Introduction to the assessment

There are two parts to the QDA Assessment as follows:

Completion of blue card (10% of final grade)

Your weekly lab work is linked to the completion of a blue card and will represent 10% of your final grade for this module. The deadline for your blue card to be signed off by a lab tutor is Friday 29th November 2024.

Completion of research report (90% of final grade)

This will be a quantitative research report due on Monday 6th January 9pm. It follows a similar format to your Level 4 WQE assessment however the written requirements are much more detailed. The report is an independent piece of work using secondary data that will be provided to you. It is 2,300 words and is worth 90% of the overall module mark.

This information booklet contains all the information that you need to successfully complete your research report however please note that the assignment datasets will not be released on Moodle until Friday 22^nd November at 5pm therefore you will not be able to start working on the assessment until that date.

It is important that you read this booklet very carefully and that you do not deviate from the instructions about presentation, layout and content; you will lose marks if you do. In line with the learning outcomes of this module, the purpose of the assessment is for you to demonstrate that you can:

Use SPSS to produce univariate and bivariate analysis; visualise the results.
Apply the appropriate statistical method to the univariate and bivariate analysis of categorical and scale variables. This includes testing parametric assumptions and choosing the appropriate inferential, bivariate tests to answer your formulated hypotheses.
Describe the secondary survey data and methods used to answer a research question and critically evaluate these data and methods by identifying their strengths and limitations.
Report the findings of bivariate analysis with reference to statistical significance and mean values. Interpret and discuss the findings of your analysis with reference to previous research and the current criminological or sociological policy context.

Use of generative AI

The use of generative AI is permitted in this assessment, so long as it is used in accordance with the instructions provided in the ‘Are you allowed to use AI in assessments?’ section of the AI Literacy Rise Study Pack. All submitted work must be your own original content. For further info: Rise x Future Me at Manchester Met (mmu.ac.uk)

Do You Need Assignment of This Question

Order Non Plagiarized Assignment

QDA Marking Rubric – please read carefully

Section instructions	Outstanding 84+	Excellent 70-84	Good 60-69	More needed 50-59	Much more needed 40-49	Unacceptable 0-39	Not included
Intro & literature review table (weight 10%): You should introduce the research question and layout of your report. Signpost the reader as to what to expect. There is no requirement for a literature review, just a literature summary table, including a citation to support the choice of each independent variable.	The introduction is of an outstanding quality. Very detailed, clear. The justification for hypotheses is supported by a range of credible sources in the summary table, demonstrating a profound understanding of the variables’ choice and their linkage to hypotheses.	An excellent introduction that effectively outlines the report’s structure. The sources used to justify hypotheses extend beyond class materials, showcasing comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the variables and hypotheses.	A good introduction and literature review summary table that provides a clear overview of the report. The justification for hypotheses is supported by credible sources, though there might be a need for a more extensive use of literature to strengthen the linkage between variables and hypotheses.	An introduction that might lack depth or coherence. While attempts are made to justify hypotheses in literature summary table, the use of credible sources could be more robust and detailed, improving the connection between literature and hypotheses.	Only a small number of references used with little evidence of real engagement with the material. The introduction might lack clarity, and the connection between literature sources and hypotheses is weak or missing.	Poor attempt at this section, e.g., incomplete or lack of Introduction, literature summary table, references No link to hypotheses	No introduction or literature summary table included
Hypotheses (weight 5%): There should be THREE null and THREE research hypotheses. They should start with the null and then have the research hypothesis. The hypothesis should mirror each other and clearly show what is being tested.	All hypotheses are clearly and correctly presented. They are also succinct and do not waste any words. They correctly distinguish between tests for difference and tests for relationship.	All hypotheses are clearly and correctly presented. They correctly distinguish between tests for difference and tests for relationship but could be a little more concise.	All hypotheses are clearly and correctly presented but require a little more detail. They may not distinguish tests for difference and tests for relationship.	All hypotheses stated but have some errors of presentation, e.g., lack of consistent mirroring.	Some hypotheses are stated but possibly not the required amount. They are also incorrectly presented, e.g., may not mirror each other, may not include research or null.	Section incomplete, and where hypotheses are included, these are poorly presented, do not mirror each other.	No hypotheses included.
Method (weight 20%): This section should include a brief description of the quantitative data and methods used to answer the research question. This should include a description of the dataset, its year of data collection; who is in the sample; data collection techniques; sampling techniques; details of the variables chosen, and the methods of analysis used. It should also include a critical evaluation of these data and methods by identifying their strengths and limitations with reference to specific data and methods used rather than quantitative data/methods more generally. There should be evidence of understanding that this is an SDA approach, using randomly sampled data and inferential testing to answer the research question.	Clear and comprehensive description of the data. Clear and concise summary of the methods used. Well-formulated and focused critical evaluation. This section is supported by citations from a range of credible sources.	Clear and comprehensive description of the data. Summarises the methods used. Sound critical evaluation supported by citations.	Clear description of the data and methods used but with some minor gaps. Some evidence of critical evaluation but this is more general rather than linked to the specific data and methods used in the report. Some supporting citations included.	Description of the data and methods is included but with a number of gaps. Limited evidence of critical evaluation with no supporting citations. The student may have partly demonstrated understanding of the importance of exploratory statistics along with inferential statistics and assumptions but with no sources. There is little discussion on the importance of measurement or link to the SDA approach. The student has not mentioned the sampling strategy and the use of hypotheses.	Description of the data and methods with many gaps. No evidence of critical evaluation and no sources cited. The student has not discussed the importance of exploratory/inferential statistics and their assumptions. There is little discussion on measurement or links to the SDA approach. The student has not mentioned the sampling strategy and the use of hypotheses.	An attempt at this section is included however the data description has many gaps and/or methods are not mentioned at all. No evidence of critical evaluation and no sources cited.	No Methods section y Included
Univariate (weight 10%): Briefly explores each of the four variables and presents the findings as outlined in the instructions. You should present a frequency table or measures of central tendency, the relevant graph and descriptive summary for all four variables.	The univariate analysis is error-free. The appropriate tables and charts are included depending on the variable type. Descriptive summaries are clear and concise and include all necessary information.	The univariate analysis is excellent. The appropriate tables and charts are included depending on the variable type. Descriptive summaries are clear and concise but may omit some of the required information.	The univariate analysis is included for all four variables. It is broadly correct although there are a small number of errors, for example, a frequency table is reported for a scale variable instead of a table including Measures of Central Tendency. The descriptive summaries are wordy and may miss some of the required information such as a relevant percentage or “n”.	All four variables are included in the univariate analysis however it requires more attention as there are a number of errors throughout such as incorrect tables/charts for the variable type and/or incomplete descriptive summaries	The univariate analysis is weak and lacks due care and attention. It is incomplete, has considerable errors and omissions such as a lack of descriptive summaries	An attempt at univariate analysis is included however the section has many gaps and descriptive summaries are not included at all. The univariate analysis is not presented for each variable and what is presented contains considerable errors and is hard to follow.	No univariate analysis included.
Bivariate (weight 20%): This section should include three sub-sections. Each sub-section should present the parametric assumptions, inferential statistics, and descriptive summary for each hypothesis. In each sub-section, you should first report your results from the parametric assumption tests and summarise the parametric test results as your justification for choosing the inferential test you used. Results from all parametric assumptions should be screenshot and labelled. Next, in each sub-section, you should include the results of the inferential test, ending with a descriptive summary where you indicate whether there is evidence to reject the null hypothesis and comment on the differences/relationships that you have found.	Very detailed, clear and comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the appropriate test to use following parametric tests. This led to the correct statistical tests being used and then interpreted correctly. The null hypotheses correctly accept/ rejected with high quality table summaries.	A clear and comprehensive knowledge and understanding of the appropriate test to use following parametric tests. This led to the correct statistical tests being used and then interpreted correctly. The null hypotheses correctly accept/ rejected with high quality table summaries. Perhaps the table summaries could have been more concise, but these were still excellent.	The bivariate analysis was good, and the parametric assumptions clearly followed leading to the appropriate test being carried out. Some of the table summaries were well written but others did not quite follow the template set out in the assignment instructions. In some areas, the incorrect interpretation of the p values lead to the null hypotheses not being correctly accepted/rejected.	There are some areas where the tests carried out are incorrect. This could be when carrying out the parametric tests when the parametric assumptions were not met, or vice versa. An insufficient rationale of the parametric assumptions was not provided. P values were sometimes incorrectly interpreted leading to the null hypotheses being incorrectly accepted/rejected.	The bivariate analysis is poor and does not include the appropriate number of tests. There are many errors and omissions throughout with the instructions not being followed.	A poorly completed section, with a number of issues evident. E.g., not all hypotheses tested, e.g., parametric tests consistently carried out incorrectly throughout the section. There is clear confusion of how to appropriately test the data.	There is no bivariate analysis section
Discussion (weight 15%): This section should refer to your research question and explore the key factors influencing your dependent variable. This is where you interpret and discuss the findings of your analysis with reference to previous research and the current criminological or sociological policy context. You should draw on literature cited earlier in the literature summary table and consider how your findings compare with what others have discovered. You can also be critical of what you found. Talk about any problems or limitations to your research.	The discussion successfully links the literature and all results from the bivariate analysis. There is a clear narrative throughout. The work is close to perfect for this level. May also present some limitations of your research and/or identify areas of future research.	The discussion links to the literature and results section together in a clear and concise way. More could be made of the univariate analysis in the discussion although the bivariate findings are thoroughly explored.	The discussion links back to the literature and weaves in the current findings demonstrating a degree of understanding. There are some areas however, where this lacks depth, for example, limited discussion on results of bivariate findings and literature.	The discussion tries to link back to the substantive themes but does not show a depth of understanding in how the statistics tested can help support the literature.	A limited discussion section is included and does not make use of the available word count to develop ideas. Only weak reference to literature and/or key findings is included.	An attempt at this section is included however there is no evidence that the purpose of a discussion section is understood. There are no references and no discussion to previous literature. Key findings not discussed.	No discussion included

Referencing (weight 5%):

All references should use the Cite them Right MMU Harvard referencing system.

Perfect referencing throughout the report and reference list

One or two small errors in the citing but overall, a good level of referencing throughout.

All references included but not correctly cited.

Weak referencing throughout, inconsistent, poorly, or incorrectly cited.

Very weak referencing throughout. Few references used in the report as a whole.

No references used.

Presentation (weight 5%):

The report should be of a professional standard and formatted as illustrated in the instructions contained in the assessment handbook.

The presentation of the work is outstanding and almost looks professionally formatted. There are no spelling or grammar errors, and no tables go over two pages.

The presentation is excellent. There are no spelling or grammatical errors, and no tables go over two pages.

Good presentation. Clearly been proofread and there are only very few spelling and grammatical errors. No table goes over onto two pages.

Presentation needs improvement. Few signs of proof reading. The work has too many spelling and grammatical errors. Tables and heading require attention.

Very poor presentation. Not proofread the work which is littered with spelling errors and poor grammar. Tables going over several pages.

Far too many errors, not appropriately laid out and the instructions have clearly not been followed.

Not followed instructions in the assessment handbook.

Whole Report (weight 10%):

This section rewards excellence throughout the report. There is clear demonstration of either a sociological or criminological imagination. The overall coherence and consistency of the report is rewarded where there is a clear link between each section.

A very well-structured and coherent piece of work. Arguments flow clearly and logically throughout the work to a set of reasoned conclusions. A clear and strong central narrative that links everything together and demonstrates a sense of real and sustained engagement by the student with the subject matter. An outstanding academic style for this level.

A well-structured and coherent piece of work. Arguments flow clearly and logically throughout the work to a set of reasoned conclusions. There is a strong narrative linking everything together. An excellent academic style for this level.

The overall report is of good quality and there is a clear narrative within the report. Some sections are stronger and clearer than others. Therefore, some slight imbalance in the narrative.

There has been some attempt at an overall narrative but with clear imbalance between sections. This would be remedied by spending more time drafting and redrafting the work so that each section supported the others.

There has been some attempt at linkage but misguided; student demonstrates a lack of understanding of how each sections fits together.

The student has had a go, but it is a very poor attempt with clear gaps in understanding evident throughout.

Not all sections included, no sense of linkage throughout.

Outstanding 84+

Excellent 70-84

Good 60-69

More needed 50-59

Much more needed 40-49

Unacceptable 0-39

Not included

Buy Answer of This Assessment & Raise Your Grades

Request to Buy Answer

Report structure

Presentation & Layout Guidelines

Follow the instructions set out in this document; use the tick box below as a checklist to help you stay on track:

	Requirement	Tick Box
Font Size and style	12 – Arial
Writing Style	Formal and in the 3^rd person.
Page numbers	The report will include page numbers positioned in the middle and at the bottom of the page.
Title Page	The title page should include a nice title. You can include pictures/diagrams if you want, but this is not a requirement.
Table of Contents	The report will have a table of contents by using headings 1 and 2 in MS Word. The link below shows how this is done https://support.office.com/en-us/article/insert-a-table-of-contents-882e8564-0edb-435e-84b5 1d8552ccf0c0
Report Sections	Each new section of the report will have a heading in bold and will begin on a new page. Subheadings will also be in bold.
Tables and Figures	All relevant SPSS output tables and charts are required. Each table and chart require a numeric label and heading in bold (see template for an example). Tables are to be labelled ‘tables’ and charts are to be labelled ‘figure’.
Referencing	Manchester Met uses the Cite them Right Harvard system of referencing. More information about this can be found at: https://www.mmu.ac.uk/library/referencing
List of references	The reference list will include all articles and books used in the report and will be located at the end of the report. Websites such as Wikipedia, Theory.Org, are not academic sources and can result in the report being marked down
Word Count	Please put the word count at the end of the report

Suggested word count guidance

Section	Suggested word count
Introduction	150
Literature summary table	Does not count towards the word count
Hypotheses	150
Method	700
Univariate Analysis	200
Bivariate Analysis	400
Discussion	700
Total	2300

The above are suggested word counts but there is a degree of flexibility. The important point to remember is how a well-balanced report will achieve a higher mark.

The word count includes:

Titles
Subheadings
References (citations) in the body of the text
Direct quotations
Table summaries

The word count excludes:

Tables in the body of the text. All tables should be in the JPEG format so as not to count to the word limit. For this, please use the snipping tool or copy and paste as picture.
Reference lists

Regulations on length of assessed course work

These regulations state that students will be penalised if their work is 10% under or over the word limit. So, with your report being 2,300 words, understand that you cannot exceed 2,530 words or submit with under 2,070 words as this will result in a 10% reduction of your original mark.

The penalty for exceeding the word limit by more than 10% is a deduction of 10% off the original mark. For example, a piece of work marked at 60% will have 6% deducted, making the final mark 54%. Excessive lengths are penalised because they give students an unfair advantage over those who kept their work to the limit. Moreover, a skill is tested in keeping to a specified assignment length.

Submission of coursework

You must upload the report to Turnitin via the QDA Moodle page following the instructions and layout provided by or on the due date of Monday 6^th January 2025 at 9pm.

SPSS

Please refer to the Moodle page for how to download and use SPSS. Any technical issues around installing the software on your personal computer should be directed to IT: Email – it.helpline@mmu.ac.uk or the chat function Tel. 0161 247 4646

The QDA report task: choosing your data

For this assessment, you must use only one dataset. This is the only dataset that you may use; if you do not use either of the two datasets then you will be awarded an automatic fail. You should attempt the following task in 2,300 words:

Option 1: Using the tests you have learnt in the module, discuss the factors that might influence sexually conservative attitudes. You will need to use four variables in total, using the NATSAL Assessment Data provided on Moodle.

Option 2: Using the tests you have learnt in the module, discuss the factors that might influence fear of being a victim of crime. You will need to use four variables in total, using the CSEW Assessment Data provided on Moodle.

Your dependent variable (DV) will be either sexually conservative attitudes or fear of being a victim of crime, depending on the dataset you choose. It is important that you choose only one dataset. You are encouraged to choose the dataset most relevant to your course (Criminology or Sociology). If you are studying both, you are encouraged to choose the one you are most interested in.

Please note that you are not required to download the dataset yourself; this has already been done for you and will be released on Moodle on Friday 22^nd November). All variables in both datasets are already cleaned.

Further information about the two datasets is as follows and will be useful for writing your methods section:

The NATSAL Dataset

The National Surveys of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (NATSAL) are among the largest surveys of sexual behaviour in the world. The surveys use a probability sampling method to randomly select people across Britain to take part. The assessment data has been reduced and shaped for the purposes of this assessment. More information about NATSAL can be found via the links below – this will be useful for your method section

https://www.natsal.ac.uk/natsal-survey/natsal-3

https://beta.ukdataservice.ac.uk/datacatalogue/studies/study?id=7799

The NATSAL-3 dataset for the UK (N=15,162) is based on participants in Great Britain. You have been given a cut down version of the original dataset; your version features the following variables:

Age
Sex (Gender)
Age respondent first had sex
Ethnic group
Importance of religion and religious beliefs
Sexual identity (Recoded)
Sexually Conservative attitudes (higher score = more conservative attitudes)

The CSEW Dataset

The Crime Survey for England and Wales (CSEW) asks a sole adult, in a random sample of households, about their, or their household’s, experience of crime victimisation in the previous 12 months. A wide range of questions are then asked covering demographics and crime-related subjects such as attitudes to the police and the criminal justice system (CJS) these variables are contained within the non-victim form (NVF) data file. More information about CSEW can be found via the link below:

https://beta.ukdataservice.ac.uk/datacatalogue/studies/study?id=8608

The CSEW dataset for the UK (N=34,163) is based on participants in England and Wales. You have been given a cut down version of the original dataset; your version features the following variables:

Sex (Gender)
Age
Rural or Urban Area
English Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD: 1 = 10% most deprived)
Ethnic Group
Occupation (5 categories from NSSEC, SOC2010)
Fear of being a victim of crime (higher score = more worried)

Choosing variables

Once you have decided on your dataset, you must select three independent variables (IVs), one of each of the following:

A categorical variable with 2 groups
A categorical variable with more than 2 groups
A scale variable

As we have learned, selecting the right independent variables (IVs) is a critical step in hypothesis testing. IVs are the factors or conditions that you believe may influence or have an impact on your DV therefore ideally you want to be able to justify your choice of IVs based on theory and/or previous research.

Once you have chosen your dataset, ensure you have selected variables that answer the research question and meet the criteria listed. Once you have the appropriate variables, tick the check box on the far-right column.

Do you have…	Check Box
A scale dependent variable (this will be either sexually conservative attitudes or fear of being a victim of crime, depending on the dataset you have chosen)	☐
A categorical independent variable with 2 groups	☐
A categorical independent variable with more than 2 groups	☐
A scale independent variable	☐

Consider deleting the variables you will not use and creating a new version of your dataset (saving this to your One Drive).

Are You Looking for Answer of This Assignment or Essay

Pay & Buy Non Plagiarized Assignment

The SDA Report Structure

Guidance for each section of your report is provided below:

Introduction

In no more than 150 words, briefly introduce the report. This section should introduce:

Your research topic and research question
The layout of your report so that the reader knows what to expect.

Literature summary table

This table should briefly summarise the literature that you have reviewed to justify your choice of independent variables. We have provided some suggested reading on Moodle that may help but feel free to also do your own research. Guidance as to how to approach this section will be provided in lectures during week 10.

Please use the following table template in your report to show the reader what literature is relevant to your research. Try to aim for two citations for each independent variable. We recognise that the same citation may be relevant for more than one of your variables and therefore there may be some repetition. The words in the table will not form part of your word count however please keep the table as brief as possible – we suggest between 150 to 200 words; you will have space in the Discussion section to develop your ideas.

Literature summary table template (example only, do not copy content):

Independent Variable Description	Citation(s)	Finding that links your IV to the DV
e.g., ethnicity	Smith et al (2013); Nadal and Smith (2019)	Found those in minority ethnic groups had lower levels of life satisfaction compared to white group.

Hypotheses

The report should include three null and three research hypotheses (i.e., one pair for each IV). All hypotheses should be as brief as possible, and wordiness will not be rewarded (See week 2 lecture slides for example wording)

Method

In this section you should:

Briefly describe the quantitative data and methods you have used to answer your research question.
Critically evaluate the data and methods used by identifying their strengths and limitations.

Your description of the data should include a brief description of the dataset, its year of data collection; who is in the sample; data collection techniques; sampling techniques and the variables you have chosen. Some of this detail can be located by reading the background on the dataset selected for the assignment (see above).

Be specific by focusing on the strengths and limitations of the data and methods used in your report rather than quantitative data/methods more generally. There should be evidence of understanding that yours is a Secondary Data Analysis approach, using randomly sampled data and inferential testing to answer the research question. In writing this section, you will also find it helpful to refer to the lecture material and the suggested reading provided. Please include citations to support this section.

As part of your description of the variables chosen, please include the key information on your selected variables using the template table below (example only, do not copy content):

Variable name	Variable label	Is the variable an IV or the DV?	Type of variable (scale or categorical)
Life Satisfaction	How satisfied are you with life on a scale of 0 – 10	DV	Scale

Data analysis and results

This section should include:

Univariate analysis (present frequency table or measures of central tendency, the relevant graph and descriptive summary for all four variables)
Bivariate analysis (present parametric assumptions, inferential statistics, and descriptive summary for each hypothesis

Please note that no data cleaning is necessary as both datasets are already clean.

Univariate analysis

Here you should present both of your categorical IVs and present your findings as follows:

Categorical variables

Name of variable: (insert Variable Label here)

INSERT Frequency table for variable. See example below.

Table 1 – Frequency for Gender

Gender

		Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cumulative Percent
Valid	Male	21055	45.1	45.1	45.1
	Female	25625	54.9	54.9	100.0
	Total	46680	100.0	100.0

Please also illustrate the data with a bar or pie chart. Underneath each table, provide the summary of the key features of the variable, i.e., what are the predominant attitudes, behaviours, characteristics for this sample, per variable? Your summary should not exceed a maximum of 40 words per variable.

Scale variables

Note, this section will include your chosen dependent variable and your scale independent variable.

Name of scale variable: (Insert variable label here)

Table 2 –

Mean
Median
Mode
Std. Deviation
Range
Minimum
Maximum

For each scale variable, include Measures of Central Tendency and Measures of Dispersion in the table above along with a histogram to represent this visually. Then in around 50 words, provide a brief descriptive summary.

Bivariate analysis

This is the most important section in your report. You will provide a sub-section for each hypothesis that is being tested and therefore will have three sub-sections (one for each hypothesis).

First, in each sub-section, you should report your results from the parametric assumption tests. Results from all parametric assumptions should be screenshot and labelled; the marker will use them to determine your understanding and mark accordingly. Remember, it is these results that help you decide what inferential test should be used. Of course, when eyeballing the data, it can be interpreted in various ways. That means that any decision made must include a justification – please refer to the guides to help you summarise the parametric test results you have and describe your justification for choosing the inferential test you used.

Second, in each sub-section, you should include the results of the inferential test, ending with a descriptive summary where you indicate whether there is evidence to reject the null hypothesis and comment on the differences/relationships that you have found. There are templates for what output to include and how your summary should be written. These are found on Moodle in the guides (you are used to doing this in the weekly labs but please also see table below to locate the guides).

Remember all the tests covered this semester can be considered for use. The reports that use the appropriate tests will gain the highest marks. It is therefore important that only the appropriate tests are used (this means that not all tests you have learned will be used in your report).

Please note – there is no need to repeat writing your hypotheses in this section if it is clear to the reader what variables are being tested in each sub section. For example, the first sub-section may have a heading ‘Life Satisfaction and Ethnicity’. The second may have a sub heading ‘Life Satisfaction and Sex’. Presentation, punctuation, and grammar is considered when marking the report (See marking Rubric Below).

Where on Moodle are the guides for the tests?

Parametric assumption guide for a scale DV and categorical IV (used for all types of categorical variable, i.e., those that have only two groups and those that have more than two groups)	Week 3
Guide for comparing a scale DV and a categorical IV with two groups (Tests for Difference: T-Test and Mann Whitney)	Week 4
Guide for comparing a scale DV and a categorical IV with more than two groups (Tests for Difference: ANOVA and Kruskal Wallis)	Week 5
Guide for Correlation for comparing a scale DV and a scale IV – Assumptions and hypothesis testing (Tests for Relationship: Pearson’s R & Spearman’s Rho)	Week 7

All resources can be found on Moodle.

Discussion of Findings

This is where you interpret and discuss the findings of your analysis with reference to previous research and the current criminological or sociological policy context. Keep the main research question in mind – this is where you answer it!

You should re-state your overall findings and go into more detail on specific differences/relationships.
Consider how your findings fit with prior research. Draw on literature cited earlier in your literature summary table. It is important to consider your findings to what others have discovered to show the importance of your work. Do your findings support or refute existing research on the topic?
What might explain your findings? Why might there be relationships between the IVs and DV? Can you offer any further insights into the results using theory? Is this a social problem that needs addressing?
Be critical of what you found; talk about any problems or limitations to your research. What should future research explore?

The suggested word count for this section is 700 words (max). More detailed guidance as to how to write this section will be provided in lectures during weeks 10 to 11.

List of references

List all references cited correctly, using the MMU Cite them Right Harvard referencing system.

All output tables must be included in the report and not put in an appendix.

GOOD LUCK!