Identify the population that might be considered

Paper details:
Part 1
Review the scenarios and related research questions below. Create some context for the identified scenario and research question. Then, select one research
method that could address the research questions (one for each) based on the section topics and readings. For each method, discuss what the method is,
how it would be designed to support the research question and the rationale for choosing the selected method.
Then, discuss the hypotheses you might have in support. Explain the following and justify your response:
Identify the population that might be considered.
Explain the sampling process to be used.
Propose a collection strategy.
Determine an analysis process that could be applied. In particular, identify and support an appropriate analysis process, and explain why.
Discuss any ethical considerations.
You must clearly describe the key points of each area, supporting each step with citations to your course text as well as peer-reviewed studies that directly
align with the key areas discussed.
Scenario: Literature has revealed that there is a need to understand television-watching behaviors between two groups of students. The following research
question was developed in support:
Research Question for Method 1: Do undergraduate college psychology students watch more TV than psychology graduate students?
Scenario: Research demonstrates that there is a need to identify whether there is a relationship between individuals who have high cholesterol and
depression, as this could help reveal additional, related risk factors for health concerns. The following research question was developed in support:
Research Question for Method 2: What is the relationship, if any, between high cholesterol and depression?
Part 2
For Part 2, reflect on your experiences. First person perspective is acceptable. In the reflection, begin by considering your research learning experiences for
the first six weeks of this course, and then address the following:
Describe your experiences of engaging the activities and material for Weeks 1-5.
What was new information to you?
What was familiar?
What did you enjoy the most and why (if at all)?
What did you enjoy the least and why (if at all)?
What preconceived notions did you have about quantitative methods and how have your experiences over these weeks supported or conflicted with them?
As you continue exploring research on your topic of interest and a potential research problem and research questions, and if the research was revealing that
a quantitative study was more appropriate, how comfortable are you with implementing a quantitative research study (again, consider how the problem and
research questions guide this direction)?
Support your assignment (for Part 1) with at least five scholarly resources. In addition to these specified resources, other appropriate scholarly resources,
including seminal articles, may be included.
Part 1 Length: 8-10 pages
Part 2 Length: 3-5 pages
Total Length: 11-15 pages, not including title and reference pages

Sample Solution

Transient memory is the memory for a boost that goes on for a brief time (Carlson, 2001). In reasonable terms visual transient memory is frequently utilized for a relative reason when one can’t thoroughly search in two spots immediately however wish to look at least two prospects. Tuholski and partners allude to momentary memory similar to the attendant handling and stockpiling of data (Tuholski, Engle, and Baylis, 2001).

They additionally feature the way that mental capacity can frequently be antagonistically impacted by working memory limit. It means quite a bit to be sure about the typical limit of momentary memory as, without a legitimate comprehension of the flawless cerebrum’s working it is challenging to evaluate whether an individual has a shortage in capacity (Parkin, 1996).

 

This survey frames George Miller’s verifiable perspective on transient memory limit and how it tends to be impacted, prior to bringing the examination state-of-the-art and outlining a determination of approaches to estimating momentary memory limit. The verifiable perspective on momentary memory limit

 

Length of outright judgment

The range of outright judgment is characterized as the breaking point to the precision with which one can distinguish the greatness of a unidimensional boost variable (Miller, 1956), with this cutoff or length generally being around 7 + 2. Mill operator refers to Hayes memory length try as proof for his restricting range. In this members needed to review data read resoundingly to them and results obviously showed that there was a typical maximum restriction of 9 when double things were utilized.

This was regardless of the consistent data speculation, which has proposed that the range ought to be long if each introduced thing contained little data (Miller, 1956). The end from Hayes and Pollack’s tests (see figure 1) was that how much data sent expansions in a straight design alongside how much data per unit input (Miller, 1956). Figure 1. Estimations of memory for data wellsprings of various sorts and bit remainders, contrasted with anticipated results for steady data. Results from Hayes (left) and Pollack (right) refered to by (Miller, 1956)

 

Pieces and lumps

Mill operator alludes to a ‘digit’ of data as need might have arisen ‘to settle on a choice between two similarly probable other options’. In this manner a basic either or choice requires the slightest bit of data; with more expected for additional complicated choices, along a twofold pathway (Miller, 1956). Decimal digits are worth 3.3 pieces each, implying that a 7-digit telephone number (what is handily recollected) would include 23 pieces of data. Anyway an evident inconsistency to this is the way that, assuming an English word is worth around 10 pieces and just 23 pieces could be recollected then just 2-3 words could be recalled at any one time, clearly mistaken. The restricting range can all the more likely be figured out concerning the absorption of pieces into lumps.

Mill operator recognizes pieces and lumps of data, the qualification being that a lump is comprised of various pieces of data. It is fascinating to take note of that while there is a limited ability to recall lumps of data, how much pieces in every one of those lumps can differ generally (Miller, 1956). Anyway it’s anything but a straightforward instance of having the memorable option enormous pieces right away, fairly that as each piece turns out to be more recognizable, it tends to be acclimatized into a lump, which is then recollected itself. Recoding is the interaction by which individual pieces are ‘recoded’ and appointed to lumps.

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.