Chapter 1 - Research Producers and Consumers

research producers

• Ppl who generate and share scientific research

  • Researchers that design, conduct, interpret, and publish their own studies to add to knowledge.

• Includes PIs (primary investigator), professional scientists and also:

  • Honour students

  • lab /research assistants

  • Grad students

  • Etc. 

research consumers

• People who make use of the scientific research from producers

• Can include both non-experts, scientists/researchers, organizations, etc

• Ex:

  •  look up common side effects of a drug

  • Check polls for election

    • See how smart watch measures sleep cycles in comparison to the average 

evidence based treatments

therapies are supported by scientific research

• ex. Psychologists rely on prior research if they treat clients each time they choose therapeutic approach for treatment

being a good consumer

• Interrogating information 

  • Being critical about information 

    • Where is it coming from?

    • What is it claiming?

    • What evidence is there to support?

• Be aware of biases

  • Can be easy to miss things one should be critical of 

Empiricism

• Using evidence from our senses to make conclusions

  • “Empirical method” or ”empirical research” 

• Aim to conduct research that is:

  • Systematic

  • Rigorous

  • Independently verifiable 

quantitative methods

• Collect empirical information in the form on numbers and values

  • Ex. how many? How strongly? How often?

Qualitative methods

• Collect empirical information in descriptive ways that are not easily build down to numerical values 

  • Ex. interviews commonly produce complex statements in response to questions → can't be turned into numerical values bc they are so complex and interconnected

theory-data cycle

• Ask question based on theories, make predictions, and collect and reflect upon data → does data match existing understanding? 

  • Yes? → move forward

  • No? → move backwards and reflect 

• Also called the scientific method

  • Theory shapes questions

    • Outcomes shape theories 

Theory-data cycle: example 1

• Cupboard theory vs contact comfort theory 

• Cupboard theory: mother → valuable bc is source of food. Classical conditioning leads to association between mother and getting food

  • Uses a wire mother (somewhat shaped as “mother” but main goal is to provide milk)

  • Stayed only when they wanted food

  • non-support

• Comfort theory: mother → valuable bc she's a source of comfort. Warm fuzzy fur is comforting

  • Shaped more like a monkey “mother” but does not provide any milk

  • spent most of its time with the mother 

  • support

Theory-data cycle: example 2

• Chickadee call categorization

• Theory: categorization and memorization are two common cognitive methods for telling things apart

• Research question: which of the two methods do the chickadees use? 

• Research design: operant go/no-go design

• Hypothesis: of chickadees use memorization, they wont be able to respond correctly to new calls

• Data: responses to new calls

theory

• Set of statements that describes a general principle about how variables relate to one another → leads to a specific experimental design and set-up to make hypothesis

hypothesis

Specific predictions about the outcomes of research based on theory

data

set of observations

what makes a good theory

• Supported by data

  • Consistent with scientific observation

• Falsifiable

  • Alternative explanations are possible

  • To evaluate whether a theory is actually happening → need to show evidence that it matches theory and also smth that does not match (need support and non-support to correct theory for scientific theory)

  • Ex. “aliens exist” → is a non-falsifiable theory (can't actually find evidence)

• Has parsimony/occam's razor

  • Best to start with the simplest observations and add complexity when evidence requires it

applied research

• Conducted to solve practical problems 

  • Findings are directly applied to find a solution to a real world problem 

  • Can be strong bias to applied research → often have higher chance to receive research funding

  • Ex. the best way to teach statistics in university?

basic research

• Goal is to enhance general knowledge about a particular topic 

  • Basic research can be foundational for applied studies 

  • Can be common for things we don't know much about (ex. Cephalopods → finding how they eat)

    • Ex. What do students think about statistics?

translation research

• Taking things you learn from basic research and applying it to a specific problem

  • Bridge from basic to applied research in which findings from basic research are then used to develop applications 

    • Ex. penicillin → translation of basic information to something that can solve problems

publication process

• Researches write a paper detailing their research

• Submit to a scientific journal 

  • Peer-reviewed an written by qualified contributors in journals

• After review (and often revision) the article is published

other resources

• Popular media or popular press pick up stories

  • They are: written by journalists

  • Audience: general public

• Benefits and risks associated 

  • Research cna reach a much larger audience

    • Story may not always be accurate 

mozart effect

• Rauscher, Shaw, and Ky (1993)

  • Students that listened to Mozart scored significantly higher on spatial temporal tasks than control group 

  • Unrelated to general intelligence

  • Short duration boost

  • Researchers specifically stated to not apply this result onto general situations 

• Media turned the results into:

  • Listening to Mozart makes you smart(er)

  • Playing Mozart for children makes the smarter