New User Special Price Expires in

Let's log you in.

Sign in with Facebook


Don't have a StudySoup account? Create one here!


Create a StudySoup account

Be part of our community, it's free to join!

Sign up with Facebook


Create your account
By creating an account you agree to StudySoup's terms and conditions and privacy policy

Already have a StudySoup account? Login here


by: Upasana Raja

Critiques PSY 1004 - 001

Upasana Raja
Shree Lounge

Almost Ready


These notes were just uploaded, and will be ready to view shortly.

Purchase these notes here, or revisit this page.

Either way, we'll remind you when they're ready :)

Preview These Notes for FREE

Get a free preview of these Notes, just enter your email below.

Unlock Preview
Unlock Preview

Preview these materials now for free

Why put in your email? Get access to more of this material and other relevant free materials for your school

View Preview

About this Document

Shree Lounge
Class Notes
25 ?





Popular in Psychlogy

This 24 page Class Notes was uploaded by Upasana Raja on Sunday October 25, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to PSY 1004 - 001 at Temple University taught by Shree Lounge in Summer 2015. Since its upload, it has received 61 views. For similar materials see CRITICAL THINKING IN PSYCHOLOGY in Psychlogy at Temple University.

Similar to PSY 1004 - 001 at Temple


Reviews for Critiques


Report this Material


What is Karma?


Karma is the currency of StudySoup.

You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!

Date Created: 10/25/15
Critical Thinking in Psychology PSYC H l 04 How to summarize amp critique research articles 39a i t W l he Research Process Easual an dfer Systematic ebse reatien p Idea l Elled ucti ire Fieasening Develep idea inte a testable hyp pth esist Cheese an apprepriate research design experimental cltlrrelatienala and se pnjt l Eheese subject pepulatien consider sampling tech n ic LiesI animal suhjemsI human participants and an an l Decide en what te pbse we and the apprepr iate measu rest l Cencluct stu dy Ide pretesting pilet werlc actual study l Analyse data using descriptive and in erential statistics l Repth resuhs write paper pr malte presentatienja i Library Re search ai Need to know how to summarize and analyzecritique a research article Evaluating the introduction What to include in a summary gt State the major topic of the paper gt Describe the current position of the field on the topic of the paper gt Describe the premises the author used to develop the hypothesis gt Quote the hypothesis of the paper Introduction People often claim they cannot remember and other people often doubt those claims For example during his 2007 trial VicePresidential Chief of Staff 1 Lewis Scooter Libby claimed that he could not remember mentioning the identity of a Central Intelligence Agency employee to other government officials or reporters Jurors found it difficult to believe that Libby could have forgotten having had such important conversations and found him guilty of obstruction of justice making false statements and perjury m Introduction Libby39s conversations were indeed important but they were less important at the time he had them than they became months later when the Justice Department launched its investigation Although important information increases the motivation to remember MTR research on human memory suggests that MTR is considerably more effective when it arises before rather than after information is encoded Loftus amp Wickens 1970 NavehBenjamin Craik Gavrilescu amp Anderson 2000 MTR at encoding leads people to attend to and organize information in ways that promote accessible storage in longterm memory whereas MTR at retrieval merely leads people to work hard to retrieve information and even the most earnest search of longterm memory is ineffective I when information was never stored there in the first place Introduction Do people take the timing of MTR into account when judging other people39s memories Research suggests that people39s intuitions about memorial processes are often flawed leaving them susceptible to a host of errors ranging from the illusion of knowing to hindsight bias Bjork amp Dunlosky 2008 Dunlosky Serra amp Baker 2007 Metcalfe 2000 If people do not consider the fact that MTR is more effective at encoding than at retrieval then they may mistakenly expect other people to remember information that became important as though it had always been important lWe tested this possibility Evaluatin the introduction What to critique gt Has relevant research been adequately reviewed gt Are assertions supported with the appropriate citations gt Are the purposes of the study clearly stated gt Are the hypotheses clearly stated and do they flow logically from the information in the introduction Evaluating the method section What to include in a summary gt Outline the design of the study gt Note the important characteristics of the subjects gt Note any flaws or problems you see in the study design Method Participants 89 women 41 men mean age 224 years SD 70 years were shown photographs of six individuals ostensibly taken from a highschool yearbook Each photograph was accompanied by five facts eg John Smith enjoyed playing sports with his friends or Sarah Palmer spent a lot of time tutoring her younger brother Participants were randomly assigned to the role of memorizer orjudge McGrawHillIrwin Method Memorizers Memorizers were told that they would study the material for 2 min before seeing the photographs and trying to recall the facts associated with each They were also told that they would receive 010 for each recalled fact Before they studied the material memorizers in the MTR at encoding condition 7 21 were told that they would receive a 050 bonus for each fact they remembered about the individual named Beryl White Memorizers in the MTR at retrieval condition 7 22 were told about this bonus immediately after they studied the material Memorizers in the noMTR condition 7 21 were not told about the bonus After studying the material memorizers were shown the photograph of Beryl White and I were asked to recall the facts about her Method Judges Judges were shown the same material as memorizers and read a detailed description of the instructions from the MTR at encoding condition 7 24 the MTR at retrieval condition 7 21 or the noMTR condition 7 21 Judges were then asked to predict the percentage of memorizers in that condition who would remember each fact 11 McGrawHillIrwin Outlining the esign of the stuy Evaluating the method section What to critique gt Does the design of the study allow an adequate test of the hypotheses gt Were the characteristics of the subject sample given gt Was the subject sample sufficient to test the hypothesis gt Are there any methodological flaws that might affect the validity of the results 13 Evaluating the result section What to include in a summary gt Note which effects were statistically significant gt List any discrepancies between the text and the figures gt Note any errors you see in the analysis amp any significant differences buried in the text 14 Results Memorizers39 responses were scored by two blind coders with 100 agreement Memorizers were awarded 1 point for each fact correctly recalled Judges39 predictions were converted to decimal format eg a judge who predicted that 67 of memorizers would recall a particular fact was awarded 067 points A 2 role memorizer or judge x 3 MTR MTR at encoding MTR at retrieval or no MTR betweenparticipants analysis of variance performed on actual and predicted memory revealed a main effect of role F1 124 627 p 014 and a main effect of MTR F2 124 2115 p lt 001 both of which were qualified by a Role gtlt MTR interaction F2 124 312 p 048 As shown in Figure 1 memorizers recalled more facts about Beryl White when they were motivated to remember those facts before reading them than they did when they were motivated after reading them t124 357 p 001 Being motivated after reading was no more effective than not being motivated at all t124 113 p 27 Nonetheless judges expected memorizers who were motivated after reading to remember just as many facts as those who were motivated before reading tlt 1 and they expected both motivations to be more effective than no motivation at all ts124 4462 and 3602 ps lt 001 In short judges mistakenly expected memorizers to remember information that became important as though it had always been important t124 316 p 002 15 Fig 1 Memory and predicted memory for information in each motivationtoremember MTR condition a 372 383 5 T 349 i 6 LL q o 5 238 D E j 191 3 z I l MTR at MTR at No MTR MTR at MTR at No MTR Encoding Retrieval Encoding Retrieval Judges Memorizers 39 Kassam et al Psychological Science 200920551 Pgwh mgig McGrawHillIrwin Main effects Rle amp MTR condition 4 Role 35 3 25 2 15 1 05 MTR 4 condition 0 MTR at encoding MTR at retrieval No MTR 17 Mnteraction etween role and MTR condition IIEEI M3311 5125 i Eil El 44D M r i f l Judgrea in M 1 MTR a1 Enuv i Htquot Rjretrijwal Hm MTR MTR a n d itil n 18 Evaluating the result sectin What to critique gt Did the statistically significant effects support or refute the hypotheses gt Are the differences reported large or small gt Were the appropriate statistics used gt Do the tables figures and text match gt Graph significant data presented in tables or in the text 19 Evaluatin the discussion What to include in a summary gt Briefly summarize the conclusions of the authors gt Summarize the authors interpretation gt Note any alternative interpretations you have that the author did not discuss gt List possible future studies that follow from the reported results 20 iscussion Participants who were asked to judge another individual39s memory did not distinguish between information that was important when the individual encountered it and information that became important only later Clearly people39s theories about the effects of motivation on memory are imperfect It is interesting to note in light of these findings that the US District Court denied Libby39s motion to allow expert psychologists to testify about the foibles of memory and metamemory because the court argued such research would tell jurors little that they did not already know 21 McGrawHillIrwin iscussion People do indeed encounter the frailties of memory as a matter of course but this does not mean that they understand the nature or power of these frailties Our study shows that people mistakenly expect MTR to be just as effective when it arises after information is encountered as when it arises beforehand Thus they sometimes expect others to remember more than they possibly can 22 McGrawHillIrwin Evaluatin the discussion What to critique gt Do the conclusions match the results reported gt Do the authors extend the interpretation beyond what the results can support gt Do the authors suggest amp rule out alternative interpretations gt Do the authors indicate potential future directions 23 Other points to consider gt Is the publication current or dated gt Has the author s work been cited by others gt What is the quality level of the journal gt What are the author s credentials and institutional affiliation gt Are there potential conflicts of interest A 24


Buy Material

Are you sure you want to buy this material for

25 Karma

Buy Material

BOOM! Enjoy Your Free Notes!

We've added these Notes to your profile, click here to view them now.


You're already Subscribed!

Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'

Why people love StudySoup

Bentley McCaw University of Florida

"I was shooting for a perfect 4.0 GPA this semester. Having StudySoup as a study aid was critical to helping me achieve my goal...and I nailed it!"

Jennifer McGill UCSF Med School

"Selling my MCAT study guides and notes has been a great source of side revenue while I'm in school. Some months I'm making over $500! Plus, it makes me happy knowing that I'm helping future med students with their MCAT."

Steve Martinelli UC Los Angeles

"There's no way I would have passed my Organic Chemistry class this semester without the notes and study guides I got from StudySoup."

Parker Thompson 500 Startups

"It's a great way for students to improve their educational experience and it seemed like a product that everybody wants, so all the people participating are winning."

Become an Elite Notetaker and start selling your notes online!

Refund Policy


All subscriptions to StudySoup are paid in full at the time of subscribing. To change your credit card information or to cancel your subscription, go to "Edit Settings". All credit card information will be available there. If you should decide to cancel your subscription, it will continue to be valid until the next payment period, as all payments for the current period were made in advance. For special circumstances, please email


StudySoup has more than 1 million course-specific study resources to help students study smarter. If you’re having trouble finding what you’re looking for, our customer support team can help you find what you need! Feel free to contact them here:

Recurring Subscriptions: If you have canceled your recurring subscription on the day of renewal and have not downloaded any documents, you may request a refund by submitting an email to

Satisfaction Guarantee: If you’re not satisfied with your subscription, you can contact us for further help. Contact must be made within 3 business days of your subscription purchase and your refund request will be subject for review.

Please Note: Refunds can never be provided more than 30 days after the initial purchase date regardless of your activity on the site.