MEASuREMENT IN PSYCHOLOGY Flashcards
(33 cards)
VARIABLES
A variable is anything that varies
Variables are observable or hypothetical events that can change and whose changes can be measured in some way (height, time, the political party people vote for, feelings towards your partner or parent, extroversion, attitude towards vandals, anxiety)
The value of a variable is not always a number: nationality, profession…
Try to write down your own definition of:
Intelligence
Anxiety
Superstition
Give some examples of people displaying these characteristics.
The DEPENDENT VARIABLE (DV) is the variable in the study whose changes depend on the manipulation of the independent variables.
We do not know the values of the DV until after we have manipulated the IV.
The INDEPENDENT VARIABLE (IV) is the variable which is manipulated by the experimenter.
We know the values of the IV before we start the experiment.
Independent variable are defined in terms of LEVELS.
- PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSTRUCTS
Hypothetical constructs
Concepts that are not directly observable
Can you observe anxiety?
It is reference to an inner state that is assumed to play its part among all the effects on human behavior
Constructs can have relationship with observable behavious
- PSYCHOLOGICAL CONSTRUCTS
Hypothetical constructs
Concepts that are not directly observable
Can you observe anxiety?
It is reference to an inner state that is assumed to play its part among all the effects on human behavior
Constructs can have relationship with observable behavious
Operational definition of psychological constructs
Constructs should be carefully explained.
The variables that we use in psychological research are observable measures of often unobservable constructs.
Our measurement must be precise and clear.
An operational definition gives us a more or less valid method for measuring some part of a hypothetical construct.
Discuss with a classmate the terms shown below. How could any of these be measured?
-Identity
-Reinforcement
-Attitude
-Instinct
-Unconscious
-Attention
-Egocentricity
-Neuroticism
-Conformity
-Conscience
An operational definition of construct X gives us the set of activities required to measure X.
Depression - Construct
Clinical interview, depression inventory, teachers observations - operationalization
Conceptual variable: Employee satisfaction Operational definitions: number of days per month that the employee shows up to work on time. Rating of job satisfaction from 1 to 9
“”: Aggresion: number of presser of a button that administers shock to another student “”: time taken to honk the horn at the car ahead after a stop-light turns green
“”: deppression: number of words used in a creative story “”: number of appointments with a psychotherapist
“”: Decision-making skills “”: number of people correctly solving a group performance task. Speed at which a task is solved.
Scales of measurement
Nominal (nombres únicamente): categories only
Ordinal (ya empiezan a tener un orden, pero éste no está concretado): numerals represent a rank order, distance between subsequent numerals muy not be equal
Interval (el intervalo existente entre las posiciones ya está definido): subsequent numerals (las posiciones posteriores) represent equal distances, differences but no natural zero point
Ratio (ya hay un cero, que es una medida del círculo): numerals represent equal distances, differences and a natural zero point
Measurement errors
Measurement errors may affect the reproducibility (reproducibilidad) of outcomes across studies
Two types: systematic and random
Systematic measurement error: systematic error is an error which, in the course of a number of measurements carried out under the same conditions of a given value and quantity, either remains constant in absolute value and sign, or varies according to definite law changing conditions. An error is considered systematic if it consistently changes in the same direction. For example, this could happen with blood pressure measurement i, just before the measurements were to be made, something always or often caused the blood pressure to go up.
Systematic measurement errors are known as bias, which function as extraneous (of external origin) variables
Random errors do not contribute to systematic differences between groups
In psychological research, measurement errors refer to the discrepancies between the actual value of the variable being measured and the value obtained through a measurement tool or procedure.
Random errors (coding errors, participants inattention to and misperception of question, etc)
Other conceptual variables (self-esteem, mood, self promotion, etc) Systematic errors
Scores on a measured variable, such as a likert scale measure of anxiety, will be caused not only by the conceptual variable of interest (anxiety), but also by random measurement error as well as other conceptual variables that are unrelated to anxiety. Reliability is increased to the extent that random error has been eliminated as a cause of the measured variable. Construct validity is increased to the extent that the influencie of systematic error has been eliminated
Reliability (confiabilidad) refers to how consistent the results of a measure are
Consistency of measurement: if you repeat a study or a measurement, you should get the same results.
Test-restest: refers to the stability of a measure over time. Ej., questionnaires should produce the same results when re-tested on the same people at different times (so long as nothing significant has happened to them between testing) refers to the stability of a measure over time
Interrater: examines the consistency between different individuals (raters) who are evaluating or observing the same behavior or phenomenon. Ej. different observers counting aggressive acts made by children should come up with similar tallies
Internal: looks at the consistency within the measurement itself. It ensures that all parts of a test or survey measure the same concept and produce similar results. Ej.: answers in a questionnaire should be consistent.
Reliability: do you get consistent scores every time?
Interrater reliability: two coders ratings of a set of targets are consistent with each other.
Test-retest reliability: people get consistent scores every time they take the test
Internal reliability: people give consistent scores on every item of a questionnaire
The test-retest statistic is used to assess the realiability or stability of a measurement tool over time. It determines whether a test produces similar results when administered to the same group of people at two different points in time
Interrater reliability
Consistent scores no matter who is rating
Internal reliability
Consistent scores no matter how you ask
Internal reliability
Internal reliability: all parts of a test or survey measure the same concept and produce similar results (not to be confused with internal validity!)
The extent (proporción) to which multiple measures, or items, are all answered the same by the same set of people.
Relevant for measures that use more than one item to get at the same construct
VALIDITY
Are we measuring what we are intended to measure?
Internal validity
External validity
Construct validity
External validity
Statistical conclusion validity
Internal validity
Did the manipulation of the independent variable cause the observed changes in the dependent variable?
Whether there really is a casual link between the manipulation of the IV and the DV.
Threats:
Selection: two experimental groups have systematically different kinds of participants in them
Attrition: participant drop-out rate which could be different in each condition
Maturation: physiological processes occurring within the participants that could account for any changes in their behavior
History: extraneous events occurring during the course of the experiment that may affect the participants responses on the dependent measure
Testing: when participants are repeatedly tested, changes in test scores may be more due to practice or knowledge about the test procedure gained from earlier experiences rather than any treatment effects
Instrumentation: changes in the measurement procedures may result in differences between the comparison groups that are confused with the treatment effects
Regression to the mean: the tendency that participants who receive extreme scores when testes, tend to have less extreme scores on subsequent retesting even in the absence of any treatment effects
Internal validity
Did the manipulation of the independent variable cause the observed changes in the dependent variable?
Whether there really is a casual link between the manipulation of the IV and the DV.
Threats:
Selection: two experimental groups have systematically different kinds of participants in them
Attrition: participant drop-out rate which could be different in each condition
Maturation: physiological processes occurring within the participants that could account for any changes in their behavior
History: extraneous events occurring during the course of the experiment that may affect the participants responses on the dependent measure
Testing: when participants are repeatedly tested, changes in test scores may be more due to practice or knowledge about the test procedure gained from earlier experiences rather than any treatment effects
Instrumentation: changes in the measurement procedures may result in differences between the comparison groups that are confused with the treatment effects
Regression to the mean: the tendency that participants who receive extreme scores when testes, tend to have less extreme scores on subsequent retesting even in the absence of any treatment effects
Construct validity
Are we really measuring the construct we want to measure?
How closely our interpretation of a construct are related to the real thing.
If an affect really does occur when the independent variable is manipulated, but not for the reasons the researcher thinks; that is, the independent variable itself is not the variable causing the effect, that is a threat to construct validity:
Cofounding (factor de confusión): we make an assumption about the wrong psychological construct.
E.g.: a questionnaire intended to measure extroversion (an outcome measure) in fact only measures sociability.
E.g.: recall for concrete and for abstract words when abstract words selected are more uncommon.
E.g.: placebo effect
Eliminate possible confounding variables as alternative explanation are really the heart of scientific activity
a. Experimental group: therapeutic treatment (includes attention)
b. Placebo group (attention only)
c. Control group no therapy, no attention (often a wait list group)
————Measures after treatment, on outcome variables, e.g., anxiety, self-esteem, number of compulsive responses, time spent on previous obsessions etc.
If groups a and b improve similarly over c then placebo (attention only) appears to be affective
a) Expectancy effects
Researcher’s expectancies:
Experimenters can affect participants’ responses through facial or verbal cues, and that certain participant are more likely to pick up experimenters influence than others. Pigmalion effect.
Participants expectancies:
It refers in general to the ways in which research participants interact with the researcher and research context
b)Demand characteristics
They refer only to the cues that can inform a participant about what is expected.
Statistical conclusion validity
Inappropriate statistical procedures, or other statistical errors, may be responsible for the appearance of a difference or correlation that does not represent reality:
-We may simply have produced a ‘fluke(an unlikely chance occurrence, especially a surprising piece of luck)’ large difference between samples
We may have entered data incorrectly
We may have used the wrong king of statistical analysis
Statistical conclusion validity Null hypothesis and alternative hypothesis
Reject the null hypothesis — the result is statistically significant — the probability of getting a result this extreme, or more extreme, by chance, if the null hypothesis is true, is less or equal than 5% — the difference is significantly larger than zero. The association is significantly stronger than zero.
Retain the null hypothesis — the result is not statistically significant — the probability of getting a result this extreme, or more extreme, by chance, if the null hypothesis is true, is greater to 5% — we cannot conclude that the difference is larger than zero. We conclude that the relationship is stronger than zero.
In statistical hypothesis testing, the null hypothesis of a test always predicts no effect or no relationship between variables
Reject the null hypothesis (conclude that there is an effect) when there is really no effect in the population: type I error
Retain the null hypothesis (conclude there is not enough evidence of an effect) when there is really an effect in the population: type II error
External validity
It asks whether the apparent effects demonstrated in an investigation can be generalized beyond the exact experimental context. In particular, can effects be generalised from:
A: The specific sample tested to other people — population validity
B: The research setting to other settings — ecological validity
C: The period of testing to other periods — historical validity