Assignment Prompt & Instructions
Follow rubric and all instructions carefully.
– ## PSY-495Rubric-Benchmark-MethodsRevisionandEthicalConsiderations.pdf
– IMG_2654.jpeg
– IMG_2652.jpeg
– IMG_2653.jpeg
**## PSY-495Rubric-Benchmark-MethodsRevisionandEthicalConsiderations.pdf**
Benchmark – Methods Revision and Ethical Considerations –
Rubric
Introduction Paragraph 10 points
Criteria Description
Describe the need for additional research and include the problem
statement or hypothesis and the thesis statement.
5. Target 10 points
Description of the need for additional research of the topic, the
problem statement or hypothesis, and the thesis statement are
fully appropriate and insightful with exceptional details and clarity.
4. Acceptable 8.5 points
Description of the need for additional research of the topic, the
problem statement or hypothesis, and the thesis statement are
clear, appropriate and has strong details.
3. Approaching 7.5 points
Description of the need for additional research of the topic, the
problem statement or hypothesis, and the thesis statement are
present and appropriate. Section lacks some clarity.
2. Insufficient 6.5 points
Description of the need for additional research of the topic, the
problem statement or hypothesis, and the thesis statement are
vague or incomplete. Many important details are missing.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Description of the need for additional research of the topic, a
problem statement or hypothesis, and a thesis statement are
missing.
Collapse All
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 1 of 11
Participants Section 15 points
Criteria Description
Describe the demographics of those who can participate in the study,
any factors and excluding factors that are not implied, and the number
of participants needed to conduct the study.
5. Target 15 points
Description of the demographic of those who can participate in the
study, any factors and excluding factors that are not implied, and
the number of participants needed to conduct the study is expertly
written. Explanation is comprehensive and insightful with
exceptional details and clarity.
4. Acceptable 12.75 points
Description of the demographic of those who can participate in the
study, any factors and excluding factors that are not implied, and
the number of participants needed to conduct the study is clear and
coherent. Explanation is strong with sound details.
3. Approaching 11.25 points
Description of the demographic of those who can participate in the
study, any factors and excluding factors that are not implied, and
the number of participants needed to conduct the study is
appropriate but is somewhat limited and lacks some essential
details or clarity.
2. Insufficient 9.75 points
Description of the demographic of those who can participate in the
study, any factors and excluding factors that are not implied, and
the number of participants needed to conduct the study is vague or
incomplete. Explanation is weak and missing many important
details.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 2 of 11
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Description of the demographic of those who can participate in the
study, any factors and excluding factors that are not implied, and
the number of participants needed to conduct the study is missing.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 3 of 11
Materials/Instruments/Apparatuses Section 10 points
Criteria Description
List what is needed to conduct the study.
5. Target 10 points
List of what is needed to conduct the study is comprehensive and
insightful with exceptional details.
4. Acceptable 8.5 points
List of what is needed to conduct the study is strong with sound
details.
3. Approaching 7.5 points
List of what is needed to conduct the study is appropriate but is
somewhat limited and lacks some essential details or clarity.
2. Insufficient 6.5 points
List of what is needed to conduct the study is weak and missing
many important details.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
List of what is needed to conduct the study is missing.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 4 of 11
Procedures Section 15 points
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 5 of 11
Criteria Description
Include the informed consent and explain directions of the procedures
to conduct the study. It should be so clearly written that another
researcher could replicate your study.
5. Target 15 points
Informed consent is present. Directions of the procedures to
conduct the study are expertly written. Explanation is
comprehensive with exceptional details and clarity. Another
researcher would be able to replicate the study from these
directions.
4. Acceptable 12.75 points
Informed consent is present. Directions of the procedures to
conduct the study are appropriate, clear, and coherent. Explanation
is strong with sound details. Another researcher may be able to
replicate the study from these directions.
3. Approaching 11.25 points
Informed consent is present. Directions of the procedures to
conduct the study are appropriate but are somewhat limited and
lack some essential details or clarity. Another researcher could not
fully replicate the study from these directions.
2. Insufficient 9.75 points
Informed consent may or may not be present. Directions of the
procedures to conduct the study are vague or incomplete.
Explanation is weak and missing many important details. Another
researcher could not replicate the study from these directions.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Directions of the procedures to conduct the study are missing.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 6 of 11
Design Section 15 points
Criteria Description
Describe the design of the study and how participants are assigned to
groups.
5. Target 15 points
Description of the design of the study and how participants are
assigned to groups, if applicable, is expertly written. Explanation is
comprehensive and insightful with exceptional details and clarity.
4. Acceptable 12.75 points
Description of the design of the study and how participants are
assigned to groups, if applicable, is clear and coherent. Explanation
is strong with sound details.
3. Approaching 11.25 points
Description of the design of the study and how participants are
assigned to groups, if applicable, is appropriate but is somewhat
limited and lacks some essential details or clarity.
2. Insufficient 9.75 points
Description of the design of the study and how participants are
assigned to groups, if applicable, is vague or incomplete.
Explanation is weak and missing many important details.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Description of the design of the study and how participants are
assigned to groups, if applicable, is missing.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 7 of 11
Ethical Considerations (B) 15 points
Criteria Description
Address ethical considerations associated with your research. At a
minimum, discuss informed consent, privacy, and any potential risks to
participants. Your study may require additional ethical considerations
depending upon the nature of your proposed research. (C3.1)
5. Target 15 points
Discussion of ethical considerations associated with the research is
expertly written. Discussion is comprehensive and insightful with
exceptional details and clarity.
4. Acceptable 12.75 points
Discussion of ethical considerations associated with the research is
clear and coherent. Discussion is strong with sound details.
3. Approaching 11.25 points
Discussion of ethical considerations associated with the research is
appropriate but is somewhat limited and lacks some essential
details or clarity.
2. Insufficient 9.75 points
Discussion of ethical considerations associated with the research is
vague or incomplete. Discussion is weak and missing many
important details.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Ethical considerations associated with the research are missing.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 8 of 11
Conclusion Paragraph 10 points
Criteria Description
Describe the main points from the whole research proposal.
5. Target 10 points
Description of the main points from the whole research proposal is
fully appropriate and insightful with exceptional details and clarity.
4. Acceptable 8.5 points
Description of the main points from the whole research proposal is
clear, appropriate and has strong details.
3. Approaching 7.5 points
Description of the main points from the whole research proposal is
present and appropriate. Section lacks some clarity.
2. Insufficient 6.5 points
Description of the main points from the whole research proposal is
vague or incomplete. Many important details are missing.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Description of the main points from the whole research proposal is
missing.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 9 of 11
Mechanics of Writing 6 points
Criteria Description
Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use,
sentence structure, etc.
5. Target 6 points
No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and
sentence structure are used throughout.
4. Acceptable 5.1 points
Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and
sentence structure are used.
3. Approaching 4.5 points
Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is
generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.
2. Insufficient 3.9 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present.
Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are
recurrent.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning.
Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found
throughout.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 10 of 11
Format/Documentation 4 points
Criteria Description
Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and
level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references,
bibliography, etc., appropriate to assignment and discipline.
5. Target 4 points
No errors in formatting or documentation are present.
4. Acceptable 3.4 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor
errors.
3. Approaching 3 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there
are some obvious errors.
2. Insufficient 2.6 points
Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing.
Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is
provided.
Total 100 points
© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 11 of 11
**IMG_2654.jpeg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/img-2654-jpeg-10352381)
**IMG_2652.jpeg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/img-2652-jpeg-10352383)
**IMG_2653.jpeg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/img-2653-jpeg-10352385)
**IMG_2653.jpeg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/img-2653-jpeg-10352385)
**## PSY-495Rubric-Benchmark-MethodsRevisionandEthicalConsiderations.pdf**
Benchmark – Methods Revision and Ethical Considerations –
Rubric
Introduction Paragraph 10 points
Criteria Description
Describe the need for additional research and include the problem
statement or hypothesis and the thesis statement.
5. Target 10 points
Description of the need for additional research of the topic, the
problem statement or hypothesis, and the thesis statement are
fully appropriate and insightful with exceptional details and clarity.
4. Acceptable 8.5 points
Description of the need for additional research of the topic, the
problem statement or hypothesis, and the thesis statement are
clear, appropriate and has strong details.
3. Approaching 7.5 points
Description of the need for additional research of the topic, the
problem statement or hypothesis, and the thesis statement are
present and appropriate. Section lacks some clarity.
2. Insufficient 6.5 points
Description of the need for additional research of the topic, the
problem statement or hypothesis, and the thesis statement are
vague or incomplete. Many important details are missing.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Description of the need for additional research of the topic, a
problem statement or hypothesis, and a thesis statement are
missing.
Collapse All
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 1 of 11
Participants Section 15 points
Criteria Description
Describe the demographics of those who can participate in the study,
any factors and excluding factors that are not implied, and the number
of participants needed to conduct the study.
5. Target 15 points
Description of the demographic of those who can participate in the
study, any factors and excluding factors that are not implied, and
the number of participants needed to conduct the study is expertly
written. Explanation is comprehensive and insightful with
exceptional details and clarity.
4. Acceptable 12.75 points
Description of the demographic of those who can participate in the
study, any factors and excluding factors that are not implied, and
the number of participants needed to conduct the study is clear and
coherent. Explanation is strong with sound details.
3. Approaching 11.25 points
Description of the demographic of those who can participate in the
study, any factors and excluding factors that are not implied, and
the number of participants needed to conduct the study is
appropriate but is somewhat limited and lacks some essential
details or clarity.
2. Insufficient 9.75 points
Description of the demographic of those who can participate in the
study, any factors and excluding factors that are not implied, and
the number of participants needed to conduct the study is vague or
incomplete. Explanation is weak and missing many important
details.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 2 of 11
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Description of the demographic of those who can participate in the
study, any factors and excluding factors that are not implied, and
the number of participants needed to conduct the study is missing.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 3 of 11
Materials/Instruments/Apparatuses Section 10 points
Criteria Description
List what is needed to conduct the study.
5. Target 10 points
List of what is needed to conduct the study is comprehensive and
insightful with exceptional details.
4. Acceptable 8.5 points
List of what is needed to conduct the study is strong with sound
details.
3. Approaching 7.5 points
List of what is needed to conduct the study is appropriate but is
somewhat limited and lacks some essential details or clarity.
2. Insufficient 6.5 points
List of what is needed to conduct the study is weak and missing
many important details.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
List of what is needed to conduct the study is missing.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 4 of 11
Procedures Section 15 points
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 5 of 11
Criteria Description
Include the informed consent and explain directions of the procedures
to conduct the study. It should be so clearly written that another
researcher could replicate your study.
5. Target 15 points
Informed consent is present. Directions of the procedures to
conduct the study are expertly written. Explanation is
comprehensive with exceptional details and clarity. Another
researcher would be able to replicate the study from these
directions.
4. Acceptable 12.75 points
Informed consent is present. Directions of the procedures to
conduct the study are appropriate, clear, and coherent. Explanation
is strong with sound details. Another researcher may be able to
replicate the study from these directions.
3. Approaching 11.25 points
Informed consent is present. Directions of the procedures to
conduct the study are appropriate but are somewhat limited and
lack some essential details or clarity. Another researcher could not
fully replicate the study from these directions.
2. Insufficient 9.75 points
Informed consent may or may not be present. Directions of the
procedures to conduct the study are vague or incomplete.
Explanation is weak and missing many important details. Another
researcher could not replicate the study from these directions.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Directions of the procedures to conduct the study are missing.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 6 of 11
Design Section 15 points
Criteria Description
Describe the design of the study and how participants are assigned to
groups.
5. Target 15 points
Description of the design of the study and how participants are
assigned to groups, if applicable, is expertly written. Explanation is
comprehensive and insightful with exceptional details and clarity.
4. Acceptable 12.75 points
Description of the design of the study and how participants are
assigned to groups, if applicable, is clear and coherent. Explanation
is strong with sound details.
3. Approaching 11.25 points
Description of the design of the study and how participants are
assigned to groups, if applicable, is appropriate but is somewhat
limited and lacks some essential details or clarity.
2. Insufficient 9.75 points
Description of the design of the study and how participants are
assigned to groups, if applicable, is vague or incomplete.
Explanation is weak and missing many important details.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Description of the design of the study and how participants are
assigned to groups, if applicable, is missing.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 7 of 11
Ethical Considerations (B) 15 points
Criteria Description
Address ethical considerations associated with your research. At a
minimum, discuss informed consent, privacy, and any potential risks to
participants. Your study may require additional ethical considerations
depending upon the nature of your proposed research. (C3.1)
5. Target 15 points
Discussion of ethical considerations associated with the research is
expertly written. Discussion is comprehensive and insightful with
exceptional details and clarity.
4. Acceptable 12.75 points
Discussion of ethical considerations associated with the research is
clear and coherent. Discussion is strong with sound details.
3. Approaching 11.25 points
Discussion of ethical considerations associated with the research is
appropriate but is somewhat limited and lacks some essential
details or clarity.
2. Insufficient 9.75 points
Discussion of ethical considerations associated with the research is
vague or incomplete. Discussion is weak and missing many
important details.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Ethical considerations associated with the research are missing.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 8 of 11
Conclusion Paragraph 10 points
Criteria Description
Describe the main points from the whole research proposal.
5. Target 10 points
Description of the main points from the whole research proposal is
fully appropriate and insightful with exceptional details and clarity.
4. Acceptable 8.5 points
Description of the main points from the whole research proposal is
clear, appropriate and has strong details.
3. Approaching 7.5 points
Description of the main points from the whole research proposal is
present and appropriate. Section lacks some clarity.
2. Insufficient 6.5 points
Description of the main points from the whole research proposal is
vague or incomplete. Many important details are missing.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Description of the main points from the whole research proposal is
missing.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 9 of 11
Mechanics of Writing 6 points
Criteria Description
Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use,
sentence structure, etc.
5. Target 6 points
No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and
sentence structure are used throughout.
4. Acceptable 5.1 points
Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and
sentence structure are used.
3. Approaching 4.5 points
Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is
generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.
2. Insufficient 3.9 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present.
Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are
recurrent.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning.
Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found
throughout.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 10 of 11
Format/Documentation 4 points
Criteria Description
Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and
level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references,
bibliography, etc., appropriate to assignment and discipline.
5. Target 4 points
No errors in formatting or documentation are present.
4. Acceptable 3.4 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor
errors.
3. Approaching 3 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there
are some obvious errors.
2. Insufficient 2.6 points
Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing.
Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is
provided.
Total 100 points
© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 11 of 11
**IMG_2654.jpeg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/img-2654-jpeg-10352381)
**IMG_2652.jpeg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/img-2652-jpeg-10352383)
**IMG_2653.jpeg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/img-2653-jpeg-10352385)
**## PSY-495Rubric-Benchmark-MethodsRevisionandEthicalConsiderations.pdf**
Benchmark – Methods Revision and Ethical Considerations –
Rubric
Introduction Paragraph 10 points
Criteria Description
Describe the need for additional research and include the problem
statement or hypothesis and the thesis statement.
5. Target 10 points
Description of the need for additional research of the topic, the
problem statement or hypothesis, and the thesis statement are
fully appropriate and insightful with exceptional details and clarity.
4. Acceptable 8.5 points
Description of the need for additional research of the topic, the
problem statement or hypothesis, and the thesis statement are
clear, appropriate and has strong details.
3. Approaching 7.5 points
Description of the need for additional research of the topic, the
problem statement or hypothesis, and the thesis statement are
present and appropriate. Section lacks some clarity.
2. Insufficient 6.5 points
Description of the need for additional research of the topic, the
problem statement or hypothesis, and the thesis statement are
vague or incomplete. Many important details are missing.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Description of the need for additional research of the topic, a
problem statement or hypothesis, and a thesis statement are
missing.
Collapse All
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 1 of 11
Participants Section 15 points
Criteria Description
Describe the demographics of those who can participate in the study,
any factors and excluding factors that are not implied, and the number
of participants needed to conduct the study.
5. Target 15 points
Description of the demographic of those who can participate in the
study, any factors and excluding factors that are not implied, and
the number of participants needed to conduct the study is expertly
written. Explanation is comprehensive and insightful with
exceptional details and clarity.
4. Acceptable 12.75 points
Description of the demographic of those who can participate in the
study, any factors and excluding factors that are not implied, and
the number of participants needed to conduct the study is clear and
coherent. Explanation is strong with sound details.
3. Approaching 11.25 points
Description of the demographic of those who can participate in the
study, any factors and excluding factors that are not implied, and
the number of participants needed to conduct the study is
appropriate but is somewhat limited and lacks some essential
details or clarity.
2. Insufficient 9.75 points
Description of the demographic of those who can participate in the
study, any factors and excluding factors that are not implied, and
the number of participants needed to conduct the study is vague or
incomplete. Explanation is weak and missing many important
details.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 2 of 11
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Description of the demographic of those who can participate in the
study, any factors and excluding factors that are not implied, and
the number of participants needed to conduct the study is missing.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 3 of 11
Materials/Instruments/Apparatuses Section 10 points
Criteria Description
List what is needed to conduct the study.
5. Target 10 points
List of what is needed to conduct the study is comprehensive and
insightful with exceptional details.
4. Acceptable 8.5 points
List of what is needed to conduct the study is strong with sound
details.
3. Approaching 7.5 points
List of what is needed to conduct the study is appropriate but is
somewhat limited and lacks some essential details or clarity.
2. Insufficient 6.5 points
List of what is needed to conduct the study is weak and missing
many important details.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
List of what is needed to conduct the study is missing.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 4 of 11
Procedures Section 15 points
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 5 of 11
Criteria Description
Include the informed consent and explain directions of the procedures
to conduct the study. It should be so clearly written that another
researcher could replicate your study.
5. Target 15 points
Informed consent is present. Directions of the procedures to
conduct the study are expertly written. Explanation is
comprehensive with exceptional details and clarity. Another
researcher would be able to replicate the study from these
directions.
4. Acceptable 12.75 points
Informed consent is present. Directions of the procedures to
conduct the study are appropriate, clear, and coherent. Explanation
is strong with sound details. Another researcher may be able to
replicate the study from these directions.
3. Approaching 11.25 points
Informed consent is present. Directions of the procedures to
conduct the study are appropriate but are somewhat limited and
lack some essential details or clarity. Another researcher could not
fully replicate the study from these directions.
2. Insufficient 9.75 points
Informed consent may or may not be present. Directions of the
procedures to conduct the study are vague or incomplete.
Explanation is weak and missing many important details. Another
researcher could not replicate the study from these directions.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Directions of the procedures to conduct the study are missing.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 6 of 11
Design Section 15 points
Criteria Description
Describe the design of the study and how participants are assigned to
groups.
5. Target 15 points
Description of the design of the study and how participants are
assigned to groups, if applicable, is expertly written. Explanation is
comprehensive and insightful with exceptional details and clarity.
4. Acceptable 12.75 points
Description of the design of the study and how participants are
assigned to groups, if applicable, is clear and coherent. Explanation
is strong with sound details.
3. Approaching 11.25 points
Description of the design of the study and how participants are
assigned to groups, if applicable, is appropriate but is somewhat
limited and lacks some essential details or clarity.
2. Insufficient 9.75 points
Description of the design of the study and how participants are
assigned to groups, if applicable, is vague or incomplete.
Explanation is weak and missing many important details.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Description of the design of the study and how participants are
assigned to groups, if applicable, is missing.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 7 of 11
Ethical Considerations (B) 15 points
Criteria Description
Address ethical considerations associated with your research. At a
minimum, discuss informed consent, privacy, and any potential risks to
participants. Your study may require additional ethical considerations
depending upon the nature of your proposed research. (C3.1)
5. Target 15 points
Discussion of ethical considerations associated with the research is
expertly written. Discussion is comprehensive and insightful with
exceptional details and clarity.
4. Acceptable 12.75 points
Discussion of ethical considerations associated with the research is
clear and coherent. Discussion is strong with sound details.
3. Approaching 11.25 points
Discussion of ethical considerations associated with the research is
appropriate but is somewhat limited and lacks some essential
details or clarity.
2. Insufficient 9.75 points
Discussion of ethical considerations associated with the research is
vague or incomplete. Discussion is weak and missing many
important details.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Ethical considerations associated with the research are missing.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 8 of 11
Conclusion Paragraph 10 points
Criteria Description
Describe the main points from the whole research proposal.
5. Target 10 points
Description of the main points from the whole research proposal is
fully appropriate and insightful with exceptional details and clarity.
4. Acceptable 8.5 points
Description of the main points from the whole research proposal is
clear, appropriate and has strong details.
3. Approaching 7.5 points
Description of the main points from the whole research proposal is
present and appropriate. Section lacks some clarity.
2. Insufficient 6.5 points
Description of the main points from the whole research proposal is
vague or incomplete. Many important details are missing.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Description of the main points from the whole research proposal is
missing.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 9 of 11
Mechanics of Writing 6 points
Criteria Description
Includes spelling, capitalization, punctuation, grammar, language use,
sentence structure, etc.
5. Target 6 points
No mechanical errors are present. Appropriate language choice and
sentence structure are used throughout.
4. Acceptable 5.1 points
Few mechanical errors are present. Suitable language choice and
sentence structure are used.
3. Approaching 4.5 points
Occasional mechanical errors are present. Language choice is
generally appropriate. Varied sentence structure is attempted.
2. Insufficient 3.9 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors are present.
Inconsistencies in language choice or sentence structure are
recurrent.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Errors in grammar or syntax are pervasive and impede meaning.
Incorrect language choice or sentence structure errors are found
throughout.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 10 of 11
Format/Documentation 4 points
Criteria Description
Uses appropriate style, such as APA, MLA, etc., for college, subject, and
level; documents sources using citations, footnotes, references,
bibliography, etc., appropriate to assignment and discipline.
5. Target 4 points
No errors in formatting or documentation are present.
4. Acceptable 3.4 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used with only minor
errors.
3. Approaching 3 points
Appropriate format and documentation are used, although there
are some obvious errors.
2. Insufficient 2.6 points
Appropriate format is attempted, but some elements are missing.
Frequent errors in documentation of sources are evident.
1. Unsatisfactory 0 points
Appropriate format is not used. No documentation of sources is
provided.
Total 100 points
© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.© 2025. Grand Canyon University. All Rights Reserved.
https://halo.gcu.edu/courses/PSY-495-O500-20250609/rubrics/26a80cb0-e87f-4a93-94df-eeb864cc64b4 7/17/25, 2:54 AM
Page 11 of 11
**IMG_2654.jpeg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/img-2654-jpeg-10352381)
**IMG_2652.jpeg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/img-2652-jpeg-10352383)
**IMG_2653.jpeg**
This file is too large to display. [View in new window](https://www.sweetstudy.com/files/img-2653-jpeg-10352385)
– 1
– 2
– 3
– 4