Scientific Writing
|
|
Goal of the course:
Students (mostly non-native speakers of English) acquire knowledge and skills in scientific writing and scientific methods applied in psychology by developing a short scientific research proposal (5.000 Characters without spaces and references) in their area of interest. Additionally, each student develops a small work-package (max 2 pages) in which s/he outlines the research methods which s/he would like to use to investigate the research question. This way, each group works out a multi-method research design (different methods to investigate closely related research questions).
Students are strongly encouraged to envision research questions and methods they feel are most interesting/relevant to them.
Didactic Method:
This course follows an experience-oriented approach.
Do what you don't know how to do. Experiment, run risks and make mistakes. Your engagement and enthusiasm to run risks counts!
Schedule: In the first week students are grouped according to their interests and work actively in small research teams on the development of
From November 2018 to February 2019 students will work in their research groups through the following tasks:
Work Packages:
Each of your Work packages for the Research Methods will then start from the research question you presented in the introduction. In your work package explain the methods you want to use for your research:
Students (mostly non-native speakers of English) acquire knowledge and skills in scientific writing and scientific methods applied in psychology by developing a short scientific research proposal (5.000 Characters without spaces and references) in their area of interest. Additionally, each student develops a small work-package (max 2 pages) in which s/he outlines the research methods which s/he would like to use to investigate the research question. This way, each group works out a multi-method research design (different methods to investigate closely related research questions).
Students are strongly encouraged to envision research questions and methods they feel are most interesting/relevant to them.
Didactic Method:
This course follows an experience-oriented approach.
Do what you don't know how to do. Experiment, run risks and make mistakes. Your engagement and enthusiasm to run risks counts!
Schedule: In the first week students are grouped according to their interests and work actively in small research teams on the development of
- their research question;
- the structure of their introduction;
- the formulation of their research proposal;
- the literature research and access to scientific journals and the use of reference managers (e.g. Zotero, Endnote...);
- learn the fundamentals of scientific writing;
- learn the fundamentals of scientific research methods (quantitative and qualitative research methods);
- learn how to choose the appropriate method to investigate the research questions.
From November 2018 to February 2019 students will work in their research groups through the following tasks:
- Research groups will continue to develop together their research proposal - the introduction of 5.000 characters (spaces excluded) - on the psychological research question of their interest;
- Relevance of your Topic/phenomenon: Why is the topic important? (Provide existing data - if possible);
- Specifications (Definitions): What is your topic about precisely? Provide the Scientific context of your Research (other relevant studies);
- Research mission and possible implications: What needs to be understood better? Re-state your research question;
Work Packages:
Each of your Work packages for the Research Methods will then start from the research question you presented in the introduction. In your work package explain the methods you want to use for your research:
- Each group-member develops one work package (WP) in which one method for the empirical investigation of the research question will be outlined (max. 2 pages).
- On the the 15th of February the research proposal together with the individual work Packages has to be submitted in Word-formatted documents to the tutors:
- Tarek.el-Sehity@sfu.ac.at
- Jennifer.Stark@univie.ac.at
- Raffaella.Pocobello@istc.cnr.it
- We will send the research proposals to 4-5 reviewers (students from complementary groups) for a constructive review. The review has to be send to all tutors by the 8th of March.
- The tutors will inspect/evaluate the reviews and send it back to the research-groups by the 11th of March with the request to consider the reviews for the final version of the research proposal to be presented in written form in Vienna in the second week of May.
- The final text version of the research proposal (5.000 characters) will be read and discussed together in April (15.04-19.04) in Vienna.
- In April, each group-member will prepare and present a short presentation (max. 4 Slides) of their work-packages which outlines the method chosen to deal with their research question.
- 15.11.2018 (Thursday) 10:00-16:00: Introduction and Organization of the Course. Group formation according to participants' interests in psychology. (TeS1&JS1)
Program |
08:00-11:30 |
11:30-15:00 |
16.11.2018 (Friday) |
Group A: Scientific Writing (RP1) Group B: Research Methods (JS2) |
Group B: Scientific Writing (RP1) Group A: Research Methods (JS2) |
17.11.2018 (Saturday) |
Group A: Scientific Writing (RP2) Group B: Research Methods (TeS2) |
Group B: Scientific Writing (RP2) Group A: Research Methods (TeS2) |
19.11.2018 (Monday) |
Group A: Scientific Writing (RP3) Group B: Research Methods (JS3) |
Group B: Scientific Writing (RP3) Group A: Research Methods (JS3) |
20.11.2018 (Tuesday) |
Group A: Scientific Writing (TeS3) Group B: Research Methods (JS4) |
Group B: Scientific Writing (TeS3) Group A: Research Methods (JS4) |
|
Content and Structure
|
Input
|
Output
|
|
Research Group Formation;
Developing the Research Question; Methodological basics |
Conceptual foundations
Knowing how to find a research question, to formulate hypotheses, and which relationships are investigated in Psychology |
|
Title, Key Words, Relevance of Examples,
structuring the content Quantitative research and methods |
First structuring of the research proposal;
|
|
IMRaD-Structure of scientific articles;
Reference Manager (e.g. Zotero.org) |
Development of the proposal: Structure of Introduction; Start the development of WPs
|
|
Qualitative research and methods
Group Writing, Search Terms, Access to journals, |
First scientific references and examples/cases from the field
|
|
The importance of samples
Group work on the work packages |
Developing the text and planing of the writing in Milano
Knowledge on sampling techniques, the relevance of sample composition and size Finalizing the methods for the work packages |
|
|
Research Proposal to be submitted in Word.doc format to:
Tarek.el-Sehity@sfu.ac.at Jennifer.Stark@univie.ac.at Raffaella.Pocobello@istc.cnr.it |
|
22nd February 2019: Email invitation for the review with guidelines:
The review process: You may not simply reject the proposal, but you have to offer suggestions to improve the work. Your review will be anonymous to your colleagues. You need to send it by the 8th of March to the editors Tarek.el-Sehity@sfu.ac.at Jennifer.Stark@univie.ac.at Raffaella.Pocobello@istc.cnr.it in Word.doc format First, some general recommendations while writing your review: 1. Be honest. 2. Do not let personal sympathy or antipathy play a role in your assessment and wording. 3. Be tactful and show of respect. 4. Keep in mind that you could be erring and phrase your statements in a reversible manor. 5. Always stay constructive! First focus on the strengths and be encouraging. As you read through the proposals, consider how the draft measures up to the following criteria: With respect to the introductory section (“The state of the art”) 1. Is the introduction well-written and easy to understand? * If yes: which are the strong parts? * If not: underline the parts which are not clear and offer solutions where possible to you. 2. Is the research-question clear and well formulated? * If not: evidence the lack of the research question and/or provide better formulations. 3. Is the structure of the proposal clear and comprehensible? * If not: help in the identification of a better structure (e.g. what to present first and next to what argument…) 4. Do the authors synthesize the literature well? * If not: evidence it in the text 5. Are you convinced by the relevance of the research question? * Why or why not? State your reasons. 6. Does the introduction identify the topic clearly? * If not, what needs to be clearer? 7. Does the introduction conclude with a hypothesis or a research question (using the first person – “In this research proposal, we will …”). * Remember: the research question provides a strong guiding principle for the rest of the proposal! * If not: Offer some ideas… 8. Use of clear, concrete language and example to develop ideas; attention to detail * Note in text possible parts to improve 9. Effective use of source material (textual and visual as appropriate), which is integrated into the argument. * If not: suggest some sources, or mark in red what is better left 10. Bibliography contains the full list of citation in APA-style * If not: evidence in red the lack and misquotations A good work package: 1. Is the methodology clearly explained and do you understand what the researcher are going to do? * Evidence all possible contradictions and shortcomings of the method used * Suggest more appropriate methods, if you can 2. Does it offer good reasons for the choice of that particular research design? * Evidence the lack of a good reason |
|
LOOKING FORWARD SEEING YOU IN VIENNA! |
Timetable for the
Viennese SFU-Workshop on Short Research Proposals:
|
Days
|
Morning Sessions
|
Afternoon Sessions
|
|
10:00-10:30: Welcome note and introduction to the second part of the course as a conference.
10:30 - 12:00: Open forum on the experiences made (from Nov-May) during the course |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Evaluation criteria for the course
9.0 - 8.0p = "well" (2)
7.5 -.6.5p = "satisfactory" (3)
5.5 - 6.0 p = "sufficient" (4)
0.0 - 5.0 p = "insufficient" (5)
- Introductory text of the research proposal (max. 5.000 characters): 0-2 points
- Work package: scientific appropriateness of the chosen research methods: 0-2 points
- Review: constructiveness of review provided to the proposal of the other groups: 0-2 points
- Scientific quality of the final version of the research proposal: 0-2 points
- Methodological quality of the presentation of the Work Package (choice of sample size, operationalization of variables, choice of instruments, etc.): 0-2 points
9.0 - 8.0p = "well" (2)
7.5 -.6.5p = "satisfactory" (3)
5.5 - 6.0 p = "sufficient" (4)
0.0 - 5.0 p = "insufficient" (5)
Helpful References and Literature
- American Psychological Society. “APA Style.” American Psychological Association, 2009. http://www.apastyle.org/.
- ———. Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. 6 überarbeitete. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association, 2009.
- American Psychological Association. Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. 6 edizione. Washington, DC: Amer Psychological Assn, 2009.
- Belcher, Wendy Laura. Writing Your Journal Article in 12 Weeks: A Guide to Academic Publishing Success. Sage Pubn Inc, 2009.
- Carlisle, E. Fred. “Teaching Scientific Writing Humanistically: From Theory to Action.” The English Journal 67, no. 4 (April 1978): 35–39.
- Chiswick, Malcolm. “Writing a Research Paper.” Current Paediatrics. Accessed January 25, 2010. doi:10.1016/j.cupe.2004.07.003.
- Day, Robert A., and Barbara Gastel. How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper. 6th ed. Santa Barbara: Greenwood Press, 2006.
- Enke, C. G. “Scientific Writing: One Scientist’s Perspective.” The English Journal 67, no. 4 (April 1978): 40–43.
- Esselborn-Krumbiegel, Helga. Von Der Idee Zum Text. Eine Anleitung Zum Wissenschaftlichen Schreiben. 3. Stuttgart: UTB, 2008.
- Fahy, Kathleen. “Writing for Publication: Argument and Evidence.” Women and Birth. Accessed January 25, 2010. doi:10.1016/j.wombi.2008.04.001.
- ———. “Writing for Publication: The Basics.” Women and Birth. Accessed January 25, 2010. doi:10.1016/j.wombi.2007.12.005.
- Friedland, Andrew J., Carol Folt, and Carol L. Folt. Writing Successful Science Proposals. Illustrated edition. Yale University Press, 2000.
- Glasman-deal, Hilary. Science Research Writing: A Guide for Non-Native Speakers of English. London ; Hackensack, NJ: Imperial College Press, 2009.
- Gustavii, Bjorn. How to Write and Illustrate a Scientific Paper. 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press, 2008.
- Hartley, James, Eric Sotto, and James Pennebaker. “Style and Substance in Psychology: Are Influential Articles More Readable than Less Influential Ones?” Social Studies of Science 32, no. 2 (April 2002): 321–34.
- Kruse, Otto. Keine Angst vor dem leeren Blatt: Ohne Schreibblockaden durchs Studium. 12th ed. Campus Verlag, 2007.
- Levitt, Leon. “Of Scientific Writing and the First-Person Singular.” The Academy of Management Review 23, no. 2 (April 1998): 216–17.
- Nicol, Adelheid A. M., Linda M. Norlander, and Penny M. Pexman. Displaying Your Findings: A Practical Guide for Creating Figures, Posters, and Presentations. 1st ed. Amer Psychological Assn, 2003.
- Ogburn, William F. “On Scientific Writing.” The American Journal of Sociology 52, no. 5 (March 1947): 383–88.
- Silvia, Paul J. How to Write a Lot: A Practical Guide to Productive Academic Writing. 1st ed. Amer Psychological Assn, 2007.
- Soanes, Catherine, and Angus Stevenson. Oxford Dictionary of English. 2nd ed., Revised. Oxford University Press, 2005.
- Stalnaker, Bonny J. “But I’ve Never Taught Scientific and Technical Writing Before!” The English Journal 67, no. 4 (April 1978): 48–50.
- Sternberg, Robert J. Guide to Publishing in Psychology Journals. 1st ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.
- ———. The Psychologist’s Companion: A Guide to Scientific Writing for Students and Researchers. 4th ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
- Strunk, William I. The Elements of Style. 4th ed. Longman York Press, 1999.
- Wilkes, John. “Science Writing: Who? What? How?” The English Journal 67, no. 4 (April 1978): 56–60.
- “Writing Guidelines for Engineering and Science Students.” Writing Guidelines for Engineering and Science Students. Accessed October 19, 2009. http://writing.engr.psu.edu/.
- Yant, J. T., and Jen Tsi Yang. Outline of Scientific Writing, An, for R: For Researchers with English as a Foreign Language. World Scientific Pub Co, 1995.