1 / 41

Resources

Resources. Practice. Funding. Publication. Invitation. Scientists are writers. IMRAD Report. Introduction Methods Results Discussion. Why do women swear? An exploration of reasons for and perceived efficacy of swearing in Dutch female students. Eric Rassin and Peter Muris

galvin
Download Presentation

Resources

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Resources Practice Funding Publication Invitation

  2. Scientists are writers.

  3. IMRAD Report • Introduction • Methods • Results • Discussion

  4. Why do women swear? An exploration of reasons for and perceived efficacy of swearing in Dutch female students Eric Rassin and Peter Muris Erasmus University, Rotterdam, The Netherlands Personality and Individual Differences, Volume 38, Issue 7, Pages 1669-1674

  5. IMRAD Report • Introduction: Our question is significant. • Methods: Our method is appropriate. • Results: Our findings are valid. • Discussion: Our conclusions are important.

  6. Introduction • State significance of the phenomenon • Summarize research to date • Point out gap in research • Describe new proposed research

  7. Introduction: Stating the significance of the phenomenon The use of bad language is a major societal issue. On the one hand, swearwords abound in daily life. As a recent example, rapper Curtis Jackson, who calls himself “50 cents” [sic] scored a hit with a pop song in which he says “I am a motherfucking pimp”. This single did very well internationally in the pop charts. (p. 1670)

  8. Introduction: Summarizing research to date Rainey and Schweickert (1991), and Rainey, Schweickert, Granito, and Pullella (1990) asked baseball players about their attitude towards umpires who make bad calls. They found that some players admitted to acting in a verbally aggressive manner regularly. (p. 1670)

  9. Introduction: Pointing out the gap in research In general, little is known about why people swear (see Jay, 1992, for a study of swearing in America). More importantly, the perceived and actual efficacy of swearing is unknown. (p. 1670)

  10. Introduction: Describing the new proposed research The purpose of the present study was to explore the use of swearwords in a Dutch female student sample. We hypothesised that swearing would be correlated with general aggression, …and we hypothesised that swearing is negatively correlated with general life satisfaction. (p. 1670)

  11. Method • Justify choice in materials and methods • Provide enough detail for replication

  12. Method: Justifying choice in materials and methods Seventy-two female undergraduate psychology students completed several questionnaires in return for course credits or a small financial compensation. (p. 1671)

  13. Method: Providing enough detail First, participants completed a questionnaire constructed for this study. The first item addressed the participant’s frequency of swearing. Answer options were: “Less than once per year”, …etc. The second item instructed the participant to report her five (maximum) favourite, most often used swearwords. (p. 1671)

  14. Results • Summarize, reduce, and compare data • Generalize from data

  15. Results Table 1: Questionnaire descriptives, and correlations with swearword frequency Reasons to swear: Habit 2.52 (1.31) 0.59** Strengthening of argument 2.35 (1.31) 0.35** Expressing positive emotions 1.66 (0.91) 0.34** Expressing negative emotions 4.20 (0.80) 0.43** Shocking/insulting 1.80 (1.03) 0.27**

  16. Results: Summarizing, reducing, and comparing the data After this transformation, the mean frequency of swearing turned out to be 3.19 per day (SD = 7.30; range: 0–50). (p. 1671)

  17. Results: Generalizing from the data As to the most frequently uttered swearwords, “shit” was most popular (58 mentions), closely followed by “kut” (“cunt”, 54), “Godverdomme” (“Goddamnit”, 51), “klote” (“bollocks”, 30), “fuck” (25), “Jezus” (“Jesus”, 21), “tering” (“tuberculosis”, 15), “kanker” (“cancer”, 8), “lul” (“prick”, 5), “tyfus” (“typhus”, 4), and “bitch” (4). (p. 1671)

  18. Discussion • State significance of results • Compare results with previous studies • Acknowledge limitations of study • Make recommendations for future research social policy, or practical application

  19. Discussion: Stating the significance of the results First, our sample of female respondents reported that they swore quite regularly (i.e., on average three times per day). Second, the strongest reason to swear was the need to express negative emotions. Third and surprisingly, …people swear even though they realise that swearing will not bring them much closer to their goal. (p. 1673)

  20. Discussion: Comparing the results with previous studies These associations are plausible because previous research has yielded significant correlations between verbal aggression, physical aggression, anger, and hostility (p. 1673)

  21. Discussion: Acknowledging the limitations of study Contrary to our expectation, lack of life satisfaction did not correlate with swearing. We had hypothesised that lack of satisfaction may function as a determinant of swearing. However, such a relation was not borne out by the present data. (p. 1673)

  22. Discussion: Making recommendations for future research Future studies are needed to explore possible sex differences in the use of swearwords and to test the effects of swearing experimentally. (p. 1673)

  23. http://www.bondtegenvloeken.nl/index.php?paginaID=89

  24. Author Recorder Editor

  25. Author Recorder Editor Reviewers

  26. Author Recorder Editor Reviewers Editor No Yes, but… ? Yes

  27. Author Recorder Editor Reviewers Editor No Yes, but… ? Yes

  28. Author Recorder Editor Reviewers Editor No Yes, but… ? Yes

  29. Author Recorder Editor Reviewers Editor No Yes, but… ? Yes Printer Author Copy Editor

  30. Author Recorder Editor Reviewers Editor No Yes, but… ? Yes Printer Author Copy Editor Editor Author Copy Editor Author

  31. Author Recorder Editor Reviewers Editor No Yes, but… ? Printer Author Copy Editor Yes Editor Author Copy Editor Author Distribution Printer Copy Editor

  32. Author Recorder Editor Reviewers Editor No Yes, but… ? Yes Printer Author Copy Editor Editor Author Copy Editor Author Correspondence Distribution Printer Copy Editor

  33. (Letter to the Editor) "Folic acid as ultimate in disease prevention."  British Medical Journal.  328.7442  EDITOR--Lucock considered the likely effects of mass use of folate but did not mention the potential benefits to mental health. (1)Associations between folate status and mood have been known for some time…

  34. George A. Ricaurte, “Severe Dopaminergic Neurotoxicity in Primates After a Common Recreational Dose Regimen of MDMA (‘Ecstasy’)” Science, September 2002: Vol. 297. no. 5590, pp. 2260 - 2263

  35. “Retraction,” Science, September 2003: Vol. 301. no. 5639, p. 1479 “We write to retract our report "Severe dopaminergic neurotoxicity in primates after a common recreational dose regimen of MDMA ("ecstasy")", following our recent discovery that the drug used to treat all but one animal in that report came from a bottle that contained (+)-methamphetamine instead of the intended drug, (±)MDMA.”

More Related