Psychology Integrative Literature Review Project

December 7, 2022

Psychology Integrative Literature Review Project

Order Number	636738393092
Type of Project	ESSAY
Writer Level	PHD VERIFIED
Format	APA
Academic Sources	10
Page Count	3-12 PAGES

Instructions/Descriptions

Psychology Integrative Literature Review Project

[Order Now]

The primary goal of this literature review is to integrate concepts from four different content domains within the larger field of psychology. The four content domains should be chosen from previous coursework in this program. (attached)

In this paper, students will review the findings in the individual empirical articles, organize the research in a meaningful way, evaluate the reliability, validity, and generalizability of the research findings, and present an integrated synthesis of the research that sheds new light on the topics within and across the four domains.

The result of a successful integrative literature review may be a significant contribution to a particular body of knowledge and, consequently, to research and practice. Therefore, before writing this literature review, substantive new research must be conducted via the Internet and within the Ashford University Library for each of the four chosen domains.

A minimum of six sources must be included for each of the four domains. Although content from literature reviews completed in prior courses within this program may be included, it may not constitute the total research for the individual domains addressed within this assignment. No more than four sources from previous literature reviews completed in this program may be utilized for this integrative review.

The headings listed below must be used within the paper to delineate the sections of content. These sections include the following: a clear introduction that provides a general review and organizes the research in a meaningful way; a discussion in which the evidence is presented through analysis, critique, and synthesis; and a conclusion in which the discussion is drawn together in a meaningful way, the claims of the introduction are brought to a logical closure, and new research is proposed.

Introduction

Provide a conceptual framework for the review.

Describe how the review will be organized. The questions below may be used to guide this section.

What are the guiding theories within the domains?

How are the domains connected?

Are there competing points of view across the domains?

Why is the integration of these domains important?

What is the history of these domains?

What are the related theories or findings?

Describe how the literature was identified, analyzed, and synthesized.

How and why was the literature chosen?

What is your claim or thesis statement?

Discussion

Provide the analysis, critique, and synthesis for the review.

Analysis

Examine the main ideas and relationships presented in the literature across the four domains.

Integrate concepts from the four different content domains within the larger field of psychology.

What claim(s) can be made in the introduction?

What evidence supports the claim(s) made in the introduction?

Critique

Evaluate the reliability, validity, and generalizability of the chosen research findings.

How well does the literature represent the issues across the four domains?

Identify the strengths and the key contributions of the literature.

What, if any, deficiencies exist within the literature?

Have the authors omitted any key points and/or arguments?

What, if any, inaccuracies have been identified in the literature?

What evidence runs contrary to the claims proposed in the introduction, and how might these be reconciled with the claims presented?

Explain how the APA’s Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct might influence the reliability and/or generalizability of the chosen findings.

Did the ethical issues influence the outcomes of the research?

Were ethical considerations different across the domains?

Synthesis

Integrate existing ideas with new ideas to create new knowledge and new perspectives.

Describe the research that has previously been done across these domains, as well as any controversies or alternate opinions that currently exist.

Relate the evidence presented to the major conclusions being made.

Construct clear and concise arguments using evidence-based psychological concepts and theories to posit new relationships and perspectives on the topics within the domains.

Conclusion

Provide a conclusion and present potential future considerations.

State your final conclusion(s).

Synthesize the findings described in the discussion into a succinct summary.

What questions remain?

What are the possible implications of your argument for existing theories and for everyday life?

Are there novel theories and/or testable hypothesizes for future research?

What do the overarching implications of the studies show?

Where should the research go from this point to further the understanding of these domains and the greater study of psychology?

The Integrative Literature Review

Must be 20 to 30 double-spaced pages in length (not including title and references pages) and formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center. (Links to an external site.)

Must include a separate title page with the following:

Title of paper

Student’s name

Course name and number

Instructor’s name

Date submitted

[Order Now]

Must begin with an introductory paragraph that has a succinct thesis statement.

Must address the topic of the paper with critical thought.

Must end with a conclusion that reaffirms your thesis.

Must use at least 24 peer-reviewed sources, including a minimum of 20 from the Ashford University Library.

Must document all sources in APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

Must include a separate reference list that is formatted according to APA style as outlined in the Ashford Writing Center.

Psychology Integrative Literature Review Project

RUBRIC

Excellent Quality

95-100%

Introduction

45-41 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Literature Support

91-84 points

The context and relevance of the issue, as well as a clear description of the study aim, are presented. The history of searches is discussed.

Methodology

58-53 points

With titles for each slide as well as bulleted sections to group relevant information as required, the content is well-organized. Excellent use of typeface, color, images, effects, and so on to improve readability and presenting content. The minimum length criterion of 10 slides/pages is reached.

Average Score

50-85%

40-38 points

More depth/information is required for the context and importance, otherwise the study detail will be unclear. There is no search history information supplied.

83-76 points

There is a review of important theoretical literature, however there is limited integration of research into problem-related ideas. The review is just partly focused and arranged. There is research that both supports and opposes. A summary of the material given is provided. The conclusion may or may not include a biblical integration.

52-49 points

The content is somewhat ordered, but there is no discernible organization. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on may sometimes distract from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.

Poor Quality

0-45%

37-1 points

The context and/or importance are lacking. There is no search history information supplied.

75-1 points

There has been an examination of relevant theoretical literature, but still no research concerning problem-related concepts has been synthesized. The review is just somewhat focused and organized. The provided overview of content does not include any supporting or opposing research. The conclusion has no scriptural references.

48-1 points

There is no logical or apparent organizational structure. There is no discernible logical sequence. The use of typeface, color, graphics, effects, and so on often detracts from the presenting substance. It is possible that the length criteria will not be reached.