(Instruction: In this model parentheses are used where I want you to enter your own text,

except for this parenthesis. The content of the parenthesis is meant to give you directions for
what kind of information should be given and where. Throughout your report avoid using
words like “I” and “me”. Say for instance “a ….. sampling method was used” or “the
researcher used…”. When a word is found outside of a parenthesis I would like you to include
the word in your report - normally as a title. The work should be presented in a 12 point
academic font.)

(Title: Should contain the word

“experiment” and the independent and
dependent variables)

(IB candidate code)

(IB candidate code for all group members)
(Date, month, and year of submission)
(Word count: 1800-2200)
Table of Contents

(On this page, provide a table of contents. It should include Introduction, and all other
headings except the table of contents itself. Page numbers should be on every page except
title page and should start with 1 on the Introduction page. It is possible to do a good table of
contents using Microsoft Word, by first making each heading into a “Heading 1” (available
under the Home tab), and then going to the References tab and choosing “Table of Contents”.
A template is available which already has the headings and table of contents in place for you.
Just remember to update the table (right click, then choose update page numbers), when you
are finished with the IA.)

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Introduction...........................................................................................................................................4
Exploration.............................................................................................................................................5
Analysis..................................................................................................................................................7
Evaluation...............................................................................................................................................8
References..............................................................................................................................................8
Appendices.............................................................................................................................................8
Introduction (500-600 words)

(Outline briefly the field of psychology you are examining and the area within that field.

Describe (=detailed account) the theory/model relevant to your experiment. Clear description
using claims. Use APA referencing format. Define key terms.

Outline the experiment you are replicating (to help you to illustrate the theory). This should
include aim, participants, design, IV, DV, the different conditions, procedure, results and
conclusion. Use APA referencing format.

Aim: (state your aim, it should not be “to replicate...” rather it should be related to the topic
of the experiment you are replicating. Must include details of IV and DV, thus a clear
statement what is being investigated and what is expected. The link between the theory/model
and the aim of your experiment must be made clear.)

(Explain why this topic is important to investigate (= relevance of the aim). This must be
explicitly linked to the theory/model and not superficial in nature. Briefly explain how your
study investigates this theory by including details of how you conducted the experiment (your
IV and DV) while using terminology from the outline of the theory (you may note any
changes from the original, meaning how it relates to the original experiment, but this is less
important than the theory/model) (=The link between the theory/model and your own study is
explained.)

(State your independent and dependent variable and operationalize them. The
independent variable, i.e. the one you manipulate, and specify the two different conditions
fully operationalized. Then identify the dependent variable, i.e. the one you measure. Give
an operationalized definition of your dependent variable. An operationalized definition is
made when the concept is defined by telling how it is measured, i.e. “whether or not
participants are told the topic of the paragraph before or after hearing the paragraph” or
“number of words written down by participants within a one minute time interval”. )

Experimental hypothesis:
(Your hypothesis should be phrased as a prediction of directed difference in DV
(operationalized) depending on the condition of the IV (also operationalized). Includes
words “significantly”).

Null hypothesis:
(The null hypothesis should state that the dependent variable (operationalized) does not
depend on the independent variable (also operationalized):”There will be no significant
difference…”)

(Your introduction must include citations from reliable sources using APA format!!! All in-
text references should be found in the reference list.)
Exploration (400-500 words)

(This section should include several brief paragraphs:

The first should tell what experimental design has been used: independent group design or
repeated measures design. The choice of design should be justified by reference to the
strengths of the design (why this design? If repeated measures, did you use counterbalancing
or randomisation? If so why? ). Connect to your own study (not only generic statements).

Secondly, identify, explain and justify (why used) your sampling technique, which is almost
always opportunity sampling. Describe the sample. State the sample size (and how many
males/females respectively. Include the age (range, mean), language proficiency, ethnicity,
and gender and if relevant, other important variables (driving experience). State why these
participants were chosen. If relevant, explain how the participants were allocated to the
different conditions.

Thirdly, identify variables kept under control. Which extraneous variables you controlled
and how? Use highly relevant, not superficial controls. Why necessary? The reasons should
be clearly stated as to why these were held constant across conditions, e.g. to increase internal
validity and ensure that a causal relationship can be established between IV and DV.
For example, how you prevented the groups not copying from each other, not actually
counting backwards, or how you did a pilot study and which adjustments you made to control
the study better.

Then, explain how the materials were developed, for example the word lists. How did you
choose, why these materials (why were these words used; why this video)? Did you change
anything from the original study and why? Where did you find and how did you decide on the
video, words, etc.? All materials must be found in numbered appendices. (Materials are not
pens paper, chairs).

The description of the procedure, should be designed so that anybody that reads it should be
able to do exactly the same as you did just by following your description. You may use bullet
points to save words, and remember to list everything in the same order that it happened
during the experiment. Include ethical considerations (in the procedure). An informed
consent form and a debriefing letter should be mentioned and referenced to the appropriate,
numbered, appendices. Also, during your experiment it is likely that some parts had specific
time limits. Be careful to state all time limits in the procedure.)
Analysis (400 words)

Descriptive
(Scores from individual participants are not meant to be part of this section. It is rather central
tendencies and measures of dispersion that are interesting. Use only mean or median for
central tendency, and standard deviation or inter-quartile range/semi-interquartile range for
dispersion.
You must have only one measure of central tendency and one measure of dispersion.

You should first describe the results in a text format (refer to calculations in appendices, such
as (see appendix X). Justify the choice of central tendency and dispersion by referring to the
type of data. Explain why your data is the type it is, e.g. if you think the data is ordinal/ratio,
why do you think it’s ordinal/ratio? Interpret your descriptive findings.
Secondly you should present the results (one central tendency, and one measure of dispersion
for each condition) in a table . Make sure to give the table a proper informative caption and
title, such as “Table 1: Median semi-interquartile range of number of words recalled in 0 and
30 sec. delay conditions” (avoid using “Condition 1 and Condition 2” as this says nothing
about the hypothesis).

Finally, show your results in a graph (the graph must represent the hypothesis). This is most
likely to be a simple column graph where each bar represents mean or median scores from
one condition (the lines of the bars should not be touching). Do not include the dispersion in
your graph, as it would only confuse the reader. Make sure all axes are labelled correctly.
Also make sure the title is very informative and clear, similar to the table. Just by looking at
the graph any person should be able to understand the main aspects of your experiment and
results. Below each column also write “(n=X)” where X represents the number of participants
in that condition. Excel is very good to make these graphs, but make sure you get rid of the
“serie 1” or other irrelevant label excel sometimes puts in the graph.)

Inferential
(Identify the test of significance used. Tests that could be used: Chi-square test, Mann-
Whitney U-test, and Wilcoxon test. Justify the choice of test with reference to design and
level of data, parametric vs. non-parametric. In the text state the calculated/observed value
(U /T), the critical value (and n for each condition) found in tables of critical values, be sure
to mention number of pps, the level of significance (5% or 0.05) as well as if it is for one- or
two- tailed hypothesis and why. Based on this you should conclude that the null-hypothesis
is rejected and therefore the experimental hypothesis accepted, or that the null-hypothesis was
not rejected, and the experimental hypothesis cannot be accepted. Don’t write that the results
were or were not significant. Write that the difference found was or was not significant. Link
the findings to the hypothesis (IV and DV in your hypothesis).

In this section, only the results (calculated value and critical value) and not the actual lengthy
calculations should be included.
Instead, include the raw data, ALL calculations (Accurate! Double-check your calculations,
including the ranking. Then check one more time.) in numbered appendices and refer to the
correct appendix in this section. The table with critical values should be in the appendices
as well. AVOID sharing your calculations with your group members. This may jeopardize
your diploma. If the calculations are not included, not possible to determine if the calculations
are accurate.)

Evaluation (600+ words; use all spare words from other sections where you did not
require the whole mark allocation; around 800 words would be helpful)

(Discuss your results by linking these to the theory/model identified in your introduction.
Discuss (=a range of arguments). It might help to consider different aspects/features of the
theory and how these relate to your findings. This is not the requirement, but it could be
meaningful to compare your results to the study you are replicating. Are your results similar
to and as expected from the background theory/model? What might be the reasons for the
possible discrepancies between the results of your own and the original study?

Identify the strengths of your design, procedure (including materials) and the sample (ALL
OF THEM!) including the allocation of participants into the different conditions (if using the
independent group design). Explain WHY each of these is a strength, be specific, and relate to
your study. Include several, not just one for each (=strengths).

Identify the limitations of your design, procedure (including materials) and the sample
(ALL OF THEM!). Discuss implications of your results. Every limitation needs to be
explained in detail. For high marks, don’t just state them in a general way but connect them to
your own investigation and this particular context. Include several, not just one for each
(=limitations). Avoid naming the sample size (not relevant).

Give suggestions to modifications, how the experiment could be improved. For every
limitation, give a fully justified (WHY) and relevant modification. The modifications
should be carefully considered and detailed (i.e. explain the impact these changes might have
on the findings and how they would help to improve the credibility of the study). It is not
sufficient to say something like “larger sample should be used.”

State a clear conclusion, which summarizes what you’ve done and what you’ve found.)

(NOTE: an alternative approach (or perhaps even better approach!!!!) is using one component
at the time, such as Design first: explain strengths, limitations and modifications, then
Procedure: explain strengths, limitations and modifications, and finally: Sample: explain
strengths, limitations and modifications. It is helpful that have subtitles: DESIGN,
PROCEDURE, SAMPLE to make sure you have addressed all of them.)

(Your introduction must include citations from reliable sources using APA format!!! Every
time you mention the study replicated or the theory, you need to restate the source. All in-text
references should be found in the reference list.)
References
(In this section you should list all work that you have cited in your report. Use alphabetical
order. The format of each reference is also important: references should follow a standard
referencing style – in this case the APA format. )

Appendices
(Number and title each appendix. You should include the following material:
 Informed consent form (unfilled)
 Parental consent (if relevant)
 Standardized instruction
 Debriefing letter
 Stimulus material (include power point slides as pictures if relevant)
 Raw data tables
 Calculations made (print-outs of calculations and/or results from statistics software or
calculations made for analytical purposes). Descriptive and inferential.
 Any other material specific to your experiment.