AS Psychology - Holah.co.uk - Correlation Here are some exam style questions. Here is a tick off what you need to know sheet for correlations. Don't let yourself fall into the trap of believing that when there is a strong correlation between two variables that one of the variables causes the other. Association does not mean causation. For example, there is almost certainly a very high positive correlation between the length of people?s right arm and the length of their left arm. A matching coefficient quiz. When conducting correlational analysis it is important to operationalise the variables. A cloze hypothesis quiz. Home > Investigations > Correlation Correlation for Psychological Investigations Correlation refers to a measure of how strongly two or more variables are related to each other. A positive correlation means that high values of one variable are associated with high values of the other. A negative correlation means that high values of one variable are associated with low values of the other.
Writing a research article: advice to beginners Once the research question is clearly defined, writing the paper becomes considerably easier. The paper will ask the question, then answer it. The key to successful scientific writing is getting the structure of the paper right. The basic structure of a typical research paper is the sequence of Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion (sometimes abbreviated as IMRAD). Each section addresses a different objective. In turn, each basic section addresses several topics, and may be divided into subsections (Table 1). The Methods section should provide the readers with sufficient detail about the study methods to be able to reproduce the study if so desired. The Results section is typically fairly straightforward and factual. The Discussion section allows the most freedom. References should be used wisely.
"Graphs": Connect Fours Revision Quiz You will see a wall of 16 clues. You need to group them into 4 rows of 4 connected items. Simply click four cards to identify a group. After arranging all 4 groups (or when time runs out) the correct groups are shown. This quiz is based on, but is not affiliated with, the 'connect wall' element in the BBC quiz show 'Only Connect' gap between bars line of best fit sometimes drawn frequency on y axis (bars) continuous frequency data (not bars) +1 Point? dots not joined dots are joined frequency on y axis (not bars) simplified by plotting mean or total scores +1 Point? good for comparing two conditions/groups on one graph continuous frequency data (bars) discrete categories co-variables on axes frequency polygon sometimes drawn correlation no gap between bars data not continuous
Retraction Of Scientific Papers For Fraud Or Bias Is Just The Tip Of The Iceberg Publishing clinical trials in medical journals can help doctors and scientists rise through the ranks of the research hierarchy. While most play the publication game fairly, some cheat. Whereas all misconduct undermines the public’s trust in science – such as the recent retracted paper about gay canvassers – health research scandals put the health of millions of patients around the world in jeopardy. Professionals and patients depend on results from systematic reviews of clinical trials, which evaluate all the evidence on a particular issue, to know whether or not treatments are safe and effective. However, those of us who coordinate the preparation of Cochrane systematic reviews of treatments for seriously injured patients believe that these types of reviews can no longer be entirely trusted because of research misconduct and publication bias. An argument we recently made in the BMJ. Falsified Reports Bias In Reviews Cherry picking the data.
How Quickly Do Systematic Reviews Go Out of Date? A Survival Analysis From the Ottawa Health Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Chalmers Research Group, and Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Research Institute, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Disclaimer: The authors of this report are responsible for its content. Statements in the report should not be construed as endorsement by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Acknowledgments: The authors thank Keith O'Rourke for statistical advice, Jessie McGowan and Tamara Rader for assistance with searches, and Alison Jennings for assistance with development of the meta-analytic worksheet. They also gratefully acknowledge Dr. Grant Support: By the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, U.S. Potential Financial Conflicts of Interest: None disclosed. Reproducible Research Statement: The data set is available to interested readers by contacting Dr. Requests for Single Reprints: Kaveh G. Current Author Addresses: Drs. Ms. Mr.
Systematic review Systematic reviews are a type of literature review that collects and critically analyzes multiple research studies or papers, using methods that are selected before one or more research questions are formulated, and then finding and analyzing studies that relate to and answer those questions in a structured methodology.[1] They are designed to provide a complete, exhaustive summary of current literature relevant to a research question. Systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials are key in the practice of evidence-based medicine,[2] and a review of existing studies is often quicker and cheaper than embarking on a new study. An understanding of systematic reviews, and how to implement them in practice, is highly recommended for professionals involved in the delivery of health care. Characteristics[edit] A systematic review aims to provide a complete, exhaustive summary of current literature relevant to a research question. Stages[edit] The main stages of a systematic review are:
PLOS Medicine: Financial Conflicts of Interest and Reporting Bias Regarding the Association between Sugar-Sweetened Beverages and Weight Gain: A Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews Abstract Background Industry sponsors' financial interests might bias the conclusions of scientific research. Methods and Findings We conducted a search of the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases to identify published SRs from the inception of the databases to August 31, 2013, on the association between SSB consumption and weight gain or obesity. We identified 17 SRs (with 18 conclusions). An important limitation of this study is the impossibility of ruling out the existence of publication bias among those studies not declaring any conflict of interest. Conclusions Financial conflicts of interest may bias conclusions from SRs on SSB consumption and weight gain or obesity. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary Editors' Summary In our daily lives, we frequently rely on the results of scientific research to make decisions about our health. Why Was This Study Done? What Did the Researchers Do and Find? What Do These Findings Mean? Introduction Methods Results Figure 1.
Monitoring 101: Investigating performance issues - Datadog This post is part of a series on effective monitoring. Be sure to check out the rest of the series: Collecting the right data and Alerting on what matters. The responsibilities of a monitoring system do not end with symptom detection. Once your monitoring system has notified you of a real symptom that requires attention, its next job is to help you diagnose the root cause. Often this is the least structured aspect of monitoring, driven largely by hunches and guess-and-check. This series of articles comes out of our experience monitoring large-scale infrastructure for our customers. A word about data There are three main types of monitoring data that can help you investigate the root causes of problems in your infrastructure. By and large, work metrics will surface the most serious symptoms and should therefore generate the most serious alerts. It’s resources all the way down Most of the components of your infrastructure can be thought of as resources. 1. 2. 3. 4.
Investigating, Reporting, and Resolving a Problem This section describes how to use the Enterprise Manager Support Workbench (Support Workbench) to investigate and report a problem (critical error), and in some cases, resolve the problem. The section begins with a "roadmap" that summarizes the typical set of tasks that you must perform. Note: The tasks described in this section are all Enterprise Manager–based. Roadmap—Investigating, Reporting, and Resolving a Problem You can begin investigating a problem by starting from the Support Workbench home page in Enterprise Manager. Figure 8-2 illustrates the tasks that you complete to investigate, report, and in some cases, resolve a problem. The following are task descriptions. Task 1 – View Critical Error Alerts in Enterprise ManagerStart by accessing the Database Home page in Enterprise Manager, and reviewing critical error alerts. Task 1 – View Critical Error Alerts in Enterprise Manager To view critical error alerts: Task 2 –View Problem Details To view problem details: To close incidents:
Note-Taking for Reading When engaged in some form of study or research, either informally, for general interest, or formally, while in education or at work, you will no doubt need to read information, and potentially lots of information. This page describes how to take effective notes while reading, as a way to engage with the printed word, summarise and aid the learning process. We have a series of other related pages that you may find helpful. Our page, Effective Note-Taking covers how to take notes from verbal exchanges – the spoken word, which describes the most efficient note-taking for classes, lectures, meetings etc. See our pages: Effective Reading and Critical Reading for explanation, advice and comment on how to get the most from, and develop your, reading style. Taking Notes when Reading Reading for pleasure or as a way to relax, like when reading a novel, newspaper or magazine is usually a ‘passive’ exercise. What NOT To Do Effective Steps for Note-Taking Highlighting and Emphasising Making Written Notes
What Is Theory? This page covers the basics of understanding what is meant by the word ‘theory’ and how theories are developed. As well as describing theory the page gives a brief introduction to the steps involved in the construction of theory, in an academic or scientific context. A theory is a method we use to give us understanding. One of the major purposes of a theory is to provide an answer to the question ‘why?’. Asking, ‘why?’, to increase your knowledge of a subject area and realign your thoughts and opinions is an essential skill for anybody who wants to learn and develop. ‘Why’ is one of the very first questions that children ask: “Can you get ready for bed now?” Questions like these, from children, can be endless. Defining ‘theory’, therefore, has to take into account the ‘why?’ A theory is an attempt to explain why and so to provide understanding. Although there are no hard and fast rules, modern theory is usually developed through a series of steps, by academics and scientists. Research
Assignment Finishing Touches This page – part of our Study Skills section – provides some quick advice about the things you should check before you submit an assessed assignment. You don’t have to be a student, however, to find this page useful, perhaps you have been asked to prepare a document for work or socially? You have, no doubt, devoted a lot of time and effort to producing your work, researching your topic, carefully constructing your arguments or findings and writing it up. Before your work is submitted you should follow the simple framework outlined on this page to ensure that your work is received in the most positive way possible, for students this will ultimately mean better marks and for others it could mean the difference between your work being considered credible or not. This page covers: Knowing Your Deadline Presentation Basics Re-reading Proofreading Knowing Your Deadline For some general time management advice for study see our page: Finding Time to Study. Presentation Basics Re-reading Proofreading
Writing a Dissertation: Conclusions Once you have completed the main body of your dissertation or thesis, you then need to worry about drawing your conclusions, and the additional pages, such as whether to include a table of contents. Your university may have guidelines but, otherwise, you will have to use your own judgement. This page gives some advice about what is often included and why. Writing your Conclusion You may have been permitted, and have chosen, to include your conclusions in the discussion section, see our page on Results and Discussion for some ideas about why you might choose to do this. However, it is normal practice to include a short section at the end of your dissertation that draws out your conclusions. This section will need to have several elements, including: Your conclusion does not need to be very long; no more than five pages is usually sufficient, although detailed recommendations for practice may require more space. Other Elements for Inclusion Title Page Abstract Table of Contents Table of Figures
Dissertation Writing: Results and Discussion When writing a dissertation or thesis, the results and discussion sections can be both the most interesting as well as the most challenging sections to write. You may choose to write these sections separately, or combine them into a single chapter, depending on your university’s guidelines and your own preferences. There are advantages to both approaches. Writing the results and discussion as separate sections allows you to focus first on what results you obtained and set out clearly what happened in your experiments and/or investigations without worrying about their implications. This can focus your mind on what the results actually show and help you to sort them in your head. However, many people find it easier to combine the results with their implications as the two are closely connected. Check your university’s requirements carefully before combining the results and discussions sections as some specify that they must be kept separate. Results Section Warning! Top Tip For example: Conclusion