Features of science and psychological reports

Features of science acronym

Theory construction

Hypothesis testing

Empirical Method

Paradigm & paradigm shifts

Replicability

Objectivity

Falsification

Theory construction

A theory is a general law or principle that is used to explain something.

Theory construction occurs by gathering evidence from direct experience or observations and this also called induction.

Hypothesis testing

These are good examples of a theories as it proposes a simple explanation that reflects reality and if a theory is sound, it would also be easy to make predictions on the basis of that theory. This is when the role of hypothesis testing comes in.

A key factor of theories is that they can be tested in a scientific way, and theories should suggest a number of hypotheses.

Paradigm & Paradigm shifts

A paradigm consists of the basic assumptions, ways of thinking, and methods of study that are commonly accepted by members of a discipline or group. Sciences such as biology, or physics have a number of principles at their core, for example biology have their evolutionary theory and physics have their standard model of the universe.

Psychology on the other hand have so many overlaps and disagreements. For example, the biological and social explanations are completely opposing and because of conflicts such as this, psychology is argued to NOT BE A SCIENCE! BECAUSE WE DON’T HAVE ANY PARADIGMS.

Paradigm shifts

A paradigm shift occurs when the old paradigm does not have enough sufficient evidence to be believed by the majority of people.  But more typically,  a new/better belief is put forward that reflects reality more so than the old paradigm. For example, Newtonian mechanics was the primary paradigm in physics until the 20th Century when Einstein’s theory of relativity was demonstrated to be a better approximation of the Physics of the universe.

Replicability

This refers to whether a particular method and finding can be repeated in the same way in order to compare results.

Objectivity

Researchers should remain totally value free when studying; they should try to remain totally unbiased in their investigations. I.e. Researchers are not influenced by personal feelings and experiences. Objectivity means that all sources of bias are minimized and that personal or subjective ideas are eliminated. The pursuit of science implies that the facts will speak for themselves, even if they turn out to be different from what the investigator hoped.

Research methods such as lab experiments are argued to be the most objective. There are also techniques such as single-blind and double-blind tests that can be used in order to increase objectivity by reducing the chances of bias.

Falsification

Falsification works by finding evidence that disproves theories. I think the easiest way to understand falsification is like a process of elimination, the more theories you test and disprove, the closer you will get to the answer. Theories that survive most attempts to falsify (disprove), tend to become the strongest theories, not because they are necessarily true, but because despite the best efforts of researchers, they have not been proven false.

Psychological reports order of parts

• Abstract

• Introduction

• Method (Design, Participants, Apparatus/Materials, Procedure)

• Results

• Discussion

• References

• Appendices

What is the purpose of a report?

Psychological reports allow Psychologists to show case their findings of important and ground breaking research. It is important for Psychologists to detail all of their ingredients used (from materials used, to results. Another reason why Psychologists publish research is so that other psychologists can replicate the study conducted.

The abstract

The abstract is a summary of the entire investigation you have conducted. It includes a few sentences for each of the sections outlined above. It’s not a long piece and they are written to either 150 words or a maximum of 200 words.

Introduction

The introduction section sets the scene for the reader. It is the section in your report that contains relevant background theory and studies which are written in a logical manner to put the aim and hypothesis of your investigation into context. This part of the report needs to convince the reader of the importance of your research. An introduction should follow the steps below:

• Start with general theory, briefly introducing the topic.

• Narrow down to specific and relevant theory and research. One or two or three studies are sufficient.

• There should be a logical progression of ideas which aids the flow of the report. This means the studies outlined should lead logically into your aims and hypotheses.

• Write a paragraph explaining what you plan to investigate and why. Use previously cited research to explain your expectations. Later these expectations are formally stated as the hypotheses.

• State the alternate hypothesis and null hypothesis

Method Section

The Method section is the King or Queen section of your whole report. It is the section that requires you to be thorough so that anyone who wishes to replicate your study can follow the step by step process in what you have done. The Method Section includes four key sections – known as D.A.P.P.
D – Design
A – Apparatus/Materials
P – Participants
P – Procedure

Results

In the results section, you would give a summarised account of the data collecting using descriptive statistics – mean, median, mode and statistical results

At no point in this section, would you include the raw scores – these would need to appear in the appendices section of your report.

Discussion

The discussion will include the following:

• Providing an explanation of your results.

• Linking back and comparing to studies mentioned in your introduction to your results. Are your results similar or different to previous research?

• Highlighting the weakness of your study and mentioning modifications to your study, if you were to conduct the study again.

• Providing an overall conclusion in the conduction of your study.

References

Author, A. A. (year). Title of work. Location: Publisher, Page numbers

The list of books you reference must be in alphabetical order, in terms of the author’s name. If you have many books of the same author name, indicate the first book published for that author.

Appendicies

Appendices should contain the following items:

• Consent Form– a copy of the one you give to participants.

• Standardised Instructions – a script like document which illustrates the experiences of all participants in each experimental condition.

• Ethics Sheet – this will appear in your consent sheet which will outline the ethical issues that will not be breached.

• Materials – these could be, for example, the word lists used in memory experiment, power point slides etc.

• Raw Data – these should be in the form of tables illustrating both condition results obtained for each participant.

• Statistical Analysis – any calculations conducted on data should appear here.

Peer review

Researchers get to read other people’s studies and keep in touch with new ways of thinking and scientific developments. Knowledge grows through the sharing of information.  Studies submitted for publication are subjected to critical appraisal, which helps to ensure poor quality research does not enter the public domain.

The main aims of a peer review are to:

• allocate research funding – in order to decide whether a proposed research project should be given funding or not, this could be through the government or research charities.

• validate the quality and relevance of research – in order to ensure that the results portrayed are accurate and that it hasn’t just been made up.

• to suggest amendments or improvements – these could be minor or major changes. In some cases, the research may be thrown out or deemed inappropriate for publication.

3 stages of peer review

STAGE 1: The system begins with the research paper being submitted to a journal for consideration for publication.

STAGE 2: The editor of the journal examines the topic and sends the paper to other psychologists who are experts in the field.

STAGE 3: Their critical appraisal of the work is returned with recommendations about suitability for publication.

Problems with peer review

• researcher bias - research from prestigious universities tend to be looked upon more favourably. For example, you may find yourself thinking that because the research was carried out by Cambridge University, it must be valid. On the flip side, research carried out in Portsmouth must be questioned more thoroughly because they are not as prestigious or valued as highly as Cambridge.

• Gender Bias – male researchers seem to be favoured over female researchers. This is because more research carried out by males are published over females.

• The ‘file-drawer’ problem – there is a bias towards publishing studies with positive results i.e. those supporting the hypothesis. Negative findings tend to be either rejected or are never submitted for publication. For every study showing positive findings, there could be a hundred with negative results stuffed in a university filing drawer – our understanding of a subject then becomes distorted because there may be lots of research disproving theories which we are only aware have been proved!

  Anonymity – Some peer reviewers use anonymity to criticize rival researchers and get away with it, very sneaky! In addition, researchers may be in direct competition for the same funding pot and could be another reason why researchers may use anonymity to sabotage others.

Ways to overcome Peer Review Biases

• Issues of bias can be overcome by using a double-blind peer review. This is when both the reviewer and the author are anonymous, and therefore no extra information is provided which could influence their judgement.​

• The use of experts to evaluate the quality of research ensures a high standard of rigour in order to further improve the validity of research that the public can use.

• Ensuring that peer reviewers receive appropriate training and are made aware of the biases so that they can ensure that they do not make the same mistakes.