midterm Flashcards
c1 Psychology
the study of the mind, brain and behavior, that spans multiple levels of analysis
c1 Levels of analysis
the lower levels refer to the biological influences, specifically those components in the brain of molecules turning into brain structures. In comparison, the higher levels include social and cultural influences within the mind, including our thoughts, feelings and emotions.
c1 5 challenges of psychology
- human behaviour is hard to predict
- psychological influences are rarely independent of each other
- individuals have different thoughts, feelings, personalities, and behaviours.
- we are heavily influenced by other people
- behaviour is heavily shaped by culture
c1 why can’t we trust common sense
our intuitive understanding of ourselves and the world can often lead to errors.
- common sense can be used in some situations, but shouldn’t be relied on.
c1 Naive Realism
we see the world precisely as it is (seeing is believing). perceptions are often right but sometimes they are wrong e.g. we tend to ignore conflicting views of others
c1 case study critical thinking
- Uri Geller was exposed on live TV.
- Still active; many who believed he had powers still believed he had power despite of the evidence (Belief Perseverance)
- People who believe in his powers are more likely to look for evidence of him having powers than looking up evidence against it (like the video we saw (Confirmation Bias)
- What is most likely, that he bends spoons with his mind, or that he uses magic tricks? (Occam’s Razor)
- Saying that one can bend spoons with the mind is an extraordinary claim. Does the evidence as strong as the claim? (Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence)
c1 belief perseverance
tendency to stick to initial beliefs even when evidence contradicts them e.g. even though numerous studies show vaccines don’t cause autism 1/3 parents believe they do.
- science as safeguard against bias
c1 Confirmation bias
tendency to seek, interpret and remember information that confirms your own pre-existing beliefs.
- tend to search for evidence for what we believe - mother of all biases
c1 confirmation bias case study
- Giving out the same horoscope reading to different people, they all identify with it because it is so broad that there is bound to be something that relates to their personality.
- Online mediums – providing a general reading “In the next 118 days you will experience a transit”
c1 Occam’s razor
entities should not be multiplied beyond necessity – the simplest idea is most likely correct
c1 pseudoscience
set of claims that seem scientific but are not e.g. astrology
c1 warning signs of pseudoscience
- overuse of ad hoc immunising hypotheses = loophole people use to protect from being wrong e.g. psychics saying energy has to be right to perform
- lack of self-correction = rarely updated or proven wrong e.g. astrology same for 4000 years
- over reliance of anecdotes = often uses secondhand accounts
- finding comfort in our beliefs
- emotional reasoning fallacy = using emotions to guide in evaluation of whether claim is true or not.
- bandwagon fallacy = assuming something is true because a lot of people believe it
- not me fallacy = belief we don’t make same mistakes as other people
c1 why we should care about pseudoscience
- Opportunity costs (what we give up): pseudoscientific treatments for disorders such as those mentally can take place over effective treatments, meaning individuals are paying more and more to get worse e.g. 1/3 of depressed people receive treatment
- Direct harm: pseudoscientific treatment can sometimes cause immense harm to individuals both physically and psychologically.
- Inability to think scientifically as citizens: it takes away our ability to think scientifically, which is essential to all aspects of life e.g. educated decisions on climate change, vaccine safety.
c1 pull to pseudoscience
PATTERNICITY = we see/find patterns even when there is no pattern
- We compile patterns into our memory and then when we are thrown into similar situations, we connect the dots and say something happened.
- Case study: coin toss, even though it looks like at times there is a sequence, it is completely randomized
- We look for patterns because it makes learning easier, allows us to predict and expect what is coming e.g. jumping when a leaf scratches your neck.
c1 six principles of scientific thinking
- RULING OUT RIVAL HYPOTHESES: Before believing something, we must make sure other explanations have been disproved. Do ghosts exist?
- CORRELATION VS. CAUSATION: refers to the inability to legitimately deduce a cause-and-effect relationship between two events or variables solely on the basis of an observed association or correlation between them. a correlation between two things doesn’t demonstrate a casual connection between them.
- FALSIFIABILITY: questioning whether something can be disproven e.g. saying all crows are black can be disproven by one white crow
- REPLICABILITY: ask whether independent investigators have replicated findings that support a claim
- EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMS: asking whether there is a vast amount of evidence for an extraordinary claim?
- OCCAM’S RAZOR: The simplest explanation is most often the correct one.
c1 scientific skepticism
approach of evaluating all claims with an open mind but insisting on persuasive evidence before accepting them
- Unwilling to accept claims purely based on authority
- Skeptics evaluate claims on their own time and won’t accept anything as truth until they’ve reviewed a high standard of evidence.
c1 critical thinking
set of skills for evaluating all claims with an open-minded and careful fashion
c1 theoretical frameworks of psychology
- Structuralism
- Functionalism
- Behaviorism
- Cognitivism
- Psychoanalysis
c1 great debates of psychology
- Nature v nurture: are our behaviors attributable mostly to our genes (nature) or to our rearing environments (nurture)
- Free will v determinism: how much are our behaviors freely selected rather than caused by factors outside our control.
c1 psychology affecting our lives
- Basic research: how the mind works
- Applied research: how we use basic research to solve real world problems
- Many people are unaware of the impact of psychology on our lives
- Psychology can be done for the sake of new knowledge (basic research)
- Research can also be used to solve real-world problems (applied research) e.g. applied behavioral analysis
c2 case study - linda problem
- Linda is 31 years old, single, outspoken, and very bright. She majored philosophy. As a student, she was deeply concerned with issues of discrimination social justice, and also participated in anti-nuclear demonstrations. Which is more probable?
- Linda is a bank teller.
- Linda is a bank teller and is active in the feminist movement.
- It is more probable that she is a bank teller, because that is one thing as oppose to two – more likely
c2 heuristics
mental shortcut or rule of thumb that helps us to streamline our thinking and make sense of the world.
- better safe than sorry
e.g. prefrontal lobotomy “this person seems to be improving, so it must of worked”
c2 research designs
systematic techniques developed by scientists to harness the power of analytical thinking. This is because it forces us to look at alternative explanations on findings, that our intuitive thinking overlooks (e.g. friends protecting us from misguided snap judgements).
c2 hindsight bias
knew-it-all-along) = perceiving past events as being more predictable than they actually were
c2 two modes of thinking
- Intuitive learning: First impressions are often surprisingly accurate (snap judgements, quick and reflexive thoughts)
- Analytical thinking: used whenever we’re trying to reason through a problem of figure out a complicated concept (slow and reflective)
c2 reliability and validity
- RELIABILITY (consistency) = consistency or accuracy of a measurement e.g. similar scores over time
- VALIDITY (accuracy) = whether a measure actually measures what it claims to be measuring
When we acquire complex habits/skills, we start off analytical and then progress to intuitive - E.g. when we learn to drive a car, it is highly analytical learning the rules and technical components, but over time we intuitively know when to turn, slow down etc.
c2 pitfalls in experimental design
- PLACEBO EFFECT = improvement resulting from the expectation of improvement e.g. diluted substances that claim to cause the body to heal itself (pseudoscientific alternative medicine).
- NOCEBO EFFECT = harm resulting from the expectation of harm
- THE EXPERIMENTER BIAS = occurs when researchers hypotheses lead them to unintentionally bias a study’s outcome.
- DEMAND CHARACTERISTICS = cues participants pick up that generate guessing on the experiment
c2 methods scientists use to protect themselves from error
- Naturalistic observation
- Case studies
- Correlational designs
- Experimental designs
c2 ethical issues in research design
- Informed consent: all participants should decide whether or not they want to be a part of an experiment, this doesn’t have to apply to some cases such as naturalistic observation. To adhere to this rule, testers will allow participants the opportunity to leave at any time/provide a contract with guidelines.
- Protection from harm and discomfort
- Deception and debriefing
- There is an institutional review board that is protecting individuals from any harm
- Institutional review board IRB
- Case study: Tuskegee experiment – not informing individuals that they had syphilis
