Skills

Psychological Research Design

10 weeks · 0 milestones

Produce a complete real research proposal: a specific research question, your study design and its rationale (why this design over alternatives), participant sampling justification, an ethics consideration checklist documenting participant risk assessment and consent procedure for any human participants, and a proposed analysis plan. This is a research-track outcome — not a clinical assessment. Proof is the research proposal plus a documented methodology challenge from a psychology academic or researcher who questions at least one design choice and the threats to validity it creates — your written response is a required part of the proof.

Part of: Social Sciences, Law & Humanities · Proves for: UG

Milestone map

3 milestones

Develop a research question and design a quantitative or mixed-methods study

4 weeks

Develop a specific psychology research question — not a broad topic but a testable hypothesis or research question. Design a study to answer it: specify the design (experimental, quasi-experimental, correlational, cross-sectional, longitudinal), the sampling strategy, the measures or instruments to be used (existing validated measures only — not bespoke), the procedure, and the planned analysis. Pre-register the design on the Open Science Framework (OSF) before any data collection begins. Pre-registration is required — not optional.

Proof required

Research design document (600+ words) with OSF pre-registration link, covering: research question with theoretical rationale, study design, sampling strategy, validated measures with citations, procedure, planned analysis, and ethical considerations — all documented before data collection.

What gets checked

Research question is specific and testable — not a broad topic
OSF pre-registration link is present and timestamped before any data collection
Validated measures are cited — not bespoke measures developed for this study

Common mistakes

Designing the study after data collection and treating the pre-registration as documentation — pre-registration must occur before data collection
Using self-developed bespoke measures without validation — psychology research uses validated instruments for replicability
Ethical considerations section that does not address the specific ethical issues in this study's design

Powstik Guide

A 600-word pre-registered research design.

Steps

Ground the question in theory.
State hypotheses.
Justify sample size with a power analysis.
Pre-register before collecting data.

Template

Question and theory:
Hypotheses:
Power analysis:
OSF link:

What gets sent back

Under 600 words.
Sources uncited.
Hypothetical instead of real.

Resources

Foundationstart here

Depthgo deeper

Masteryfor the dedicated

What a verifier looks for

Confirm the OSF pre-registration link is present and access it — verify it is timestamped before data collection
Check validated measures — confirm each is cited to the original validation study
Review ethical considerations — confirm they address the specific issues in this study's design

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Collect data from real participants and document the procedure

5 weeks

Collect data from real participants following the pre-registered procedure. All participants must provide informed consent. Document the data collection: number of participants (with any deviations from pre-registered target and reasoning), any protocol deviations from the pre-registered procedure with reasoning, and a data quality check. Data and materials must be deposited on OSF or a public repository after collection for reproducibility. The CLINICAL CONTENT SAFETY RULE applies: do NOT collect data on clinical populations without appropriate ethical approval and supervised clinical oversight.

Proof required

Data collection document (400+ words) covering: consent procedure used, actual sample with any deviations from pre-registered target, any protocol deviations with reasoning, data quality check results, and OSF or repository link for deposited data and materials.

What gets checked

Consent procedure is documented — not assumed
Any deviations from the pre-registered protocol are documented with reasoning — not silently incorporated
Data and materials are deposited in a public repository with an accessible link

Common mistakes

Not documenting protocol deviations — any deviation from the pre-registered procedure must be recorded
Collecting data on clinical populations without ethical approval and supervised oversight — this violates the CLINICAL CONTENT SAFETY RULE
Not depositing data and materials — reproducibility requires public access to data and materials

Powstik Guide

Data from real consenting participants, deposited openly.

Steps

Get ethics approval if your setting requires it.
Use your consent form with every participant.
Follow the pre-registered procedure step by step.
Log every deviation the day it happens.
Run quality checks, then deposit data and materials.

Template

Consent procedure used:
Target sample:      Actual sample:
| Date | Deviation from plan | Reason |
|------|---------------------|--------|
Quality checks and results:
Repository link:

What gets sent back

Deviations not recorded.
Clinical populations without approval and supervision.
No deposited data or materials.

Resources

Foundationstart here

Depthgo deeper

Masteryfor the dedicated

What a verifier looks for

Confirm consent procedure is documented
Check for protocol deviations — confirm any are documented with reasoning
Access the repository link — confirm data and materials are deposited

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Defend research design and data collection under psychologist or researcher challenge

1 week

Present the pre-registered research design and data collection to a registered psychologist, psychology academic, or quantitative methods researcher for a structured Q&A. The reviewer must challenge design choices and data collection — 'your sampling strategy — how does selection bias affect generalizability?', 'your pre-registered analysis — you deviated here — how does that affect your conclusions?'. Peer-only verification is never sufficient for this outcome. This Q&A satisfies the ADVERSARIAL VERIFICATION RULE.

Proof required

Q&A notes (250+ words) documenting the reviewer's credentials (registered psychologist, psychology academic, or quantitative methods researcher), at least three specific challenges to design or data collection with responses, and any analysis updates committed to.

What gets checked

Reviewer is a registered psychologist, psychology academic, or quantitative methods researcher — peer verification is not acceptable
At least three specific design or data challenges are documented
At least one analysis update is committed to based on the session

Common mistakes

Using a peer verifier instead of a registered psychologist or psychology researcher
Not being able to explain deviations from the pre-registered protocol under challenge
No analysis updates after a genuine design or data quality challenge

Powstik Guide

Your design and data, challenged by a psychology researcher.

Steps

Prepare a reason for each deviation from the plan.
List confounds you could not rule out.
Book a registered psychologist or psychology academic.
Ask for three challenges to design and data.

Template

Challenge session log
Date:            Duration:
Reviewer name:
Reviewer role and credentials:

Challenge 1 (a design choice or deviation):
  What they asked:
  My answer:
  Did it hold?
Challenge 2:
  What they asked:
  My answer:
  Did it hold?
Challenge 3:
  What they asked:
  My answer:
  Did it hold?

Update I am committing to:

What gets sent back

A peer instead of a qualified reviewer.
Deviations you can't explain.
No update after the session.

Resources

Foundationstart here

Depthgo deeper

What a verifier looks for

Confirm reviewer is a registered psychologist, psychology academic, or quantitative methods researcher
Review Q&A notes — confirm at least three specific design or data challenges are documented
Check that at least one analysis update is committed to

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Part of

Prove Your Psychology Chops →

Related outcomes

Milestone map

3 milestones

Develop a research question and design a quantitative or mixed-methods study

4 weeks

Proof required

What gets checked

Research question is specific and testable — not a broad topic
OSF pre-registration link is present and timestamped before any data collection
Validated measures are cited — not bespoke measures developed for this study

Common mistakes

Designing the study after data collection and treating the pre-registration as documentation — pre-registration must occur before data collection
Using self-developed bespoke measures without validation — psychology research uses validated instruments for replicability
Ethical considerations section that does not address the specific ethical issues in this study's design

Powstik Guide

A 600-word pre-registered research design.

Steps

Ground the question in theory.
State hypotheses.
Justify sample size with a power analysis.
Pre-register before collecting data.

Template

Question and theory:
Hypotheses:
Power analysis:
OSF link:

What gets sent back

Under 600 words.
Sources uncited.
Hypothetical instead of real.

Resources

Foundationstart here

Depthgo deeper

Masteryfor the dedicated

What a verifier looks for

Confirm the OSF pre-registration link is present and access it — verify it is timestamped before data collection
Check validated measures — confirm each is cited to the original validation study
Review ethical considerations — confirm they address the specific issues in this study's design

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Collect data from real participants and document the procedure

5 weeks

Proof required

What gets checked

Consent procedure is documented — not assumed
Any deviations from the pre-registered protocol are documented with reasoning — not silently incorporated
Data and materials are deposited in a public repository with an accessible link

Common mistakes

Not documenting protocol deviations — any deviation from the pre-registered procedure must be recorded
Collecting data on clinical populations without ethical approval and supervised oversight — this violates the CLINICAL CONTENT SAFETY RULE
Not depositing data and materials — reproducibility requires public access to data and materials

Powstik Guide

Data from real consenting participants, deposited openly.

Steps

Get ethics approval if your setting requires it.
Use your consent form with every participant.
Follow the pre-registered procedure step by step.
Log every deviation the day it happens.
Run quality checks, then deposit data and materials.

Template

Consent procedure used:
Target sample:      Actual sample:
| Date | Deviation from plan | Reason |
|------|---------------------|--------|
Quality checks and results:
Repository link:

What gets sent back

Deviations not recorded.
Clinical populations without approval and supervision.
No deposited data or materials.

Resources

Foundationstart here

Depthgo deeper

Masteryfor the dedicated

What a verifier looks for

Confirm consent procedure is documented
Check for protocol deviations — confirm any are documented with reasoning
Access the repository link — confirm data and materials are deposited

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.

Defend research design and data collection under psychologist or researcher challenge

1 week

Proof required

What gets checked

Reviewer is a registered psychologist, psychology academic, or quantitative methods researcher — peer verification is not acceptable
At least three specific design or data challenges are documented
At least one analysis update is committed to based on the session

Common mistakes

Using a peer verifier instead of a registered psychologist or psychology researcher
Not being able to explain deviations from the pre-registered protocol under challenge
No analysis updates after a genuine design or data quality challenge

Powstik Guide

Your design and data, challenged by a psychology researcher.

Steps

Prepare a reason for each deviation from the plan.
List confounds you could not rule out.
Book a registered psychologist or psychology academic.
Ask for three challenges to design and data.

Template

Challenge session log
Date:            Duration:
Reviewer name:
Reviewer role and credentials:

Challenge 1 (a design choice or deviation):
  What they asked:
  My answer:
  Did it hold?
Challenge 2:
  What they asked:
  My answer:
  Did it hold?
Challenge 3:
  What they asked:
  My answer:
  Did it hold?

Update I am committing to:

What gets sent back

A peer instead of a qualified reviewer.
Deviations you can't explain.
No update after the session.

Resources

Foundationstart here

Depthgo deeper

What a verifier looks for

Confirm reviewer is a registered psychologist, psychology academic, or quantitative methods researcher
Review Q&A notes — confirm at least three specific design or data challenges are documented
Check that at least one analysis update is committed to

You'll sign in first, then come straight back here.