Psychology Notes PDF

What is psychology? ​ Scientific study of human behavior and mental process What is Science? ​ A general way of understanding the natural world featuring systematic empiricism, empirical questions and public knowledge Systematic Empiricism ​ Learning ​ Requires behaviors, events o...

What is psychology? ​ Scientific study of human behavior and mental process What is Science? ​ A general way of understanding the natural world featuring systematic empiricism, empirical questions and public knowledge Systematic Empiricism ​ Learning ​ Requires behaviors, events or phenomena in a methodical and consistent manner and it requires protocols, criterial, and methods to ensure that observations are unbiased repeatable and accurate What are empirical questions? ​ Questions about the way the world is that can be answered by aking systematic observations What is public knowledge ​ Detailed descriptions of research that are available to other researchers and the general public, usually through publication in a professional journal. What is the difference between science and pseudoscience? ​ A set of beliefs or activities that is claimed to be science but lacks one or more of the three features of science What is falsifiability ​ A claim that is falsifiable if there are an observation that would - if it were made- count as evidence against the claim ​ Scientific claims must be falsifiable. Why should we concern ourselves with pseudoscience? ​ Human behavior cannot be predicted with perfect accuracy. ​ Much of its subject matter cannot be observed directly. What is the scientific method? ​ Observation, research and background, hypothesis, experimentation, data collection, analysis, conclusions, repeat. What is the difference between basic and applied research? ​ Basic research is the study of fundamental human behavior. Scientific research conducted primarily for the sake of learning something new ​ Applied: scientific research that is conducted primarily to solve some practical problem. ​ Basic and applied research can influence one another. Open science ​ Includes pre registering studies, openly sharing study materials and data, and encouraging the replication of previously published studies ​ Set of practices intended to make scientific research more reliable and more transparent to both scientists and the general public Results of poorly conducted scientific work can have profound effects!  ​ Open science practices do not eliminate statistical flukes but they do make them more difficult ​ Practices: publish replicated studies, pre-registered studies, provide better descriptions of how study was conducted, use larger sample sizes, make data available Science and common sense ​ Intuitive beliefs about human behavior and mental processes- fold psychology. How could we be so wrong? ​ Forming detailed and accurate beliefs requires powers of observation memory and analysis we do not naturally possess ​ If a belief is widely shared it makes intuitive sense we tend to assume it is true ​ We focus on cases that confirm our beliefs and not on cases that challenged our beliefs ​ Belief gives hope ​ Critical thinking requires skepticism. Skepticism ​ Cautious approach to accepting claims and hypothesis until the are supported by empirical evidence ​ Pause to consider alternatives Tolerance for uncertainty ​ Often there is NOT enough evidence to fully evaluate a belief or claim and scientists understand this limitation Clinical practice of psychology ​ The diagnosis and treatment of psychological disorders and related problems ​ Clinical psychologists diagnosis and treat psychological disorders and related problems. ​ Types: clinical and school psychologists, marriage and family therapy, licensed clinical social workers. Empirically supported treatment ​ A psychological treatment that has been shown to be effective in scientific research studies ​ Treatment: acceptance and commitment therapy for chronic pain, Behavioral activation for depression, cognitive behavioral therapy for adult ADHD, dialectical behavioral therapy for borderline personality disorder, exposure therapy, family focused therapy (bipolar disorders), stimulus control therapy (insomnia). What is a trigger warning? ​ Journal: do trigger warnings strengthen or undermine individual resilience ​ Journal said that it increases anxiety. Who do we…? 1.​ Find research ideas? 2.​ Turn them into empirical research questions? 3.​ Review the research literature? What is a variable?  ​ Something that can be measured, changed and quantified Types of variables ​ Quantitative variable (number) ​ Categorical variable (assigned a class) What is a “population”? ​ Large group of… humans ​ Ex: people w/psychological problems. What is a “sample”? ​ Subset of… ​ Ex: college students ​ It is very important to use a representative sample! Random sampling ​ Every member of the population has an equal chance of being selected Convenience sampling ​ May not be representative of the population! What is an operational definition? ​ A precise definitions of how a variable will be measured ​ Ex: paper and pencil depression scale What is a score? ​ Individual result What is data? ​ Set of scores Relationships between variables Single variable questions ​ How often do universities faculty give trigger warnings ​ How talkative are american college students Single variable categorical ​ Measurement ​ Compute percentage of scores ​ Single variable experiments do not explain a lot about the observed phenomena. Statistical relationship ​ Differences in the average scores of one variable relative to another variable ​ Provides information -​ Causes -​ Consequences -​ Development -​ Organization Basic relationship forms 1.​ Difference between groups 2.​ Correlations between quantitative variables Differences between groups ​ Discrepancy between ​ Ex 1: are women more talkative than men? ​ Ex 2: are college students who receive trigger warnings more anxious than those who don’t Correlation between qualitative variables ​ The average score on one variable differs systematically ​ Ex 1: is being happier person associated with being more talkative ​ Ex 2: do college students who are more anxious tend to learn less in their classes Positive ​ Higher scores on one variable tend to be associated with lower scores on the other Negative ​ Higher scores one variable tend to be associated with lower scores on the other Pearson’s r ​ Measure of the strength of the correlation between 2 quantitative variables ​ Can only be from -1.00 to +1.00 ​ Pearson’s r is a good measure only to linear relationships What is an independent variable ​ A variable thought to be the cause of another variable ​ In an experiment the independent variable is manipulated by the researcher What is a dependent variable ​ Effect of the variable Correlation does not equal causation ​ Ex: positive relationship between the number of electrical appliances that people use and the extent to which they use birth control. (It would not make sense to try and increase the use of birth control by giving people toasters and hair dryers) Reasons why correlation does not imply causation 1.​ Directionality problem 2.​ Third variable problem Directionality problem ​ Two variables X and Y can be statistically related because X and Y or because Y causes X -​ Ex: whether or not people who exercise is related to happiness Third variable problem ​ Not related could be a third variable causing X and Y -​ Ex: being physically healthy could cause people to exercise and cause them to be happier Media Misinterpretation ​ Internet use in class leads to lower test scores Conduct experiment  ​ A type of empirical study in which an independent variable is manipulated and dependent variable is measured while extraneous variables are controlled. Finding inspiration ​ Sources of inspiration -​ Informal observations -​ Practical problems -​ Previous research -​ Ex of general ideas: talkativeness, depression, bungee jumping. Informal observations ​ Own and others behavior ​ Non Scientific sources such as newspapers and books Observations ​ Notice that you always seem to be in the slowest moving lie at the grocery store -​ Could it be that most people think the same thing? ​ Read in the local newspaper about donating money to a cause -​ Who are these people? ​ Extent to which ordinary people will commit immoral acts simply because they are ordered to do so by an authority figure. Inspiration from practical problems ​ How effective is psychotherapy for depression compared to drug therapy? ​ To what extent do cell phones impair people's driving ability? ​ How can we teach children to read more efficiently? ​ What is the best mental preparation for running a marathon? Inspiration from previous research ​ Reading titles and abstracts from professional journals ​ Journals tend to be specific to narrow fields of research Generate your own research questions ​ Conspeculize it as a variable and ask how frequently it occurs What are some possible effects of the behavior? What types of people might exhibit more or less of the behavior? Ask about other statistical relationships If the questions have been answered… ​ Does it generalize to other cultures ​ Does it generalize to other age groups Evaluating research questions ​ But what if you have more than one question… Evaluating criteria ​ Interestingness ​ Feasibility Interestingness  ​ Extent to which the answer is in doubt ​ Fills a gap in the research literature ​ Has important practical implications Answer in doubt ​ Reasons to expect different answers to the questions Fills a gap in the research literature ​ Questions that have not been answered by scientific literature Practical implications ​ Trigger warnings ​ Cell phones and driving Feasibility ​ Time ​ Money ​ Equipment and materials ​ Technical knowledge and skill ​ Access to research participants Complexity ​ Longitudinal ​ Brain response ​ Statistical analyses Generally good practices use methods that have already been done successfully. Previous methodology ​ “Tried and true” method ​ Compare results with others Does not include… ​ Self help ​ Pop psychology ​ Dictionary and encyclopedia entries ​ websites -​ UNRELIABLE Professional journals ​ Empirical research reports ​ Review articles Theoretical articles ​ Presents new or existing theories What is Justice? Dr Andrew wakefield (said vaccines cause autism) ​ Measles, mumps, rubella vaccinations ​ Reduction of MMR vaccinations ​ Follow studies failed to reproduce results  ​ Financial gain: lead researcher patented alternative vaccine ​ Problems with procedure: Biased methods ​ Lancet retracted article in 2010 ​ Medical license revoked Ethical research What is ethics? ​ Branch of philosophy that is concerned with morality What is mental behavior ​ Set of principles and practices Research participants: Risks ​ Treatment may fail to help ​ Procedure may result in physical or psychological harm ​ Right to privacy may be violated Research participants: benefits ​ Receiving a helpful treatment ​ Learning about psychology ​ Experiencing the satisfaction of contributing to scientific knowledge Risks of scientists ​ If study is uninterested or poorly designed resources are wasted ​ Results could be misunderstood or misinterpreted with harmful consequences Scientific community and society mst trust results Treat participants fairly Benefits and risks should be distributed across participants Autonomy ​ Peoples rights to make their own decisions and take their own actions free rom coercion Tuskegee syphilis study ​ Participants were black men (below poverty level incomes) told they were being treated for “bad blood” ​ Given free medical care and were not actually treated for their syphilis, instead were observed to see how the disease developed in untreated patients ​ Even after the use of penicillin became the standard treatment for syphilis in the 1940s these men continued to be denied treatment without being given an opportunity to leave the study. Unavoidable ethical conflict ​ There is little if any psychological research that is completely risk free there will almost always be conflict between risks and benefits ​ Research that is beneficial to one group (scientific community) can be harmful to another (research participants), and vise versa Personal space study  ​ Researchers secretly observed their participants to see whether it took them longer to being urinating when there was another man (confederate of the researchers) at a nearby urinal ​ Some found this unjustified assault on human dignity, researchers had concluded that the benefits outweigh the risks ​ They interviewed some preliminary participants and found that none of them were bothered by the fact that they had been observed Nuremberg Code ​ Ethics code for research with human participants that was written in conjunction with the trials of accused Nazi war criminals after WW2 ​ Set of ten principles written in 1947 ​ Provided a standard against which to compare the behavior of men on trial- many of whom were convicted and either imprisoned or sentenced to death. ​ Particularly clear about the importance of carefully weighing risks against benefits and the need for informed consent. Declaration of Helsinki ​ Similar to nuremberg code created by the World Medical Council in 1964 ​ Ethics code for biomedical research with human participants last updated in 2004 ​ Added to the Nuremberg code was that research with human participants should be based on written protocol Protocol: a detailed description of the research that is reviewed by an independent committee. Belmont Report ​ Set of ethical standards for research with human participants published by the U.S department of health and human services in 1978. ​ Explicitly recognized the principle of seeking justice, including the importance of conducting research in a way that disputes risks and benefits fairly across different groups at the societal level. ​ Became the basis for a set of laws (Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects or the “Common rule”) Federal policy for the protection of human subjects ​ A set of federal regulations (45 CFR part 46) for research with human participants based on the Belmont report ​ Known as the “common rule” ​ Applies to research conducted, supported, or regulated by the federal government Institutional review board ​ A committee at a university, hospital, or another institution that reviews research protocols to be sure they conform to ethical standards. ​ Must consist of at least 5 people with varying backgrounds, including members of different professions, scientists and nonscientists, men and women, and at least one person not otherwise affiliated with the institution.  ​ Helps to make sure that the risks of the proposed research are minimized (benefits outweigh the risks), the research is carried out in a fair manner, and the informed consent procedure is adequate. Three levels of risks 1.​ Exempt research 2.​ Minimal risk research 3.​ At risk research Exempt ​ Minimal risk to participants and exempt from mos of the requirements of the Federal Policy for the protection of human subjects -​ Ex: educational research with existing records -​ Ex: anonymized medical records. Minimal risk ​ Risk that exposes participants to risks that are no greater than those encountered by healthy people in daily life or during routine physical or psychological examinations. -​ Group dynamics in the workplace At risk ​ Exposes participants to risks that are greater than those encountered by healthy people in daily life or during routine physical or psychological examinations. -​ Ex: medication -​ Ex: potential for psychological harm APA Ethics Code ​ Was published in 1952 and has been revised several times. Most recently in 2002. ​ Includes about 150 specific ethical standards that psychologists and their students are expected to follow. ​ Concerns practice of psychology- advertising one’s services, setting and collecting fees, having personal relationships with clients, etc. Standard #8: Ethics of research and publication ​ Informed consent ​ Deception ​ Debriefing ​ Use of nonhuman animal subjects ​ Scholarly integrity Informed consent ​ Provide details of procedure ​ Describe risks and benefits ​ Describe the right to decline to participate or withdraw from study ​ Provide information about effects of withdrawing ​ Describe the legal limits of confidentiality ​ Having participants read and sign consent form Consent form ​ Form that participants sign as a part of the informed consent process ​ Describes procedure, risks and benefits, participants right to withdraw from the study and any confidentiality issues. ​ Most people do not read the consent forms -​ Note: there are certain situations which informed consent is not necessary Deception ​ Misleading participants about purpose and procedures of experiment ​ Could be giving them false information or by withholding true information from them ​ Use of confederates (involves themselves in experiment but knows what happens) ​ Phoney equipment (like milgram’s shock generator ​ False feedback (telling them they did poorly on a test when they did well) ​ True purpose of experiment Argues of deception ​ Fails to respect dignity as human beings ​ Potential to upset participants ​ Makes participants less honest in responding ​ Damages the reputation of researchers in the field -​ Note: some scientifically and socially important research questions may be impossible to answer without deceiving participants Debriefing ​ Process of informing research participants after a study of the purpose of the study, revealing any deception and minimizing any harm that might have occurred. Nonhuman animal subjects 1.​ Study of learning and conditioning 2.​ Behavioral neuroscience 3.​ Development of drug and surgical therapies for psychological disorders ​ APA acknowledges that the benefits of research on non-human animals can outweigh the costs. ​ Must acquire and care for animals humanely Scholarly integrity ​ Do not plagiarize ​ Do NOT fabricate data ​ Researchers should not publish the same data a second time as if it was new ​ As peer reviewers they should keep the unpublished research they review confidential ​ Authors name (the order in which those names appear should reflect the importance of each person's contributions to the research. Identify and Minimize risks ​ List all of the risks including physical and psychological harm and violations of confidentiality  ​ Modify research design (shorten or simplify procedure to prevent boredom or frustration) ​ Pre Screening procedure (select participants on demographic) ​ Maintain confidentiality (signed consent forms separate from any data collected) Types of deception 1.​ Actively mislead 2.​ Allow participants to make incorrect assumptions 3.​ Withhold information about the full design -​ Note: acceptable only if there is no way to answer the question without it -​ Note: it is unethical to subject people to pain for no reason but to satisfy your curiosity. Create informed consent and debriefing procedures ​ Write a script that explains the study to participants in simple language ​ Reveal deception as soon as possible, apologize, explain why it was necessary ​ Give participants relevant information or referrals to other sources Get approval ​ Institutional approval ​ Write a protocol that describes the purpose of the study, research design and procedure, risks and benefits, steps taken to minimize risks, and informed consent and debriefing procedures. Follow through ​ Stick to protocol you submitted or seek approval for anything other than a minor change. ​ Monitor participants for unanticipated reactions and seek feedback from them during debriefing ​ Be alert for potential violations of confidentiality ​ Maintain integrity through publication process and beyond ​ Scientific goal is to lean about the way the world actually is ​ Scientific duty to report on your results honestly and accurately