Midterm 1 (excluding review) Flashcards
Literature Search
State of research
Design ideas
Methodlogical problems
Databases
- PsychInfo
- PsychLit
- Journal articles
Journal parts
- Abstract
- Introduction
- Method
- Results
- Discussion
- penultimate paragraph: limitations
- last paragraph: future
Principles of the APA
Beneficence and Nonmalefience -minimize harm, maximize help Fidelity and Integrity -truthfulness Trust -establish w/ participants Justice -who should benefit? Respect for People's Rights and Dignity
10 sets of ethical standards
Resolving ethical issues Competence Human relations Advertising Record keeping and fees Education and training Research and publication Assessment Therapy Privacy issues
Institutional Approval (IRB)
Exempt - no deception/harm
Expidited - little deception/harm
Full review - children, animals, much deception/harm
Research misconduct
Fabrication - making up
Falsification - manipulating
Plagiarism - stealing
Deception
Active - lie
-debriefing: full story disclosed
Passive - info left out
-dehoaxing: lie revealed and why
-desensitiving: harmed in some way when leaving a study
Social and Personality (Survey) Psych use the most deception
Use of Psychological Tests
Test Publisher Responsibility:
APA standards
- sell only to qualified users
- trythfully market the tests they publish
- provide all test info, including evidence of validity (lie scales) to test users prior to purchase
- provide test manuals to users upon purchase
Types of Psychological Tests
Projective Tests (least common)
ex. Ink blot, Thematic Appreciation
- projective hypothesis - responses to ambiguous stimuli reflect unconscious processes
Intelligence Tests (most common)
ex. Welcher Adult Int Scale, Welcher Int. Scale for Children
- assesses current cognitive ability
- high reliability
- typically “battery” tests
Self-report Personality Inventories (2nd most common)
ex. Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory
- yields profile of psychological functioning
- specific subscales to measure lying/faking
- trait requirements
Compliance
Foot-in-the-door (does not work w/ $)
Door-in-the-face (works well w/ $)
Low-ball (lack if knowledge, thus ethical concerns)
That’s not all (principle of scarcity)
Levels of Measurement
Conclusions are determined by type(s) of operations that can be performed on data
Categorical (qual):
Nominal
Ordinal
Continuous (quant):
Interval
Ratio
Nominal
Words (or numbers) define categories
Ex. Gender, ethnicity, eye color, diagnoses
Can report frequencies
Cannot add, subtract, multiply, divide, calculate mean, SD, or correlation
Ordinal Scales
Numbers assigned indicate rank on some attribute
Ex. Class rank, rank as a salesperson, rank of a university
Gives no info about the distance between scores
Cannot add, subtract, multiply, divide, calculate mean, SD, or correlation
Equal Interval Scales
Most common
Numbers assigned: each number represents a point equidistant to the two points next to it
Can calculate mean, SD, and correlation, and scores of one group to another
No absolute zero point (disadvantage)
Ratio Scales
All properties of interval scales but there IS an absolite zero point
Ex. Reaction time
4 types of reliablity
Test-retest
Equivalent forms
Internal consistency (split-half)
Scorer reliability and agreement
Test-retest Reliability
Administer test to same group on 2 occasions
Challenge of practice effects (behavior changes before occasion #2)
Appropriate when test takers are not permanently changed
Equivalent-forms Reliability
Extent to which an individual obtains a similar score on different administrations of an equivalent measure
Ex college entrance exams
Internal Consistency Reliability
(Split-half)
Extent to which individuals score similarly on items of the same value
Appropriate for homogeneous tests
Administered to one group
Items must be split randomly
Scorer Reliability and Agreement
Inter-rater Reliability (IRR)
Amount of consistency among scorer’s observations
2+ individuals score the same thing
90% agreement is the gold standard
Each scorer must code independently
Appropriate only when scoring requires judgement
Calculating IRR
Inter-rater Agreement: calculated to determine consistency of judgements between scores
-Cohen’s kappa
Intra-rater Agreement: calculated to determine consistency of judgements of one scorer across all tests
-Coefficient alpha
Anhedonia
Lack of motivation
Things aren’t as appealing as they used to be
IRR of Selected DSM-5 Diagnoses
For most DSM-5 categories, reliability is good
Problem: comorbidity (symptom overlap)
4 Main types of validity
Face
Vontrnt
Criterion-Related
Construct