CHAPTER 2 Flashcards
(39 cards)
goal of research
continuously improve on tentative answers to questions
- think and seek new knowledge
- question what we know, explore unknown
research
exploration of the unknown thru data gathering
personality data
applies to psych triad using personality clues that we search for
funder’s second law
there aren’t any perfect indicators of personality, only ambiguous clues
must put tgt clues
- realize clues may be misleading bcs ambig
funder’s third law
smth beats nothing, 2/3 times
ways personality data can be collected
- s data
- i data
- l data
- b data
S data
self reports, usually surveys
- has high face validity
pros:
1. large amounts info: bcs know self best
2. access to psych triad
3. definitional truth: correct bcs you say it is i.e. i’m smart
4. causal force: self-efficacy—you become what you say you are
self-verification: try to make others see how you see yourself
cons:
1. bias: overly pos, desire privacy
2. error: active mem distortion, lack insight
3. too simple = careless
fish and water effect
an error w s data
ppl don’t notice constants in their personality i.e. always grumpy so don’t realize it
i data
informant report data: collected by informants i.e. coworkers, psychs, acquaintances
may be more accurate to ID -ve traits than S data
pros:
1. lots of info i.e. many informants
2. real-world basis: not controlled environ, more likely to be relevant
3. common sense: accounts for CONTEXT i.e. screamed at elevator vs thief
4. definitional truth: if others think it, it’s true
5. causal force: reputation affects expectations and opps
cons:
1. limited behav info
2. lack priv exp
3. error: likely to remember unusual behav
4. bias: prej and stereotype
judgments
based on observing ppl in context they know them from
collected via i data
letter of recommendation effect
bias in i data bcs ppl only offer informants w pos views of them
expectancy effect
causal force in i data
become the person others expect
- aka behavioural confirmation
L data
life outcomes data: verifiable, concrete, real-life evidence
- facts that may hold sig i.e. school records, med files, soc med
pros:
1. verifiable events
2. intrinsic importance
3. psych relevance
cons:
1. multideterminism: many reasons for evidence i..e recession causes unemployment, messy bcs of guests
B data
behavioural data: obs of daily life or in lab
- visible indication of personality
- can also be seen thru some personality tests
natural B data
natural B data: from daily life…diary and exp sampling methods
- ear: electronically activated recorder
- wearable cameras
- soc med
ambulatory assessment: uses comp methods to access psych triad in daily activiites
pros: realistic
cons: difficult, desire contexts rarely happen
laboratory B data
experiments that make situation and record behav
- examine rxns, may measure phys behav
- represents diff to observe contexts
pros:
1. inc range of contexts
2. appearance of objectivity: still subjective judgments made
cons: diff and expensive, uncertain interpretation
mixed data types
wide range of types of data relevant to personality
each w dis/advantages
reliability
tendency of measurement instrument to provide the SAME INFO mult times
measurement error
cumulative effect of extraneous influences on a test score
states vs traits
traits more stable across situations w little variation
factors undermining reliability
- low precision of measurement
- state of participant
- state of experimenters
some participants respond w/o thought, etc.
ways to enhance reliability
- carefully
- use constant, structured procedures
- measure smth imp that engages participants
aggregation
allow random influences to cancel each other out
- esp imp for predicting behav
spearman brown formula
formula in psychometrics
predicts deg to which a test’s reliability can be inc by adding more items
