research methods final

types of psych research questions

description, explanation, prediction, application

what motivates conspiracy theorists

epistemic motives - lack of certainty

existential motives - lack of control

social motives - belonging to a group

science

based on systemic empiricism, examines empirical questions, results must be shared

systematic empiricism

learning thru systemic observation

empirical research questions

testable, can be supported/opposed with data and falsified

pseudoscience

activities/beliefs that claim to be scientific but dont follow scientific method - not falsifiable

research methods

qualitative, cross-sectional surveys, experiments, longitudinal studies, multi method designs

qualitative methods (research)

produce qualitative data, open-ended surveys and interviews

cross-sectional surveys

measure and associate constructs

experiments

manipulate 1 construct to measure another

longitudinal studies

measures constructs over time to find change

multi method designs

combo of research designs

best research design for ur question

description - qualitative

explanation - cross-sectional, experiments

prediction - longitudinal

application - multimethod

generating research ideas

basic/applied

think groundbreaking

basic research

solves theoretical issues to increase general understanding

basic research advancements

new theoretical models that explain phenomenon, challenging key ideas, new methods to explore questions

applied research

applying theory to solve practical problems

applied research advancements

interventions - new treatment helps problem

better decision making - new choice helps problem

persuasion - convincing ppl that something is a problem

policy implementation - government/other organization helps problem

research process

generate ideas → literature review → hone ideas 

need to belong theory

humans have fundamental need for social connections; we need frequent, pleasant interactions and a certain amnt of stable relationships

hypothesis

specific testable prediction about the association between variables

must be falsifiable, logical, and positive

implication

broader meanings and consequences of findings

literature review

summary of most relevant work published on ur topic, NOT an exhaustive list

helps u build off existing research and inform ur hypothesis and design

good literature review articles

from expert sources, for a scientific audience, primary sources (include full mythology and results), peer reviewed

secondary sources

sumarize primary info, accessible to non-experts but less preferred by researchers

impact factor

how many times a journal’s papers are cited on average, < 1 indicates its a bad journal

predatory journals

look peer reviewed but aren’t, pay to be published

parts of a good research question

important, testable, specific, novel but doesn’t need to be brand new, builds off existing literature

interesting and feasible!

principles of ethical research

respect for persons, concern for welfare, justice

respect for persons (ethics)

autonomy, informed consent, no giant incentives

privacy, anonymity, confidentiality

concern for welfare (ethics)

benefits outweigh risks, important studies only

justice (ethics)

fair compensation, equal risk/benefit across groups, not lying

tuskegee study

poor black men weren’t treated for syphillis, NO justice principle, informed consent, huge risks

ethics review process

submit application → risk evaluation → approve/request changes

risk levels

minimal risk = risk no greater than everyday life, delegated review

more than minimal risk = full review (study rationale, informed consent, compensation, debriefing, deception)

how to implement deception in a study

low-risk, essential to study, undecieved in debrief w an option to withdraw consent

information age concerns

concern data sharing and privacy

open data sharing

uploading info so others can verify ur results, but risks for participants (de-identification is hard) and lowers public trust

phenomenon

established finding from repeated observation

e.g over generations species adapt

constructs

variables that aren’t directly observable

theory

coherent explanation of why phenomena happen, working truths

parts of a good theory

useful for organization and need to generate testable predictions, answering them generates new hypothesis

formality (theories)

specificness

e.g. losses are more painful than gains - informal

scope (theories)

broadness, how many phenomena the theory explains

theoretical approach (theories)

does ur theory explain why or how something works?

functional theories

the why, explains something’s purpose

mechanistic theories

the how, explains the mechanism of function

direct replication

repeating study the same way, increases hypothesis confidence

conceptual replication

using different methods to test the same question, increases theory confidence

attachment theory

ur biologically drawn to be attached to others when ur stressed, especially ur attachment figure

stems from helplessness in babies and generalizes to romantic relationships in adulthood, helpful for pair bonding and thus for survival

perspectives

broad approach to explaining phenomena (e.g. developmental, biological)

model

specific explanation for 1 phenomena

e.g. model of clinginess - if u dont get support from ur attachment figure it activates ur attachment system even more, vicious cycle :(

shapes metaphor

each research study u conduct is a point, ur theory is the lines u draw between those points

ways of knowing

intuition, authority, rationalism (logic), empiricism, the scientific method

scientific method

systemically collecting and evaluating evidence to test ideas

3 goals of science

to describe, predict, and explain!

folk psychology

usually wrong intuitive beliefs about thoughts/behaviour, stem from heuristics and confirmation bias

heuristics

mental shortcuts from problem solving

e.g. belief widely shared and intuitive, we think its true

confirmation bias

focus on cases that confirm our beliefs

scientific attitude

skepticism, tolerance for uncertainty

skepticism

considering alternatives and looking for evidence

which type of psychologists do research

experimental psychologists - phDs, usually at unis

clinical psychologists - treat psychological disorders w empirical treatments

empirically supported treatments

studied scientifically, result in improvement (e.g. CBT)

model of scientific research

research question → empirical study → data analysis → conclusions → research literature → research question

review articles

summarize previous research, published in professional journals

either theoretical (present new theories)

or meta-analysis (statistical summary)

double-blind peer review

article gets sent to 2-3 experts to review and give recommendations, editor decides its fate. experts/researchers dk each others identity

scholarly books

written by researchers for other researchers, monograph or edited volumes

monograph (scholarly book)

few authors presenting a topic

edited volumes (scholarly books)

many authors write separate chapters on a topic

hypothetic-deductive method

cycle, testing a hypothesis derived from a theory helps refine the theory and thus generate new hypothesis

drive theory

observation results in dominant response

what does it mean for a hypothesis to be positive

the assumption is that the relationship exists and you’re trying to find evidence that it does

operational definition

defining variables in terms of how they’re measured

simple random sampling

every member of the population has an equal chance of being selected

experimental approach

the independent variable’s effect on the dependent variable is measured, extraneous variables are controlled

confounds

extraneous variables that change with the variables under investigation, provide alternate explanations

internal validity

can infer causal relationship, high in lab studies

external validity

can generalize to other environments, high in field studies

empirical research reports

describe new empirical studies done by authors, published in professional journals

field experiments

extraneous variables controlled, high in internal and external validity

inferential statistics

allow researchers to generalize results by determining if effects are statistically significant (less than 5% chance of error)

type 1 error

false positive, null rejected but was true

type 2 error

missed opportunity, null retained but was false

privacy (ethics)

right to decide what info is shared

confidentiality (ethics)

nondisclosure of personal info

anonymity (ethics)

personal info just not collected

nuremberg code

early ethics code post ww2, set human research standards

declaration of helsinki

ethics code, said human research should be based on a written protocol and independently reviewed

belmont report

ethics code, recognizes respect for persons, justice, and beneficence

beneficence

importance of maximizing benefits and minimizing harm

APA ethics code

150 ethical standards for psychologists and students

talks abt deception, debriefing, ways to conduct ethical research

standard 8 (APA ethics code)

informed consent, general research standards

federal policy for the protection of human rights

laws for government research, from the Belmont report

established IRBs and risk levels

ethics board / IRB (institutional review board)

committee with varied backgrounds that checks research for ethical issues

exempt research (risk level)

lowest risk, exempt from regular review (e.g. educational surveys)

expedited research (risk level)

minimal risk the same as everyday life, review by 1 IRB member

greater than minimal risk research

full review by IRB

bem’s “writing the empirical journal article”

says u should highlight/discard parts of ur research (bad approach)

bem’s search for psi

tried proving esp was real, big controversy bcs top journal wouldn’t publish failed replications. led to nosek (2015) finding most psych findings are irreplaceable and caused open science movement

centre for open science

tries to support open science movement by mitigating QRPs, preregistration, open data, null effects still published