Analyzing Lab Reports:

Sleep Affecting External and Internal Behaviors

The City College of New York

Sleep is important for the body and mind to be well rested. However, not having enough sleep can lead to negative effects. These negative effects of sleep deprivation can vary in age, race and gender. There have been studies comparing sleep deprivation to people’s external and internal behaviors. The following lab reports are examples of such sleep studies and improvements towards a better lab report for future studies.

The lab report by Michael S. Christian and Aleksander P.J. Ellis, Examining the Effects of Sleep Deprivation on Workplace Deviance: A Self-Regulatory Perspective (Lab report 1), discusses workplace deviance and how other employees are affected by the exposure of workplace deviance. There are two samples tested, nurses from a medical center and undergraduate students. The hypothesis tested is that sleep deprivation decreases individuals’ self-control while increasing hostility. Both samples supported the hypothesis in the experiment.

The report, Children’s Sleep and Cognitive Functioning: Race and Socioeconomic Status as Moderators of Effect (Lab report 2), by Peggy Keller, Joseph A. Buckhalt, and Mona El-Sheikh, follows the same topic of sleep affecting peoples actions but specifically towards children. The hypothesis is how race and socioeconomic status (SES) moderated link between children’s sleep and cognitive functioning. Samples were taken from both African and European American children between the ages of 8 and 9. The lab report proves there to be difference between children’s race and socioeconomic status (SES) levels.

The lab report, Children’s Sleep and Adjustment Over Time: The Role of Socioeconomic Context (lab report 3), by Mona El-Sheikh, Ryan J. Kelly, Joseph A. Buckhalt and J. Benjamin Hinnant, also discusses how sleep can affect children externally and internally. External behaviors are aggression, delinquency and trouble making. Internal behaviors are anxiety and depression. There are two groups tested, 3^rd and 5^th graders, which are the same group of children but at different age points. The results prove that bad sleeping habits in young children do affect their external behaviors such as aggression and their internal symptoms such as anxiety.

All three lab reports begin with an abstract which gives a brief preview of the report. Lab report 2 explains the purpose, measures, variables manipulations and outcomes. The following example is from lab report 2, demonstrating the brief introduction given for the abstract. “Sleep measures were actigraphy, sleep diaries, and self-report.” (El-Sheikh and Keller). Lab report 2 and 3 similarly introduce the main point and hypothesis with minimum outcome. These two lab reports focused more on introducing the topic to the audience and measures used. Lab report 3 is precise with their thoughts and is specific with the plan towards the lab. The following is an example of lab report 3 being specific, “Relations were examined between children’s sleep and their externalizing and internalizing symptoms.” (Auburn University). However, lab report 1, does not have enough details compared to the other two lab reports. Lab report 1 expresses the hypothesis and the purpose of the report and it is clearer compared to the other two lab reports. Lab report 1 is the only report that has a clear hypothesis and shares that the results support the hypothesis. “…we argue that sleep deprivation decreases individuals’ self-control while increasing hostility, resulting in increased workplace deviance…Results from both samples largely converge in supporting our hypotheses.” (Christian and Ellis). The abstract is the first thing that is read and needs to be clear for readers to better get an understanding of the rest of the report. To improve the abstract, all the three lab reports should include the hypothesis, independent and dependent variable(s) and brief summary of the report.

The introduction for lab report 3, was specific in terms of providing background information for every aspect of the lab. Lab report 3 as well explains the reason why they’re following up with the experiment such as reasons for each part that is being researched. “Several studies have reported gender-related sleep differences among school-aged children…We examined gender as a moderator of effects in the association between sleep and child adjustment” (Auburn University). Lab report 2 follows similar structure, but the organization of the introduction is different. Lab report 3, organize the introduction in the same order that the method section is organized. This report has a flow of comparing different studies and including their reasons to study children sleep. Lab report 2, separate the introduction between studies of sleep and the moderators effects. “Our hypothesis is that effects of disruptions in a primary domain of biological regulation, namely sleep, may have a differential impact on individuals based on their race or SES” (Buckhalt, El-Sheikh, Keller). This demonstrates that lab report 2 has the hypothesis stated within the introduction. Both lab report 2 and 3 introduce other reports and summarize their connection to their own labs. However, lab report 1, follows a different structure. The lab report has mini sections for the different categories mentioned. Lab report 1 introduces subtitles in the introduction making it clear to the audience what they’re about to read. The introduction is organized by “Workplace Deviance and Self- Regulation”, “The Effect of Sleep Deprivation”, and “The Role of Self- Control and State Hostility”. All three lab reports have well written introductions which hits the points of explaining further the purpose of the report and answering any question that the audience may have. One suggest is, lab report 1 to not have a figure within the introduction.   

Lab report 1 structures the method section differently compared to the other two lab reports. There are two method sections for each sample tested: nurses and undergraduate students. Each method has its own results, procedure, measures and descriptions. Both sample 1 and 2 methods are organized the same with subtitles. Both methods are well detailed. “Nurses received survey 1 in the beginning of their shift. After a period of 12 hours the same nurses received survey 2.” (Christian and Ellis). This is an example how sample 1 method is including a procedure. However, sample 2, has a manipulation section that sample 1 did not have. The other two lab reports do not separate their ideas but put it all in one section. Lab report 3 and 2 both separate the method with subsections such as participants and procedure. However, lab report 3, has more sections, going more in depth about the procedures. “Actigraphy has been frequently used as a proxy for sleep duration and quality, and has demonstrated good reliability…” (Auburn University). This shows that lab report 3 compared to lab report 2 insures the audience that the equipment used, and results are trustworthy.

Lab report 1, results section is separated in two based on the two samples. Each result has subtitles: graphs and tables, test of hypothesis, measures and procedures. For each sample result, goes in depth about their own sample except for sample 2 which did not have tables to provide visual evidence of the results. Lab report 3, do includes images explaining the findings and explanation towards the images. Lab report 2, is also similar to the previous lab report by following this structure. However, in Lab report 2 there is more comparing and contrasting in the result section. Lab report 2 compares the results with other lab reports and within all the other factors of the report. A proper results section includes figures and explanation of the findings. All three lab reports do support this format.

Lab report 1, includes the conclusion, further research, limitations and theoretical & managerial implications into the discussion section. In the discussion, there were explanations towards a better report and the flaws the report had. “The purpose of this two-part study was to merge evidence drawn from social and organizational psychology, sleep research, and neuroscience to develop and test a theoretically and empirically driven model of the effects of sleep deprivation on workplace deviance.” (Christian and Ellis). The other two lab reports as well have the same points touched in the discussion. Yet Lab report 2 and 3 do not separate the discussion in sections. Lab report 3, however, do not have a recap of the purpose of the lab compared to the other two lab reports. Lab report 3 begins with an explanation about the lab report. “In summary, the current study’s primary contribution is in demonstrating cross-sectional and longitudinal relations between various sleep parameters and externalizing and internalizing symptoms in a community sample of children.” (Auburn University). Discussions are supposed to be the final explanation of the lab report including results and methods to further improve on future studies. All three lab reports do follow these standards in a lengthy form.

All three lab reports are the same with the reference page. In this section, everyone who was mentioned in the lab report was seen in the reference page. Lab report 1 has footnotes throughout the report including the reference page.

Lab reports are important when rewriting lab studies to than be repeated in the future. A proper lab report will contain an abstract, introduction, method, results, discussion and reference page. All three of the following lab reports have shown to be excellent examples of lab reports with a few improvements needed.

References

Buckhalt, J. A., El-Sheikh, M., & Keller, P. (2007). Childrens Sleep and Cognitive Functioning: Race and Socioeconomic Status as Moderators of Effects. Child Development, 78(1), 213-231. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2007.00993.x

Christian, M. S., & Ellis, A. P. (2011). Examining the Effects of Sleep Deprivation on Workplace Deviance: A Self-Regulatory Perspective. Academy of Management Journal, 54(5), 913-934. doi:10.5465/amj.2010.0179

El-Sheikh, M., Kelly, R. J., Buckhalt, J. A., & Hinnant, J. B. (2010). Children’s Sleep and Adjustment Over Time: The Role of Socioeconomic Context. Child Development, 81(3), 870-883. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01439.x

Self-Reflection: Lab Analysis

The purpose of the lab analysis was to write a rhetorical analysis on 3 lab reports based on the differences and similarities of the formatting.  The object of the assignment is to bring an in-depth understanding of the format of the lab report and its real applications. Initially, I thought the assignment would be easy to accomplish because all I am doing is analyzing lab reports. However, there came many challenges such as finding lab reports that interest me. After overcoming this challenge (which took over a week), I had to overcome other challenges which is following the course learning outcomes.

One of the learning of the course learning outcomes is considering my audience. This time in my writing I tried to consider my audience. I did this by explaining the different aspects of the lab reports such as brief summary of each report. Even though I did this, I feel that I didn’t acknowledge the fact that my audience didn’t read the lab reports. For assuming that the audience also read the lab reports, I lacked evidence when comparing and contrasting the lab reports. For future writing, I will be specific in details and explain everything. I should assume that my audience do not know anything, and I am teaching them. 

            Writing strategies is another course learning outcome. My writing strategy I believe is a strength I had in my lab analysis. I began with a basic outline which gave me time to read other lab analysis and from there decide how I would like to write my own analysis. I consider this very helpful when I do not know what to do my writing. Yet, my grammar and editing I should improve on by practicing and rereading my writing many times and editing it until it is grammatically correct.

            Another challenge I encountered from the course learning outcomes was using library sources and databases. I struggled initially to find lab reports because I always found undergraduate lab reports. After using the CCNY library system it helped me to properly find a lab report that is at the level needed for my assignment. However, my first bash of lab reports I couldn’t understand or have interest in. Therefore, I tried again and focus on psychological lab reports which I considered more interesting. With help from outside sources and not underestimating myself I found 3 new lab reports worthy for my assignment.

            These were my greatest weaknesses in my lab report. The other course learning outcomes, I believe I did well in. But I will not let my confidence stop me from improving my writing towards my other assignments.