PAC 799A Module 3 Questions and Definitions Example

Course	PAC 799A Addiction Studies Capstone
Module	Module 3
Paper type	Research questions section
Length	About 1,127 words, 7 pages
Format	APA 7 student paper
School	Aspen University
Program	Psychology and Addiction Studies
Updated	October 2026

Free sample paper for PAC 799A Module 3

Four Questions and a Default: Research Questions and Definitions for a Jail Naloxone Evaluation

Student Name

Psychology and Addiction Studies Program, Aspen University

PAC 799A: Addiction Studies Capstone

Instructor Name

Month Day, Year

What this page is doingThe title counts the questions and names the default, the idea the project tests. APA 7 student title page.

Four Questions and a Default: Research Questions and Definitions for a Jail Naloxone Evaluation

Avery's capstone evaluates how naloxone is offered to people walking out of Pine Hollow's county jail in Georgia, a setting that exists only in this course, as does Avery. In Module 2 the purpose was set in three parts: measure how often kits leave with the people offered them, learn why some say no and see whether a default kit in the property bag moves the numbers. This section turns that purpose into research questions and defines the terms they use.

Why an Opt-Out Offer

The idea to be tested comes from behavioral economics. Johnson and Goldstein (2003) compared organ donation consent across European countries and found striking differences tied to the default. In countries where citizens were donors unless they opted out, effective consent rates were close to universal; in countries where citizens had to opt in, rates were far lower. An online experiment showed the same pattern: when participants had to opt in, fewer than half agreed to be donors, while when they had to opt out, about eight in ten remained donors. The authors argued that defaults matter because they require no effort, may be seen as recommended and relieve people of an active decision. At Pine Hollow, the current offer is opt-in: the nurse asks, and the person must say yes. Under opt-out, the kit would already be packed with the person's belongings and would go home with them unless they asked staff to take it out.

The Research Questions

RQ1: What proportion of eligible people released from Pine Hollow accepted a naloxone kit during the twelve months of the opt-in offer, and how did acceptance vary by time of release, type of release and number of prior bookings?

RQ2: How do recently released people and jail nurses describe the reasons people accept or decline a naloxone kit at release?

RQ3: After the change to an opt-out offer, did the level or trend of monthly kit uptake change compared with the twelve months before?

RQ4: How do the accounts of released people and nurses help explain the patterns of uptake found in RQ1 and RQ3?

What this page is doingNone of the questions asks whether the opt-out caused uptake to rise or whether deaths fell; the design cannot answer either.

Why Each Question Is Worded as It Is

RQ1 is descriptive. It establishes the baseline and identifies groups with lower uptake, such as people released at night, who may need a different approach. RQ2 is exploratory and open, because the reasons people decline are not known and should not be assumed. RQ3 follows the logic of an interrupted time series. Lopez Bernal et al. (2017) explain that this design compares the trend in an outcome before an intervention with the level and trend afterward, using repeated measurements over time, and that it guards against simple before-and-after comparisons that ignore existing trends. They also note its limits: other events occurring at the same time can produce changes, and a short series gives less confidence. RQ3 therefore asks about change in level and trend rather than about cause. RQ4 joins the two strands. Fetters et al. (2013) describe integration as the point at which qualitative and quantitative data are brought together, whether by building one on the other, merging them for comparison or using one to explain the other. RQ4 uses the interviews to explain the numbers, an explanatory form of integration.

Questions Considered and Set Aside

Three other questions were drafted and dropped. The first asked whether the opt-out offer reduced overdose deaths among people released from Pine Hollow. It was dropped because deaths among one jail's releases over six months are too few to show a change, and because death records cannot easily be linked to release records within the capstone. The second asked whether people who took kits used them. A few interviews may describe use, but the project has no reliable way to track kits after release, so the question was folded into RQ2 as something participants may raise rather than something measured. The third asked whether nurses' attitudes toward naloxone predicted uptake. With only two nurses making the offer, the question could not be answered with numbers, and their views are better explored in interviews under RQ2.

What Answers Might Look Like

Stating possible answers in advance helps check that each question can be answered. RQ1 will produce percentages, such as uptake among night releases compared with day releases. RQ2 will produce themes, such as fear of being seen with the kit by officers. RQ3 will produce an estimated change in level and in slope with confidence intervals. RQ4 will produce a joint display in which, for example, lower uptake among night releases is set beside nurses' accounts of rushed overnight releases.

Matching Questions to Data

Question	Data	Analysis
RQ1	Release log and booking screen, twelve months before the change	Proportions; comparison across groups
RQ2	Interviews with about ten recently released people and both nurses	Thematic analysis
RQ3	Monthly uptake across the eighteen months spanning the switch, twelve under opt-in and six under opt-out	Segmented regression, as described by Lopez Bernal and colleagues
RQ4	Results of RQ1 to RQ3 together	Joint display comparing patterns and explanations

Operational Definitions

Term	Definition for this project
Eligible release	A release of a person who answered yes to the booking question on opioid use in the past year, or who received opioid withdrawal care in the jail
Naloxone kit	Two doses of nasal naloxone with an instruction card, supplied by the county health department
Uptake	The release log records that the kit left the jail with the person, in hand or in the property bag
Decline	The release log records that the kit was offered and refused, or under opt-out, removed at the person's request
Night release	A release logged after seven in the evening or before seven in the morning
Type of release	Sentence completed, released on bond or released directly from court
Opt-in offer	The nurse offers the kit and the person must agree to take it
Opt-out offer	The kit is placed in the property bag of every eligible person, who may ask to have it removed

Alignment With the Purpose

Each question maps onto a part of the purpose. Describing uptake is RQ1; exploring reasons is RQ2; assessing the opt-out change is RQ3; and RQ4 joins them, as a mixed-methods purpose requires. No question reaches beyond the purpose, and no part of the purpose lacks a question.

Conclusion

Four questions, descriptive, exploratory, comparative over time and integrative, turn the capstone's purpose into answerable form. Johnson and Goldstein's work on defaults explains why an opt-out offer is worth testing, Lopez Bernal and colleagues shape the wording of the time series question and Fetters and colleagues shape the integrative one. Operational definitions make every key term measurable, preparing the ground for Chapter 1.

References

Fetters, M. D., Curry, L. A., & Creswell, J. W. (2013). Achieving integration in mixed methods designs: Principles and practices. Health Services Research, 48(6, Pt. 2), 2134-2156. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6773.12117

Johnson, E. J., & Goldstein, D. (2003). Do defaults save lives? Science, 302(5649), 1338-1339. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1091721

Lopez Bernal, J., Cummins, S., & Gasparrini, A. (2017). Interrupted time series regression for the evaluation of public health interventions: A tutorial. International Journal of Epidemiology, 46(1), 348-355. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyw098

What the PAC 799A Module 3 instructions ask for

The third module of PAC 799A typically asks for research questions aligned with your purpose and for definitions of key terms. Follow the Module 3 instructions in your Aspen course; the jail here is invented. Write questions that your design can answer, in the right form for each type of data. Avoid causal wording unless your design supports it. Match each question to its data source. Define every key term operationally, so that someone else would measure it the same way. Show that each question follows from the purpose. Cite sources that support your question types and any theory behind them, using APA 7 throughout. It also helps to list questions you considered and dropped, with the reason, since instructors often ask why an obvious question is missing.

Inside the PAC 799A Module 3 example

The purpose of the composite Pine Hollow evaluation is to describe uptake, explore reasons for accepting or declining and test an opt-out offer. Johnson and Goldstein's Science article on organ donation defaults explains why an opt-out offer may raise uptake. RQ1 describes uptake and its variation; RQ2 explores reasons through interviews; RQ3 asks whether monthly uptake changed in level and trend after the switch; RQ4 asks how the interviews explain the numbers. Lopez Bernal and colleagues' International Journal of Epidemiology tutorial shapes RQ3's wording. Fetters and colleagues' Health Services Research article shapes RQ4. A definitions table covers eligibility, uptake and night release. A section on dropped questions explains why overdose deaths and kit use are not measured, which anticipates the most likely objection from a reviewer.

Reading the PAC 799A Module 3 grading rubric

Research question sections earn credit for questions that follow from the purpose, fit the design and use precise, measurable terms. This example writes four questions of different types and explains the wording of each, including why RQ3 asks about change in level and trend rather than whether the opt-out caused higher uptake. Each question is paired with data. The definitions table is operational: uptake is defined by what is recorded at release, not by intention. Theory from behavioral economics explains why the opt-out test is worth running. The alignment check closes the section, showing nothing in the questions falls outside the purpose. Questions considered and set aside are explained, which shows judgment about what the data can bear.

PAC 799A Module 3 help from the desk

Research questions often ask more than the design can answer, such as whether a change reduced overdose deaths. Ask what your data can show. Use descriptive wording for descriptive questions, exploratory wording for qualitative ones and comparative wording for before-and-after questions. Define every key term in measurable form, including time windows and what counts as yes. Keep the number of questions manageable; three or four is common. Check each question against your purpose sentence. Ask a colleague to read your definitions and say how they would measure each term; if their answer differs from yours, the definition needs work. Sketch what an answer to each question would look like, a percentage, a theme or a slope; a question with no imaginable answer is not ready.

Write yours, or have the desk draft it

This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Aspen University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.

More PAC 799A and Psychology and Addiction Studies sample papers

PAC 799A Module 3 questions, answered

What does PAC 799A Module 3 usually ask for?

Aspen's PAC 799A covers research questions and definitions in this module, so writing aligned questions and operational definitions is typical. Read your Module 3 prompt.

Why might an opt-out offer increase uptake?

Johnson and Goldstein found that default options strongly shape choices; organ donor consent was far higher in countries where people had to opt out rather than opt in.

What can an interrupted time series answer?

Whether an outcome's level or trend changed after an intervention, compared with the trend before; Lopez Bernal and colleagues explain its strengths and limits.

Where can I find a free PAC 799A Module 3 sample paper?

This page holds the full section: four research questions for a jail naloxone evaluation, a question-to-data table and operational definitions.

What is an operational definition?

A definition that states exactly how a term will be measured, so that different people would record it the same way.

PAC 799A Module 3 Research Questions and Definitions Example