MSc Organisational Psychiatry & Psychology
MSc Organisational Psychiatry & Psychology
Dissertation [7PCSORES] Dissertation marksheet (100% of overall module mark)
Student ID: 21183146 Final mark (out of 100%):
Please provide a mark for each of the sections below
Maximum Mark Grade Boundaries
Introduction
Summarize previous research and provide the wider context and background to the current study
Set the stage for the present research, indicating gaps in knowledge
Introduce the present research, stating its purpose and question, explaining its importance and outlining its design
State the hypotheses or objectives of the current study and, if appropriate, their correspondence to the research design 8/20 Distinction (14 -20 range)A++ 18 20
A+ 16 17.5
A 14 15.5
Merit (12 13.5 range) B+ 13 13.5
B 12 12.5
Pass (10 11.5 range) C+ 11 11.5
C 10 10.5
Fail (8 9.5 range)
Method
Selection, suitability and/or sufficiency of the study sample, design, materials and methods
Sufficiently detailed is provided to allow replication
Ethical considerations: information sheet, informed consent, anonymity or confidentiality issues; ethical approval (Assess as applicable.)
Student autonomy: self-project or allocation from catalogue (Assess autonomy in research design and data collection) procedure; data analysis) 11/20 Results
A comprehensive structure for the results is presented that includes both descriptive information and formal quantitative and/or qualitative analyses.
The relevant analyses are presented and sufficiently detailed (e.g., F-, T- and p-values for quantitative research; identified themes for qualitative results).
The reported results are limited to those relevant to the main research objectives and hypotheses. 10/20 Discussion
Comprehensive structure that includes a brief summary of the main results of the study, and a discussion of theoretical, methodological and applied implications
Strengths and limitations of the research are presented with recommendations for future studies
Critical discussion with logical and coherent arguments with new insights to the topic 8/20 Academic Writing
Paper follows guidelines of the selected journal
Presentation & writing to academic conventions (APA);
References (range, relevance and format);
Citation and referencing (APA);
Number and formatting of tables & figures;
Appendices relevance and formatting (if appropriate) 10.5/20 TOTAL SCORE 47.5
Please follow the structure provided and do not merge or create new sections.
A section not included in the dissertation is marked with 0.
A rough checklist of issues we would expect to be mentioned is included for each section.
Please provide any additional feedback on the proposal
First Marker:
Project background
The study was mostly designed prior to the student involvement: it was part of a stage 1 registered report on the factors involved in unethical behaviour at work (but not well-being, see later point), so the introduction and method had already been written by the wider research team; the student was therefore asked to propose an extension, which they chose to be focused on employee well-being, selecting both the theoretical framework suggesting an impact of unethical behaviours on wellbeing, and the method elements related to measuring well-being.
Academic writing
The abstract provides no information about the method, findings or discussion/conclusion, effectively only summarizing the background (and this with a somehow weak structure, the last sentence being poorly related to the rest). The paragraphs in the measures section do not support an organization per measure (e.g., the reliability for the Work Locus of Control scale is in a different paragraph, which is closer to a paragraph on another scale). I would argue that Journal of Organizational Behaviour has a stronger standard of describing participants characteristics in the method than in the results section, but this is a relatively minor point. The use of variable codes in the result section is not to publication standards and make following the results section more difficult than necessary.
Introduction
More references should be provided to support arguments (e.g., in the second paragraph), while there is also a tendency to include more general points which do not serve the argument (e.g., how organizations value employee wellbeing has little direct relevance to the research question, or at least it is not made clear how related to the question it could be). The argument about the link between someone committing unethical behaviour at work and their own wellbeing (which are both things measured in this study) is a little diluted by also talking about the implications of unethical behaviour at work for the victims of the behaviour (e.g., Ample evidence indicates that individuals faced with assault at work experience a variety of negative and occasionally fatal Outcomes."). The most critical limitation in the section is as previously the lack of details about the other factors that were measured along unethical behaviour at work, and the original study this one conceptually replicates (Jones & Kavanagh, 1996; e.g., why replicate this specific study).
Method
Measures are generally well described. I would suggest describing the procedure after the measures, and the longitudinal design would be easier to follow if it had been mentioned in the aims (since it allows measuring actual unethical behaviour, making the replication conceptual only, but more ecologically valid). The procedure contains inaccuracies (e.g., unethical behaviours were measured in the second part, not in the first one). The method itself, which was established prior to the project by the team lead, is appropriate to test the research question.
Results
Descriptive statistics tables repeat the information in the text: I would only include the statistics in the tables, and use the text for a purely narrative description. The reporting of the regression also lacks conciseness, similarly with numerous repetitions of figures between texts and tables: for example, the ANOVA table could be left out, while also making sure the ANOVA statistics are reported in adherence with APA style. The inferential analyse used is fine, with a hierarchical regression isolating the impact of unethical behaviour at work on employee well-being. However, the discussion states that The main objectives of the study were to determine how several independent factors impacted unethical behaviour at work and to investigate the relationships between these variables and employee well-being; yet, in the current state, the impact of the other factors on unethical behaviour at work was not analysed (which arguably was also hypothetized).
Discussion
The results should be summarized more concisely at the start of the discussion, and these should not be into practical implications before discussing the results meaning. The interpretation of the findings misses out the opportunity to reflect on the theoretical frame presented in the introduction (Ethical Impact Theory). There are also points in the discussion which still ignore the reality of the findings (e.g., the discussion on the impact of manager influence, although this was not significant). Limitations are generic rather than applying specifically to the study and supported by the reality of the design and/or data. The links back to the literature also tend to be made less often than would be optimal.
Second Marker:
AUTHOR GUIDELINES
The following table presents a summary of the Instructions to Authors. It is only a summary and students should refer to the journal guidelines.
Journal Instructions to authors Focus Length/Word Limits Structure of the paper Reference Style Keywords
Journal of Organisational Behaviour https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/page/journal/10991379/homepage/forauthors.html Organizational behavior within and across individual (e.g., personality, attitudes, beliefs, stress, emotions, decision making), group (e.g., size, composition, leadership, power, group affect) and organizational (e.g., job satisfaction, performance, diversity, work-life balance, organisational culture and climate, cross-cultural issues) levels of analysis Length 40 pages (includes references, tables and figures) Use 8,000 a reference for the main body.
Abstract: 200
Title, abstract, and key words; Main text; References; Tables (each table complete with title and footnotes); Figure legends; Appendices (if relevant). APA 5 keywords
Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/page/journal/20448325/homepage/forauthors.html Industrial, organizational, work, vocational and personnel psychology
behavioural and cognitive aspects of industrial relations
ergonomics and human factors
industrial sociology Main body: 8,000 words
Abstract: 100-200 words
Include Practitioner Points these are 2-4 bullet points, following the abstract
Title
Main text
References
Tables and figures (each complete with title and footnotes)
Appendices (if relevant) APA Number not specified; for reference use up to 5 keywords
European Journal of Work and Organizational Psychology
HYPERLINK "https://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=pewo20&page=instructions" https://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=pewo20&page=instructions Papers should improve our understanding of phenomena occurring in work and organizational settings. Publishes empirical, theoretical, methodological, and review articles that are relevant to real-world situations No word limit. Use 8,000 a reference for the main body
Abstract: 100-200 words Title page; abstract; keywords; main text introduction, materials and methods, results, discussion; acknowledgments; declaration of interest statement; references; appendices (as appropriate); table(s) with caption(s) (on individual pages); figures; figure captions (as a list). APA
4 to 6 keywords
Work & Stress
HYPERLINK "https://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=twst20&page=instructions" https://www.tandfonline.com/action/authorSubmission?journalCode=twst20&page=instructions Publishes research on psychologically salient features of the work environment to their psychological, behavioural and health consequences, focusing on the underlying psychological processes. Topics may include work-family interface, social relations at work (including topics such as bullying and conflict at work, leadership and organizational support), workplace interventions and reorganizations, and dimensions and outcomes of worker stress and well-being Length 30 pages (includes references, tables and figures) Use 8,000 a reference for the main body. Abstract:200 words Title page; abstract; keywords; main text introduction, materials and methods, results, discussion; acknowledgments; declaration of interest statement; references; appendices (as appropriate); table(s) with caption(s) (on individual pages); figures; figure captions (as a list). APA
3 to 6 keywords
Organisational Psychology Review https://uk.sagepub.com/en-gb/eur/journal/organizational-psychology-review#submission-guidelines Publishes original conceptual work and meta-analyses in the field of organizational psychology (broadly defined to include applied, industrial, occupational, personnel, and work psychology as well as organizational behavior).
Does not publish primary empirical research. Dissertations under this format can only include systematic reviews, meta-analysis and meta-synthesis Contributions should typically not exceed 8,00010,000 words all-included. Use 8,000 a reference for the main body. Abstract: No structure specified.
Introduction
Method (use PRISMA guidelines for systematic reviews and meta-analysis)
Results
Discussion*
APA
Up to 5 keywords
* Please refer to the additional information on the writing-up qualitative research
