Definitions (Test 1)

Question 1

Science

Answer 1

an effort to make accurate observations, valid causal inferences about the world and assemble them in a compact and coherent way.

Question 2

Empiricism

Answer 2

A way of knowing that relies on direct observations and experience.

Question 3

Authority

Answer 3

1/3 non-scientific ways of knowing. When people accept the validity of information because it comes from a source that they deem to be an expert and form beliefs based by agreeing with an authoritative figure/source.
e.g. parent-child, student-teacher, student-textbook, patient-doctor.

Question 4

A priori method

Answer 4

A way of knowing in which a person develops a belief through the use of logic and reasoning until an agreement is reached with others who are equally as convinced that the argument is valid.

Question 5

What is Anecdotal Evidence and when is it used?

Answer 5

> Typically invloves evidence from a single case study that demonstartes the pheonomnon of instrest but it’s uncritical use of such evidence leads to dubious or invalid conclusions.
Used predominantly in pseudosciences.

Question 6

Pseudoscience

Answer 6

A feild of enquiry which claims to use scientific methods and puts effort into being viewed as scientific. However, their conclusions are based on inadequate, non-scientific methods and the conclusions made are false and too simplistic.

Question 7

(4) Characteristics of pseudoscience:

Answer 7

1. A false association of true science
   claims to be a science but produces false or oversimplified conclusions that are based on inadequate or non-scientific methods.
2. Relies heavily on anocdotal evidence
   uncritical use and heavy relience on anecdotal evidence
3. Avoidance of falsification
   tendency to lack specificity of their theory in order to avoid falsification and are known to alter their theory to fit or discredit disconfriming evidence.
4. Oversimplification of complex phenomena
   Tendency to reduce complex phenomena into simplistic terms inorder to increasing consumer appeal.

Question 8

The (4) goals of psychological research?

Answer 8

1. Description
   Precise definition of phenomena that makes it observable and measurable. Includes identifying patterns and classes of pehonema.
2. Prediction
   Behavior follows laws, general patterns that make behavior predicitable.
3. Explanation
   >Being able to explain behavior and identify its causes
   >Back up causal inferences i.e. systematic change in Y caused the observable covariance in X. with exisiting psychological theories and literature.
   >Be abe to rule out other plausibale explanations or confounding variables
4. Application
   Provide knowledge of the world which is truthful and reliable so it can be applied successfully.

Question 9

Use of Reason

Answer 9

2/3 non-scientific ways of knowing. A Priori Method In which a person develops a belief by reasoning and reaching agreement with other who are convinced of the merits of the reasoned argument.

Question 10

Experience

Answer 10

3/3/ non-scientfic ways of knowing which relies on direct observation or experience.

Question 11

2 assumptions of science

Answer 11

1. Statistical Determinism
   An assumption made by research psychologists that behavioral events can be predicted with a with a probability greater than chance.
2. Discoverability
   An assumption that by using the agreed upon scientific method the causes of events can be discovered with a degree of confidence.

Question 12

What is the Interpretive Gap

Answer 12

The distance between the object of study (the data) and the claims we make about infer from it. In other words, the external validity of the study’s findings.

Question 13

What is the Replication Crisis? And 3 plausible explanations/causes?

Answer 13

A large proportion of psychological research that has been accepted and published into credible journals are not replicable.

 A Small Study Bias:
Where studies with insufficiently small sample sizes report big, statistically significant results.
 Publication Bias:
Journals are more likely to publish studies with eye-grabbing headlines and significant results.

 P-hacking:
The process of running data through many statistical analyses with the goal of finding the desired result and then re-formulating your hypothesis to fit the significant statistical result.

Question 14

How is Quantitative research evaluated?

Answer 14

Measurement tools such as validity and reliability.

Question 15

Examples of how to increase replicability:

Answer 15

 Pre-registration of studies
Prior to data collection researchers must publicly share their research question, aim and hypothesis.
 Sharing Research Protocols
Publicly share detailed report of how you conducted your study to cover the important details that are left out of publication.
 Publicly sharing data
Sharing raw data publicly so people can check that no alterations have been made that impairs the validity of the study and its findings.

Question 16

Open-science practices are used for:

Answer 16

Restoring public trust in science we must increase our transparency and thus, our replicability.

Question 17

Three stages where the interpretive gap increases:

Answer 17

 Rendering data for analysis i.e. operationalizing phenomena into a measurable and observable event.
 Analysis: the statistical test or qualitative test we conduct
 Inferences & conclusions drawn

Question 18

(3) dimensions that research accomplishes:

Answer 18

1. Generalizability
2. Accuracy
3. Specificity

Qual > Specificity
Quan > Generalizability

Question 19

Does qualitative or quantitative research have a larger interpretive gap?

Answer 19

Quantitative

Question 20

What are the practical problems of qualitative research and open science methods?

Answer 20

(A) Pre-registration of studies:
Qualitative research does not identify a research hypothesis prior to data collection. It is inductive process which aims to find out and explain what is important to participants within the context data is collected in. Hopefully, you can see that pre-registering is not suitable for qualitative methods.

(B) Sharing Research protocols:
Data-collection for qualitative methods is primarily semi-structured interviews where researchers come into the session with loose predetermined topics they wish to cover but are very flexible to explore areas that the participants themselves make relevant and may not have been expected to lead to.

(C) Publicly sharing data:
This raises a serious ethical concern of maintaining the participants anonymity and rights to confidentiality. In addition, to remove any identifying information from the transcript in order to protect the participants identity we would be obscuring the data and removing the very parts of the data we make inferential claims from and making it very difficult to test for trustworthiness.

Question 21

what principles help us evaluate the trustworthiness and transparency of qualitative research?

Answer 21

(A) Owning your Perspective
 What is your theoretical perspective?
Epistemological view on knowledge how we come to know about the world, what can be studied and how we study it.
 What is your subjective position?
What role do you have as a researcher and how do your relate to the object of study (power-dynamics).
 Engaging in reflexivity

(B) Situating the Sample
 Describing the research participants and the context in which data was collected in a way that allows readers to judge the applicability of your findings (time, history, culture etc.)

(C) Grounding in Examples
 Providing raw data when possible with the corresponding analytical commentary underneath so readers can see the process of how an inferential conclusion was made.
 A tool to help narrow the interpretation gap

(D) Providing Credibility Checks
 Varity of different types of analysis on the same data to see if you come to the same conclusion
 Different researchers
 Triangulation (using different methods)
 Testimonial Validity (sharing inferences with participants to confirm if our interpretation is correct).

(E) Coherence
 Link from data to interpretation is clear, coherent and integrated.
 Do not oversimplify data.

(F) Accomplishing General vs Specific Tasks
 Is the research question general or specific?
 Have adequately fulfilled your aim?
 Have you provided enough detail for the reader to understand the range of people and situations sampled?

(G) Resonating with the Reader
 Subjectively was the reader convinced, persuaded that your findings are reliable, coherent and useful.

Question 22

Two goals of debriefing?

Answer 22

1. Dehoaxing

2. Desensitising

Question 23

Two types of reflexivity?

Answer 23

1. Personal Reflexivity
   Questinging our role as a researcher, our identity, demand charateristics, beliefs and experiences etc. influence the study.
2. Epistemological Reflexivity
   Questioning our beliefs about knoweldge, what it is and how it is obtained and what it can be used for.

Question 24

Power dynamics?

Answer 24

The Ivory tower metaphor, where psychological research has an underlying power dynamic between the reseacrher and object of study. The researcher is seen to be of a higher standing coming from academia with the object of study below them:

> conducting resaecrh “to” or “on” participants
Passive or active voice when writing lab report.

Question 25

Responding to power dynamics:

Answer 25

> collaborative research
engaing in reflexivity
respecting participants unqiue prespective, way of knowing, observations etc.
building a positive relationship between scientist and science

Question 26

3 dimensions of scientific study that can be used to evaluate if the study accomplished its goal?

Answer 26

1. Generalisability
2. Accuracy
3. Specificity

Question 27

three stages where interperative gap increases?

Answer 27

1. Rendering data for anaysis
2. Analysis
3. Conclusions & Inferences

Question 28

Different data collection methods?

Answer 28

> semi-structured interviews
> focus groups
> text, digital media, news
> surveys
> naturalistic observations