Research Papers in Education has developed a reputation for publishing significant educational research findings of recent years.Up-to-date andauthoritative, the journal has given researchers the opportunity to present full accounts of their work; its rationale, findings and conclusions.
The experiment: Say you have just conducted the Milgram Study. (Milgram actually waited two years before writing about his study.)Here's a shortened example of a research article that MIGHT have been written.
DISCLAIMER: This article is not written by Stanley Milgram, but is intended as an example of a psychology research paper that someone might have written after conducting the first Milgram-study. Normally you would use double spacing in the paper.
The conclusion is that, contrary to common belief, personal ethics mean little when pitted against authority.
Current theories focus on personal characteristics to explain wrong-doing and how someone can intentionally harm others.
Can people be ordered to act against their moral convictions?
The experiment will test whether a person can keep administering painful electric shocks to another person just because they are ordered to do so.The journal publishes high quality articles in the fields of educational policy and practice, and research that links the two.The considerable experience of the editors, editorial board and the international advisory board will ensure that Research Papers in Education continues to publish the finest and most relevant research in education today.The study comprised an exploration of maths and physics questions from past GCSE examinations, which were marked in an experimental setting by groups of markers and yielded differing marking accuracies.The questions also varied in their difficulty for GCSE candidates, and in the cognitive strategies needed to mark them.The ratings were analysed together with the marking accuracy data, enabling an investigation of possible relationships between each question feature and (i) marking accuracy, (ii) question difficulty for the candidate, and (iii) apparent cognitive marking strategy usage.For both subjects, marking accuracy was found to be related to various subject-specific question features, some of which were also related to question difficulty (for the candidate) and/or apparent marking strategy complexity.Such features could potentially contribute to a broad rationale for designating questions to markers according to personal expertise.The aim of this study was to identify question features that can distinguish those questions that are marked highly accurately from those that are marked less accurately.This is unsurprising, given the diverse cognitive strategies that the marking process can entail, but what makes some questions harder to mark accurately than others?Are there distinct but subtle features of questions and their mark schemes that can affect accuracy?