Following the American Psychological Association’s Guidelines
Each section of a peer reviewed article as a specific purpose. For example, the abstract and introduction are typically used to state the purpose of the paper and to display evidence to support the paper’s claim. In regards to the peer reviewed article about divorce’s impact on aggression in young males, the abstract and introduction perform these acts inadequately. The abstract states the procedure and results of the rest, rather than the purpose of the test. Varying evidence was stated in the abstract, but not enough to detract from the revealing results. In comparison, the introduction stated the purpose of the paper by providing background information concerning young males, aggression, and correlations to divorce. The reader immediately understands the need for the study without the introduction stating the procedure and results of the study.
In spite of the mistakes made in the abstract, the results of the experiment allowed researchers to draw the conclusion that divorce had a negative impact on the aggression level of young males. The study involved two groups of males, half from divorced parents and half from parents who had parents that were still married. Both groups came from similar socioeconomic backgrounds. The males were given puzzles that were easily solvable, and mazes that were impossible to solve in high stress situations. Through their studies, they were able to observe that all males displayed levels of aggression, however, the males who had divorced parents displayed higher levels of aggression than those who came from homes that were not considered broken. While the study was considerably well thought out, allowing the researchers to draw the conclusion that males from homes with divorced parents were more aggressive than the others were, an important control group was still missing. The study only involved children of homes wherein which the father had left and the mother had not remarried. Positive male role models are important for males aged 13-15; the study should have included children who lived primarily with their fathers as well in order to ensure that it was not a factor.
If I were to change the study, I would include an equal amount of young males, aged 13-15, from a similar socioeconomic status who were primarily raised by their father. It would allow me to assess whether the divorce had an impact on the child’s aggression, or the feeling of abandonment from a specific parent was more to blame. Parental bonds and gender role modeling should be taken into account. Young males of divorced parents who lived full-time with their fathers may display less aggression than those that live with their mothers due to these factors, signifying that it is not divorce that affects aggression at all.
The article suggested that only sons become aggressive after a divorce, while daughters do not become aggressive. The idea of daughters becoming aggressive after a divorce was not a consequence that was mentioned in the study. This conclusion is not justified primarily because no young females were included in the study. The researchers did not assess the impact on divorce and aggression concerning young females in the same manner they did young males. Therefore, there was no comparative data to indicate the aggressive nature of young females after a divorce. In order to justify this claim, or attempt to draw this conclusion, I would include young females in the study. Girls of the same age and socioeconomic status would be gathered. I would include young females from divorced parents and married parents, as well as participants who lived with full-time with their mother and their father in order to assess which factor caused the aggression, if any.
The dependent variable in the study was the participants’ aggression when they became frustrated while trying to solve a maze. Two of the mazes were readily solvable, essentially in the worst of conditions. The other mazes were created to be unsolvable in frustrating conditions. It would be easy to simplify the level of frustration or anger felt by the participants in this situation, or other situations based on these facts. The mazes were designed to be unsolvable; while the participants who had experienced divorce became more frustrated while solving the more difficult mazes, it could be generalized that they were simply frustrated with the level of difficulty involved in the maze. The basis of the maze to measure aggression is fundamentally like measuring aggression based on whether individuals get upset at rush hour traffic after a long day at work versus a day off at home.
Expectancy effects may have impacted the experimenters’ ratings of aggression in the participants. It was preconceived that participants from divorced homes would display higher levels of aggression. Without knowing they were doing so, the observers may have been expecting them to be aggressive and rated them higher consequently. There are a few ways to eliminate the expectancy effect. However, if I were in control of this experiment, the most effective method that I would choose would be not to reveal which participants were from which parents. The observers would then not expect certain participants to display higher levels of aggression and the expectancy effect would be eliminated.
The statistical test used to analyze the data is void because the results were combined. The results for the two groups resulted in the same number, therefore, the experimenters decided to combine them “for the purpose of analysis.” However, the analysis needed to be performed on the two groups separately. The two numbers should not have been combined in order to maintain proper results for each group.
