Most of the content in this workshop is my personal opinion (backed up with a little bit of research and a fair bit of experience)
If something I say contradicts what your supervisor has told you, go with their context-specific expertise.
Things that sound like rules, are really guidelines.
Borrowing from George Orwell 6 writing rules
- Break any of these rules sooner than say anything outright barbarous.
"the subjective feeling of ease or difficulty while processing perceptual information... more fluent processing results in positive assessments of perceptual stimuli"
"the subjective feeling of ease or difficulty while processing perceptual information... more fluent processing results in positive assessments of perceptual stimuli"
Your marker needs you to have done all the hard thinking for them.
Your marker wants your thesis to be so well structured and easy to read that they can skim.
Your marker doesn't don't know ANYTHING about your project/research area, so they need you to hold their hand.
Oppenheimer, D. M. (2006). Consequences of erudite vernacular utilized irrespective of necessity: Problems with using long words needlessly. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 20, 139-156. link
"All writers (will have to) edit their prose, but (the) great writers edit (it) viciously, always trying to eliminate (words which are) ‘fuzz’ – (excess) words (which are not adding anything of value). Zinsser compares (the process of editing out) ‘fuzz’ to fighting weeds – you will always be slightly behind (because they creep in when you aren't looking for them). Scan (through) your text (and look) for opportunities to (get rid of) words - (places) where two words (can become one), or three words (can become) two… (or where you can get rid of some words altogether?)"
"All writers edit their prose, but great writers edit viciously. The point of editing is to eliminate ‘fuzz’, or excess words which don't add value. Zinsser compares removing ‘fuzz’ to fighting weeds – you will always be slightly behind. Scan your text for opportunities to shed words - where can two words become one? or three words two?"
example from Zinsser On Writing Well
Billing, M. (2011). Writing social psychology: Fictional things and unpopulated texts. British Journal of Social Psychology, 50, 4-20. link
Participants were recruited for a study entitled ‘Being Australian’ and completed the questionnaire in supervised groups of 10–12, and were compensated for their time with course credit. They were informed verbally and in writing that their anonymity was protected. Completed questionnaires were placed in an opaque drop box, and participants were debriefed and given the opportunity to request a summary of the results of the study (Barlow, Louis, & Hewstone, 2009, p. 394)
credit Billings (2011) "Writing social psychology: Fictional things and unpopulated texts
Participants were recruited by zombies for a study entitled ‘Being Australian’ and completed the questionnaire in supervised groups of 10–12, and were compensated by zombies for their time with course credit. They were informed verbally and in writing that their anonymity was protected by zombies. Completed questionnaires were placed in an opaque drop box by zombies, and participants were debriefed by zombies and given the opportunity to request a summary of the results of the study (Barlow, Louis, & Hewstone, 2009, p. 394)
credit Billings (2011) "Writing social psychology: Fictional things and unpopulated texts
passive voice and zombie nouns are not always bad (particularly in your method)
but they can make your writing unwieldy and harder for a naive reader (aka your marker) to digest
"Whereas intergroup anxiety is by now an establish mediator of intergroup contact and cross-group friendship, the present study also sought to explore cognitions of rejection as a cognitive mediator predicted by cross-group friendship, and predictive of intergroup anxiety, as well as a range of attitudes toward the outgroup"
"Whereas intergroup anxiety is by now an establish mediator of intergroup contact and cross-group friendship, the present study also sought to explore cognitions of rejection as a cognitive mediator predicted by cross-group friendship, and predictive of intergroup anxiety, as well as a range of attitudes toward the outgroup"
"Specifically, we propose that people with cross-group friends cease to expect outgroup members to reject their attempts at contact ad friendship (Barlow et al, 2009, p391)"
It is measured by placing EMG electrodes on the facial muscles of interest and measuring the electrical impulses produced by the muscles as they respond to emotion evoking stimuli.
(29 words)
It is measured by placing EMG electrodes on the facial muscles of interest and measuring the electrical impulses produced by the muscles as they respond to emotion evoking stimuli.
(29 words)
Researchers measure mimicry using facial EMG electrodes that detect the electrical impulses generated when participants view emotional stimuli.
(⏬ 18 words)
A positive attitude towards the expressor may foster emotional mimicry and increase the interpretation of the emotional expressions as friendly.
(20 words)
A positive attitude towards the expressor may foster emotional mimicry and increase the interpretation of the emotional expressions as friendly.
(20 words)
People who like each other are more likely to mimic and judge emotional expressions to be friendly.
(⏬ 17 words)
Empathy facilitates the formation of strong social relationships by motivating helping behaviour.
(12 words)
Empathy facilitates the formation of strong social relationships by motivating helping behaviour.
(12 words)
Empathy helps people build strong social relationships because it motivates them to help each other.
(🆙 15 words)
Read this paper by Billing (2011) - it is good and not just for social psychologists
(I find that cognitive theses are the worst for this 🤷 😄)
The first sentence of every paragraph should give away the take home message.
It should be a general statement summarising a particular part of the literature.
A study conducted by Phillips and colleagues (2015) found that participants aged 65-86 performed significantly worse than younger groups on tasks assessing comprehension of sarcastic exchanges. Interestingly, there was no effect of age on the understanding of sincere exchanges (Phillips et al, 2015). Further, a meta-analysis across 23 theory of mind (TOM) studies showed that older adults performed worse on TOM tasks compared to younger groups (Henry, Phillips, Ruffman, & Bailey, 2013).
A study conducted by Phillips and colleagues (2015) found that participants aged 65-86 performed significantly worse than younger groups on tasks assessing comprehension of sarcastic exchanges. Interestingly, there was no effect of age on the understanding of sincere exchanges (Phillips et al, 2015). Further, a meta-analysis across 23 theory of mind (TOM) studies showed that older adults performed worse on TOM tasks compared to younger groups (Henry, Phillips, Ruffman, & Bailey, 2013).
Much research has investigated social cognition in older people. For example, Phillips and colleagues (2015) found that while participants aged 65-86 had no problem understanding sincere exchanges, they found it more difficult to understand sarcastic exchanges than did young adults (Phillips et al, 2015). This result is consistent with a recent meta-analysis of theory of mind studies, which showed that older adults performed worse on TOM tasks compared to younger groups (Henry, Phillips, Ruffman, & Bailey, 2013).
Much research has investigated social cognition in older people. For example, Phillips and colleagues (2015) found that while participants aged 65-86 had no problem understanding sincere exchanges, they found it more difficult to understand sarcastic exchanges than did young adults (Phillips et al, 2015). This result is consistent with a recent meta-analysis of theory of mind studies, which showed that older adults performed worse on TOM tasks compared to younger groups (Henry, Phillips, Ruffman, & Bailey, 2013).
As we age, our ability to understand how other people are feeling and what other people are thinking declines. For example, Phillips and colleagues (2015) found that while participants aged 65-86 had no problem understanding sincere exchanges, they found it more difficult to understand sarcastic exchanges than did young adults (Phillips et al, 2015). This result is consistent with a recent meta-analysis of theory of mind studies, which showed that older adults performed worse on TOM tasks compared to younger groups (Henry, Phillips, Ruffman, & Bailey, 2013).
Paste all the topic sentences in your intro into a paragraph.
It should read like a summary of your argument/rationale.
When it comes to writing, most experts agree that clarity, simplicity and parsimony are ideals that authors should strive for. However, most of us can likely recall having read papers, either by colleagues or students, in which the author appears to be deliberately using overly complex words. There are many plausible reasons that the use of million-dollar words would lead readers to believe that an author is smart. Indeed, there is some evidence that complex vocabulary can be indicative of a more intelligent author.
Gernsbacher, M. A. (2018). Writing empirical articles: Transparency, reproducibility, clarity, and memorability. Advances in methods and practices in psychological science, 1(3), 403-414.
So & So (2014) did a study that involved X and found that Y. In addition, Joe & Co (2016) have found that A relates to B. Also, Big Dude and colleagues (2019) ran a study showing that manipulating X results in changes in B.
So & So (2014) did a study that involved X and found that Y. In addition, Joe & Co (2016) have found that A relates to B. Also, Big Dude and colleagues (2019) ran a study showing that manipulating X results in changes in B.
Your marker is REALLY tired, they don't want to have to think hard. You can help them by doing the hard thinking for them.
⭐ SYNTHESIS ⭐
Pick the 3 most important (yes only 3) findings from your thesis.
Consistent?
Not consistent?
explain why you think that happened
Keyboard shortcuts
↑, ←, Pg Up, k | Go to previous slide |
↓, →, Pg Dn, Space, j | Go to next slide |
Home | Go to first slide |
End | Go to last slide |
Number + Return | Go to specific slide |
b / m / f | Toggle blackout / mirrored / fullscreen mode |
c | Clone slideshow |
p | Toggle presenter mode |
t | Restart the presentation timer |
?, h | Toggle this help |
Esc | Back to slideshow |