PS295 Introduction to Research Methods 2024 PDF

PS295: Introduction to Research Methods  Week 1 & 2 Outline Introduction to the course  Instructor introduction  Course outline and requirements  Method vs. content distinction  Goals of the course The scientific approach  Defining science as an approach  Feat...

PS295: Introduction to Research Methods  Week 1 & 2 Outline Introduction to the course  Instructor introduction  Course outline and requirements  Method vs. content distinction  Goals of the course The scientific approach  Defining science as an approach  Features of a scientific approach Research compared to other ways of knowing  Research vs. your experience  Research vs. your intuition  Research vs. authorities More on theories, hypotheses, and prediction  The functions of a theory  Propositional logic: induction and deduction  Features of good theories and hypotheses Generating research questions and hypotheses  Types of questions  Sources of research ideas Finding and reading research  Types of scientific sources  Finding scientific sources  Components of an empirical journal article  Research in the media – from journal to journalism  PS 295: Research Methods I  Fundamentals of the logic of science, research design and interpretation  Meetings: A 2:30-3:50 TR (N1001)  B 4:00-5:20 TR (N1001)  Instructor  Dr. Christian Jordan  Office: N2022  MW 11:00-noon or by appt.  Email: [email protected]  Lab Coordinator  Doreen Weise  Office: N2075D  Office hours by appointment  Email: [email protected] Textbook: Morling (4th Edition)  Need e-book with InQuizitive  DTA program  10% of grade for InQuizitives  Opt out deadline is Sept 20  MyLearningSpace  Course information posted regularly  Syllabus,lecture outlines, lab materials, grades, announcements  It is your responsibility to check regularly  Lecture slides posted weekly, usually at the beginning of the week  They will not necessarily include all info  Final Grade Breakdown  Assignments: 25% total  Midterm: 20%  Final exam: 30%  Reading Quizzes 10%  Participation in lectures: 5%  Participation in labs: 10%  Research participation: 2% bonus  Midterm and Exam  20% Midterm  Location: N1001  Scheduled Tuesday Oct 29 during regular class time  Covers text, lectures, labs  Approximately 75% MC and 25% Short Answer  30% Final Exam  Scheduled by Registrar  Covers text, lectures, labs  Cumulative: covers entire course with emphasis on second half  Approximately 80% MC and 20% Short Answer  Reading Quizzes (InQuizitive)  Earn 10% of course grade  Optional, may have 40% final instead  Whichever gives you the highest grade  Access quizzes through MyLS  In “e-book and Inquizitive” folder  Must access this way to record grades  Earn 100% by reaching target score  Keep working to reach target score  Average score across all quizzes  Lowest two grades dropped  Assignments  Four assignments  25% of course grade (6.25% each)  Instructions will be posted on MyLS  Submitted to TAs/IAs and returned using the Dropbox in MyLS  Direct questions to your TA/IA first, and then to the Lab Coordinator (Doreen Weise) if needed  Weekly Labs  Conducted by TAs/IAs under supervision of Lab Coordinator (Doreen Weise)  Held in BA207  Exercises, demonstrations, discussions  Assignment instructions and assistance  Labs are considered mandatory and 10% of grade is based on attendance and participation  Labs begin week of Sept 9-13  Teaching Assistants  TAs/IAs are graduate students or senior undergraduates in psychology Conduct labs Grade assignments Office hours TA/IA contact information will be posted on MyLS In “Course Information”  iClickers in Lecture  Purchase iClicker subscription/access code through the bookstore  Create an iClicker student account  Download the app and select Sign Up!  Go to iClicker page on site for detailed info  Register for correct section (A or B)  Earn 5% of grade for clicker responses Full marks for at least 80% participation Not based on attendance but participation  Detailed info in “Clicker Instructions” Section A (2:30pm) join join.iClicker.com/DEUG Section B (4:00pm) join join.iClicker.com/TIFY  Bonus: Research Participation  Earn up to 2% bonus on final grade  Lab studies: 1% per hour  On-line studies: 0.5% per hour  Sign up using PREP system  https://wlu-psych.sona-systems.com  Or access from WLU Psychology under Research  Instructions will be posted on MyLS  PREP Startup Guide  PREP Presentation  Questions: [email protected]  Course Focus: Method vs. Content Distinction  Content courses  Emphasis on research findings  The “what” of psychology: what is known; what has been discovered  e.g., PS275 Developmental  e.g., PS270 Social  e.g., PS260 Cognitive  e.g., PS263 Behavioural Neuroscience  Methods courses  Emphasis on research process  The “how” of psychology: How do we know things; how do we come up with answers; how do we produce new findings?  Course goals  Appreciate the role of research in psychology  Learn how to conduct research  Career relevance  Practical, transferable skills  Learn how to evaluate research claims  Senior courses, findings in media, advertising  Become “informed consumers” of research  Promote critical reasoning  Develop enthusiasm for research  Course goals  Appreciate the role of research in psychology  Learn how to conduct research  Career relevance  Practical, transferable skills  Learn how to evaluate research claims  Senior courses, findings in media, advertising  Become “informed consumers” of research  Promote critical reasoning  Develop enthusiasm for research Best study techniques  Dunlosky et al. (2013). Psychological Science in the Public Interest  Most effective:  Spaced practice/distributed practice  Practice testing/retrieval practice  Less effective:  Highlighting and underlining  Rereading  Summarizing Science and the study of human behaviour  Psychology as a scientific discipline Psychology is typically defined as: The scientific study of behavior, thought, and emotion Not only a profession that promotes human welfare (through counseling, education, and other activities) Alsoa scientific discipline that studies behavior, mental processes, and emotion The scientific approach  Psychology is a scientific discipline  Common misconceptions  Science is NOT defined by:  Subject matter  Equipment or apparatus  Having enough facts  Science as an approach  Defined by the methods used to study subject matter Features of the scientific method 1. Scientists are empiricists 2. Scientists test theories 3. Scientists work in a community 4. Scientists tackle applied and basic problems 5. Scientists make their work public 1. Scientists are Empiricists  Empiricism  Empiricism = relying on observations to draw conclusions  Systematic empiricism  Systematic = observation is structured; observing with a definite purpose in mind; guided by a theory, question or idea  Empirical questions  Must study questions that are potentially answerable through systematic observation  Example study: Aggression  What causes aggression?  Hightemperatures could lead to increased aggression  Example study: Aggression  Empirical test  Create a situation where people could behave aggressively  Expose people (participants) to different temperature levels  Observe how much aggression they display when angered  Draw conclusions based on data 2. Scientists Test Theories and Hypotheses Terminology: Theory, Research Question, Hypothesis, Prediction General Specific  Theories, hypotheses and predictions  Theory  A set of statements that describes general principles that can account for many observations  Usually about how variables relate to one another  Too broad and complex to be tested in just one particular study; tested across many different studies  Research question  The specific question a researcher wants to answer  Usually a question about how variables might relate to one another  Often it is a question that follows directly from the theory  Hypothesis (conceptual hypothesis)  The tentative answer to the research question; what the researcher thinks is true; still needs to be tested  Specific, focused statement about what is expected in a specific situation  Usually a statement about how variables are thought to be related to one another  Prediction (experimental hypothesis)  When the hypothesis refers to a particular research study  The specific outcome or result the researcher expects in that study Example: Temperature and Aggression Theory-Data Cycle  3. Scientists Work in a Community  Norms – expectations for what is considered appropriate behaviour  Help science to progress and be self-correcting Norm Universalism The merit of a scientific claim is based on methods not credentials or reputation Communality Scientific findings belong to the whole scientific community Disinterestedness Should not be heavily invested in the particular outcomes of a study Organized skepticism Scientists should not take anything at face value – base beliefs on observable data  4. Scientists Tackle Applied and Basic Problems  Basic Research  Want to understand something, without regard for whether the knowledge is immediately useful  Main goal is to increase knowledge  Applied Research  Want to apply the research findings to a problem of immediate concern  Main goal is to find a solution for a specific problem  Has clear practical application  4. Scientists Tackle Applied and Basic Problems  Basic Research  Want to understand something, without regard for whether the knowledge is immediately useful  Main goal is to increase knowledge  Applied Research  Want to apply the research findings to a problem of immediate concern  Main goal is to find a solution for a specific problem  Has clear practical application  Overlap and Synergies  Distinction is blurry  Translational research provides a bridge from basic to applied  5. Scientists make their work public Researchers usually submit their work to scientific journals Before publication in a journal article, the paper goes through a rigorous peer-review process The peer review process: 1.Author submits paper to a scientific journal 2.Editor sends it to 2-3 expert reviewers 3.Reviewers provide reviews describing the strengths and weaknesses of the research -Usually anonymous so feel free to be critical 4.Editor considers the reviews and makes decision -Accept, revise and resubmit, reject Paper remains open to scrutiny after publication: -commentaries -replication attempts -competing studies  Research vs. other sources  Empirical research has advantages over other sources of evidence for people’s beliefs:  Experience  Intuition  Authority 1. Research vs. your experience  Experience is based on subjective perceptions  Experience has no comparison group  Experience is confounded  Research is probabilistic Experience is based on subjective perceptions  Seems real because “I saw it with my own eyes”  Problems  Perceptions are fallible: People can misperceive or misinterpret what they see  Perceptions are biased by expectations, context  E.g., visual illusions Muller-Lyer illusion Experience Lacks a Comparison Group Experience Lacks Comparison Groups  Experience Lacks a Comparison Group  “Using a laptop helps students get high grades” Grade 90  Seems true because I’ve 80 70 observed students who use a 60 laptop get high grades 50 Laptop No Laptop  Need to ask: Compared to what?  Compare grades of those who use a laptop to those who don’t Experience lacks comparison groups  Claims that may lack comparison groups  Example of claims based on experience  PlayingWordle makes your brain sharper  Too much screen time makes kids irritable  Rainy weather puts me in a bad mood  Think of one or more comparison groups that would help you evaluate each conclusion Claims that lack comparison groups  Playing Wordle makes your brain sharper Claims that lack comparison groups  Too much screen time makes kids irritable Claims that lack comparison groups  Rainy weather puts me in a bad mood Experience is confounded  Confounds occur when you think one thing caused an outcome, but other things also changed that might have caused the outcome  Two possible causes are varying together, so you can’t tell which one produced the effect  Experience is confounded  Believe screen time makes kids irritable  Experience confirms it – even when considering a comparison group  But there could be confounds (i.e., other things that changed too)  When kids use a lot of screen, they may differ in other ways (more tired, hungry, bored)  Research is probabilistic  Research findings do not explain all cases  Findings are probabilistic  They indicate when there is a higher likelihood of an outcome occurring  There will be exceptions  Exceptions don’t invalidate the general conclusions drawn from research  Example:  Vaccines prevent the spread of COVID  “But my brother got two doses of the vaccine and still got COVID!”  2. Research vs. your intuition  Intuition is biased by a good story  Intuition is biased by what comes to mind easily  The availability heuristic  Failing to think about what isn’t present  The present/present bias  Focusing on the evidence we like best  Confirmation bias  Cherry-picking the evidence we take in  Bias blind spot The “present/present” bias  Rainy weather puts me in a bad mood Bad Mood Good Mood Rain 25 50 No Rain 100 200  2. Research vs. your intuition  Intuition is biased by a good story  Intuition is biased by what comes to mind easily  The availability heuristic  Failing to think about what isn’t present  The present/present bias  Focusing on the evidence we like best  Confirmation bias  Cherry-picking the evidence we take in  Bias blind spot  3. Research vs. authorities  Must be cautious trusting the claims of others, even “authorities”  Authorities can be biased  Base beliefs on personal experience, intuition, what they want to see  Consider the source of their ideas  Do they refer to research evidence?  If so, may be more trustworthy  Being confident does not mean being right  Research vs. other sources  Scientific research has advantages over other sources  Research also incorporates elements from other methods  E.g., experience & intuition as sources of ideas  Researchers themselves are not unbiased, but the scientific approach helps prevent the influence of personal biases  Series of “filters”  System of “checks and balances”  E.g., peer review process, replication attempts, open science  Scientific Filters Before an idea is seen as established knowledge, it must pass through several “filters” that help to separate valid from invalid conclusions.  Theories, hypotheses and predictions  Theory  A set of statements that describes general principles that can account for many observations  Usually about how variables relate to one another  Too broad and complex to be tested in one particular study; tested across many different studies  Research question  The specific question a researcher wants to answer  Usually a question about how variables might relate to one another  Often it is a question that follows directly from the theory  Hypothesis (conceptual hypothesis)  The tentative answer to the research question; what the researcher thinks is true; still needs to be tested  Specific, focused statement about what is expected in a specific situation  Usually a statement about how variables are thought to be related to one another  Prediction (experimental hypothesis)  When the hypothesis refers to a particular research study  The specific outcome or result the researcher expects in that study More on Theories and Hypotheses  The importance of theory  Two major functions of a theory  1. Explain existing data/observations  Summarize and integrate; in doing so gain new insights; see new relations among things  2. Guide future research  Suggest new hypotheses to test  Thereis constant interplay between theory and empirical observations  See following diagrams Theory-Data Cycle  Two types of propositional logic  Induction  Reasoning from specific instances to a general proposition  E.g., start with findings, derive a theory  Deduction  Reasoning from a general proposition to a specific implication of that proposition  E.g., start with a theory, derive a hypothesis  Induction and deduction Theory Deduction Induction Data (observations)  Deduction Theory (memory declines with age) Deduction “I expect younger adults should perform better Data (scores on than older adults memory test) on a test of memory ability”  Induction Theory (memory declines with age) Induction “These scores suggest that memory ability declines with age” Data (scores on memory test) Theory-Data Cycle Theory-Data Cycle Deduction Theory-Data Cycle Deduction Induction Induction  Features of good theories and hypotheses  Supported by data  Large quantity and variety of evidence  Can explain many different observations  A good theory ties many disparate observations together  Testable and Falsifiable theories  Must be clear on when the theory would NOT be supported  Karl Popper: theories are tested best through attempts at falsification  Note – do not say a finding “proves” a theory  Support theory, consistent with theory  Evaluative theories based on “weight of evidence” for and against  Testable and Falsifiable theories  Hypotheses and theories should be stated in clear, testable form  Offerclear predictions  Be open to criticism and revision  Falsifiable—theories should stand up to tests that can prove them wrong  Karl Popper, black swans  A theory is never proven to be true  Generating research questions and hypotheses  Narrow your ideas  Find a specific topic or area of interest  As opposed to being “interested in psychology” or “interested in how people act”  Begin with a research question  Start with a question and work toward an answer–that will be your hypothesis Types of Research Questions  1. Frequency or description questions  What is x like? What are the characteristics of X?  What is the typical standing on X?  Example: How many hours of sleep do teenagers get each night on average?  Example: How many university students drink energy drinks?  Example: What are Canadians’ attitudes toward abortion?  2. Association or relationship questions  Is there an association or relationship between X and Y?  Example: Is honesty related to socio-economic status (e.g., household income)?  Example: Do younger people have better memory than older people?  Example: Is children’s self-esteem related to their grades in school?  3. Causal questions  Do changes in X cause changes in Y?  Does an increase in X lead to an increase (or decrease) in Y?  Example: Does using cannabis cause psychosis?  Example: Does excessive screen time cause depression?  Example: Does social exclusion cause aggression? Generic templates: Association hypotheses  Question:  Is there a relationship between X and Y?  Is there a relationship between people’s anxiety and their test performance?  Hypothesis:  Increases in X are associated with decreases (or increases) in Y.  Increases in anxiety are associated with decreases in test performance.  Note: be clear on direction of relationship  Generic templates: Causal hypotheses  Question:  What effect does X have on Y?  What effect does anxiety have on test performance?  Hypothesis:  Increases in X cause decreases (or increases) in Y.  Increases in anxiety cause decreases in test performance.  Note: be clear on direction of effect Getting ideas for research  Existing theory  Other research  Programs of research  Questions are rarely resolved in a single study  Establishing boundary conditions  Everyday observations  Observing oneself and others  Commonsense views  Practical and applied issues  Literature Search: Types of Scientific Sources  Empirical journal articles  Report original results of an empirical study  Details of study method, results, conclusions  Terminology: article title, journal title, volume, issue Mahadevan, N., & Jordan, C. H. (2022). Desperately seeking status: How desires for, and perceived attainment of, status and inclusion relate to grandiose and vulnerable narcissism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 48(5), 704-717.  Review journal articles  Provide a summary of many published studies on a topic  May use “meta analysis” to combine results of many studies  Examples: Psychological Review; Psychological Bulletin  Chapters in edited books  Each chapter by a different contributor  Usually each chapter reviews a collection of studies on a topic  Not peer reviewed as rigorously as journal articles Components of an Empirical Journal Article  Title: Conveys main idea of article in about 12 words or less.  Abstract: Summary of the article about 120-250 words long.  Introduction: Explains the topic of the study, reviews the background for the research, and ends by stating the specific research questions or hypotheses for the current study.  Method: Explains in detail how the researchers conducted their study, usually with subsections such as Participants, Materials, and Procedure.  Results: Describes the results of the study including statistical tests used to analyze the data.  Discussion: Begins by summarizing the main findings and whether they supported the hypotheses. Goes on to discuss the study's importance, alternative explanations for the findings, and directions for future research.  References: An alphabetical list of all the sources the authors cited in the article.  Literature Search: Types of Scientific Sources  Empirical journal articles  Report original results of an empirical study  Details of study method, results, conclusions  Terminology: article title, journal title, volume, issue Mahadevan, N., & Jordan, C. H. (2022). Desperately seeking status: How desires for, and perceived attainment of, status and inclusion relate to grandiose and vulnerable narcissism. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 48(5), 704-717.  Review journal articles  Provide a summary of many published studies on a topic  May use “meta analysis” to combine results of many studies  Examples: Psychological Review; Psychological Bulletin  Chapters in edited books  Each chapter by a different contributor  Usually each chapter reviews a collection of studies on a topic  Not peer reviewed as rigorously as journal articles Literature Search: Online Databases  Google Scholar  Advantages  Free tool  Easy to use; Similar to Google Search but for scholarly articles  Lists results according to a “relevance” ranking  Disadvantages  May come up with many articles that are not relevant (e.g., from outside of psychology)  Need to do more sifting through output because it is less organized  Doesn’t categorize the articles listed (e.g., peer reviewed or not)  Not linked as directly to campus library system for accessing an electronic version of the article  PsycINFO  Advantages:  Very broad and extensive coverage of psychology literature  Limits to psychology and a few related disciplines (avoids listing a lot of unrelated information)  Can limit to peer reviewed articles  Can search by author, title, keyword, or phrase  Shows other articles that have cited the target article (for citation searching)  Interfaced with campus library to access an electronic version of the article  Disadvantages:  Can only use if have access through university library  Other Relevant Databases:  Web of Science  PUBMED or MEDLINE (Medicine, Physiology, Neuroscience)  ERIC (Educational Resource Information Center)  “From Journal to Journalism”  Psychology research is reported by journalists to the general public  Magazines, newspapers, blogs, podcasts, etc.  Journalists may distort the findings of research  Need to ask:  Is the story important? (or just cute, sensational)  Is the story accurate? (or distorted, exaggerated) “From Journal to Journalism” For a fun video describing the sometimes fraught relations between scientists and journalist, see this video from Last Week Tonight with John Oliver.