Description
Welcome to your first paper (out of five)!
Before I discuss Paper One, I want to jump ahead and mention your final paper, Paper Five. Your final paper in this course will be similar to an empirical manuscript that researchers submit to academic journals. It takes a lot of work, but we want to make the process as painless for you as possible. Rather than just turning in one final paper, you will turn in sections of the paper and get feedback on your work. You will then merge your first four papers together into one final fifth paper. Make sure to read over our feedback and incorporate changes we might suggest into your final paper!
While each paper focuses on a specific part of your manuscript, all papers have supporting materials to help you craft your paper. Each paper includes paper instructions (which are long and detailed but worth reading!), a grading rubric, a checklist, and an example paper from a prior semester. If you look over ALL FOUR items, your chances of getting a good grade will improve dramatically!
1). Paper I – Literature Review Study One Instructions (Reactance Theory Study, Spring 2024)
2). Paper I – Literature Review Grading Rubric
3). Paper I – Literature Review Checklist (If you can check “Yes” to all items in this checklist, your paper will be really good!)
4). Paper I Example Paper #1 – Counterfactual Thinking (This is from a student from a prior semester. It is a good example, but do not copy it as the topic differs. Includes helpful notes from your instructor)
5). Paper I Example Paper #2 – Facebook Apologies (This is also from a student from a prior semester)
6). Articles to Use for Paper I: For your first paper, you MUST cite to three of the following articles. You can cite four of them if you like, but you must find a fifth article to cite using PsycInfo. These are listed in no particular order, but make sure to read the abstracts to see how well they will fit in with your own paper. Some might be more relevant to your study than others.
Autonomy supportive message (Altendorf).pdf
Autonomy supportive syllabus (Young-Jones).pdf
Controlling Language and Irony (Staunton).pdf
Controlling Language Fear and Disgust Appeals (Ma).pdf
Politeness Theory Approach (Jenkins).pdf
Reactance and Health Messages (Miller).pdf
Reactance Between China and the United States (Rui).pdf
Syllabus Sanctions (Frey).pdf
Additional Supporting Material for Paper I
1). APA Formatting – APA Example Paper (This is an “official” APA training paper you can find online. It provides another good example of how to format your paper)
2). To find the surveys and Researcher Instructions (which contains the hypothesis), go to the Assignment #4 – Study One Materials.
3). Paper V – Example Paper #1 – Counterfactual Thinking (This is well beyond Paper I, but if you want to see how your Paper I will eventually fit in with your final course paper, I encourage you to look at this Paper V example paper)
4). Paper V – Example Paper #2 – Facebook Apologies
5). Paper One – Overview PowerPoint Presentation (Similar to the one presented by Dr. Winter in the “Paper Clinics”)
Example Paper referred to in the Paper One Overview Presentation (Word Document)
Unformatted Attachment Preview
1
COUNTERFACTUAL THINKING
Counterfactual Thinking: Impressions of Blame in a Seemingly Avoidable Car Accident
Former Student
Florida International University
COUNTERFACTUAL THINKING
2
Counterfactual Thinking: Impressions of Blame in a Seemingly Avoidable Car Accident
As free-willed beings, we can often become the victims of our own decisions. Imagine
accidentally running over a stray cat because you decided to look away from the road at the exact
moment the kitten decided to cross the street. Following the accident, most people would be
plagued with thoughts of how alternative circumstances or decisions could have prevented such
an unfortunate situation. Every time an individual forms a ‘what if’ scenario in which he or she
mentally alters the course of events occurred, they are participating in a process that is known as
counterfactual thinking (Ruiselová at al., 2007; Williams et al., 1996). This process allows
individuals to consider the multiple factors at play in a situation (i.e mutability), and to decide
what specific condition was responsible for the ultimate outcome of the event. The primary focus
of our study is to analyze the extent of culpability people place on a particular factor depending
on the preventability of the outcome. That is, if it is easy to “undue” an event that ends in a tragic
outcome, will participants find an actor who fails to engage in that easy behavior more at fault?
The development of counterfactual thoughts relies on the variability of the situation, as
well as the knowledge that different actions could have resulted in alternate outcomes (Alquist et
al., 2015). According to Alquist et al., situations that are believed to be highly changeable
generate more counterfactual thoughts than events that seem unavoidable. However, ruminating
on every conceivable alternative of a situation would take an unlimited amount of time and
resources. Instead of allotting so much time and energy on a cognitive task, people tend to
narrow down the different scenarios that come to mind according to the degree of controllability
of the factors involved (McCloy & Byrne, 2000). For example, the deliberate decisions
individuals make that ultimately lead to a certain outcome is considered to be a controllable
event, whereas uncontrollable events are unavoidable circumstances, such as traffic jams or
COUNTERFACTUAL THINKING
3
natural disasters (McCloy & Byrne, 2000). When mentally forming a scenario different than the
one occurred, individuals tend to change controllable rather than uncontrollable events.
Therefore, events that are within an individual’s jurisdiction generally receive the brunt of the
blame for the resulting situation.
In a similar light, a study performed by McCloy and Byrne (2000), discovered that
inappropriate events are more often changed through the process of counterfactual thinking than
appropriate ones, especially when the outcome of these events was negative. Inappropriate
events include the decisions individuals make that are considered to be ‘socially wrong’, whereas
appropriate events are ‘socially acceptable’ actions. Due to these results, we can conclude that
what McCloy and Byrne consider to be “inappropriate controllable” events, will likely be
regarded as highly culpable factors in the outcome of a situation.
Another contributing factor to perceived culpability is the extent of knowledge of the
actors involved in an event, as well as the intent of their actions (Gilbert et al., 2015). For
example, in the aforementioned scenario, had the driver known that looking away from the road
would have caused her to run over the stray cat, the driver would have been more likely to be
perceived guilty, even though the actions and the outcome of the situation remained the same.
This rationalization is the product of a bottom-up method of thinking in which individuals are
able to generate more counterfactual thoughts due to the actor’s knowledge of the outcome
(Gilbert et al., 2015). As these authors have noted, the increased development of counterfactual
thoughts will in turn attribute more responsibility to the actor, which will ultimately increase
perceived blame. But this is not the full picture when it comes to focusing on the role of
counterfactual thoughts in altering participant responses.
COUNTERFACTUAL THINKING
4
In pursuance of counterfactual thinking and its relationship to perceived blame, we have
devised a study that analyzed the extent of culpability people place on a particular factor
depending on the preventability of the outcome. We provided participants with one of three
scenarios, each of which depicted a variation of the same situation where alternate events lead to
different conclusions. In the changeable condition, an actor engaged in a behavior that led to an
undesirable outcome (death) that could have been avoided had he acted differently. In the
unchangeable condition, the same actor engaged in a behavior that once again led to an
undesirable outcome, but here the outcome could not have been avoided if he acted differently.
In the neutral condition, the actor engaged in an alternative behavior, but the outcome was still
undesirable. We predicted that participants would place more blame on the actor in the
changeable condition where the actor could have avoided the undesirable outcome had he
behaved differently than in both the unchangeable and neutral conditions, where the actor’s
behavior could not be altered. This is because we expected changeable participants to generate
more counterfactuals (more statements about how the actor could have behaved) in the
changeable condition.
COUNTERFACTUAL THINKING
5
References
Alquist, J. L., Ainsworth, S. E., Baumeister, R. F., Daly, M., & Stillman, T. F. (2015). The
making of might-have-beens: Effects of free will belief on counterfactual thinking.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(2), 268-283.
http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.fiu.edu/10.1177/0146167214563673
Gilbert, E. A., Tenney, E. R., Holland, C. R., & Spellman, B. A. (2015). Counterfactuals,
control, and causation: Why knowledgeable people get blamed more. Personality and
Social Psychology Bulletin, 41(5), 643-658.
http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.fiu.edu/10.1177/0146167215572137
McCloy, R., & Byrne, R. M. J. (2000). Counterfactual thinking about controllable
events. Memory & Cognition, 28(6), 1071-1078.
http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.fiu.edu/10.3758/BF03209355
Ruiselová, Z., Prokopčáková, A., & Kresánek, J. (2007). Counterfactual thinking in relation to
the personality of women–doctors and nurses. Studia Psychologica, 49(4), 333-339.
http://ezproxy.fiu.edu/login?url=https://www-proquestcom.ezproxy.fiu.edu/docview/622099723?accountid=10901
Williams, C. W., Lees-Haley, P., & Price, J. R. (1996). The role of counterfactual thinking and
causal attribution in accident-related judgments. Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
26(23), 2076-2099. http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.fiu.edu/10.1111/j.15591816.1996.tb01789.x
HOW SINCERITY AFFECTS FORGIVENESS
To Forgive, or Not to Forgive: How the Sincerity of Apologies Online Affect Forgiveness
Jane Doe
Florida International University
1
HOW SINCERITY AFFECTS FORGIVENESS
2
To Forgive, or Not to Forgive: How the Sincerity of Apologies Online Affect Forgiveness
Everybody makes mistakes. From mundane situations such as accidentally grabbing
someone else’s lunch to more unique incidents like breaking mom’s favorite vase. While they
are not limited to mistakes, an expected apology follows transgressions by recognizing
responsibility, consequences, and emotions. Apologies are a two-way street, with the
transgressor apologizing and the victim(s) receiving the apology and potentially forgiving the
transgressor. However, this act of communication and hopeful mitigation can be driven by
numerous emotions that affect its delivery and impression (Hareli & Eisikovits, 2006).
Equivalently, the decision on whether that apology should be accepted and forgiven by the
recipient is also a product of multiple influences, including type of apology and offense removal
(Zeichmeister et al., 2004). A novel factor is the environment, specifically the online
environment of the internet and social media platforms. Thus, our study is fixated on analyzing
how favorable participants find apologies with varying levels of sincerity (i.e. sincere or
insincere) presented on the social network system Twitter, as well as apologies compared to
receiving no apology at all. Overall, the study seeks to reveal how the manner in which a
transgressor apologizes affects their self-image and perception of the apology.
Even apologies serve a purpose, which is namely to restore relationships between the
transgressor and the audience and to repair images of an individual’s self as perceived by others
at a social value, otherwise known as efforts to save “face” (Hareli & Eisikovits, 2006; Hu et al.,
2019; Matley, 2018). Media figures, such as celebrities and politicians, often engage in
apologizing as a strategy to maintain a positive image in the eyes of the public after causing a
transgression that defies norms (Hu et al., 2019). Self-presentation, or “face” on social media,
has been found to demonstrate a positivity bias, where positive forms of self-presentation defined
HOW SINCERITY AFFECTS FORGIVENESS
3
by norms within an online environment are favorable compared to negative forms (norm
defying) (Matley, 2018). Positive self-presentation aims to form a positive impression, such as a
photo of a date one planned out for their partner, while negative self-presentation may risk
ruining that impression by expressing socially undesirable behavior such as hateful comments.
This “saving face” factor encourages apologizing after transgressions to cancel out the offense
that damages an individual’s image and reputation, and thus regain that positive self.
Additional components that comprise an apology are the emotions in which the
transgressor elicits the apology from. These social emotions are key in the process between
relationships, as delivery can affect how the message is received. In a study by Hareli and
Eisikovits (2006), participants were asked to envision being insulted and getting their feelings
hurt by a friend. When the participants were provided with an apology from this friend later on,
each apology included the same phrase but differed in cause of the apology mentioned. The
causes were stated to be either of the social emotions: guilt, shame, or pity, as well as
combinations of two or all three. The apology was then rated in terms of forgiveness and anger
toward that friend. The findings suggest that when guilt and shame were stated as the cause for
the apology, ratings of forgiveness were higher. However, expressing pity decreased the
participant’s forgiveness and increased anger towards the transgressor. The participants
perceived apologies motivated by guilt and shame as sincere, although guilt was considered more
sincere than shame when comparing an apology driven by guilt and shame to those driven solely
by guilt (Hareli & Eisikovits, 2006). Perception of sincerity within the apology and forgiveness
had a strong positive correlation, suggesting that the social emotions (i.e. guilt and shame) may
serve as an indicator for perceived sincerity of apologies, and thus impact whether the
transgressor will be forgiven or not (Hareli & Eisikovits, 2006). This highlights that the
HOW SINCERITY AFFECTS FORGIVENESS
4
perception of an apology, not just the apology itself, is the true indicator in whether a
relationship has successfully been mended or if the transgressor’s public image has been
cleansed. Similar, in a study performed by Zechmeister et al. (2004), participants would perceive
apologies distinctively by the presence or absence of certain components. Participants considered
apologies insincere when the transgressor apologized, but did not remove the offense, and
considered apologies sincere when the transgressor apologized, removed offense, and augmented
an effort to make amends. Accordingly, the insincere apologies were the least forgivable, and the
sincere apologies were more likely to be forgiven (Zechmeister et al., 2004). The exchange of an
apology and forgiveness is extremely complex beyond the surface, and it is more difficult
considering the two parties involved might not be on the same page.
Further research by Leunissen et al. (2013) observed and found that guilt mediates the
perpetrator’s willingness to apologize depending on the intentions behind the transgression.
Perpetrators preferred to apologize for an unintentional transgression more so than intentional
ones. A disparity existed between perpetrators and victims, where perpetrators are more likely to
admit following a transgression if it was unintentional, but victims were more likely to expect an
apology when the transgression is intentional. A victim’s need for an apology is mediated,
instead, by anger (Leunissen et al., 2013). Additionally, Kirchhoff et al. (2012) conducted
research on the relevancy of verbal components within an apology and how it relates to
forgiveness. Leunissen et al. (2013) propose that the apology mismatch can function as an index
for whether perpetrators are forgiven. The findings suggest that an apology is predicted more so
by the perpetrator’s needs and, as such, are forgiven more when they apologize (Leunissen et al.,
2013). Thus, the transgressor’s higher need to apologize after unintentional transgressions
promotes its probability of being forgiven compared to intentional transgressions.
HOW SINCERITY AFFECTS FORGIVENESS
5
Considering the elaborate process of apologies known thus far—how function and
feelings affect sincerity, and hence, forgiveness—researchers are looking into how much more
complex it gets when moved onto an online environment. Social network systems have expanded
audiences and communities from local to worldwide, making every post and detail much more
profound. This goes back to one’s sense of self and what we want presented online. Matley
(2018) investigates this concept by observing the function of speech acts on the platform app
Instagram and examines how the hashtag #sorrynotsorry functions as a non-apology marker.
Apologies operate as speech acts that serve as justification and accountability for behavior
online, all to make users’ social value return to the positive scale (Matley, 2018; Hu et al., 2019).
This is especially interesting considering how individuals can choose to present their whole lives
for the world to see or keep themselves hidden behind anonymous accounts. This allows for
perpetuation of self-conflict between social approval and sharing offensive opinions. Hashtags
on social media are used to search for content, but also provides the user with the control to
manipulate the interpretation of a post’s content (Matley, 2018). The #sorrynotsorry hashtag
(essentially the phrase “Sorry, not sorry”), as studied by Matley (2018), has two components: the
“sorry” and the “not sorry”. The “sorry” element functions as a face-mitigation strategy, which
attenuates the offenses made within the content of the post in order to reestablish a positive face.
The “not sorry” attached along conflicts with the initial “sorry” by expressing disregard for the
recipient’s emotions, which threatens positive face and diminishes social approval (Matley,
2018). Moreover, the ironic hashtags attached to posts can be detrimental to social status.
To add onto this research, our present study aims to explore essentially how differing
levels of sincerity and the presence of an apology, using hashtags on a social network system
attached to an apology post, can affect the favorability of whether the transgressor can be
HOW SINCERITY AFFECTS FORGIVENESS
6
forgiven. Participants were all given a scenario in which Charlie Webb, a user on the social
media platform Twitter, apologizes for an incident at the mall. Participants were randomly
assigned to different conditions where Charlie offers either a sincere apology, an insincere
apology, or no apology. The participants were then asked to rate Charlie’s actions and how
favorable they view the apology offered.
In general, it was predicted that participants in the sincere apology condition viewed the
apology (and apologizer) more favorably than participants in both the no apology and insincere
apology conditions, though participants viewed an insincere apology less favorably than no
apology.
More specifically, if participants view a sincere apology (compared to an insincere
apology or no apology), then they will more strongly agree that the apology showed an
acknowledgement of wrongfulness and an acceptance of responsibility, though participants who
viewed an insincere apology will more strongly disagree with these statements compared to
those who saw no apology. In addition, if participants viewed a sincere apology (compared to an
insincere apology or no apology), then they will more strongly agree that the apology is sincere,
with participants ironically finding no apology more sincere than an insincere apology.
HOW SINCERITY AFFECTS FORGIVENESS
References
Hareli, S., & Eisikovits, Z. (2006). The role of communicating social emotions accompanying
apologies in forgiveness. Motivation and Emotion, 30(3), 189-197.
http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.fiu.edu/10.1007/s11031-006-9025-x
Hu, M., Cotton, G., Zhang, B., & Jia, N. (2019). The influence of apology on audiences’
reactions toward a media figure’s transgression. Psychology of Popular Media Culture,
8(4), 410–419. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000195
Leunissen, J., de Cremer, D., Reinders Folmer, C., & van Dijke, M. (2013). The apology
mismatch: Asymmetries between victim’s need for apologies and perpetrator’s
willingness to apologize. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 49, 315324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2012.12.005
Matley, D. (2018). “Let’s see how many of you mother fuckers unfollow me for this”: The
pragmatic function of the hashtag #sorrynotsorry in non-apologetic Instagram posts.
Journal of Pragmatics. 133. 66-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.06.003
Zechmeister, J. S., Garcia, S., Romero, C., & Vas, S. N. (2004). Don’t apologize unless you
mean it: A laboratory investigation of forgiveness and retaliation. Journal of Social and
Clinical Psychology, 23(4), 532–564. https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.23.4.532.40309
7
Checklist – Paper One: Study One Literature Review
Use the check sheet below to make sure your paper is the best it can be! Make sure you answer
“Yes” to all questions before submitting your paper or you will lose points! Please note that the
7th Edition of the American Psychological Association Publication Manual has some flexibility
in terms of language, font, spacing, and other items, but that papers in this course MUST adhere
to the guidelines listed before.
General Paper Format
Yes
No
1. Is everything in your paper (including headers, the main body of your study
one literature review, and references) in 12 point Times New Roman font?
2. Is everything in your paper double spaced, including references (here I mean
the spacing above and below each line, not the spaces following a period)?
3. Do you have one inch margins on all sides of the paper (one inch from the top
of the page, one inch from the bottom, and one inch from each side)
4. Are the first lines of all paragraphs indented roughly ½ inch?
5. Are your paragraphs aligned left? (That is, text should be flush left, with lines
lining up on the left of the page, but text should NOT line up on the right side
of the page – it should look ragged)
6. Do you need help figuring out how to configure a word document in APA
format (inserting headers, page numbers, indents, etc.)? If YES or NO, I
recommend watching this video which walks you through setting up an APA
formatted paper! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kt4HdjyvZBs
Yes
No
Title page
Header
1. Is your header title in ALL CAPS, and is it a shorter version of your real title?
2. Is your Running head in 12 point Times New Roman font?
3. Do you have a page number that is flush right (also in 12 point Times New
Roman font)?
4. Is your header title 50 characters or less (including spaces and punctuation)?
Title / Name / Institution
1. Is your title focused and short, avoiding unnecessary words and abbreviations
that serve no purpose (as recommended by the APA)?
2. Does your title describe your general paper theme (while avoiding something
bland like “Paper One: Literature Review”)? Note that your header should be
a shorter version or your title (For example, the first few words are fine)
3. Do all title words with three letters or more start with a capital letter?
4. Is your title in bold?
5. If your title is longer than one line, is it double-spaced (like everything else in
your paper)?
6. Are your name and institution correct?
7. Are your title, name, and institution elements centered and in 12 point Times
New Roman font?
8. Does your title start three or four lines under the margin at the top of the
page?
9. Are there two spaces between your paper title and your name?
General Paper Format
Yes
No
Yes
No
Yes
No
Literature Review
Header
1. Is your header title present and identical to your header from the title page?
2. Is your header title in ALL CAPS and 12 point Times New Roman font?
3. Do you have a page number starting on page 2
Title for the literature review
1. Do you have the identical title you used on the title page rewritten at the top
of your literature review (including being in bold)?
2. Is this title centered?
Main body of the literature review
1. Does your literature review start broadly, giving a brief overview of the paper
to come?
2. Does your literature review start to narrow down toward your hypotheses?
3. Do your paragraphs transition from one to the next? (That is, avoid simply
listing studies you read. Tie them together. How does Study A in paragraph A
relate to Study B in paragraph B?)
4. Does your paper end in your very specific hypotheses? (You will lose a lot of
points if your paper doesn’t provide the specific predictions!)
5. Did you make sure your predictions are written in the past tense?
6. Is your paper at least two pages long (not including the hypotheses)?
Citations for the literature review
1. Did you cite a minimum of 5 citations? (Note that you can give a lot of detail
for some articles you cite but only a sentence or two for others. How much
detail you go into depends on how important the article is in helping your
support your hypotheses)
2. Are your citations in APA format (That is, ONLY the last name of the
author(s) and date of publication)?
a. Note that you do NOT include first names, initials, or the title of the article
the authors wrote when citing. That information belongs in the references
pages only.
b. Also note that you only use an ampersand – the & symbol – when it occurs
within parentheses. In other instances, use the word “and”
3. If you quoted, did you provide a page number for the direct quote?
4. If you paraphrased in any way, did you cite the source of that information?
5. Did you cite everything that sounded like it was factual information?
6. Did you make sure the period follows the citation rather than coming before it?
7. If there are two authors, did you cite both of them? If in parentheses, did you
use the & symbol? If outside of parentheses, did you use the word “and”?
8. If there are three or more authors in the same citation, did you use the phrase et
al. every time you cited them?
References Page
Title for the references page
1. Do references start on their own page?
2. Is the word “References” centered? Is it in bold?
References – Make sure these are in APA format!
References Page
1. Are references listed in alphabetical order (starting with the last name of the
first author listed)?
2. Are all citations from the literature review referenced?
3. Is the first line of the reference flush left while subsequent lines are indented
(Note: Use the ruler function for this. DO NOT simply tab)?
4. Did you use the “&” symbol when listing more than one author name?
5. Did you include the date of publication
6. For article references, is the article title (which is not italicized) present, with
only the first word and proper names starting with a capital letter?
7. For article references, is the name of the journal present with all major words
starting with a capital letter (Note: this journal title is italicized)?
8. For article references, is the volume number italicized
9. For article references, are the page numbers present (not italicized)
10. For article references, is the DOI present
Yes
No
Writing Quality
1. Did you proofread your paper, go to the writing center, go to the research
methods help center, or use the Pearson writer to make sure your paper flows
well?
2. Did you use the past tense (which is recommended, since your papers in this
class will reflect work you already did rather than work you will do)?
3. Did you use a scientific / objective terms like “people”, “participants”. “users”,
“readers”, etc. (as opposed to subjective words like “you”, “we”, “me”, “I”, or
“us”, etc.)? Note that you can use the word “I” when referring to your own work.
STUDY ONE LITERATURE REVIEW INSTRUCTIONS
Instructions for Paper I: Study One Literature Review Instructions (Worth 25 Points)
Ryan J. Winter
Florida International University
Pay attention to the title page formatting
above (header, page number, title, my
name, and my institution)! This is the same
format that YOU will use for your own title
page (minus this text box, of course)!
1
STUDY ONE LITERATURE REVIEW INSTRUCTIONS
2
Paper I: Table of Contents
Item
Title Page
Page #
1
Table of Contents
2
Purposes of Paper I – Study One Literature Review
1. The psychological purpose (Paper overview)
2. The APA formatting purpose
3. The writing purpose
3
3
3
4
Notes About Paper I – Study One Literature Review (+AI Technology)
5
Formal Paper Instructions
6
The Title Page (5 points)
1. The header
2. The title
3. Your personal information
6
6
6
6
The Abstract (Not needed for this paper)
7
The Literature Review (12 points)
1. The first page of the literature review
2. Citations for the literature review
3. The content of the literature review
7
7
8
10
References (6 points)
1. APA reference page formatting
2. Number of required references
3. APA formatting for references
10
10
10
10
Writing Quality (2 points)
11
Other Helpful Hints
11
Your study hypotheses (Psychological Reactance Theory Study)
13
Paper I Grade Rubric
14
Note: Right-click on the page number to open a link to the content in these instructions
(Select “Open Hyperlink)
STUDY ONE LITERATURE REVIEW INSTRUCTIONS
3
Purposes of Paper I: Study One Literature Review
1). The psychological purpose (Paper overview)
This paper serves several purposes, the first of which is helping you gain insight into research
papers in psychology. As this may be your first time reading and writing papers in
psychology, one goal of Paper I is to give you insight into what goes into such papers. This
study one-literature review paper will help you a). better understand the psychology topic
chosen for the semester (Psychological Reactance Theory, or PRT for short), b). learn about
the various sections of an empirical research report by reading five peer-reviewed articles
(that is, articles that have a Title Page, Abstract, Literature Review, Methods Section, Results
Section, and References Page), and c). use information gathered from research articles in
psychology to help support your hypotheses for your first study this semester (PRT). You
will also write a second literature review later in the semester (for study two), so think about
Paper I as the first segment of your semester long paper. I highly recommend looking at the
example Paper V to see what your final paper will look like. It will give you a good idea
about how this current Paper I (as well as Papers II, III and IV) all fit together to form your
final paper of the semester (Paper V).
In this current paper (Paper I), you will read five research articles, often summarizing what
the authors did and found, and using that information to help support your PRT study
hypotheses. IMPORTANT: Yes, you need five references, but note that you can spend a lot
of time (a page or two!) summarizing one reference but only a sentence or two summarizing
others. Thus spend more time on the more relevant articles!
Paper Writing Hints: For Paper I, start the paper broadly and then narrow your focus (think
about the hourglass example provided in the lecture). My suggestion is to give a brief
overview of your paper topic in your opening paragraph, hinting at the research variables that
you plan to look at for study one. Your next paragraphs will review prior research (that is, the
five references required for this paper). Make sure that you draw connections between these
references rather than just listing them. Use smooth transitions between paragraphs and build
a case that supports your study predictions. Your final paragraphs will use the research you
just summarized to support your hypothesis. And yes, that means you MUST include your
study one predictions in Paper I (which we provided in the researcher instructions, the
debriefing statement, and at the end of these instructions. Use those predictions! They go at
the end of your Paper I). Another good hint is to look at the literature reviews of the articles
that you are using as references as you write your own paper! See what those authors did in
their literature reviews and mimic their literature review style. Keep in mind that Paper I will
end with your hypothesis (and your references) rather than moving directly into your study
methods. In Paper II, you will pick the topic up again and discuss your study methods,
results, and discussion. Paper I thus merely leads up to your study one.
2). The APA formatting purpose
STUDY ONE LITERATURE REVIEW INSTRUCTIONS
4
The second purpose of Paper I: Study One Literature Review is to teach you proper
American Psychological Association (APA) formatting. In the instructions below, I will tell
you how to format your paper using APA style. There are a lot of very specific requirements
in APA papers, so pay attention to the instructions below as well as your APA Formatting
PowerPoint presentation! Keep in mind that the research methods classes at FIU now use the
7th edition of the APA formatting manual.
3). The writing purpose
Finally, Paper I is intended to help you grow as a writer. Few psychology classes give you
the chance to write papers and receive feedback. This class will! We will give you extensive
feedback on your first few papers in terms of content, spelling, and grammar. You will even
be able to revise aspects of Paper I and include that content in future papers (notably Papers
III and V). My hope is that you eventually craft a final paper that could be submitted to an
empirical journal.
Thus write your paper for readers who are familiar with APA style and methods but
note that they may not know much about your specific study topic. Your job is to educate
them on the topic (PRT) and make sure they understand how your study design advances the
field of psychology. In other words, your reader will be knowledgeable about research
methodology but not your specific topic. Teach them about your topic, not methods.
Finally, note that your final paper in this class (Paper V) might be read by someone other
than your instructor / lab assistant. For example, many students use their Paper V as a writing
sample for their graduate school or career applications. Thus write your Paper I for that
“other” reader – a person who may know NOTHING about your PRT topic and your specific
study but is familiar with the mechanics of APA formatted papers and research methodology.
STUDY ONE LITERATURE REVIEW INSTRUCTIONS
5
Notes About Paper I – Study One Literature Review
Note #1: I am looking for 2.5 pages minimum for Paper I (around 850 words), including your
study predictions (2 pages without predictions, or around 650 words), but that is the bare
minimum. If it is only 2 pages, it better be really, really good. I do not think I could write Paper I
in less than three pages and do the research topic justice, so aim for 3 to 4 pages.
Note #2: The plagiarism limit for Paper I is 30% (assessed by turn-it-in within Canvas). This
excludes any overlap your paper might have regarding citations, references, and hypotheses.
Make sure your paper falls under 30% (or 35% if including your predictions). Future papers will
have different plagiarism limits, so make sure to read the instructions
