The research paper you will hand in will essentially be a 'mini' empirical (that is, data-based) scientific paper, similar to the kinds that scientists write when they publish the results of their research. The data will be gathered from the PSYC 1F90 class. The paper will include introduction, method, results, and discussion sections.

Some of you will be offering up a groan at this point, because writing a paper of this kind will feel very much like a hoop that we are making you jump through - one with very little relevance to whatever career path you have in mind. I care a lot about students' ability to get jobs upon graduation - in fact, that's the primary focus of my own research. Because of that, I've spent a great deal of time thinking about the 'assignments as hoops' issue, based on many comments from students over the years. I'll talk more about this issue in class, but if you want to begin to understand my perspective on the connection between this assignment and your preferred career, I encourage you to read this short 2page article that I wrote a few years ago, which describes how a PSYC 1F90 student (who didn't see much value in this assignment) helped me to understand something I hadn't really considered before. You can also check out the next section of this General Overview ('How to Leverage this Assignment in a Job Interview').

readings : Fear of Missing Out (FoMO) and social media's impact on daily-life and productivity at work: Do WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram, and Snapchat Use Disorders mediate that association? Dmitri Rozgonjuka,b, , Cornelia Sindermanna , Jon D. Elhaic , Christian Montaga

Fear of Missing Out (FoMO) and social media's impact on daily-life and productivity at work: Do WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram, and Snapchat Use Disorders mediate that association? Dmitri Rozgonjuka,b, , Cornelia Sindermanna , Jon D. Elhaic , Christian Montaga

Formatting Requirements: Maximum length for your research paper is 9pages - this page count includes the title page, introduction, method, results, and discussion, and reference list

Formatting information is in the Brightspace folder labeled Referencing and APA Formatting

MS Word (.doc or .docx) or Adobe (.pdf) document Sources to Cite in Your Research Paper: You must cite the following sources in your research paper:

the Introduction/Discussion Articles that we have provided to you (Weaver and Swank, 2021; Rozgonjuk et al., 2020). These articles are described further below. They have been annotated for you and can be found in the folder labeled Project Articles on Brightspace.

the two Methods Articles that describe the measures we used in the PSYC 1F90 project (Xanidis & Brignell, 2016; Przybylski et al., 2013). These articles are described further below. You do not need to read these articles, and they are not posted on Brightspace. If you are interested in reading them, feel free to reach out to Dr. Martini and she can supply you with copies.

the PSYC 1F90 textbook (you need to cite the text to make two different points in your research paper; cite the book only once in the Reference section) three different web-based sources (no more, no less). By 'different' web-based sources, I mean that you cannot cite information from the same source more than once (e.g., you cannot cite three different articles from the New York Times). These sources will be fact-checked as you complete the Source Check Worksheet assignment for the PSYC 1F90 project, and they are expected to differ across people in the class.

Sources to Cite in Your Research Paper: You must cite the following sources in your research paper: the Introduction/Discussion Articles that we have provided to you (Weaver and Swank, 2021; Rozgonjuk et al., 2020). These articles are described further below. They have been annotated for you and can be found in the folder labeled Project Articles on Brightspace.

the two Methods Articles that describe the measures we used in the PSYC 1F90 project (Xanidis & Brignell, 2016; Przybylski et al., 2013). These articles are described further below. You do not need to read these articles, and they are not posted on Brightspace. If you are interested in reading them, feel free to reach out to Dr. Martini and she can supply you with copies.

the PSYC 1F90 textbook (you need to cite the text to make two different points in your research paper; cite the book only once in the Reference section)

three different web-based sources (no more, no less). By 'different' web-based sources, I mean that you cannot cite information from the same source more than once (e.g., you cannot cite three different articles from the New York Times). These sources will be fact-checked as you complete the Source Check Worksheet assignment for the PSYC 1F90 project, and they are expected to differ across people in the class. Language: We place a lot of emphasis on being succinct and clear - you should tend toward writing in short sentences that convey just a single thought. Plain language is more desirable than relying on 'thesaurus substitutions'. Foundations of the Research Paper: The Research Questions: In the PSYC 1F90 Project, we will address two main research questions:

1. What are the two social media platforms that participants are using most often?

2. Is there a correlation between problematic social media use and fear of missing out?

The Hypotheses:

1. It was expected that xxx and yyy would be the social media platforms used most often by participants. [In place of xxx and yyy, you should fill in the two platforms that you think are most often used. Your hypothesis should be based on data that you have found rather than a guess, and we will talk more about this in Seminar 2.]

2. Based on past research, it was expected that a moderate positive correlation between FoMO and PSMU. (We will talk more about correlations in class.) The Measures:

Social Media Preferences (SMP): the amount of time that students in the PSYC 1F90 class spend on different social media platforms

(Research Question 1).

Fear of Missing Out (FoMO): We will assess fear of missing out with the Fear of Missing Out Scale, developed by Przybylski and colleagues. This questionnaire will provide a measure of PSYC 1F90 students' experience of FoMO if they are not on social media regularly

(Research Question 2).

This is the first of the two 'Methods' articles that must be cited in the Method section of your paper (see the 'Sources to Cite in Your Research Paper' section, above). The citation for this scale in your reference section is: Przybylski, A. K., Murayama, K., DeHaan, C. R., & Gladwell, V. (2013). Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1841-1848. doi: https://10.1016/j.chb.2013.02.014

Problematic Social Media Use (PSMU): We will assess problematic social media use with the Social Media Use Questionnaire, developed by Xanidis and Brignell (2016).

This questionnaire will provide information about the extent to which participants (PSYC 1F90 students) are preoccupied with a need to be on social media regularly, and the extent to which social media hinders other aspects of their lives (e.g., work, school)

(Research Question 2). This is the second of the two 'Methods' articles that must be cited in the Method section of your paper (see the 'Sources to Cite in Your Research Paper' section, above). The citation for this scale in your reference section is: Xanidis, N., & Brignell, C. M. (2016). The association between the use of social network sites, sleep quality and cognitive function during the day. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 121-126. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.004

Structure of the Research Paper: Just as different journals have specific guidelines, we are asking all PSYC 1F90 students to follow a common format.Your write-up should have the following sections (please also see the grading rubric on Brightspace).

Introduction (approximately 2-3pages): You should think about the introduction as having three parts. The first part is the opening and it's very short -

usually it's the first paragraph, and it's just 3- 4sentences long for this project. The opening should begin with a general introduction to the topic of the study and make it clear to the reader why this topic is important (that is, it provides a 'hook' to gain the reader's interest). At the end of the opening you should introduce, in very broad terms, the question being investigated. Here's an example of an opening from a real article (Sana, Weston, & Cepeda, 2013) that looked at the effects of multitasking on a laptop while in class. The green text provides the information that persuades the reader that the topic is important. The purple text outlines the question being studied. Multitasking is ingrained in our daily lives. As you read this article, you may also be attending to a text message, sipping coffee, or writing out a list of to-dos. Such a lifestyle is intended to increase efficiency; however, there are limitations to how well multiple tasks can be carried out concurrently (Posner, 1982). Multitasking places considerable demands on cognitive resources, which, in turn, degrades overall performance, as well as performance on each task in isolation (Broadbent,1958). The issue of multitasking and its consequences has become a growing concern in education, as students are more commonly found engaged with their laptops or smartphones during class time. The current study investigated the effect of laptop multitasking on both users and nearby peers in a classroom setting. The second section of the introduction is the literature review, and its purpose is to build an argument for your research question and hypothesis (presented at the end of the introduction). What that means is that when you create an outline for the literature review, you should be asking yourself what points the reader needs to understand if they're going to 'buy into' the hypothesis. (Please note that this type of writing, in which you build a case for something you'll be presenting or requesting later, can be found in all types of careers.)

In the literature review you should be able to list two to four major points that will argue for your hypothesis, and they will be the backbone of this section. These points would each be addressed separately in the literature review (one paragraph for each point) and, as you make each one, you would turn to relevant literature - either the assigned 'Introduction/Discussion' articles, the textbook, or the web-based sources that you have found - for evidence to support them. The most common mistake in students' writing is to present three sequential summaries of different articles or web-based sources - you should be organizing your literature review around major points, not around studies or web-based sources. As you make the points to build a case for your hypothesis, you can, and should, feel free to cite the articles or web-based sources more than once (in other words, the same article or web-based source can be used as evidence for more than one point). Think carefully about whether it makes sense to make the points in a particular order to better make your case for the hypothesis you're testing. The third and final part of the introduction is often subtitled 'The Current Study', and contains a clear statement of the question(s) and hypothesis. Like the opening, this section will be quite short. In a few sentences, you should summarize the argument you have made in the literature review and conclude with a direct and clear statement of the question(s) and hypothesis (again, see examples in the annotated articles).

Method (approximately 1page): The method section describes how the study was conducted in enough detail that someone else (who was not present to witness how it was done) could accurately replicate the study. This method section should be divided into three subsections. In the Participants section, describe the participants (including your sample size, where the participants were recruited from, and some basic characteristics such as participants' self-reported gender identity and their average age). In the Measures section, describe the materials that were used to carry out the study including a description of the questionnaires that were used. In this section, you need to cite the two articles that describe the development of those questionnaires. Elsewhere, we have referred to them as the 'Methods Articles'. You do not need to read these articles (they are not posted on Brightspace); you simply need to cite them in this section of the text, and in the reference section of your paper.

Finally, in the Procedure section, you should explain exactly how the study was conducted, including what instructions were given to participants. When you write up the procedure, you need to provide sufficient detail that someone who had never heard of this study could replicate it exactly, without asking you for any clarification. For a good example of how the method section should be written, take a look at the annotated Weaver and Swank (2021) paper.

Results (approximately half a page): The results section presents the findings of the study. You should begin by telling the reader about the specific analysis that you ran to test the hypothesis and the results obtained. Again, for a good example, see the results section of the Weaver and Swank (2021) annotated paper.

Discussion (approximately 2pages): The discussion section has four parts. Keep in mind that the discussion will re-examine many of the issues raised in your introduction - in this way, they are like bookends of your paper. The first part will summarize the findings and indicate whether your results support the hypothesis. This section will be short; likely just a sentence or two. The second section of the discussion is the place where you explain or interpret the findings for each research question in turn.

Questions that are often addressed in this section might include:

How does this finding fit in with - and extend - what we know about this topic, and/or how does it advance the theory on which the study was based?

If applicable: Is it possible that there is another way to interpret the findings?

If applicable: If your hypothesis was not supported, do you think it was because of shortcomings in the design of the study? Explain what you think the problems might have been and how they may have affected the results you found.

If applicable: Or perhaps you feel that the study was adequate, and the unexpected findings should be believed, despite the fact that they didn't support the hypothesis. In this case, the hypothesis and/or theory maybe open to question and you should explain how, and propose and discuss modifications to the hypothesis/theory. In this section, it may be appropriate to cite the two 'Introduction/Discussion' articles, the textbook, or the web-based sources you selected. The second section is also the place for discussing the implications of your study. We've already talked about the theoretical implications (see the prior paragraph), but maybe there are practical "real world" implications of what you have found as well. Some examples might include addressing the following questions:

Is the knowledge gained relevant to the general public? How?

Could these findings have an impact on public policy such as government regulations or the law? How? The discussion is the place to raise these issues with your readers. Please support any points you make by citing an appropriate source (either of the two 'Introduction/Discussion' articles, the textbook, or your web-based sources).

In the third part of the discussion, we address limitations and possible future directions for research in this area (there is often a subtitle to separate this section). Whether or not our hypothesis is supported, you should comment on potential problems with the study. Issues you wish to comment on may include (but are not limited to):

adequacy of the measures

representativeness of the sample

appropriateness of the statistical tests used

researcher bias

research participant bias

ethical issues

the issue of correlation vs. causality For each weakness, you should be able to offer some specific suggestions for future research. Where should researchers go from here? What follow-up studies would address these problems or expand upon our knowledge? The fourth and final section of the discussion is the conclusion. This section will be just a few sentences long, and will clearly outline the broad conclusion or "take-home" message from this study.