Writing Psych Research Reports

Writing Introductions

…Next comes the most important paragraph of the whole paper: the first one. Even if it is a work of expositional genius, few among a broad audience are likely to read beyond it. So it is vital that this paragraph tells the central story of the paper, and makes clear why this story deserves to be told. Elements of Style, Nature Physics

What do you expect when you sit down to read a scientific article? You want to know “what happened?” and “why should I care?”. These are the two main questions that any research report has to answer. Historically, scientists themselves created a standardized format through which to answer these questions → this is the “research report”, and while each discipline has a slightly different take on how to write one, all science publication on experimental data is composed of 4 parts, each answering some part of “what happened?” and “why does it matter?”. The Introduction tackles motivation, providing part of the answer to why the reader should care. It does so in 5 steps; that is, 5 informational moves that both inform and persuade.

How are these goals accomplished? The writer provides a brief review of the literature in the correct order (given below!). The content of the introduction informs; the organization of the introduction persuades.

5 steps to Writing the Introduction

1) Establish Topic — quick, concise (what is being studied)
2) Provide significance — research, practical, clinical (why it is generally important)
3) Review the relevant literature — what the expert literature reveals (what we know already)
4) Point out the gap — what’s missing in the research literature (what we don’t know — motivation for study)
5) Reveal the research question (and sometimes, hypotheses) — the specifics of this research

Let’s take a look at an example!

Example (Quantitative) || A Psychological Exploration of Engagement in Geek Culture

A geek is traditionally defined as an enthusiast who develops expertise on a topic through exceptional determination and devotion [1]. The word “geek” is used to describe not only enthusiasts in science, technology, and engineering but also especially devoted fans of media (i.e., “fandom geeks”). Here, we refer to geek culture as a subculture of enthusiasts that is traditionally associated with obscure media (Japanese animation, science fiction, video games, etc.). However, geek culture is becoming an increasingly mainstream influence on contemporary culture. Geek culture includes a range of activities such as role-playing games (e.g., Dungeons and Dragons), science fiction (e.g., Star Trek), comic books, and dressing in costumes (i.e., cosplay). Although geek interests were once marginalized [2], comic book movie adaptations (e.g., Iron Man, Thor) [3] are now major box office draws. Likewise, science-fiction (sci-fi) and fantasy themed video games (e.g., World of Warcraft) have become multi-billion dollar industries. There has also been enormous growth in geek conventions such as Comic-con and Dragon*Con. In the past year alone, New York Comic-Con, one of the premier geek conventions in the United States, attracted over 130,000 attendees [4] and Dragon*Con in Atlanta has grown from 2,400 fans in 1989 to 57,000 fans in 2013 [5].

Despite the popularity of geek culture, it has received little attention from the social sciences. Yet this increasing tendency of individuals to engage in a culture with heroic and magical themes may be linked to important trends in our wider culture, such as increasing narcissism[6], thwarted belongingness [7], and the interface between technology and entertainment media. In the present paper, we have two primary goals. First, we develop and validate the construct of geek engagement as participation in specific activities represented at major geek conventions. Second, we describe and examine three new theoretical accounts of geek culture related to the cultural trends above, which we refer to as the great fantasy migration hypothesis, the belongingness hypothesis, and the desire for engagement hypothesis. These theoretical accounts are not considered to be mutually exclusive—participation in geek culture is almost certainly determined by multiple factors and several of these hypotheses share predictions. This research is designed to be the first rather than last word on these hypotheses.

To these ends, we present results from 7 studies (N = 2354). These include construct operationalization and scale development (Studies 1–2), and examination of personality, self-concept, intelligence and other individual differences variables associated with geek engagement as well as a social network analysis of geek culture (Studies 2–7). Before we begin, however, we (a) define geek culture, and (b) describe three theoretical accounts.

The topic identifies the part of the research universe being studied. In some articles, the topic can be identified in as little as a single noun phrase; here, the authors devote a couple of sentences to carry the reader from the more familiar term, “geek”, which is used as a label for an individual, to the idea that there is a subculture defined by similar characteristics.
The significance is not the impact of the research study itself, but something that explains why the topic is of interest. Significance is usually expressed in as a research, application/clinical, or social/public interest item. In this case, the authors highlight the social impact of geek culture as motivation for why the topic merits investigation.
The lit review in a research report has 2 functions: 1) provide explanations of concepts necessary to understanding the research; 2) arrange explanations so they lead to a gap or conflict that motivates the specific research question driving the study. In this case, the authors provide some background information on the impact of geek culture: note the use of citations! The lit review establishes that geek culture does indeed have widespread influence, leading directly to the gap statement.
The gap statement is where the writer states the “conflict” motivating the actual research question. The most successful gap statements embody an “A but B” problem statement where “A” and “B” are conflicting states or situations. In this case, “A” is the influence of geek culture and “B” is the lack of social science research (we would assume that a culture with widespread relevance would also be studied, which the authors spend a bit more time explaining). The gap in academics can flow from a simple lack of knowledge (as is the case here) or a genuine conflict, such as sets of contradictory data points or dueling theories.
The research question is the actual investigation covered by the research report. Sometimes, hypotheses or expectations are also included in psych papers, but not always.

The final paragraph of this Introduction presents a roadmap of where the paper is going after the Introduction. This is not a common step, but makes sense in this paper because it is part of a larger investigation and also includes a separate lit review following the Intro which covers the topic and theoretical literature in more depth. Not all psych research reports require this step, but a longer literature review is common when the research question itself is complex and/or exploratory.

Example (Qualitative) || Socio-Psychological Factors Driving Adult Vaccination: A Qualitative Study

While immunization is one of the most effective and successful public health strategies in reducing or eliminating the health, economic and societal burden of many infectious diseases [1], major developed economies such as the US and Germany still report up to 30,000 deaths each year due to vaccine-preventable diseases, almost all in adults [2], [3]. The extraordinary success of childhood routine immunization programs across the world, which show high immunization coverage levels, has not been matched in adult programs [4]–[6]. This disparity is of increasing relevance in the context of a rapidly aging population and the attendant societal and economic burden.

Influenza and tetanus-containing boosters (tetanus boosters) are two commonly recommended vaccines for adults. Most countries follow World Health Organization (WHO) influenza vaccination recommendations: an annual vaccine, particularly for people who are at higher risk of developing influenza-related complications [7]. Although the WHO recommends an extra tetanus toxoid-containing dose in adulthood [8], recommendations for adult tetanus boosters vary across countries. For example, the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommends a 1-time dose of tetanus, diphtheria and pertussis (Tdap), followed by a tetanus and diphtheria (Td) booster every 10 years [9], whereas in France a tetanus, diphtheria and polio booster (Td/IPV) is recommended for under 25 s, a second dose at 45 years old and every 10 years for over 65 s, with one booster being replaced by a Tdap/IPV [10].

In the UK, an influenza vaccine is recommended and available free of charge for people ≧65 years old, ≤65 s with an eligible chronic health condition and pregnant women. Yet, despite comparatively high vaccination rates among ≧65 s (73%) and, to a lesser extent, ≤65 s in a clinical risk group (52%) in 2013/2014 [11], over 10,000 excess deaths were reported in UK the previous influenza season [12]. Although tetanus boosters are not included in ‘The complete routine immunisation schedule 2013/14’, the National Health Service (NHS) recommends a Td/IPV to those who have not or have been partially immunized, or are travelling to a country with limited medical facilities [13]. The number of tetanus cases reported in the UK is low (83 in

England and Wales since 2002) [14]. However, research suggests that the success of the tetanus vaccination program may be partly attributed to a mismatch between clinical practice and immunization guidelines, reflected in emergency departments’ tendency to over-vaccinate patients who attend them [15]. This misalignment may also be occurring in primary care.

In countries with universal vaccination coverage, where structural barriers to access are limited, social and psychological influences such as perceived risk of diseases and vaccines are important determinants of acceptance and uptake of influenza vaccine [16]–[20]. Specifically in the UK, few qualitative studies to date have explored influenza vaccination decision-making and most have focused on the elderly [21]–[23]. Research evaluating factors driving tetanus boosters’ uptake from the perspective of the vaccinee is scarce [24], [25].

To better understand social and psychological drivers of adult vaccination, we have set up a large-scale multinational qualitative study, which aims to use interview-based techniques to explore in depth adults’ perceptions of vaccination and the factors that drive them to have themselves vaccinated (or not) [26]. The detailed qualitative dataset will subsequently be used to inform the development of practical survey tools that can reliably capture key determinants of vaccination behavior and predict uptake. The study that we report here is part of this larger research program. It explores the social and psychological factors that drive adult vaccination in the UK, specifically influenza and tetanus, and evaluates whether these factors are comparable between vaccines or vaccine-specific.

Analysis: In terms of color, each of the 5 steps works as follows: 1) Topic: Blue; 2) Significance: Orange; 3) Lit Review: Green; 4) Gap: Brown; 5) RQ: Purple. The bolded items emphasize the central information in each section. In this case, the topic and significance are stated in the opening sentence. This is very common! Often, topic and why the topic matters are so closely linked that it makes good writing sense to combine them into a single sentence. The remainder of the paragraph explains the significance in greater detail, though it is arguably also part of the lit review. The lit review then lays out the current state of immunizations, leading to a gap statement that identifies a lack of information about decision-making among adults in healthcare-rich countries; qualitative research methods are ideal for exploring such psychological states. The RQ specifies the direction of the research as well as how outcomes will be applied.

Thus, a basic 5 step process is employed regardless of whether quantitative or qualitative methods are used. As stated above, the content informs while the organization persuades. You will see a lot of variation in the literature for length of the 5 parts; nonetheless, you’ll also find that these 5 steps are present in most published research because they create an introduction which is concise, informative, persuasive, and occasionally, even elegant.

Page 2 — Introduction
Page 3 — Methods
Page 4 — Results
Page 5 — Discussion
Page 6 — Action Plan and Outlines

Pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Writing in the Disciplines Knowledge Base