I’ll Read That!: What Title Elements Attract Readers to an Article?

2020 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 26-31
Author(s):  
Robert M. Hallock ◽  
Tara N. Bennett
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Psychology Students ◽  
Undergraduate Psychology

The title of an article is the first chance at catching a reader’s attention. We set to develop a list of title attributes that lead to attractive titles in psychology papers, which could then be used to help instruct undergraduate students on how to write good titles for their papers and projects. Currently, research into successful elements that comprise an effective title is generally limited to publication metrics (the number of hits and citations an article has). Here, we created and administered a survey to 99 undergraduate students to rate the effectiveness of titles of psychology papers that varied in length, use of colons, acronyms, clichés, being results-oriented, and phrased the title as a question. We then reworded these titles as the opposite choice (e.g., we made a longer title shorter or took the colon out of a title without changing the meaning or length). We found that participants significantly preferred long over short titles, titles containing colons over the absence of a colon, and titles phrased as questions. We hope our results aid in the instruction of writing in the discipline, and that undergraduate psychology students and authors alike can develop more effective and attractive titles to attract attention from scholars and invite broader audiences to read their work.

Contributions to the History of Psychology: CII. Attitudinal Shifts in Responses to ‘Psychological Prescriptions’ among Undergraduate Students in a ‘Systems of Psychology’ Course

1995 ◽  
Vol 77 (3) ◽  
pp. 840-842
Author(s):  
William F. Vitulli
Keyword(s):  
Analysis Of Variance ◽  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Psychology Students ◽  
History Of Psychology ◽  
History Of ◽  
Undergraduate Psychology ◽  
Psychology Course

18 contrasting pairs of psychological prescriptions formed the basis of a rating scale upon which 25 undergraduate psychology students (5 men and 20 women) enrolled in a course in “systems of psychology” indicated their “attitudinal preferences.” An analysis of variance, followed by pair-wise comparisons using t tests for correlated samples taken at the beginning and end of the quarter showed a trend toward endorsements of more “phenomenological” as compared to “operational” prescriptions.

scholarly journals Examining Eating Habits of Undergraduate Psychology Students

Eureka ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-56
Author(s):  
Wendy Salvisberg ◽  
Peter Tom ◽  
Sandra Ziolkowski
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Parenting Styles ◽  
Eating Habits ◽  
Psychology Students ◽  
Self Esteem ◽  
Parent Care ◽  
Unhealthy Eating ◽  
Undergraduate Psychology ◽  
And Control ◽  
Dieting Behaviors

The current study examined the relationship between parenting styles, eating and dieting behaviors, and self-esteem in undergraduate psychology students. Standardized assessments of eating and dieting behaviors, parent care and control, and self-esteem were collected from 99 undergraduate psychology students in November 2012. Expected associations of parent care and control with undergraduate students’ eating and dieting habits and self-esteem were not found; however, results indicating the influence of mother care and father control on potential eating disorder diagnosis and self-esteem were discovered. Together, these results suggest that more research is needed to explore other characteristics of parenting that may be more related to unhealthy eating and dieting behaviours and self-esteem.

scholarly journals A student’s and a teacher's right to freedom of education

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
pp. SF1-SF28
Author(s):  
Eugene Matusov
Keyword(s):  
Undergraduate Students ◽  
Psychology Students ◽  
Critical Examination ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Final Word ◽  
Critical Dialogue ◽  
Dialogic Pedagogy ◽  
South Korean ◽  
Undergraduate Psychology ◽  
The Right

This conceptual essay, which opens the special issue, examines why a student’s right to freedom of education – the right for a student to define their own education – is so crucial for the education itself. Four diverse educational approaches are considered: training, closed socialization, open socialization, and critical examination, along with the Bakhtinian dialogic pedagogy to reveal the need for freedom of education within each of the approaches and the pedagogy. The eight aspects of the right to freedom are explicated. Three major objections against the right are considered and rebuked: 1) the Kantian paradox of autonomy and paternalism in education, 2) the paradox of learning and ignorance, and 3) fear of non-participation in education without coercion. The legitimate limitations of the right are discussed. Finally, the two major pathways to the right – radical and gradual – are analyzed. I sent the earlier draft of the paper to the Dialogic Pedagogy journal community, asking for critical commentaries. Many people submitted their critical commentaries involving their agreements, disagreements, associative readings, extensions, evaluations, and so on. My paper, their commentaries constitute this special, and my reply constitutes this special issue. Three people – David Kirshner, Belkacem TAIEB, and Jim Rietmulder – chose to provide commentaries on the margins. I included most of their comments on the margins as a new genre to promote a critical dialogue in our readers. Also, Belkacem TAIEB and Matthew Shumski submitted short commentaries that I included, below, at the end of this article as Appendix I and II. Jim Cresswell shared the manuscript with his undergraduate psychology students, and one student volunteered to add her commentary. Shelly Price-Jones shared it with her international undergraduate students studying English at a South Korean university. Twenty-one of them chose to provide a video reply. I selected a few of them that attracted my attention. Finally, I chose to address some of the issues brought in the presented critical commentaries either as my reply on the margins or at the end of this special issue. This should not be taken as “the final word” in the debate, but rather a dialogic response inviting other responses in the authors and in the audience.

Cultures of Diversity

2017 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 100-107
Author(s):  
Andrew M. Guest ◽  
Zachary L. Simmons ◽  
Andrew Downs ◽  
Mark R. Pitzer
Keyword(s):  
Psychology Students ◽  
Introductory Psychology ◽  
Multicultural Awareness ◽  
Important Goal ◽  
Multicultural Sensitivity ◽  
Psychology Courses ◽  
Nature And Nurture ◽  
Undergraduate Psychology ◽  
Multiple Challenges ◽  
Topical Knowledge

Teachers of psychology tend to agree that learning about diversity is an important goal for undergraduate psychology courses. There is significantly less agreement about what aspects of diversity psychology students should understand. The current research proposes and investigates two potentially distinct ways students might understand diversity: more scientific understandings of topical knowledge related to nature and nurture and more humanistic understandings related to multicultural awareness and sensitivity. Drawing on standardized surveys and open-ended responses to diversity questions from the beginning and end of introductory psychology courses, results indicate that students’ topical knowledge of diversity is not strongly associated with multicultural sensitivity. These results emphasize the importance of clarifying the meanings of addressing diversity as a course goal and are discussed in relation to the multiple challenges of teaching about diversity in psychology courses.

The Presentation of Ethics in Undergraduate Psychology Syllabi

2018 ◽  
Vol 45 (4) ◽  
pp. 346-350 ◽  
Author(s):  
Di You ◽  
Ana Ruiz ◽  
Judith Warchal
Keyword(s):  
Psychology Students ◽  
National Sample ◽  
Learning Goals ◽  
Academic Honesty ◽  
Policy Statements ◽  
Psychology Courses ◽  
Undergraduate Psychology ◽  
Ethics Courses

To identify where ethics is presented to undergraduate psychology students, this study reviewed a national sample of 706 syllabi for required mandatory psychology courses. The results indicated that 6 syllabi were designated as ethics courses and 65 syllabi did not mention ethics at all. Even though 641 syllabi mentioned ethics, the most frequent listing was under course policies, usually as a standard statement (e.g., academic honesty and plagiarism) required by many institutions. Our recommendation is that ethics should be intentionally included in the learning goals/objectives/outcomes with a corresponding assessment (assignments) in all syllabi in addition to policy statements.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document