module 4 - MIDTERM 2 Flashcards
1
Q
internal validity
A
- how much you can trust that the findings of the study are due to the factors explored in the study
- confounding variables/lurking variables
- control groups and randomization
- clinical sample vs. non-clinical sample vs. analogue sample
2
Q
confounding variables/lurking variables
A
- factors that you did not explore
- can potentially affect findings/results but you did not include them in your study (“oopsies”)
3
Q
control groups and randomization
A
- control group can be used as a comparison group
- randomization involves randomly assigning individuals to groups and it is used to eliminate systematic differences
4
Q
clinical sample
A
involved in a clinic study where participants may be diagnosed as a part of the study
5
Q
non-clinical sample
A
everyday folk, general public, undergrad students
6
Q
analogie sample
A
- experimental design where the procedures or participants used are similar but not identical to the situation of interest
- e.g. recreating situations as similar as possible; simulated scenarios; mundane realism
7
Q
external validity
A
- do these results actually apply to the real world? Are they generalizable?
- high external validity = highly applicable to the real world
- statistical and clinical significance
- completer analysis vs. intent-to-treat analyses
- effect sizes
8
Q
statistical significance
A
- a result or difference is meaningful enough/mathematically meaningful enough between variables that wasn’t caused solely by chance
- e.g. Does this treatment work more than that treatment?
- affected by sample size and type of statistical test used
9
Q
completer analysis
A
- any one dropped it is not included at all; only include those who completed treatment are included in the analysis
- assumed people who dropped out wouldn’t have responded to treatment anyway
- often times overestimates the efficacy of a treatment because it only included people who stayed throughout the study
10
Q
intent-to-treat analysis
A
- the people who dropped out would not have changed anymore since they dropped out
- assume that the person didn’t change since dropping out so whatever scores they had when dropping out will be used at the end for the analysis
11
Q
effect sizes
A
- pearson’s correlation
- looking at the relationship between to variables
- if one variable increases what will happen to the other?
- a perfect correlation is 1; as one variable goes up by one so does the other variable
12
Q
interpretation of correlations
A
- 0 → .10 = no relationship
- R = .10 → .30 = weak correlation
- R = .30 → .50 = moderate correlation
- R = .50+ = strong correlation
13
Q
clinical significance
A
- if expert in the field believes a statistically significant finding is large enough/meaningful enough to be clinically important and should therefore direct the course of patient care
- we decide the difference is great enough we should change the way we treat
- just because something is statistically significant doesnt mean its going to be clinically significant/clinically meaningful or important
14
Q
correlational research
A
data from how things naturally occur
15
Q
cross-sectional designs
A
data from one time point
16
Q
cohort effects
A
- gathering information from different groups
- e.g. gathering information of marijuana use from 22 year olds and 80 year olds today
17
Q
longitudinal designs
A
- data at multiple time points over a period of time from the same group (typically years)
- make inferences about cause and effect
- expensive, take a long time and are rare
18
Q
cross-generational effects
A
- cohort effects but in longitudinal research
- e.g. if you followed a group of 20 year olds for 20 years would the next group of 20 year olds be the same
19
Q
epidemiological research
A
- correlational research that involves studying the prevalence, distribution and consequences of disorders in populations
- prevalence and incidence
20
Q
prevalence
A
- percentage of the population that have the disorder
- 12 month prevalence: % of population that have had the disorder in the past year
- lifetime prevalence: % that has ever had the disorder in their life
21
Q
incidence
A
- number of new cases of the disorder in a specific time
- typically in the past year
- incidence is normally lower than prevalence
22
Q
treatment outcome research
A
- experimental research involves manipulation
- outcome research is interested in the effects of research and treatment
23
Q
open label trials
A
participants know what they are signing up for and what treatment they are getting
24
Q
randomized control
A
randomly assign people to a control trial; treatment or no treatment, they don’t know what they will get
25
Q
single-blind vs. double-blind studies
A
- single-blind: just the participant is blind to the treatment
- double-blind: neither the research or participant knows who is getting what treatment
26
Q
waitlist-control studies
A
someone its on a waitlist the same amount of time as the treatment; but receive treatment after serving as the comparison group
27
Q
placebo-control studies
A
- comparison can be treatment vs. placebo
- psychotherapy vs. support group for psychotherapy vs. component of therapy (homework) that is believed to not make a change
28
Q
comparison studies
A
- compare treatment A to B to C
- randomly assigned to various treatment conditions
29
Q
process studies
A
- what part of treatment helps
- e.g. What part of CBT works? Why?
- e.g . systematic desensitization is it the relaxation or hierarchy that helps?
30
Q
community-based studies
A
- applying treatment to the real world
- will results change? Will they be applicable or generalizable?
31
Q
experimental research - prevention research
A
- health promotion
- universal prevention strategies
- selective prevention strategies
- indicated prevention strategies
32
Q
health promotion
A
- focuses on giving something to everyone to prevent layer problems
- skills building rather than fixing
- e.g. canada’s food guide; inform on 4 food groups in order to prevent later health issues
33
Q
universal prevention strategies
A
- offered to an entire population regardless of their level of risk, to try and address/reduce a specific risk factor
- e.g. reducing tobacco or alcohol use
34
Q
selective prevention strategies
A
- targeting groups within a population identified as having an increased risk, with specific interventions
- e.g. D.A.R.E programs is geared towards teens to prevent drug use
35
Q
indicated prevention strategies
A
- offered/target to people experiencing early/subclinical symptoms of a disorder with specific interventions
- e.g. screening a highschool for depressive symptoms and identifying students with symptoms of depression who may be at risk of major depressive disorder and now targeting them with specific intervention like CBT
36
Q
family studies
A
- examining symptoms in proband, then first degree relatives and then more distant relatives
- connecting if other relatives also have this disorder to see if there is any levels of heritability or genetic influence
- the more distant the relative the less likely they are to have the disorder
37
Q
limitation of family studies
A
- people are more likely to live with people they are closely related to
- makes it hard to separate the nature vs. nurture influence and determine the true cause of the disorder
38
Q
twin studies
A
- examining symptoms in MZ twins and same-sex DZ twins
- disorders should occur more often in MZ twins if the disorder is more genetic based compared to DZ because of genetic similarity
39
Q
advantage of twin studies
A
any difference between MZ twins and DZ twins is due to genetics, meaning they grew up with similar environments in utero and life, meaning an easier separation of environmental influence
40
Q
adoption studies
A
- examining symptoms in the adopted child, the adoptive parents and biological parents
- if a disorder is based on genes it should occur most often in bio parents
- if a disorder is based in an environment it will occur most often in adoptive parents
- major advantage: separating genes from environment
41
Q
twins reared apart studies
A
- combines adoption and twin studies
- direct test of heritability; if its based in genetics, even reared apart the disorder is more likely to co-occur
- generally, the likelihood if developing disorders is as similar as twins reared together
- highlights the huge genetic component to psychological disorders
42
Q
cross-cultural research
A
- interpreting incongruent findings from different cultures because there are a lot of complexities in interpreting findings that are different from one place to another
- differences in manifestation of symptoms across locations and cultures
- differences in cultural acceptability; what cultures deem appropriate
- differences in treatment due to areas of competence and priority
