What are the Hypotheses of the Current Study The American Psychological Association - Management Assignment Help

Assignment Task:

Task:

Drafting your Introduction
This exercise is intended to assist you with writing your introduction section in your lab report. Your final submission is expected to adhere to APA 7th edition** format.
Very broadly introduce the topic (define key terms “executive function”, “hot and cool executive function”)
…
Narrow the topic down and introduce the specific key elements of the topic. What does the literature say about this area of research?
…
Considering what is known, what is the rationale for out study?
…
What is the aim of the current study?
…
What are the hypotheses of the current study?
…
** The American Psychological Association has published the APA 7th referencing style which includes a number of changes to the style. The VU APA Referencing Style Guide has been updated to reflect these changes.  http://libraryguides.vu.edu.au/apa-referencingRefer to the Summary of 6th to 7th edn changes tab on the APA Guide for what these changes are, and how this will affect your work
Literature Review Structure from Session 4 Presentation

• Think about word limit: 1500 words overall; weighting of paper heavy in literature review and discussion
• Suggested word length for each section:
• Lit review (aka introduction): 600 words
• Materials, Method, Results: 300 words
• Discussion: 600 words
• (play around; could be 400 for Materials etc.)
• You must paraphrase points from the presentation
• Only things that should be copied and pasted directly are aim and hypotheses!
• Use 6 articles from interactive reading list
• 2 are materials that are not counted towards your reference list- these go in the materials section only: BART (Lejuez et al., 2003) and Life events questionnaire (Camacho et al., 2003)
• Must source 2 additional articles related to hot/cool EF and/or RFT
• Make sure that you reference throughout! (8 references in total for the literature review)
• Introduction
• Broadly state area of research
• Executive Functioning (EF): definition
• A variety of skills necessary for higher order goal directed behaviour.
• This can be broken down into hot and cool EF
• What are these again? Define them.
• Research has demonstrated that hot and cold EF are distinct, and hot (emotional) components often influence the cold skills what is the issue? Poor ecological validity with respect to cold EF because tests that tap into “cold EF” also tap into “hot EF”…so… it is important to look at hot EF, because…
• Are there any other gaps in relation to HOT EF? How does hot EF link with self-regulatory focus theory?
• Given that hot EF is about affective decision making, wouldn’t it be interesting to investigate what might give rise to these affective decisions for goal directed behaviour, especially as we are arguing that EF lacks ecological validity?
• Research as revealed that Self regulatory focus theory might play a role in affective cognitions (i.e., hot EF) Define these two facets of SRFT
• It is important to explore this in adults because…
• Body Paragraph 1- hot and cold EF, with the focus more so on hot EF
• What is EF?
• What can it be broken down into?
• What are they?
• What do they do?
• How does this help us in everyday life?
• What is the background? When do they develop? Which part of the brain?
• What is the issue, and why should we focus on hot EF?
• Studies to demonstrate that hot and cool EF are distinct, but is there evidence to suggest that hot components influence cold skills? Worth discussing evidence here – remember presenting balanced argument where possible
• Evidence/findings to highlight and substantiate rationale that:
• Hot EF is associated with emotional regulation/appraisals of the task
• Body Paragraph 2- SRFT- promotion and prevention
• Self-regulatory focus-what is it?
• What does it do?
• How does it explain our everyday behaviour?
• What are they broken down into?
• Evidence suggests that humans differ in their decision making, emotions, and therefore performance on complex task. Source this evidence/studies/findings with respect to promotion AND prevention focus to demonstrate their differences
• Ties in nicely with hot EF, right? How so? Explain this link?
• This difference in emotion produced by success and failure in turn influence the strategy used in hot EF tasks, by the two regulatory focuses.
• Conclusion
• Rationale, aim, and hypotheses
• Rationale
• EF is often classified as the umbrella term that covers a hierarchy of skills that are essential to function as a self serving individual (Lezak et al., 2004).
• Controversy with respect to the separable domains of hot and cold EF, and that hot EF most likely influences cold EF. Thus, there is limited ecological validity.
• Self-regulatory focus theory is closely related to hot emotional EF. Given that this is all about the emotional approach to a task, and promotion does…. And prevention does……., and hot EF is all about emotional regulation- it's a match made in heaven- explain.
• Aim and hypotheses (the only thing that can be copied and pasted!!!)
• Therefore, the aim of the current study is to investigate whether manipulation of regulatory focus for prevention or promotion affects performance on a hot executive functioning task.
• It was hypothesised that participants who were primed to be promotion focus would make significantly more risky decisions on a hot EF task than participants who were primed to be prevention focused.
• Now that you have dot pointed your draft. Write this out in full sentences using APA guidelines. Please see an example literature review below, on a completely different topic.
• Sample Introduction
• The Auditory Verbal Learning Test Performance of Younger and Older Adults: Comparing Verbal Memory Differences in Recall, Learning Curve and Interference
• Clinicians and researchers have extensively used auditory and verbal learning tests to examine numerous aspects of verbal memory (Carstairs, Shores, & Myors, 2012). Verbal memory is a broad term used in cognitive psychology that involves the storage of information in words or other cognitive representations involving language (Burton, Westen, & Kowalski, 2015). This study uses the Auditory Verbal Learning Test (AVLT; Geffen, Butterworth, Forrester, & Geffen, 1994) to examine differences in younger and older adults’ performance within three components of verbal memory: initial recall, learning curve, and interference. Recall is the conscious recollection of material from memory (Burton et al, 2015); and learning curve is the rate at which an individual can obtain new information (Wozniak, 2016). Interference involves the recollection of material after receiving similar intruding memories (Burton et al, 2015). Previous research produced mixed results on effects of age on the various aspects of verbal memory (Salgado et al, 2011; Vakil, Greenstein, & Blachstein, 2010).
• Murphy, West, Armilio, Craik, and Stuss (2007) found that younger adults (M = 23.4 years) were significantly better in verbal recall than older adults (M = 73.3 years), as measured by a word learning task which was one part of a larger array of test including The National Adult Reading Test-Revised and Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-Revised. However, given that, the purpose of their study was to examine the effects of false memory and circadian variation on word learning performance by using reading, vocabulary, and intelligence tests along with word recall tasks, there are limitations in applying this study. Other studies with a large sample size (N = 528) that used the AVLT as a measure for recall produced similar findings in which younger adults (20-29 years) performed significantly better in verbal recall tasks than older adults (50-59 years, and 60+ years; Blachstein & Vakil, 2016; Vakil et al., 2010). Such studies demonstrate that verbal recall declines with age.

Previous research on learning curve in verbal memory performance have reported varying results (Blachstein & Vakil, 2016; Simensky & Abeles, 2002). Studies of verbal memory across the lifespan found that learning curve performance was not dependent upon age (Blachstein & Vakil, 2016; Mitrushina, Satz, Chervinsky, & D’ella, 1991). Both studies used the Rey’s Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) and gathered consistent results, strengthening the RAVLT as a measure for learning curve. However, in Mitrushina, Satz, Chervinsky, and D’ella’s (1991) study, the focus was exclusively on older adults (57-85 years) and they did not have a younger comparison group thus weakening their inferences regarding the effect that age has on learning curve performance. In contrast, Simensky and Abeles (2002) found that learning curve performance declined with age. Their study was limited, due to the focus on the frontal lobe functioning when previous research indicates the temporal lobe is associated with verbal memory functioning (Burton et al, 2015). Overall, previous studies examining learning curve performance have produced mixed results; therefore, further studies are needed to determine whether age affects learning curve performance.
Previous studies using the RAVLT to measure verbal recall after interference across age groups produced conflicting results (Salgado et al, 2011; Vakil, Greenstein, & Blachstein, 2010). Salgado et al. (2011) found no significant difference in recall after interference on the RAVLT between participants aged 20-60 years. Similarly, Mitrushina et al.’s (1991) study of adults aged 57-85 years found no significant difference in the interference trial of the RAVLT. In contrast, interference had a significantly greater effect in recall performance on the RAVLT for participants aged 60+, and for ages 70+, than participants aged 20-49 years, showing age to impact on the interference trials of the RAVLT (Vakil et al., 2010). Thus, multiple studies have examined the effects of interference on recall in different age groups using the RAVLT, and results from those studies have varied.
The review of findings has revealed that recall performance using auditory and verbal learning tests declines with age; however, it remains unclear whether learning curve and recall following an interference trial declines or remains stable with aging. Therefore, the aim of this study is to investigate whether there is a difference between young (18-30 years) and older (50+ years) people in the verbal memory performance of recall, learning curve, and interference. Using the AVLT, it is hypothesised that the younger age group will have better trial 1 recall than the older group. It is also hypothesised that the average learning curve on the AVLT, calculated as trial 5 recall minus trial 1 recall, will show no difference between age groups. Lastly, it is hypothesised that the younger age group will have better recall, after an interference trial, on the AVLT than the older age group.

The above  Management  Assignment has been solved by our  Management Assignment  Experts at onlineassignmentbank. Our Assignment Writing Experts are efficient to provide a fresh solution to this question. We are serving more than 10000+ Students in Australia, UK & US by helping them to score HD in their academics. Our experts are well trained to follow all marking rubrics & referencing style.