applied Flashcards
what do health psychs do?
could b clinical psychs working w/ ppl with other health issues, could b promoting health, could work on therapeutic relationship between patient + other healthcare workers
environmental psych
how ppl relate to their environment, might look at factors how neighbourhood u live in could influence behaviour
scientist-practitioner model
need to do research + apply it
descriptive research methods examples:
- observations - observe ppl’s behaviour
- focus groups - talking 2 a group of ppl
- epidemiological studies - looking at disease trends
- incident analysis - why r things going wrong, how could they b better
absolute validity
to what extent do the results u get realistically reproduce what u get irl
face validity
how measure appears to participants, do they see it as valid?
relative validity
do we get same pattern of results across different methods
what indicates practical significance + not just statistical significance?
how big is effect size, how meaningful is effect
ergonomics (more physical work)/human factors (more psych aspects) brief def
concerned w/ understanding interactions between humans + other elements of a system
when did human factors get popular?
mid-20th century, triggered by WW2 - getting psychologists 2 work on optimising the work of military + air force personnel etc.
what does HFE stand 4?
human factors n ergonomics
HFE characteristics
- takes a systems approach - looking at how humans work w/ tech + other systems, as well as overall system in which humans operate (e.g. laws)
- design driven + outcome-focused (performance, safety, user satisfaction)
key difference between HFE + org psych:
org psych is people working w/ people, HFE is people working w/ things/tech
usability
how easy + pleasant is it 2 use
what does the design aspect of HFE look @?
- usability
- equipment (physical ergonomics)
- tasks (look at way it’s being carried out - is it effective)
- environment
- organisation/regulation
ambient environment
people’s immediate work space
e.g. of issues w/ workplace processes
carrying out abortion on wrong person due 2 workers not following procedures as they should + having communication difficulties
error of commission
action that shouldn’t have been done or was done incorrectly
error of omission
action that wasn’t done (failure to execute action), more common in healthcare
human error template/HET
- fail to execute
- execution incomplete
- executed in the wrong direction
- wrong task executed
- task repeated
- executed on wrong interface element (e.g. B-17 using wrong control)
- executed too early
- executed too late
- executed too much
- executed too little
- misread information
- other
HTA/hierarchical task analysis def
working out what the tasks r
Stanton et al., 2010
- 8 undergrads trained 2 use HET
- compared errors that they predicted w/ alternative methods 4 error prediction + actual errors that ppl had made flying planes
- gave them diff scenarios, undergrads worked out how likely particular errors were
- key limitation of using this is that likelihood is really easy 2 quantify, but criticality is harder 2 quantify - differing criticality for diff individuals
vigilance
ability 2 maintain attentional focus n remain alert over prolonged periods, can involve detecting discrete events (e.g. warning light that smth’s gone wrong)
key features of vigilance tasks
- monitor 1+ info task
- prolonged period - between 5 mins-2 hrs for research vigilance tasks, irl example could b a security guard working 8 hr shift
- detect low probability signal
- signal requires response
features of a continuous performance task
- items r presented 1 at a time on the screen
- task is to respond to a specific item (e.g. respond only if x follows a)
- interested in attention span + memory
d prime def
factors in the hit rate + the false alarm rate = measure of sensitivity, how good r ppl at discriminating the signal from noise
vigilance decrement def + description
task performance declines w/ time
1. occurs w/ in 5-15 mins
2. can b explained by how demanding, stressful, + unengaging vigilance tasks r (self-reports)
neuroergonomics
application of neuroscience 2 ergonomics
how often does target typically appear in visual search research and why?
abt half the time, although this is v diff from real-life
1. this is bc when target is low prevalence (2% in security screening ?), ppl change search strategies 4 the worse bc they think they’re not gonna come across it
low prevalence effect def
when rare targets r missed at a disproportionately high rate
1. happens no matter what, is usually quite large n pronounced
how 2 reduce low prevalence effect:
- increase prevalence - not practical irl
- give false performance feedback (make them think they’re missing more than they r) –> makes them more vigilant, but often not possible 4 the task
- getting software 2 project false images onto luggage –> keeps ppl vigilant, works where a computer interface is involved (most effective when false high prevalence occurs in short bursts)
- give breaks
TAIC (NZ)
investigate accidents involving planes, ships, n other forms of non-road transport
human factors analysis + classification system (HFACS)
latent failures:
1. organisational influences
2. unsafe supervision
latent and/or active failures
1. preconditions 4 unsafe acts
active failures:
1. unsafe acts
errors def + types (HFACS)
generally unintentional, unsafe acts of operators
1. skill-based errors - know what they should b doing, but not following procedure properly
2. decision errors (e.g. exceeded ability)
violations def + types (HFACS)
know that this isn’t what u should b doing, unsafe acts of operators
1. routine - everyday actions, e.g. I don’t really Need 2 b doing this
2. exceptional - not just disregarding a small move, equivalent of doing doughnuts in ur plane
condition of operator (preconditions; HFACS)
- adverse mental states - temporary
- adverse physiological states - temporary
- physical/mental limitations - them just being incompetent ig
personnel factor (preconditions; HFACS)
- crew resource management - ur not working well as a team
- personal readiness - ur own competence
enviro factors (preconditions; HFACS)
- physical environment (not as important 4 indoor job)
- technological environment
unsafe supervision (HFACS)
- inadequate supervision - ur a bad mentor
- planned inappropriate operations - ur bad at planning
- failed 2 correct a known problem
- supervisory violations - doing stuff in ur supervision role u Know is wrong
resource management (HFACS)
- human resources
- monetary/budget resources - excessive cost-cutting
- equipment/facility resources (e.g. shitty aircraft)
organisational climate (HFACS)
- structure (e.g. delegation of authority)
- policies
- culture
organisational process (HFACS)
- operations - incentives, time pressure
- procedures (e.g. performance standards)
- oversight - how much ur looking over things, make sure it’s safe
Shappell et al., 2007 (looking @ uses of HFACS)
tend to attribute mistakes more 2 individuals than actual govt. or bigger structure (bias??)
1. found most accidents involved unsafe acts rather than organisational influences or unsafe supervision
automation def n description
execution by a machine agent of a function that was previously carried out by a human
1. not binary, exists on a continuum
2. leaves humans to do difficult tasks that can’t b automated
how reliable is automation usually?
most of the time automation is pretty reliable (80-90%), but we may think of it as 100% reliable + trust it blindly → more error prone than not having automation available
what level of automation should be used for easy vs difficult tasks?
- easy task 4 operator, lower automation
- harder task, increase automation
info acquisition n automation (Parasuraman et al., 2000)
info acquisition - equivalent 2 human sensory processes
1. recommended relatively high automation here
info analysis (Parasuraman et al., 2000)
working memory, inferential processes - making predictions, identifying trends
1. recommended relatively high automation
decision selection (Parasuraman et al., 2000)
equivalent 2 human decision making, AI just needs info acquired n info analysis 2 come to a decision
1. 4 high risk task, low automation
2. 4 low risk task, high automation
action implementation (Parasuraman et al., 2000)
replaces human voice, hand movements etc
1. moderate degree of automation, lower automation if there’s high risk
Rasmussen, 1997
competing pressures:
1. economic failure (unsustainable costs)
2. unacceptable workload (unsustainable work requirements)
want 2 stay in space of possibilities - safe n sustainable work
work teams
2 or more ppl working together on a collective goal
task work
any actions or behaviours that ppl do that r directly related 2 a specific task, both teams n individuals can do taskwork
teamwork
behaviours inherent 2 the team (how the team works 2gether), can only b undertaken by the team
framework 4 understanding teamwork
input (e.g. u + ur teammates) → processes (can be behavioural, cognitive, emotional - how does team work 2gether) → output (e.g. group presentation)
3 types of teamwork processes r:
- transition phase
- action phase
- interpersonal
transition phase (teamwork)
evaluating n planning work that team will do. 3 key aspects:
1. mission analysis
2. goal specification
3. strategy formulation
diff types of strategy formulation (teamwork)
- deliberate planning - plan A
- contingency planning - plan B
- reactive strategy adjustment - if ur plan doesn’t work, have 2 decide if ur gonna change strategies or abort task altogether
action phase (teamwork)
when ur doing the work
1. monitoring progress towards goals
2. systems monitoring - what resources r available?
3. team monitoring + backup behaviour
4. coordination (may also occur in transition phase)
interpersonal (teamwork)
- conflict management - can do this reactively or thru preemptive conflict management (set up conditions so that conflict doesn’t arise - e.g. keeping ppl who hate each other separate)
- motivation + confidence building
- affect management
Kühnel & Sonnetag, 2010
- compared immediately b4 + after vacation → work engagement went up, emotional exhaustion went down
- effect were gone by 4 weeks (particularly for those w/ stressful jobs)
- should have short, frequent breaks
unlimited paid time off.. what happens w this?
ppl often take less time off than if they have limited paid time off. why?
1. descriptive n injunctive norms
2. psychological contract w/ employer - have 2 b ideal worker (shouldn’t take time off)
3. paradox of autonomy - if they’re going 2 get anything done at work w/ out relying on employer influence, need 2 have strong motivation (self-exploit)
4-day work week pros n cons
pros:
1. reduced turnover n cost
2. easier recruiting
3. boosted morale n job satisfaction
cons:
1. scheduling issues
2. worker fatigue
3. childcare
4. workload
5. intensified performance management + monitoring
what’s inconclusive abt the 4-day work week?
- productivity
- absenteeism
- employee health
- enviro benefits
- long-term effects
what is personnel selection looking @?
- knowledge
- skills
- abilities
- attitudes
- aptitudes
- personal characteristics
California POST dimensions (4 public safety officers)
- emotional regulation n stress tolerance
- avoiding damaging + excessive risk-taking behaviour - but don’t want them 2 b completely risk-averse
- impulse control/attention 2 safety
- assertiveness/persuasiveness
- social competence
- teamwork
- decision-making + judgement
- adaptability + flexibility
- conscientiousness/dependability
- integrity/ethics
how r psychometrics used in diff contexts?
- clinical psych - diagnosing
- org psych - r they suitable 4 the job?
- ed psych - identifying extreme disabilities, do they need support
- forensic psych - r they competent enough 2 b a witness etc
test types
- cognitive testing
- personality (more wordy) - either assessing ppl in normal range or looking 4 abnormal functioning (California POST requires that u do 1 of each)
normal range personality tests:
- NEO-PI-3
- 16PF
- MPQ (Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire)
- CPI (California Psychological Inventory)
abnormal functioning personality tests
- MMPI-3 - most common in law enforcement, can screen 4 anxiety depression n impulsivity
- PAI
- MCMI-IV - developed specifically 4 clinical populations, less 4 prospective law enforcement
sports psych def
anything relating 2 competition, can b elite athletes or ppl in local competition
3 key areas sport psychs can work in (APA):
- athlete skills training (psychological - helping their mental game)
- counselling n clinical interventions
- consultation n training - organisations, teams, support networks → trying 2 make overall experience better, how 2 motivate athletes + make them perform their best while still being healthy
what’s the basic principle of the Yerkes-Dodson Law?
as task gets harder, stress worsens performance; as task gets easier, stress is good 4 performance
trickle down model (sports psych)
investing in elite athletes
1. international sporting success fosters sense of national identity n pride → see All Blacks being good, take up rugby –> get larger talent base, feeds back 2 the elites
pyramid models (sports psych)
broad base of PE n community sport increases performance @ top levels
1. limitations: conceptualised as a pyramid, getting as many ppl at the bottom as possible - have nowhere 2 go bc they only take ppl who r good
inclusive model (sports psych), adapted from pyramid model
- grid not pyramid
- columns r diff levels of talent, row r diff age groups
- not taking young children n sending them off 2 high-performance training (can only go to high-performance stage @ 13)
what’s a broad description of physical activity levels in NZ?
- mostly either highly physically active (5+ hours per week) or insufficiently active (.5-2.5 hours per week)
- followed by little or no physical activity (<30 mins per week) n then physically active (2.5-5 hours per week)
self-determination theory (useful in designing exercise interventions)
has a scale for type n presence of exercise motivation
1. intrinsic motivation –> integrated regulation –> identified regulation –> introjected regulation (controlled motivation) –> external regulation (controlled motivation) –> a-motivation
intrinsic motivation
e.g. i run bc i love running
integrated regulation
integrated ur motivations into ur sense of self (e.g. I run bc im a runner)
identified regulation
you’ve identified benefits 2 exercising
introjected regulation
punishing/rewarding urself 4 exercise
external regulation
you’ll b in trouble if u don’t run/you’ll be rewarded if u do (not a good approach, not super effective)
Silva et al., 2008
having high autonomous motivations might not make a big difference in exercise levels initially (12 months), but makes big difference long-term (24 months)
instrumental evaluation
is behaviour beneficial
subjective norms
what’s relevant
what percentage of variation in ppl’s exercise behaviour is due 2 attitudes?
35%
how is the theory of planned behaviour useful in exercise psych?
useful bc it’s telling u what’s gonna facilitate engaging in that behaviour
1. need 2 think abt how we can change ppl’s instrumental evaluation, perceived power etc
describe the best model 4 exercise psych
stages of behaviour change model
1. pre-contemplation (no intention 2 exercise, no exercise)
2. contemplation (intention w/ in 6 months, no exercise)
3. preparation (intention w/ in 30 days, irregular n <criterion amount)
4. action (intention, regular n ≥ criterion amt for <6 months)
5. maintenance (intention, regular n ≥ criterion amt for >6 months)
criterion amount in the stage of behaviour change model:
> 20 mins for 3 days a week, at least moderate intensity
WHO road crash stats
- 8th leading cause of death globally
- kills approx. 1.2 million ppl worldwide per year
- no.1 cause of death 4 young people
significance of transport as a social determinant of health (factor affecting ur overall wellbeing):
- direct influence: injury, stress, pollution, physical activity
- indirect influence: access 2 education, employment, activities, services
- mental health interactions
courtesy crossing
not official crossing, but gives pedestrians place 2 cross instead of just doing it randomly
self-explaining roads
should just b able to look @ a road n know where 2 go
driver education
broad knowledge abt driving
driver training
abt specific skills - cognitive (e.g. planning how ur going 2 drive) n physical/procedural (how do u manoeuvre vehicle)
DeKalb study (U.S., late 70s/early 80s)
- looked @ 16k high-schoolers
- 3 levels: control (no driver training), safe performance curriculum/gold standard (SPC; 70h total), + pre-driver licensing (PDL; 20h total)
- SPC had better driving performance than control, but more likely 2 crash n get tickets
- PDL had better driving performance than control, no difference on crashes n violations
- explanation: didn’t pilot programme properly, don’t really know much abt the programme content
- confounds: accelerated licensure, increased exposure 2 driving
graduated driver licensing (GDL) system
gain knowledge over time
what does 2-day AA defensive driving course allow u 2 do?
get ur full license 6 months early
NZ drivers study (Begg & Brookland, 2015)
looked @ newly licensed drivers, 49% did defensive driving course
1. motivations: 85% 2 get full license sooner, 4% to improve knowledge, 2% to b a safer driver
2. ppl who took defensive driving course had more violations than those who didn’t
3. only ppl who were safer were those who didn’t take time discount
hazard perception training benefits n limitations
- ppl who score higher on hazard perception tests have lower crash risk
- hasn’t been proven directly that hazard perception increases hazard perception test scores + studies haven’t been longitudinal or v large
what might hazard perception training focus on?
hazard anticipation + mitigation, attentional maintenance
insight training
improve safety by getting ppl 2 realistically evaluate their driving ability
resilience training
reduces risk-taking by developing interpersonal skills (teaching u 2 resist peer pressure)
1. evidence supports this as a training method
is there a substitute for distributed practice in driving?
distributed practice - experience accumulated over time
+ No, there is not
naturalistic driving studies def + limitations
put data loggers (cameras) in cars, record from start to end of drive. limitations:
1. can’t usually record sound (no context)
2. lots of data, but don’t necessarily capture type of data ur interested in
3. lack of control
instrumented vehicles def + limitations
real driving, consistent predetermined route - lots of control (enclosed area where they can control water etc.). limitations:
1. less data
2. ethics - putting ppl in potentially dangerous situations 2 gather relevant data (overcome by having 2 drivers, but changes experience n v expensive)
driving simulator studies
- can measure everything v precisely
- limitations:
lacking realism (40% ran thru stop stop sign in front of approaching trains, not replicated irl)
can make u ill
require participants 2 b in same place as researcher
self-report studies (4 driving)
- p accurate 4 assessing average behaviour n attitudes
- not v accurate 4 specific things due 2 memory difficulties (e.g. mileage, crashes)
driver behaviour questionnaire (DBQ) basic def
measuring aberrant (departing frm accepted standard) driving behaviour
types of aberrant behaviour in the DBQ:
- errors (more serious than lapses - fail 2 notice, brake too quickly on slippery road etc
- lapses - forget where u left car, driving 2 wrong place
- ordinary violations - e.g. disregard speed limit
- aggressive violations (hostility towards other road users)
errors n lapses can b difficult 2 observe lapses can be difficult to observe
DBQ + personality (personality is a significant predictor 4 driving behaviour)
- hostility correlated w/ both types of violations
- impulsivity correlated 2 ordinary violations n errors
- disinhibition correlated 2 ordinary violations n lapses
- risk-taking n thrill-seeking correlated 2 ordinary violations
- negative correlation between conscientiousness + ordinary violations, errors, lapses
- negative affectivity correlated w/ everything
- irresponsibility correlated w/ errors n lapses
- perseveration correlated 2 lapses
- attentional control negatively correlated 2 errors + lapses
- antagonism + trait anger correlated to aggressive violations
personality + driving implications
- ppl who r more conscientiousness get more out of driver training
- useful for understanding how 2 form deterrence programs 4 driving offenders, offender rehabilitation
driving anger scale (how ur anger is triggered)
- progress impediment (slow driving, traffic obstructions)
- being put at risk (illegal driving)
- inconsiderate driving (discourtesy, hostile gestures)
- police presence
cultural differences in levels of road rage findings (US, China, n Turkey):
top anger 4 U.S., followed by Turkey + then China
riding anger scale (for motor-cyclists)
- perceived risk (much more prominent issue 4 motorcyclists)
- forced riding style
- perceived hostility
- slow riding
cycling anger scale (from most triggering 2 least)
- cars (physically putting them at risk, violating their right of way?)
- pedestrians
- cyclists
- police
since when has ed psych been a separate discipline?
since late 19th-early 20th century
key influencers in ed psych:
- Herbert - formal steps of learning (reviewing what students already know, how does new info relate 2 this)
- Witmer - evidence-based interventions, found no framework 4 dealing w children with learning issues
- Binet - intelligence testing (initially 2 identify children w/ intellectual disabilities)
- Piaget - cognitive development
- Simon-Binet tests - young children think differently than older children or adults
4 basic emphases in ed psych research (20th century)
- cognitive psych
- behavioural psych - not as prominent in contemporary research
- social cognitive theory - combines elements of behaviourism w cognition
- humanism - more student-centred, focuses on their experience of learning (not much testing 4 students)
metacognition in learning + key associated concept
how good r we at assessing how much we’ve learned
1. key concept: judgements of learning (JoLs)
research for JoLs:
- typically have participants learn new material, then rate how well they would do on a test of that material
- learning research often uses word learning, takes 2 forms: asking participants to learn new language, have participants learn novel word pair associations for 2 words frm same language
Koriat, 1997 - 3 types of cues influence JoLs
- intrinsic - characteristics of studied items (subjective, but predicts performance p well)
- mnemonic - internal signals abt how well we’ve learned material (e.g. ease of recall)
- extrinsic - conditions of learning (Not good predictor of performance, learners don’t recognise which conditions r most effective 4 learning) xtrinsic - conditions of learning; how learning session is structured, study methods etc (Not good predictor of performance - learners dont seem 2 recognise which study conditions r mos effective 4 learning)
self-explanation
explaining how new info that ur learning relates to previous knowledge
in the problem-solving context - explaining steps taken during problem-solving
elaborative interrogation
generating explanation 4 why explicitly stated fact or concept is true
keyword mnemonic
using keywords n mental imagery 2 associate w/ verbal materials (e.g. might associate ‘egg’ w/ ‘l’oeuf’)
mass practice
cramming
interleaved practice
schedule of practice that alternates different problems or material (e.g. alternate between studying for 212 + 210)
Dunlosky et al. (looking at efficacy of studying types across 4 dimensions)’s dimensions:
- materials being learned - e.g. is method only effective 4 memorising word defs
- criterion tasks - how is learning being tested
- student characteristics - who is it working 4
- learning conditions (e.g. does it only work when studying late @ night)
cued recall
learner is given prompt/clue abt answer
Dunlosky et al.’s findings:
- high utility: practice testing, distributed practice
- moderate (either limited evidence or don’t work in all contexts): interleaved practice, elaborative interrogation, self-explanation
- low (work only in specific contexts): keyword mnemonics, imagery , summarisation
- low overall effectiveness: re-reading, highlighting (least effective - can actually impair performance), often most common study types LEAST effective - at best, no benefit; can actually impair performance), often most commonly used study techniques
what is the optimal time between study sessions?
approx. 10-20% of desired retention time
1. longer u need 2 remember it for, the longer u shld space out study sessions
hindsight bias
once there’s research on smth, ur like oh yeah that makes sense that’s common sense
Heck et al., 2018
- ask ppl if they’re more intelligent than the average person
- 65% say yes, 20% say idk, abt 20% admit that they’re not more intelligent than the average person
Dunning-Kruger effect
- looked at American uni students’ final exam scores
- ppl who r in 3rd + 4th quartiles 4 school performance think they’re above average, above average ppl r more accurate, best slightly underestimate themselves
meta-ignorance
ppl r ignorant abt their own ignorance
policies
principles or rules that guide decision-making + actions 2 achieve desirable outcomes
research translation
need 2 have psychs doing applied research, then have those findings communicated 2 policy makers
research vs. policy questions
research - what’s going on
policy questions - what does that mean 4 the law
why aren’t all policies evidence-based?
pragmatic reasons:
1. policy may predate evidence
2. no evidence, low quality evidence
political/ideological reasons:
1. policy-makers could b unaware of evidence, might not b able 2 access it
2. evidence could contradict tradition, beliefs of policy-makers
3. policy-makers might be confident in their own experiences + common sense
intervention standards (Flay et al., 2005):
@ least 2 real-world studies w:
1. relevant samples
2. sound measures n procedures
3. appropriate analysis + documentation
4. positive effects of practical significance
5. at least 1 long-term follow up
most common amt of hours driven during learning stage?
30-50
why shouldn’t we use Sweden’s driver licensing data 2 inform our own driving policies?
- data was of age-based crash rates, not no. of driving hours
- data was frm real-life ppl that self-selected (@ 16 need someone 2 teach u, would probs b more motivated; at 17.5 can just get a permit)
so - doesn’t support 120 hours driving practice idea
what might happen if there was a min. of 40-50 hrs driving practice in NZ?
U.S. studies show it’s better than 30 hrs, but people who need more practice might reach requirement + stop (as seen in Aussie data)
what category do most accidents usually fall under when ppl use HFACS?
freak accidents
does terror management protect n enhance self-esteem?
yes
terror management
ppl feel threatened by their own death + adopt worldviews that allow them 2 find meaning n worth in their lives
