Review. Read the Guidelines for Discussing Research Article,

Part II. Review this week's article (Greitemeyer & Osswald, 2009, Prosocial video games reduce aggressive cognitions [Experiment 1]) using these guidelines (all items in the guidelines except numbers 3 and 11). This time you do not need to write the review in a narrative format. Just answer each question in a numbered list. I'm most interested this week in making sure all the concepts are clear to you. Feel free to add your comments as well.

You do not need to formally review Experiment 2, but please read it. You can discuss it informally on the forum. Validity may be the most difficult concept we need to grasp this week. Here are some links to help you understand and discuss internal and external validity in your reviews These links are also posted on the forum. Let me know if you have more questions about validity or any of the other concepts. Greitemeyer, T., & Osswald, S. (2009). Prosocial Video Games Reduce Aggressive Cognitions.

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45(4), 896-900. Guidelines for Discussing Research Articles: Part II

1. Write the reference for the article in APA style. Make sure to cite the article in-text when appropriate as per APA 6th edition style.

2. Write a brief "overview" or summary of the article. Indicate your assessment of what the study is about and the major findings of the study.

3. According to the introduction, what information was already known about the topic (look for references to previous research).

4. What variables were studied? Identify independent and dependent variable(s). What were the hypotheses concerning these variables?

5. What were the operational definitions of the variables studied?

6. Who were the participants in this study? Were there any special participant characteristics?

7. What were the procedures used to test the hypotheses? Did you notice any problematic features of the procedure?

8. Was the experimental or nonexperimental method used? Were there attempts to control any extraneous variables?

9. Discuss the validity of the research to the best of your ability, including construct, internal, and external validity.

10. What were the major results of the study? Were the results consistent with the hypotheses?

11. How do the results relate to the other studies cited in the introduction?

12. How did the researcher interpret the results? Can you think of alternative interpretations?

13. Did the author give suggestions for future research or applications? Can you provide other suggestions?

14. What would you do if you wished to find out more about this research topic? Your "official" quiz for this week is a group exercise involving Hypotheses and Operational Definitions. I have created a place for a discussion thread for this exercise in the Week 3 forum -- the exercise and instructions are posted there. Each person will work on one of the hypotheses and post their response to the forum, and then the class can discuss the exercise together. Here are the assignments.

(I chose them in a random manner). Hypothesis 5: Aline Hypothesis 5: Visual imagery improves memory. Hypothesis and Operational Definition Exercise Provide the same information for each hypothesis.

1. What type of relationship would you predict (positive linear, negative linear, and so on)?

2. Graph and label the relationship you predict. State a prediction based on the relationship shown by your graph.

3. Which method (experimental or nonexperimental) would you use to test this hypothesis? Why?

4. Which is the independent or "cause" variable and which is the dependent or "effect" variable?

5. State an operational definition for each variable. If experimental, describe how the independent variable might be manipulated and the dependent variable measured. If nonexperimental, describe how both variables might be measured.