Research Report
Order Description
Quantitative written research report
I. Evidence an introduction to the literature which contains indication of substantive
engagement with the relevant literature and a clear rationale for their research
II. Evidence an ability to describe their research process such that it could be replicated by other
researchers
III. Evidence a capacity to use appropriate methods to analyse quantitative data
IV. Describe quantitative research results in an appropriate style
V. Explain quantitative research results in an appropriate style

Layout:
Introduction to the literature
Hypotheses
Method
Procedure
Instrument
Participants
Ethics
Analysis
Results
Discussion
References
Appendix

Introduction to the literature
Hypotheses
Method
Procedure
Instrument
Participants
Ethics
Analysis
Results
Discussion
References
Appendix

Introduction to the literature
Does it contain a range of well referenced relevant literature to frame the context for your
research?
Does it build towards a clear rationale for your research needs to be carried out?
Hypotheses
Are your hypotheses clear and well presented?
Do they sufficiently articulate your independent and dependent variables?
Are they clear about whether you are using a null or directional hypothesis and can directional
hypotheses be supported by the literature?
Method
Does your method section contain the following?
Procedure
What did you actually do?
What did the participants actually do?
Can what I write mean that it can be replicated?
Instrument
What was the instrument and what did it measure?
How was the instrument developed?
Was it reliable and valid?
Evidence of instrument?
Participants
Who were they? Give as much detail as possible.
How were they recruited?
Ethics
What are the relevant ethical considerations that relate to your method?
Were there any potential risks to participants or researchers?
Did you follow a standard code of ethics that emphasises the importance of
confidentiality/anonymity, informed consent, the right to withdraw without
explanation?
Analysis
28
What analytical techniques did you draw upon and why were they the
appropriate techniques for your research?
Results
Have I adequately described the results?
Did I include descriptive statistics?
Did I include inferential test statistics?
Did I describe their significance?
Does the reader know what I found?
Discussion
Did I explain the results using relevant literature in the field?
Did I outline any implications, policy or otherwise?
Did I reflect on the strengths and limitations of my work?
Did I reflect on potential avenues for future research?
References
Are they perfect (if not then they need to be)
Do they use the Harvard system consistently?
Are they in the same font?
Appendix

Research report /

The participants were required to pretend they were epidemiologists, and to learn the source of the various food-based illnesses that were occurring in the city. In order to do this, they were presented with the names of different meals served in different restaurants, and the consequence that occurred(i.e.a disease or no disease). In each trial, the paritcipants were given the name of the resaurant and the name of the meal served in that restaurant. The participants then had to indicare on a scale form 0 to 8 whether they thought the meal would be followed by a disease or not. …..
causal test
The first test was designed to ask the participants how strongly they thought that a meal, erved in a particular restaurant, would cause a disease. In thistest, the participants were asked to rate how likely they thought that meals M01 and M02 served in either restaurant A or B would cause a diseae on a scale from 0 to 8………

memory test
The second test was designed to test the subjects’ memory for the training phases. In these tests, the subjects were asked to try to remember the particular name of the disease that a meal had been paired with. In this test, the subjects were given the name of one of the meals and a list of 5 options which were 4 diseases and ‘no disease’……………

Research report /

The participants were required to pretend they were epidemiologists, and to learn the source of the various food-based illnesses that were occurring in the city. In order to do this, they were presented with the names of different meals served in different restaurants, and the consequence that occurred(i.e.a disease or no disease). In each trial, the paritcipants were given the name of the resaurant and the name of the meal served in that restaurant. The participants then had to indicare on a scale form 0 to 8 whether they thought the meal would be followed by a disease or not. …..
causal test
The first test was designed to ask the participants how strongly they thought that a meal, erved in a particular restaurant, would cause a disease. In thistest, the participants were asked to rate how likely they thought that meals M01 and M02 served in either restaurant A or B would cause a diseae on a scale from 0 to 8………

memory test
The second test was designed to test the subjects’ memory for the training phases. In these tests, the subjects were asked to try to remember the particular name of the disease that a meal had been paired with. In this test, the subjects were given the name of one of the meals and a list of 5 options which were 4 diseases and ‘no disease’……………