Writing a Method Section

Lab 1

Dave Brocker

Farmingdale State College

Method Section

Objective

  • Transparency: Allows replication of the study.

  • Organization: Structured approach to presenting details.

  • Credibility: Demonstrates rigor and validity.

Components of the Method Section

  • Participants
  • Materials
  • Procedure
  • Design

Components of the Method Section

Participants

  • Number of participants.
  • Demographics (age, gender, other relevant factors).
  • Recruitment method.

Components of the Method Section

Materials:

  • Instruments (e.g., scales, questionnaires).
  • Description and citation of tools used.

Components of the Method Section

Procedure:

  • Step-by-step explanation of what participants did.
  • Timeline of events.
  • Ethical considerations (e.g., informed consent, debriefing).

Components of the Method Section

Design:

  • Specify research design (e.g., experimental, correlational).
  • Variables (IVs, DVs, and control).

Example Review

Writing Exercise

You are conducting a study to explore how exposure to morbidly curious stimuli (e.g., unpleasant smells, sights, or sounds) influences people’s emotional reactions and decision-making. The research focuses on visual stimuli (e.g., unsettling images) and their impact on self-reported curiosity and arousal levels.

  • The study uses two groups:

    • Participants who view neutral images (e.g., landscapes).
    • Participants who view morbidly curious images (e.g., depictions of natural disasters or abandoned locations).

Writing Exercise

After viewing the images, participants rate their curiosity and emotional arousal using a validated 5-point Likert scale.

  • Participants: Who would participate and how they are selected.
  • Materials: Instruments or tools used for the study.
  • Procedure: Describe how the study will be conducted.
  • Design: Outline the study design and variables.
  • Peer Review: Students exchange drafts and give constructive feedback.

Common Mistakes to Avoid

  • Overgeneralization or lack of specificity.
  • Omitting key details (e.g., sample size or instrument reliability).
  • Failing to justify design choices.