Psychology Research Notes

WHY IS RESEARCH IMPORTANT?

  • Historical beliefs about trephination: The practice of making a hole in the skull to allow evil spirits to escape, believed to cure mental illness.

    • This demonstrates how misconceptions can arise when evidence is not relied upon.

  • Evidence-based claims vs. groundless assumptions: Without the process of research, claims can arise from intuition rather than facts.

    • Research validates claims through empirical evidence, which is repeatable and observable regardless of the observer.

  • Psychology as a science: Research is pivotal for verification and support of findings, making it essential for the advancement of psychological science.

USE OF RESEARCH INFORMATION

  • Example of the D.A.R.E. program: Despite its popularity in schools, research indicates that it may not be effective.

  • Advertising and scientific evidence: Many campaigns misuse the term "scientific evidence" to support unproven claims.

  • Critical thinking questions on claims:

    • What is the expertise of the claim maker?

    • What could they gain if the claim is valid?

    • Is the claim justified based on the evidence?

    • What is the consensus among other researchers?

THE PROCESS OF SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH: INDUCTIVE VS DEDUCTIVE REASONING

  • Use of reasoning in psychological research:

    • Deductive reasoning: Results are predicted from a general premise.

    • Example: Premise: All living things need energy; Conclusion: Ducks, being living things, require energy.

    • Inductive reasoning: Conclusions are drawn from specific observations.

    • Example: Observing that many fruits grow on trees leads to the assumption that all fruits grow on trees.

  • Steps in scientific reasoning:

    1. The formation of theories or hypotheses using deductive reasoning.

    2. Testing these hypotheses through empirical observations and deriving conclusions using inductive reasoning.

    3. These conclusions help generate new theories or hypotheses.

THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD

  • Components of the scientific method:

    • Proposing hypotheses, conducting research, and developing/modifying theories based on research findings.

    • Theory: A well-developed set of ideas explaining observed phenomena.

    • Hypothesis: A testable statement predicting the relationship between variables, typically structured as an "if-then" statement and must be falsifiable.

FALSIFIABLE HYPOTHESES

  • Critique of Freud's theories:

    • Freud's ideas, such as the id, ego, and superego, are criticized for being non-falsifiable, leading to their decline in favor, yet influencing modern psychological thought concerning the unconscious mind.

APPROACHES TO RESEARCH

  • Major research methods:

    • Clinical or case studies

    • Naturalistic observation

    • Surveys

    • Archival research

    • Longitudinal and cross-sectional research

CLINICAL OR CASE STUDIES

  • Focus on an individual’s unique psychological state.

    • Insightful but difficult to generalize to the broader population.

    • Example of Genie: A case study on a girl raised in severe isolation and abuse, exploring impacts on her development.

NATURALISTIC OBSERVATIONS

  • Definition: Observing behavior in its natural context without intervention.

    • Example: Presence of a police car may alter driving behavior, thus naturalistic observation aims to eliminate performance anxiety.

  • Observer bias: The tendency for researchers to alter observations based on their expectations.

    • Establishing clear observation criteria minimizes the risk of bias.

  • Notable example: Jane Goodall’s studies on chimpanzee behavior.

SURVEYS

  • Definition: A method for asking questions to a large group of people via various delivery methods (e.g., online, paper, verbally).

    • Useful for gathering extensive data samples representative of larger populations.

ARCHIVAL RESEARCH

  • Involves examination of past records or datasets to uncover patterns or relationships to respond to research questions.

LONGITUDINAL AND CROSS-SECTIONAL RESEARCH

  • Longitudinal Research: Studies the same individuals repeatedly over time (e.g., CPS-3 on smoking and diseases).

    • High dropout rates expected, necessitating an initial large participant pool.

  • Cross-Sectional Research: Compares different segments of a population at one specific time (e.g., varying age groups).

  • Attrition: The phenomenon of participant dropouts over time in longitudinal studies.

ANALYZING FINDINGS

  • Overview of research types:

    • **Correlational Research;

    • Differentiating correlation vs causation;

    • Experimental Research.**

CORRELATIONAL RESEARCH

  • Definition of correlation: The relationship where two or more variables change together.

  • Correlation Coefficient: Value indicating the strength and direction of a relationship, ranging from -1 to +1, denoted as r.

    • Positive Correlation: Both variables change in the same direction.

    • Negative Correlation: Variables change inversely, one increases while the other decreases.

CORRELATION DOES NOT INDICATE CAUSATION

  • Definition of cause-and-effect relationships: Determined only through experimental research.

  • Confounding variable: An extraneous factor that can cause misleading correlations.

    • Example: Rise in ice-cream sales correlating with increase in crime rates; temperature acts as a confounding variable.

ILLUSORY CORRELATIONS

  • Definition: The perception of a relationship between two variables when none exists.

    • Confirmation bias: Ignoring evidence contrary to one’s beliefs can contribute to illusory correlations.

    • Example: Belief in full moons causing erratic behavior is unsupported by research.

CAUSALITY: CONDUCTING EXPERIMENTS & USING THE DATA

  • Establishing causation requires a scientific experimental framework.

  • Experimental Hypothesis: Developed through observation or review of existing research.

    • Example: Hypothesizing a link between children's viewing of violent programming and subsequent violent behavior.

DESIGNING AN EXPERIMENT

EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUPS

  • Experimental Group: Receives the manipulated variable.

  • Control Group: Does not receive manipulation, serving as a comparison benchmark.

  • Only experimental manipulation differentiates the two groups, allowing the effect of manipulation to be measured.

DEFINING VARIABLES

  • Operational Definition: Describes the operations to measure dependent variables and manipulate independent variables.

AVOIDING BIAS AND THE PLACEBO EFFECT

  • Experimenter Bias: Researcher expectations can skew outcomes.

  • Participant Bias: Expectation from participants can also alter results.

  • Single-Blind Study: Participants unaware of their group assignment, controlling for participant bias.

  • Double-Blind Study: Both researcher and participant unaware of assignments, controlling for both types of bias.

  • Placebo Effect: The impact of belief on participant experience (e.g., mood improvement from a sugar pill).

INDEPENDENT AND DEPENDENT VARIABLES

  • Independent Variable: Controlled or manipulated by the experimenter.

  • Dependent Variable: Measured to assess the effect of the independent variable.

SELECTING PARTICIPANTS

PARTICIPANT AND POPULATION DEFINITIONS

  • Participants: Subjects in research.

  • Sample: A smaller subset from a larger population, chosen due to impracticality of including everyone.

  • Population: The broader group of interest (e.g., college students).

  • Random Sample: Ensures each population member has an equal selection opportunity, enhancing representativeness.

ASSIGNING PARTICIPANTS TO GROUPS

RANDOM ASSIGNMENT

  • All participants have equal assignment chances, reducing systematic group differences.

  • Essential for establishing authentic cause-and-effect relationships, limiting potential bias.

ISSUES TO CONSIDER

MANIPULATING VARIABLES

  • Random assignment is critical for causal assertions.

  • Complex designs exist, such as quasi-experimental studies where independent variables, like gender, cannot be manipulated.

  • Some research questions cannot ethically utilize experimental designs (e.g., child abuse effects).

INTERPRETING EXPERIMENTAL FINDINGS

  • Statistical Analysis: Assesses the likelihood that observed differences are due to chance; results are significant if the probability is 5% or lower.

  • Executing true experiments reduces chances of random outcomes affecting results.

REPORTING FINDINGS

  • Research findings are publicized in scientific journals, targeting professionals.

  • Peer-Reviewed Journal Articles: Undergo rigorous review processes by experts prior to publication, ensuring quality and replicability of studies.

  • Replication: Validates original findings and explores additional measures/research angles.

BAD SCIENCE & RETRACTION: THE VACCINE-AUTISM MYTH

  • Misinformation from early peer-reviewed studies erroneously linked vaccines to autism.

  • Subsequent research disproved this link; many early studies have been retracted, revealing conflicts of interest among authors.

RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY

  • Reliability: Consistency and reproducibility of results.

    • Inter-rater reliability ensures consistent observation methods among different researchers.

  • Validity: Accuracy in measuring intended constructs.

    • A valid measure is reliable, but reliable measurements are not always valid.

ETHICS: RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN PARTICIPANTS

  • Research with human participants requires adherence to IRB guidelines.

    • Institutional Review Board (IRB): Reviews human research proposals, ensuring ethical compliance.

  • Informed Consent: Participants must be aware of research expectations and risks before participation, including voluntary status and confidentiality assurances.

DECEPTION

  • In specific cases, deception is necessary to avoid biasing results but must not inflict harm.

  • Debriefing: Post-experiment explanation of the study's true nature for participants misled during the experiment.

  • Historical example: The unethical Tuskegee Syphilis Study, where informed consent and participant well-being were ignored.

ETHICS: RESEARCH INVOLVING ANIMAL SUBJECTS

  • Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC): Reviews proposals involving non-human subjects, primarily rodents and birds.

    • Animal research parallels human biological processes, enabling studies infeasible with human participants.

    • Emphasis must be on minimizing pain and distress for animal subjects.