Week 1, 2, 3 Exam Notes PDF

Week 1/2/3 Week 1: Intro Week 2: Qualitative & Mixed-Methods Week 3: Research with Special Populations Week 1 describe what is meant by ‘science’ explain the major steps in the research process Understand the distinction between describing events...

Week 1/2/3 Week 1: Intro Week 2: Qualitative & Mixed-Methods Week 3: Research with Special Populations Week 1 describe what is meant by ‘science’ explain the major steps in the research process Understand the distinction between describing events & explaining them Recognise difficulties associated with scientific research (e.g., biases) Science Empiricism: we gain knowledge through experience & observation theories must be tested by observing the real world Logical & empirical critical appraisal  9 Step research process 1. Finding a research question 2. From theory to hypothesis 3. Defining & operationalising variables 4. Identifying participants 5. Select research strategy (types of research) 6. Select research design (between/within subjects etc) 7. Collect/analyse data 8. Test hypotheses 9. Evaluate theory Step 2 Deducing specific hypotheses from general theory  Hypotheses must be… Logical Testable: Refutable Positive/directional /Falsifiable: is consistent with the variables are a relationship expectations from measurable it can be false exists between the variables previous research E.g. as x increases, y decreases 5. Select a Research theory/strategy What research questions are being asked? What is being hypothesized? Correlational Method Experimental Method Describing events (what is happening?) Explaining events (why is it happening?) Describing relationships between Attempting to infer causality variables E.g E.g. Is there a relationship between X & Y ? does a change in X cause a change in Y ? Prediction: does X predict Y ?  Experimental Method Independent variable (IV): ‘manipulated’ Dependent variable (DV): ‘measured’ The influence of the IV on DV Experimental condition: receives IV ‘treatment’; Levels of IV Control condition: does not receive IV ‘treatment’ Extraneous variables: all other variables in the study Confounding variables: Extraneous variables that may also influence the DV  Week 2 Qualitative & Mixed Methods Psychology as science Psychology follows the hypothetico-deductive model of research (scientific method). Aimed at discovering the laws/theory that governed the relationships between cause and effect. Empirical testing of theories (deductive logic) by quantitative methods theory incorrect —-> rejected theory correct —-> accepted as truth.  Cultural identity sense of belonging and connection to a particular cultural group or community Quantitative Qualitative a survey with closed-ended questions to in depth interviews or focus groups measure aspects of cultural identity allow participants to share their personal E.g. stories, experiences, and perspectives language proficiency related to their cultural identity. engagement with traditional practices self-identification may NOT capture cultural identity effectively  Critiquing the scientific method The scientific method is often superior allows us to make ‘objective’ observations scientific method problems: ecological validity replication crises ethical issues Parker’s Methodological Horrors Indexicality: Inconcludability: Reflexivity: Explanations are always An account is always the way we characterise a tied to particular incomplete; it can always phenomenon situations and will be supplemented and —-> change the way it operates for change with time and will evolve as it is added us, context. to. —-> change our perception of the Problems of Problems of phenomenon, Reliability theory building ----> change our characterisation. validity and Definitiveness generalisability Problems of instability of social deductive closure. and psychological ‘reality’ obstacles to objectivity  Fighting the horrors with Qualitative research Indexicality: Inconcludability: Reflexivity: Qualitative researchers Qualitative research aims Qualitative methods regard admit their work is never to tell a plausible story, subjectivity as a perfectly replicable rather than a complete resource/opportunity one. rather than a problem. include an account of the changes over time in their We welcome change and We must acknowledge our report. are open for others to perspective/biases supplement an account as regarding the topic and We aim to describe a results are always how that may influence the specific context, rather provisional. interpretation of the than formulating general findings rules (idiographic).  Theory development The scientific method Quantitative methods Qualitative methods leaves little space for contribute to new theory development theory development. emphasis is on testing existing no a priori hypotheses theories in attempt to replicate findings. particularly in grounded theory approaches when evidence fails to confirm a theory attribute failure to the researcher Does not attribute failure to the inadequacy of the theory.  psychological research achieved through quantitative research 1. Examining how individuals feel, think, and behave. 2. Discovering what influences how individuals feel, think, and behave. 3. Determining the consequences of how individuals feel, think, and behave. achieved through qualitative research 4. Exploring individuals’ perspectives/experiences and the meanings they attach to different phenomena. 5. Examining how ideas, events, and phenomena are represented in language and made sense of. Types of qualitative data analysis case study grounded theory content analysis participant observation Ethnography Phenomenology field study focus group research  The role of the researcher Reflexivity Statement: researcher states their standpoint (personal epistemology) their beliefs, perspective, interpretation etc so readers know where they coming from) functional epistemology how they presented as ‘true’ a representation of the phenomenon Research is a non-linear process generates some ideas looks for evidence to dis/prove their theory modifies their existing accounts & generates new accounts no pre-ordinate assumptions theories/assumptions/hypotheses emerge as the project progresses.  4 pillars of research “POEM” (P)urpose – why research is conducted? (O)ntology – what is the nature of reality and what can be known about it? (E)pistemology – what is the relationship between the knower (researcher) and what can be known? i.e., what can we know about the world and how do/can we know this? (M)ethodology – how research can be practically carried out and the epistemology/ontology investigated? Research paradigms includes your background knowledge which tells others what you think exists how you understand it how you believe it should be studied/investigated. Paradigms are systems of interrelated practice  Paradigm Positivist / Quantitative research Interpretive Constructionist common ideas with each ‘anti-positivist’ approach The ‘anti-positivist’ paradigm developed into several different paradigms, each with a different purpose/ontology/epistemology/methodology e.g., interpretivism, constructionism, critical. Too much information is ‘lost’ during quantification. All observation is influenced by background knowledge and opinion. Research is affected by the researcher’s values and purpose  Types of interview schedule 1. Structured: Same set of standardised questions in same order Used in large sample surveys where participants unable to complete questionnaire on own e.g., young children 2. Semi-structured: can be flexible in questions and respond in natural ways 3. Unstructured: No set format — when little is known about the phenomenon. E.g.‘I would like you to tell me about yourself — just tell me as much as possible Modes of analysis  Coding Axial / thematic Focused coding / category development Open coding  The “divide” QUANTITATIVE QUALITATIVE - Test hypothesis that the researcher Capture and discover meaning once the begins with researcher becomes immersed in the data - Concepts are in the form of distinct variables - Constructs are in the form of themes, motifs, generalisations, taxonomies - Measures are systematically created before data collection and are - Measures are created in an ad hoc standardised manner and are often specific to the individual setting or researcher - Data are in the form of numbers from - Data are in the form of words from precise measurements documents, observations, transcripts - Theory is largely causal and deductive - Theory can be causal or noncausal and is often inductive - Procedures are standard, and replication is assumed - Research procedures are particular, and replication is very rare - Analysis proceeds by using statistics, - Analysis proceeds by extracting themes tables or charts and discussing how what or generalisations from evidence and they show relates to hypotheses organising data to present a coherent, consistent picture  Mixed-methods approaches qual-QUANT: Qualitative study first but secondary to the study’s primary goals e.g., exploratory qualitative study findings are used as a basis for major quantitative study (like developing a model tested quantitatively via a survey). quant-QUAL: Quantitative study first but secondary to the study’s primary goals e.g., quantitative screen study used to identify targeted participants for large-scale qualitative study. QUANT-qual: Primary quantitative study first with secondary follow-up qualitative study e.g., develop a model and test it quantitatively and the carry out a qualitative phase to add meaning and richness to the data. QUAL-quant: Primary qualitative study first with secondary follow-up quantitative study e.g., testing whether qualitative findings transfer to other populations/groups  Week 3 special populations Vulnerable to coercion Diminished autonomy Capacity to consent is questionable Can be challenging to recruit and collect data Examples Children and young people Specific ethnic, cultural or minority groups (e.g., ATSI, CALD) Prisoners People with a cognitive impairment, intellectual disability or a mental illness  Willowbrook Hepatitis Experiments 1950s - Dr. Sol Krugman School for children with an intellectual disability. Deliberately infected children with hepatitis for a study to develop a vaccine. Parental consent was eventually sought, but the ethics were questionable. Issues with Consent form Does NOT mention risk involved Lots of jargon, difficult for a lay person to understand Stuttering experiment 1930s Dr. Johnson and Dr Tudor Cause and cure for stuttering 22 orphaned children with/without a stutter Speech therapy positive reinforcement —- “its ok if you stutter, you tried your best” Punishment — “don’t speak unless you say it fluently without stuttering” Issues Not debriefed Potential harm — did not reverse the harm of children in the punishment condition  Informed Consent children under 16 do not give legal consent —> rather a parent or guardian gives consent From age 18 must give informed consent. Ages 16-17 – can be considered a ‘mature young person’ under certain circumstance In school contexts ― Opt out consent ― Standing consent Confidentiality Discuss upfront Explain (in age-appropriate language) Have plans for how breaching confidentiality will be handled. Reporting is required when a researcher “suspects that a child is at risk of significant harm” ― Physical abuse ― Sexual abuse ― Physical abuse ― Emotional/Psychological abuse ― Neglect ― Exposure to domestic violence Clinical populations Dan Markingson 2004 – study of antipsychotics First onset psychosis Choice of involuntary admission or following recommendations of his treatment team. Reported worsening symptoms, remained in study then died by suicide Ethical concerns: Capacity to consent Conflict of interest Adverse affects psychosis —> unable to give the researcher was not monitored proper consent Dan’s psychiatrist led him to commit suicide  Practical considerations A clinical sample may not be necessary can use Clinical analogue samples (meet a several criteria but not diagnosed) Methods for studying clinical populations Direct vs. Indirect (asking friends, family about a person with condition) Identifiable vs anonymous Methods Interviews Focus groups Questionnaires Observation Manipulation vs. no manipulation Self-report vs. other-report interview vs. observational Clinical trials  Clinical trial comparison conditions Placebo-control and waitlist control Allows comparison to active ingredient in treatments Concern about withholding effective treatment Allows smaller sample sizes – cumulative risk reduced Active control Is the experimental treatment better / more tolerable than other treatments Controls for non-specific elements (e.g., clinical contact) Washout studies Gradually reduce existing medication to study when drug/intervention-free Differentiate symptoms related to a medication and/or withdrawal from disorder Must minimise risks and ensure rapid response to symptoms if necessary