Dear Marina, Yes, that is correct. They should write about "considerations," not violations. So, the way you describe it is exactly what they should do.
Ethical considerationsThat is correct. 4,5 is correct. 4,25 is what Excel will give. 4.75 appears to be wrong. I would mark it down for the calculation of descriptive stats in the analysis strand.
Interpreting data: Descriptive statisticsHello! I am wondering, if the students should be writing on the ethical consideration they are sure about from the study? For example, discussing Loftus&Palmer, if they are unsure, what kind of deception was actually used, can they discuss it...
Ethical considerationsOk sorry just for clarification, you’re saying you would mark the 4,75 value down as in have it negatively affect their score of the Analysis section, but you wouldn’t mark it down if they got 4,25 or 4,5 as a result? thanks in advance John,...
Interpreting data: Descriptive statisticsIf they used Excel, then they probably had the lower value. I don't understand the higher value. I would mark that done in your marking.
Interpreting data: Descriptive statisticsIf there was a minimum of 30 data points, they are fine with the t-test.
IA Exemplar HighYes, that is accurate.
Experiment: Exercise and memoryHello there! Quick question: I was grading an IA that calculated the IQR. For one of the groups, the 3 members got different results of their IQR: one of them got 4,25 and the other got 4,75. I did the calculation manually using the formula...
Interpreting data: Descriptive statisticsHello, quick question! One of my groups is conducting a partial replication of Craik and Tulving (https://psycnet.apa.org/record/1976-00185-001) to test the LOP theory. Their sample is n=34 and they carried out a repeated measures design. For...
IA Exemplar High
Ron
Dear John, Can students reference Robert Sternberg's theory of love here, particularly his argument that love can be construed as a story (and that human beings has conscious or unconscious preferences for types of stories)?...
Attraction: Cognitive explanations