Outstanding Research Award

The Outstanding Research Award recognizes rigorous and transparent research by graduate students. Empirical submissions will be evaluated for the quality of the research design, transparency of the reported results, and legitimacy of the statistical conclusions. The goal of this award is to highlight outstanding empirical research regardless of the statistical significance of the results.

Submissions will be reviewed by student peers and/or faculty members. Five students will be chosen for the award and will receive a $100 honorarium. As an additional honor, all recipients will be offered the opportunity to meet virtually or in person at the convention with a mentor of their choice. All graduate students, whether pursuing dissertation or pre-dissertation research, are welcome to submit an application.

Selection Process

There will be one round of judging for this award. Five winners will be chosen by a group of reviewers based on the merits of the entire application. Reviewers will be matched to appropriate applications based on keyword matches and field of work. Applications will be reviewed blindly based on the judging rubric.

Eligibility

Applicants must be student members of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology at the time they apply for the award.

Applicants must be full-time graduate students at the time of submission.

Published data is eligible for the award if the applicant was involved in the research project.

Data collection and analyses must be complete.

Applicants are eligible to enter ONE first-author submission to the award. If more than one submission is entered, they will all be voided.

Please note: The ORA no longer requires applicants to physically attend the conference or have an accepted submission at SPSP.  Past winners of the Student Poster Award and Student Travel Award are eligible for this award. Past winners of the Outstanding Research Award are not eligible.

Applications should include a brief abstract and a detailed project summary, both of which should be BLIND (should not include any identifying information, such as names and affiliations):

• An abstract of 400 words or fewer summarizing the research. There is no minimum word limit for abstracts; however, we believe that abstracts that adequately describe the details of the research require at least 300 words.
• A project summary limited to three pages. The summary should include the purpose of the research, a brief introduction, a detailed methods section, a detailed results section, and a discussion/implications section.
• The introduction must include a clear, concise, and completely justified statement of the hypotheses tested (if applicable) or the research questions.
• The method and results sections must include detailed and transparent reports of the study’s design, procedures, analyses, and findings.
• The discussion/implications should discuss the significant contribution of the work while taking into account the potential limitations of the study.
• The summary can include up to two tables or figures (i.e., one table/one figure, two tables, or two figures) that are not counted toward the three-page limit. References also do not count towards the three-page limit.
• The summary must adhere to APA 7th edition format (i.e., 1-inch margins, 12-point Times New Roman font, double-spaced).

Please view the judging rubric for the Outstanding Research Award before you make your submission. This rubric will be used to score your application.

Preparing Your Files for Blind Review

Please name your application file “ORAprojectsummary”. Remove all identifying information (e.g., names, affiliations) from your abstract, application, AND file names before uploading your submission.

If you have any questions, please e-mail us at [email protected]

Applications Closed

2021

Yalda Daryani, Faustian Bargain: Investigating the role of monetary value amount in moral judgment and decision difficulty using taboo trade-off narratives

Eleni Kremeti, Distinguishing preferences for group-based inequality for different types of social hierarchies

Jordan Wylie, Exploring the motivated enforcement of frequently violated codified rules

Jeewon Oh, Happiness Singled Out: Bidirectional Associations Between Singlehood and Life Satisfaction

Hannah Waldfogel, Ideology selectively shapes attention to inequality

2020

Andres Montealegre Moreno, Does Maximizing Good Make People Look Bad?

Eugene Ofosu, A Tripartite Factor Structure Underlies Regional Intergroup Prejudice

Yoobin Park, Singles’ Sexual Satisfaction is Associated With More Satisfaction With Singlehood and Less Interest in Marriage

Cristina Salvador, Relational mobility predicts a faster spread of COVID-19: A 39-country study

Sze Yuh Nina Wang, Moral Language Use by U.S. Political Elites

2019

Zachariah Berry, When Less Is Enough: The Relationship Between Prosocial Effort and Moral Character Judgments

Tobias Ebert, Religious People Only Live Longer in Religious Cultural Contexts: A Gravestone Analysis

Juliana French, Change of Heart: The Implications of Changing Hormonal Contraceptive Use After Relationship Formation

Oriane Georgeac, Instrumentality Undermines Underrepresented Group Members' Psychological Sense of Belonging and Attraction to Organizations

Ahra Ko, Family Matters: Rethinking the Psychology of Human Social Motivation

2018

Emily Lasko

Angelica Leigh

Heather M. Maranges 

Michael S. Rosenblum 

Samantha Krauss

2017

Laura Wallace 

David March 

Jae Yun Kim 

Paige Lloyd 

David Newman

2016

Courtney Walsh

Gregg Sparkman

Jennifer Dannals

Zoë Francis

Kassandra Cortes

For questions regarding this award, contact the Student Committee at [email protected].