In the first, the participants section is followed by a design and procedure subsection, which describes the rest of the method. As you write your discussion section, look back on your results section to ensure that all the data you need is there to fully support the conclusions you reach.
Once again remember that references need to be in alphabetical order according to surname. While your study might not have supported your original predictions, your finding can provide important inspiration for future explorations into a topic.
Why does the result you suggested make sense logically? In simple terms every time you refer to a name and date of a psychologist you need to reference the original source of the information.
Don't Omit Relevant Findings Just as your results sections should sufficiently justify your claims, it should also provide an accurate look at what you found in your study. Regardless, Bem  suggests the following basic structure for discussing each new result: Remind the reader of the research question.
This works well when there are complicated materials to describe. Even if your study did not support your hypothesis, it does not mean that the conclusions you reach are not useful.
The opening introduces the research question and explains why it is interesting, the literature review discusses relevant previous research, and the closing restates the research question and comments on the method used to answer it. Does it have practical implications? How to reference this article: McLeod, S.