1-research methods Flashcards
THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD
A procedure for finding information by using empirical OBSERVABLE evidence
- used to:
- test theories!
- organizations of our observations of natural phenomena
- proposed explanations for why the phenomena occurred
Theories
organize our understanding of phenomena, well-developed set of ideas that propose an explanation for observed phenomena
Hypotheses
testable prediction about how the world will behave if our idea is correct. Used to test specific aspect of a theory, bridges the gap between ideas and real world
Deductive reasoning
ideas are tested against the empirical world
- Starts with generalization that is tested against real-world observations
- start with theory to test a hypothesis
Inductive reasoning
empirical observations lead to new ideas
- start with obersvation, use to generate a theory
- Uses empirical observations to construct broad generalizations
Case studies
Conduct in-depth interviews to gain insight into a rare disorder
- can provide profound insight into the workings of the brain
pros and cons of case studies
Pros: provide incredible detail on studied phenomena
cons: bases are often of rare disorders—results are mostly not generalizable; application of gained knowledge is limited
Naturalistic observation
Observing behaviour in it’s “natural habitat”
- researcher needs to be inconspicuous
- if people feel that they are being watched, they will change their behaviours
- Not limited to research about humans!
- Best known example is going to observe animals
pros and cons fo naturalistic observation
Pros
- high on ecological validity—expect natural behaviour in a natural setting
- findings: very generalizable
- validity of info
cons:
- difficult to set up
- Observer bias
observer bias and how to get around it
researchers seeing what they want to see
- get around this by having multiple people watching the same behaviour and then comparing notes to see how reliable they are
- or!! get people that don’t know the research questions
Inter-rater reliability
measure of reliablity that assess the consistency of observations by different observers
Surveys
lists of questions answered by research participant
- can gauge the public’s udnerstanding/interest in something
pros and cons of surveys
pros:
- can collect A LOT of data!!
- can better generalize our findings
- larger sample sizes
cons:
- gives a lot of information, but doesn’t tell us why phenomenon occurs
- data not as rich as case study
- people might
- lie
- misremember
- respond in a socially desirable way
Archival Research
Use existing records to answer various research questions—interesting patterns/relationships
pros and cons of archival research
pros
- The researcher never directly interacts with research participants (probably a con too hahah)
- Investment of time and money is less!!
cons
- Researchers have no control over what info was originally collected
- Research questions have to be tailored so they can be answered within the structure of existing data
- No guarantee of consistency—hard to compare and contrast different data sets
CORRELATION COEFFICIENT
number from -1 to +1 that indicates the strength and direction of the relationship between variable, represented by letter r
-1 < r < 1
the closer it is to 1 or -1, the stronger the relationship
- positive=variables move in same direction
- negative=variables move in opposite directions
issue with correlation coefficient?
correlation does NOT imply causation
- with correlation coefficient, cannot say which one causes the other
confounding variables
unanticipated outside factor that affects both variables of interest
- often giving the false impression that changes in one variable causes changes in the other variable, when, in actuality, the outside factor causes changes in both variables
Illusory Correlations
- when two things correlate by chance
- 1 in 20 correlations!!
-
why?
- read/hear about something and just accept the info as valid
- or… confirmation bias
- is involved in the formation of prejudical attitudes and then discriminatory behaviour
- P(winning) = 1 — (1-p)^n
Cross-sectional research
if we measure a correlation between variables at one point in time
Longitudinal research
- uses correlations over time to test a causal chain
- follow same people over time and match up earlier response with later responses
pros and cons of longitudinal research
PROS:
- better idea of causality
- see how processes unfold overtime
CONS:
- time intensive
- participants drop out
- 3rd variable problem 😟
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE
the variable that you manipulate and see its effect on the outcome variable (dependent variable!)
DEPENDENT VARIABLE
outcome variable, variable that is the measure of — of interest in the study
CONTROL GROUP
the group that does not recieve the intervention
RANDOMIZATION
randomly assign participants to conditions! that way, each of the participants has equal opportunity to be assigned to the control or experimental condition
OPERATIONAL DEFINITION
important!! a clearly defined description of some characteristic. It should be specific and describe not only what you are measuring but how.
influences the conclusions you can from your dependent variable!!
QUASI-EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
when we have two naturally occurring groups that we perform an experiment on, cannot directly control the independent variable, cannot make cause-and-effect claims in these circumstances
- useful! but limits the claims we can make about causality
SINGLE-BLIND
the participants are unaware of the hypothesis/condition
DOUBLE-BLIND
when both the researchers (experimenter) AND!!! the participants are unaware of the condition/hypothesis of the study
EXPERIMENTER BIAS
possibility that a researchers expectations might skew the results of the study
PLACEBO EFFECT
when ppl’s expectations/beliefs influence or determine their experience in a given situation
what test subjects are most of psychology based on?
university students
- younger, more liberal, more educated, less diverse
Random sample
subset of a larger population in which every member of the population has an equal chance of being selected
Random assignment:
- all participants have an equal chance of being assigned to either group
- makes it unlikely for systemic differences
- important bc we wouldn’t know the origin of any differences—-preexisting, or caused by independent variable?
why randomization?
- everyone in a given population has equal opportunity of being selected for the sample
- everyone in a given sample has equal opportunity for being assigned to a condition
- random samples allow us more confidence in generalizing our effects from the sample to the population as a whole
sir francis galton
-
first set of studies into intelligence
- measured it using reaction time
- how quickly someone could classify a sound
- measured it using reaction time
-
not valid!!
- did not measure what he thought he was measuring
- empirical observations of intelligence wasn’t actually observations of intelligence
- did not measure what he thought he was measuring
VALIDITY
does our instrument measure what we want to measure?
RELIABILITY
does our test return consistent results overtime
institutional review board (IRB)
any research instiution that receives federal support for research involving human participants must have access to an institutional review board (IRB)
committee of individuals often made up of members of the institution’s administration, scientists, and community members
reviews proposals for research that involves human participants
ethics guidelines
- no Harm should come to participants
- respect for human Dignity and safety
- participants must Consent to participation in experiments—what the study is about and any risks associated with the study
- informed consent
- must be free to withdraw Consent at any point
- data collection is Confidential
- sometimes Deception is necessary, but must be very well motivated
- regardless, participants should be fully Debriefed after the study
HCCCDDD
animal’s role in experimentation?
- 90% of all animal research in psychology uses rodents or birds
- many basic processes in animals are sufficiently similar to those in humans
- these animals are acceptable substitutes for research that would be considered unethical in human participants
Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC)
reviews animal experimental proposals, consists of institutional administrators, scientists, vets, and community members
the Tuskegee Syphilis Study
- investigating Syphilis in black men
- offered “free medical care”, meals, and burial insurance
- were NOT actually getting medical care!!
- they studied these individuals for 40 years
- the researchers did not tell the participants if they had syphilis!!
- they didn’t even provide treatment when penicillin was discovered in 1947
- syphilis thus spread through their communities and many died
- stopped in 1972
national research act 1974
sets out the guidelines for what is considered an ethical study
