Research Design Exam 1

sources of research ideas

• you

• your situation

• paradoxes

• existing knowledge

introspection

• reflecting on your own thoughts, feelings, and experiences

“bug listing”

• a list of everyday things that bother you

self as a source of ideas

• introspection

• bug listing

• interpersonal relationships of social groups

• self presentation

happenstance

• look into your immediate situation for ideas

paradox

• any situation that appears to contradict established beliefs or expectations

paradoxical events

• paradox

• folk wisdom

• attitude-behavior problems

conceptual replication

• add new IV’s/DV’s

• alter stimuli

• change the experimental context

measured variables

• observed

• recorded

manipulated variables

• levels of variables are controlled

frequency claims

• statements that describe the rate, proportion, or level of a single measured variables within a specific population

association claims

• argues that a specific level of ones variable is directly linked to a particular level of another variable, indicating a correlation or relationship

causal claims

• statement asserting that a change in one variable directly causes a change in another variable

construct validity

• how well a test or tool measures the abstract, unobservable concept it is designed to evaluate

external validity

• the extent to which the results of a scientific study can be generalized to other people, settings, times, and real-world situations

statistical validity

• the degree to which the conclusions drawn from a statistical test or data analysis are accurate, meaningful, and well-justified

internal validity

• the degree of confidence you have that a study's results prove a true cause-and-effect relationship, rather than being the result of other outside factors

hypothesis

• testable prediction derived from observations or a theory

null hypothesis

• no difference exists between groups

experimental hypothesis

• a difference exists between groups

two types of experimental hypothesis

• directional hypothesis

• nondirectional hypothesis

directional hypothesis

• specifically indicates the nature of the relationship between the variables

nondirectional hypothesis

• a relationship between variablesexists but the nature of the relationship is unspecified

what makes a good experimental hypothesis

• a clear statement, not a question

• identifies relationships among variables

• is based on theory or existing knowledge

• can be tested empirically

descriptive definition

• definition between variables in the abstract

operational definition

• concrete accounts of the variables being measured

criteria for causation

• covariance

• temporal precedence

• internal validity

experiment

• a designin which groups of participants are exposed to different conditions

IV

• manipulated by the researcher

DV

• outcome variable

• may change in response to manipulation of IV

IV has:

• experimental group

• control group

experimental group

• group that receives the experimental treatment

control group

• the group that does NOT receive the experimental treatment

subject variables

• individual characteristics patients bring to an experiment that are beyond the control of the experimenter

potential sources of error

• random error

• systematic error

random error

• minor, chance fluctuations around a true value

• tend to cancel each other out in many trials

systematic error

• bias in measurement that leads to measured values being systematically too high or too low

type I error

• false positive

• a researcher accepts the experimental hypothesis as true, when the null hypothesis is really true

type II error

• false negative

• occurs when a researcher accepts the null hypothesis

the nuremberg code

• set of ten ethical principles for human experimentation

ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct

• guides the professional, scientific, and clinical practice of psychologists to protect clients, the public, and the profession

cost benefit analysis

• researchers must carefully weigh the benefits and costs of conducting research

institutional review board

• ensures the research participants are treated in accordance with established ethical guidelines

informed consent

• informing patients about aspects of the research and obtaining their consent to proceed

• patients have the right to withdraw

• patients 18+ provide their own consent

debrifing

• a post-experimental interview to learn patients reaction and assess suspicion

what are the goals of debriefing

• provide a detailed summary of the research

• answer patients questions or concerns

• reduce patients discomfort or correct misunderstandings

• remind patients that their responses are confidential and/or anonymous

• ask patients not the tell their peers

deception

• the intentional withholding of information within the context of the study

active deception

• patients are purposefully misled about the actual nature of the study

passive deception

• some info is intentionally withheld from patients

• white lie