© Odilia Yim 2025 PSY220 – Introduction to Social Psychology 1
Assignment #4: Article Analysis (11%)
Argument Construction For this writing assignment, students will engage with scholarly research in the field of social psychology by writing a focused summary of a peer-reviewed article followed by an analysis of a specific aspect of the research presented. The Critical Analysis will allow students to deeply engage with a research article’s core arguments and critically evaluate the research by analyzing their strengths, limitations, and validity of their findings. Moreover, students will practice constructing clear and logical arguments in their writing with the support of relevant course concepts and other academic sources, engaging more deeply with the reasoning and claims presented in social psychological research.
Learning Outcomes and Skill Development Through this assignment, students will:
• Develop critical thinking skills and analytical reasoning capacity
• Evaluate empirical research by applying knowledge to assess strengths, limitations, and validity of findings
• Strengthen academic writing and argument construction
Instructions Students will be randomly assigned a peer-reviewed research article in the area of social psychology and required to write a short summary of the article, followed by a critical analysis of the key concepts, research practices, and/or findings presented. Students should analyze a specific aspect of the article (e.g., theoretical framework, methodology, implications, etc.) using relevant arguments supported by scholarly research to support their claims, demonstrating analytical thinking and reasoning. The submission should include and clearly articulate the following:
• a title page
• a summary of the assigned article
• a critical analysis of an aspect (or aspects) of the article
o including at least two (2) peer-reviewed empirical research articles1
• a complete reference list 1 Empirical studies are reports of original research that typically include sections that reflect the research process: introduction, method, results, discussion (APA 7th edition). For more info, refer to U of T Libraries’ guide on finding resources: https://guides.library.utoronto.ca/c.php?g=250740&p=5255821
Assignment #1
§ apply thinking
§ personalize concepts
§ link theory to practice
Connecting Describing
Assignment #2
§ identify & extract
relevant info
§ summarize facts
§ explain claims
Explaining
Assignment #3
§ convey understanding
§ deconstruct complex ideas
§ translate for audience
Analyzing
Assignment #4
§ gather evidence
§ evaluate arguments
§ consider perspectives
(Yim, 2025)
Writing
© Odilia Yim 2025 PSY220 – Introduction to Social Psychology 2
The submission should be approximately 2.5 pages in length (double-spaced; max. 3.0 pages; 650-700 words) and follow APA style. Students are responsible for submitting a Word and/or PDF copy on Quercus by Friday, November 28th at 5:00pm.
For the critically analyzing, use the following questions as points to consider:
• What are the strengths and/or limitations in the research design?
• Are the research findings/conclusions supported with appropriate logic?
• Is there sufficient evidence provided to support the arguments, claims, and/or conclusions?
• What are the implications of the authors’ arguments for the area of social psychology?
• In what ways does the research represent the application of effective and/or ineffective social psychological research methods?
• How might the research support psychology professionals (e.g., researchers, clinicians, etc.) across different contexts?
• How do the ideas and/or conclusions in the article extend to different disciplines outside of the social psychology field?
Remember:
• Use specific examples/references to support and strengthen your arguments
• Examples and refences from class can be included, but stronger support comes from peer-reviewed academic sources
• Writing: structure, organization, and flow
• APA style (7th edition)
© Odilia Yim 2025 PSY220 – Introduction to Social Psychology 3
Rubric
Very Good Good Satisfactory Poor
Content (7) Conceptual Understanding/ Critical Analysis
Summary (3) - provides clear, accurate, and concise summary of article’s main thesis, key concepts, and central argument(s) - clearly identifies focal study, discusses methods (e.g., sample, design, analysis) in appropriate detail; briefly highlights key contributions of additional studies - accurately summarizes core results and basic implications without overclaiming findings
- provides mostly clear and accurate summary of article’s main thesis, key concepts, and central argument(s); minor gaps or redundancy - identifies focal study and describes methods with generally appropriate detail; one or two elements (e.g., sample, design, or analysis) may be briefly or somewhat vaguely described; additional studies described vaguely or excessively - summarizes core results and basic implications with small inaccuracies/ oversimplification
- provides partial or uneven summary; some main ideas are missing, unclear - mentions focal study but gives limited or incomplete methods; key details (sample, design, analysis) vague/omitted; additional studies incorrectly referenced - describes some results, but coverage is superficial; some misunderstanding of implications
- does not clearly identify article’s main thesis, key concepts, or central argument; summary inaccurate - fails to clearly identify focal study; methods not described or misrepresented; additional studies are omitted - core results and implications missing or largely incorrect
Analysis (4) - 1-2 clear, focused aspect of article selected (e.g., theory, method, validity, implications); in-depth engagement rather than re-summarizing article - 1-2 strong arguments included (e.g., strengths, limitations, validity, implications); specific, well-chosen examples from article - at least 2 peer-reviewed empirical articles used in a way that accurately and critically supports analysis
- generally clear aspect of article selected; some depth, though parts drift into summary - at least 1 reasonably strong argument made, with relevant examples; reasoning or specificity could be tighter - at least 2 peer-reviewed articles used; link may be less clear or appropriate
- aspect of article is broad or vague; substantial re-summary, limited focused analysis - arguments partially developed, rely on general statements, lack clear, specific examples from article. - peer-reviewed articles present; may be non-empirical, weakly connected, or inappropriate for critique
- no clear analytical focus; section functions mainly as another summary or very vague analysis. - arguments unclear, unsupported, or not directly tied to article - peer-reviewed articles missing, misused, or not meaningfully connected to the analysis
© Odilia Yim 2025 PSY220 – Introduction to Social Psychology 4
Very Good Good Satisfactory Poor
Writing (4) Organization/ Format/Written Communication
- ideas communicated clearly, coherently; strong logical flow and smooth transitions - structure is well organized, making arguments easy to follow - no grammar, spelling, or punctuation errors - no APA errors
- writing generally clear, with only minor lapses in coherence or flow - structure is logical but transitions may occasionally be uneven - minor grammar, spelling, or punctuation errors that do not affect readability - minor to no APA errors
- writing conveys meaning but is sometimes unclear, awkward, or repetitive - organization and ideas are disconnected or poorly sequenced - major grammar, spelling, or punctuation errors that do affect readability - major APA errors
- writing unclear, confusing, or disorganized; meaning hard to follow - no clear structure nor logical flow of ideas - major formatting errors - APA style not followed - assignment instructions have not been followed

学霸联盟