Checklist for Measurement Project

Abstract

Are implications of research discussed? Yes No

Have you kept in mind the goal of the research and avoided

claims that far exceed that goal? Yes No

Introduction

We have not put any results of the study in the introduction. Yes No

When we make a claim (e.g., "honesty" is an important aspect

of every relationship"; "emotions start in the mind and then the

body reacts"), we cite a study or book that supports

that assertion. Yes No

We define our construct and cite the source of our definition. Yes No

We explained the reasons for the types of items we Yes No

will include (e.g., why we will have three subscales)

We have kept in mind the goal of the research and have not

put forth hypotheses that go beyond that goal -- and beyond

what we could have found in the study conducted. Yes No

We have made it clear why we want to do the study (This

might include talking about the importance of the construct

and the weaknesses --or lack of--of existing measures of

that construct). Yes No

We have avoided talking about our own personal experiences

and feelings. Yes No

We have included a statement, such as "The purpose of this

study was to examine the ___ Scale's ......." Yes No

Method

Is it clear that your scale is separate from that of the other scales

that were given to participants? (You may have to make sure

you didn't mislead/confuse readers in your Abstract as well)Yes No

For each of the other scales you used, have you cited the source

of the items for that scale? Yes No

If we took items from a scale, we said so, rather than

saying "we got our ideas for questions from an article

written by ...." Yes No

Is it clear from your write-up what each of the scales you

used was supposed to measure? For example, did you avoid

saying "our discriminant measure was ...." without telling

us what construct the scale was supposed to measure. Yes No

We included sample items from each measure. Yes No

We used separate paragraphs to describe each measure. Yes No

Did you avoid misusing the terms "randomly selected" or

"randomly assigned"? (You may have to make sure

you didn't mislead readers in your Abstract as well) Yes No

Did you avoid misusing the term "experiment"? Yes No

Results

When you report an analysis using correlation coefficients,

is it clear that you are correlating two sets of scores?Yes No

When you talked about a correlation, was it clear which two

scales or sets of scores were being correlated with each other?

(You may have to make sure you didn't confuse readers

about this in your Abstract as well) Yes No

We allow the reader to understand what the correlation

coefficient means. That is, they know what a high score

on each measure indicates, so they know what a positive

or negative correlation between the scales shows. Yes No

When you report an analysis, do you give a reason for

doing the analysis (rather than merely reporting a

correlation coefficient)? Yes No

When you report an analysis, do you tell whether the

results provide evidence for the internal consistency,

convergent validity, or discriminant validity of your study?Yes No

Do you use the correct form of reporting the Pearson

r? (See the format checklist in Appendix A) Yes No

If we didn't do a statistical significance test, we didn't

say that our results were significant (or not significant). Yes No

Discussion

As with the introduction, we have kept in mind the goal

of the research and have not put forth hypotheses that go

beyond that goal. Yes No

We have not acted like results of the study support

conclusions that they do not. Yes No

Have you spelled out some interesting future directions for

research? (Note: Sometimes, in your original introduction,

you suggested some good directions. Sometimes,

in your original discussion, you even claimed your research

proved certain interesting hypotheses Although your study

wasn't designed to test those ideas, further studies could.)Yes No

If we argued for using more participants in a future study,

we clearly explained the benefits of that strategy. Yes No

If our discriminant validity was poor because our measure

correlated too strongly with another measure, we speculated

about the reasons for this strong relationship. Yes No

General

We have read your paper aloud to somebody to see if it Yes No

makes sense.

We have avoided the passive tense. Yes No

We have tried not to confuse "affect" and "effect" Yes No

We use "who" or "whom" to refer to people rather Yes No

than the word "that."

We didn't make cause-effect statements you couldn't back up. Yes No

We didn't use the term "experiment" if we didn't really mean

experiment. Yes No

We didn't use any bold-face type. Yes No

We outlined our introduction and discussion sections. Yes No

We avoided the word "which" whenever possible. Yes No

Numbers under 10 are spelled out ("four") rather than

put in number format ("4"). Yes No

We have spell-checked our paper. Yes No


Note: You should be able to answer " yes" to all these questions.


Back to Chapter 5 Main Menu