Missouri University of Science and Technology

English 1160: Writing and Research

“Dogs vs. Babies”

Understanding Methodology

Once you have accessed this worksheet, click "File" and "Make a copy" to edit. Then, submit to the
Canvas assignment as a Word or Google doc. (If submitting as a Google doc, make sure that your
professor is shared as "can edit")

A paper’s methodology, or “research design,” is a description of how the authors went about answering their research
questions. For a systematic review (aka literature review), the methodology usually contains these five elements:
1. A statement of the research question(s) or the problem the study is trying to solve
2. A description of where the author will search for the sources to be collected, including any databases or
websites (generally, we don’t mention specific scholarly journals here)
3. A description of inclusion criteria - that is, what kinds of sources the author will search for (should indicate
the content of the desired articles, not simply the fact that they would be “credible” or “peer reviewed”)
4. A description of exclusion criteria - that is, what kinds of sources the author will not include in the study (this
helps to narrow the study’s scope, so that you’re not expected to read everything on a particular subject)
5. A description of what the author will be doing with those articles - that is, what exactly the author is looking
for, and how that content will be evaluated or incorporated into the study

N.B. When you write your methodology for your proposal, you should include each of these five steps in future tense (“I
will use the following databases…”) because you have not yet conducted your research. When you describe your
methodology in your literature review you should touch on each of the five steps, but your language should be more
conversational (your readers will be more interested in your results than in your process), and you should write in past
tense (“I used the following databases…”) because the research has already been conducted.

For this activity, I have provided you with two sources that describe the studies’ methodologies, and you will be asked to
identify the five elements in the boxes provided. Your two sources are:
● “The Data Says Don’t Hug The Dog” by Stanley Coren
● “Breast milk and cognitive development—the role of confounders: a systematic review” by Asnat Walfisch et.al

“Don’t Hug the Dog” “Breast milk and cognitive development”

Is this source a popular or A scholarly sources because it is peer A scholarly source because it is a journal
a scholarly source? How do reviewed part of a database with a professor as a
you know? correspondence.

What is the study’s The reactions of dogs to being hugged. The relationship between breast milk
research question? consumption and cognitive development

What are the databases that American Veterinary Society of Animal MEDLINE(R) with Daily Update, Cochrane
the author searched to Behavior (AVSAB) because this source is Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane
relevant to expertise in the reactions of Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of
answer the research Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Health
dogs. Also references the authors books
question? Why did the Technology Assessment, NHS Economic

Jossalyn G. Larson, Ph.D

[email protected]
Missouri University of Science and Technology
English 1160: Writing and Research

author choose those that also focus on the reactions of dogs to Evaluation Database, EMBASE and PsycINFO
databases? human actions. using the OvidSP interface and on Science
Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED),
Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI),
Conference Proceedings Citation Index-
Science (CPCI-S), and Conference
Proceedings Citation Index—Social Science &
Humanities (CPCI-SSH) using the Web of
Knowledge interface.

What was the study’s The author studied whether the dogs -One of the study aims was to address the
inclusion criteria? What were stressed, relaxed, or neutral in all question of breastfeeding and cognitive
development;
was the rationale for pictures. This would show the overall -The authors used reliable validated methods
including those items? trend of how dogs reacted to being to evaluate cognitive development (eg, Bayley
hugged. scales of infant development, Wechsler
Intelligence Scale for Children Revised (WISC-
R));
-Prospective or retrospective documentation of
use and duration of breastfeeding was used;
The authors focused on healthy term infants
and not those at increased biological risk for
developmental delays (eg, prematurity,
intrauterine growth restriction).

What was the study’s Photos where the dog might be showing -The study group included preterm or small for
exclusion criteria? What stress for reasons other than being gestational age babies. This could affect the
cognitive ability of the child and thus add
was the rationale for hugged because that would not show data another variable to the study
excluding those items? specifically for how dogs react to being -Evaluation of cognitive development was
hugged. carried out using only a non-reliable or
subjective tool (such as school grades, or
maternal report). The would lead to bias results
in the conclusion due to this information being
bias
-Dietary patterns and breastfeeding were not
evaluated since birth. This would lead to a
conclusion that might not take into account
unknown information that might have affected
the results.

How does the author The author studies photos of dogs being
evaluate the items included hugged by humans and looks for signs of A (good): A study that adheres mostly to the
in the study? How does the stress. They then calculate the commonly held concepts of high quality
author suggest that this percentages proving that dogs are more including the following: clear description of the
population, setting, interventions and
evaluation will answer the often than not quite stressed when being comparison groups; clear description of the
research question? hugged comparison groups; appropriate measurement
of outcomes; appropriate statistical and
analytic methods and reporting; no reporting
errors; less than 20% dropout; clear reporting
of dropouts and appropriate consideration and
adjustment for potential confounders.

B (fair/moderate): Category B studies do not

meet all the criteria in category A because they
have some deficiencies, but none of them are
likely to cause major biases. The study may
have suboptimal adjustment for potential
confounders. The study may also be missing
information, making it difficult to assess

Jossalyn G. Larson, Ph.D

[email protected]
Missouri University of Science and Technology
English 1160: Writing and Research

limitations and potential problems.

C (poor): Category C studies either did not

consider potential confounders or did not
adjust for them appropriately. These studies
may have serious shortcomings in design,
analysis or reporting; have large amounts of
missing information, or discrepancies in
reporting.

Do you think that this Yes this methodology was able to show The study does show that there is
methodology adequately the overarching reaction of dogs to correlation between breastfeeding and
answers the research hugging enough to prove that hugging a cognitive development, but does not really
question? Why or why not? dog is not a recommended nor healthy prove that improved cognitive
way to show affection for the dog. development is due to breastfeeding. It is
stated in the essay but things like wealth,
location, and resources could all contribute
to the same change in cognitive
development.

Jossalyn G. Larson, Ph.D

[email protected]