1. Abstract evaluation Another example…

2. The abstract The purposes of this study were to examine athletes' mental skill use in practice and competition, their mental skills training experience, and their perceptions of success. The Test of Performance Strategies (TOPS) and a perception of success questionnaire were administered to 199 collegiate baseball and softball players. An ANOVA revealed a significantly greater use of mental skills in competition than in practice, and significantly higher perceptions of success in practice and competition were found when athletes reported a greater use of mental skills in both environments. The athletes' experience with mental skills training, however, did not have a significant influence on their mental skill use during practice or competition. The results demonstrate the importance of mental skill use, and provide numerous applied implications for practitioners as well as opportunities for further research regarding the practice environment of athletes.

3. Variables, design Independent variables  Practice vs. competition  Mental skills training experience Dependent variables  Mental skills use Design  No treatment  Two measures  Could argue on groupings via experience differences, and p vs c

4. External validity Population: Athletes Sampling method  Non-probability, purposive  Unclear of range of institutions, demographics Actual sample:  college baseball, softball players (division, type of institution unknown) Discrepancies  College vs. other levels, levels within colleges  Athletes of other sports  Age differences (college has restricted age range) Potential for altering results?

5. Construct validity Mental skills use  Self-report, after the fact. Timing? When was q completed relative to these events? Mental skills training experience  Probably restricted range due to sampling…potentially problematic.  Probably also self-report Perceptions of success  Again self-report. Practice vs competition  Again restricted due to restrictions on experience Potential to alter results?

6. Internal validity Use of surveys:  No manipulation of conditions.  Cannot ascertain temporal precedence  Could get at covariation  No assignment to conditions.  Multiple group style threats Control of causality certainly weak, but…  Plausible alternative explanations?