Includes:
- Title/ Abstract
- Project Introduction
- Method (Design, Materials, Procedure)
- Analysis
- Discussion
- References/ Appendices
RQ: How does the British press construct the identity of women in Formula One racing?
Abstract must be concise (150–200 words) and include:
- a clear statement of the research question and rationale
- a description of the method used
- the findings
- a conclusion relating the findings to the rationale.
For Introduction: Start the Introduction with a general statement which explains why your project is interesting or important. Don’t waste your word count on vague or overly general statements about life or the universe, such as ‘It is people’s ability to use language that separates us from animals and enables us to be the most successful species on the planet’. Focus on the topic of your project and/or the psychological theory or method that you seek to contribute to the development of. The Introduction should end with a clear statement of your research question.
In your literature review, only refer to studies that are directly relevant to your project. You are not writing an essay on the broader area of research or methodological approach. Always keep your research question in mind and remember that the Introduction needs to lead to the question and explain why it is relevant. When describing previous research, make sure that you do so in your own words, and avoid quotations.
When reviewing the literature, you do not need to go into the minutiae of each paper that you cite – merely state what was investigated, what the method was (briefly) and what was found. And, most importantly, make sure that it is clear how each paper relates to your study.
The Introduction should also reflect on your chosen analytical approach and explain how it is relevant to answering the research question.
For Methods:
- In the Design section, you need to state the method that you will have used (CDP analysis) and briefly explain why it is relevant to the research question. Analytical procedures must be explained in enough detail to enable another researcher to adopt the same approach. Then state what data was analysed (interview, focus group, media texts) and explain your choice.
- No Participants section is needed.
- Materials: media text data, you need to specify what data you selected, and mention that you used the Nexis database.
- Procedure: For existing data, mention how you went about selecting your sample (e.g. what search terms you used in Nexis and how you narrowed down the sample) and justify your choices. Explain also how the existing data was prepared for analysis. (check attached file)
The Method section should contain references to all the important documents used for your research, such as the PIL, consent form and data management plan. These documents should be included as Appendices, and a link made to these in appropriate parts of the Method section (but do not include any actual signed consent forms with your report). Complete transcripts (for interviews or a focus group) or copies of the articles (for existing media texts) should also be included as an Appendix.
Remember that the Method section must be sufficiently detailed to allow another researcher to follow the same approach. So, think of the parts of the Method section as a recipe in a cookbook: the Participants and Materials sections are like the ingredients, while the Procedure talks you through the steps. Once you have completed the Method section, read it carefully and ask yourself: ‘Have I provided all the relevant information?’ and, just as importantly, ‘Is all the information I provided relevant?’
For Analysis: For a discursive approach, then you may use the key analytical concepts (i.e. interpretative repertoires, subject positions or ideological dilemmas) to structure this section. Whatever the analytical approach, it is a good idea to start with a broad overview or ‘story’ of your analysis, identifying anything especially interesting or novel, but without presenting any quotations. From there, you can narrow the focus on a selection of specific themes or analytical findings, providing a clear justification for each of your choices.
A Discussion also needs to include a critical evaluation of the research, assessing its strengths and limitations. For example, you could consider alternative ways of looking at the data, from other methodological and analytical perspectives, and then defend your chosen methodological and analytical approach. If you can demonstrate awareness of alternative approaches or interpretations, and then defend your own approach against possible criticism, this will strengthen your Discussion section.
Also, you should reflect on your choice of data or data-collection method, as well as on the impact that you, as the researcher, had on the study, the data and the analysis.
A critical evaluation for a discursive project should, therefore, consider what ways of talking or thinking about the topic were unavailable or ‘closed-off’ during both data collection and analysis.
In the Discussion, it may also be useful to reflect on the wider social and political implications of the research. Does the study tell us something interesting about the society we live in, about our subjective experiences or constructions of identity? This issue also has an ethical dimension.
Summarise the strengths of the findings, conclusions and implications or ideas for future research.
I attached the articles I have selected from Nexis and that is the material for analysis (50 articles, only max 7000words need analysed from that with a rondom generator) and attached the method details as well as some details about CDP.