DOWNLOAD the Paper Posting HTML Formating HELP SHEET!
We also have a GUIDE for depositing articles, images, data, etc in your research folders.
Decision making is a fundamental aspect of human nature. The choices humans make are the legacies of their lives and determine all of their actions. Every decision that a person faces includes an assortment of choices and subsequent outcomes. A rational decision maker evaluates an array of costs and gains pertaining to a situation and chooses what he or she believes to be the most beneficial outcome. Decision makers use any source of information they obtain in order to limit the variables of a situation. The social setting of a decision maker also plays a major role in determining how that person will act. Early and modern human beings have consistently relied on social structure and group decisions for survival. Our project involves the experimentation of individuals and groups in simple decision making tasks of estimation and rationalization. In our project we predict there will be a significant difference between the data of individual test responses and group test responses. We further predict that the group responses will be more accurate than individual responses for all of our tests. Our next prediction entails that responses from subjects who are provided more information will be significantly different and more accurate than responses from subjects given no additional information before conducting the tests.
Our project merges facets of several disciplines. The study of decision making derives from cognitive psychology, and our experiments parallel research previously performed in that field. The estimation testing and rational testing we are conducting are critical parts of cognitive psychology. Aside from cognitive psychology, the use of statistics will play a major role in how we will analyze quantitative data to find differences and accuracy levels from test responses. To analyze the data, we will be conducting ANOVA tests to compare our results. Lastly, this project will also draw from features of sociology in our study of group behavior in comparison with individual behavior.
Our research has connections to other aspects of human nature involved in this course. Rational decision making is the fundamental basis for the section involving economic human behavior. In addition, Homo economicus is bound by his ability to rationalize through costs and gains and decide which is most beneficial for himself and his kin. In addition, our study of the effectiveness of group decision making relates to the social animal portion of our course. Additionally, the biological segments of our course are linked to our project through the instinctive ability for humans to rationalize and make decisions. Moreover, group decision making also relates to the nature versus nurture argument as to which is more influential in the accuracy of decisions we make, our society or our genes.
II. RELEVANCE OF RESEARCH QUESTION
A. LITERATURE REVIEW
Allingham, M. (1999). Rational choice. Houndmills: MacMillan Press LTD.
Annotation: Chosen for its remarkable relevance to the complex connection between probabilities and rational choices, Allingham's work devotes an entire chapter to questions surrounding problems of uncertainty. In this chapter, Allingham defines rationality as the ability to assign subjective probabilities to given events that ultimately will equal the expected utility of outcome. In other words, a rational choice can be explained through the correct application mathematics. This book also explores the history of logic and the foundations of rational choice theory.
Andrade, Jackie. May, Jon. Cognitive Psychology. New York: Garland. 2004.
Annotation: This book details several topics that pertain to our project. Andrade and May exhibit how linear perspectives are established and estimations on distance are created. This applies to our testing of distance estimation. This book also has an a chapter on decision making which illustrates how decisions are made to maximize personal gain. It elaborates upon the extensiveness of decision making and also includes anchor and adjustment demonstrations which we will be included in our project.
Brewer, M.B., & Hewstone, M. (Eds.). (2004). Social cognition. Malden: Blackwell
Publishing Ltd.
Annotation: Because our experiment is testing the differences between group and individual decisions, it seemed relevant to find an excellent source on modern social psychology. This book is a collection of articles and studies all dealing with differing aspects of social thought. The study title "Shared Cognition in Small Groups" perfectly fit our basic questions about group decision making. After reviewing the history of social psychology theory, the authors investigated what types of behaviors led to the best social decisions. They concluded that groups with members who openly shared all their known information, tended to make the best choices in social settings.
Galotti, K.M. (1999). Cognitive psychology in and out of the laboratory. Belmont:
Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Annotation: Covering almost all areas of cognitive psychology, this text dedicates a single chapter to each of the following topics: problem solving, reasoning, and decision making. These three topics connect to form the basis of our research experiment. In the decision making chapter, Galotti provides the step-by-step procedure for correctly answering probability problems and introduces the topic of expected utility, which is the idea that people shape probabilities on the basis of personal reward. The expected utility theory can explain why a person should be willing to invest everything they have in the St. Petersburg paradox. This book also discusses numerous problem solving heuristics that we can use to identify the types of ways people solve problems (as determined by the answers on the post experiment survey).
Healy, Alice F. Experimental Cognitive Psychology. Washington: American
Psychological Association. 2005.
Annotation: Healy describes the influences of frames of references and anchor points in cognitive testing. Healy also depicts the relationship between perception and action as a goal-directed act. The results from simple tasks, she states, have higher implications into overall behavior of the subjects. This book also demonstrates the importance of control variables when conducting cognitive testing. Our project will use both anchor points and control variables along with connecting simple task responses to greater social issues.
Izawa, Chizuko. Cognitive Psychology Applied. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc. 1993.
Annotation: This book outlines the progress in cognitive psychology and how emotions and other settings can influence cognitive decisions. This is relevant to our project because it displays a variety of ways in which studies on cognitive responses can aid in other areas such as mental health and understanding emotions. It shows a broad range of scientific opportunities opened up by study of cognition.
Johnson-Laird, P.N. Shafir Eldar. Reasoning and Decision Making. Oxford: Elsevier
Science Publishers. 1993.
Annotation: This source displays the interaction between reason and decision making. It exhibits the process by which humans make their decisions through a limitation of pros and cons in the situation. Experiments in this book present how individuals can be manipulated in their decision making from slight adjustments to a test. Furthermore, this book assesses rationality and its differentiation from simple logic.
Kahneman, D., Slovic, P., & Tversky, A. (Eds.) (1982). Judgment under uncertainty:
Heuristics and biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Annotation: Compiled and edited by three well-known experts in human judgment, this work has provided the foundation for our probability tasks. Our fifth experimental task is actually an example cited in the first chapter of the book. This book explores the different factors affecting human decisions and whether the choices are accurate. The most pertinent information to our topic can be found in the text's first chapter where Tversky and Kahneman simply list and explain several categories of errors made in estimating probability. The error of "insensitivity to small numbers" is the reason why many individuals incorrectly answer the question utilized in our task five.
Keeney, Ralph L. Sebenius, James K. Zeckhauser, Richard J. Wise Choices: Decisions,
Games, and Negotiations. Boston: President and Fellows of Harvard College.
1996.
Annotation: This book is important to our research because it shows the connections between the study of decision making and the real world. This source expresses decision making as an indispensable factor of the fields of economics, international trade, and health and medicine. There are details of various complex decisions which professionals make everyday and create repercussions for themselves and others.
Kellogg, Ronald T. Cognitive Psychology. London: SAGE Publications, Inc. 1995.
Annotation: Kellogg has two chapters which are foundations of our project entitled, Reasoning and Decision Making, and Sensation and Perception. Kellogg describes different types of reasoning such as conditional reasoning and deductive reasoning. This book also displays how vital reasoning is in the most important and also the most trivial decisions of our lives.
Latin square analysis of variance. (n.d.) Statistics. Retrieved February 15, 2006, from
StatsDirect Limited Web Site:
http://www.statsdirect.com/help/analysis_of_variance/latin.html
Annotation: This website was extremely helpful in designing the Latin Square for our experimental procedure. The website first gave a documented example of a Latin Square experiment and continued to explain why this particular research method is useful and informative. After reading the text of this website, we were able to construct our own Latin Square and understood how it would work in our procedure. The second half of the website was dedicated to the relationship between the Latin Square experimental procedure and the analysis of variance statistic. A thorough step-by-step calculation of an example ANOVA was posted on the website to ensure understanding behind the statistic. We were able to document why we chose to use an ANOVA test in our proposal because of the help provided by this website.
McNamara, Carter. "Decision Making." 1999.
http://www.managementhelp.org/prsn_prd/decision.htm
Annotation: This website is designed to be a guideline in good decision making techniques for managers and business owners. This source shows some real world examples of when decisions are important to keep a business running and employees productive.
Over, David E. Evolution and the Psychology of Thinking. New York: Psychology
Press. 2003.
Annotation: This source outlines the evolutionary development of social cooperation. It shows how people work together to make decisions which will benefit the individual and the group. This book also demonstrates the process of probability judgment and how it affects decision making.
Pastor, M.A., & Artieda, J. (Eds.). (1996). Time, internal clocks, and movement.
Amsterdam: Elsevier Science B.V.
Annotation: This collective work compiles several psychological studies all dealing the human perception of time. One particular work focused on the possible cognitive explanations for human time estimation and concluded that selective attention is a key component to prospective time estimation. This book was included in our reference section because it directly discussed the background investigation into the psychological processes involved with time estimation. This background will prove to be useful in examining the results of our own time estimation task in our designed procedure.
Pohl, R.F. (2004). Cognitive illusions: A handbook on fallacies and biases in thinking,
judgment, and memory. Hove: Psychology Press.
Annotation: This book is a collective work of several psychological studies focusing on the field of cognitive illusions or reasons why people make inaccurate choices. One study of particular relevance to our experiment was investigating the strength of the anchoring effect. The anchoring effect, which suggests that people base decisions on "anchors" or pieces of seemingly relevant information, was found to be especially powerful in creating inaccurate assessments of subjective probabilities. However, we found this article to be extremely informative, since our conditions are testing for the anchoring effect by allowing some groups/individuals to handle additional information before making estimations.
Senders, J.W., & Moray, N.P. (1991). Human error: Cause, prediction, and reduction.
Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
Annotation: The entirety of this book rests on the notion of human error. The authors begin the text by questioning if error is inherent in human nature? If so, what implications can this have on the everyday life of humans? In the section entitled Predicting Probabilities, Senders and Moray attribute errors in probabilities to circadian rhythms, citing that more errors occur in the morning hours as compared to the errors made in the evening hours. The authors also comment on the incredible range of variability in errors of probabilities. We included this work into our reference section, since it dealt with the same basic topics as our experiment, mainly the accuracy of human decisions.
Simon, Herbert A. "Decision Making and Problem Solving." 1986.
http://dieoff.org/page163.htm
Annotation: This website outlines the topics of decision making and rationality. It discusses the breakthroughs in cognitive psychology and theories which go along with it. It also discusses limits to rationality and the variance of rational choices.
St. Petersburg paradox. (n.d.). Wikipedia. Retrieved February 17, 2006, from
Answers.com Web site: http://www.answers.com/topic/st-petersburg-paradox
Annotation: This website is solely focused on the St. Petersburg paradox, which was a probability task designed by Daniel Bernoulli in 1738. The paradox questions how much money people would be willing to pay to play a game of chance. Historically, people would not invest enough money to make more than their entry fee; however, the probability work behind the paradox shows that with numerous trials the payoff would compound to infinity. This idea introduces the notion of expected utility, an idea we will be scrutinizing in task six of our experiment. We are actually be utilizing the St. Petersburg paradox as our second probability task and are interested to see if Miami students will continue the trend to be wary of betting much money on this game.
Student Organization Resources. "Effective Group Decision Making." 2003.
http://www.csuchico.edu/sac/leaders/grpdecision.html
Annotation: This website displays different types of group decision making. There are examples of group decisions such as unilateral, majority rule, and otherwise. This website shows the extensiveness of group decision making and how research about it can guide businesses and other aspects of society.
B. LARGER QUESTION
Our project is structured around discovering the dependency of human beings on sociality. Humans have been the most successful species at establishing a well organized social hierarchy, conducting complex reciprocal altruism and overcoming environmental barriers such as weather and predation. All of the previous acts have utilized cooperative decision making for overall benefits to society. Human success and survival has been driven by the ability to rationalize better in groups whether the decisions are trivial or paramount. The goal of this project is to display that in application "two heads is better than one."
III. INTERDISCIPLINARY APPROACH
This research project has implications or influences from culture, the social sciences and scientific perspectives. Decision making is dominant in all forms of interactions. Fields which have difficult and profound decisions are economics, international trade, health and medicine, law and politics. All aspects of culture are influenced by decision making, and sometimes one decision can influence the masses as is such in politics and lawmaking. Health and medicine professionals make decisions which can save a life or be fatal. There are many instances in which humans are faced with extremely important choices and our study will experiment the accuracy of simple rational decisions to see how some people fare.
This project will involve the social sciences of cognitive psychology and sociology. We are formatting our experiment around cognitive testing of decision making and rationality. In our project we will utilize the anchor and adjust method and also conduct rational tests which are both methods of cognitive psychological research. While most cognitive research projects pertain to higher implications of emotions, environment of the subject or other areas, our project deals with the social aspect of decision making. The sociology of our project will be integrated through comparison of group test results and individual test results in order to support our hypothesis that group responses for both decision making and rational tests will be more accurate than individual responses.
IV. SPECIFIC RESEARCH DESIGN
Experimental Design:
Our experimental procedural is twofold: the estimation tasks and the probability tasks. The methodology we will be employing in conducting the four estimation tasks is referred to as the Latin Square method. This method provides a within-subject feedback system where each participant will be performing each of the four tasks under a different condition. Likewise, each task will have data scores from all four manipulated subject conditions. Before performing the tasks, each participant will be randomly assigned to one of four arbitrary groups labeled A-D. Each group has a specific designated condition for the four tasks. For example, group A will perform the first task individually with no previous information, the second task in pair with information, the third task in a pair without information, and the final task individually with information. To see the exact condition assignments for each group, please refer to the Latin Square for our experiment.
The second portion of our experimental design deals with answering two probability questions. We will refer to the previously assigned Latin Square groups A-D when designating the controls for these tasks. Groups A and B will perform the first probability task in pairs and will then perform the second probability task individually. On the contrary, groups C and D will perform the first task individually and will follow by performing the second task in a pair. Therefore, the Latin Square assignments will prove to be extremely useful in assigning conditions onto the participating individuals.
Latin Square Assignments for Research Procedure
Distance Task Temperature Task Volume Task Time Task
Group A Individual/ No Information Pair/ Information Pair/ No Information Individual/ Information
Group B Pair/ Information Pair/ No Information Individual/ Information Individual/ No Information
Group C Pair/ No Information Individual/ Information Individual/ No Information Pair/ Information
Group D Individual/ Information Individual/ No Information Pair/ Information Pair/ No Information
Research Tasks:
Our experiment contains six separate tasks, four using estimation skills and two using probability skills. To ensure complete understanding of our experimental tasks, we will thoroughly explain each task individually making sure to include: an explanation of what the task measures, the correct answer to the task, the process we will utilize to score each performance, and the method by which we will evaluate the accuracy or "correctness" of the score.
Task 1: Task one is the first of our four estimation tasks. Specifically, this task will be measuring the accuracy of the participants' distance estimations. The task will require the participants to estimate the distance from a marked line on the ground to an inanimate object, a box. The box will be placed before experimentation twenty feet away from the line taped on the floor. A participant's score on this task will be his/her estimation in feet. From this raw score, we will calculate the individual's accuracy score by taking the difference of the expected value (twenty feet in this case) and subtracting his/her score.
Task 2: Task two is our second estimation task. This task judges the accuracy of humans to estimate volume and will entail having the participants pour a designated amount of liquid from one glass into a larger glass. The participants will be instructed to pour a volume of five ounces; therefore, their scores will be the actual volume (in ounces) poured, as measured by the facilitators. Following the procedure in task one, we will define a person's accuracy as his/her difference score calculated by subtracting the raw score from the expected score of five ounces.
Task 3: Task three is our third estimation task and tests the participant's accuracy in estimating mass. During this task, participants will be directed to lift an object, the same box from task one, and determine its mass in pounds. The participant's estimation will be his/her score for the task and will be judged for accuracy by comparing it to the actual mass (this mass has not been taken yet). Using the difference score formula, actual score minus expected score, we will give each participant an accuracy score.
Task 4: Task four concludes the estimation portion of the experiment. This task judges the participants' accuracies in estimating time in seconds. The facilitator will instruct the participants to estimate twenty seconds from the designated start command. Using a stopwatch, the facilitator will keep time until the participant says stop. The estimated time by the participant is the raw score for this task and will be judged for accuracy against the expected value of twenty seconds by utilization of the difference formula.
Task 5: Task five is the first probability task in our experiment. This task evaluates how accurately participants can estimate the probability of a given event after reading a brief paragraph of information. The specific problem for task five is as follows:
Imagine an urn filled with balls, of which 2/3 are of one color and 1/3 of another. One individual has drawn five balls, and found that four were red and one was white. Another individual has drawn twenty balls and found that twelve were red and eight were white. Which of the two individuals should feel more confident that the urn contains 2/3 red balls and 1/3 white balls, rather than the opposite? (Kahneman, 1982)
After reading the paragraph, the participant must chose between the first and second individual. His/her choice will be the raw score and will be evaluated as either correct or incorrect based on whether or not they correctly identified the right answer to the question. In this case, the correct answer is the second individual. We will be measuring rationality in this task, as defined by the ability to use correct probabilities in evaluating information.
Task 6: Task six is the final task in our experiment and is another probability task. As with the last task, task six requires the participant to read a given set of information and make a conclusion based on probabilities. The specific problem for this task is as follows:
You pay a fixed fee to enter a game of chance, and then a fair coin will be tossed repeatedly until a "head" first appears. You win 1 cent if a head appears on the first toss, 2 cents if on the second, 4 cents if on the third, 8 cents if on the fourth, etc. It doubles with every toss. In short, you win 2k−1 cents if the coin must be tossed k times. How much should you to pay to enter the game? One dollar or one-hundred dollars?
After considering all the information, the participant must decide whether they would invest one dollar or one-hundred dollars to enter the game, and his/her choice will be the raw score. This problem is known as St. Petersburg paradox and is one of the oldest probability tasks in psychology. The participant should be willing to pay one-hundred dollars, the correct choice. We will evaluate rationality in this example on whether the individual chooses the correct answer because the application of probabilities to this problem reveals that the return payment will be infinite after numerous trials.
Experimental Conditions:
In the first segment of our experiment (estimation tasks 1-4), we will be utilizing the application of four general testing conditions. Again, it is important to note that each participant will be completing the four trials under a full rotation of these conditions; therefore, for each participant, we will gather four data points, one under each differing condition. The conditions will be assigned according to the matrix established in the Latin Square by dividing the participants in groups A-D before asking them to perform any estimation tasks. Our first testing condition is referred to as "Individual/No Information" on our Latin Square, so participants will complete the designated task by individually given no previous information. In our second condition, participants will also complete the estimation task individually, but this time they will receive inference information (specific information discussed after all conditions have been stated). The third condition allows participants to answer the questions with a partner given no previous information, while the final task permits the participants to evaluate the estimation task with a partner given a set a previous information before the task.
The second and four estimation conditions utilize the use of outside information and are specified for each task. If the participant is allowed to view information before the completion of task one (distance estimation), he/she will receive a ruler to inspect for twenty seconds before the task. Likewise, if the participant is assigned to see the information before the volume task, he/she will be allowed to hold and inspect a soda can, which holds twelve ounces. The information used before the third task, the mass task, will permit participants to hold a five pound hand weight. Similarly, the participants assigned to view information before the fourth task (time task) will listen to the facilitator read off five seconds from the stopwatch. The information given before each task is constant whether the participant is assigned to perform the task individually or with a partner.
The two probability tasks (tasks five and six) will utilize only two conditions. The first condition allows the participants to answer the probability task in a paired group, while the second condition permits participants to perform the probability task individually. No extra information will be administered during these tasks. The group assignments for each condition and task are defined in the modified Latin Square (explained above).
Basic Overview of Trials:
The first step in our experimental procedure is to assign the participants to an arbitrary group A-D. Because some tasks will require the use of a partner, participants will be assigned initially as pairs. For instance, our first two participants will be assigned to group B. Once individuals have been placed into groups, the data collection process can commence. By referring to the Latin Square design, the two participants will first execute the paired estimation task with a partner given no information. Then, the participants will perform the designated task for partners given information. The participants will split up to individually perform the next two tasks in hopes of keeping their scores independent from one another. One facilitator will test the participant answering the individual task given previous information, while the other participant will complete the individual task given no previous information under the guidance of the second facilitator. When both individuals are finished with their first individual task, they will switch positions to the other facilitator and perform the tasks as mentioned previously. This concludes the estimation task data collection procedure.
Immediately following the estimation tasks, the participants will perform the two probability questions. The participants will again be paired for the first probability task as assigned by the extended Latin Square designations. Upon completion, the participants will be separated to read and answer the second probability task individually. This concludes the data collection procedure for the experiment. Participants will finally be asked to complete a brief survey of their methods for performing the tasks as well as their comfort and confidence levels between conditions. After the surveys are returned to the facilitators, the experiment is complete, and the participants are free to leave.
Social Dimension of the Experiment:
Our research conditions for this experiment are testing the significance of socialization in making accurate estimations and probability choices. We are evaluating the choices made in pairs and comparing them to the choices made by the individuals to answer the following question: do humans make better decisions in groups or individually? Ultimately, our project goal is to determine whether social decisions are a natural form of human behavior and if those decisions are "best". To test the social implications of our experiment, we will be conducting a post experiment survey that allows participants to describe their methods in making decisions, to express their preference in choice situations (partner or individual), and to generate their confidence levels for the decisions they made in both the partner tasks and in the individual tasks. Please refer to our survey below in order to see the full range of questions.
Post Experiment Survey
1. What methods did you employ, while trying to answer the estimation tasks (tasks 1-4)?
2. What methods did you employ, while trying to answer the probability tasks (tasks 5-6)?
3. In which setting did you feel more comfortable in performing both tasks?
Circle one option:
as an individual as a pair
Briefly explain the reasoning behind your choice:
4. In which setting did you feel more accurate/confident in performing both tasks?
Circle one option:
as an individual as a pair
Briefly explain the reasoning behind your choice:
V. MATERIALS AND METHODS
Materials Utilized in Research:
For our experiment, each task requires the use of different materials. To set up the first task, we will use tape to create a line on the ground and will use a tape measure to place a box twenty feet away from the line. If participants are given information before the task, they will receive a ruler to handle. The second task requires the use of a measuring cup, a large glass filled with water, and a smaller glass. The participant will use the large glass of water to pour our five ounces into the smaller glass, and the facilitators will measure their poured volume with the measuring cup. If participants are granted permission to view information before this task, they will be given a twelve ounce can of soda. The third task will include the use of the box from task one and a balance to assign the correct mass of the box before the trials. If participants are permitted to additional information before the mass estimation task, they will be given a five pound weight to hold. The fourth task relies on the use of a stopwatch to measure the participants' time estimations and can also provide selected participants with the five second count-off. The probability tests (tasks five and six) require the participants to first read the probability question and directions on note cards. The participants will provide their answers on scrap paper with pencils. The final step in the procedure states that the participants will reflect on their performances by completing a survey with pencils. Please note that the actual materials needed for the experiment are bolded within their context of the procedure.
Statistics:
After the data completion phase of our experiment, we will rely on statistical computations to make conclusions regarding our hypotheses. More specifically, we will be utilizing JMP, a statistical computer program, to compute the ANOVA scores for our data. The ANOVA test, also referred to as the analysis of variance test, compares the means of two or more variables. This statistic will allow us to determine if there exist statistical differences between the accuracy of individual decisions and the accuracy of group decisions. For this statistic, we will be utilizing the mean "difference" score, the expected score minus the actual score, to compare the means (see formula below for further explanation).
Formula: Xd = Xe - Xa
Data Sheet:
Please refer to our attached data sheet.
Data Sheet Notation:
Participant Number: the chronological order of participants (Numbers 1-160)
Group: arbitrary group assignment for experiment (Groups A-D)
Score: raw score for each particular task
Diff: the expected score minus the raw score for each particular task
I/G: whether the participant performed the task as an individual or in a group
Time-Line for Research Execution:
February 27, 2006: begin sampling and collecting data
February 27-March 5, 2006: Week 1 of data collection (sample forty participants)
March 5-12, 2006: Week 2 of data collection (sample forty participants)
March 20-26, 2006: Week 3 of data collection (sample forty participants)
March 27-April 2, 2006: Week 4 of data collection (sample forty participants)
April 2, 2006: data collection deadline
April 3-9: organizing data and computing statistics
April 9, 2006: completion of all statistics analyses of the data
April 10-21, 2006: compiling the final report, writing the Results and Discussion
April 21, 2006: final project reports due
April 24, 2006: week of project presentations
Standards for Team Work:
Our research team will work closely together throughout the duration of the experiment and will closely follow the time-table generated in the previous section. The actual data collection procedure requires the help of both facilitators to quickly move the participants from one task to another. The facilitators will each direct the successful completion of three tasks for each pair of participants. The facilitator leading the task will be responsible for giving directions and monitoring the task, while the other facilitator will be responsible for collecting the data scores and preparing the next task. After the data collection process, both team members will meet over the course of three weeks to organize the data sheets, compute the statistics, and finalize the final report by co-writing the results and discussion sections. As can easily be seen, both partners will be required to perform an equivalent amount of work for this project.
Next Article
Previous Article
Return to the Topic Menu
IMPORTANT: For each Response, make sure the title of the response is different than previous titles shown above!
DOWNLOAD the Paper Posting HTML Formating HELP SHEET!
We also have a GUIDE for depositing articles, images, data, etc in your research folders.
WEATHER & EARTH SCIENCE RESOURCES |
|
OTHER ACADEMIC COURSES, STUDENT RESEARCH, OTHER STUFF
|
|
TEACHING TOOLS & OTHER STUFF
 |
Listen to a "Voice Navigation" Intro!
(Quicktime or