Reading Articles
Abstracts are the key
Abstracts are the key to understanding the research question, methods, and results discussed in a journal article. Read the abstract (like the sample below) first to understand the study, its purpose, and its implications before you read the sections of the article. Although many abstracts in psychology journals separate information according to the headings found below, some do not. Reading abstracts will help you gain insight into the sections of the article.
5 steps, to guide your reading
WHAT did they want to find out? (research question)
WHY did they want to know this? (rationale)
HOW did they test the question? (method)
WHAT did they find out? (results)
SO WHAT? Why is this important? (significance)
Exercise:
Below is an example of an abstract. Use the abstract to answer the key questions above. When you are ready, highlight the area using your mouse/finger, then click the buttons to see if you are correct. If you see a text highlighted in a different colour than yours, you have missed some of that section.
Abstract:
Objective: Deficits in working memory (WM) are commonly observed after brain injuries and cause severe impairments in patients’ everyday life. It is still under debate if training can enhance or rehabilitate WM in case of malfunction. The current meta-analysis investigates this issue from a clinical point of view. It addresses under which conditions and for which target group WM training may be justifiable. Method: Relevant WM training studies were identified by searching electronic literature databases with a comprehensive search term. In total, 103 studies, which added up to 112 independent group comparisons (N = 6,113 participants), were included in the analysis. Results: Overall, WM training caused a moderate and long-lasting improvement in untrained WM tasks. Moreover, improvement of WM functioning led to sustainable better evaluation of everyday life functioning, however, effect sizes were small. Concerning transfer effects on other cognitive domains, long-lasting improvements with small effect sizes were observed in cognitive control and reasoning/intelligence. In contrast, small immediate, but no long-term effects were found for attention and long-term memory. Studies with brain injured patients demonstrated long-lasting improvements in WM functions with moderate to large effect sizes. A main moderator variable of intervention efficacy is the number of training sessions applied. Conclusion: WM training produces long-lasting beneficial effects which are strongly pronounced in patients with acquired brain injuries. This finding supports the application of WM training in clinical settings. To determine optimal training conditions, future studies must systematically investigate the characteristics of interventions as they are at present inevitably confounded. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2015 APA, all rights reserved)(journal abstract)
The research question is generally towards the end of the introduction. Researchers want you to know "why" first.
Researchers want readers to know a little about the topic first and explain why the research is important.
The heading "method" may not be in the abstract, you will need to know how to identify the methods section from the wording used.
The results will explain what happened when the data from the experiment was examined.
The conclusion of the abstract will discuss trends in the data and implications that can come from the research and findings.
Reference:
Weicker, J., Villringer, A., & Thöne-Otto, A. (2015). Can impaired working memory functioning be improved by training? A meta-analysis with a special focus on brain injured patients. Neuropsychology, doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/neu0000227