Articles to Use for Paper I: For your first paper, you MUST cite to three of the

Articles to Use for Paper I: For your first paper, you MUST cite to three of the following articles. You can cite four of them if you like, but you must find a fifth article to cite using PsycInfo. These are listed in no particular order, but make sure to read the abstracts to see how well they will fit in with your own paper. Some might be more relevant to your study than others.
In general, we predicted that if participants saw a Twitter user’s friend post an unfiltered (and less flattering) photo of the user that differed from a filtered photo the user originally posted, then they would more strongly agree that the original Twitter user seemed insecure about her appearance and seemed dissatisfied with her appearance, at least when compared to participants who saw the friend either repost the original filtered photo or post a new control photo, with no differences in the impression ratings of the original Twitter user between the filtered and control photo conditions. Similarly, we predicted that if participants saw a friend who posted an unfiltered photo, then they would more strongly disagree that the friend seemed supportive of the original Twitter user as well as seemed like a good friend, at least when compared to who saw a friend either repost the original filtered photo or post a control photo, with no differences in the impression ratings of the friend between the filtered and control photo conditions.
Ok. You’re maybe a bit confused right now. Let me give you some background (also found in the full “researcher instructions- filter study” in assignment #3)
At the start of our study, all participants will see the same filtered picture of a Twitter user. They will then see a second picture, but this second picture will differ across study conditions. One third of our participants will see the same filtered picture of the Twitter user a second time (Filtered Condition). One third will see a similar picture of the Twitter user, but this second picture will be unfiltered (Unfiltered Condition). Remaining participants will see a control picture (not related to the Twitter user – Control Condition).
In our study, all participants saw the same Twitter page owned by Katie Evers. Katie had just tweeted a photo of herself post-workout. In all conditions, the photo that Katie posted was flattering, showing her with a fit and flat stomach. Likewise, in all conditions, participants saw the same follow-up tweet from Katie’s friend, Sarah Sloan, who commented that she loved Katie’s “super-flattering” photos, and that she wanted to share a picture of the “real” Katie. However, the photo that Sarah shared differed across three conditions. In our filtered photo condition, Sarah shared the same photo that Katie had originally shared (Katie with a flat-stomach). In the unfiltered photo condition, Sarah shared a photo of Katie that was nearly identical to the one Katie originally shared, but in Sarah’s photo Katie had visible fat rolls in her less than flat stomach. This unfiltered condition highlights that Katie must have filtered her original photo. In the final control condition, Sarah shared a humorous photo of an elderly male bodybuilder that had no connection to Katie. This condition was included to determine if any photo that Sarah shared impacted participants or if it had to be related specifically to Katie.
Now you should be a bit more oriented to what our hyp are based on based on that bit of background. Read the full “researcher instructions- filter study” in assignment #3 for more details.
Your paper 1 should end with the underline hypotheses above. Now your job is to build a narrative that starts out broad that tells the research story of why we are studying social media filters this term. In the paper 1 assignment, many articles are linked there for you. DO NOT just pick the first 3 or 4 to use for the paper. Think about our hypotheses. How would you structure an argument to show support for why we are researching our topic. Then find the articles that best support the narrative you are building from the articles provided (and the 1 or 2 you find on your own) to summarize and support our research. Remember to only include the relevant details about the article that help the reader understand OUR hypotheses. Do not summarize the entire article to include in paper 1. That is the wrong thing to do. Summarize and paraphrase only what is relevant for supporting what we are researching.
Be sure you are tying together the ideas from paragraph to paragraph so you aren not just listing summaries of articles that are not connected to each other in any way.
I hope this orients you to paper 1 a bit. There are MANY resources linked in the paper 1 assignment that are resources for you. Note, the rubric for grading is the one you see embedded in canvas, not the document that is linked. To be clear, our paper 1 is worth 55 points.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.