SCWK 470 SOCIAL RESEARCH METHODS II
RESEARCH PROJECT: FINAL ASSIGNMENT
Assignment: Write a paper that evaluates the empirical status of a knowledge proposition
that you think is important to your discipline. The paper must be typewritten; doublespaced with one-inch margins all around; and use a 12-point font. REMEMBER Writing
counts! Use the Writing Center!!! Use spell check!! Revise, revise, revise!!!!!
Structure of the paper: The paper must follow the outline presented below and must limit
the space devoted to any section or subsection to the amount of space indicated in
parentheses at the end of each section in the outline below. The paper must deal with
each of the issues presented in the outline and must present the discussion in the order
suggested by the outline. The paper must use the section numbers, but not the topic
headings contained in the outline. Note: Remember: all sources are to be empirical
articles from professional journals.
Outline for the paper:
Part I
The title of the paper is The relationship between _______ and _______
(name the two variables in your proposition).
2. State a knowledge proposition (hypothesis) that names two variables and the
relationship between them; and state your belief that this is an important knowledge
proposition to your discipline. (1-2 sentences)
3. State which is the antecedent, and which is the consequent variable. (1 sentence)
4. Provide a conceptual definition of each of the two variables. (1-2 paragraphs, per
variable)
5. Assert that you are going to investigate the empirical status of the knowledge
proposition by reviewing relevant empirical articles. (1 sentence)
6. State that you will describe the search strategy that you used to find information about
the empirical status of the proposition by presenting a chart (1 sentence). Present the
chart, using the following outline:
Years Database Keywords/Phrases # Abstracts found
Length of chart depends on extensiveness of search; your search should be extensive and
1
• must contain at least two databases, one of which must be PsycInfo and the
other of which must be either Medline, Sociological Abstracts, or Eric (You
may want to use EBSCO multiple search).
• use 5 search combinations for each database and must contain at least three
different keywords/phrases
• each individual search must include three elements: a keyword/phrase for the
antecedent variable, a keyword/phrase for the consequent variable, and a
keyword/phrase for the sample
Under the heading “Keywords/Phrases,” put several keywords for each search, e.g., the
several keywords for one search of the hypothesis, community violence causes anxiety
among adolescents, could be community and violence and anxiety and adolescent.
NOTE: Use only hypothesis-testing research articles
: You are searching for information on the hypothesis; therefore, each search must
combine keywords from both antecedent and consequent variables and from the
sample.
PART II
7. Describe your general reaction to the results of the search: were you surprised by the
amount of information you found on the relationship between the two variables in your
knowledge proposition? e.g., was it more than, less than, or about what you expected to
find? (1-2 sentences)
8. Report the findings, from the relevant empirical research article(s) that you found in
your search, about whether or not there is covariation between the two variables in your
proposition; report findings from no more than three studies. You must find the
information regarding covariation in the text and/or in the table; information about
covariation is typically given along with statistical significance (the probability level).
Use proper APA style for citing articles in the text. [Note: You must state the exact
page(s) on which the finding(s) may be found in the article (text and/or table(s)).
Remember to look for the probability level!!!]
If you find more than three relevant studies, select the three most recently published
studies to report the findings; if you find fewer than three relevant studies, report the
results of the studies that you did find. If you find no relevant studies, 1) report that
fact; and 2) either a) mention one study that initially seemed promising and relevant
but turned out not to be relevant; and explains why it was not relevant, e.g., it did
not directly address my knowledge proposition; rather, it addressed the following
knowledge proposition: . . . ; OR b) mention one study that is relevant to the population
2
and one of the variables in your knowledge proposition and states the hypothesis that the
researcher(s) report.
Remember that to be relevant a study must report on covariation between the two
variables in your proposition — although the term “covariation” may not be used in the
report. Remember to look for statistical significance and the probability level in order to
determine covariation! (1 paragraph)
9. Report your conclusion, based on what you found and the adequacy of your search,
about the empirical status of your knowledge proposition. (Is it an assumption (widely
believed, no evidence), a myth (widely believed, the evidence says the opposite), a fact
(widely believed and true), or is there mixed evidence?) (1-2 sentences)
10. Present one implication of your findings; the implication should be in your major,
e.g., social work, psychology, sociology, education, and anthropology. (2 sentences)
11. List, under a centered heading “References”, the references that you cite in your
paper.
12. Attach (or a snapshot) a copy(ies) of the articles (not abstracts) whose findings you
reported in 8, above. Include, if appropriate, the article that you initially thought was
relevant but that turned out not to be so. (Note: the number of articles copied must
match the number of articles whose findings you reported in 8, above, and in no case may
exceed three!)
Mark directly on the article where you found information about covariation
between the two variables in your knowledge proposition (or have the snapshot in
the appropriate place). The information may be found in the text and/or tables.
Remember: the information should include the probability level!!
3