| Course | PS300 Research Methods I |
|---|---|
| Unit | Unit 1 |
| Paper type | Discussion board post |
| Length | About 410 words, 2 pages double-spaced |
| Format | APA 7 discussion post |
| School | Purdue University Global |
| Program | BS in Psychology |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for PS300 Unit 1
Heads Down at the Crosswalk: A PS300 Unit 1 Discussion Post Proposing a Research Question
PS300 · Unit 1 Discussion Board Post
Posted by [Student Name]
The writer, the intersection and the classmates are composite; the sources cited are real.
Initial Post
My question comes from my commute. Every weekday I wait at the light at Division Street and Spokane Falls Boulevard, a crossing near the university campus, and I watch pedestrians step into the crosswalk while looking at their phones. Last month a young man walked into the street against the signal, eyes on his screen, and a delivery van stopped a few feet from him. He never looked up. Emergency department records suggest that injuries to pedestrians using phones rose through the late 2000s (Nasar & Troyer, 2013), so the question seems worth asking.
My question has two parts. First, how common is it for pedestrians to use a phone while crossing at a busy intersection? Second, do people using phones behave less carefully, for example by not looking both ways or crossing against the signal?
I can count how many people look at phones while crossing; showing that the phone makes them careless is a much harder problem.
I think the first part could be answered by simply watching and counting, which I understand is called naturalistic observation. The second part is harder. Even if phone users cross less carefully, the reason might be something else about them, such as being younger or in more of a hurry. A study I found observed more than a thousand pedestrians at Seattle intersections and reported that people texting took longer to cross and were more likely to cross unsafely (Thompson et al., 2013), but I am not sure whether that kind of study can show that the texting caused the behavior.
My question for the class: what design would let us say a phone causes unsafe crossing, and would it be ethical to run it?
Reply to Kayla
Kayla, your question about whether background music helps people study could be tested with an experiment, since you could randomly assign students to music or silence. That seems easier to answer causally than my crosswalk question.
Reply to Ramon
Ramon, I like your idea of comparing how often drivers use phones at red lights in two neighborhoods. You might want to define use carefully, since holding a phone and looking at it are not the same behavior.
References
Nasar, J. L., & Troyer, D. (2013). Pedestrian injuries due to mobile phone use in public places. Accident Analysis & Prevention, 57, 91-95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aap.2013.03.021
Thompson, L. L., Rivara, F. P., Ayyagari, R. C., & Ebel, B. E. (2013). Impact of social and technological distraction on pedestrian crossing behaviour: An observational study. Injury Prevention, 19(4), 232-237. https://doi.org/10.1136/injuryprev-2012-040601
The Purdue Global PS300 Unit 1 instructions
The opening PS300 board asks you to propose a research question drawn from everyday life and suggest how it might be studied. Start from something you have noticed, then turn it into a question that names something observable or measurable. If the question has parts, separate them, since describing how often something happens and explaining why are different research problems. Suggest a first idea for a method, and say what that method could and could not tell you. A source showing that others have studied something similar is useful. End by asking classmates something about design or ethics. In replies, help a classmate sharpen a variable or suggest a design, rather than simply saying the topic sounds interesting.
How this PS300 Unit 1 example is built
The post opens at the Division Street light with a near miss between a van and a pedestrian on his phone, then cites emergency department data on phone-related pedestrian injuries. The question is split into a counting part and a careful-crossing part, under a highlighted line contrasting counting with proving cause. The writer proposes naturalistic observation for the first part and explains why other differences between people could explain the second, mentioning Thompson and colleagues' Seattle observation. The post asks which design could show cause and whether it would be ethical. Kayla's reply notes that her music question could use random assignment, and Ramon's suggests defining phone use carefully. The writer leaves the method question open on purpose, since later units will settle it.
PS300 Unit 1 rubric: what earns full points
On PS300's first board, the instructor wants a question that can be answered with data and for early awareness of what different methods can show. Posts that pose a broad topic, such as technology and safety, earn less than those that name specific behaviors to observe or measure. Separating descriptive and causal questions shows the kind of thinking the course builds. A source that connects the question to existing research adds weight. The closing question should invite discussion of design or ethics rather than opinions about the topic. Replies earn credit by improving a classmate's question with a variable, a definition or a design idea, and the strongest ones also mention a limitation.
Common PS300 Unit 1 mistakes, and how to avoid them
The most common slip is a question that cannot be measured, such as whether phones are ruining society. Another is assuming that watching or surveying people can show cause. Students sometimes propose an experiment that would be unethical without noticing, such as exposing people to danger. Posts often omit any idea of method, leaving the question floating. Replies tend to praise topics. Before posting, rewrite your question so it names something you could count or rate, write one sentence on what your first method could show and one on what it could not, and end with a question about how to study it rather than about whether it matters.
Get a PS300 Unit 1 example written to your instructions
Send the Unit 1 prompt and the rubric. A custom post poses a researchable question and a first idea for studying it. It arrives within 24-48h, and the first is free. The paper above is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Purdue University Global document.
More PS300 papers and BS in Psychology samples
- PS300 Unit 2: Research Methods Comparison
- PS300 Unit 3: Research Article Analysis
- PS300 Unit 4: Evaluating Conclusions Paper
- PS300 Unit 5: Observation Plan and Coding Scheme
- PS300 Unit 6: Seminar Reflection
- PS300 Unit 7: Naturalistic Observation Report
- PS300 Unit 8: Survey Design
- PS300 Unit 9: Survey Results Analysis
- PS300 Unit 10: Research Report
- PS115 Unit 1: Psychology Introduction Board Post
- PS220 Unit 1: Developmental Question Board Post
- PS200 Unit 1: Cognitive Slip Board Post
- PS215 Unit 1: Biological Basis Board Post
PS300 Unit 1 questions, answered
What makes a question researchable?
It names something that can be observed or measured and can be answered with data.
Should the post propose a method?
A first idea helps; later units refine it.
How long are replies?
A few sentences suggesting a variable to measure or a design.
Where can I find a free PS300 Unit 1 sample paper?
This page holds the complete PS300 Unit 1 post proposing a composite study of pedestrians using phones at a Spokane crosswalk, with two replies.
Why does the PS300 Unit 1 sample split its question in two?
Counting how often people use phones while crossing is a descriptive question, while showing that phones cause careless crossing needs a different kind of evidence.