Encouraging Students to Write Better Literature-Review Papers in Cognitive Psychology
1
Encouraging Students to Write Better
Literature-Review Papers in Cognitive
Psychology
Margaret W. Matlin
I. Overview
In Chapter 10 of Cognition (7th ed.), I emphasize that writing is a challenging task. In fact, writing requires virtually every cognitive process: attention, memory, metacognition, imagery, background knowledge, language, problem solving, creativity, reasoning, and decision making. Accordingly, when I teach my course in Cognitive Psychology, the course content provides a perfect opportunity to discuss how students can learn to write more effectively. In fact, throughout the semester, we examine the components of writing a literature review.
Over the years, I have developed a sequence of topics to examine with my students, in connection with writing a literature-review paper. Every week, we consider some aspect of writing this paper. Chapter 12 of my textbook discusses a useful concept, called the "planning fallacy" (p. 429). According to the planning fallacy, students tend to underestimate the amount of time required to complete a paper. However, if we professors can encourage students to envision each phase of writing their paper, then they should become more realistic in their time estimates.
At SUNY Geneseo, the three prerequisite courses for Cognitive Psychology are Introductory Psychology, Psychological Statistics, and Research Methods. Therefore, students are already familiar with several kinds of statistical analysis. They have also been taught how to use APA style for citing references in a paper. In addition, they know how to use PsycINFO to locate journal articles, and they have had some experience in reading journal articles in psychology.
In the current era, professors need to reduce the likelihood of students purchasing their papers commercially, through web-based paper mills (euphemistically called "research services”). The literature-review approach I describe certainly cannot eliminate this problem, but it probably decreases the likelihood. On the first day of class, my students learn that they will be required to submit a Paper Preview in the 5th week of class (see below). In addition, they know that I might not approve the topic described in their preview. Most of my students cannot afford to purchase a paper about a topic that might not be acceptable for their literature review. Furthermore, the kind of student who purchases a paper is probably not likely to plan this purchase 6 weeks before the paper is actually due! Students also know that their lit review must include several very recent journal articles, and it must critique the research from the perspective of the methodological issues we have discussed in class. Again, a purchased paper is not likely to fulfill these criteria.
The next section of this description shows the time line I have developed for discussing topics related to the lit review. In the final section of this document, I have included samples of five handouts that provide concrete examples of some important guidelines for writing a paper.
II. Sequence of topics focusing on writing a literature review
The First Day of Class
During our first day of class each term, I distribute a course syllabus. (See "Course Syllabus," elsewhere on this web site.) Immediately afterwards, I hand out "Instructions for the Literature-Review Paper." (See below.) At this time, I discuss the primary goals of this assignment, but I do not review each item on the lit-review handout.
Week 2 of Class
In the second week, we review each point in the "Instructions for the Literature-Review Paper." I bring extra copies of this handout to class, because I want students to read each specific point while we discuss it in class. (Again, with vivid information about the paper, they may partially overcome the planning fallacy.)
Here are my specific comments during this class session:
1. The topic of your paper must be genuinely cognitive. Suppose that you want to write a paper on some aspect of psychological depression. Specifically, you would like to examine the effects of depression on a person's social interactions with other people. This topic would be appropriate for a course in Abnormal Psychology or Social Psychology. However, it doesn't really focus specifically on cognitive processes.
You must select a paper topic that focuses on some cognitive process as either the independent or dependent variable. Consequently, a topic such as "The Effects of Environmental Noise on Working Memory" would be a good choice. In this case, the dependent variable—working memory—is discussed in Chapter 4 of your textbook. Sometimes, the cognitive process may be the independent variable, as in the topic, "The Effects of Mental-Imagery Training on Athletic Performance." This paper topic would be related to the discussion of imagery in Chapter 7.
Here is a heuristic that you can use to determine whether your paper topic is genuinely cognitive. Specifically, check the independent and the dependent variable to see if either (or both) appears in the table of contents of your Cognition textbook. For example, working memory is the name of one chapter, so that first paper topic is fine. Mental imagery is the name of another chapter, so that second paper topic is fine.
I also assure them that they can choose a paper topic that focuses on a correlation, such as “The Relationship Between Working Memory and Depression.” Again, working memory is the name of a chapter in their textbook, so this topic meets the criterion of being related to cognition. (Incidentally, within a week or two, we discuss the problem of correlation and causation. I encourage students to think about whether they should discuss this issue in their lit-review paper.)
2. Your paper must focus on empirical research, rather than merely describing a cognitive concept. For instance, suppose that you are interested in the topic of creativity. You might be tempted to write a paper in which you spend several pages discussing alternative definitions of creativity. You may also be tempted to spend several pages discussing theoretical approaches to creativity.
However, in this class, your paper must emphasize the actual research that has been conducted on a specific topic. For example, you might choose a topic such as, "The Effects of Reward on Children's Creativity." To determine whether your topic is sufficiently empirical, look at the journal articles you have gathered. Do they have sections labeled "Methods," "Results," and "Discussion"? If not you'll have to search for additional journal articles, or you may even need to change your topic.
3. The scope of your paper must not be too broad. For example, "Children's Eyewitness Testimony" is much too broad. You might start with just one facet of this topic, such as "The Misinformation Effect in Children's Eyewitness Testimony." As you gather resources on this topic, however, you may find that you need to narrow your focus even further. For instance, you may want to focus specifically on “The Misinformation Effect in Preschoolers’ Eyewitness Testimony.”
4. At least three articles that you discuss must have been published during the last 5 years, for instance, "2004 and more recent." [Note: To avoid ambiguity, I describe a specific time span to my students.] If you cannot find enough recent articles, you may need to rethink your topic. Please check with me during an office hour, and we can work together to find a topic that interests you. [Incidentally, early in the semester, some especially conscientious students typically come to my office who really want to write a paper on a specific topic. However, they have discovered that even their most recent reference is ancient. I hand them a copy of the document called, “Finding Recent Articles on a Topic for Your Cognitive Psychology Literature-Review Paper.” [See this handout, below.]
[I will hand this document to all students in the course, somewhat later in the semester, during the third week of class. Earlier in the semester, however, most students have not yet tried to locate research on their topic, and many don’t yet know that they will not find abundant current research.]
5. It's possible that you may already have a paper topic in mind. However, if not, here are several techniques that can help you identify some possible topics:
a. Think about your future occupation, and ask yourself how some component of cognitive psychology can provide you with relevant knowledge in this area.
b. Search through the chapters of your textbook, especially the last chapters, which we will discuss after you have already handed in your paper.
c. Browse through relevant journals in our college library. I distribute a list of all the psychology journals in our library, and I point out about 20 journals that are especially likely to include empirical research in cognitive psychology. I urge them to browse through the relevant journals that our college still has in hard-copy form. [In contrast, browsing an electronic version of these journals provides a narrower perspective, a kind of “tunnel vision.”]
Week 3 of Class
I pass out a copy of our department's Writing Guidelines. These guidelines are also posted on our department's web site: < However, I want students to have the actual physical document in front of them during class, while we discuss writing-style issues.
I describe how writing is essential for virtually every career they may contemplate, and it is also essential for students in graduate school. For motivational purposes, I read letters from former students who now have careers in areas such as school psychology, social work, industrial-organizational behavior, public health, and biopsychology. I also read letters from former students who are now in graduate school. Invariably, these former students emphasize how happy they are that they had been required to write papers at SUNY Geneseo, because now they feel comfortable with their grad-school writing assignments. Students are more likely to trust the testimonies of former students from their own college than to be persuaded by their professor's comments!
After this "motivational speech," we consider selected points from the Writing Guidelines. I particularly emphasize the errors that students frequently make on their Cognitive Psychology literature reviews. I then urge them to carefully review the document on their own, especially because they will have their first exam during the following week. Because good writing style is an important skill for any career related to psychology, I emphasize that I will consider writing style in grading their essays on each of the three examinations in this course, as well as their literature-review paper.
Our Writing Guidelines also include information about APA citation style. However, at this point, we do not discuss this issue.
Week 3 of class also provides me the opportunity to talk in more detail about how to locate previous research on their chosen topic. I sometimes have trouble finding recent information about a topic that I want to explore when writing a new edition of Cognition. I know that many of my students will face the same problem with their papers. Our college subscribes to PsycINFO. (Faculty members had the opportunity to try other alternatives, but we thought that they did not yield substantially better references.) Sometimes I find that PsycINFO leads me directly to many current studies. Other times, I know that there must be many current studies, but I cannot be using the correct search terms.
Several years ago, I discovered a strategy that other frustrated professors have certainly developed on their own. Specifically, I search for new research by looking for the title of a classic study in the area, using the assumption that these new research articles will cite the classic article in their reference sections. (For details, see below: “Finding Recent Articles on a Topic for Your Cognitive Psychology Literature-Review Paper.”)
Week 4 of Class
During this week, I describe the "Paper Preview" that will be due in two weeks. I pass out a couple of strong sample previews submitted by previous students. (See "Sample Paper Previews" below.) I point out that their previews must be fairly specific, but students obviously cannot determine the specific scope of their paper at this point in the semester.
At this time, we also discuss APA citation style. Our department's Writing Guidelines provide examples for a journal article, a book, and a chapter in an edited book. Because most of the references for their Cognitive Psychology paper are journal articles, we focus on the style for this citation. Each student receives a photocopied first page of an article from a journal in cognitive psychology. (I use one from Memory & Cognition, because the first page of each article in that journal includes all the relevant information.) With the Writing Guidelines in front of them, students are told to write the appropriate citation for this article, using APA format.
When everyone has finished, I write a citation of that article on the overhead projector. However, I intentionally make at least one error, and I ask them to identify any errors. I also emphasize that they cannot create an APA-style reference by precisely copying the elements of the article. (For instance, the journal may capitalize most of the words in the article’s title, but that format is not consistent with APA style.)
I then emphasize that their paper preview is due the following week. The preview must include a tentative paper title, about half a page describing the scope of the paper, and two or more recent references that are written in APA citation style. The purpose of the preview is to make certain that students have chosen a topic that is (1) current, (2) cognitive in content, (3) empirical, rather than descriptive or theoretical, and (4) sufficiently focused in scope. I also emphasize that one point will be subtracted for each day that the preview is turned in late.
Week 5 of Class
I collect all the Paper Previews, review them, and then write a note on each preview. For the best papers, I write "OK" and then comment on the specific strengths of their paper. For the "OK, but with a caution" papers, I will note the potential problem with their lit review. (Most often, the scope of the paper is somewhat too broad, and I mention that we can discuss strategies about how to limit the topic.) For the "Revise and resubmit" papers, I describe how their topic is not appropriate or their description is not sufficient. I emphasize that we can discuss some options either during my office hours or by email. (They must hand in a revised preview, no more than one week later.) On each paper, I make specific comments, and I also edit their citations for APA style.
During my earlier days of teaching Cognitive Psychology, I thought that intrinsic motivation would be sufficient to inspire my students to write thoughtful previews for their literature-review papers. After about 20 years, the results were clear. Yes, the more conscientious students in the class did write excellent previews. Unfortunately, however, many other students simply turned in substandard previews, hoping that it would pass my inspection.
At this point, I began to assign a point value to the preview. If a student’s paper received either an “OK” or an “OK, but with a caution,” then I would add 2 points to his or her total grade on the paper. If the first preview was not satisfactory—but the second preview was satisfactory—then the total grade would remain unchanged. However, if the second preview was not satisfactory, the student would need to submit a third preview, and I would subtract 2 points from the total paper grade. Although I haven’t conducted formal research, the point system does seem to generate more carefully written previews.
I then photocopy the annotated Paper Previews, so that I have a record that I can consult later, if necessary. Then I pass the previews back during the next class session. I urge students to come to my office hours or to contact me via email if they have any questions.
During Week 5, I also provide a handout that contains advice about writing papers. This advice was provided by students who had been enrolled in the class during previous semesters. (See "Advice Regarding the Cognition Literature Review Paper," below.) Again, students seem more receptive to advice provided by other "real live students," rather than a professor. Also, some of these suggestions evoke vivid imagery about students’ skyrocketing levels of stress if they had failed to begin working on their papers until the last moment. It seems likely that these cautionary tales help to counteract the "planning fallacy." Professors who teach Cognitive Psychology should request similar advice from the students in their own classes. The students in the following semester’s class will consider this advice to be much more credible and persuasive if it was written by students at their own college or university!
Week 6 of Class
In Week 6, we begin to discuss the specific features of an ideal literature-review paper. These features had been described in the "Instructions for the Literature-Review Paper," which they received on the first day of class. However, now that they have an actual topic, they need to think more concretely about how to write a strong paper. I emphasize that the major criterion on which I will grade their paper is the amount of cognitive effort that seems to be reflected in the paper. Then I make the following comments about features that indicate cognitive effort: