Description
I need help in writing discussion and limitation paragraph (what could be wrong everything that could be wrong in study) below are tips what need to be included in that discussion section.
I need like 4 pages for that section. I will download introduction, methods and results section below becasue based on that discussion need to be write from.
Discussion
The Discussion is the fourth and final section of the paper (centered and bold). This is the part where you interpret and explain your results. Try to explain why you found what you did in your study. Is it what you predicted? If not, why? You may have to think about your results in a theoretically meaningful way. Also, how do your findings fit in with previous theory and literature? You may want to cite them here again in the paper. Are your results consistent or inconsistent with what has been found in the past? If they are inconsistent, how can you explain this? The explanation and interpretation of results will probably be the biggest part of the Discussion.
There are at least two additional parts of the discussion. First, include limitations of the study. Describe the ways in which the internal and external validity of the study may have been compromised. Was the sample biased? Were the measures problematic? Think about what you would do different next time if you conducted a similar study. Future research ideas are often discussed when limitations are discussed. Second, describe the implications of your findings to theory and practice. Answer the question, “How does my study add to psychological theory?” Also, think about practical applications of your findings. Perhaps give some additional directions for future research. When you’ve done that, you have written a paper in APA style! Do you best to keep this section around 1 ½ pages long (do not keep under one page!). Following this is the References section that requires a page break!
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Purchase answer to see full attachment
Explanation & Answer
Attached.
Running head: BINAURAL BEATS
1
Binaural Beats Stimuli Increases Cognitive Function
Student’s name:
Course title & number:
Professor:
Date:
BINAURAL BEATS
2
Binaural Beats Stimuli Increases Cognitive Function
Discussion
The study was not able to establish the effects of the binaural beats of creativity, mindfulness,
depression and the level of anxiety. This is because the researcher did not have the tools and
measures to objectively evaluate the effects of binaural beats on these variables. Therefore, the
findings discussed here are based on the cognitive abilities (attention, reading, thinking,
memory).
The results, it was found that there was no significant difference between the pre-test and
post-test as measure using the t-test. This shows that the cognitive abilities in pre-test did not
change significantly after the binaural beats were administered to the participants and a post-test
done. To check for the improvement, the differences between the pre-test and post-test
improvement scores were subjected to one-way ANOVA. The finding from the analysis showed
that there was no significant improvement. Thus, the study showed that binaural beats do not
improve cognitive abilities.
According to the results, the effects of binaural beats on the cognitive abilities are the
same regardless of the type of beats used on the participant. This can be deduced from the
finding that there was no difference in performance across all the four conditions (alpha, beta,
gamma, and control) after the one-way ANOVA was conducted.
The independent-samples t-test showed no gender difference on the improvement scores.
This means that the effects of the binaural beats on cognitive abilities are not gender dependent.
Thus, males and females would be expected to have similar improvement in cognitive abilities
when subjected to the binaural beats.
BINAURAL BEATS
3
Thus, the researcher found that binaural beats did not improve the cognitive abilities of
the participants. However, this finding may not apply to anxiety, creativity, mindfulness, and
depression which had been shown to improve in previous studies but were not considered in this
study.
Theoretically, binaural beats are expected to stimulate certain neural patterns in specific
areas of the brain that perceive auditory stimuli. On this background, the investigator had
expected that the binaural beats would improve cognitive abilities in the nine participants in this
study. This is because the previous studies on the same had shown improvement of cognitive
abilities when binaural beats were administered. For instance, as cited in the literature review,
previous studies had shown binaural beats increased attention in children, teens and adults with
ADHD (Chaieb et al., 2015). Also, binaural beats had been shown to improve memory and
concentration on subjects in previous studies (Kennel et al., 2010). Thus, the researcher had
expected to have similar results in this study. However, the findings showed that binaural beats
did not improve cognitive function and improvement scores subjected to t-tests showed no
significant improvement in the cognitive abilities. This finding could be due to environmental
factors that affect the participants’ perception of binaural beats and other internal validity and
external validity issues that affected the study. Also, it could be because the binaural beats do not
actually improve cognitive abilities and the study findings are accurate.
The researcher had expected significant differences in improvement of scores across the
four frequencies of binaural beats (alpha, beta, gamma, and control). Previous studies had shown
that beta waves increased vigilance and attention while alpha waves binaural beats had been
shown to increase divergent thinking. The results however showed no significant differences
when different waves (alpha, beta, and gamma) of binaural beats were used. This finding may be
BINAURAL BEATS
4
because the study focused on cognitive abilities while the findings in previous studies had used
other variables (divergent thinking, memory, and mood) to establish the differences in
improvement scores as determined by the type of waves used in the binaural beats (Chaieb et al.,
2015; Fink et al., 2006, 2009). Again, the difference in improvement scores due to the beta,
gamma and alpha waves was not objectively evaluated in this study and could have let to the
above finding when the scores were subjected to one-way ANOVA.
According to Chaieb et al. (2015), the menstrual cycle affects auditory perception in
females. Thus, the investigator expected the study findings to show gender difference in the
improvement scores. However, the gender difference in improvement scores was not apparent in
this study. This could be due to the fact that the sample used was inadequate to show statistically
significant difference in improvement scores between males and females.
There were some limitations that affected the study. The recruitment of the participants
was difficult and affected the study. For instance, the study had only nine participants aged
between 18-64 years who were students recruited from Northeastern Illinois University.
However, the investigator had expected to have a sample size of at least 38 participants in the
study. Thus, the sample size was inadequate to meet the study objective and to confidently
generalize the findings to the population from which the study sample was drawn. In addition,
selecting participants from the same context was a threat to the internal validity of this study. In
...