Unit 0 Psych: 9/29

what is psychology?

the scientific study of behavior and mental processes

nature vs. nurture

ex: were you BORN athletic or TAUGHT to be athletic?

person vs. situation

does someone act a certain way because of who they are? or is it the situation?

• ex: that person may have cut you off because they were speeding to go to the ER

mind vs. body

ex: stomach needs food(body), mind makes choice to eat chicken

stability vs change

are you going to be the same person in 20 years?

diversity vs university

does everyone need 7 hours of sleep?

what does the APA do?

creates ethical guidelines for research

school of thought: biological/physiological

• how genetics, brain structures, neurotransmitters, hormones, and nervous system influence behavior + mental processes

KEYWORDS: genetics, brain, neurotransmitters, hormones, tumors/strokes, nervous/endocrine system

ex: psychiatrists prescribes SSRI to patient w depression, targeting low serotonin levels in brain to improve mood regulation

school of thought: humanistic

• emphasizes free will, conscious choice, innate drive toward growth + self-actualization (becoming the best version of yourself)

• people are basically good and shaped by their own self-concept (the internal picture you hold of yourself)

• RING finger. think marriage. u cant lift ring finger w/o the help of other fingers

KEYWORDS: free will, self-actualization, unconditional positive regard, self-concept, Maslow’s hierarchy, Rogers, personal growth

ex: counselor uses person-centered therapy, offering genuine empathy and unconditional positive regard so a client can close the gap between their real and ideal self

school of thought: behavioral

• focuses only on observable, measurable behavior and how it’s learned from the environment through conditioning

• doesn’t care about inner/mental stuff b/c it can be subjective and not definite

• think MIDDLE finger: we don’t know it’s bad until we see it used as insult

school of thought: cognitive

• mental processes

• keywords: thinking, memory, encoding, retrieval, perception, schemas, problem solving, information processing, attentnion

• ex: someone may withdraw socially if they believe no one likes them

school of thought: evolutionary

• explains behavior + mental processes as inherited adaptations that increased ancestors’ chance of survival + reproduction

• keywords: natural selection, adapatation, survival, reproduction, fitness, inherited traits, Darwin, ancestral environment

• people prefer sweet/fatty foods because calorie-dense food was scarce for ancestors + its taste aided survival

school of thought: psychodynamic

• behavior driven by internal conflicts, childhood experiences

• keywords: unconscious, ego/superego, defense mechanisms, repression, childhood experiences, dream analysis, free association, Freud

school of thought: social-cultural

• examines how behavior and thinking vary across different cultures, social environments, and group dynamics

• keywords: culture, norms, roles, conformity, obedience, groups, individualism vs. collectivism, socialization, situational influence

• ex: one culture might view grades as the definition of your worth, while another culture takes a more holistic view and values overall life experiences or effort

school of thought: biopsychosocial

• integrated approach saying that behavior is best explained by biological, psychological, and social-cultural influences working together, not by any one alone

• keywords: integrative, multiple levels of analysis, interaction, nature and nurture, diathesis-stress

• ex:

- person’s depression is linked to:

1) family history of the disorder (bio)

2) pessimistic explanatory style (psych)

3) a recent job loss with little social support (social)

what are 3 key elements of scientific attitude

1) curiosity: passion to understand

2) skepticism: shift reality from fantasy (“how do you know that?”)

3) humility: changing beliefs when wrong

hindsight bias

“i knew it all along” / “i knew i should’ve/shouldn’t have done that”

overconfidence

thinking we know more than we actually do/ overestimating our skills

ex from class w the word sort: '‘it will only take me 2 mins”

confirmation bias

the tendency to filter and seek information that matches your existing beliefs

perceiving order in random events

• we try to find patterns in random data bc our minds love predictability

• ex: the coin flip from class

• ex: gambler’s fallacy

importance of peer reviews

review research study to see if deserves publication. catches errors + bias in the study (theory, originality, accuracy)

theory

explanation (not a guess) based on accumulated mass of data + observations

ex: it appears that students who avoid computer games during class perform better on exams

falsifiability

• can it be proven false?

• sign of scientific strength

scientific method

generate question → formulate theory → develop hypothesis → test hypothesis → replicate/revise

non experimental methods

• case study

• naturalistic observation

• correlational research

correlational research

• identify relationship between 2 factors

• CORRELATION IS NOT CAUSATION

• be careful about third variable problem + directionality problem

directionality problem

• 2 variables are linked, but it is impossible to tell which variable causes changes in the other

• A study finds that people who exercise are happier than people who do not. -Does exercising boost your mood (exercise → happiness)? OR does being happy give you the energy to work out (happiness → exercise)?

third variable problem

• a confounding variable causes both of the studied variables to change, making them look like they cause each other when they do not.

• ex: Ice cream sales and drowning rates rise and fall together. Ice cream does not cause drowning, and drowning does not cause ice cream sales. A third variable—hot summer weather—causes both.

correlation coefficient (r)

• close to 0 = weak

• close to 1 = strong

• negative does NOT mean weak → but that it’s an inverse relationship

illusory correlation

• perceiving a relationship where one doesn’t exist

-we overemphasize outcomes (that are surprising + emotional) and believe there is a relationship

-if i wash my car, it’ll rain. when i change my answer, i get it wrong

-brought on by confirmation bias (we pick/choose what results to ignore)

spurious correlation

• statistical relationship exists, but it is possibly coincidental or related to third variable

• ex: ice cream sales and sunburn (third variable is hot weather)

likert scales are qualitative or quantitative

qualitative

sampling bias

if you only ask certain ppl (like asking seniors at NH about their satisfaction), you can’t generalize. samples should be random and representative of popluation

convenience sampling

• choosing participants bc they’re easy to reach

• this doesn’t give everyone in target population an equal chance of being chose

• resulting data doesn’t represent wider population, but results also shouldn’t be dismissed

social desirability bias

people answer in a way they think will please the researcher

leading questions lead to ___ answers

flawed

self-report bias

when ppl don’t accurately report or remember their behaviors

case study

• detailed description of ONE OR A FEW INDIVIDUALS!

• interviews, observations, tests, etc.

• pro: in-depth view of one person

• cons: hard to generalize from one person

naturalistic observation

pro: behavior more likely to be genuine

cons:

• can’t manipulate environment or “freeze” situation to study event in depth

• Hawthorne effect: “when you know you’re being watched, you might change your behaviors”

experimental

only research method that establishes CAUSATION

manipulate variables and then measure the effect of manipulation

ethics

random assignment

reduces confounding variables (can do this by coin flip!)

inert means..

inactive

operational definitions

create clear definition so experiment can be easily replicated

IRBs (Institutional/Internal Review Boards) how are they different from APA

the researches send their study protocols for approval to the local irb, not the apa

more data =

less skewed + will even out

skewed distribution: normal or not normal

not normal

how to tell if skew is positive or negative

look where the tail is

what skew is this + what happens to mean

negative, mean is lower bc lowest data point drags everything to left

what skew is this + what happens to mean

positive, mean is higher bc highest data point drags everything to right

biomodal distribution

has TWO modes

why is range not rlly useful

• doesn’t show what’s inside

• outliers can affect it a lot

high/low standard dev. + how it looks on graph

high standard dev = more spread (more variability)

low standard dev = clustered

stats to remember w standard dev

• 68% fall within 1 standard dev from mean

• 95% fall within 2 standard dev from mean

• 99% fall within 3 standard dev from mean

p-value (probability value)

the LIKELIHOOD that the difference in the dependent variable for experimental + control groups is DUE TO CHANCE

effect size

how much of a difference we see between control and experimental groups

• 0.2 is small

• 0.5 is medium

• 0.8 is large

within vs between group variation

within: variations of weight loss in just keto diet

between: variations of weight loss between general keto diet and no keto diet

inferential statistics

• can generalize if:

• sample is representative

• less variation in data the better

• more examplesthe better

• no cohort effects

statisically significant

meaning that scores were NOT likely due to chance