Integrative Discussion Paper Psychology

The goal of the paper is to demonstrate the factual understanding ofeach article as well as present an integrative discussion on both articles.
Summary of two articles (1 single-spaced page each)
For each article, summarize the methods, design, and results.
Integrative discussion(1 sing-spaced page)
Discuss how the findings of each article can be integrated/understood (what do these two papers suggest together?)
You can refer to other articles beyond the two that you summarized
For some ideas on what to discuss:
a. how are the articles similar, and what does this similarity suggest?
b. how are they different, what does this discrepancy suggest?
c. do you agree or disagree with the authors or presenters? why?
d. are there limitations of the articles? how would you fix this?
e. what are the implications of these findings to the current understanding of human memory?
f.what are the implications of these findings to everyday activities?
Reference page (not count toward page limit)
Two reference that needs to be used
Peich, M., Husain, M., & Bays, P. M. (2013). Age-Related Decline of Precision and Binding in Visual Working Memory. Psychology and Aging, 28(3), 729-743. 10.1037/a0033236
Brockmole, J. R., & Logie, R. H. (2013). Age-related change in visual working memory: a study of 55,753 participants aged 8-75. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, 12. 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00012

Things to be careful about on Summaries
Failing to adequately describe the research question and predictions that were made
Failing to adequately describe the task that were completed by participants
Failing to adequately describe how task performance was measured (dependent and independent variables)
Failing to adequately describe how task performance was interpreted to address the research questions
Things to be careful about on integrative discussion
:Must provide new and original insight that is not discussed by the authors
discussion only restates conclusions from each individual paper
discussion that fails to integrate or focus on superficial comparisons that are non-specific to the studies selected
“These findings should be replicated in older adults/ patients/ another demographic”
“These findings should be replicated with a larger sample size”
“One study looked at working memory and the other looked at long-term memory”
Discussion focuses overly on personal anecdotes and does not engage with the details of the research findings
“I agree with the author that taking tests is better for recall because(insert anecdote about school)
Discussion is underdeveloped by nature of an insufficient amount of writing
Discussion attempts to integrate the studies, but in doing so, inaccurately describes one or both of the findings in the selected papers to try and make the discussion make sense
Critiques of the study without proper justification or rationale
“Both papers did a good job”
I agree with the authors’ conclusion”
Over-reliance on cliches that are non-specific to the studies selected
“The brain is complex organ that is constantly processing information”

Last Completed Projects