The Scientific Method Flashcards
Psychology as Science
- science of mental life
- involved w/exploring basis/impact of mental states (ie. personality) or dynamic mental processes (ie. memory)
Psychology as Science (Example)
- eg. “Does absence make the heart grow fonder?”
- not enough to make informal observations (“lay scientists”); opinions are natural but inevitably make unique opinions due to different info/agendas/experiences
- to know WHEN/WHY the statement is correct involves SCIENTIFIC METHOD; differentiates psych from lay methods
- procedure of SYSTEMATIC OBSERVATION/EXPERIMENTATION (via empirical methods)
Principles of Scientific Approach
- DETERMINISM/DISCOVERABILITY
- SYSTEMATIC OBSERVATION/EXPERIMENTATION
- FINDING PUBLIC/VERFIABLE KNOWLEDGE
- DATA-BASED/TENTATIVE CONCLUSIONS
- ASKING ANSWERABLE/EPIRICAL QUESTIONS
- DEVELOPING FALSIFIABLE EXPLANATIONS/THEORIES
PSA: Determinism/Discoverability
- all events have causes which can be discovered
- determinism ISN’T that all events are “pre-determined”
- PROBABILISTIC DETERMINISM = events are predictable, but not indefinitely
- cause (X) —> effect (Y)
- determinism doesn’t cancel free will or vice versa; SOMETIMES we consider consequences of actions before behaviour takes place based on perceived probability of desired outcome
- CARNAP (1928); impossible to make choice w/o cause as it involves preference; if alternatives can’t be foreseen, it’s not a choice
PSA: Systematic Observations/Experimentation
- precise definitions, reliable/valid measuring tools and acceptable methodologies yield interpretable data, from which conclusions are made via logic systems to fit into theory
PSA: Finding Public/Verifiable Knowledge
- verifiable for 2/+ observers
- terms/procedures precisely defined so replication is easy
PSA: Data-Based/Tentative Conclusions
- conclusions via data NOT opinions
- natural questioning of data
- GALTON (1872); ultimate data-driven approach; the unscientific use amalgamation of emotional experience to make decision (ie. does prayer work); the scientific scrutinise events and compare via methodological system before declaring it evidence
- DAMASIO (1994); scepticism about all conclusions doesn’t disregard new work; tentativeness is healthy as it shows self-awareness of human error
PSA: Asking Answerable/Empirical Questions
- answered via data (aka. “does belief in God increase w/age?” NOT “does God exist?”)
- require OPERATIONALISATION:
IE. “Does the way you speak affect how other people treat you?” - “the way you speak” = content/tone/accent/gestures/speed?
- “affect” = direct/indirect/short-term/long-term/immediate/gradual?
- “other people” = relationship to target?
- “treat you” = what they say/think/do?
NEW. “Are the people who use a pronunciation stereotypically associated w/disadvantaged backgrounds during an interview less likely to get a job offer than those who use a standard pronunciation?”
PSA: Developing Falsifiable Explanations/Theories
- HYPOTHESES (predicted research outcomes); deduced from THEORIES (explanations of phenomena)
- FALSIFIABLE theories can principally either be supported/unsupported by data
Goals of Psychological Research
- DESCRIPTION
- PREDICTION
- EXPLANATION; X causes Y if:
- X = experimentally varied/extraneous factors are controlled/alternatives rules out/Y variations predicted from X variations/explaining Y via X fits some theory
- APPLICATION
QGR: Validity
- correct/valid interpretation of observed outcomes
QGR: Reliability
- confidence that findings can be replicated constantly and not chance occurrence
Qualities of Good Research
- RELIABILITY
- VALIDITY
- PUBLIC
- CUMULATIVE
- PARSIMONY
QGR: Public Quality
- exposes rationale/methods/conclusions to others for verification via peer review process which allows data to be cumulative
QGR: Cumulative Quality
- builds upon existing knowledge/theory; haphazard info isn’t enough; must develop previous insights
- think Newton’s “standing on the shoulders of giants”
QGR: Parsimony
- the idea that theories must provide simplest/most economical/efficient facts; a theory that explains 2 phenomenon is better than one that explains 1 (does absence make the heart grow fonder/wander?)
QGR: Parsimony (Example)
THEORY A: “MOTIVATED NOSTALGIA”
- separation causes exaggeration of object’s merit; motivation via positive past memories; explains “absence makes the heart grow fonder”
THEORY B: “PHYSICAL REINFORCEMENT THEORY”
- separation causes object devaluation; attraction predicted via physical reinforcement; explains “absence makes the heart wander”
THEORY C: “DISTORTED MEMORY THEORY”
- separation causes exaggeration of objects qualities, regardless of their nature; memory magnifies the past; explains both “absence makes the heart wander/grow fonder”; preferable as uses fewer principles
Research from Theory
- progress needs more than fact count
- IE. findings of “unhappiness via separation from loved ones” and “apathy via separation from one’s disliked” must be integrated w/ comprehensive/unitary theories; have to say WHY AND WHAT
RFT: Theories
- statements summarising/organising knowledge of phenomenon into variable relationships
- manuscripts are rejected not because of stats but because they don’t contribute to human theory
- IE. “separation from loved ones enhances love as separation exaggerates (good) memories” is a theory as it explains AND describes separation/emotion relationship
- generalise for multiple facts/make predictions for novel situations
- IE. can hypothesise that memory disorders (ie. Alzheimer’s) lessen extreme separation appraisals; phenomenon is less profound, so lesser emotional arousal
RFT: Process
- THEORY: precise/falsifiable/parsimonious explanation
- DEDUCTION/HYPOTHESIS: if theory is valid, get hypothesis from observation
- DESIGN STUDY
- DATA ANALYSIS: statistics
- CONSISTENCY DETERMINATION W/HYPOTHESIS
- INDUCTIVE SUPPORT/UNSUPPORTED: if supported, it isn’t proven; theory only explains facts; if unsupported, check for errors (ie. poor instructions/sample issues); change and repeat; only change hypothesis if fails multiple times
- FURTHER TESTING: go to next logical hypotheses
Alternative Research Development
- OBSERVATIONS: don’t overdo/anecdote it; still systematic as experiments
- SERENDIPITY: right place at right time
- EVERYDAY ISSUES: “applied” psych
- REPLICATION/EXTENSION: crisis in psych research
- DEVELOPING OTHERS WORK: test someone’s explanation against an alternative based on own opinions; adapt their methods/procedures for other issues
