Foundations Flashcards
Experimental method
Involves manipulation of one or more independent variables to observe the effect on a dependent variable. Allows researchers to establish cause-and-effect relationships. Control groups and random sampling needed.
ex. a study testing the effectiveness of a new medication
Correlational method
Examines the relationship between two or more variables without experimentation/manipulation. Correlation coefficients (r) indicate the strength and direction of the relationship (positive, negative, or none). Can be affected by third variables. Correlation may not mean causation.
Cross-sectional studies
Examines different groups of participants at a single point in time. Useful for comparing different age groups, demographics, or conditions. Provides a snapshot of data but does not track changes over time. Can identify correlations but not causation.
Meta-analysis
Combines results from multiple studies (maybe hundreds) to identify overall trends and effects. Increases statistical power and provides a more comprehensive understanding of a research question.
Quasi-experimental design
Involves comparison between groups without random assignment. Useful when random assignment is not feasible or ethical (e.g., studying existing groups). Can suggest causal relationships but is more vulnerable to confounding variables. Often used in field settings where controlled experiments are impractical. Results should be interpreted with caution due to potential biases.
Ethical Considerations
“CARD/UD”
Consent
Anonymity
Right to withdraw (leave)
Debrief
Undue Harm
Deception
Research Hypothesis
This is the one you believe. It clearly predicts that there is a relationship between the dependent and independent variables. For example, one could predict that the way you frame questions about a student’s future to them, might impact how they behave
Reactivity
simply being observed can change your behavior. This is one of the problems with lie detector tests, some people will show spikes in anxiety just by being ASKED certain questions, even if they aren’t guilty.
Interference effects
one condition in the study impacts your ability to do the others
Confirmation bias
finding what you expect to find because you accidentally only look for info that confirms your hypothesis. If a person believes in astrology, they may only recall, or look for, instances in which their horoscope was correct. They’ll ignore and dismiss the instances in which it did not apply.
Hindsight bias
the “I knew it all along” phenomenon. After we seen the outcome of something like a sporting even or an election, we overestimate our ability to have actually predicted this thing.
P-hacking
Shooting an arrow and painting a bull’s-eye around it afterward. Altering your hypothesis as you go along, or picking only the best stats and data that make your experimental results confirm what you want.
Bidirectional ambiguity
chicken or the egg problem. Does exercise make people happier or do happier people just exercise more?
Internal validity
AKA construct validity. This is when your experiment is measuring what it claims to be measuring, with no extraneous variables or confounds. Conclusions and implications can be made using your data.
External validity
your experimental results can be generalized to other types of similar situations.