Click on the following links. Please note these will open in a new window.

Journal Article 1: Kibbe, M. M., & Leslie, A. M. (2011). What do infants remember when they forget? Location and identity in 6-month-olds’ memory for objects. Psychological Science, 22, 1500–1505.

Abstract: What does an infant remember about a forgotten object? Although at age 6 months, infants can keep track of up to three hidden objects, they can remember the featural identity of only one. When infants forget the identity of an object, do they forget the object entirely, or do they retain an inkling of it? In a looking-time study, we familiarized 6-month-olds with a disk and a triangle placed on opposite sides of a stage. During test trials, we hid the objects one at a time behind different screens, and after hiding the second object, we removed the screen where the first object had been hidden. Infants then saw the expected object, the unexpected other object, or the empty stage. Bayes factor analysis showed that although the infants did not notice when the object changed shape, they were surprised when it vanished. This finding indicates that infants can represent an object without its features.

Discussion Questions:

1. Identify the independent variables. For each independent variable, indicate if it was manipulated between-subjects or within-subjects.
2. Identify the dependent variables. Which two behaviors of interest are operationally defined by these dependent variables (one for each DV)?
3. Do you think the participants are exhibiting the Hawthorne effect? How do you know and how could the Hawthorne effect interfere with the results of the study?
4. Consider the internal validity of this study. Does the study appear to provide a good test of the research question? Why or why not?
5. Consider the external validity of this study. Are the behaviors exhibited in the study realistic? Why or why not?

Journal Article 2: Cook, K., & Murowchick, E. (2014). Do literature review skills transfer from one course to another? Psychology Learning and Teaching, 13, 3–11.

Abstract: Creating literature reviews encompasses skills that are central to psychology students’ academic and professional lives, yet writing them consistently challenges students. Research shows that instruction leads to improvement in students’ literature reviews within courses (Boscolo, Arfé, & Quarisa, 2007; Granello, 2001), but little work examines how such instruction carries over to other courses. Our study addresses this by comparing literature reviews from two required courses. Students are taught to write reviews in a psychology writing course (PSYC 205), and without additional instruction, students again write reviews in a Statistics and Research Methods course (PSYC 305). Do the skills transfer? A sample of PSYC 305 reviews (n = 17) was drawn and their PSYC 205 literature reviews obtained. All reviews were graded using the same rubric. A within-subjects comparison showed that students’ PSYC 305 reviews were significantly improved. For a second between-subjects comparison, these PSYC 305 reviews were compared to the 305 reviews of students who did not have PSYC 205. The reviews of those who had PSYC 205 were significantly better than the reviews of those who did not. These combined results suggest that we can teach transferable literature review skills, and, given their importance, we suggest that psychology programs should.

Discussion Questions:

1. Identify the independent variables. For each independent variable, indicate if it was manipulated between-subjects or within-subjects.
2. Identify the dependent variables. Which two behaviors of interest are operationally defined by these dependent variables (one for each DV)?
3. Does this study exhibit any order effects? How about testing effects? If they are present, describe why.
4. Would you characterize this study as higher on internal validity or external validity or high on both?