The final paper should be LONG (not including , abstract, references, tables, etc.). It is OK to run longer than that if necessary; in my experience, USE THE GUIDELINES BELOW AND work on A PROPOSAL PAPER ON THE TOPIC"THE INFLUENCE OF ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE ON ENGAGEMENT AND TURNOVER INTENTIONS IN HEALTHCARE STARTUPS"

(a) explaining your thoughts clearly and in your own voice, (b) referencing the existing research literature to support your points, particularly in the development of your hypotheses, and (c) offering a clear rationale for why the research was done and what led to the conclusion. II Abstract .( on a separate page) III. Introduction (long pages) The central goal of this section of the paper is to introduce the topic, explain why it is important, explain how the research contributes to the literature, how the concept is defined and what previous papers supports the research and rationale for the hypothesis. The introduction should include one or more formally stated testable hypothesis along with some statement of a theoretical rationale that supports the hypothesis. As an alternative, the introduction could be organized around testing a particular kind of intervention, but would normally include similar kinds of discussion of previous literature. A. General introduction of the topic/issue/problem and goal of your study (approximately long). a. What is the general research topic? Why is it important in a broader social sense? b. What is the gap in the literature that the proposal addresses? c. Why is addressing that gap important in a social or theoretical sense? (note that the fact that something has not been studied before is not, by itself, sufficient justification for studying it). d. What specific relationship will the study be testing? (note that a., b., c., & d. are not specific headers to be should use in the article) B. Review of relevant literature - approximately long. This section should include discussion of findings from peer-reviewed literature on findings from past research that are relevant to the study (i.e., that inform your hypothesis). it is okay to bring in other sources such as web pages, textbooks, etc. but the literature review should focus on studies published in peer-reviewed journals. The goal of the literature review

is to establish what is already known about the research question of interest, explain how concepts are defined, and explain why the concepts should be related, leading up to a formal statement of the hypothesis(ses) that will be tested in the study. Normally, this section includes a general discussion of some relevant theoretical framework, review of previous literature, and explanation of how the theoretical framework leads to the hypotheses that is proposed for testing. IV. Method section (approximately detailed) The central goal of this section of the paper is to explain who is to be studied (participants) and what is proposed to be done to them (measures, design, etc.). The method section should be explained clearly enough that someone else could read what is written and replicate the study. Where measures, etc. come from prior literature, that literature should be cited. If propose developing a new measure, explain the process planned to be used to develop this measure. The key goal for the method section is to have a clear, complete, and specific explanation of how the hypotheses will be tested. A. Participants ( paragraphs). Who they are, where they will be recruited from, what demographic characteristics gathered, etc. Here is an example: The nurse union with whom we collaborated sent mail and email registration invitations to Registered Nurses (RNs) working in the Pacific Northwest. The RNs registered for the study online at the union's website, and then, were sent a link to an online survey. Respondents were awarded $20 for their participation. Of the 460 nurses who registered, a total of 207 RNs completed the survey. These nurses averaged 46 years old, were predominately women (91%), and White/Caucasian (94%). About 80% of participants primarily worked in a hospital setting or other acute care facility, and 62% had earned at least a baccalaureate degree. Most participants (63%) worked full-time, averaging 35 hours per week. Participants averaged 18 years of work experience, including 11 with their current organization. Since it is a research proposal, this section should provide expected/desired characteristics of the research sample (i.e., those characteristics wont be known because data has not been gathered yet ). B. Measures. This section may be shorter or longer depending on the nature of the measures, but for each measure , explain what the construct is, where the measure came from (citation or explain that you developed it), give a sample item for multi-item scales, describe the scoring process/instructions, response format, explain what high or low scores mean, etc. Here is an example of how to describe one of the measures:

Engagement. Engagement will be measured with the 9-item Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (Schaufeli, Bakker, & Salanova, 2006). Participants rate how frequently each item occurred over the past 30 days on a 5-point frequency scale. An example items is, "I was enthusiastic about my job". Scale means will be computed such that higher scores represent higher engagement.

C. Procedures . Describe the steps in gathering the data. This is typically relatively short for survey projects; if proposing experimental manipulations , explain them in a bit of detail. V. Analyses This section should explain the statistical tests you anticipate conducting to test the hypotheses including the criteria you would use to determine whether the hypotheses are supported. Note that this is not a class on statistical methods so do not necessarily need to include the most complex test that could possibly be used but the analytical methods should be appropriate and reasonable to test the hypotheses. VI. Discussion Section The central goal of the discussion section is to talk about the thought behind the findings mean and why they are important. In a discussion section, authors usually: (a) Restate the purpose of the study. (b) Discuss the theoretical implications of the study (e.g., if the expected resultsvfound was). (c) Discuss, where appropriate, practical implications of the findings (e.g., for managing employees, treating mental health, promoting student success, changing social policy). (d) Acknowledge potential limitations of the work with some discussion of (a) what the most important limitations are (i.e., what are the potential problems with the work) and why they are a concern and discuss why those potential limitations are not fatal flaws in the research. (e) Conclude the paper with a general paragraph or so. VII. References There is no "right" number of references for a research paper. You may also need citations to sources for any measures you took from the literature or found on-line etc. VIII. Tables, Figures, Appendices

Tables and Figures may be helpful but are not required. There are many possibilities depending on the nature of the study; it is certainly permissible to present more than one table/figure. If you are testing a model/system of hypotheses, it is often helpful to summarize those hypotheses in a figure.also should include your measures in an appendix (i.e., complete survey items or examples of other research materials. Grading Criteria : the quality of the content of your research (i.e., the extent to which you fulfilled the goals of the assignment) and the quality of the writing/presentation. Listed below are some general tips for each of these criteria. Quality of content This involves two basic questions: (1) are all the goals of the assignment fulfilled? and (2) how well were they fulfill them? Some common mistakes I see include: 1. Not clearly identifying a gap in the literature that was aim to fill. 2. Not reviewing a sufficient amount of relevant literature. 3. Not clearly defining the study constructs and variables before providing hypotheses about them.

4. Not providing sufficient conceptual justification for the hypotheses. 5. Choosing methods that are not appropriate to test the hypotheses. 6. Not clearly defining the study variables or including an outcome measure in the analyses. 7. Not providing any kind of thoughtful discussion of the implications of the findings and possible directions for future research. Writing the paper should be consistent with the latest publication style of the American Psychological Association (a good free resource is https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01//. Some common mistakes students make include (1) referring to authors by their first names in the body of the paper (e.g., "According to a study by David Smith..."), (2) listing the title of the study or the name of the journal in the body of the paper (e.g., According to a study titled "The Effects of the Independent Variable on the Dependent Variable" published in the Journal of Applied Psychology...), (3) not providing page numbers for quoted material, (4) incomplete/improper formatting of references in the reference section.