Have the paper started just need the spots filled in. We need Literature Review,

For This or a Similar Paper Click Here To Order Now

Have the paper started just need the spots filled in. We need Literature Review, Method, Participants, Discussion, and limitations. Attached is files from the study and what we have done on the paper so far.
<
<
The aim of this assignment is to prepare you for your final research report. Below you will see some background on the proposed study you will be analyzing and writing up as a research report. For this assignment, I have designed the study for you, provided you with the data you need to analyze, and proposed your data analysis that you will conduct. You will be working in your previously created groups.
<
<
Study Background
<
Eyewitness testimony research has informed the federal government’s guidelines for competent use of eyewitness evidence in criminal matters (Wells, Malpass, Lindsay, Fisher, Turtle, & Fulero, 2000). Such research has led the New Jersey Supreme Court to mandate that judges tell jurors that eyewitness memory can be unreliable (Weiser, 2012). An important question is how juries actually respond to evidence and to cautions about the strength of the evidence.
<
<
Not surprisingly, the question is complex because of the wide variety of factors that can affect juries (Devine, Krouse, Cavanaugh, & Basora, 2016; Wells & Olson, 2003). However, psychological scientists have identified some strategies that might help jurors reach optimal decisions (Rodriguez & Berry, 2016).
<
<
The Proposed Study
<
The computer randomly assigns each participant to one of three different scenarios, in which the participant learns details of a crime. In the first scenario, the defendant provides testimony and argues he is not guilty. The second scenario is similar but also includes a statement that a witness saw the defendant commit the crime. In the third and final scenario, an attorney indicates that the witness was not wearing his glasses, thus his testimony may have been false. Loftus (1979) found that participants, acting in the role of juror would be more likely to convict someone on the basis of eyewitness testimony, even if that testimony were questioned.
<
<
Proposed Design
<
Participants are in one of three treatment conditions (a) no eyewitness, (b) unrefuted eyewitness, and (c) discredited eyewitness. Participants in this study rate their belief about the defendant’s guilt. The rating scale ranges from a 1 (definitely not guilty) to a 7 (definitely guilty).
<
<

<
<
Data Analysis
<
The analysis that will conducted with this study is a one-way ANOVA that explores whether there is a difference between the treatment conditions. Post-hoc analyses can illustrate which means differ ( if needed). SPSS must be used to analyze the data. Please use this data Download dataset. Please see below for a video demonstrating how to run an ANOVA using SPSS.
<

<

For This or a Similar Paper Click Here To Order Now