Great Deal! Get Instant $10 FREE in Account on First Order + 10% Cashback on Every Order Order Now

Topic overview and formatting requirements Computerised cognitive training (or ‘brain training’) is a hot topic right now, and a large number of companies are selling brain training software systems...

1 answer below »

Topic overview and formatting requirements

Computerised cognitive training (or ‘brain training’) is a hot topic right now, and a large number of companies are selling brain training software systems (e.g., Lumosity, Fast ForWord, Cogmed, BrainHQ, Cognifit etc.). Some of these systems are designed for use by children, whereas others are marketed at adults orthe elderly. They are frequently promoted as suitable for improving memory, auditory processing, problem solving, logical reasoning, processing speed, spatial orientation, attention, and so on. However, as Lampit, Hallock, and Valenzuela XXXXXXXXXXnote the empirical support for such claims is unclear. In this assignment, you will address this issue by (a) identifying a single specific claim that has been made about the efficacy of one of these systems; and then (b) designing a piece of experimental research that could empirically test that claim.

Formatting requirements:

There are many decisions that need to be made and defended in designing any piece of research and, as this is your first attempt at such a task, we are going to guide you through the process by asking a series of questions1. Your answers to all 10 questions must be contained within four pages (excluding reference list) that meet the following formatting requirements:

A. 12-point Times New Roman font.

B. 2.5 cm (1 inch) margins.

C. 1.5 line spacing.

D. Indent the first line of each paragraph.

Please abide by these formatting requirements(which, with the exception of 1.5 line spacing, are all standard formatting requirements for an APA style manuscript), as they ensure that all students have the same amount of space in which to express their ideas.

Note that you do not need to re-type the questions before your answers, or leave blank spaces between answers. Just label each answer clearly. Likewise, you do not need to write an “introduction” or a “conclusion”. Just answer each question as clearly and concisely as you can.

Questions: 1.

In one sentence, and with an appropriate citation, identify the claim you will be examining. Next, provide a brief (absolutely no more than one page) critical overview ofrelevant current research. In this overview, please cite at least three pieces of original research2 and aim to address the following issues with regards to each: (a) What research methods were used? (b) What wasfound? (c) What (if any) is the key limitation of the research? Ideally, your answer to this question will be an integrated review (in the style that you would find in the introduction of a journal article), rather than three discreet paragraphs, each dedicated to a single study. (15 Marks)

Now that you are familiar with current research in the area of your claim, you can begin describing and defending the design of your experiment. Keep it simple. You only need one IV and one DV, and you are not expected to propose anything methodological or statistical that is not covered in the first six lecture topics. Furthermore, you do not need to ‘reinvent’ any wheels! For example, there are lots of established methods for measuring the types of outcomes that brain training systems claim to produce. You do not need to invent a new way of measuring, for example, working memory.

Questions: 2

In one sentence, specify a research question for your experiment. (5 Marks)


Use your research question to develop a (i.e., ONE) hypothesis for your research. (5 Marks)


What is your IV (and what are its levels)? What is your DV? How will you operationally define these variables (i.e., how will you measure or manipulate them?), and what will the resultant data look like (i.e., will it be nominal data? Interval data?)? If your operational definitions are inspired by previous research, be sure to include the appropriate citations.

(10 Marks)

Question: 5

Who are the proposed participants for your research? In your answer, please define the population, and explain how you will sample from this population. Also specify how large the sample is required to be, and justify this decision. Note that a good justification will demonstrate a clear understanding of a priori power analysis and related issues. (10 Marks)

Question: 6

Describe, in a systematic fashion, the procedure for your experiment. In your answer, describe how participants will be assigned to levels of your IV, and then describe what you will ask them to do. Again, if your proposed procedure has been inspired by previous research, don’t forget to include citations. (10 Marks)

Question: 7

Explain how you will test your hypothesis. What statistical test will you use? If your hypothesis is supported, what would you expect the results of this test to look like? (For example, what might the pvalue be? What might the group/condition means look like? How large do you expect the effect size to be?) What are the assumptions of your hypothesis test? How will you know whether or not these assumptions have been met? (15 Marks)

Question: 8

Describe one plausible threat to the internal validity of your study, and explain how you will address or limit the impact of this threat in your design. If your design does not address this threat, explain why not. (10 Marks)

Question: 9

Comment on the external validity of your study. (10 Marks)

Question: 10

Describe one ethical issue that you could encounter in this research, and how it might be addressed/resolved to the satisfaction of a Human Research Ethics Committee. If you don’t believe that it could be addressed/resolved to the satisfaction of a Human Research Ethics Committee, explain why not. (10 Marks)

Q1 /15 Claim clearly identified. Concise but comprehensive, wellwritten

and critical overview of current research relevant to

the claim. Cites at least three appropriate pieces of original

research. Provides a clear, accurate and integrated account

of this research highlighting the most relevant

methodological features and findings. Identifies the most

relevant limitations of the body of research overviewed.

Q2 /5 Clearly articulated research question that is consistent with claim identified and material reviewed in Q1. Can be addressed using the methods described in the rest of the assignment.

Q3 /5 A clearly articulated hypothesis that is consistent with the research question, the claim, and the material reviewed in Q1. Can be tested using the methods described in the rest of the assignment.

Q4 /10 Consistent with the hypothesis presented in Q3. Both IV and DV are identified, appropriately labelled and operationally defined. Measurement scale of each is correctly identified. All points inspired by or derived from previous research are appropriately referenced.

Q5 /10 An appropriate population is defined, and the proposed method of sampling is clearly articulated and realistic. A target sample size is proposed that is fully justified by a priori power analyses.

Q6 /10 All relevant aspects of the proposed procedure are clearly articulated in sufficient detail to permit replication. Proposed procedure is consistent with research question and hypothesis, as well as the rest of the assignment. Is not confounded by any factors that could reasonably be controlled or eliminated. Aspects of the procedure that have been inspired or derived from previous research are appropriately referenced.

Q7 /15 An appropriate test of the hypothesis is identified. The assumptions of the test are completely described. A pattern of results that would be consistent with the hypothesis and previous research in the area (where applicable) are presented.

Q8 /10 Defines or explains what is meant by ‘internal validity’. Describes one of the most plausible and/or serious threats to the internal validity of the proposed research, and its implications. Appropriate strategies for managing the threat (or a correct explanation for why the threat cannot be managed in the proposed design) are clearly articulated.

Q9 /10 Defines or explains what is meant by ‘external validity’. Provides a reasonable assessment of the external validity of the proposed research, with appropriate justification. Identifies aspects of the research likely to strengthen the external validity of the research, as well as aspects likely to undermine it

Q10 /10 Clearly describes a pertinent ethical issue. Explains how this issue could be addressed to the satisfaction of a HREC, or why it could not be addressed to the satisfaction of a HREC.

Answered Same Day Apr 11, 2020


Pooja answered on Apr 14 2020
135 Votes
Research article "Do 'Brain-Training' Programs Work?" by authors Daniel J. Simons, Walter R. Boot, Neil Charness, Susan E. Gathercole Susan E. Gathercole, Christopher F. Cha
is, David Z. Ham
ick and Elizabeth A. L. Stine-Mo
ow enlightens about this topic. An experimental research was performed here. According to this article, there is evidence to support the claim that
ain training interventions intend to improve the performance of the trained task.
There is another research regarding "Does targeted cognitive training reduce educational disparities in cognitive function among cognitively normal older adults?" by Daniel O. Clark, Huiping Xu, Frederick W. Unverzagt, and Hugh Hendrie. This research was conducted with the objective to know the difference in education in terms of response to memory, reasoning, and speed of processing cognitive training in relation to no‐contact control. The method of repeated measure mixed effect model was conducted. The analysis indicated that speed of processing training is effective in older adults who have a low educational attainment.
I consider article named "Cognitive Training among Cognitively Impaired Older Adults: A Feasibility Study Assessing the Potential Improvement in Balance" by Renae L. Smith-Ray, Cheryl Irmiter and Kristin Boulter. This research was implemented to know the implementation of CT program among cognitively impaired older adults. The aim was to know if there are potential improvements in balance following CT. A method of single group repeated measures design was conducted in this experiment.This study has evidence to support the feasibility of implementation of cognitive training program among cognitively impaired older adults in an adult day setting.
The area of research is to know if cognitive training (also known as ‘
ain training’) improve the memory of children as claimed by the marketing department of BrainHQ.
The null hypothesis, Ho: there is no significant difference in the mean memory of children between those who receive cognitive training and those who did not.
An alternative hypothesis, h1:  the mean memory of children who received cognitive training is greater than those who did not.
The dependent variable in my research is the memory of children. The memory of children is measured by ratio scale of measurement. Its value...

Answer To This Question Is Available To Download

Related Questions & Answers

More Questions »

Submit New Assignment

Copy and Paste Your Assignment Here