Criteria

High Distinction

Distinction

Credit

Pass

Unsatisfactory

Introduction

Summary of research background, logically leading to a research question and statement of hypotheses.

Student has provided the appropriate number of sources chosen -5 peer-reviewed journal articles AND all are appropriate

Clear, accurate and succinct presentation of previous research, following a logical structure, and leading clearly to the research question.

Hypotheses are clearly stated, indicating the relationship between variables and the expected effects

Student has provided the appropriate number of sources chosen -5 peer-reviewed journal articles AND all are appropriate

Research background presented with logical structure. Relationship between previous literature and research question is clearly stated.

Hypotheses are stated with clear reference to the relationship between variables and the expected effects. May lack clarity or succinctness.

Student has mostly used the appropriate number of sources 5 peer-reviewed journal articles which are mostly appropriate

Research background presented with limited logical structure and a lack of clarity. Research question is sufficiently linked to previous literature.

Hypotheses are stated without clear reference to the relationship between variables and the expected effects.

Student has used 4-5 sources which have some relevance and its narrowed scope

Research background presented lacking clear, logical structure. Research question articulated without direct reference to the way it relates to the literature.

Explicit listing of hypotheses might be missing, unclear or inaccurate.

Insufficient evidence/ appropriateness of the sources

Insufficient evidence

knowledge of the

topic or evidence of

summary of

literature

No introduction included, or unclear or irrelevant research background, research question and hypotheses provided.

Method

A clear and concise description of participants, design, materials and procedure. Reports data cleaning and statistical assumptions

Clear description of participants used and recruitment process including who they were, how many there were, and how they were selected

Excellent explanation of the experimental design, including IV, DV, control or extraneous variables. All variables operationalised in exceptional detail.

Clear description of the materials, measures, equipment, or stimuli used in the experiment

Procedure is in chronological order, concise but with su?icient details so it could be reproduced from the description

Clearly outlines all data cleaning steps and justifies why particular steps were taken to clean the data

Reports whether all relevant assumptions were met. Justifies all standards for identification of assumptions, using references. Justifies use of parametric or non-parametric statistical tests.

Outline of participants including who they were, how many there were, and how they were selected

Clear explanation of the experimental design. All variables operationalised with high level of detail.

Outline of materials, measures, equipment, or stimuli used in the experiment

Procedure is in chronological order, with details so it could mostly be reproduced from the description

Outlines all data cleaning steps and justifies why particular steps were taken to clean the data

Reports whether all but one assumption was met. Justifies most standards for identification of assumptions, with references.

Most details about participants provided including at least one of the following: who they were, how many there were, and how they were selected

Basic explanation of the experimental design. All variables mentioned, operationalisation lacks detail.

Most details of the materials, measures, equipment, or stimuli used in the experiment included

Procedure is in chronological order, with details so it could mostly be reproduced from the description.

Mentions most data cleaning steps and justifies in part why particular steps were taken to clean the data

Reports whether all but two or three assumptions were met. Mentions some standards for identification of assumptions, with some references. Clearly describes the impact of any departures for the findings.

Some details about participants provided including at least one of the following: who they were, how many there were, and how they were selected

Basic summary of the experimental design, missing some stages/variables. Limited operational definition.

Some details of the materials, measures, equipment, or stimuli used in the experiment included

Procedure is in chronological order, with details so some aspects could be reproduced from the description

Mentions some data cleaning steps but does not justify why particular steps were taken to clean the data

Omits more than four assumptions. Provides basic standards for identification of assumptions. Basic description of the impact of any departures for the findings

Missing details about participants including who they were, how many there were, and how they were selected

Incorrect summary of design/variables and no operational definition.

Key details of the materials, measures, equipment, or stimuli used in the experiment missing that prevents replication

Di?icult to follow what was done in the study and what was measured.

Data cleaning steps not mentioned or unclear

Does not report standards for identification or references. Does not address the impact of any departures for the findings or whether any assumptions were met, or reports an insufficient number of assumptions.

Results

Clear, accurate and succinct reporting of descriptive and inferential statistics, including visualisations

Clear, accurate and appropriate report of descriptive statistics, including appropriate measures of central tendency and variability.

Clear, accurate and appropriate report of inferential statistics. Has provided a clear statement of the pattern and direction of results (without interpretation).

Clear and accurate presentation of the data in an appropriate visualisation with all axes labelled correctly, appropriate scale and legend included.

Accurate and appropriate report of descriptive statistics, including appropriate measures of central tendency and variability.

Accurate and appropriate report of inferential statistics. Has provided a clear statement of the pattern and direction of the majority of results (without interpretation).

Accurate presentation of the data in an appropriate visualisation with all axes labelled correctly, appropriate scale and legend included.

Accurate report of descriptive statistics, including measures of central tendency and variability, though may not be appropriate.

Accurate report of most inferential statistics. Has provided a clear statement of the pattern and direction of the majority of results (has included some interpretation).

Accurate presentation of the data in an appropriate visualisation (small errors) with at least one axis labelled correctly, inappropriate scale or unclear legend included.

Limited report of the descriptive statistics. Reported at least one measure of central tendency or variability missing.

Limited report of inferential statistics. Unclear statement of pattern or direction of results and has included unclear interpretations.

Inaccurate or unclear presentation of the data through visualisation. At least one axis labelled correctly. Inaccurate scale or unclear legend.

Very limited report of descriptive statistics. Key summary statistics missing.

Very limited report of inferential statistics. Inaccurate reporting of the data. No clear statement of the pattern or direction of results.

Inaccurate or no presentation of the data through visualisation. Axes not labelled, no legend. Unclear presentation of data.

Discussion

Results linked to research question, hypotheses, and research background. Appropriate discussion of limitations, future directions and conclusions

Exceptional summary of the results of all four analyses. Full evaluation of hypotheses on the basis of the results

Potential limitations to the study and potential solutions for future studies offered.

Excellent summary of the results of all four analyses. Evaluation of the hypotheses on the basis of the results, with no more than one omission or error.

Summary of the results of all four analyses, with minor omissions or errors. Evaluation of hypotheses on the basis of the results, with minor omissions or errors.

Basic summary of the results of analyses. Basic evaluation of the hypotheses.

No or inadequate summary of the results of the analyses. No or inadequate reference to the hypotheses.

References

In text citing and references in APA

Applies correct referencing style (e.g., reference list and in-text citations) to the research report

Applies correct referencing style (e.g., reference list and in-text citations) to the research report

An attempt in the use of consistent and correct referencing style (e.g., either reference list or in-text citations) to the research report

Inconsistent use of the correct referencing style (e.g., either reference list or in-text citations) to the research report

Has not applied the correct referencing style (e.g., reference list and in-text citations) to the research report.

Academic style -

writing (e.g.,

spelling, grammar,

punctuation)

Applies correct writing style (e.g., spelling, grammar, punctuation) to the research report

Uses correct writing style (e.g., spelling, grammar, punctuation) with minimal errors in the research report

Uses correct writing style (e.g., spelling, grammar, punctuation) with some errors in the research report.

Uses correct writing style (e.g., spelling, grammar, punctuation) with a number of errors in the research report.

Has not applied the correct writing style (e.g., spelling, grammar, punctuation) to the research report.