Kinesiology 213 Fall 2024 Midterm Study Guide PDF

Kinesiology 213 Fall 2024, University of Calgary Dr. John Holash 2024 Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) This work is licensed under a Creative Comm...

Kinesiology 213 Fall 2024, University of Calgary Dr. John Holash 2024 Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-No- Derivatives 4.0 International License. To view a copy of this license, visit: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Study Guide Module 1: Research History of and Media Quality of Research Depends on: – Who: Subjects and comparison groups – What: Variables being controlled and measured – Where: Settings (natural vs structured) – How: Methodology (how the test is conducted) Interpretation of Results: – Critical to understand the significance and limitations Philosophies and Ideas Technology and Idea Transfer: – Chinese, Indian, Greek historical records – Formal writing emerged and spread globally – Indigenous philosophies require an ethnophilosophical approach – Oral traditions: Stories, cultural practices, rituals – Importance of recognizing non-Western philosophies Scientific Method Origins Attributed to Aristotle: – Formal process of testing ideas – Parallel ideas in Chinese, Arabic, and African writings Rationalism (Rene Descartes): – Investigation into ontology and epistemology – Cartesian Skepticism: Questioning the nature of knowledge and reality Descartes’ Philosophical Inquiry Key Questions:  – How do I know what I believe is true? – Can senses be trusted? Apple Barrel Metaphor: – Examine each idea critically Ontological Question: – Nature of reality if senses can be deceived Cogito Ergo Sum: “I think, therefore I am” Empiricism (John Locke) Empiricism: – Knowledge through physical experience – Primary Qualities: Weight, mass, density (objectively real) – Secondary Qualities: Colour, taste, texture, smell (subjectively real) Immaterialism (George Berkeley) Immaterialism – Primary and secondary qualities are not exclusive and in fact inseparable. – Perception as the key to existence – “Esse Est Percepi” – To be is to be perceived Post Modernism (Michel Foucault) Societal accepted truths are shaped by power dynamics this alters knowledge creation, sharing, and enforcement Belief in subjective relativism as apposed to objective reality for truth Knowledge and Science Knowledge Defined: – Justified, True, Belief – Justification: Evidence or support – Truth: Objectively or perceptually correct – Belief: Considered true but needing justification Summary Epistemological Question: – What do I consider knowledge? (What is knowledge?) – How do I come to know things? Ontological Question: – What is real? – What type of things exist? – What is the nature of reality? Philosophical Contributions: – Descartes: Rationalism and the existence of self – Locke: Empirical evidence and primary/secondary qualities  – Berkeley: Perception as existence Knowledge Definition: – Based on ontological and epistemological perspectives Questions to consider: What are some potential limitations when comparing research from different cultural or historical contexts? How do oral traditions contribute to philosophical inquiry compared to written traditions? What are some of the philosophical roots that underpin our thoughts about science? Appeal to Authority and self correcting nature of science and research. Appeal to Authority Definition: Belief in something based on the authority of the person without adequate supporting facts. Key Points: – Relies on fame, power, or status outside their domain of competence. – Logically fallacious. Heuristics Definition: Mental shortcuts or problem-solving strategies that simplify complex decisions using approximate “rule of thumb” methods. Key Points: – Enable quick decision-making with limited information. – Can lead to errors or biases, including susceptibility to the appeal to authority fallacy. Historical Examples of Appeal to Authority Thalidomide Scandal: Authorities assured the safety of thalidomide, leading to severe birth defects. Geocentric Model: Acceptance of Earth-centered universe based on ancient scholars like Ptolemy, until evidence supported the heliocentric model. Assumptions vs. Axioms Axioms: – Universally accepted truths, foundational in logical systems. – Not subject to debate (e.g., “I think therefore I am”). Assumptions: – Accepted as true without concrete evidence, often for argument’s sake. (e.g., “All trees have leaves”). – Subject to questioning and revision based on new evidence. Science as a Process Nature: A process to determine reality through experimentation, observation, and logic. Divisions: Natural Sciences, Social Sciences, Formal Sciences. Research: – An adventure into the unknown. – Involves asking falsifiable questions. – Emphasizes proving oneself wrong to promote objectivity. Self-Correcting Nature of Science Key Components: – Hypothesis testing and refinement. – Replication and verification. – Peer review and publication. – Feedback, criticism, and paradigm shifts. – Technological advancements. Outcome: Continuous improvement and refinement of knowledge. Fallacious Arguments Related to Appeal to Authority Ad Hominem: Attacking the person instead of the argument. Straw Man: Misrepresenting an argument to make it easier to attack. Slippery Slope: Arguing a specific action will lead to an undesirable outcome. False Dichotomy: Presenting only two options when more exist. Bandwagon Fallacy: Believing something is true because many others do. Information Evaluation Guiding Principles: – Healthy skepticism. – Consider context. – Look for supporting work and consensus. Modern Challenges: Managing information overload with critical thinking and reliable sources. Questions to Consider How does the appeal to authority impact decision-making? What are heuristics and how do they influence judgments? How are axioms and assumptions used differently in logical reasoning? What mechanisms ensure the self-correcting nature of science? How can fallacious arguments be identified and avoided in scientific discussions? Worldviews in Kinesiology Research: 1. Epistemology: – Study of knowledge and belief  – Concerned with the nature, sources, and limits of knowledge – Explores how knowledge is acquired and justified – Investigates the distinction between knowledge and belief, as well as between true and false beliefs 2. Ontology: – Study of existence and the nature of reality – Concerned with the nature of being and what exists in the world – Explores the classification and organization of entities, such as objects, events, or processes – Investigates the relationships between different entities and their properties 3. Positivism: – Emphasis on empirical evidence and scientific methods – Pursuit of objective truths through systematic observation, measurement, and experimentation 4. Interpretivism: – Focus on subjective experiences and cultural contexts – Understanding meaning and significance through social interactions and personal interpretations 5. Constructivism: – Knowledge actively constructed by individuals – Role of personal interpretations, cognitive processes, and social interactions in shaping understanding of reality 6. Pragmatism: – Prioritizes practical implications, usefulness, and effectiveness of ideas and theories – Focus on addressing specific problems or challenges rather than abstract principles or metaphysical truths 7. Two-Eyed Seeing in Research: – Integrating Indigenous and Western knowledge systems – Promoting respect, balance, and understanding between different perspectives 8. Other Worldviews (Realism, Idealism, Relativism, Existentialism) Questions to Consider How do epistemology and ontology differ in their focus, and why are both important for understanding research approaches? How does positivism differ from interpretivism in its approach to knowledge, and what are the strengths and limitations of each? In what ways do constructivism and pragmatism shape the process of knowledge creation, particularly in relation to practical research problems?  How does the concept of Two-Eyed Seeing enrich research by integrating Indigenous and Western knowledge systems, and what are the potential benefits of this approach? How do we learn new things, Thinking-Reasoning. Key ideas: 1. Appeal to Authority: Definition: A logical fallacy where a claim is accepted based on the authority of the person making the claim, rather than the strength of the evidence or logical reasoning supporting it. Factors to consider when evaluating an appeal to authority argument: – Verify the expertise – Assess the relevance – Evaluate the consensus – Consider potential biases – Analyze the argument – Recognize fallibility – Seek out diverse perspectives 2. Deductive Reasoning: Definition: Drawing specific conclusions based on general principles or premises. Key features: – Starts with general principles or premises – Conclusions are logically derived from the premises – Guarantees a true conclusion if the premises are true 3. Inductive Reasoning: Definition: Drawing general conclusions based on specific observations or experiences. Key features: – Starts with specific observations or experiences – Generalizes or predictions based on limited information – Provides strong evidence for a conclusion but does not guarantee the truth of the conclusion, even if the premises are true 4. Abductive Reasoning: Definition: Forming a hypothesis or explanation based on limited or incomplete evidence, deemed the most likely or plausible explanation given the available information. Key features: – Also known as inference to the best explanation – Involves generating hypotheses based on available evidence – Does not guarantee the truth of the conclusion or explanation ####Study Focus: * Understand the differences between deductive, inductive, and abductive reasoning. * Recognize the appeal to authority fallacy and know how to evaluate such arguments. * Be able to identify examples of each type of reasoning and the appeal to authority fallacy in real-world scenarios. * Understand the potential limitations and pitfalls of each type of reasoning and the appeal to authority argument. ####Questions to Consider - How can you critically evaluate an appeal to authority in research, and what factors determine its validity? - In what situations is deductive reasoning most effective, and what are the potential risks if the premises are flawed? - What are the limitations of inductive reasoning, particularly when making generalizations from limited data? - How does abductive reasoning help form hypotheses with incomplete evidence, and what are the potential pitfalls? Research Design in Kinesiology: Introduction to research design Qualitative research – Use of theory – Emphasis on understanding and interpretation – Data is based on subjective interpretations! – Mostly based in constructionist world view. Quantitative research – Use of theory – Hypothesis (Questions) must be falsifiable – Emphasis on measurement and analysis – Mostly based on a positivist world view! – Specific research designs (e.g., case studies, experiments, surveys) Research Approaches and Methods: 1. Quantitative Research: – Focuses on investigating relationships between variables. – Uses numerical data and statistical analysis. – Independent and dependent variables. – Research designs: causal, experimental, correlational. – Common data collection methods: surveys, measurements of variables. instruments. 2. Qualitative Research: – Focuses on understanding experiences and perspectives. – Uses narrative data and thematic analysis. – Research approaches: case study, ethnography, grounded theory, phenomenology. – Common data collection methods: in-depth interviews, focus groups, observations, document analysis.  3. Mixed Methods Research: – Combines quantitative and qualitative research methods. – Provides a more comprehensive understanding of a research problem. – Research designs: concurrent, explanatory, exploratory. – Integration of quantitative and qualitative components. 4. Two-eyed Seeing Research: – Integrates Indigenous and Western knowledge systems. – Respectful collaboration with Indigenous knowledge holders. – Research designs that incorporate both Indigenous and Western methodologies. – Emphasis on cultural preservation and environmental sustainability. 5. Research Design and Methodology: – Quantitative research: experimental and correlational designs. – Qualitative research: case study, ethnography, grounded theory, phenomenology. – Mixed methods research: concurrent, explanatory, exploratory designs. – Two-eyed seeing research: integration of Indigenous and Western methodologies. 6. Data Collection Methods: – Quantitative research: surveys, physiological measurements – Qualitative research: in-depth interviews, focus groups, observations, document analysis. – Mixed methods research: combination of quantitative and qualitative data collection methods. – Two-eyed seeing research: collaborative engagement with Indigenous knowledge holders. 7. Research Purpose Statements: – Quantitative research: focus on relationships between variables – Qualitative research: focus on understanding experiences and perspectives – Mixed methods research: focus on integrating both quantitative and qualitative components. – Two-eyed seeing research: focus on integrating Indigenous and Western knowledge systems. Questions to Consider How do the goals of qualitative research differ from those of quantitative research, and why might one approach be better suited for certain research questions? What are the key considerations when designing a study that investigates relationships between variables using quantitative research? How do different data collection methods (e.g., surveys vs. interviews) influence the outcomes in both qualitative and quantitative research?  What are the challenges of integrating qualitative and quantitative components in mixed methods research, and how can these be addressed? Scientific Methods and Problem Solving Unscientific & logical Methods: Tenacity: Clinging to beliefs thought to be true over time. Authority: Accepting beliefs because an authoritative figure holds them. Serendipity: Accidental discoveries leading to scientific insights (e.g., penicillin by Fleming). Intuition: Relying on common sense developed through experience. Rationalistic Method: Using reasoning to derive knowledge. Empirical Method: Collecting evidence through systematic investigation. Scientific Method of Problem Solving: Developing the problem: Clearly defining the research question or hypothesis. Formulating the hypothesis: Establishing a testable prediction or theoretical framework. Gathering data: Collecting quantitative or qualitative information. Analyzing data: Interpreting the results through statistical or thematic analysis. Reporting results: Presenting findings in a structured, replicable manner. Questions to Consider How do unscientific methods (e.g., intuition or tenacity) differ from scientific methods in problem solving? Why is it important for research hypotheses to be falsifiable in the scientific method? What role does serendipity play in scientific discoveries, and how can researchers ensure such findings are scientifically validated? How does the scientific method promote objectivity and reliability in research findings? Specific questions from the lecture material you should be able to answer: 1. What does APA stand for? Why do we use APA in Kinesiology? (2 reasons). 2. Is APA limited to the formatting of citations? Or does it extend to the whole paper? 3. If you were to view a APA reference that had errors in it, could you find and indicate them? 4. What is the “Scientific method of problem solving.” – Can you outline the steps and describe what occurs in each step? 5. What are the 5 characteristics of research that we covered in class? – How are those 5 characteristics realized? 6. When we process visual information is that information completely accurate? 7. Why would our minds be considered predictions machines? 8. We examined the visual system in the “do you see what I see lecture” does this prediction context just involve the visual system or are many of senses vulnerable to the predictive nature of our minds? 9. What would make a variable discrete, what would make a variable continuous? 10. Why is it important to understand and describe the characteristics of your subject pool in a research paper? – Is it important that subject pool mirrors the population. If the two are vastly different, how could you argue that the results from an animal experiment in rats is somehow applicable to humans? What level of confidence do you have in these results as they apply to humans?