🖋️ 5. APA Reporting Tips

For Writing Quantitative Results in APA 7th Style

When writing your thesis or research paper, it’s crucial to report your findings clearly, consistently, and according to academic standards. The American Psychological Association (APA) 7th edition provides widely accepted guidelines for reporting quantitative data, including statistics like reliability, t-tests, and factor analysis. This section offers key tips and examples for correct APA reporting.

---

📌 General APA Style Guidelines for Statistics

• Use italics for statistical symbols (e.g., t, p, M, SD, r, F).

• Round numbers to two decimal places unless more precision is needed.

• Do not use leading zeros for p-values or correlation coefficients under 1.00 (e.g., p = .04).

• Report exact p-values whenever possible (e.g., p = .023), except when p < .001.

• Include confidence intervals (CIs) when available, especially in advanced reporting.

---

✅ Reporting Descriptive Statistics

Format:

The mean score for student engagement was M = 4.21, SD = 0.78.

Tips:

• Report both mean (M) and standard deviation (SD).

• Mention sample size (N) at least once at the start of the section.

---

✅ Reporting Reliability (Cronbach’s Alpha)

Format:

The scale demonstrated good internal consistency (α = .87).

Tips:

• Use Greek letter alpha (α) for Cronbach’s Alpha.

• Add a sentence about the number of items if needed:

The Academic Support construct (5 items) showed high reliability (α = .91).

---

✅ Reporting t-Test Results

Independent Samples t-Test Format:

There was a significant difference in motivation scores between groups, t(58) = 2.34, p = .023, d = 0.61.

Paired Samples t-Test Format:

Students scored significantly higher after the intervention, t(29) = 3.45, p = .002, d = 0.79.

Tips:

• Include degrees of freedom (in parentheses).

• Report Cohen’s d for effect size.

• Use p < .05 threshold for significance, and mark p < .001 when extremely small.

---

✅ Reporting Factor Analysis (EFA/CFA)

Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA):

The Kaiser–Meyer–Olkin (KMO) measure verified sampling adequacy (KMO = .81). Bartlett’s test of sphericity was significant, χ²(120) = 802.35, p < .001. Three factors were extracted using principal axis factoring with varimax rotation.

Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA):

CFA indicated good model fit, χ²(124) = 201.43, p < .001; CFI = .96; TLI = .95; RMSEA = .045 [90% CI: .034, .056].

Tips:

• Always include the χ² (chi-square), degrees of freedom, and p value.

• Add multiple fit indices for CFA (CFI, TLI, RMSEA, SRMR).

• Report AVE and CR values in tables or briefly in text:

All constructs showed acceptable convergent validity (CR > .70, AVE > .50).

---

✅ Reporting Correlations (Pearson’s r)

Format:

There was a moderate positive correlation between engagement and motivation, r(78) = .52, p < .001.

Tips:

• Mention correlation strength (e.g., weak, moderate, strong).

• Include sample size and p value.

• Avoid interpreting causation.

---

✅ Reporting Multiple Statistics Together

In a summary paragraph:

The three subscales showed good internal consistency (Academic Support: α = .88; Motivation: α = .91; Engagement: α = .86). Descriptive statistics indicated moderate to high scores across all constructs (Ms = 4.01–4.35, SDs = 0.60–0.85). An independent samples t-test revealed a significant group difference on motivation, t(78) = 2.58, p = .012, d = 0.58.

---

✏️ Common APA Mistakes to Avoid

---

📄 Summary Checklist