Week 6 Flashcards
research questions may be looking for…
differences between groups
relationships between variables
what is a variable?
anything that can be measured and that can vary
relationships
observing natural variability between 2 or more variables to see if they are meaningfully associated with one another
e.g. how different personality traits are related to one another
differences
can be answered using experiential designs.
ptps assigned to different experimental conditions
scores are measured and compared
interventions
relationships involve measuring things that naturally vary = no intervention
differences involve manipulation of variables = intervention
hypothesis for relationships
null hypothesis - the statement there is no relationship in the population
alternate hypothesis - can be one-tailed or two-tailed
hypothesis for differences
null hypothesis - the statement that the two groups don’t differ
alternate hypothesis - can be one-tailed or two-tailed
causal conclusions
inferences that A causes B
associative conclusions
inferences that A and B are related
DON’T make claims of cause and effect
why don’t relationship tests support casual conclusions?
possibilities such as backwards causation and third variable problems
comparing pre-existing groups
quasi-experiments
cannot randomly allocate to groups, we cannot therefore rule out the possibility that there are systematic differences between groups
should refrain from drawing casual conclusions since we can’t find differences between groups
media role in reporting
the media may sensationalise scientific findings in such. way that they become inaccurate
the media is vital in communication of scientific reports
Mehr (2015)
- post hoc ergo propter hoc - misinterpreting the findings of correlational studies as causal effects
- meaning of the measures - misinterpreting what the behaviour reported measures actually capture
inaccurate reports will be interpreted incorrectly
- may affect choices that individual make and the policies made
- could affect certain societal groups more negatively than other
is the report reliable?
those who include a link tot he original Reseach are more reliable than those who don’t
however, language often used in scientific journals puts people off reading the original findings
the importance of an informed public
there’s a big differences between scientists and the general public, e.g when asked for opinions on:
whether humans have evolved over time, the two groups would have very different knowledge to answer this question
continued financial support
it is difficult to generate support from the public and the government if they do not understand the importance or relevance of the research and trust the science
communication of ideas between academics and key stakeholders
researchers are not encouraged to use their training and expertise outside academia or their own discipline. this hinders the useful applications of ideas and the identification of the needs of society
why is research on the media an important issue?
public engagement important and the media is a vital conduct of information to the public
however the media often reports findings to the public in inaccurate ways
media misreporting
in the pursuit of attracting wider readership, the media is incentivised to sensationalise scientific findings and may result in inaccuracies
why is media misreporting a problem?
biased reporting - only a partial understanding of issues by the public
sensationalism and oversimplification - panic and misunderstanding
post hoc ergo propter hoc - assuming a casual element when there is no evidence for this
partially important when considering socially sensitive research, has harmful consequences to particular groups in society
reducing media misreporting
use reputable sources - those that provide link to the original research articles are more reliable than those who don’t
read the original article and be mindful of the ways media misreport information
ways forward with media misreporting in the general public
collaboration and communication
