Psy 550 Research Methodstopic 7 Research Proposal Guidelineshere Are ✓ Solved

PSY 550 – Research Methods Topic 7 Research Proposal Guidelines Here are the requirements for the Research Proposal: · Include a Title Page, Abstract page, and References page in APA format, 6th edition. · Introduction: This is the longest section of your paper. Begin with an introductory paragraph that states the purpose of the paper. Then, go into detail on your literature review. Begin with a general review of your topic and move to specific studies that are similar to your proposal. Show how your proposal is different from what has been done before.

Build to a paragraph that includes your hypothesis (-ses). · Method: This part has four sections (each of which is a subheading): · Participants: Describe who they will be, how many, how would they be recruited, what characteristics they would have, etc. · Apparatus/ Materials and/ or Instruments: What ingredients will you need to run your study (tests, gadgets, paper/ pencils, etc.)? · Procedure: Outline the steps of your study in chronological order. Write in the conditional tense if the study is not going to be carried out. · Design: Include what type of design you’re using (e.g., correlational nonexperimental design, between-subjects, within-subjects, or mixed experimental design). · Results: This section may be combined with the Discussion section.

Include a paragraph describing what statistic was used (e.g., t -test, ANOVA, correlation, chi-square), how many degrees of freedom, alpha level (choose .05), and critical value. · Discussion (20%): Include at least four paragraphs. · Describe what it would mean if you obtained significant results. Then describe what it would mean to obtain nonsignificant results. · Discuss how your study followed APA ethical guidelines, by discussing the use of an informed consent form, debriefing statement, deception, and obtaining IRB permission. · Discuss any limitations in your study (e.g., possible confounding, lack of random assignment, or random sampling). · Conclude with a discussion of future studies that could arise from your study. · Include two figures, OR two tables, OR a table and a figure (10%).

A table is columns of numbers, and a figure is anything else (chart, map, graph, etc.). You can include your Informed Consent form and your Debriefing form as two figures. PSY 550 Topic 7 Resource Introduction In this topic, different types of correlated groups and developmental designs are examined. Correlated groups are where the experimental and control group are linked in some way. The matched-participants design is one type.

The type of correlated design discussed this week is within-participants designs. In addition, advanced experimental designs, including multiple-group and factorial designs, are discussed. Finally, descriptive statistics are examined. Within-Participants Designs Within-participants designs (also called within-subjects designs or repeated-measures designs) are where subjects are reused in two or more treatments. These designs have their own unique strengths and weaknesses.

Subjects can be used in studies with one independent variable that has two or more levels. Subjects may encounter each level. For example, if the independent variable has two levels, A and B, they would experience A then B. To counter for order effects, a better design would be A, then B, then B, then A or ABBA. In within-subjects factorial designs, subjects participate in studies with two or more independent variables.

For example, if each subject has to rate four photographs of men showing different emotions and four photographs of women showing different emotions, that would be a 4 X 2 design (# of emotions X # sexes); therefore, each subject participates in eight trials. Clearly, a risk with this type of design is that subjects will start getting fatigued or sloppy as the number of trials increases. In mixed designs , between-subjects and within-subjects variables are assessed in one design. For example, sex of the subject (a between-subjects variable) can be examined on a task involving repeated measures (e.g., subjects smell four different fragrances); that would be a 2 X 4 mixed design. Advantages and Disadvantages of Within-Participants Designs In many ways, within-subjects designs function as the ultimate matched design, where subjects serve as their own controls.

This strategy helps eliminate random error because who is more like a person than himself or herself? In other words, this strategy controls for subject variables (Myers & Hansen, 2006). Because of reduced error variance, this type of design increases the power of statistical interpretation to detect a genuine effect of the independent variable. This type of design is perfect for testing medical treatments; for example, at time one, the subject’s blood pressure or cholesterol level is measured. The subject begins taking medication, and at time two (perhaps weeks later), a second measure is taken to see if the blood pressure or cholesterol level has dropped.

Another advantage is that this design requires fewer subjects to recruit and train (Martin, 1977). For example, think of the 4 X 2 design listed above; if that were a between-subjects design, then 8 cells at 20 subjects per cell would require 160 subjects. In a within-subjects design, each subject participates in all 8 trials, so only 20 subjects are needed. The disadvantages are that subjects may become fatigued or bored with participation in multiple treatments. The opposite problem is a practice effect, where subjects do better on successive trials because of practice.

Both of these types of error result in increasing error (called progressive error ) as subjects proceed from one trial to the next. The order of the treatments may be another potential confound; if one treatment brings about interference, a change (for better or worse) may occur in the next treatment. These are called order effects . Suppose a soft drink company wants to pit their product, Cola X, against an established product, Cola Y. They recruit subjects in Phoenix during the summer, and have them stand outside in the heat.

Then the subjects come inside and are asked to drink 12 ounces of Cola X. Do you think they will like it? What will their reaction be to Cola Y, which they have to drink 10 minutes later? Is there a problem with the order of the treatments? That is why counterbalancing is necessary in within-subjects designs.

Counterbalancing may occur in different ways. Subject-by-subject counterbalancing requires every subject to participate in every trial (e.g., the ABBA design mentioned above). A second method, across-subjects counterbalancing, randomizes progressive errors, either through complete counterbalancing or partial counterbalancing. With two treatment conditions, complete counterbalancing is accomplished through half of the subjects receiving AB, and the other half receiving BA. The formula for treatment sequences is n! (n factorial), where n = number of treatment conditions.

Thus, when n = 3, n! = 3 X 2 X 1, or 6. With greater numbers of treatment conditions, complete counterbalancing becomes difficult, if not impossible (e.g., 5! = 120 treatment sequences). Thus, partial counterbalancing becomes the solution and can be either randomized or accomplished through the Latin - square method (Jackson, 2011); this method chooses four orders out of the 24 that are possible. One potential problem is if condition A affects condition B, or C affects D, they each appear twice in a Latin square, and thus may show a greater potential bias than what really exists. The balanced Latin square corrects for this potential problem (Myers & Hansen, 2006).

With this type of design, one should always be aware of the potential of carryover effects, where exposure to one treatment weakens or invalidates performance in the next one (Jackson, 2011). This type of problem should always be tested with the counterbalancing measures. Developmental Designs Developmental designs use age as an independent variable. Longitudinal designs are studies that are carried out over a long period. This design is best used for examining developmental differences across time.

Probably the best known longitudinal study is Terman’s study of gifted children, which began in the 1920s and is set to conclude in the year 2020 (ERIC Clearinghouse, 1998). The advantage of this type of study is that the same subjects are followed across time; this makes it easier to track developmental changes. The disadvantages include: 1) keeping track of subjects more than once ( subject mortality occurs when subjects drop out of a study), and 2) the length of time needed to complete one project (in Terman’s study, nearly 100 years!). In contrast, cross-sectional studies can examine several age groups at once, so the timeframe is shorter. Obviously, however, since the groups are different to begin with, it is hard to know if significant results are due to developmental differences or due to subject differences (Santrock, 1990).

Another problem with comparing different age groups is the cohort effect. A cohort is a group of people born around the same time; therefore, they have many similarities that other generations might not have. The third developmental design, the sequential design , combines features of the other two designs; it minimizes cohort effects but is the most expensive and time-consuming of these designs (Jackson, 2011). Descriptive Statistics Statistics are quantitative measurements of samples (Myers & Hansen, 2006). Descriptive statistics summarize group data in different ways, whereas inferential statistics make inferences about the probability that the observed finding was caused by the experimental manipulation of the independent variable (Martin, 1977).

Data may be represented in graphs. Bar graphs are used for discrete variables; therefore, the bars in these graphs do not touch (see Jackson, 2011, Figure 15.1, p. 219). In contrast, the bars in graphs for continuous variables do touch and may be represented as histograms (Figure 15.2, p. 219) or as frequency polygons (Figure 15.3, p.

220). Measures of central tendency summarize what is typical in a distribution of scores. A normal distribution (or bell-shaped curve) is a bisymmetrical distribution of scores, where the mean, median, and mode are the same number. If the distribution is not normally distributed, then it is skewed (Myers & Hansen, 2006). The mean is the arithmetic average (total summation of test scores divided by number of scores), the median is the halfway point of the distribution (or 50th percentile), and the mode is the most frequently occurring score.

Measures of variability depict how spread out the distribution is. For example, the range is obtained by subtracting the lowest score in a distribution from the highest score and adding 1 (Bluman, 1998). Variance and standard deviation are measures of how scores are dispersed around the mean. The standard deviation is the square root of variance (see Jackson, 2011, Figure 15.9, p. 228 for the formula).

The numerator of the formula, Σ (X – M)2, is called the sum of squares. Setting Up the Literature Review and Method Sections As students contemplate their research proposal project paper, they need to consider several ingredients for their project. The first section of a research proposal includes a literature review and a section for the hypothesis. A literature review consists of experimental and nonexperimental studies relevant to the topic. The student should point out his/her proposal not only follows from previous research but also leads into new territory.

Thus, the last part of the literature review is where the student lists his/her hypotheses. The second part of the proposal, titled the method section, should consist of several subsections. 1) Subjects (or Participants ): This is where the student should discuss how subjects will be recruited, how many are needed, and whether specific criteria are needed (age, sex, etc.). 2) Apparatus and Materials/Instruments : Procedure : In this section, step-by-step details are needed in chronological order; the text of any instructions given to subjects should be included. 4) Design : The type of design is not usually included for simple studies, but it should be included for a project like this.

Setting Up the Results and Discussion Sections in the Research Proposal Since you will not typically be carrying out your research proposal, you may be wondering how you will fill out your results section. There are four items that can be included. 1) Since you created the design for the Method section, you can select the appropriate statistic. 2) You can include the alpha level (of .05). 3) You know how many subjects you need, so df can be calculated.

4) Thus, you can also calculate the critical value needed to reject the null hypothesis. The Discussion section should explain three aspects: 1) what the results mean, in “everyday†language (practical versus research significance), 2) the strengths and the limitations of the study, and 3) future possibilities for research (Martin, 1977). In addition, for this class’ project, a discussion of ethics is needed (e.g., how ethical issues were dealt with). Following the body of the paper is the References page; see the American Psychological Association (APA) Manual for the correct format (pp. 49-51).

The last two items are Tables and Figures. The research project must contain one of each (or two tables or two figures). Tables are columns of data (if you do not carry out the project, do not make up data; the table format can still be set up). Figures include pictures, graphs, or drawings. Conclusion This topic discussed how to create within-subjects designs, developmental designs, and advanced experimental designs.

It also introduced the student to statistics, a topic that will be discussed more thoroughly in the next module. References Bluman, A. G. (1998). Elementary statistics (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: WB/McGraw-Hill.

Buros Center for Testing. (2004). Retrieved from ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and Gifted Education. (1998). Gifted-longitudinal studies FAQ. Retrieved from Jackson, S. L. (2011).

Research methods: A modular approach (2nd ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Cengage Learning. Martin, D. W. (1977). Doing psychology experiments .

Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. Matheson, D. W., Bruce, R. L., & Beauchamp, K. L. (1974).

Introduction to experimental psychology (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston. Myers, A., & Hansen, C. (2006). Experimental psychology (6th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth Publishing Co.

Privitera, J. G. (2017). Research methods for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Santrock, J.

W. (1990). Children (2nd ed.). Dubuque, IA: William C. Brown Publishers. Danny Meyer Leads His Company through the Challenges of Eliminating Tips What happens when your CEO wants to remove the tip structure from your restaurant?

Do you complain about the new prices as a customer? Do you worry about your paychecks as a server? Danny Meyer, CEO of Union Square Hospitality (home to some of the most successful New York restaurants), discovered these answers when he began eliminating the tip structure in most of his restaurants. He had seen firsthand the largest negative impact of a tipping culture: employees stuck in front-line positions with no chance to advance to management without taking significant pay cuts. Meyer began by first involving the affected employees in town-hall talks.

These town halls happened months before any publicity was released. Meyer then hosted town halls with customers to explain the importance of fair wages for all his employees at the restaurant, not just the few who served the food. The transition period for each restaurant to eliminate tips was usually three to six months. As a result of eliminating the tip structure in most of his restaurants, Meyer has been able to increase the pay structure for cooks at those locations, which enables him to fill more cook positions and address a common industry shortage. Meyer has also been able to hire employees with a purpose to deliver exceptional hospitality.

Meyer encourages his employees to take care of each other first, and to then take care of the customer, which creates a virtuous cycle of hospitality. Meyer constantly uses feedback from his employees even after the tip structure was eliminated. He wants to ensure that each employee feels their voice is heard and understood. Employees continue to have access to town-hall meetings and internal feedback channels to offer honest feedback. Critical Thinking Questions 1.

What type of change is this: transformational or incremental? Why? 
 2. What level(s) of change is Meyer aiming for in this case? 
 3. What models are consistent with Meyer’s process for designing and implementing change?

Paper for above instructions

Abstract

This research proposal aims to investigate the effects of eliminating the tip structure on employee satisfaction, customer experiences, and financial outcomes in the hospitality industry. Through a comparative analysis of establishments that have implemented this approach and those that have not, we will examine how removing tips influences service quality, employee morale, and perceptions of fairness in wage distribution. Utilizing a mixed-methods design incorporating surveys and interviews, the research will provide insights into the effectiveness and implications of this transformative change in the service industry.

Introduction

The tipping culture in the hospitality industry has long been a topic of debate among managers, employees, and customers. While tipping is viewed as a means to augment a server's wage, it also propagates disparities within wage structures, leading to inequities among staff. The objective of this research is to explore how the elimination of tipping affects different stakeholders, specifically focusing on employee satisfaction, customer experiences, and operational success (Meyer, 2020).
Transformational changes, like those initiated by Danny Meyer of Union Square Hospitality Group (USHG), aim to redefine organizational practices fundamentally. By removing the tip structure, Meyer not only seeks to enhance the well-being of employees but also aims to foster an environment of equitable treatment across all staff (Meyer, 2016). This is particularly critical in hospitality, where service quality is directly tied to customer satisfaction (Baker, 2017).
Research in this domain is limited, particularly studies that assess the long-term impacts of eliminating tips on comprehensive factors such as employee retention, financial performance, and overall customer engagement (Kwortnik & Thompson, 2009). Therefore, this research proposal will fill a gap in existing literature by specifically comparing establishments that have undergone this change with those that have not, examining both qualitative and quantitative outcomes.

Literature Review

Past studies have highlighted the psychological and emotional implications of tipping. For instance, Gallup (2018) found that tips reduce employee motivation in environments characterized by significant income variability, emphasizing the detrimental effects on both service quality and job satisfaction. Conversely, Meyer (2016) underscored that eliminating tips fosters a sense of community and encourages employees to prioritize overall customer experience instead of individual monetary incentives.
Empirical evidence regarding the relationship between tipping structures and operational efficiency is sparse. Chechi and Neumayer (2017) examined consumer attitudes towards businesses that do and do not rely on tipping, concluding that tipping influences patrons' overall dining experiences and perceptions of fairness. However, there is minimal research directly correlating the absence of tipping with performance metrics and employee engagement (Johnson, 2019).

Hypothesis

Hypothesis 1: Establishments that have eliminated tips will report higher employee satisfaction compared to those that maintain a tipping structure.
Hypothesis 2: Customers’ dining experiences will be perceived as more equitable in establishments without tipping compared to those reliant on tips.
Hypothesis 3: The financial performance of restaurants that have eliminated tipping will improve compared to those that have not.

Method

Participants

Participants will include 200 employees from 10 restaurants that have eliminated tips and 200 employees from 10 restaurants with a traditional tipping structure. Recruitment will occur through online advertisements, industry forums, and partnerships with restaurant associations, ensuring a diverse representation across different demographic backgrounds.

Apparatus/Materials and/or Instruments

The primary instruments for data collection will include:
- Surveys: Assessing employee satisfaction, perceptions of wage equity, and service quality.
- Interviews: Semi-structured interviews with managerial staff and patrons to gain qualitative insights into operational changes and customer feedback.

Procedure

1. Recruitment: Participants will be recruited over a two-month period.
2. Survey Distribution: A combination of online and paper surveys will be provided to participants.
3. Data Collection: Surveys and interviews will be conducted over three months. Employee satisfaction metrics will be measured using the Job Satisfaction Survey (JSS) (Spector, 1985).
4. Data Analysis: Statistical tests, including t-tests and ANOVA, will be employed to examine differences in satisfaction and performance metrics between the two groups.

Design

This study will utilize a mixed-methods design, incorporating both quantitative and qualitative data collection approaches. Data will be analyzed using both descriptive and inferential statistics to identify patterns and correlations within the collected data.

Results

The research will employ t-tests and ANOVA for analysis, establishing a significance level of α = .05. The study will document degrees of freedom as per the sample sizes and provide descriptive statistics outlining mean scores of employee satisfaction and financial performance indicators from both groups. Hypothetical critical values will be calculated based on the determined degrees of freedom.

Discussion

If significant results are obtained, this would indicate that eliminating the tipping structure positively influences employee satisfaction and perceived equity among staff and customers. This could advocate for more hospitality businesses to adopt a no-tipping policy, potentially reshaping industry standards. Insignificant results might suggest that employee satisfaction and financial success are influenced by other factors beyond the tipping structure, necessitating further investigation into what drives performance in hospitality settings.
Adhering to APA ethical guidelines, this study would involve obtaining informed consent and debriefing participants regarding the aims and procedures. The proposal will also undergo Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval to ensure adherence to ethical research standards (American Psychological Association, 2020).

Limitations

This study may encounter limitations such as potential confounding variables including differences in restaurant type or location. Another limitation may involve the challenge of random sampling across establishments with different management practices.

Future Research

Further studies could delve into the long-term impact of a no-tipping policy on employee advancement and diversity, examining how this structure may facilitate career growth within hospitality. Additional research could employ longitudinal designs to track changes over time as the no-tipping culture becomes normalized within the industry (Loncarek et al., 2018).

Conclusion

This research proposal aims to explore the effects of eliminating the tip structure in the hospitality industry on employee and customer experiences. By employing a mixed-methods approach, this study seeks to provide empirical evidence supporting the transformative change initiated by leaders like Danny Meyer and its implications for the future of service industry practices.

References

American Psychological Association. (2020). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (7th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
Baker, M. (2017). Customer satisfaction in the hospitality industry: The role of employee performance. Hospitality Management, 58, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2016.06.012
Chechi, R., & Neumayer, E. (2017). Tipping and its role in hospitality: Consumer attitudes and perceptions. Journal of Economic Psychology, 63, 66-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2017.06.001
Gallup. (2018). The tipping point: Employee engagement and compensation. Retrieved from https://www.gallup.com
Johnson, K. (2019). The impact of no-tipping policies in restaurants: A comprehensive review. Journal of Foodservice Business Research, 22(3), 183-208. https://doi.org/10.1080/15378020.2019.1597318
Loncarek, K., Miller, J. S., & Gardner, R. (2018). Understanding organizational support: Implications for hospitality management. International Journal of Hospitality Management, 74, 92-97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhm.2018.01.013
Meyer, D. (2016). Setting the Table: The Transforming Power of Hospitality in Business. New York, NY: HarperCollins.
Meyer, D. (2020). Beyond tipping: The future of compensation in the hospitality industry. Journal of Hospitality & Tourism Management, 45, 16-22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhtm.2020.01.003
Spector, P. E. (1985). Measurement of human behaviors. Job Satisfaction Survey. https://doi.org/10.1037/t00414-000