The Introductory paper:The skeletal structure of the CAPPUN paper.

Outline of the contents of the paper:

  Cover page:   Abstract:

  Introduction:   Literature Review:

  Hypotheses:   Research Methods and Procedures:

Results:   Discussion:   Conclusion:

  Reference page

[NEW PAGE]TITLE PAGE

(This is the first page and is not paginated)

Title of the paper

your name my name

course date

]

 [NEW PAGE]

 Abstract

 The abstract should be approximately seven sentences, with one sentence devoted to each of the following:         your research question,         what the literature shows,         the hypotheses being tested,         the statistical methods used,         the results of the analysis,         key ideas from your discussion, and         suggestions for future research.     [This page is single spaced and is not paginated.]   

[NEW PAGE]  

Introduction Research question(s)- general and specific Brief reader education, alluding to the highlights of

the literature review with citations. Strong paragraph about the importance of the topic Preview of the organization of the paper    

 [This page is paginated-begin page 1. This and all further pages are double spaced.]

   

 

 [NEW PAGE](average=5 pages)

 Literature Review

Introduction

A review of the relevant literature suggests four main themes relevant to public support for the death penalty (DPS): 1) The effect of public opinion on

death penalty law and policy; 2) trends over time in support for the death penalty; 3) socio-demographic correlates of death penalty support, with gender and political

orientation emerging as particularly strong predictors of DPS; and 4) theoretical explanations for variations in death penalty support, with models that offer

explanations for gender and political orientation variations in DPS particularly salient.

The effect of public opinion on death penalty law and policy [Insert 2 paragraphs]

Trends over time in support for the death penalty  [Insert 1 paragraph]

Socio-demographic correlates of death penalty support  [Insert 2 paragraphs]

Explanations DPS variations by gender and political orientation  [Insert 3 paragraphs]

Summary [Insert 1 paragraph]

[NEW PAGE]  (average: 2-3 pages)

Research Question & Hypotheses Introduction:

A review of relevant literature indicates that support for capital punishment varies by numerous sociodemographic characteristics. Among these

characteristics, gender and political identification emerge as variables that have been found to be consistently associated with differences in support for

the death penalty. More specifically, the literature indicates that men and political conservatives are more likely to support the death penalty than women

and liberals (Jones 2000; Stack 2000; Ellsworth and Gross 1994). Research question:   [INSERT]

In keeping with prior research findings, does death penalty support vary by gender and political orientation in the 1996 GSS sample?Hypotheses:   Hypothesis # 1:

Null hypothesis #1: Rationale:

Hypothesis # 2: Null hypothesis #2:

Rationale: Hypothesis #3: Null hypothesis #3: Rationale:

Summary:

[NEW PAGE](average: 3 pages)

Research Methods and Procedures[PUT THE FOLLOWING IN PARAGRAPH FORM AND DOUBLE SPACE]

 Introduction : INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:Link to the previous section. Ex: In this section of the paper, the method and data used to test the previously presented hypotheses are explained, the sample described, and the data analysis procedures outlined. Research design: INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:Type of research: Secondary AnalysisData Set: 1996 General Social SurveyData Source information: Include who conducts the survey, what it is about, the use of and implications of a random, representative sample, and how the GSS is administered. Make sure to specify that you are using a subset of the GSS.Sample characteristics: INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:Lead in with a paragraph describing the number of respondents included in the GSS subset and describe the sample in terms of the basic socio-demographic characteristics. While this information should be composed into a paragraph, it should also be presented in tabular form below that paragraph.Socio-demographic characteristics to include: Sex, race, age, education, income. You may include others if you wish. Although political orientation and DPS are not necessarily socio-demographic characteristics, you may include these here as well since they relate to the hypotheses. For tabular presentation, refer to DSF to include all necessary information.Sample table: (PARTIAL)

Statistical procedures and recoding: INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING:To be included: In paragraph form, describe the procedures used to test the three hypotheses. You can assume that the reader is familiar with SPSS data analysis. Therefore, tell the reader what he/she needs to know to replicate your work.         Crosstabulation used to determine association.         Pearson Chi square used to determine statistical significance. (p.05 limit).         Cramer’s V. used to determine strength of significance.         Recoding of political orientation into a dichotomous variable.Summary

Table 1: 1996 GSS sub-sample characteristicsSocio-demographic characteristic, with GSS variable in parentheses

valid percent/summary statistic in 1996 GSS

Sex (SEX) 44.1% male; 55.9% femaleRace (RACE) 85.6& white; 14.4% blackAge (AGE)

Source: 1996 GSS Tab subset

 [NEW PAGE] (average: 4 pages)

Results

[Introduction- INSERT PARAGRAPHHypothesis # 1

Restate hypothesis #1.Direct your reader to the tabular presentation. 

While a majority (76.6%) of respondents in the 1996 GSS sample support capital punishment (DPS), there is a moderately strong (V= .129), statistically significant difference (p.<.000) in DPS by sex, with 82.6% of men favoring capital punishment, in contrast to 71.6% of women. (DOUBLE SPACE IN PAPER)The dta lend support for hypothesis #1. [THIS IS THE SAMPLE PARAGRAPH ON THE COVER OF THE SPSS UNIT 1 PACKET]

Hypothesis # 2Restate hypothesis #2.Direct your reader to the tabular presentation. (This will be table #3)Describe the results using the paragraph format above.End with a statement of whether or not the data lends support for the hypothesis.NEVER SAY DATA PROVE OR DISPROVE THE HYPOTHESIS

Hypothesis # 3 [NOTE CHANGE OF FORMAT]Restate hypothesis #3. Tell your reader that the results are presented in a three table layout: tables 4a, 4b, and 4cTable 4a: Sex/Cappun (=Table 2) with paragraph below table. Do not include hypothesis support statement.Table 4b: Sex/Cappun for Conservatives ( =the 1st attribute of the CV POLVIEW2 ) with paragraph below table. Do not include hypothesis support statement.Table 4b: Sex/Cappun for Non- Conservatives ( =the 2nd attribute of the CV) with paragraph below table. Now include hypothesis support statement.

Summary: Summary statement of results

Table 2: Crosstabulation of support for capital punishment by sex ,with column percentages reported.

  Respondent’s Sex  male female total

Capital Punishment

favor 82.6% 71.6% 76.6%oppose 17.4% 28.4% 23.4%

  total 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% Pearson X2:p.<.000; Cramer’s V=.129

Source: 1996 GSS Tab subset

NEW PAGE](Average: 4 pages)

 Discussion

(SEE online paper skeleton for details) 

[Introduction: Preview content, connect with previous section. Gender differences in DPS (Hypothesis # 1) 

Current findings relative to prior research For each hypothesis, reiterate, and expand if possible, the literature based rationale, inserting specific quantitative findings. Compare your results with those found in prior research.

 Theoretical explanations relevant to the findings

At this point, we want to consider each of Stack’s categories of theoretical explanations as a possibility and note what is suggested for future research.

DPS variations by political orientation (Hypothesis #2)

Current findings relative to prior research

Theoretical explanations relevant to the findings Gender differences in DPS among conservatives and non-conservatives (Hypothesis #3)

Current findings relative to prior research

Theoretical explanations relevant to the findings Summary: Summarize content; preview next section. 

  [NEW PAGE](Average: 2-3 pages)

  

Conclusion 

[FILL IN CONTENT AS PER CLASS DISCUSSION.] 

 Introduction Review of the research  Strengths of the research Weaknesses of the research Suggestion for future  Summary   

  [NEW PAGE]  

References

APA OR ASA STYLETHREE ARTICLES ONE CITATION FOR GSS INFORMATION IN THE METHODS SECTION