Making presentations Psych 231: Research Methods in Psychology

Announcements Don’t forget: Class experiment papers are due in class this Wednesday of this week No formal lab meetings this week. Use the time to meet and work on your group project posters

Factorial ANOVAs Reporting your results The observed differences Because there may be a lot of these, may present them in a table instead of directly in the text Kind of design e.g. “2 x 2 completely between factorial design” (class exp. “mixed”) Computed F-ratios May see separate paragraphs for each factor, and for interactions Degrees of freedom for the test Each F-ratio will have its own set of df’s The “p-value” of the test May want to just say “all tests were tested with an alpha level of 0.05” Any post-hoc or planned comparison results Typically only the theoretically interesting comparisons are presented

Presentations Presenting your research Posters Talks Papers

Why do presentations? To present your work/theory/research Get feedback It is an opportunity for peers to ask you questions about your work For you to ask them questions You want your audience to walk away remembering a few key points So your goal is to be as clear as possible

Rough sketch of a presentation Introduction of the issue Background information Specific hypotheses Design Results Interpret the results General Conclusions Hourglass shape Broad Specifics of your study Broad

Preparation Consider your audience - who are they, what do they want, what do they already know Start collecting the things that you think that you’ll need - graphs, tables, pictures, examples, data analyses, etc. Determine the key points that you want them to remember focus your presentation on these points Camping trip analogy Your initial pack usually has too much stuff Need to figure out what to take out Practice, rehearse, and then practice again

Poster content Stick to the hourglass shape for content Balance of text and figures Use bullet points Give example stimuli Use large enough font to read from 6 feet away End with 3 or 4 key “take home” points Decide what these are at the beginning, and then construct the poster so that they are the logical take home points

Brief checklist for the poster Initial sketch/outline Rough layout Balance (text/pictures, data/conclusions) Typography Movement Simplicity Final layout

Title Authors and affiliation Introduction Not a lot of detail Just the main points Hypotheses & predictions Methods Not a lot of detail just the main points Participants Design IVs & DVs Examples of stimuli Results Graphs/tables Bullet points of main results Conclusions 3 or 4 take home points Potential limitations References If you cite something give the full reference

Title Authors and affiliation Introduction MethodsResults ConclusionsReferences

The pen is mightier than the brush: Using mnemonics Leon DaVinci and Bill Shakespear Illinois State University Remembering things is often a challenge in everyday life. “What was I supposed to get at the grocery store?” (Cutting, 2000) We examined two factors We predicted: mnemonic devices will help memory for both pictures and words effect larger for words than pictures 900 native English speakers 2 x 2 between groups design Measured the percent correctly recalled items from a free recall procedure 24 pictures and words Stimulus type matters: participants remembered words better than pictures Use of mnemonic devices helps memory performance Potential limitations Cutting J. C. (2000). Finding things in your house. Journal of Memory and Stuff, 17, pg mnemonics No mnemonics Percent recall pictures words Results main effect of stimulus type main effect of mnemonic no interaction stimulus type: pictures/words use of mnemonics Introduction Methods Conclusions References wordspictures books frog

Presentation of the poster Arrive early and set up Author(s) stand next to poster Have a short “walk through” presentation ready Answer questions (also ask questions) Handout copies of the poster available (sometimes), or a request sign-up

Your posters (our checklist) Content Introduction Problem of interest Very brief summary of past research Basic purpose of experiment(s) Hypotheses Method Brief but clear Design Materials Procedure (brief)

Your posters (our checklist) Content cont. Results Descriptive statistics Inferential results Discussion Hypothesis rejected or supported Implication of results A few take home points References Tables and figures Useful info to reader Easy to understand

Your posters (our checklist) Format Overall clarity Organization Font size Figure/text balance Title Authors

Different kinds of talks Research Presentations (typically 10 to 30 mins) Paper with respondent Panel Presentation Workshop

Talk Content Create a logical progression to the talk Hourglass shape Work on the transitions between slides Be brief, but include enough details so that the audience can follow the arguments Use slides to help simplify/clarify points Include tables, graphs, pictures, etc. Don’t just read the slides but do “walk through” those that need it (e.g. graphs of results) Be careful of jargon, explain terms (if in fact you really need them)

Presentation of the talk Make it smooth (lots of practice will help) Watch your speaking rate (again, practice) Maintain eye contact with whole audience Emphasize the key points, make sure that the audience can identify these Point to the slides if it helps Beware jokes, can be a double-edged sword Don’t go over your time

Dealing with questions Repeat the question in your own words so that the rest of the audience can hear it to make sure that you understood the question to buy yourself some time to think about the answer Try not to be nervous you know your study better than anyone else When preparing, try to think of likely questions and prepare answers

Checklist for the talk Preparation Analyze the audience Choose your main points etc. Prepare the Final Outline fix any problems/loose ends Construct your “speaking” outline e.g., the note cards that you’ll read Rehearse, rehearse, rehearse

Factorial ANOVAs Reporting your results The observed differences Because there may be a lot of these, may present them in a table instead of directly in the text Kind of design e.g. “2 x 2 completely between factorial design” Computed F-ratios May see separate paragraphs for each factor, and for interactions Degrees of freedom for the test Each F-ratio will have its own set of df’s The “p-value” of the test May want to just say “all tests were tested with an alpha level of 0.05” Any post-hoc or planned comparison results Typically only the theoretically interesting comparisons are presented