Unit 1 - Basic (2).pdf

 Prologue The Story of Psychology What Is Psychology? Psychology Is a Science THINKING CRITICALLY ABOUT: The Scientific Attitude Critical Thinking Psychological Science Is Born Psychological Science Matures Contemporary Psychology Use Psychology to Become a Strong...

 Prologue The Story of Psychology What Is Psychology? Psychology Is a Science THINKING CRITICALLY ABOUT: The Scientific Attitude Critical Thinking Psychological Science Is Born Psychological Science Matures Contemporary Psychology Use Psychology to Become a Stronger Person—and a Better Student Astronomer Owen Gingerich has described the human brain as “by far the most complex physical object known to us in the entire cosmos” (2006, p. 29). On the scale of outer space, we are less than a single grain of sand on all the oceans’ beaches, and our lifetime lasts but a relative nanosecond. Yet there is nothing more awe inspiring than our own inner space. Our consciousness—our mind somehow arising from matter—remains a profound mystery. Our thinking, emotions, and actions (and their interplay with others’ thinking, emotions, and actions) fascinate us. Outer space staggers us with its enormity. But inner space enthralls us. Enter psychological science. From news and media portrayals, you might think that psychologists offer counseling, analyze personality, dispense child-raising advice, examine crime scenes, and testify in court. Do they? Yes— and much more. Consider some of psychology’s questions that you may wonder about: Have you ever found yourself reacting to something as one of your biological parents would—perhaps in a way you vowed you never would—and then wondered how much of your personality you inherited? To what extent do genes predispose our individual differences in personality? How do home and community environments shape us? Have you ever worried about how to act among people of a different culture, gender identity, or sexual orientation? How are we alike as members of the human family? How do we differ? Have you ever awakened from a nightmare and wondered why you had such a crazy dream? Why do we dream? Have you ever played peekaboo with a 6-month-old and wondered why the baby finds your disappearing/reappearing act so delightful? What do babies actually perceive and think? Have you ever wondered what fosters school and work success? Does inborn intelligence explain why some people get richer, think more creatively, or relate more sensitively? Or does gritty effort, and a belief in the power of persistence, matter more? Have you ever become depressed or anxious and wondered whether you’ll ever feel “normal”? What triggers our bad moods—and our good ones? What’s the line between a routine mood swing and a psychological disorder? Psychology is a science that seeks to answer such questions about us all—how and why we think, feel, and act as we do.  What Is Psychology? Once upon a time, on a planet in our neighborhood of the universe, there came to be people. Soon thereafter, these creatures became intensely interested in themselves and in one another: “Who are we? What produces our thoughts? Our feelings? Our actions? And how are we to understand and manage those around us?” Psychology Is a Science LEARNING OBJECTIVE QUESTION LOQ P-1 How is psychology a science? Underlying all science is, first, a passion to explore and understand without misleading or being misled. Some questions (Is there life after death?) are beyond science. Answering them requires a leap of faith. With many other ideas (Can some people demonstrate extrasensory perception?), the proof is in the pudding. We can let the facts speak for themselves. To assist your learning, numbered Learning Objective Questions appear at the beginning of major sections. You can test your understanding by trying to answer the question before, and then again after, you read the section. Magician James Randi has used this empirical approach when testing those claiming to see glowing auras around people’s bodies: Randi: Do you see an aura around my head? Aura seer: Yes, indeed. Randi: Can you still see the aura if I put this magazine in front of my face? Aura seer: Of course. Randi: Then if I were to step behind a wall barely taller than I am, you could determine my location from the aura visible above my head, right? empirical approach an evidence-based method that draws on observation and experimentation. Randi once told me [DM] that no aura seer had agreed to take this simple test. Throughout the text, the most important concepts are boldfaced. As you study, you can find these terms defined nearby and in the Glossary at the end of the book. (In the e-book, definitions are always a click away.) No matter how sensible-seeming or how wild an idea, the smart thinker asks: Does it work? When put to the test, do the data support its predictions? Subjected to such scrutiny, crazy-sounding ideas sometimes find support. During the 1700s, scientists scoffed at the notion that meteorites had extraterrestrial origins. When two Yale scientists challenged the conventional opinion, Thomas Jefferson reportedly scoffed, “Gentlemen, I would rather believe that those two Yankee professors would lie than to believe that stones fell from Heaven.” Sometimes scientific inquiry turns jeers into cheers. More often, science becomes society’s garbage collector, sending crazy-sounding ideas to the waste heap atop previous claims of perpetual motion machines, miracle cancer cures, and out-of-body travels into centuries past. To sift reality from fantasy and fact from fiction therefore requires a scientific attitude: being skeptical but not cynical, open-minded but not gullible. When ideas compete, careful testing can reveal which ones best fit the facts. Do some people have a psychic power to predict an unexpected catastrophe? Is electroconvulsive therapy (delivering an electric shock to the brain) an effective treatment for severe depression? As we will see, putting such claims to the test has led psychological scientists to answer No to the first question and Yes to the second. Putting a scientific attitude into practice requires not only curiosity and skepticism but also humility—an awareness of our own vulnerability to error and an openness to new perspectives (Leary et al., 2017). What matters is not my opinion or yours, but the truths revealed by our questioning and testing. If people or other animals don’t behave as our ideas predict, then so much the worse for our ideas. This humble attitude was expressed in one of psychology’s early mottos: “The rat is always right.” (See Thinking Critically About: The Scientific Attitude.) Throughout the book, information sources are cited in parentheses, with researchers’ names and the date the research was published. Every citation can be found in the end-of-book References section, with complete documentation that follows American Psychological Association (APA) style. Humility predicts helpfulness and realistic academic confidence (Erlandsson et al., 2018). One nine-country study asked 40,000 teens which of 16 math concepts they were familiar with, including three fake terms: “proper number,” “subjective scaling,” and “declarative fraction.” Those who arrogantly claimed to know the nonexistent concepts were often men from advantaged backgrounds (Jerrim et al., 2019). The point to remember: Knowing what we don’t know enables generosity and intellectual humility. ASK YOURSELF Were you surprised to learn that psychology is a science? How would you explain that now if someone asked you about it? Critical Thinking LOQ P-3 How does critical thinking feed a scientific attitude, and smarter thinking for everyday life? The scientific attitude—curiosity + skepticism + humility—prepares us to think smarter. This smart thinking, called critical thinking, examines assumptions, appraises the source, discerns hidden biases, evaluates evidence, and assesses conclusions. When reading a research report, an online opinion, or a news story, critical thinkers ask questions: How do they know that? What is this person’s agenda? Is the conclusion based on anecdote, or on evidence? Does the evidence justify a cause-effect conclusion? What alternative explanations are possible? critical thinking thinking that does not automatically accept arguments and conclusions. Rather, it examines assumptions, appraises the source, discerns hidden biases, evaluates evidence, and assesses conclusions. From a tongue-in-cheek Twitter feed: “The problem with quotes on the internet is that you never know if they’re true.” — Abraham Lincoln Critical thinkers wince when people make factual claims based on their gut: “I feel like climate change is [or isn’t] happening.” “I feel like self-driving cars are more [or less] dangerous.” “I feel like my candidate is more honest.” Such beliefs (commonly mislabeled as feelings) may or may not be true. Critical thinkers are open to the possibility that they might be wrong. Sometimes the best evidence confirms what we believe. Other times it challenges and beckons us to a different way of thinking. Cynics often seem smart, but most demonstrate less cognitive ability and academic competence than average (Stavrova & Ehlebracht, 2018). To believe everything—or to reject everything—is to be a fool. Critical thinking, informed by science, helps clear the colored lenses of our biases. Consider: Does climate change threaten our future, and, if so, is it human-caused? In 2016, some climate-action advocates interpreted record Louisiana flooding as proof of climate change. In 2015, climate-change skeptics perceived North American bitter winter cold as discounting global warming. Rather than having their understanding of climate change swayed by such local examples of today’s weather, critical thinkers say, “Show me the evidence.” Over time, is the Earth actually warming? Are the polar ice caps melting? Are vegetation patterns changing? Are extreme weather events becoming more frequent? And is human activity emitting atmospheric Error parsing MathML: error on line 1 at column 672: Opening and ending tag mismatch: img line 0 and annotation-xml that would lead us to expect such changes? When contemplating such issues, critical thinkers will also consider the credibility of sources. They will look at the evidence (Do the facts support them, or are they just makin’ stuff up?). They will recognize multiple perspectives. And they will expose themselves to news sources that challenge their preconceived ideas. Some religious people may view critical thinking and scientific inquiry, including psychology’s, as a threat. Yet many leaders of the scientific revolution, including Copernicus and Newton, were deeply religious people acting on the idea that “in order to love and honor God, it is necessary to fully appreciate the wonders of his handiwork” (Stark, 2003a,b). “My deeply held belief is that if a god anything like the traditional sort exists, our curiosity and intelligence are provided by such a god. We would be unappreciative of those gifts … if we suppressed our passion to explore the universe and ourselves.” — Carl Sagan, Broca’s Brain, 1979 Critical inquiry can lead us to surprising findings. Some examples from psychological science: Massive losses of brain tissue early in life may have minimal long-term effects (see Chapter 2). Within days, newborns can recognize their mother by her odor (see Chapter 5). After brain damage, a person may be able to learn new skills yet be unaware of such learning (see Chapter 8). Diverse groups—all genders, old and young, wealthy and not wealthy, with varying physical abilities—report roughly comparable levels of personal happiness (see Chapter 12). Later chapters also illustrate how critical inquiry sometimes debunks popular presumptions. Sleepwalkers are not acting out their dreams (see Chapter 3). Our past experiences are not all recorded verbatim in our brains; with brain stimulation or hypnosis, one cannot simply replay and relive long-buried or repressed memories (see Chapter 8). Most people do not suffer from unrealistically low self-esteem, and high self-esteem is not all good (see Chapter 14). Opposites tend not to attract (see Chapter 13). In these instances and many more, what psychological scientists have learned is not what is widely believed. Psychology’s critical inquiry can also identify effective policies. To deter crime, should we invest money in lengthening prison sentences, or should we increase the likelihood of arrest? To help people recover from a trauma, should counselors help them relive it, or not? To increase voting, should we tell people about the low turnout problem, or emphasize that their peers are voting? What matters is not what we “feel” is true, but what is true. When put to critical thinking’s test—and contrary to common practice— the second option in each of this paragraph’s examples wins (Shafir, 2013). Thinking critically can—and sometimes does—change the world. Critical thinking can also change us, by helping us assess popular applications of psychology. Looking at a self-help book, we can consider the author’s expertise and goals. We can ask: Are the suggestions based on evidence or anecdote? And how might the author’s personal values and agenda affect the advice? If you defer to guidance about how to live—how to raise children, how to achieve self-fulfillment, how to respond to sexual feelings, how to get ahead at work—you are accepting value-laden advice. A science of behavior and mental processes can help us reach our goals. But it cannot decide which goals are worth pursuing. Psychological scientists teach, but they do not preach. Study Tip: Memory research reveals a testing effect: We retain information much better if we actively retrieve it by self-testing and rehearsing. (More on this at the end of this Prologue.) To bolster your learning and memory, take advantage of the Retrieval Practice opportunities you’ll find throughout this text—with answers for checking in Appendix E, or a click away in the e-book. RETRIEVAL PRACTICE RP-1 Describe what’s involved in critical thinking. ANSWERS IN APPENDIX E Psychological Science Is Born LOQ P-4 What were some important milestones in psychology’s early history? To be human is to be curious about ourselves and the world around us. Before 300 B. C. E., the Greek naturalist and philosopher Aristotle theorized about learning and memory, motivation and emotion, perception and personality. Today we chuckle at some of his guesses, like his suggestion that a meal makes us sleepy by causing gas and heat to collect around what he believed was the source of our personality, the heart. But credit Aristotle with asking the right questions. Psychology’s First Laboratory  Wilhelm Wundt (1832–1920) Wundt established the first psychology laboratory at the University of Leipzig, Germany. Philosophers’ thinking about thinking continued until the birth of psychology as we know it. That happened on a December day in 1879, in a small, third-floor room at Germany’s University of Leipzig. There, two young men were helping an austere, middle-aged professor, Wilhelm Wundt, create an experimental apparatus. Their machine measured how long it took for people to press a telegraph key after hearing a ball hit a platform (Hunt, 1993). Curiously, people responded in about one-tenth of a second when asked to press the key as soon as the sound occurred—and in about two- tenths of a second when asked to press the key as soon as they were consciously aware of perceiving the sound. (To be aware of one’s awareness takes a little longer.) Wundt was seeking to measure “atoms of the mind”—the fastest and simplest mental processes. So began the first psychological laboratory, staffed by Wundt and psychology’s first graduate students. Psychology’s First Schools of Thought Before long, this new science of psychology became organized into different branches, or schools of thought, each promoted by pioneering thinkers. Two early schools were structuralism and functionalism. structuralism an early school of thought promoted by Wundt and Titchener; used introspection to reveal the structure of the human mind. functionalism an early school of thought promoted by James and influenced by Darwin; explored how mental and behavioral processes function—how they enable the organism to adapt, survive, and flourish. STRUCTURALISM Edward Bradford Titchener (1867– 1927) Titchener used introspection to search for the mind’s structural elements. Much as chemists developed the periodic table to classify chemical elements, so psychologist Edward Bradford Titchener aimed to classify and understand elements of the mind’s structure. He engaged people in self-reflective introspection (looking inward), training them to report elements of their experience as they looked at a rose, listened to a metronome, smelled a scent, or tasted a substance. What were their immediate sensations, their images, their feelings? And how did these relate to one another? Alas, structuralism’s technique of introspection proved somewhat unreliable. It required smart, verbal people, and its results varied from person to person and experience to experience. As introspection waned, so did structuralism. Hoping to assemble the mind’s structure from simple elements was rather like trying to understand a car by examining its disconnected parts. FUNCTIONALISM Philosopher-psychologist William James sought to go beyond labeling our inward thoughts and feelings by considering their evolved functions. Smelling is what the nose does; thinking is what the brain does. But why do the nose and brain do these things? Under the influence of evolutionary theorist Charles Darwin, James assumed that thinking, like smelling, developed because it was adaptive—it helped our ancestors survive and reproduce. Consciousness serves a function. It enables us to consider our past, adjust to our present, and plan our future. To explore the mind’s adaptive functions, James studied down-to-earth emotions, memories, willpower, habits, and moment-to-moment streams of consciousness. James’ writings moved the publisher Henry Holt to offer James a contract for a textbook on the new science of psychology. James agreed and began work in 1878, with an apology for requesting two years to finish his writing. The text proved an unexpected chore and actually took him 12 years. (Why are we not surprised?) More than a century later, people still read the resulting Principles of Psychology (1890) and marvel at the brilliance and elegance with which James introduced psychology to the educated public. Psychology’s First Women James’ legacy stems from his Harvard mentoring as well as from his writing. In 1890— thirty years before American women had the right to vote—he admitted Mary Whiton Calkins into his graduate seminar over the objections of Harvard’s president (Scarborough & Furumoto, 1987). When Calkins joined, the other students (all men) dropped out. So James tutored her alone. Later, she finished all of Harvard’s Ph.D. requirements, outscoring all the male students on the qualifying exams. Alas, Harvard denied her the degree she had earned, offering her instead a doctorate from Radcliffe College, its undergraduate “sister” school for women. Calkins resisted the unequal treatment and refused the degree. She nevertheless went on to become a distinguished memory researcher and, in 1905, the first female president of the American Psychological Association (APA).  William James (1842–1910) and Mary Whiton Calkins (1863–1930) James was a legendary teacher-writer who authored an important 1890 psychology text. He mentored Calkins, who became a pioneering memory researcher and the first female president of the American Psychological Association. Margaret Floy Washburn (1871–1939) The first woman to receive a psychology Ph.D., Washburn synthesized animal behavior research in The Animal Mind (1908). The honor of being the first official female psychology Ph.D. later fell to Margaret Floy Washburn, who also wrote an influential book, The Animal Mind, and became the second female APA president in 1921. But Washburn’s gender barred doors for her, too. Although her thesis was the first foreign study Wundt published in his psychology journal, she could not join the all-male organization of experimental psychologists founded by Titchener, her own graduate adviser (Johnson, 1997). What a different world from the recent past: Between 1997 and 2019, more than half of the elected presidents of the science-focused Association for Psychological Science (APS) were women. In the United States, Canada, and Europe, women now earn most psychology doctorates. Psychology increasing diversity At this 1964 meeting of the Society of Experimental Psychologists (a), Eleanor Gibson was easy to spot among the many male members, all in a sea of White faces. By contrast, women now are 62 percent of Association for Psychological Science members and 75 percent of its psychology student affiliates, as is clear in this current photo of APS graduate students (b). People of color have made enormous contributions to the field (see, for example, coverage of Kenneth Clark and Mamie Phipps Clark in Chapter 1), and psychology’s diversity continues to grow. For more on the history of these changes, see Appendix A, the Story of Psychology: A Timeline.  ASK YOURSELF How do you think psychology might change in the future as more women, and others from historically excluded groups, contribute their ideas to the field? RETRIEVAL PRACTICE RP-2 What event defined the start of scientific psychology? RP-3 Why did introspection fail as a method for understanding how the mind works? RP-4 The school of used introspection to define the mind’s makeup; focused on how mental processes enable us to adapt, survive, and flourish. ANSWERS IN APPENDIX E Psychological Science Matures LOQ P-5 How did behaviorism, Freudian psychology, and humanistic psychology further the development of psychological science? In psychology’s early days, many psychologists shared with the English essayist C. S. Lewis the view that “there is one thing, and only one in the whole universe which we know more about than we could learn from external observation.” That one thing, Lewis said, is ourselves. “We have, so to speak, inside information” (1960, pp. 18–19). Wundt and Titchener focused on inner sensations, images, and feelings. James also engaged in introspective examination of the stream of consciousness and of emotion, hoping to understand how they help humans survive and thrive. For these and other early pioneers, psychology was defined as “the science of mental life.” Behaviorism That definition endured until the 1920s, when the first of two provocative American psychologists challenged it. John B. Watson and, later, B. F. Skinner dismissed introspection and redefined psychology as “the scientific study of observable behavior.” After all, they said, science is rooted in observation: What you cannot observe and measure, you cannot scientifically study. You cannot observe a sensation, a feeling, or a thought, but you can observe and record people’s behavior as they are conditioned—as they respond to and learn in different situations. Many agreed, and behaviorism was one of two major forces in psychology well into the 1960s. behaviorism the view that psychology (1) should be an objective science that (2) studies behavior without reference to mental processes. Most psychologists today agree with (1) but not with (2). John B. Watson (1878–1958) and Rosalie Rayner (1898–1935) Working with Rayner, Watson championed psychology as the scientific study of behavior. In a controversial study on a baby who became famous as “Little Albert,” he and Rayner showed that fear could be learned. B. F. Skinner (1904–1990) This leading  behaviorist rejected introspection and studied how consequences shape behavior. Freudian (Psychoanalytic) Psychology The other major force was Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalytic psychology, which emphasized the ways our unconscious mind and childhood experiences affect our behavior. (In chapters to come, we’ll look more closely at Freud’s teachings, including his theory of personality, and his views on unconscious sexual conflicts and the mind’s defenses against its own wishes and impulses.) Sigmund Freud (1856–1939) The controversial ideas of this famed personality theorist and therapist have influenced humanity’s self- understanding. Humanistic Psychology As the behaviorists had rejected the early twentieth-century definition of psychology, other groups rejected the behaviorist definition. In the 1960s, humanistic psychologists, led by Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow, found both behaviorism and Freudian psychology too limiting. Rather than focusing on conditioned responses or childhood memories, the humanistic psychologists focused on our growth potential, our needs for love and acceptance, and the environments that nurture or limit personal growth. humanistic psychology a historically significant perspective that emphasized human growth potential. RETRIEVAL PRACTICE RP-5 From the 1920s through the 1960s, the two major forces in psychology were and psychology. ANSWERS IN APPENDIX E Contemporary Psychology LOQ P-6 How has contemporary psychology focused on cognition, on biology and experience, on culture and gender, and on human flourishing? Simultaneous with humanistic psychology’s emergence, psychologists in the 1960s pioneered a cognitive revolution. This led the field back to its early interest in how our mind processes and retains information. Cognitive psychology today continues its scientific exploration of how we perceive, process, and remember information, and of how thinking and emotion interact in anxiety, depression, and other disorders. The marriage of cognitive psychology (the science of mind) and neuroscience (the science of brain) gave birth to cognitive neuroscience. This specialty, with researchers in many disciplines, studies the brain activity underlying mental activity. cognitive psychology the study of mental processes, such as occur when we perceive, learn, remember, think, communicate, and solve problems. cognitive neuroscience the interdisciplinary study of the brain activity linked with cognition (including perception, thinking, memory, and language). Today’s psychology builds on the work of many earlier scientists and schools of thought. To encompass psychology’s concern with observable behavior and with inner thoughts and feelings, we now define psychology as the science of behavior and mental processes. Let’s unpack this definition. Behavior is anything an organism does—any action we can observe and record. Yelling, smiling, blinking, sweating, talking, tweeting, and questionnaire marking are all observable behaviors. Mental processes are our internal, subjective experiences—our sensations, perceptions, dreams, thoughts, beliefs, and feelings. psychology the science of behavior and mental processes. The key word in today’s definition of psychology is science. Psychology is less a set of findings than a way of asking and answering questions. Our aim, then, is not merely to report results but also to show you how psychologists play their game. You will see how researchers evaluate conflicting opinions and ideas. And you will learn how all of us, whether scientists or simply curious people, can think harder and smarter when experiencing and explaining the events of our lives. Psychology—the science of behavior and mental processes—has roots in many disciplines and countries. The young science of psychology developed from the more established fields of philosophy and biology. Wundt was both a philosopher and a physiologist. James was an American philosopher. Freud was an Austrian physician. Ivan Pavlov, who pioneered the study of learning, was a Russian physiologist. Jean Piaget, the last century’s most influential observer of children, was a Swiss biologist. These “Magellans of the mind,” as psychology historian Morton Hunt (1993) called them, illustrate the diversity of psychology’s origins. Like those pioneers, today’s estimated 1+ million psychologists are citizens of many lands (Zoma & Gielen, 2015). The International Union of Psychological Science has 82 member nations, from Albania to Zimbabwe. In China, the first university psychology department was established in 1978; by 2016 there were 270 (Zhang, 2016). Psychology is both growing and globalizing. The story of psychology is being written in many places, with interests ranging from the study of nerve cell activity to the study of international conflicts. Contemporary psychology, shaped by many forces, is particularly influenced by our understanding of biology and experience, culture and gender, and human flourishing. ASK YOURSELF How would you have defined psychology before taking this class? Evolutionary Psychology and Behavior Genetics Are our human traits inherited, or do they develop through experience? This has been psychology’s biggest and most persistent issue. But the debate over the nature–nurture issue is ancient. The Greek philosopher Plato (428–348 B. C. E.) assumed that we inherit character and intelligence and that certain ideas are inborn. Aristotle (384–322 B. C. E.) countered that there is nothing in the mind that does not first come in from the external world through the senses. nature–nurture issue the longstanding controversy over the relative contributions that genes and experience make to the development of psychological traits and behaviors. Today’s science sees traits and behaviors arising from the interaction of nature and nurture. Charles Darwin (1809–1882) Darwin argued that natural selection shapes behaviors as well as bodies. In the 1600s, European philosophers rekindled the debate. John Locke argued that the mind is a blank slate on which experience writes. René Descartes disagreed, believing that some ideas are innate. Descartes’ views gained support from a curious naturalist two centuries later. In 1831, an indifferent student but ardent collector of beetles, mollusks, and shells set sail on a historic round-the-world journey. The 22-year-old voyager, Charles Darwin, pondered the incredible species variation he encountered, including tortoises on one island that differed from those on nearby islands. Darwin’s On the Origin of Species (1859) explained this diversity by proposing the evolutionary process of natural selection: From among chance variations, nature selects traits that best enable an organism to survive and reproduce in a particular environment. Darwin’s principle of natural selection—what philosopher Daniel Dennett (1996) has called “the single best idea anyone has ever had”—is still with us 160+ years later as biology’s organizing principle. Evolution also has become an important principle for twenty-first-century psychology. This would surely have pleased Darwin, who believed his theory explained not only animal structures (such as a polar bear’s white coat) but also animal behaviors (such as the emotional expressions associated with human lust and rage). natural selection the principle that the inherited traits enabling an organism to survive and reproduce in a particular environment will (in competition with other trait variations) most likely be passed on to succeeding generations. The nature–nurture issue recurs throughout this text as today’s psychologists explore the relative contributions of biology and experience. They ask, for example: How are we humans alike because of our common biology and evolutionary history? That’s the focus of evolutionary psychology. And how do we individually differ because of our differing genes and environments? That’s the focus of behavior genetics. evolutionary psychology the study of the evolution of behavior and the mind, using principles of natural selection. behavior genetics the study of the relative power and limits of genetic and environmental influences on behavior.  A nature-made nature–nurture experiment Identical twins have the same genes. This makes them ideal participants in studies designed to shed light on hereditary and environmental influences on personality, intelligence, and other traits. Fraternal twins have different genes but often share a similar environment. Twin studies provide a wealth of findings—described in later chapters—showing the importance of both nature and nurture. We can, for example, ask: Are gender differences biologically predisposed or socially constructed? Is children’s grammar mostly innate or formed by experience? How are intelligence and personality differences influenced by heredity and by environment? Are sexual behaviors more “pushed” by inner biology or “pulled” by external incentives? Should we treat psychological disorders—depression, for example—as disorders of the brain, disorders of thought, or both? Such debates continue. Yet over and over again we will see that in contemporary science the nature–nurture tension dissolves: Nurture works on what nature provides. In Chapter 4, you’ll also learn about epigenetics—how experience can influence genetic expression. And in Chapter 2 you will see that our species has been graced with the great biological gift of brain plasticity: an enormous capacity to learn and adapt. Moreover, every psychological event (every thought, every emotion) is simultaneously a biological event. Thus, depression can be both a brain disorder and a thought disorder. ASK YOURSELF Think of one of your own traits. (For example, are you a planner or a procrastinator—do you usually complete assignments on time, or late? Are you more an extravert or introvert—do you become energized by social interactions,  or recharge by spending time alone?) How do you think that trait was influenced by nature and nurture? RETRIEVAL PRACTICE RP-6 How did the cognitive revolution affect the field of psychology? RP-7 What is natural selection? RP-8 What is contemporary psychology’s position on the nature–nurture issue? ANSWERS IN APPENDIX E Cross-Cultural and Gender Psychology What can we learn about people in general from psychological studies done in one time and place—often with participants from what psychologists have called the WEIRD cultures (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic [Henrich et al., 2010; Hruschka et al., 2018])? As we will see time and again, culture—shared ideas and behaviors that one generation passes on to the next—matters. Our culture shapes our standards of promptness and frankness, our attitudes toward premarital sex and varying body shapes, our tendency to be casual or formal, our willingness to make eye contact, our conversational distance, and much, much more. Being aware of such differences, we can restrain our assumptions that others will think and act as we do. culture the enduring behaviors, ideas, attitudes, values, and traditions shared by a group of people and transmitted from one generation to the next.  Culture and kissing Kissing crosses cultures. Yet how we do it varies. Imagine yourself kissing someone on the lips. Do you tilt your head right or left? In Western cultures, in which people read from left to right, about two-thirds of couples kiss right, as in Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan’s wedding kiss and Auguste Rodin’s sculpture, The Kiss. In one study, 77 percent of Hebrew- and Arabic-language right-to-left readers kissed tilting left (Shaki, 2013). “All people are the same; only their habits differ.” — Confucius, 551–479 B. C. E. It is also true, however, that our shared biological heritage unites us as a universal human family. Some aspects of our humanity—how we see and hear, how our bodies respond to stress, how our smiles communicate feeling—we share with all humans (Stroebe et al., 2018). The same underlying processes guide people everywhere. Some examples: People diagnosed with specific learning disorder (formerly called dyslexia) exhibit the same brain malfunction whether they are Italian, French, or British (Paulesu et al., 2001). Variation in languages may impede communication across cultures. Yet all languages share deep principles of grammar. People in different cultures vary in feelings of loneliness (Lykes & Kemmelmeier, 2014). But across cultures, loneliness is magnified by shyness, low self-esteem, and being unmarried (Jones et al., 1985; Rokach et al., 2002).  A smile is a smile the world around This book tells the story of psychology as a global science, one that studies and celebrates cultural and gender similarities and differences. For example, cultural norms vary in when and how often people should smile, but a naturally happy smile means the same thing anywhere in the world. We are each in certain respects like all others, like some others, and like no other. Studying people from all cultures helps us discern our similarities and our differences, our human kinship and our diversity. You will see throughout this book that our gender identity—our sense of being male, female, neither, or some combination of male and female—also matters, as does our biologically influenced sex. Today’s researchers report gender differences in what we dream, in how we express and detect emotions, and in our risk for alcohol use disorder, depression, and eating disorders. Gender differences fascinate us, and studying them is potentially beneficial. For example, many researchers have observed that women carry on conversations more readily to build relationships, while men talk more to give information and advice (Tannen, 2001). Understanding these differences can help us prevent conflicts and misunderstandings in everyday interactions. But again, psychologically as well as biologically, humans are overwhelmingly similar. Regardless of gender, we learn to walk at about the same age. We experience the same sensations of light and sound. We remember vivid emotional events and forget mundane details. We feel the same pangs of hunger, desire, and fear. We exhibit similar overall intelligence and well-being. The point to remember: Even when specific attitudes and behaviors vary by gender or across cultures, as they often do, the underlying processes are much the same. ASK YOURSELF How have your cultural experiences influenced your development? Our online learning tools will help you excel in this course. Take advantage of the adaptive quizzing that adjusts to your individual needs, Assess Your Strengths personal self-assessments, interactive simulations, and How Would You Know? research activities. For an excellent tour of psychology’s roots, view the 9.5-minute Video: The History of Psychology. Positive Psychology Psychology’s first hundred years often focused on understanding and treating troubles, such as abuse and anxiety, depression and disease, prejudice and poverty. Much of today’s psychology continues the exploration of such challenges. Without slighting the need to repair damage and cure disease, Martin Seligman and others (2002, 2011, 2016) have called for more research on human flourishing—on understanding and developing the emotions and traits that help us to thrive. These psychologists call their approach positive psychology. They believe that happiness is a by-product of a pleasant, engaged, and meaningful life. Thus, positive psychology uses scientific methods to explore the building of a “good life” that engages our skills, and a “meaningful life” that points beyond ourselves. positive psychology the scientific study of human flourishing, with the goals of discovering and promoting strengths and virtues that help individuals and communities to thrive. Psychology’s Three Main Levels of Analysis  LOQ P-7 How do psychologists use the biopsychosocial approach, and how can it help us understand our diverse world? We all share a biologically rooted human nature. Yet many psychological and social- cultural influences fine-tune our assumptions, values, and behaviors. We differ individually by gender identity, physical ability, and sexual orientation. And each of us is a complex system that is part of a larger social system—a family, ethnic group, culture, and socioeconomic status (combines education, income, and occupation). The biopsychosocial approach integrates these three levels of analysis—the biological, psychological, and social-cultural. biopsychosocial approach an integrated approach that incorporates biological, psychological, and social-cultural levels of analysis. levels of analysis the differing complementary views, from biological to psychological to social-cultural, for analyzing any given phenomenon. Consider horrific school shootings. Do they occur because the shooters have brain disorders or genetic tendencies that cause them to be violent? Because they observe brutality in the media or play violent video games? Because they live in a gun-toting society? The biopsychosocial approach enables psychologists to move beyond labels (“school shooter”) and to consider the interconnected factors that may lead to violent acts (Pryor, 2019) (FIGURE 1). Clinical psychologists use this approach to help people with mental disorders (Teachman et al., 2019).  FIGURE 1 Biopsychosocial approach This integrated viewpoint incorporates various levels of analysis and offers a more complete picture of any given behavior or mental process. Each level of analysis offers a perspective for looking at a behavior or mental process, yet each by itself is incomplete. Each perspective described in TABLE 1 asks different questions and has its limits, but together they complement one another. Consider, for example, how they shed light on anger: Someone working from a neuroscience perspective might study brain circuits that cause us to be red in the face and “hot under the collar.” Someone working from an evolutionary perspective might analyze how anger facilitated the survival of our ancestors’ genes. Someone working from a behavior genetics perspective might study how heredity and experience influence our individual differences in temperament. Someone working from a psychodynamic perspective might view an outburst as an outlet for unconscious hostility. Someone working from a behavioral perspective might attempt to determine what triggers aggressive acts. Someone working from a cognitive perspective might study how our interpretation of a situation affects our anger and how our anger affects our thinking. Someone working from a social-cultural perspective might explore how expressions of anger vary across cultural contexts. TABLE 1 Psychology’s Theoretical Perspectives  TABLE 1 Psychology’s Theoretical Perspectives Perspective Focus Sample Questions Examples of Subfields Using This Perspective Neuroscience How the body and How do pain messages travel from the hand to the Biological; cognitive; brain enable emotions, brain? How is blood chemistry linked with moods clinical memories, and sensory and motives? experiences Evolutionary How the natural How does evolution influence behavior tendencies? Biological; selection of traits has developmental; promoted the survival social of genes Behavior How our genes and our To what extent are psychological traits such as Personality; genetics environment influence intelligence, personality, sexual orientation, and developmental; our individual vulnerability to depression products of our genes? Of legal/forensic differences our environment? Psychodynamic How behavior springs How can someone’s personality traits and disorders Clinical; counseling; from unconscious be explained by unfulfilled wishes and childhood personality drives and conflicts traumas? Behavioral How we learn How do we learn to fear particular objects or Clinical; counseling; observable responses situations? What is the most effective way to alter industrial- our behavior, say, to lose weight or stop smoking? organizational Cognitive How we encode, How do we use information in remembering? Cognitive process, store, and Reasoning? Solving problems? neuroscience; retrieve information clinical; counseling; industrial- organizational Social-cultural How behavior and How are we affected by the people around us, and by Developmental; thinking vary across our surrounding culture? social; clinical; situations and cultures counseling The point to remember: Like two-dimensional views of a three-dimensional object, each of psychology’s perspectives is helpful. But each by itself fails to reveal the whole picture. ASK YOURSELF Which of psychology’s theoretical perspectives do you find most interesting? Why? RETRIEVAL PRACTICE RP-9 What advantage do we gain by using the biopsychosocial approach in studying psychological events? RP-10 The - perspective in psychology focuses on how behavior and thought differ from situation to situation and from culture to culture, while the perspective emphasizes observation of how  we respond to and learn in different situations. ANSWERS IN APPENDIX E Psychology’s Subfields LOQ P-8 What are psychology’s main subfields? Picturing a chemist at work, you may envision a laboratory scientist surrounded by test tubes and high-tech equipment. Picture a psychologist at work, and you would be right to envision a white-coated scientist probing a rat’s brain. an intelligence researcher measuring how quickly an infant shows boredom by looking away from a familiar picture. an executive evaluating a new “healthy lifestyles” training program for employees. a researcher at a computer analyzing “big data” from social media status updates or Google searches. a therapist actively listening to a depressed client’s thoughts. a traveling academic visiting another culture and collecting data on variations in human values and behaviors. a teacher or writer sharing the joy of psychology with others. The cluster of subfields we call psychology is a meeting ground for different disciplines. Thus, it’s a perfect home for those with wide-ranging interests. In its diverse activities, from biological experimentation to cultural comparisons, the tribe of psychology is united by a common quest: describing and explaining behavior and the mind underlying it. Some psychologists conduct basic research that builds psychology’s knowledge base. We will meet a wide variety of such researchers, including biological psychologists exploring the links between body and mind; developmental psychologists studying our changing abilities from womb to tomb; cognitive psychologists experimenting with how we perceive, think, and solve problems; personality psychologists investigating our persistent traits; and social psychologists exploring how we view and affect one another. basic research pure science that aims to increase the scientific knowledge base. These and other psychologists also may conduct applied research, tackling practical problems. Industrial-organizational psychologists, for example, use psychology’s concepts and methods in the workplace to help organizations and companies select and train employees, boost morale and productivity, design products, and implement systems. applied research scientific study that aims to solve practical problems. Psychology is a science, but it is also a profession that helps people have healthier relationships, overcome feelings of anxiety or depression, and raise thriving children. Counseling psychology and clinical psychology grew out of different historical traditions. Early counseling psychologists offered job skills guidance, whereas clinical psychologists worked alongside psychiatrists to assess and provide psychotherapy to people in the first psychology clinics. Today’s counseling psychologists and clinical psychologists have a lot in common. Counseling psychologists help people to cope with challenges and crises (including academic, vocational, and relationship issues) and assist those with psychological disorders to improve their personal and social functioning. Clinical psychologists focus on assessing and treating people with mental, emotional, and behavior disorders. Both counseling and clinical psychologists administer and interpret tests, provide counseling and therapy to people with all levels of psychological difficulties, and undergo the same licensing exams. They sometimes also conduct basic and applied research. By contrast, psychiatrists, who also may provide psychotherapy, are medical doctors licensed to prescribe drugs and otherwise treat physical causes of psychological disorders. counseling psychology a branch of psychology that assists people with problems in living (often related to school, work, or relationships) and in achieving greater well-being. clinical psychology a branch of psychology that studies, assesses, and treats people with psychological disorders. psychiatry a branch of medicine dealing with psychological disorders; practiced by physicians who sometimes provide medical (for example, drug) treatments as well as psychological therapy.  Psychology in court Forensic psychologists apply psychology’s principles and methods in the criminal justice system. They may assess witness credibility or testify in court about a defendant’s state of mind and future risk. Rather than seeking to change people to fit their environment, community psychologists work to create social and physical environments that are healthy for all (Bradshaw et al., 2009; Trickett, 2009). To prevent bullying, they might consider ways to improve the culture of the school and neighborhood, and how to increase bystander intervention (Polanin et al., 2012). community psychology a branch of psychology that studies how people interact with their social environments and how social institutions (such as schools and neighborhoods) affect individuals and groups. With perspectives ranging from the biological to the social, and with settings ranging from the laboratory to the clinic to the office, psychology relates to many fields. Psychologists teach in medical schools, business schools, law schools, and theological seminaries, and they work in hospitals, factories, and corporate offices. They engage in interdisciplinary studies, such as psychobiography (the study of the lives and personalities of public figures), psycholinguistics (the study of language and thinking), and psychoceramics (the study of crackpots).1 Psychology: A science and a profession Psychologists experiment with, observe, test, and help modify behavior. Here we see psychologists testing a child, measuring emotion-related physiology, and doing face-to-face therapy. ASK YOURSELF When you signed up for this course, what did you know about different psychology specialties? Want to learn more? See Appendix B, Career Fields in Psychology, at the end of this book, and go to our online Pursuing a Psychology Career resource to learn about the many interesting options available to those with bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral degrees in psychology. To review and test your understanding of psychology’s perspectives and subfields, engage online with Concept Practice: Psychology’s Current Perspectives and Concept Practice: Psychology’s Subfields. Psychology also influences culture. Knowledge transforms us. Learning about the solar system and the germ theory of disease alters the way people think and act. Learning about psychology’s findings also changes people: They less often judge psychological disorders as moral failings, treatable by punishment and ostracism. They less often regard and treat women as men’s mental inferiors. They less often view and raise children as ignorant, willful beasts in need of taming. “In each case,” noted Morton Hunt (1990, p. 206), “knowledge has modified attitudes, and, through them, behavior.” Once aware of psychology’s well-researched ideas—about how body and mind connect, how a child’s mind grows, how we construct our perceptions, how we learn and remember, how people across the world are alike (and different)—your mind may never again be the same. “The mind, once stretched by a new idea, never returns to its original dimensions.” — Ralph Waldo Emerson, 1803–1882 But bear in mind psychology’s limits. Don’t expect it to answer the ultimate questions, such as those posed by Russian novelist Leo Tolstoy (1904): “Why should I live? Why should I do anything? Is there in life any purpose which the inevitable death that awaits me does not undo and destroy?” Although many of life’s significant questions are beyond psychology, some very important ones are illuminated by even a first psychology course. Through painstaking research, psychologists have gained insights into brain and mind, dreams and memories, depression and joy. Even the unanswered questions can renew our sense of mystery about things we do not yet understand. Moreover, your study of psychology can help teach you how to ask and answer important questions—how to think critically as you evaluate competing ideas and claims. “I have uttered what I did not understand, things too wonderful for me.” — Job 42:3 Psychology deepens our appreciation for how we humans perceive, think, feel, and act. By so doing, it can enrich our lives and enlarge our vision. Through this book we hope to help guide you toward that end. As educator Charles Eliot said a century ago: “Books are the quietest and most constant of friends, and the most patient of teachers.” RETRIEVAL PRACTICE RP-11 Match the specialty (i through iii) with the description (a through c). i. Clinical a. works to create social and physical environments that are psychology healthy for all  ii. Psychiatry b. studies, assesses, and treats people with psychological disorders but usually does not provide medical therapy iii. Community c. is a branch of medicine dealing with psychological disorders psychology ANSWERS IN APPENDIX E Use Psychology to Become a Stronger Person— and a Better Student LOQ P-9 How can psychological principles help you learn, remember, and thrive? Psychology is not just about understanding others; it is also about understanding ourselves. It is only through such learning that we can be—and show to the world—our best selves. Throughout this text, we will offer evidence-based suggestions that you can use to live a happy, effective, flourishing life, including the following: Manage your time to get a full night’s sleep. Unlike sleep-deprived people, who live with fatigue and gloomy moods, well-rested people live with greater energy, happiness, and productivity. Make space for exercise. Aerobic activity not only increases health and energy; it also is an effective remedy for mild to moderate depression and anxiety. Set long-term goals, with daily aims. Successful people take time each day to work toward their goals, such as exercising or sleeping more, or eating more healthfully. Over time, they often find that their daily practice becomes a habit. Have a growth mindset. Rather than seeing their abilities as fixed, successful people view their abilities as like a muscle—something that grows stronger with effortful use. Prioritize relationships. We humans are social animals. We flourish when connected in close relationships. We are both happier and healthier when supported by (and when supporting) caring friends. Psychology’s research also shows how we can learn and retain information. Many students assume that the way to cement new learning is to reread. What helps more— and what this book therefore encourages—is repeated self-testing and rehearsal of previously studied material. Memory researchers Henry Roediger and Jeffrey Karpicke (2006) call this phenomenon the testing effect. (It is also sometimes called the retrieval practice effect or test-enhanced learning.) They note that “testing is a powerful means of improving learning, not just assessing it.” In one study, English-speaking students who had been tested repeatedly recalled the meaning of 20 previously learned Lithuanian words better than those who had spent the same time restudying the words (Ariel & Karpicke, 2018). Repetitive testing’s rewards also make it reinforcing: Students who used repetitive testing once found it helped, and more often used it later when learning new material. testing effect enhanced memory after retrieving, rather than simply rereading, information. Also referred to as a retrieval practice effect or test-enhanced learning. Many other studies, including in college classrooms, confirm that frequent quizzing and self-testing boosts students’ retention (Cho et al., 2017; Foss & Pirozzolo, 2017; Trumbo et al., 2016). “If you read a piece of text through twenty times, you will not learn it by heart so easily as if you read it ten times while attempting to recite it from time to time and consulting the text when your memory fails.” — Francis Bacon, Novum Organum, 1620 As you will see in Chapter 8, to master information you must actively process it. In one digest of 225 studies, students engaged in active learning showed the highest examination performance in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (the STEM fields) (Freeman et al., 2014). Likewise, when learning a new language, those who practice speaking it learn better than those who passively listen to it (Hopman & MacDonald, 2018). Better to talk than listen. So don’t treat your mind like your stomach, something to be filled passively. Treat it more like a muscle that grows stronger with exercise. Countless experiments reveal that people learn and remember best when they put material in their own words, rehearse it, and then retrieve and review it again. The SQ3R study method incorporates these principles (McDaniel et al., 2009; Robinson, 1970). SQ3R is an acronym for its five steps: Survey, Question, Read, Retrieve,2 Review. SQ3R a study method incorporating five steps: Survey, Question, Read, Retrieve, Review. To study a chapter, first survey, taking a bird’s-eye view. Scan the table of contents on the chapter’s first page, and notice the organization. Before you read each main section, try to answer its numbered Learning Objective Question (for this section: “How can psychological principles help you learn, remember, and thrive?”). Researchers Roediger and Bridgid Finn (2010) have found that “trying and failing to retrieve the answer is actually helpful to learning.” Those who test their understanding before reading, and discover what they don’t yet know, will learn and remember better. Then read, actively searching for the answer to the Learning Objective Question (LOQ). At each sitting, read only as much of the chapter (usually a single main section) as you can absorb without tiring. Read actively and critically. Ask questions. Take notes. Make the ideas your own: How does what you’ve read relate to your own life? Does it support or challenge your assumptions? How convincing is the evidence? (Our new Ask Yourself questions and Apply Psychological Science features throughout each chapter will help you engage personally with the material.) Write out what you know. “Writing is often a tool for learning,” say researchers (Arnold et al., 2017). Having read a section, retrieve its main ideas: “Active retrieval promotes meaningful learning,” says Karpicke (2012). So test yourself. This will not only help you figure out what you know; the testing itself will help you learn and retain the information more effectively. Even better, test yourself repeatedly. To facilitate this, we offer periodic Retrieval Practice questions throughout each chapter (for example, the questions at the end of this section). After answering these questions for yourself, you can check the answers in Appendix E and reread the material as needed. “It pays better to wait and recollect by an effort from within, than to look at the book again.” — William James, Principles of Psychology, 1890 Finally, review: Read over any notes you have taken, again with an eye on the chapter’s organization, and quickly review the whole chapter. Write or say what a concept is before rereading to check your understanding. Survey, question, read, retrieve, review. We have organized this book’s chapters to facilitate your use of the SQ3R study system. Each chapter begins with an outline that aids your survey. Headings and Learning Objective Questions suggest issues and concepts you should consider as you read. The material is organized into sections of readable length. The Retrieval Practice questions will challenge you to retrieve what you have learned, and thus retain it better. The end-of-section Review is set up as a self-test, with the collected Learning Objective Questions and key terms listed, along with Master the Material questions in a variety of formats. In the e-book, answer-checking is a click away. In the printed text, answers may be found in Appendix C and Appendix D. Survey, question, read … Four additional study tips may further boost your learning: Distribute your study time. One of psychology’s oldest findings is that spaced practice promotes better retention than massed practice. You’ll remember material better if you space your time over several study periods—perhaps one hour a day, six days a week— rather than cram it into one week-long or all-night study blitz. For example, rather than trying to read an entire chapter in a single sitting, read just one main section and then turn to something else. Interleaving your study of psychology with your study of other subjects boosts long-term retention and protects against overconfidence (Kornell & Bjork, 2008; Taylor & Rohrer, 2010). Spacing your study sessions requires a disciplined approach to managing your time. For more tips on time management, see the new Student Preface—Student Success: How to Apply Psychology to Live Your Best Life at the beginning of this text. Learn to think critically. Both inside and outside of this course, critical thinking— smart thinking—is a key to wisdom. Whether you are reading or conversing, note people’s assumptions and values. What perspective or bias underlies an argument? Evaluate evidence. Is it anecdotal? Or is it based on informative experiments? Assess conclusions. Are there alternative explanations? Process class information actively. Listen for the main ideas and sub-ideas of a lecture. Write them down. Ask questions during and after class. In class, as in your private study, process the information actively and you will understand and retain it better. As psychologist William James urged a century ago, “No reception without reaction, no impression without … expression.” Make the information your own. Engage with the Ask Yourself questions and the Apply Psychological Science features found periodically throughout each chapter to relate what you read to your own life. Tell someone else about it. (As any teacher will confirm, to teach is to remember.) Also, take notes by hand. Handwritten notes, in your own words, typically engage more active processing, with better retention, than does verbatim note taking on laptops (Mueller & Oppenheimer, 2014). More learning tips To learn more about the testing effect and the SQ3R method, view the 5-minute animation, “Make Things Memorable,” at tinyurl.com/HowToRemember. Overlearn. Psychology tells us that overlearning improves retention. We are prone to overestimating how much we know. You may understand a chapter as you read it, but that feeling of familiarity can be deceptively comforting. By using the Retrieval Practice and Master the Material questions as well as our online learning opportunities, you can test your knowledge and overlearn in the process. Memory experts Elizabeth Bjork and Robert Bjork (2011, p. 63) offer simple, scientifically supported advice for how to improve your retention and your grades: Spend less time on the input side and more time on the output side, such as summarizing what you have read from memory or getting together with friends and asking each other questions. Any activities that involve testing yourself—that is, activities that require you to retrieve or generate information, rather than just representing information to yourself—will make your learning both more durable and flexible. ASK YOURSELF Of all of these helpful principles, which ones seem most relevant and important for improving your own life and studies? How will you add them to your usual routines? RETRIEVAL PRACTICE RP-12 The describes the enhanced memory that results from repeated retrieval (as in self-testing) rather than from simple rereading of new information. RP-13 What does SQ3R stand for? ANSWERS IN APPENDIX E REVIEW The Story of Psychology LEARNING OBJECTIVES Test yourself Answer these repeated Learning Objective Questions on your own (before checking the answers in Appendix D) to improve your retention of the concepts (McDaniel et al., 2009, 2015). LOQ P-1: How is psychology a science? LOQ P-2: What are the three key elements of the scientific attitude, and how do they support scientific inquiry? LOQ P-3: How does critical thinking feed a scientific attitude, and smarter thinking for everyday life? LOQ P-4: What were some important milestones in psychology’s early history? LOQ P-5: How did behaviorism, Freudian psychology, and humanistic psychology further the development of psychological science? LOQ P-6: How has contemporary psychology focused on cognition, on biology and experience, on culture and gender, and on human flourishing? LOQ P-7: How do psychologists use the biopsychosocial approach, and how can it help us understand our diverse world? LOQ P-8: What are psychology’s main subfields? LOQ P-9: How can psychological principles help you learn, remember, and thrive? TERMS AND CONCEPTS TO REMEMBER Test yourself Write down the definition in your own words, then check your answer. empirical approach critical thinking structuralism functionalism behaviorism humanistic psychology cognitive psychology cognitive neuroscience psychology nature–nurture issue natural selection evolutionary psychology behavior genetics culture positive psychology biopsychosocial approach levels of analysis basic research applied research counseling psychology clinical psychology psychiatry community psychology testing effect SQ3R MASTER THE MATERIAL Test yourself Answer the following questions on your own first, then check your answers in Appendix E. 1. How can critical thinking help you evaluate claims in the media, even if you’re not a scientific expert on the issue? 2. In 1879, in psychology’s first experiment, and his students measured the time lag between hearing a ball hit a platform and pressing a key. 3. William James would be considered a(n). Wilhelm Wundt and Edward Titchener would be considered. a. functionalist; structuralists b. structuralist; functionalists c. evolutionary theorist; structuralists d. functionalist; evolutionary theorists 4. In the early twentieth century, redefined psychology as “the science of observable behavior.”  a. John B. Watson b. Abraham Maslow c. William James d. Sigmund Freud 5. Nature is to nurture as a. personality is to intelligence. b. biology is to experience. c. intelligence is to biology. d. psychological traits are to behaviors. 6. “Nurture works on what nature provides.” Describe what this means, using your own words. 7. Which of the following is true regarding gender differences and similarities? a. Differences among the genders outweigh any similarities. b. Despite some gender differences, the underlying processes of human behavior are the same. c. Both similarities and differences among the genders depend more on biology than on environment. d. Gender differences are so numerous that it is difficult to make meaningful comparisons. 8. Martin Seligman and other researchers who explore various aspects of human flourishing refer to their field of study as. 9. A psychologist treating emotionally troubled adolescents at a local mental health agency is most likely to be a(n) a. research psychologist. b. psychiatrist. c. industrial-organizational psychologist. d. clinical psychologist. 10. A mental health professional with a medical degree who can prescribe medication is a. 11. A psychologist conducting basic research to expand psychology’s knowledge  base may a. design a computer screen with limited glare and assess the effect on computer operators’ eyes after a day’s work. b. treat older people who are overcome by depression. c. observe 3- and 6-year-olds solving puzzles and analyze differences in their abilities. d. interview children with behavioral problems and suggest treatments. Continue testing yourself with LearningCurve or Achieve Read & Practice to learn and remember most effectively.  CHAPTER 1 Thinking Critically With Psychological Science Research Strategies: How Psychologists Ask and Answer Questions The Need for Psychological Science Psychological Science in a Post-Truth World The Scientific Method THINKING CRITICALLY ABOUT: Correlation and Causation Psychology’s Research Ethics Statistical Reasoning in Everyday Life Describing Data Significant Differences Hoping to satisfy their curiosity about people and to relieve their own woes, millions turn to “psychology.” They read advice columns aimed at helping people cope with their problems, overcome their addictions, and save their marriages. They watch “celebrity psychics” demonstrate their supposed powers. They attend stop-smoking hypnosis seminars. They play online games, hoping to strengthen their brain. They immerse themselves in self-help books, websites, and lectures that promise to teach the path to love, the road to personal happiness, and the “hacks,” or shortcuts, to success. Others, intrigued by claims of psychological truth, wonder: How—and how much—does parenting shape children’s personalities and abilities? Are first-born children more driven to achieve? Do dreams have deep meaning? Do we sometimes remember events that never happened? Does psychotherapy heal? In working with such questions, the science of psychology does more than speculate. To separate uninformed opinions from examined conclusions, psychologists use the scientific method to conduct research. Let’s consider how psychology’s researchers do their science.  Research Strategies: How Psychologists Ask and Answer Questions The Need for Psychological Science LEARNING OBJECTIVE QUESTION LOQ 1-1 How does our everyday thinking sometimes lead us to a wrong conclusion? Some people think that psychology merely proves what we already know and then dresses it in jargon: “You get paid for using fancy methods to tell me what my grandmother knew?” Indeed, Grandma’s common sense is often right. As the baseball great Yogi Berra (1925–2015) once said, “You can observe a lot by watching.” (We also have Berra to thank for other gems, such as “Nobody goes there anymore—it’s too crowded,” and “If the people don’t want to come out to the ballpark, nobody’s gonna stop ’em.”) Because we’re all behavior watchers, it would be surprising if many of psychology’s findings had not been foreseen. Many people believe that love breeds happiness, for example, and they are right (we have what Chapter 11 calls a deep “need to belong”). But sometimes Grandma’s common sense, informed by countless casual observations, is wrong. In later chapters, we will see how research has overturned popular ideas— that familiarity breeds contempt, that dreams predict the future, and that most of us use only 10 percent of our brain. We will also see how research has surprised us with discoveries about how the brain’s chemical messengers control our moods and memories, about other animals’ abilities, and about the effects of stress on our capacity to fight disease. Other things seem like commonsense truth only because we so often hear them repeated. Mere repetition of statements—whether true or false—makes them easier to process and remember, and thus more true-seeming (Dechêne et al., 2010; Fazio et al., 2015). Easy-to-remember misconceptions (“Vitamin C prevents the common cold”) can therefore overwhelm hard truths. This power of familiar, hard-to-erase falsehoods is a lesson well known to political manipulators, and kept in mind by critical thinkers. “All effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans.” — Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, 1926 Three common flaws in commonsense thinking—hindsight bias, overconfidence, and perceiving order in random events—illustrate how, as novelist Madeleine L’Engle (1973) observed, “The naked intellect is an extraordinarily inaccurate instrument.” “Those who trust in their own wits are fools.” — Proverbs 28:26 Did We Know It All Along? Hindsight Bias Consider how easy it is to draw the bull’s-eye after the arrow strikes. After the stock market drops, people say it was “due for a correction.” After the athletic match, we credit the coach if a “gutsy play” wins and criticize the same “stupid play” if it doesn’t. After a war or an election, its outcome usually seems obvious. Although history may therefore seem like a series of inevitable events, the actual future is seldom foreseen. No one’s diary recorded, “Today the Hundred Years War began.” “Life is lived forwards, but understood backwards.” — Philosopher Søren Kierkegaard, 1813–1855 This hindsight bias is easy to demonstrate by giving half the members of a group some purported psychological finding and giving the other half an opposite result. Tell the first group, for example: “Psychologists have found that separation weakens romantic attraction. As the saying goes, ‘Out of sight, out of mind.’” Ask them to imagine why this might be true. Most people can, and after hearing an explanation, nearly all will then view this true finding as unsurprising. hindsight bias the tendency to believe, after learning an outcome, that one would have foreseen it. (Also known as the I-knew-it-all-along phenomenon.) Tell the second group the opposite: “Psychologists have found that separation strengthens romantic attraction. As the saying goes, ‘Absence makes the heart grow fonder.’” People given this untrue result can also easily imagine it, and most will also see it as unsurprising. When opposite findings both seem like common sense, there is a problem. “Anything seems commonplace, once explained.” — Dr. Watson to Sherlock Holmes Such errors in people’s recollections and explanations show why we need psychological research. It’s not that common sense is usually wrong. Rather, common sense describes, after the fact, what has happened better than it predicts what will happen. More than 800 scholarly papers have shown hindsight bias in people young and old from around the world (Roese & Vohs, 2012). As physicist Niels Bohr reportedly jested, “Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future.”  Hindsight bias When drilling its Deep-water Horizon oil well in 2010, BP employees took shortcuts and ignored warning signs, without intending to harm people, the environment, or their company’s reputation. After an explosion killed 11 employees and caused the largest ever marine oil spill, the foolishness of those judgments became (in hindsight) obvious. Overconfidence We humans tend to think we know more than we do. Asked how sure we are of our answers to factual questions (Is Boston north or south of Paris?), we tend to be more confident than correct.1 Consider these three anagrams, shown beside their solutions (from Goranson, 1978): WREAT → WATER ETRYN → ENTRY GRABE → BARGE About how many seconds do you think it would have taken you to unscramble each of these? Did hindsight influence you? Knowing the answers tends to make us overconfident. (Surely the solution would take only 10 seconds or so?) In reality, the average problem solver spends 3 minutes, as you also might, given a similar anagram without the solution: OCHSA.2 Fun anagram solutions from Wordsmith (wordsmith.org): Snooze alarms = Alas! No more z’s Dormitory = dirty room Slot machines = cash lost in ’em Are we any better at predicting social behavior? Psychologist Philip Tetlock (1998, 2005) collected more than 27,000 expert predictions of world events, such as the future of South Africa or whether Quebec would separate from Canada. His repeated finding: These predictions, which experts made with 80 percent confidence on average, were right less than 40 percent of the time. It turns out that only about 2 percent of people do an excellent job predicting social behavior. Tetlock (with Gardner, 2016) calls them “superforecasters.” Superforecasters avoid overconfidence. Faced with a difficult prediction, a superforecaster “gathers facts, balances clashing arguments, and settles on an answer.” Overconfidence in history: “We don’t like their sound. Groups of guitars are on their way out.” — Decca Records, in turning down a recording contract with the Beatles in 1962 “Computers in the future may weigh no more than 1.5 tons.” — Popular Mechanics, 1949 “They couldn’t hit an elephant at this distance.” — General John Sedgwick just before being killed during a U.S. Civil War battle, 1864 “No woman in my time will be prime minister.” — Margaret Thatcher, 1969 (British Prime Minister, 1979–1990) ASK YOURSELF Do you have a hard time believing you may be overconfident? Could overconfidence be at work in that self-assessment? How might reading this section about overconfidence help reduce your tendency to be overconfident? RETRIEVAL PRACTICE RP-1 Why, after friends start dating, do we often feel that we knew they were meant to be together?  ANSWERS IN APPENDIX E Perceiving Order in Random Events We’re born with an eagerness to make sense of our world. People see a face on the Moon, hear Satanic messages in music played backward, or perceive the Virgin Mary’s image on a grilled cheese sandwich. Even in random data, we often find patterns, because—here’s a curious fact of life—random sequences often don’t look random (Falk et al., 2009; Nickerson, 2002, 2005). Flip a coin 50 times and you may be surprised at the streaks of heads or tails—much like supposed “hot” and “cold” streaks in basketball shooting and baseball hitting. In actual random sequences, patterns and streaks (such as repeating digits) occur more often than people expect (Oskarsson et al., 2009). That also makes it hard for people to generate random-like sequences. When embezzlers try to simulate random digits when specifying how much to steal, their nonrandom patterns can alert fraud experts (Poundstone, 2014). Why are people prone to pattern-seeking? For most people, a random, unpredictable world is unsettling (Tullett et al., 2015). Making sense of our world relieves stress and helps us get on with daily living (Ma et al., 2017). Some happenings, such as winning a lottery twice, seem so extraordinary that we find it difficult to conceive an ordinary, chance-related explanation. “But with a large enough sample,” said statisticians Persi Diaconis and Frederick Mosteller (1989), “any outrageous thing is likely to happen.” An event that happens to but 1 in 1 billion people every day occurs about 7 times a day, more than 2500 times a year. “The really unusual day would be one where nothing unusual happens.” — Statistician Persi Diaconis (2002) The point to remember: Our commonsense thinking is flawed due to three powerful tendencies—hindsight bias, overconfidence, and our tendency to perceive patterns in random events. But scientific inquiry can help us sift reality from illusion.  Play the role of a researcher using scientific inquiry to think smarter about random hot streaks in sports. Engage online with the activity How Would You Know If There Is a “Hot Hand” in Basketball? Psychological Science in a Post-Truth World LOQ 1-2 Why are we so vulnerable to believing untruths? In 2017, the Oxford English Dictionary’s word of the year was post-truth—describing a modern culture where people’s emotions and personal beliefs often override their acceptance of objective facts. Consider two U.S. examples of such “truth decay”—of widely shared misinformation: Belief: The crime rate is rising. Every recent year, 7 in 10 adults told Gallup that there is more crime “than there was a year ago” (Swift, 2016). Fact: For several decades, both violent and property crime rates have been falling. In 2015, the violent crime rate was less than half the 1990 rate (BJS, 2017; Statista, 2017). Belief: Many immigrants are criminals (McCarthy, 2017). Memorable incidents feed this narrative. Stories of an immigrant murdering, burglarizing, or lying spread through social networks and news outlets. Such fears are commonplace not only in North America but also in Europe and Australia (Nunziata, 2015). Fact: Most immigrants are not criminals. Compared with native-born Americans, immigrants are 44 percent less likely to be imprisoned (CATO, 2017; Flagg, 2018, 2019). The same has been true in Italy, the United Kingdom, and elsewhere (Di Carlo et al., 2018). Political party bias has distorted Americans’ thinking. Psychologist Peter Ditto and his colleagues (2019a,b) reported that researchers have found “partisan bias in both liberals and conservatives, and at virtually identical levels.” In the United States, a majority of Republicans believed unemployment had increased under Democratic President Barack Obama (it decreased), while a majority of strong Democrats believed inflation had worsened under Republican President Ronald Reagan (it improved) (Gelman, 2009; PPP, 2016). One study found that both U.S. Democrats and Republicans discriminate against the other-party candidates for college scholarships (Iyengar & Westwood, 2015). So, let none of us smugly think “Yes, but bias doesn’t apply to me.” Bias goes both ways. U.S. Democrats and Republicans share concern about failures to separate fact from fiction. In his farewell address, President Barack Obama (2017) warned that without a “common baseline of facts,” democracy is threatened: “We become so secure in our bubbles that we start accepting only information, whether it’s true or not, that fits our opinions, instead of basing our opinions on the evidence that is out there.” The late Republican Senator John McCain (2017) similarly expressed alarm about “the growing inability, and even unwillingness, to separate truth from lies.” So why do post-truth era people so often, in the words of psychologist Tom Gilovich (1991), “know what isn’t so?” False news Some misinformation gets fed to us intentionally. It’s “lies in the guise of news” (Kristof, 2017). In the 2016 U.S. election cycle, 6 percent of all Twitter- enabled news consumption was fake news (Grinberg et al., 2019). And made-up news persists. In one analysis of 126,000 stories tweeted by 3 million people,  falsehoods—especially false political news—“diffused significantly farther, faster, deeper, and more broadly than the truth” (Vosoughi et al., 2018). The good news is that most people can often tell the difference between high- and low-quality information sources (Pennycook & Rand, 2019). Repetition In experiments, statements become more believable when they are repeated (De keersmaecker et al., 2019). What we hear over and over—perhaps a made-up smear of a political opponent—gets remembered and comes to seem true (Fazio et al., 2015). Availability of powerful examples In the media, “if it bleeds it leads.” Gruesome violence—a horrific murder, a mass killing, a plane crash—gets reported, with vivid images that color our judgments. No wonder Americans grossly overestimate their risk of being victimized by crime, terror, and plane crashes. Group identity and the echo chamber of the like-minded Our social identities matter. Feeling good about our groups helps us feel good about ourselves. On social media we tend to friend people who think as we do (see FIGURE 1.1). We often read news sources that affirm our views and demonize news sources that do not. FIGURE 1.1 The meeting of like minds On social media, most people discuss contentious issues, such as gun control, same-sex marriage, and climate change, only with likeminded others. In this graph of  politically charged Twitter activity, each node represents a user who sent a message; each line represents a user who retweeted another user. As we can see, users overwhelmingly sent messages to, and retweeted messages from, those who shared their liberal (blue) or conservative (red) ideology (Brady et al., 2017). The good news is that we can build a real-truth world by embracing a scientific mindset. With a mix of curiosity, skepticism, and humility, we can adopt the spirit of critical thinking: To accept everything is to be gullible; to deny everything is to be a cynic. “We have … become sloppier than ever: Tweet first, research later. Post first, rescind later. Guess first, confirm later.” — Luvvie Ajayi, I’m Judging You: The Do-Better Manual, 2016 To experience my [DM’s] recap of some important, scientific thinking strategies, view the 3.5-minute animated video: Thinking Critically in Our “Post-Truth” World (also at tinyurl.com/PostTruthMyers). The Scientific Method The foundation of all science is a scientific attitude that combines curiosity, skepticism, and humility. Psychologists arm their scientific attitude with the scientific method—a self-correcting process for evaluating ideas with observation and analysis. Psychological science welcomes hunches and plausible-sounding theories. And it puts them to the test. If a theory works—if the data support its predictions—so much the better for that theory. If the predictions fail, the theory gets revised or rejected. When researchers submit their work to a scientific journal, peer reviewers—other scientists who are experts in that field—provide anonymous evaluations of a study’s theory, originality, and accuracy. With this feedback in hand, the journal editor decides whether the research deserves publication. Constructing Theories LOQ 1-3 How do theories advance psychological science? In everyday conversation, we often use theory to mean “mere hunch.” Someone might, for example, discount evolution as “only a theory”—as if it were mere speculation. In science, a theory explains behaviors or events by offering ideas that organize observations. By using deeper principles to organize isolated facts, a theory summarizes and simplifies. As we connect the observed dots, a coherent picture emerges. theory an explanation using an integrated set of principles that organizes observations and predicts behaviors or events. A theory of how sleep affects memory, for example, helps us organize countless sleep- related observations into a short list of principles. Imagine that we observe over and over that people with good sleep habits tend to answer questions correctly in class and do well at test time. We might therefore theorize that sleep improves memory. So far so good: Our principle neatly summarizes a list of observations about the effects of a good night’s sleep. Yet no matter how reasonable a theory may sound—and it does seem reasonable to suggest that sleep boosts memory—we must put it to the test. A good theory produces testable predictions, called hypotheses. Such predictions specify what results would support the theory and what results would disconfirm it. To test our theory about sleep effects on memory, we might hypothesize that when sleep deprived, people will remember less from the day before. To test that hypothesis, we might assess how well people remember course materials they studied either before a good night’s sleep or before a shortened night’s sleep (FIGURE 1.2). The results will either support our theory or lead us to revise or reject it. hypothesis a testable prediction, often implied by a theory. FIGURE 1.2 The scientific method A self-correcting process for asking questions and observing nature’s answers. Our theories can bias our observations. Having theorized that better memory springs from more sleep, we may see what we expect: We may perceive sleepy people’s comments as less accurate. The urge to see what we expect is strong, both inside and outside the laboratory, as when people’s views of climate change influence their interpretation of local weather events. As a check on their own biases, psychologists report their research with precise, measurable operational definitions of research procedures and concepts. Sleep deprived, for example, may be defined as “at least 2 hours less” than the person’s natural sleep. (Likewise, a study of “aggression” may observe how many pins you stab into a doll that represents a lab partner, or a study of “helping” may record dollars donated.) Using these carefully worded statements, others can replicate (repeat) the original observations with different participants, materials, and circumstances. If they get similar results, confidence in the finding’s reliability grows. The first study of hindsight bias, for example, aroused psychologists’ curiosity. Now, after many successful replications with differing people and questions, we feel sure of the phenomenon’s power. Replication is confirmation. operational definition a carefully worded statement of the exact procedures (operations) used in a research study. For example, human intelligence may be operationally defined as what an intelligence test measures. (Also known as operationalization.) replication repeating the essence of a research study, usually with different participants in different situations, to see whether the basic finding can be reproduced. Replication is an essential part of good science. Psychology experienced a “replication crisis” when recent multi-lab efforts to replicate as many as 100 studies produced mixed results—ranging from 36 percent to 85 percent of studies replicating (Camerer et al., 2018a; Klein et al., 2014, 2018; Open Science Collaboration, 2015). (None of these nonreproducible findings appear in this text.) Replication failures often result when samples are small, so psychologists increasingly study large samples of people (Camerer et al., 2018b; Sassenberg & Ditrich, 2019; Stanley et al., 2018). Bigger sample = a bigger chance of replication. Today’s psychological research is benefitting from more replications, more rigorous research methods, and more sharing of research data (Dougherty et al., 2018; Smaldino & McElreath, 2016; Zwaan et al., 2018). More and more psychologists use preregistration to publicly communicate their planned study design, hypotheses, data collection, and analyses (Nosek et al., 2018). (This openness and transparency also prevents later modifications, such as changing the hypotheses to fit the data.) There is still a place for exploratory research: Investigators gather data and seek patterns that inspire theories, which can then be tested with confirmatory research (with preregistered hypotheses and preplanned analyses). preregistration publicly communicating planned study design, hypotheses, data collection, and analyses. Explorations, replications, preregistrations, and the open sharing of raw data are enabling “Psychology’s Renaissance” of improved scientific practices (Motyl et al., 2017; Nelson et al., 2018). “Failure to replicate is not a bug; it is a feature. It is what leads us along the path—the wonderfully twisty path— of scientific discovery.” — Lisa Feldman Barrett, “Psychology Is Not in Crisis,” 2015 Psychological and medical science also harness the power of meta-analysis. Meta- analysis is a procedure for statistically synthesizing a body of scientific evidence. By combining the results of many studies, researchers avoid the problem of small samples and arrive at a bottom-line result. meta-analysis a statistical procedure for analyzing the results of multiple studies to reach an overall conclusion. In the end, our theory will be useful if it (1) organizes observations and (2) implies predictions that anyone can use to check the theory or to derive practical applications. (Does people’s sleep predict their retention?) Eventually, our research may (3) stimulate further research that leads to a revised theory that better organizes and predicts. As we will see next, we can test our hypotheses and refine our theories using descriptive methods (which describe behaviors, often through case studies, surveys, or naturalistic observations), correlational methods (which associate different factors), and experimental methods (which manipulate factors to discover their effects). To think critically about popular psychology claims, we need to understand these methods and know what conclusions they allow.  RETRIEVAL PRACTICE RP-2 What does a good theory do? RP-3 Why is replication important? ANSWERS IN APPENDIX E Description LOQ 1-4 How do psychologists use case studies, naturalistic observations, and surveys to observe and describe behavior, and why is random sampling important? The starting point of any science is description. In everyday life, we all observe and describe people, often drawing conclusions about why they think, feel, and act as they do. Psychologists do much the same, though more objectively and systematically, through case studies (in-depth analyses of individuals or groups). naturalistic observations (recording the natural behavior of many individuals). surveys and interviews (asking people questions). THE CASE STUDY Among the oldest research methods, the case study examines one individual or group in depth in the hope of revealing things true of us all. Some examples: Brain damage. Much of our early knowledge about the brain came from case studies of individuals who suffered particular impairments after damage to a certain brain region. Children’s minds. Jean Piaget taught us about children’s thinking after carefully observing and questioning only a few children. Animal intelligence. Studies of various animals, including a few chimpanzees, have revealed their capacity for understanding and language. case study a descriptive technique in which one individual or group is studied in depth in the hope of revealing universal principles. Intensive case studies are sometimes very revealing, and they often suggest directions for further study. But atypical individual cases may mislead us. Both in our everyday lives and in science, unrepresentative information can lead to mistaken judgments and false conclusions. Indeed, anytime a researcher mentions a finding (Smokers die younger: 95 percent of men over 85 are nonsmokers) someone is sure to offer a contradicto