Overview

The aim of this 1500-word lab report is to investigate how

This assignment is worth 40% of the
accurately people can detect fake news headlines across
total mark for Cognitive Psychology
three conditions. As part of your lab classes, you participated
(PSYC20007).
in a categorisation experiment requiring you to classify
actual news headlines as “real” or “fake”. In one condition,
Due 16 September 2024 before 8:00
participants are instructed on the key attributes used in fake
am.
news headlines. In the other condition, participants only
have a limited amount of time to classify each headline. The
final condition is a control condition.

Students were randomly allocated to one of these conditions, making this a between-conditions design. Average
detection accuracy was recorded and compared across conditions.

We hypothesise that compared to the Control condition, accuracy will be increased in the Instruction condition and
decreased in the Deadline condition. Please note, you should state your hypotheses in your own words.

Due date
The lab report is due before 8:00 am on Monday, 16th September (Week 9).

Word limit
The 1500-word limit for the lab report includes the Abstract, Introduction, Results, Discussion, and in-text
citations. The 10% word-limit penalty applies as per the Student Manual. The following items are not included in
the word limit but are expected:

• The Method. Students will be provided with a Method in the lab report template which will help with
understanding what was done in this “experiment”. Students will have to fill in the number of
participants and some additional summary details.
• Other report elements. Heading, sub-headings, figures and/or tables, title page, and the reference list.

Readings
The following are required readings for the lab report. These readings will give you a strong grounding in both
understanding why the study of fake news/misinformation is important, but also a background in basic
categorisation research and theory. Beyond these readings, it will be up to you to decide what information to
include in your introduction. You are also encouraged to include other papers you may come across while
researching on search engines such as the University of Melbourne Library, Google Scholar, or PubMed.

Kruschke, J. K. (2005). Category learning. In R. Goldstone & K. Lamberts (Eds.), The handbook of cognition (pp. 183-
201). Sage Publications Ltd. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781848608177

Lamberts, K. (1995). Categorization under time pressure. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124(2), 161-
180. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.124.2.161

Pennycook, G., & Rand, D. G. (2021). The psychology of fake news. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 25(5), 388-402.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2021.02.007
Assessment criteria
A. Title and Abstract Weight
A1. Title Content • Clearly and concisely outlines the main topic of the research, 2%
including the relationship between key variables.
A2. Abstract Content • Provides a brief, comprehensive summary of the paper in a 8%
paragraph of no more than 150 words. This summary includes a
concise description of:
o the problem under investigation (i.e., the research topic)
o key study characteristics (e.g., number of participants,
study design, main outcome measures, data-gathering
and analysis procedures)
o the main findings
o the implications of the findings for the problem under
investigation
B. Introduction Weight
B1. Opening • Opens by introducing the problem under investigation and 5%
outlining its importance.
B2. Literature Review • Provides a succinct and focused review of literature relevant to 8%
(Relevance and the problem.
Understanding) • Summarises key background information accurately and in
appropriate detail.
B3. Literature Review • Develops a cogent rationale by critically evaluating the literature 7%
(Rationale) and explaining how the current study builds on prior research.
B4. Aims and Hypotheses • Outlines the purpose and scope of the study and generates 5%
specific hypotheses for testing.
C. Method Weight
C1. Participants • Describes the participants involved in the research. In most cases, 0%
this includes:
- number of participants in total and in relevant subgroups
- descriptive statistics for years of age
- gender composition of the sample
- other major demographic characteristics as warranted by
the study
- eligibility and exclusion criteria
C2. Materials and • Describes all outcome measures, and the materials used to derive 0%
Measures them, with sufficient detail to facilitate reproducibility.
C3. Procedure and • Describes the procedures that were carried out in the study, 0%
Design including a detailed outline of how participants were allocated to
groups or conditions and the specific steps involved in collecting
and analysing data.
D. Results Weight
D1. Statistical • Presents all relevant statistical information accurately and 5%
Information completely.
D2. Presentation • Describes the results of each analysis appropriately and presents 10%
statistical and mathematical information in correct APA Style
format.
• Presents results in an organised manner, following the structure
set by the study’s design and the order of the aims and
hypotheses.
• Avoids making interpretive comments that are better suited for
the Discussion (e.g., interpreting what the result means for the
hypotheses stated in the Introduction).
D3. Tables and Figures • Presents at least one table or figure which is referred to and 5%
described appropriately in text.
• Tables/figures conform to the requirements of APA Style.
• Each table/figure serves a purpose and does not merely duplicate
information contained in the text or in another table or figure.
E. Discussion Weight
E1. Hypotheses • Opens with a clear statement summarising the aims and 5%
hypotheses and indicating whether the hypotheses were
supported or not.
E2. Interpretation • Considers how the study’s findings are similar to or different from 15%
relevant prior work.
• Considers what the results mean for the problem under
investigation, particularly with regard to the specific issues raised
in the Introduction.
• Reflects on how the study advances scholarship in the field
without overstating the importance of the study and its findings.
E3. Future Directions • Suggests future directions informed by issues that remain 8%
unresolved, new questions that have arisen as a consequence of
the study’s findings, or limitations in the design of the study that
may need to be addressed in future work.
E4. Conclusions • Concludes by briefly returning to a discussion of why the problem 2%
is important and how the findings relate to the overarching issues
motivating the research.
F. Writing/Presentation Weight
F1. Written Expression • Demonstrates clarity and conciseness in written expression. 7%
• Demonstrates continuity and flow within and across all sections
of the report.
• Exhibits a professional tone suitable for academic writing.
• Word choice is appropriate and sentences are well-constructed,
with no errors in spelling, grammar, or usage.
• Contains an appropriate amount of original material.
F2. Report Formatting • Adheres to APA Style formatting requirements (e.g., with regard to 3%
page numbers, headings, line spacing, and paragraph alignment
and indentation).
F3. Referencing • Works are cited appropriately in-text and in the reference list, 5%
following the requirements of APA Style.
Assessment and feedback The following texts provide advice specific to lab
Your work will be evaluated according to the reports. They offer strategies for tackling each major
assessment criteria, with the table below used as a section of the report, while also addressing other
guide for marking. Your tutor will also provide aspects of the research process, such as how to
feedback on your report, with the aim of offering conduct a literature search. These texts are also
practical guidance that you can use to enhance your available through the library
lab report writing in the future. (https://library.unimelb.edu.au/).

Making sense of feedback and figuring out how to use Beins, B. C., & Beins, A. M. (2021). Effective writing in
it is often a challenge. This short talk by Dr Phillip psychology: Papers, posters, and presentations
Dawson discusses that challenge and offers some (3rd ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
helpful tips on how to approach it
Burton, L. J. (2021). An interactive approach to
(https://go.unimelb.edu.au/f9zi).
writing essays and research reports in psychology
(5th ed.). Wiley.
Grade Range Example Descriptor
H1 80–100 Excellent performance; Kail, R. V. (2019). Scientific writing for psychology:
shows a high to very high Lessons in clarity and style (2nd ed.). Sage.
level of proficiency.
H2A 75–79 Very good performance; Landrum, R. E. (2021). Undergraduate writing in
shows a high level of psychology: Learning to tell the scientific story (3rd
proficiency. ed.). American Psychological Association.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0000206-000
H2B 70–74 Good performance; shows
a sound level of O’Shea, R. P., & McKenzie, W. A. (2021). Writing for
proficiency. psychology. (7th ed.). Cengage.
H3 65–69 Competent performance;
shows a fair level of Understanding the assessment criteria:
proficiency. Some pointers
P 50–64 Satisfactory performance;
shows an acceptable or Title and abstract
adequate level of
The title of the report should be focused and
proficiency.
succinct. Ensure that the title captures the main topic
N 0–49 Unsatisfactory by including only essential terms. Avoid using
performance; shows an abbreviations and phrases that serve little to no
inadequate level of purpose (e.g., “a study of”).
proficiency.
The abstract should provide a brief, comprehensive
Writing resources summary of the report in a paragraph of about 150
The Publication Manual of the American Psychological words or less. It should include a description of the
Association forms the basis of APA Style and provides research topic, relevant sample characteristics,
guidelines for scholarly writing in psychology and essential features of the study method, main
related disciplines. You can access the manual findings, and conclusions and implications. On a new
through the library (http://go.unimelb.edu.au/a9qj). line immediately below the abstract, include three to
The companion website (https://apastyle.apa.org/) five relevant keywords that capture important
summarises much of the manual’s contents and aspects of the study.
includes webinars, tutorials, and other resources that
According to the Publication Manual, “the abstract
can help you with your writing.
needs to be dense with information” (p. 73), meaning
that each sentence needs to count and should
convey important details about the paper being
summarised. Begin by summarising the problem address. One very common approach is to identify a
under investigation in a way that establishes the gap in current knowledge and to explain how your
purpose and scope of your study (i.e., what you set study will help in addressing this gap. Importantly,
out to do and why). Following this, summarise key the rationale should guide the reader toward the
aspects of your study’s methodology, including specific aims and hypotheses of your study. Thus, to
details such as the number of participants involved, develop a cogent rationale you will need to think
the study design, the main outcome measures, and carefully about what your study is trying to
the data-gathering and analysis procedures used. Do accomplish and how it fits with prior research as you
not include details that are not likely to be deemed work through your literature review.
important to understanding the findings. For
Aims and hypotheses
example, a statement like “Data were analysed in
RStudio” may be pertinent in the Method section, but The Introduction ends with a statement of your
probably does not warrant inclusion in the abstract. study’s aims and hypotheses. These should follow
Finally, report the main findings of the study and logically from the rationale, meaning that by the end
briefly summarise your interpretation of them (i.e., of the Introduction, it should be clear to the reader
the implications of the findings for the problem how your aims and hypotheses were derived. Your
under investigation). hypotheses must also be specific and testable,
meaning that you need to articulate clear
Introduction expectations for the results of your study.

Opening Results
The opening should give the reader an understanding There are three criteria for the Results section. The
of the broader context for the research topic, setting first criterion focuses on the accuracy and
the stage for the more detailed review that follows. In completeness of the statistical information (i.e.,
this paragraph, you will attempt to capture the whether you have reported the correct values from
reader’s interest by outlining the importance of the the statistical analyses). The second criterion
problem under investigation. considers how well each result has been described,
whether formatting conventions have been applied
Literature review
correctly, and whether the results have been
There are two aspects to the literature review that
presented in an organised manner.
your readers (and assessors) will be paying attention
to. The first aspect focuses on whether you have In this section, you should describe the results of
selected relevant literature for your review, whether each analysis clearly in prose. But avoid discussing
that literature is discussed in appropriate detail, and whether the findings lend support to the hypotheses
whether you understand the key ideas under or not—such material is better placed in the
consideration. Discussion. Ensure that you follow the conventions of
APA Style with regard to rounding, leading zeros,
The second aspect is the rationale, which is central to
spacing, the proper use of statistical symbols and
the purpose of the Introduction. Your task is not
abbreviations, and so on. Finally, think carefully
merely to describe what has come before, but to
about how best to organise the Results section. If you
evaluate it and to build an argument for your study.
are reporting results from multiple analyses, it is
Readers will have this question in mind as they read
useful to closely follow the structure already laid out
through your Introduction: Is it clear why further
in earlier sections of the report.
research is warranted and why the current
investigation will be valuable in advancing our If you are required to include a table and/or a figure,
understanding of the problem? ensure that it serves a purpose and does not merely
duplicate information presented elsewhere. Ensure
Building a compelling rationale can be tricky and
that all tables and figures are formatted correctly and
there is no single recipe for how to do it; it depends
refer to each table and figure in text by its designated
on the study and on the problem that study seeks to
number only (e.g., Table 1). Do not refer to tables and
figures by their position relative to the text (e.g., is unlikely that that your study was perfect and that
“above” or “below”). there are no further questions to answer with regard
to the problem. Thus, in suggesting future directions,
Discussion you should think about limitations in your study’s
design, issues that remain unresolved, and new
Hypotheses
questions that may have arisen from your findings.
The Discussion section should begin with a clear
statement summarising the aims and hypotheses As with other parts of the report, each point you
and indicating whether the hypotheses were make needs to be argued for. For example, if you
supported or not. When you describe your results claim that a certain aspect of the study’s
here, you do not need to present any statistics (e.g., p methodology constitutes a limitation, you should
values), as this information should already be explain why that is the case and how it could have
contained in the Results section. affected the results. Likewise, if you claim that future
research should explore a particular line of inquiry,
Interpretation you need to explain why that would be useful and
In the Introduction, you would have critically how it would help build on your work. Importantly,
engaged with relevant literature to develop a the goal here is not to discredit your study; rather, it
framework for your study’s aims and hypotheses. In is to show readers that you understand its limitations
the Discussion, your interpretation will involve and have some notion of the paths that future work
relating your study’s findings to that framework and may take.
drawing inferences about what it all means for the
problem under investigation. This is an essential part Conclusion
of the scientific process, but it can be difficult to write The final paragraph of your report is similar to the
about—even experienced lab report writers often opening paragraph; it is broad in scope and should
find it challenging. Here are some questions to give the reader an appreciation of the wider
consider as you write this part of the Discussion: How significance of the topic your study addresses. Use
do your findings fit with those of relevant prior work? this paragraph to summarise your findings and
Do they corroborate the general conclusions of conclusions and to recapture the importance of the
previous research or do they suggest the need to problem. This helps to underscore the value of your
revise our thinking on the topic? What are the study—why it was worthwhile—and gives the reader
theoretical and practical implications? a renewed sense for why the topic deserves
investigation.
As you try to answer these questions, keep in mind
that you are writing for a critical reader, one who will Writing and presentation
attend to how you argue each of the points you raise.
Throughout your report, readers will be paying
Thus, you should ensure that your statements are
attention to how you express yourself in writing, how
supported with evidence and that you explain the
you format the paper, and how you reference work
reasoning behind your conclusions.
from other authors. You can find advice relevant to
In a similar vein, while it is appropriate to reflect on these matters in the Publication Manual.
how your study contributes to knowledge in the area,
take care not to overstate those contributions. Your
study may build on prior work in various interesting
and important ways, but readers are not likely to be
convinced by claims that exaggerate its overall
significance.

Future directions
Having given your interpretation, you should then
consider directions for future research on the topic. It