Introduction to Scientific Psychology PDF

Scientific Psychology: Theories and empirical studies  Problems, theories and hypotheses Investigations in Psychology normally starts with a certain problem To start an investigation, not only do we need a PROBLEM to start with, but also a possible solution to that problem: an e...

Scientific Psychology: Theories and empirical studies  Problems, theories and hypotheses Investigations in Psychology normally starts with a certain problem To start an investigation, not only do we need a PROBLEM to start with, but also a possible solution to that problem: an explanation that is provisionally accepted: Hypothesis. Theory: a set of assumptions, propositions or accepted facts to describe or explain a certain phenomenon. Introduction to research process in Psychology 1. Reliability and validity. 2. Sampling techniques. 3. General ethical issues in research. 4. Quantitative methods: Experiments 5. Qualitative methods: observations, case studies and interviews 1. Reliability and validity In any research, the data obtained must be reliable and the method used must be valid. a) Reliability: If we use the same method in the same situation, we should get the same results. 2 conditions:  Replicability: research can be repeated by other researchers getting the same results. Example: (Milgram obedience study, 1963).  Test-retest reliability: if we use a reliable test with the same participant, we should get the same result. (Intelligence tests). 1. Reliability and validity (page 15) b) Validity: the research should be studying what it claims to be studying. INTERNAL VALIDITY: it refers to whether the effects observed in a study are due to the manipulation of the independent variable and not some other factor. In-other-words there is a causal relationship between the independent and dependent variable. Internal validity can be improved by controlling extraneous variables, using standardized instructions, and eliminating demand characteristics, Hawthorne effects, or researcher expectations. EXTERNAL VALIDITY: Experiments in laboratories are artificial. External validity is the condition in which a laboratory experiment can be generalized to real-life environment. Ecological validity: the study represents what happens in real life. Cross-cultural validity: is the research relevant to other cultures or is it ethnocentric? Population validity. Temporal validity. CONSTRUCT VALIDITY: to what extent do operationalisations reflect the constructs/ideas/concepts? 2. Sampling techniques 2. Sampling techniques, page 11-12 Research cannot be carried out on the entire human population, that is why researchers need representative samples of a target population. How do we get samples? a) Random sampling – The researcher makes sure that every member of the target population has an equal chance of being invited to participate. b) Opportunity or convenience sampling – using a group of participants just because they happen to be available: psychology  2. Sampling techniques c) Stratified sampling – it’s a sample that take into consideration the diversity of the target population. Example: if a researchers knows that there are more females than males in the target population, it may seem wise to ensure that the same proportion is maintained in the sample. d) Snowball sampling – researchers ask participants to invite other people they know to participate in the study. Used in social psychology or qualitative research: for example investigating ilegal drug use. It is better to ask participants to encourage others. f) Purposive sampling: A purposive sample is a non-probability sample that is selected based on characteristics of a population and the objective of the study. c) Self-selected sample: made up of volunteers. Problem of self-selected samples: they rarely represent the more general population. Difficult to make  Experimental designs, page 12,13 Independent measures design involves random allocation of participants into groups and a comparison between these groups. In its simplest form, you randomly allocate participants from your sample into the experimental group and the control group. Then you manipulate the experimental conditions so that they are the same in the two groups except for the independent variable. After the manipulation you compare the dependent variable in the two groups. An independent measures design the IV is manipulated by randomly allocating participants into groups. This allows us to assume that the groups are equivalent from the start so whatever difference we observe at the end of the experiment must have been caused by our experimental manipulation. Matched pairs design is similar to independent measures. The only difference is that instead of completely random allocation, researchers use matching to form the groups. With a small sample there is a chance that random allocation will not work. So you want to control the Repeated measures design is used when the goal is to compare conditions rather than groups of participants. The same group of participants is exposed to two (or more) conditions, and the conditions are compared. Example: the effect of classical music on learning. The problem with repeated measures designs is that they are vulnerable to order effects: results may be different depending on which condition comes first, practice or fatigue effects to be controlled. Counterbalancing to control order effects.  3. General ethical issues in research. Early research in psychology often did not follow clear ethical guidelines. Many of the early studies in psychology involved causing brain damage in animals, exposing people and animals to electrical shocks, or rather incredible acts of deception. “The monster study” stuttering (1939). Watson’s Little Albert. Zimbardo’s Stanford Prison. Robber’s cave experiment, Sherif. Psychological associations around the world have come up with sets of guidelines that psychologists must use in carrying out psychological research. These ethical guidelines also apply to research done within the  3. General ethical issues in research. 1. Protection from undue stress or harm. "Undue" stress is a higher level of stress than an individual may experience on a day-to-day basis. Asking participants to solve a frustrating puzzle is not an example of “undue” stress. 2. Informed consent. Participants must be told about the nature of the study and agree to participate. They must be told what rights they have, including the right to withdraw. From the point of view of the researcher, informed consent is problematic. 3. Deception. It can either be misinformation or it may be not telling the participant the complete goal of study. Deception should generally not be used; however, slight deception, which does not cause any stress to the participant, may be used in some cases. However, before deception may be used, the psychologist proposing the study must justify why it is necessary and an ethics board should approve the study.. By omission or commission.  3. General ethical issues in research. 4. Right to withdraw. If the participant wishes to withdraw from the study, they should feel no pressure or coercion from the psychologist to remain and their data must be withdrawn from the study. 5. Briefing & Debriefing. At the end of the study, all participants must be debriefed. The true aims and purpose of the research must be revealed to the participants. Any deception must be justified. 6. Confidentiality. Participants should be guaranteed that their identities will not be revealed in the publication of the study or any other use of the data thereafter. 4. Obtaining data: Quantitative vs qualitative methodology (page 7). Quantitative methods (experiments) have been used to maintain the appearance of psychology as a scientific discipline. Quantitative and qualitative methods can work together (Triangulation). Quantitative: hypotheses are tested in the research situation: EXPERIMENTS. Variables are identified and relationships between them is measured using statistics. Importance of operational definitions. Nomothetic. Numbers. Objective. Focus on behaviour. Qualitative: Idiographic. Texts. Describe human experiences, meaninings by investigating the subjective meaning that people attach to their experience. 5. Quantitative methods: Experiments a) KINDS OF EXERIMENTS (chart page 19): - Lab experiments - Field experiments - Quasi experiments (field or lab)  A subset of quasi-experiments is "natural experiments." Although these two terms are often used interchangeably, a natural experiment usually refers to an independent variable that is environmental in nature and outside of the control of the researcher. Most natural experiments work on a pre-test, post-test design - that is, the behaviour is measured both before and after the variable was introduced. For example, in 2017 the Czech Republic in introducing a smoking ban in all bars, restaurants and workplaces. Researchers may decide to measure the level of clinical depression in the city of Prague before the ban is put in place and then again six months after the ban is in place. In both quasi and natural experiments, participants are not randomly allocated to conditions. In quasi- experiments, participants are grouped based on a trait or behaviour. For example, in a quasi- experiment you may have two groups attempt to memorize a list of words. One group is made up of people who have been diagnosed with depression and the other group, the control, would not have such a diagnosis. As the variable that we want to study - having clinical depression - cannot be randomly assigned, this study is a quasi-experiment. Other typical examples of IVs used in quasi- experiments include gender, culture and age. Quasi and natural experiments do not show direct causation, but they are able to imply a causal relationship between an IV and a DV. 5. Quantitative methods: Experiments b) Confounding variables in experiments - Confounding variables are undesirable variables that influence the relationship between the IV and the DV. Demand characteristics – Hawthorne effect and “screw-you” effect. Single blind control to counteract demand characteristics. Researcher bias: researcher expectations may affect the findings. Double blind control to avoid it. Clever Hans example. page 3. Participant variablility: characteristics of the sample affect the DV. This can be controlled selecting a random sample.  CORRELATIONAL STUDIES Correlationalstudies are different from experiments in that no variable is manipulated by the researcher, so causation cannot be inferred. Two or more variables are measured and the relationship between them is mathematically quantified. Examples: relationship between anxiety and aggressiveness in a group of students; playing violent videogames and violent behaviour. Bidirectional ambiguity. Exercise: design an experiment to prove causality to the above example. A positive correlation demonstrates the tendency for one variable to increase as the other variable increases. A negative correlation demonstrates the inverse tendency: when one variable increases the other variable decreases.  Correlation interpretation Correlation coefficient effect size (r): Less than 0.10 Negligible 0.10–0.29 Small 0.30–0.49 Medium 0.50 and larger Large  P value Statistical significance. Page 22 Probability percentage of results being attributed to random chance. Value accepted: P value 0,05 or less.  6. Qualitative methods: Observation https://youtu.be/rHZomto0TLw Observation: there is no manipulation of an IV. It is just a description or measurement of the behaviour without trying to establish cause and effect relationships. Types of observation Covert vs overt Participant vs non- Naturalistic vs participant controlled (Lab)  6. Qualitative methods: Observation Covert vs overt observations: Covert: Participants do not know they are being observed. The advantage is that participants act more naturally. Ethical considerations: Researcher is deceiving the participants and there is lack of informed consent. Overt: the participants know they are being observed. It avoids ethical problems. Disadvantage: observer effects (participants behavior can change due to the presence of the observer).  6. Qualitative methods: Observation Participant vs non-participant observations: Participant: The researcher becomes part of the target group. It can be overt, ex: an observer enters a classroom. Or covert, ex: an observer joins a business team, in order to understand behavior and roles of the different members. (Risk of “going native”). Non-participant: The researcher remains outside the group being studied. Ex: studying small children. Covert: tiny hidden camera or one way mirror. Overt: big camera or sitting in a corner.  6. Qualitative methods: Observation Naturalistic vs controlled observations: Naturalistic: takes place in the environment in which the target behaviour normally occurs. (ex. Participant’s work place or a child’s home). Controlled: Takes place in the lab or any other environment. Involves an artificially constructed situation devised by the researchers in order to observe behaviour.  6. Qualitative methods: Observation Challenges in observation: It is not possible to record everything. Ethical issues. Observer effect, reaction effect, social desirability Researcher bias: is the observation affected by what the researcher expects to find? Beliefs, previous ideas, expectations, feelings…Possible solution: 2 observers ensure inter-observer reliability or blind researcher.  Interviews page 33 Structured Semi-structured Unstructured (narrative) Focus Groups  Case study A case study is an in-depth investigation of an individual or a group. You might say that this is not a proper definition because other research methods can also be defined this way, and you would be right. In fact, case studies can involve a variety of other methods (observations, interviews, and so on), anything that deepens our understanding of an individual or a group of interest. There are several reasons why case studies are referred to as a separate research method, even though they are actually a combination of other methods.  Uniqueness of the participant maeks it worth sudying it. Representativeness is not that much of an issue. Less focus on generalizablity. Combined with other methods and longitudinally. Risk of getting too involved, researcher bias. Participant bias.  Credibility in qualitative research Equivalent to internal validity in the experimental quantitative method. Measures can be taken: Triangulation: method, data, researcher and theory. Establishing good rapport Iterative questioning Reflexivity: epistemological and personal  Credibility in qualitative research Thick descriptions: rich, deep, adding contexts Credibility checks: Reading transcripts to participants  BIAS Be aware of possible participant bias:. Demand characteristics: Hawthorne effetc, “screw you” effect. Expectacny effecrt. Social desirability effect Acquiescence bias: tendency to give positive answers Sensitivity bias: building trust and assuring confidentiality Control dominant respondent in focus group  BIAS Be aware of possible researcher bias: Confirmation: prior belief to confirm (mis)Leading questions: careful when wording Question order bias Sampling: careful with convenience sampling Biased reporting: dishonest reporting in articles  Real life applications of psychological research Dweck’s study of people’s motivation to learn: Carol MINDSET THEORY: Fixed mindset vs Growth mindset. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_X0mgOOSpLU Exercise 1: Watch video. Evaluate Carol Dweck’s research. Peer marking out of 9. Exeercise 2: In-think quizzes, analise “gold or rubbish”cute aggression In-think. Exercise 3: Page 3. Design an experiment in pairs and present in class  IN-THINKING BINGE DRINKING EXERCISE DP Psychology: Binge drinking research (thinkib.net) IN-THINKING CAKES OF DECEPTION EXERCISE DP Psychology: Cakes of deception (thinkib.net) m&m experiment DP Psychology: Quiz: The M & M study (thinkib.net)