This is an example of how you could format your research page. This focuses only on organization and content. You should consult the many Monkey Cage examples that we've seen all semester to think about what you need to communicate, how to motivate the focus, etc.
Each of these sections was added by selecting "text box" from the "insert" menu on the right margin. You can insert images from your Google Drive or other source, structure content blocks to combine text and figures, and make any number of stylistic changes to font size, color, headings, indentation and alignment, etc. using the menu that automatically appears when typing in this textbox. You are free to follow any format you see fit, but remember that your goal is clear scientific communication.
In this section, I would introduce my research question. Remember, the best way to do this is to emphasize some of the real-world examples that we identified earlier in the semester that illustrates the contemporary relevance of your question. Hyperlinks to these stories (and even more) are your friend here. Make sure that they open in a new window. You can even change their text color so they stand out.
How long should this section be? Like almost everything in this business, there is no one-size-fits-all answer. You need to spend enough time in this introductory section to introduce the topic, provide some motivating examples or anecdotes, and justify your focus on it.
This is where you will emphasize prior and related studies on the question and your theoretical argument, although you don't have to call it a "theory" and "literature review" like you might if the paper were a more formal research paper.
If this were my project, I would briefly describe the underlying argument for the project, and a brief overview of a few relevant studies on the same topic. Remember, these are some of the articles and books that you've consulted in developing your own research question and design. As before, you can hyperlink to these articles or other related materials.
The goal of this section is to *briefly* acknowledge how your project is building on an existing body of knowledge and/or developing new arguments to supplement what we already know about a phenomena.
I think it makes sense to have a separate section that makes your testable hypothesis precise. What are you evaluating in this project, and what do you expect to find? You don't have to be rigid in your language -- you can avoid the formal "if/then" structure of a hypothesis. However, the concepts should be clear, we should be able to determine which is the independent and which is the dependent, and we should be able to ascertain the direction of the effect.
Here is where you will discuss the key elements of your research design. How did you measure the variables? Where did you find the data for this? What sorts of measurement choices did you make, and why? What are some rival explanations that you considered, and how did you measure these factors? What is your unit of analysis, and how did you construct your sample? Where are the data from? Again, hyperlinking to some of the sources is a useful practice.
In short, you will likely want to discuss each element from the research design assignment, although I would suggest you NOT go through these in a 1-10 numbered list. You should develop a smooth narrative style.
One thing to consider in this research design section is some descriptive statistics, especially if you collected original data. Don't just tell us what the data measure, show us the histogram or the frequency distribution so we can get a sense of what is going on under the hood.
This is the most important part! What did you find? What sort of evidence is there for your hypothesis, and how do you interpret it?
The emphasis here should be on visuals. If you can graph it, then you should present that. If you have output from jamovi, think about how you can present this in a more visually pleasing fashion. Do NOT simply cut and paste or screenshot Jamovi output. You should, at a minimum, construct a nicer formatted and nicer looking contingency table than the one that jamovi automatically presents (if you are using this technique). Make sure columns and rows are labeled clearly and in an intuitive fashion for your audience. Remember, we don't know what a variable with a title like "aid_1_yr_after" actually means -- only you do. So change this or restructure the output in a way that helps your audience understand.
Although you are expected to draw on the appropriate statistical techniques, you must also provide the appropriate interpretation in terms of your hypothesis. Supplement your discussion of p-values and null hypotheses with a more substantive discussion of what this tells you about the hypothesis and research question.
This should probably be the longest and most in-depth section of the project.
What did we learn from this project? Did the evidence support our hypothesis? If not, what should we conclude? Is it because of our research design choices? Is it because the underlying argument (and thus the theories we drew on) are incorrect? How would future scholars interested in the same question improve on the design you implemented? These are just a few of the items we could discuss in a concluding section.