Tutorial 6-13 Exam Notes PDF

Tutorial 6 - 13 Week 6 Ways we can observe behaviour Naturalistic observation Observing a playground to study the occurrence and triggers of aggressive behaviour among children during unstructured playtime. They sit on a nearby...

Tutorial 6 - 13 Week 6 Ways we can observe behaviour Naturalistic observation Observing a playground to study the occurrence and triggers of aggressive behaviour among children during unstructured playtime. They sit on a nearby park bench and document Participant observation A psychologist becomes an employee Field experiments — manipulate IV and can predict cause & effect observe how these seating configurations impact student engagement Manipulates the seating by forming 3 different groups Contrived observation Observation of physical traces Archival research, content analysis, and digital traces  Ways we can sample behaviour Continuous sampling – recording ALL behaviour Situation sampling – target behaviour in different locations / circumstances Time Sampling – record at specified time periods Instantaneous Sampling — observe a snapshot in time Event sampling – 1 specific event or behaviour to be observed Individual sampling — Only 1 participant at a time. A researcher is interested in how agitated behaviours in dementia patients vary before, during, and after mealtime. For each of 21 meals across the week, they select 1 patient in the cafeteria area and record what behaviours they are exhibiting at each of three moments: 5 minutes before they receive their meal, 5 minutes into meal consumption, and 5 minutes after their meal is cleared. Instantaneous Sampling AND Individual sampling  ways to quantify behaviours The Frequency Method The Duration Method The Interval Method A researcher wants to investigate whether a mindfulness-based therapy can help improve quality of sleep in patients with PTSD. For all patients, they detect changes in heart rate and movement. Participants undergo a one month mindfulness course. Quality of sleep is measured pre and post. Frequency method — amount of times they are awake in the night and amount of times their heart rate goes above a certain level Duration method – how long their heart rate is below a certain level Interval method – every 10 mins look at the heart rate whether it is above or below certain level – requiring a yes/ no answer  Reliability intra-rater reliability = same researcher records the same way at different time points inter-observer reliability = different researchers agree Factors that impact inter-rater/intra-observer reliability ❖ Observer effect – participants know they are observed & behave differently ❖ Observer error Observer bias – see what you want to see Error of recording – poor techniques and equipment Error of apprehending – cannot see / record ❖ Not clearly defined constructs ❖ Computational error  Week 7 Dictator game Player A gets $10 Player A decides how many $ to give to player B May give any amount between 0 and 10 Player B must accept the outcome What factors may influence decisions? Manipulating the interaction Talking to the person before hand We expect generosity will increase with interaction / and decrease with no interaction Manipulating knowledge If you knew your decisions would be revealed = expected to be more generous If you knew your decisions were confidential = expected less generous  Hypothesis 1. If social distance impacts generosity, interaction should give more than no interaction 2. If reputation concern impacts generosity, revealed results should give more than concealed results We desire to be seen as generous and kind Week 8 – assignment info NO Week 9  Week 10 Developing self-report instruments Items should be easy to understand Should be culturally appropriate (should not be unfamiliar or offensive) Should consider ethical issues Respect participant’s values Consent form – you can withdraw at at point I tend to vote for liberal political candidates (US scale) Liberal — Different definitions – change wording for Australia Use the word “left wing/right wing” — universal, clear language “Tend” —- too vague, not a frequent action, remove this word from item  study we will be examining the relationship between knowledge, religiosity and attitudes associated with organ donation Past research: Positive correlation – knowledge and favourable OD attitudes Negative correlation – religion and less favourable OD attitudes Contains 4 scales ❖ Knowledge – 1 scale ❖ Attitudes – 2 scales ❖ Religiosity — 1 scale Significant, positive correlation between knowledge and attitudes Negative, weak but significant correlation between religiosity and attitudes  Week 11 Research ethics Why is ethics approval important? Important to address any issues upfront before running the study We need to protect the welfare, rights and safety of participants Protect researcher’s rights to conduct legitimate investigation Ensure the release of grant funds Ensure research is appropriately insured  MQ Ethics Committees 2 Human Research Ethics Committees to review the ethical aspects of procedures where humans participate in research and in teaching projects HREC (Human Sciences and Humanities) HREC (Medical Sciences) HRECs review greater than low risk ethics applications Faculty Ethics Subcommittees review no more than low risk ethics applications. Examples of Examples of no more than low risk studies more than low risk projects Study examining the effects of Surveys, interviews, focus groups challenge demands, job resources on asking about eating disorders, mental health issues, distressing work engagement, job performance topics, traumatic experiences among bank workers Research where no consent is being Whether eye movements can be obtained from participants related to reading comprehension Uses active deception or planned concealment Research using devices (e.g. functional MRI) that could discover physical conditions that require follow up by a health professional  In accordance with the National Statement, the HRECs comprise: a chairperson, with suitable experience 2 lay people with no affiliation with the institution 1 person with knowledge of and experience in the professional care, counselling or treatment of people 1 person who performs a pastoral care role 1 lawyer not engaged to advise the institution at least 2 people with current research experience that is relevant to research proposals being submitted MQ Risk Review Question  Limited disclosure may be approved when: 1. there are no suitable alternatives involving fuller disclosure by which the aims of the research can be achieved 2. potential research benefits are sufficient to justify limited disclosure to participants and any risk to community’s trust in research/researchers 3. the research involves no more than low risk to participants and the limited disclosure is unlikely to affect participants adversely 4. the precise extent of the limited disclosure is defined 5. after participation has ended, participants will be provided with information about aims of the research an explanation of why the omission or alteration was necessary offered the opportunity to withdraw any data or tissue provided by them  Active concealment/planned deception may be approved when: 1. participants will not be exposed to an increased risk of harm as a result of the concealment or deception 2. a full explanation, both of the real aims and/or methods of the research, and also of why the concealment or deception was necessary, will subsequently be made available to participants 3. there is no known or likely reason for thinking that participants would not have consented if they had been fully aware of what the research involved  Week 13 Research process ❖ Finding a research idea ❖ From theory to hypotheses ❖ Defining & operationalizing variables ❖ Identifying participants ❖ Research strategies (types of research) Correlational research strategy Experimental strategy Quasi-experimental strategy ❖ Research designs (between/within subject etc)  Describing events (what is happening?) Explaining events (why is it happening?) Describing relationships b/w variables Attempting to infer causality eg. is there a relationship b/w X & Y ? eg. Does X cause Y ? Prediction: does X predict Y ? Research strategies Describe the Correlational research strategy Examining the relationships b/w 2 or more variables (strength/relation) Describe the Experimental strategy Examining cause-effect relations using manipulation, measurement, comparison & control Describe the Quasi-experimental strategy Typically compares conditions defined by a non manipulated variable major differences between these strategies?  Hypothesis Research hypothesis A specific prediction A statement that describes or explains a relationship b/w or a specific situation or event among variables that can be directly observed LOGICAL (based in theory) Is tested & evaluated TESTABLE (measurable/observable) REFUTABLE (can be wrong) POSITIVE (a relationship or difference between variables) internal validity external validity The extent to which a study The extent to which we can produces a single, generalize outside of our study unambiguous explanation for the relationship b/w 2 variables  Experiments Cause-&-effect relationships (IV & DV) Need to consider: Manipulation Measurement Comparison Control Manipulating a Measuring scores treatment condition Controlling other variable to in each treatment scores variables that may create 2 or more condition influence the 2 treatment variables being conditions (IV) examined  Research exercise You notice that students who study hard have less test anxiety. Upon consulting the literature you find there is some scientific evidence for your observation Develop a hypothesis to investigate the relationship between study & test anxiety that can be tested using the correlational research strategy It is hypothesized that more time spent studying will be associated with less test anxiety IV: time spent studying Measuring the variables Anxiety: self-report and physiological symptoms DV: test anxiety Measuring it a week before, 24hrs and then morning of Study: hours per week spent studying Recruitment (who & how many) 100 high school students What analysis will you use to test the hypothesis Correlation Is there a relationship between studying & test anxiety? Does X (studying) predict Y (test anxiety)? extraneous variables to hold constant Exclude people with high natural anxiety states  correlational studies: DO NOT have high internal validity (does not provide a single explanation for the relationship b/w 2 variables) DO have high external validity (can generalize) directionality problem in correlational research A causes B Or B causes A third-variable problem in correlational research relation caused by C strengths of correlational research Quicker More cost efficient Can have easier ethics approval Non-intrusive  Research exercise 2 Develop a hypothesis to investigate the relationship between study & test anxiety that can be tested using the experimental research strategy It is hypothesized that studying more will lead to less test anxiety Design an experimental study to test the research hypothesis IV: time spent studying Measuring the variables Anxiety: self-report and physiological symptoms DV: test anxiety Measuring it a week before, 24hrs and then morning of Study: hours per week spent studying design of your study (between, within, mixed) Quasi experimental —- between subjects design Recruitment 100 high school students What analysis will you use to test the hypothesis Independent sample t-test extraneous variables to hold constant Trait anxiety Sleep Time of day when tested for anxiety levels control this by: Exclude participants high in baseline anxiety Randomisation  remember about experimental control: Randomisation and random assignment Disrupting systematic relationships between variables equal chance of assignment per condition Manipulation check Confirming that the manipulation is working (assess the effect of the manipulation) Holding constant Standardizing an extraneous variable across all treatment conditions (eg testing only females; same time of day) Matching Balancing levels of the variable across treatment conditions (e.g., ensuring ratio of males to females is the same in each group)