an
important skill is being able to find a developmental psychology study using PSYCINFO and
write about it in your own words.
The place to get a source is PSYCINFO picks a topic about had a adolescent development
Your paper should incorporate the information you have learned from your reading of the
article, but should be written in your own words. Note that the writing rubric requires you to
discuss one study in detail. If you are writing about a multi-study paper, discuss the methodology
of one of the studies in detail. You may then choose to discuss the methods and results of other
studies in the paper in a more cursory fashion. When the article you have chosen (or other
material) is discussed, make sure to properly cite when needed (using APA format). Papers must
adhere to APA format, be six pages long, typed, double-spaced, Times New Roman font size 12.
Six pages is defined as having the body of the paper be 1500 words long, not counting title page
info or references. An abstract is not required.
Your synopsis and critique should be written using the following sections and all questions
within each section should be answered:
i) Rationale and Research Question: This is the introduction to your essay.
What phenomenon are you examining? Why is this interesting? What is the
main research question asked in the target study of the paper you are
discussing? If your paper has more than one study, select ONE study as your
target study for more in-depth discussion.
ii) Introduction & Methodology Sections: What is the purpose of the experiment and
how did the authors study it? That is, what is compared to what, and exactly how
and why does any difference between these conditions (or lack thereof) answer
the question posed in (i). Don’t focus on the trivial experimental details. Rather,
emphasize the main idea behind the paper (e.g. the task the subjects performed is
likely to be important, the exact nature of the stimuli likely is not.)
iii) Results: What were the main findings? How did they answer the question posed?
iv) Implications: What can you conclude from the results—what are the
broader implications of what the authors found?
v) Commentary/Critique: This is your summary and discussion section. What do you
want people to take away from this paper? Are there additional studies in the paper
that shed further light on your topic. In a multiple study paper, this is the point
where you may discuss the additional studies in less detail either together or
sequentially. Does the design make sense, or do you see flaws and if so what are
they? If you do not see any flaws, could you have answered the question with a
different design? What further experiments would you want to try next, based on
the results reported in this paper? How might the findings be applicable to your own
life?
Important Point: Please note that the definition of “critique” is a detailed analysis and
assessment of something. Note that the definition does not imply that the critique must be
negative. What I mean is, the word “critique” doesn’t just mean “tear to shreds”. What I am
interested in doing is developing your scientific minds … encouraging you to think about what
should come next in the research program.
