PSY2012 CH2 Outline
PSY2012 CH2 Outline PSY 2012
Popular in General Psychology
Popular in Psychlogy
This 4 page Class Notes was uploaded by Sally O'Donnell on Saturday January 16, 2016. The Class Notes belongs to PSY 2012 at University of Florida taught by Hayley Kamin in Spring 2016. Since its upload, it has received 22 views. For similar materials see General Psychology in Psychlogy at University of Florida.
Reviews for PSY2012 CH2 Outline
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 01/16/16
PSY2012: CHAPTER 2 RESEARCH METHODS OUTLINE I. The Beauty and Necessity of Good Research Design Two Modes of Thinking o Intuitive thinking—quick and reflexive, consists little mental effort Heuristic—a mental short-cut or rule of thumb o Analytical thinking—slow and reflective, requires mental effort Preferred method of thinking in scientific method II. The Scientific Method: Toolbox of Skills See Table 2.1 p48 for research designs Naturalistic observation—watching participant’s behavior in real-world settings without trying to manipulate actions o Advantages High in external activity—extent to which findings applicable to real-world settings o Disadvantages Low in internal validity—extent to which we can draw cause and effect inferences Doesn’t allow us to infer causation Case Studies o Advantages Provides existence proofs—demonstrations that a psychological phenomenon can occur Allows us to study rare phenomena Offers insights for later systematic testing o Disadvantages Typically anecdotal Don’t allow us to infer causation Self-Report Measures and Surveys—People are asked about themselves directly o Example: questionnaires, surveys o Advantages Easy to administer o Disadvantages Inaccurate—recall error, lack of self-awareness Unreliable—desirability bias, halo effect (people try to peg themselves as desirable/with better intentions) Response sets—tendencies to distort answers to questions in a socially desirable direction Correlational Designs—relation between two variables is examined o Correlations can be positive, negative, or zero o Correlation coefficients measure the extent to which 2 variables are related o Illusory correlation—perception of a statistical association between 2 variables where none exists o Advantages Allows us to generate inferences about the future o Disadvantages Correlation is not causation Experimental Designs o Random assignment of participation between groups Experimental group Control group o Manipulation of an independent variable Independent variable—variable that’s manipulated Dependent variable—variable that’s measured as a result o Operational definition—working definition of what they’re measuring o Confounding variable—variable that differs from the independent and dependent variables o Advantages Permit cause-and-effect inferences High internal validity o Disadvantages Sometimes low in external validity Placebo and nocebo effect Placebo effect—improvement caused by expectation of improvement Nocebo effect—harm caused by expectation of harm Solution o Blind experiment (patient does not know which treatment is being received) Experimenter expectancy effect—researchers’ hypotheses lead them to unintentionally bias a study’s outcome Solution: double blind experiment (administrator and patient do not know which treatment is being received) Demand Characteristics—cues that allow participants to guess researcher’s hypothesis Hawthorne effect—people behave differently when they are being watched Solution o Researcher may disguise the true purpose of the study with a cover story What Makes a Good Study? Things to keep in mind: o Random sampling—where everyone in the population has an equal chance of being selected—is recommended for optimal generalization o Reliability—consistency of measurement Test-retest reliability—consistency in time Interrater reliability—extent to which different people who conduct an interview agree on characteristics that they’re measuring o Validity—are the variables measuring what we want to measure? III. Ethical Issues in Research Design Tuskegee: A Shameful Moral Tale o African American men were not told that they had syphilis or that an effective treatment for syphilis was available o At the end of the study many died, only after infecting their wives with syphilis o Example of unethical study Ethical Guidelines for Human Research o Institutional review board (IRB) to review research in order to protect participants against abuse o Informed consent—researchers must inform subjects what they’re getting into before asking them to participate o Debriefing—researchers inform participants what study is about Learning experience for participants Ethical Issues in Animal Research o Animal testing usually relies on invasive procedures o Concerns regarding ethical treatment of animals—adequate housing and feeding o However, animal testing has yielded important information on the brain and behavior IV. Statistics: The Language of Psychological Research Descriptive Statistics—describe data o Central tendency—gives a sense of the “central” score or where the group tends to cluster Mean—affected by outliers median, and mode—not affected by outliers o Variability—gives a sense of how loosely/tightly bunched scores are Range—affected by outliers, more deceptive Standard deviation—depicts variability by taking all points into account, less deceptive Inferential Statistics—determines how much we can generalize findings from sample to the full population o Statistical significance (p is low, get rid of the Ho) Generally use 95% confidence test o Practical significance Real world significance, is the difference little/big enough to matter? Confidence interval How People Lie With Statistics o Using mean when the median or mode should have been used (outliers affect results) o “truncated line graph”—graph that does not start at the lowest possible score on the y-axis. Makes difference in bars look more significant than they are o “base rate fallacy” V. Evaluating Psychological Research Peer review Evaluating Psychology in the Media o Consider the source—some newspapers hire reporters without sufficient knowledge to write about psychology o Watch out for sharpening (exaggerations) and leveling (under exaggeration) o Watch out for pseudosymmetry—appearance of a scientific controversy where none exists
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'