HPHY 212 Week 2 Lecture Notes
HPHY 212 Week 2 Lecture Notes HPHY 212
Popular in Evidence, Inference and Biostatistics
verified elite notetaker
Popular in Human Development
This 2 page Class Notes was uploaded by Scott Morrison on Thursday April 9, 2015. The Class Notes belongs to HPHY 212 at University of Oregon taught by Dr. Andrew Karduna in Spring2015. Since its upload, it has received 172 views. For similar materials see Evidence, Inference and Biostatistics in Human Development at University of Oregon.
Reviews for HPHY 212 Week 2 Lecture Notes
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: 04/09/15
HPHY 212 Lecture Notes Week 2 The Scienti c Method and the Vital Parts of Scienti c Experiments Control Groups vs Experimental Groups Control groups are groups of subjects in an experiment that do not receive any signi cant treatment It is important to have a control group to compare to the experimental group in order to see the relative change Placebo Often the control group receives a placebo This is necessary due to a phenomenon called the placebo effect This occurs when a person has been made to believe that they are receiving a bene cial treatment of some kind when in actuality they were given false treatment such as a sugar pill instead of antibiotics This ensures that both experimental and control groups have accounted for the placebo effect and the data only measures the results of giving actual treatment leaving the placebo effect out of the equation Peer Review A process by which researchers get their studies reviewed by other experts in the eld and subsequently published in scienti c journals Advantages only highquality articles get published holds scientists to a higher standard authenticates articles Disadvantages takes a long time not all reviewers are reputable or ethical The researcher initiates the peer review process in the report results step of the scienti c method The Main Components of Peer Review authors write article send it to journal editor editors edit article send out to other scientists for peer review reviewers edit article send it back to editor with feedback reviewers either reject revise or accept publishers when reviewers editor and author all come to a consensus the publishers can publish the article in a journal How does an author decide which journal will receive their article look for journals relevant to the eld look for reputable journals within that eld looks good on a resume important to note that one cannot send an article to two different journals at the same time because ultimately the journal will end up with the rights to the article it39s not like applying for college However if a journal rejects an article the article can be sent to a different journal instead Who pays for publishing the authors pay to have their articles published Libraries pay publishers to publish articles What could go wrong in the peerreview process biased reviewers time delay controversial articles may not be successful occasionally people try to review their own papers assumes reviewers are ethical and interested in preserving the scienti c method not always true the publishers receive most of the money so there is a lot of incentive for publishers to publish whatever they can get their hands on
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'