid databases you can click on the author’s name as it appears in the
Abstract to get a list of their publications. As a guideline to judge the number of
publications: academics can publish any number of chapters in books (which do not
require data collection) and reviews, etc. per year, but they can only really be
expected to publish one or two research reports per year. Research projects may take
years to complete, and you can only really have more than one-two research projects
active at any one time if you have lots of good Masters and PhD students. Again, look
at the quality of the journals author has published in. Chapters in edited books can be
evidence of peer-esteem and recognition, the author will have been asked by the
book’s editor to write it (or by a publisher, if they are the editors of the book). In order
to really assess this you will need to know something about the publisher for the book.
Some publishers are more concerned with academic standards – and less prone to
publish anything controversial that will sell - than others. Information can also be
gained by looking at the co-authors. Maybe the first author got to write up the
research, but really s/he is the PhD student of the second or third author – so they will
not have published much. The real mastermind behind the research among the listed
co-authors may be known to you as an authority in the area, or may be revealed by
looking at who is on the ‘address for correspondence about this article’ - typically
specified either on the first or last page of the article – this is the person who can
really answer the questions from critical colleagues, and they may have published
heaps.
 The number and quality of the references. Once you know enough about a topic and
have identified who the authorities and/or the gold standards are, you do not bother
reading a report until you have checked the reference list. If they do not make
reference to the publications you know to be important, likelihood is the authors are
reinventing the wheel, which could be worthwhile doing, but only if you are going to do
a better job of it.
 The quality of the actual research methods used, and the suitability of the approach
chosen. Be suspicious of articles that do not describe their methods in enough detail -
unless they acknowledge this, and refer you to some earlier publication where they
have published a detailed description.
 Whether the results /findings actually are solid or definitive enough to allow the
author(s) to draw whatever conclusions they have drawn. Critically assess their
figures and tables – are authors giving an accurate picture, or are they trying to
exaggerate the significance of their findings? See Appendix C in McIntyre (2005).
 How often the study has been cited by other researchers. See
http://www.isinet.com/tutorials/citedreference/ for a tutorial on the Web of Science, a
citation index that covers the sciences (including social), the arts, and the humanities.

 Level of self-scrutiny shown in the discussion. The discussion section of a research
report should summarise and relate the results back to the hypothesis/ theory: Do the
findings support or question the theory? Particularly if the findings do not support the
theory (and the theory is well established) the author(s) should then go on to assess
their own methodology and look for possible flaws in the design, or in the data
collection instruments, or in data analysis methods used, which could explain why
their findings are different from what the theory would predict. The discussion should
point to all the shortcomings of the study reported on, and point to areas where
more research is needed
AND NEVER REFER TO A PUBLICATION IN THE TEXT OTHER THAN BY NAME OF AUTHOR AND YEAR
Cristina Parra 14/7/09 6:16 AM
Formatted: Heading 2
APA STYLE GUIDELINES
You must use APA referencing style for all your assignments while at AUT. Use of EndNote
for construction of Reference lists is (very much) encouraged. Cristina Parra 14/7/09 6:17 AM
Formatted: Left
Guidance from AUT Library on APA style can be found in
http://aut.ac.nz.libguides.com/APA6th . Marks will be deducted for obvious disregard for APA
style formatting guidelines. Cristina Parra 14/7/09 6:15 AM
What follows is based on advice originally compiled by Rosemary Brewer, Senior Lecturer, School of Formatted: English (US)
Communication Studies
When you are writing as a student or a professional (e.g. in essays or reports) unless you are
reporting an original idea all of your own, you need to refer to relevant published research in
the area. This has two very important purposes:
1. To back up your claims, by linking them to an existing body of knowledge
2. To give credit to whom it is due. Failure to do this – pretending you came up with an Formatted: Bullets and Numbering
idea that is not really yours - is called plagiarism. Plagiarism is regarded as a very
serious offence. Learning to reference correctly is your best protection against
charges of plagiarism.
In any scientific publication, referencing is done in two places:

Within the body of the text: The author and year of the publication on which you are basing
your claim are written into the text itself (NEVER refer to a publication by its title in the body of
the text)
In the Reference list: A list of all the publications actually referred to in the text is placed at
the end. It is titled 'References' and includes author, title, and publication details for all your
references. Do not call this a Bibliography. A bibliography is a list of background readings on
a subject, which may or may not have been actually referred to in the text Cristina Parra 14/7/09 6:21 AM
Formatted: Underline
1. REFERENCING WITHIN THE BODY OF THE TEXT
There are two basic ways you can refer to other people’s research findings or ideas in your
writing: paraphrasing and quoting.
Paraphrasing involves expressing a concept in your own words. This should ALWAYS be
attempted first. If you cannot paraphrase, then you have not understood what you have read.
Make reference to the source after each new claim supported by that source.

Quoting - copying the exact words from the source publication. This should only be used as
a LAST RESORT if you find that paraphrasing just does not do justice to the author’s
intended meaning. This should not happen more than a couple of times in any written
assignment.
Please Note: If Turnitin shows that more than 50% of your submission consists of
quotes, you will be required to resubmit, even if you have acknowledged the sources
you have copied from, since not enough of the submission is your own work. The Cristina Parra 14/7/09 6:43 AM
maximum grade you can get for a resubmission is a C-. Formatted: Underline
The author and date of publication quoted need to be inserted immediately after the quote
(see below for formatting details), and you must include the number of the page you have Cristina Parra 14/7/09 6:58 AM
copied from. The quotation itself will be identified as such in either of two ways, depending on Formatted: Underline
its length:
(a) Short quotations are signalled by quotation marks at beginning and end of
quote Cristina Parra 14/7/09 6:55 AM
Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5", Hanging:
(b) Long quotations (40 or more words) should be started on a new line, and all
lines should be indented, creating a distinctly separate block of text. No
quotation marks are necessary.
When referring to a publication in the text you need to do so by author(s)’ surname(s) and
year of publication. NEVER refer to a publication by its title in the text. When using the
authors' names as part of a sentence only the year of publication goes in brackets, otherwise Cristina Parra 14/7/09 6:47 AM
both names and year of publication are put in brackets: Formatted: Font:11 pt
Examples:
Devito, O'Rourke and O'Neill (2000) divide the process of perception into three stages
The process of perception can be divided into three stages (Devito, O'Rourke &
O'Neill, 2000) … Cristina Parra 14/7/09 6:49 AM
Formatted: Font:Not Italic
When several sources can be used to support a claim, put them all in brackets. Use a Cristina Parra 14/7/09 6:49 AM
semicolon to separate publications, and list them in alphabetical order by first author: Formatted: Indent: Left: 0.5"
Example: Cristina Parra 14/7/09 6:49 AM
Formatted: Font:Not Italic
The process of perception consists of three stages (Adler & Towne, 1990; Devito,
O'Rourke & O'Neill, 2000; Littlejohn, 1996; Tubbs & Moss, 2000). Cristina Parra 14/7/09 6:48 AM
Formatted: Normal, Indent: Left: 0.5"
When a text has two authors, both names are used every time the text is cited. When a
source has up to six authors, all the authors' names must be included the first time the source
is cited. After that, the first author's name and 'et al.' (which means ‘and others’) are used.
(Note the full stop after 'et al.'). Also, if you cite the same source more than once within a
single paragraph, only the first citation needs to include the date. See the APA manual for Cristina Parra 14/7/09 7:02 AM
specific formatting guidelines for publications with more than six authors. Formatted: Font color: Auto
Examples: Formatted: Font:Not Bold, Font color:
Tubbs and Moss (2000) say about perception that it is a process in three stages ... Cristina Parra 14/7/09 7:02 AM
There are three stages to the perception process (Tubbs & Moss, 2000). Formatted: Font color: Auto
Devito, O'Rourke and O'Neill (2000) describe …. Devito et al. also describe ...
You should really only cite sources you have read first hand, but sometimes this is
impossible. When the source publication quotes a further source that you want to include, you
cite the original publication and then add ‘as cited in’ followed by a citation of the publication
you did read:

Example:
The symbolic nature of language has been considered by many authors. Humans are
prone to "symbol making, symbol using, and symbol misusing" according to one of
them (Burke, 1986, p. 223 as cited in Larson, 2001, p.85).
When referring to a text with a corporate author, use the name of the organisation:
Example:
Harassment prevention policies are designed to minimise harm to all parties
(Auckland University of Technology, 2001). Cristina Parra 14/7/09 6:52 AM
Formatted: Normal, Indent: Left: 0.5"
2. PUTTING TOGETHER THE REFERENCE LIST
The list of the references you have used makes up the last section of your assignment or
report. Readers - assignment markers in particular - often look at the reference list before
they even begin to read the text. The reference list shows them the range and depth of your
reading as well as giving them enough information to find your references if they want to
check them. That is the main guiding principle for the Reference list: all the information the Cristina Parra 14/7/09 7:20 AM
reader will need to locate your source must be included, and each reference must be Formatted: Font:Italic
correctly formatted so that the reader knows WHAT it is they are looking for (an article in a Cristina Parra 14/7/09 7:20 AM
journal? a book?) Formatted: Font:Not Italic
The section should be titled ‘References’. You should list you references alphabetically by
first author’s last name. NEVER change the order of authors in a publication, since they will
be ordered strictly according to how much they contributed to that publication. The first author Cristina Parra 14/7/09 7:47 AM
is (should be) the person that actually wrote the article. Formatted: Underline
Each reference is contained within a single paragraph. To make it easier for the reader you
should have the first line of each reference ‘stick out’:
Bitchener, J. (2000). The negotiation of meaning by advanced ESOL learners: The effects of
individual learner factors and task type. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University
of Auckland, Auckland.
To do this on Microsoft Word, go Format > Paragraph > Indents and Spacing > Special, and
choose the ‘Hanging’ option.
The best way to ensure that all the references in the text are included in the reference list -
and vice versa, that you have not ‘padded’ your reference list with publications you have not Cristina Parra 14/7/09 7:15 AM
actually used - is to use EndNote. Padding a Reference list is considered dishonest and a Formatted: Justified
breach of academic discipline.
IF YOU ARE IN A HURRY:

Below is the basic format for the three types of publication you will most likely use for your
assignments (with made-up examples).
1. Article in a scientific journal

Author’s last name, Initial(s). (Year of publication). Title of article in sentence case.
Name of Journal in Title Case and in Italics, volume number in italics, first
page – last page.
Example:
Factor, M. A. & Crowe, R. P. (2001). Why eyes have eyelids. Journal of Eye
Anatomy, 15, 69-86.

References to authored articles in magazines or newspapers are formatted the same
way, BUT they need to have the date of publication inserted into brackets after year Cristina Parra 14/7/09 8:07 AM
i.e. (2001, March 24) Formatted: Left
If you have only read the article in its electronic form (i.e. you have downloaded it), Formatted: Underline
you must specify the DOI number for the article. If the DOI is not available, give the
journal home page URL for the article.
Please look under the Journal, Magazine, Newspaper Articles tab
under http://aut.ac.nz.libguides.com/APA6th for instructions on where to find DOI or
journal home page URL
Always download the .pdf version of an article if available.
Example:
Factor, M. A. & Crowe, R. P. (2001). Why eyes have eyelids. Journal of
Eye Anatomy, 15, 69-86. doi:10.1177/1077556805285735 Cristina Parra 14/7/09 7:32 AM
Formatted: Indent: Left: 1.5", Hanging:
2. Book Formatted: Left, Indent: Left: 0", First
line: 0"
Author’s last name, Initial(s). (year of publication). Title of book in sentence case. US
state initials or Country: Publisher
Example:
Factor, M. A. (2002). How the eye developed a lid. New York, NY: Lousy Publishers.
3. Chapter in edited book (note how editors’ initials go before their last name) Cristina Parra 14/7/09 7:17 AM
Author, A. A., & Author, B. B. (Year of publication). Title of chapter. In A. Editor & B. Formatted: Font:Not Bold
Editor (Eds.), Title of book (pages of chapter). US state initials or Country: Cristina Parra 14/7/09 7:18 AM
Publisher. Formatted: Normal
Example: Formatted: Font:Not Bold
Factor, M. T. & Crowe, D. P. (2001). Why eyes have eyelids. In T. Ermite & F. Lute Cristina Parra 14/7/09 7:18 AM
(Eds.), The truth about the anatomy of the mammal eye (pp. 78-98). Auckland, Formatted: Font:Not Bold, Underline
New Zealand: Lousy Publishers.
PLEASE REFER TO THE APA MANUAL FOR CORRECT FORMATTING OF ANY OTHER TYPE OF SOURCE

Research & Analysis 2010 Handbook v3

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Descrizione originale:

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Research & Analysis 2010 Handbook v3

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

TE TARI PUTAIAO-A-IWI

RESEARCH & ANALYSIS

Should we let truth get in the way of a good story?

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

ON COMPLETION OF THIS PAPER, SUCCESSFUL STUDENTS WILL BE ABLE TO:

Summary of Goals To achieve this goal you will need:

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

ATTEND ALL LECTURES AND TUTORIALS AND STUDY:

COMPLETE ALL ASSIGNMENTS

READ THE TEXTBOOK - AND ANY OTHER ASSIGNED READINGS:

WHO’S WHO AND WHERE TO GET HOLD OF THEM

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

LECTURE AND T UTORIAL TIMETABLE – PLUS READINGS

Lecture topics and readings Tutorial activities Quiz

WEEK Categories vs. variables (qualities vs. TUTORIAL 2 Q1

WEEK Ethics1 – basic requirements TUTORIAL 3 IN LAB Q2

WEEK Sampling TUTORIAL 4 Q3

WEEK Elements of research design 2 TUTORIAL 5 (and last one!) Q4

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

WEEK Survey research No tutorials this week Q5

WEEK Ethics 2 – who benefits? No tutorials this week Q8

WEEK Qualitative research 1: Overview of No tutorials this week Q9

WEEK Qualitative research 2: General No tutorials this week LAST

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

MORE DETAILED INSTRUCTIONS:

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

Every quote unacknowledged as such will incur a 5% penalty 1

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

WHILE DOING ALL OF THE ABOVE…

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

HOW TO WRITE A RESEARCH REPORT (GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS)

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

HARDCOPY SUBMISSION – ASSIGNMENT BOX

ELECTRONIC SUBMISSION TO TURNITIN

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

PLAGIARISM WILL NOT BE TOLERATED

DO NOT CUT AND PASTE from other people’s writing without

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

In any scientific publication, referencing is done in two places:

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

IF YOU ARE IN A HURRY:

1. Article in a scientific journal

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

285104 Research and Analysis Handbook 2010 Page 1 of 19

Potrebbero piacerti anche