3-1
- Theory = Idea based on prediction, no real foundation
- Good theory leads to hypotheses that we can test
- Shouldn’t be biased to prove your hypothesis, use very specific word choice to make sure this doesn’t happen
How do theories advance psychological science?
- Theory organizes observed ideas, such as behavior and thoughts
- Theory can be supported or disproved by experiments, helps us learn more about the subject
- Operational Definitions - Used to be incredibly specific and unbiased in observations
- Example: Instead of sleep deprived, list how many hours of sleep lost
- Observations like this can be replicated
- Replication - Repeating a certain experiment, repeat the observations and see if the effects are the same
- Allows for theories to correct themselves
- A good theory should…
- Organize observations
- Implies predictions for testing
- Stimulate further research
- When testing hypotheses, we use
- Descriptive methods - describing behaviors through gathered information
- Correlational methods - associating different factors in behavior
- Experimental methods - Manipulating factors to see effects
3-2
- Description is very important in science
- Information from description can lead to big reveals and further advancements
- Big methods to find descriptions:
- Case Study - Study of one individual or a group with a unique quality
- Naturalistic Study - Study of people or animals in their natural state
- Survey - Asking questions to a large group of people
- Could also coincide with Laboratory Observations
How do psychologists use case studies, naturalistic observations, and surveys to observe and describe behavior, and why is random sampling important?
- Case Studies:
- Individual studies give us ideas - possible that those ideas don’t just apply to that specific group: could apply to everyone
- Although they could be specific to the group/individual being tested, ideas are useful for advancement in psychology
- Naturalistic observation:
- By recording behavior in natural environments, psychologists can gain descriptions of common actions among people
- These observations do not explain behavior, just describe it - but those descriptions will help us explain the behavior eventually
- Can’t control outside factors in naturalistic study, makes it harder to draw definitive conclusions
- Example: Twitter had a lot of positive posts on a Saturday evening, and barely any on Tuesday afternoons
- Survey:
- Wording effects - by changing the wording of a question, the answer can change significantly
- Should always go for a random sampling with surveying, otherwise researcher’s belief seeps into the research - by going with random sampling, everyone has the opportunity to participate
3-3
- The descriptions as described above are used to find connections between certain behaviors and actions
- Can graph data found as a scatter plot to find a trend - can be very difficult to notice any connections without seeing them
What does it mean when we say two things are correlated, and what are positive and negative correlations?
- Correlation = how close traits/behaviors are to each other; by understanding this relationship, we can make predictions on how the results of certain behaviors
- Positive correlation = two behaviors rise and fall together; Negative correlations = one behavior rises, the other one falls
- Positive/negative says nothing about the strength of the correlation
- Correlation coefficient = slope of trendline in scatterplot, helps us see how connected behaviors are, and helps draw conclusions
3-4
- Illusory Correlation - Nonexisting correlation that the mind is convinced of
- Basically - when we believe in a correlation, we take note of things related to the correlation and ignore things that disprove it
- This is called regressing towards the mean - illusion that uncontrollable events correlate with our actions
- Very damaging - need to notice when it’s actually happening
3-5
- Correlation =/= causation
- Basically: Correlation is used to predict things, but it’s unclear whether the two things that are correlating are directly causing each other
- Example - just because parental support is associated with low grades in college, doesn’t mean that not supporting your student will lead to better grades
- Correlation suggests the possibility of a cause-effect relationship, but doesn’t confirm it
3-6
- Experimentation - Like correlation studies, but instead of just observing, factors are manipulated in order to see more concrete results
- Useful to see how an independent variable affects a dependent variable - provides focused results that explain behavior. Closer to causation than correlation
What are the characteristics of experimentation that make it possible to isolate cause and effect?
- If we see a correlation, we confirm a cause and effect through experimentation.
- Manipulate factors of interest
- Hold other factors constant
- This means that experimentation is only possible in a controlled environment, and also will produce results that fully determine a cause-and-effect relationship
- Any differences at the end of an experiment (dependent variable) are caused by the manipulated factor (independent variable)
- Not all experiments are conclusive - need to be tested over and over again to be considered as a fact
- Double Blind Procedure - Recieving treatment without clarification as to what the treatment is to see the effects
- Placebo - Not recieving any real treatment and still feeling the effects of said treatment
- Confounding variables - Variables that could influence the outcome of an experiment if not controlled in some way
3-7
- Variables in experiments will not be exactly the same as variables in real life - can’t perfectly predict the real world results
- However - Experiments will show a certain principle that can be applied to the real world
- Example - if shocking a patient makes them angry, then them getting slapped in the real world would also make them angry
- Psychological science doesn’t focus on specific behaviors; instead focuses on principles that explain behaviors
3-8
- Ethics of psychology and all sciences agree to test on animals in order to secure the safety of humans, as long as the treatment is humane
- Animals are protected, as well as humans - in situations where humans are put under some sort of stress, there are warnings of what could happen and explanations after the experiment to help explain the reasoning for this stress
\