代写论文：自我报告
Haeffel＆Howard（2010）将自我报告背后的心理与科学方面联系起来。作者已经讨论了诸如自我报告的有效性和应用等各种问题。这个论点是，该论文强调了批评已经转向了不需要关键的行为或生物学措施的简单方法。事实上，情况并非如此。单纯的方法在任何时候都不会产生高质量的结果。正如结论部分所述，工具也被用来测试理论并验证人们的结果。因此，自我报告是理解人的行为方面的又一个工具。论文解决的方式令人满意。它还对需要了解一个人的心理行为和自我报告的贡献形成了清晰的认识。
代写论文：自我报告
虽然Tourangeau＆Rasinski（1988）的论文与上述作者所讨论的主题非常相似，但行为分析的实际应用存在差异。本文更多地讨论了被访者的态度，而不仅仅是对自己的分析。这使他们有机会判断和理解优先事项。整个过程恰好处于逻辑格式。上下文效应被广泛讨论。争论在于管理对各种问题的意见。它可能因人而异，取决于他们的标准，报告格式，判断策略和信仰。在这种情况下，意见会影响报告过程。检索线索变得混乱。虽然这个想法是产生一个可以用来判断态度和监测反应的合适模型，但作者还没有提出一个端到端的分析模型。
代写论文：自我报告
Haeffel & Howard (2010) have associated the psychology behind self-report with scientific aspects. Various issues such as the validity and application of self-report have been discussed by the authors. The argument is that the paper has highlighted that the critiques have shifted to unsophisticated approach that does not require critical behavioral or biological measures. In reality, this is not the case. Unsophisticated approach does not yield quality results at all times. As mentioned in the conclusion part, tools are also used to test the theories and validate with the results of people. As a result, self-report acts as yet another tool to understand the behavioral aspect of people. The way the argument has been solved in the paper is satisfactory. It also establishes clear understanding on the need to learn psychological behavior of a person and the contribution of self-report to the same.
代写论文：自我报告
Although the paper by Tourangeau & Rasinski (1988) is very similar to the theme as discussed by authors above, there is a difference in the practical application of the behavior analysis. This paper discusses more on the attitude of the respondents than the mere analysis of oneself. This gives them the opportunity to judge and understand the priorities. The entire process happens to be in a logical format. Context effects are widely discussed. The argument lies in the management of opinions on varied issues. It could vary from one person to another depending on their standards, reporting format, judgment strategies and beliefs. In such cases, opinions affect the reporting process. The retrieval cues become messy. Though the idea is to produce a proper model that can be used to judge the attitude and monitor the response, the authors have not produced an end to end model for analysis.
