Drafting an Introduction for your Pr-Registration Paper
Research question: Does an individual’s social media use cause them to be more or less dishonest?
To receive full credit for this assignment, you should:
Submit a complete first draft of your introduction section (around 2-3 pages double-spaced) based on a research question that was approved by your instructor
Include a title page that includes:
The title of the paper
Your name and affiliation
A running head IN ALL CAPS (which also appears on the following pages)
A page number (which also appears on the following pages)
Include a references page that contains all in-text citations and is properly formatted.
Use Times New Roman, 12-point font, double-spaced.
Use at least 5 properly formatted APA7 citations in the text of your introduction.
GENERAL INFORMATION:
Purpose of an introduction
Introduce your topic and research question to the reader
Explain why it is important that we study your research question
Describe how previous work relates to your hypothesis—supporting it or not
Justify your hypotheses and set up the rationale for the current study
State your hypotheses clearly
Structure of papers and Introduction
The introduction begins broadly and narrows to the hypothesis of the current study. You can conceptualize the introduction as having the four sections below, each having a goal. The research question and ultimately the hypothesis is the focus of the paper and is introduced in this section.
Illustration of the narrowing of focus of the introduction
Section 1: Broad introduction. Introduce your topic, make it relevant, and grab the reader’s attention. Define your key variables. Identify your research question.
This section is typically 1-2 paragraphs. Your first sentence or so is sometimes called a ‘hook’.
The hook helps your reader understand the importance and relevance of your topic. Real world examples of either daily life or research applications may be used to motivate your reader to keep reading.
In this introduction section, you should introduce and define the variables in your study. The reader should understand what your research question is by the end of this section.
Section 2: Review the prior research, explain what we know about the possible relationship. Summarize previous research in a structured way. Begin to narrow toward the hypothesis.
Organize this review so that as you discuss each study, it builds towards your proposed study. It should not read like a list of diverse findings; it should tell a story.
As you concisely describe one study, you will want to transition to the next. You may wish to begin with a brief outline of what evidence you will summarize.
You need to include at least 5 empirical articles, but you should also cite any other work you draw from (including other kinds of papers such as reviews).
A key challenge is how to remain concise when summarizing. Only include what is relevant to the current topic.
You may want to describe:
The key findings of previous studies, the general method that was used, but you will not likely want to describe the nitty-gritty details of the method, such as the Ns (unless the study was dangerously small).
If the particular population studied was important, then include it (e.g. special age groups, individual differences). If not, do not give great detail.
If the way the variables were operational is unclear, or different in important ways from the current study, then include details, if not, keep it simple.
You may also often include the researchers’ conclusions or interpretations, but bear in mind, others may come to different conclusions from the same findings.
If you find contrasting/contradicting studies, acknowledge this, it makes the topic more interesting. If there is any insight as to why these differences occur, include it.
If the studies that you have read also contain several other factors or variables not directly relevant to the current study, be deliberate in what you include.
You may choose to summarize just the relevant findings from a complex multiple experiment paper. Be sure though that you don’t distort the overall findings from that study when you do.
Section 3: Provide the rationale for the current study. Point out a gap in the literature, i.e. what don’t we know yet? Explain why there is reason to fill this gap (with the current study). Why is the current study needed?
Section 4: Propose the current study. Finally, state your hypothesis clearly, in terms of direction and magnitude if possible. Your reader should understand clearly what you expect.
You will need to quickly summarize the method of the study in 1-2 sentences to put the hypotheses in context.
Then state your hypotheses (which are based on the most relevant literature), explaining briefly why (you may end up citing here, something you previously reviewed)
Your hypotheses should clearly name the variables and the predicted direction of the effects and should match your research design (e.g., in a simple experimental design, you will state predicted comparisons between groups)
