Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Written expression, Hooper, and blind rating.

T A Muenz1, J C Cole, A Balderson

  • 1California School of Professional Psychology, San Diego, USA. TAMuenz@home.com

Psychological Reports
|October 12, 2000
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Patient-Reported Outcomes (Pro) in Go/No-Go Decision Making in Drug Development.

Value in health : the journal of the International Society for Pharmacoeconomics and Outcomes Research·2016
Same author

Maternal and fetal outcomes following unplanned conversion to general anesthetic at elective cesarean section.

Journal of perinatology : official journal of the California Perinatal Association·2015
Same author

Effects of ritanserin and 1-(2,5-dimethoxy-4-iodophenyl)-2-aminopropane (DOI) in the murine elevated plus-maze test of anxiety: an ethopharmacological study.

Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England)·2012
Same author

Salvia divinorum use and phenomenology: results from an online survey.

Journal of psychopharmacology (Oxford, England)·2010
Same author

Minimal important differences in the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire (MSQ) version.

Cephalalgia : an international journal of headache·2009
Same author

Sexual activity and functioning in female scleroderma patients.

Clinical and experimental rheumatology·2009
Same journal

Understanding Love in Couple Relationships: A Scoping Review of Sternberg's Triangular Theory.

Psychological reports·2026
Same journal

Psychological Impacts of Instagram Use: The Interplay of Social Comparison, Self-Esteem, and Anxiety.

Psychological reports·2026
Same journal

The Effect of Self-Compassion on Shame in Post-Event Processing.

Psychological reports·2026
Same journal

Tracking Rumination as a Stable Habit (TRASH); Scale Modification and Convergent Validity in a Clinical Sample of Youth With a History of Depression.

Psychological reports·2026
Same journal

Prompting to Practice: Daily Practice Mediates the Benefits of Supplement to a Mindfulness-Based Intervention.

Psychological reports·2026
Same journal

Continued Influence Effect: A Three-Dimensional Framework Shaping Practical and Theoretical Perspectives.

Psychological reports·2026
See all related articles

Specific writing prompts significantly impact written responses in middle schoolers. Blind ratings confirmed that "Hooper-like" prompts enhance structural elements but not mechanical aspects of writing.

Area of Science:

  • Educational Psychology
  • Writing Instruction
  • Cognitive Science

Background:

  • Previous research indicated specific stimuli elicit better written responses.
  • Prior studies involved hypothesis-aware raters, potentially biasing results.
  • Hooper et al. (1994) proposed certain prompts are more effective.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To validate Hooper et al.'s (1994) findings using blind rating.
  • To investigate the effect of "Hooper-like" versus non-"Hooper-like" prompts on student writing.
  • To differentiate prompt effects on writing structure versus mechanics.

Main Methods:

  • A study involving 29 middle school children.
  • Implementation of blind rating to mitigate rater bias.
  • Comparison of written responses to "Hooper-like" and non-"Hooper-like" prompts.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • Significant differences were found between prompt types for structural writing elements.
  • No significant differences were observed for writing mechanics based on prompt type.
  • Blind rating supported previous assertions regarding prompt effectiveness.

Conclusions:

  • "Hooper-like" prompts are effective in improving the structure of written responses.
  • Prompt effectiveness may vary depending on the specific writing attribute being assessed.
  • Future research should consider blind rating protocols in writing assessment studies.