The purpose of this assignment is to help you read and summarize research in psychology. This assignment builds on the Article Dissection and Article Summary assignments that you "should" have done in General Psychology I and II (or Intro to Psych).

1. Read the attached article by Gingerich and Lineweaver (2014)

• Provide the full citation of the article, as it would appear in a reference list of an a p a 

 

1. Who is/are the author(s) of this article?
2. What year was this article published?

 

1. What is the hypothesis?
   1. Make sure to include the IV, DV, and predicted relationship between them.
   2. If multiple hypotheses, make sure to state these.

 

1. How many participants were in the study?
2. Who were the participants (e.g., college students, infants, etc)?
3. Were the participants compensated for their participation?

 

1. What was/were the independent variable(s)?
2. How many levels of the independent variable(s) were there?
3. What were the levels of the IV(s)? That is, what groups were people divided into?
4. What was the dependent variable?
5. What materials were used in the study? Did participants complete a survey, use a computer program, were they interviewed, etc?
6. Summarize what the participants did.
7. What type of research method was used? That is, was it an experiment, a correlational study, an observational study or a case study?

 

1. How was the data analyzed (that is, what statistical analysis was used)?
2. Did the author(s) find a significant effect?
3. What did you learn from the figure (graph) in the results section?

 

1. Was the hypothesis supported?
2. What can you conclude from this study?
3. Did the author(s) make any suggestions for further investigation? If so, what suggestion was made?
4. Write the APA-Style reference and a summary of the article

 

1. Write the A P A reference and a  summary of the article.

Transcribed Image Text:

Check for updates Topical Article OMG! Texting in Class U Fail :( = Empirical Evidence That Text Messaging During Class Disrupts Comprehension SOCIETY FOR THE TEACHING OF PSYCHOLOGY Teaching of Psychology 2014, Vol 41 (1) 44-51 The Author(s) 2013 Reprints and permission: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0098628313514177 top.sagepub.com SSAGE Amanda C. Gingerich' and Tara T. Lineweaver' Abstract In two experiments, we examined the effects of text messaging during lecture on comprehension of lecture material. Students (in Experiment 1) and randomly assigned participants (in Experiment 2) in a text message condition texted a prescribed con- versation while listening to a brief lecture. Students and participants in the no-text condition refrained from texting during the same lecture. Postlecture quiz scores confirmed the hypothesis that texting during lecture would disrupt comprehension and retention of lecture material. In both experiments, the no-text group significantly outscored the text group on the quiz and felt more confident about their performance. The classroom demonstration described in Experiment I provides preliminary empiri- cal evidence that texting during class disrupts comprehension in an actual classroom environment. Experiment 2 addressed the selection bias and demand characteristic issues present in Experiment I and replicated the main findings. Together, these two experiments clearly illustrate the detrimental effects of texting during class, which could discourage such behavior in students. Keywords texting, distraction, comprehension, cognitive overload According to Nielsen, U.S. wireless subscribers between the ages of 18 and 24 sent an average of 790 text messages per month between January 2006 and June 2008 (The Nielsen Company, 2008). That equates to more than one text message on average sent each hour of every day over the entire month. Survey Copious research has demonstrated the detrimental cogni- tive effects of divided attention, although not conducted in a classroom setting. Rubinstein, Meyer, and Evans (2001), for example, found that people lost time as they switched from one cognitive task to another: the amount of time they lost Check for updates Topical Article OMG! Texting in Class U Fail :( = Empirical Evidence That Text Messaging During Class Disrupts Comprehension SOCIETY FOR THE TEACHING OF PSYCHOLOGY Teaching of Psychology 2014, Vol 41 (1) 44-51 The Author(s) 2013 Reprints and permission: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0098628313514177 top.sagepub.com SSAGE Amanda C. Gingerich' and Tara T. Lineweaver' Abstract In two experiments, we examined the effects of text messaging during lecture on comprehension of lecture material. Students (in Experiment 1) and randomly assigned participants (in Experiment 2) in a text message condition texted a prescribed con- versation while listening to a brief lecture. Students and participants in the no-text condition refrained from texting during the same lecture. Postlecture quiz scores confirmed the hypothesis that texting during lecture would disrupt comprehension and retention of lecture material. In both experiments, the no-text group significantly outscored the text group on the quiz and felt more confident about their performance. The classroom demonstration described in Experiment I provides preliminary empiri- cal evidence that texting during class disrupts comprehension in an actual classroom environment. Experiment 2 addressed the selection bias and demand characteristic issues present in Experiment I and replicated the main findings. Together, these two experiments clearly illustrate the detrimental effects of texting during class, which could discourage such behavior in students. Keywords texting, distraction, comprehension, cognitive overload According to Nielsen, U.S. wireless subscribers between the ages of 18 and 24 sent an average of 790 text messages per month between January 2006 and June 2008 (The Nielsen Company, 2008). That equates to more than one text message on average sent each hour of every day over the entire month. Survey Copious research has demonstrated the detrimental cogni- tive effects of divided attention, although not conducted in a classroom setting. Rubinstein, Meyer, and Evans (2001), for example, found that people lost time as they switched from one cognitive task to another: the amount of time they lost