Intro to Research Methods Flashcards
What are the challenges with personal experience as a source of information?
Bias
Bias
Partiality; an inclination or predisposition for or against something; systematic error arising during sampling, data collection, or data analysis
*Confirmation bias
*Availability bias
*Anchoring bias
*Misinterpretation
Common Decision Biases
Confirmation Bias, Availability Bias & Anchoring Bias
Confirmation Bias
The tendency to gather evidence that confirms pre-existing expectations, typically by emphasizing or pursuing supporting evidence while dismissing or failing to seem contradictory evidence
Availability Bias
The more available and relevant information there is, the more likely the event is judged to be. Use of this strategy may lead to errors of judgement when information is highly available in memory (eg; well publicized events such as plane crashes) or relatively unavailable (eg; less well publicized causes of death, as from diabetes) leads people to believe that those kinds of events are more/less probable than they are.
Anchoring Bias
the tendency, in forming perceptions or making quantitative judgements under conditions of uncertainty, to give excessive weight to the starting value (or anchor), based on the first received information or one’s initial judgement, and not to modify this anchor sufficiently in light of later information.
Scientific Method
A set of procedures, guidelines, assumptions, and attitudes required for the organized and systematic collection, interpretation, and verification of data and the discovery of reproducible evidence, enabling laws and principles to be stated or modified.
Empirical
Based on observation, direct, or indirect
Inductive
Use observations and data to formulate a theory, ground up.
Deductive
Test an existing theory, top down
Hypothesis
An empirically testable proposition about some fact, behavior, relationship, or the like, usually based on theory, that states an expected outcome resulting from specific conditions or assumptions.
***Predicted outcome of a single study
Theory
in the philosophy of science, a set of logically related explanatory hypothesis that are consistent with a body of empirical facts and that may suggest more empirical relationships.
***Description of a phenomenon based on multiple studies.
Experimental
*Manipulate IVs to observe DV changes
*Control/Exp Groups
*Random sampling and assignment
*Blind and double-blind
Non-Experimental
*Less variable control
*More descriptive, applied
*Ex: surveys, polls, interviews, case studies
*Correlation
Quantitative
*Measurements in numbers
*Advantages: standardization, reliability, easy to analyze statistically
*Often deductive: test existing theories, generalize from sample to population
*Larger, random samples, collected quickly
Qualitative
*Data collected in words, narrative; analyzed for themes
*Advantages: Greater depth, exploration
*Often inductive: exploratory; observe and form/refine questions
*Smaller, “purposeful” samples, more narrative data requiring interpretation
Basic Research
Research conducted to enhance the general body of knowledge without a specific problem in mind.
Examples: exploring perceptual limits or non-impaired speech processing (ASHA)
Transactional Research
Using basic research results to develop and test applications.
Examples: development of a new cochlear implant or translating how typically developing children map verb meaning into new approaches teaching verbs to children with language impairment (ASHA)
Applied Research
Research conducted to address a specific problem in society.
Examples: assessing specific treatment for communication in children with ASD
On program evaluation
Collecting, analyzing, and using information on a program or project to assess efficacy and impact, recommend changes
Process: how program is implemented
Progress: outcomes before end goal
Product: end goals, deliverables, and results
Some facets of a program evaluation:
Needs assessment of those served by program (stakeholders)
Can utilize formative evaluation data: change program while assessing
Summative evaluation: final or long-term benefits
Ethics
the principles of morally right conduct accepted by a person or a group or considered appropriate to a specific field. In psychological research, for example, proper ethics requires that participants be treated fairly and without harm and that investigators report results and findings honestly.
Research Ethics
the values, principles, and standards that guide the conduct of individual researchers in several areas, including the design and implementation of studies and the reporting of findings. For example, research ethics stipulate that studies involving data collection from human participants must be evaluated by institutional review boards.
ASHA Code of Ethics
Principle 1: Individuals shall honor their responsibility to hold paramount the welfare of persons they serve professionally or who are participants in research and scholarly activities, and they shall treat animals involved in research in a humane manner.
Principle 2: Individuals shall honor their responsibility to achieve and maintain the highest level of professional competence and performance
Principle 3: Individuals shall honor their responsibility to the public when advocating for the unmet communication and swallowing needs of the public and shall provide accurate information involving any aspect of the professions.
Principle 4: Individuals shall uphold the dignity and autonomy of the professions, maintain collaborative and harmonious interprofessional and intraprofessional relationships, and accept the professions’ self-imposed standards.
Evolving Federal Regulations
1974 National Research Act (PL 93-348) established the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research
1979 Belmont Report outlined original three ethical principles
Multiple revisions and subparts for:
All human subjects (1974)
Pregnant women, fetuses, and neonates (1975)
Additional protections for research with prisoners (1978)
Additional rights for children (1983)
Registering Institutional Review Boards (2009)
1981 Department of Health and Human Services issues Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 45 (public welfare), Part 46 (protection of human subjects)
1991 Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects or the “Common Rule” published and codified by 15 Federal departments and agencies (rev. 2018)
Includes common language adopted by most federal departments
DoJ, CIA, and Director of National Intelligence currently not signatories
Codified “Common Rule” (revised subpart A) outlining basic protections, establishing research types (e.g., exempt) and outlining IRB procedures
Beneficence
Doing good, being kind, improving well-being
Nonmaleficence
Avoid doing harm, focus on NOT reducing wellbeing
Autonomy
(respect for persons, informed consent): A person’s right to make his/her own decisions; competence; the autonomous rights of one person should not infringe on the rights of another
Justice
Obligation to be fair in the distribution of benefits and risks; fairness – persons in similar circumstances should be treated similarly
Institutional Review Boards
Responsible for ensuring:
-Risks are minimized
-Risks are reasonable compared to benefits
-Selection of participants is equitable
-Informed consent will be obtained
-Confidentiality is adequately maintained
Allows for exemptions if participants cannot be identified:
-Surveys, interviews, or questionnaires
-Studies of existing records
-Research on normal educational process
-Also allows for expedited review if minimal risk (e.g., noninvasive specimens), minor changes, or renewal
Operationalize
Determining how something is measured.1
What makes a study experimental
