r and a 2 exam one

causal claim

one manipulated and one measure, IV directly affects DV, causes, promotes, increases/decreases, advice given, experimental study

frequency claim

one measured, rate, degree, or percentage, descriptive study

association claim

two measured, correlational study, links, connects, may predict, associated with

external validity

the extent to which a study generalize to some larger population

statistical validity

how well the numbers support the claim, how strong the effect is and the precision of the estimate, study replicated

internal validity

in a relationship between one variable A and another B, the extent to which A rather than another variable is responsible for changes B

construct validity

how well the variables in a study are measured or manipulated, operational variables are a good approximation of the conceptual variables

accuaracy, consistency, scope, simplicity, fruitfulness

five features of strong scientific theories

non zero association, IV supposed cause come before the DV supposed effect, eliminating confounds

3 parts of establishing causality

positive association

both are moving in the same direction on a graph positive or negative

negative association

moving in opposite directions (inverse)

zero association

one variable is not related to another variable

confirmation bias

seeking out info that supports our existing beliefs

availability heuristic

judge the likelihood of an event based on how easily examples come to mind

representativeness heuristic

judgement based on how closely a person/ event matches our existing expectations or stereotypes

bias blind spot

tendency to recognize cognitive biases in other people while failing to see them in themselves

intuiton

your gut feeling base on past experiences, biased

systematic empiricism

a way of making observations/learning through the scientific method

confidence artists

people who use their position of authority to confidently sell their idea without scientific support

skepticism

withholding judgement until sufficient evidence is available

no comparison group and confounding variables

what are the two main problems as using personal experience as a source

parsimonous

seek the simpler explanation if two explanations are available, no extra details or assumptions

IQ, age, gender, race/ethnicity

what are variables that can only be measured

alcoholism, mental health, physical health

variables that can be manipulate but unethical

hair color, note taking

variables that can measured or manipulated

conceptual variables

abstract, theoretical constructs/ hypothetical construct

operational definition

concrete specific procedures or measures

theory, research question, research design, hypothesis, data

theory data cycle

internal validity

which validity is most relevant for causal claim

respect for persons, beneficence, and justice

what are the three ethical principles of the Belmont report

deception

when a scientist purposefully misleads participants or hides the true goal of a study to get honest, natural reaction

what are the best ways to assess participant risk

beneficence and nonmaleficence, fidelity and responsibility, integrity, justice, respect for peoples rights and dignity

what are the principles of apas ethic standard

institutional review board (IRB)

an administrative ethics committee that reviews, approves, and monitors research involving human participants, at least five member, one scientist and one non scientist, one external member

active deception

Giving false information, fake feedback, or using actors (confederates).

passive deception

Withholding details about the real purpose of the study or what will happen

the medical atrocities that happened in ww2

cruel human experiments by Nazis, injecting patients with deadly drugs, surgeries without anesthesia or consent, put patients in freezing water, the reason for the nuremberg code

tuskegee syphilis study

withheld treatment from patients, lied to patients that they were getting treated for syphilis, prevented patients from getting actual treatment, the medical world knew what was going on, voted to not tell the research participants because “it wouldn’t help anything”

Milgrams obedience to authority

measured the willingness of ordinary people to obey an authority figure who ordered them to inflict painful electric shocks on an innocent person, 65 percent of participants administered the 450 voltage shock because a person of authority told them too

willowbrook hepatitis study

a controversial 15-year medical experiment (1956–1971) where researchers deliberately infected children with intellectual disabilities at the Willowbrook State School with live hepatitis virus, researchers fed children extracts made from the stool of infected patients or injected them with the virus, patients with disabilities could not give informed consent and the living conditions of the school were awful

conceptual- caffeine operational: 0 mg of caffeine, 125 mg of caffeine, 300 mg of caffeine

example of conceptual and operational variable

lied about procedures, not informed consent

How did Tuskegee fail to respect persons

justice

a subgroup should not be targeted to take all the risk when other groups could also benefit

only people in the study were poor African American men when many others could benefit

how did Tuskegee study fail to give justice

harmed participants and withheld treatment

how did Tuskegee study fail beneficene

respect for persons

informed consent goes with which of belmont’s principles

beneficene

anaonymity and confidentiality goes with which of belmont’s principles

justice

The why patients were selected goes with which of belmonts principles

theory

a well-supported framework of ideas, concepts, and principles that explains and predicts human thoughts, feelings, and behaviors

hypothesis

a specific, testable prediction about how two or more variables relate to each other in a stud