exploring psychology
Page 1:
Exploring PSYCHOLOGY The Scientific NINTH EDITION Method David G. Myers PowerPoint R Presentation by Jim Foley THE COLLEGE OF WOOSTER
Page 2:
Topics and Questions
The Scientific Attitude: Curiosity, Skepticism, Humility
The Scientific Method
Description, Correlation, and Experimentation
Frequently Asked Questions about Psychology
Page 3:
The Need for Psychological Science: Overview
Typical errors in hindsight, overconfidence, and coincidence
The scientific attitude and critical thinking
The scientific method: theories and hypotheses
Gathering psychological data: description, correlation, and experimentation/causation
Describing data: significant differences
Issues in psychology: laboratory vs. life, culture and gender, values and ethics
Page 4:
When our natural thinking style fails:
Hindsight bias: “I knew it all along.”
Overconfidence error: “I am sure I am correct.”
The coincidence error, or mistakenly perceiving order in random events: “The dice must be fixed because you rolled three sixes in a row.”
Page 5:
Hindsight bias is like a crystal ball that we use to predict… the past.
I knew this would happen… You were accepted into this college/university
Classic example: after watching a competition (sports, cooking), if you don’t make a prediction ahead of time, you might make a “postdiction”: “I figured that team/person would win because…”
When you see most results of psychological research, you might say, “that was obvious…”
Page 6:
These sayings all seem to make sense, in hindsight, after we read them.
Out of sight, out of mind
S/He who hesitates is lost
No [wo]man is an island
Actions speak louder than words
You’re never too old to learn
Curiosity killed the cat
Opposites attract
There’s no place like home
Absence makes the heart grow fonder
Look before you leap
Good fences make good neighbors
The pen is mightier than the sword
You can’t teach an old dog new tricks
The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence
Seek and ye shall find
Birds of a feather flock together
But then why do these other phrases also seem to make sense?
Page 7:
Hindsight “Bias”
The mind builds its current wisdom around what we have already been told.
We are “biased” in favor of old information.
For example, we may stay in a bad relationship because it has lasted this far and thus was “meant to be.”
Why call it “bias”?
Page 8:
Overconfidence Error: Predicting performance
We overestimate our performance, our rate of work, our skills, and our degree of self-control.
Overconfidence Error: Judging our accuracy
When stating that we “know” something, our level of confidence is usually much higher than our level of accuracy.
Overconfidence is a problem in preparing for tests.
Familiarity is not understanding
If you feel confident that you know a concept, try explaining it to someone else.
Test for this: “how long do you think it takes you to…” (e.g. “just finish this one thing I’m doing on the computer before I get to work”)?
How fast can you unscramble words? Guess, then try these: ERSEGA HEGOUN
Page 9:
Result of this error: reacting to coincidence as if it has meaning
Perceiving order in random events: Example: The coin tosses that “look wrong” if there are five heads in a row.
Danger: thinking you can make a prediction from a random series.
If there have been five heads in a row, you cannot predict that “it’s time for tails” on the next flip
Why this error happens: because we have the wrong idea about what randomness looks like.
If one poker player at a table got pocket aces twice in a row, is the game rigged?
Page 10:
Making our ideas more accurate by being scientific
What did “Amazing Randi” do about the claim of seeing auras?
He developed a testable prediction, which would support the theory if it succeeded.
Which it did not. The aura-readers were unable to locate the aura around Randi’s body without seeing Randi’s body itself, so their claim was not supported.
Page 11:
Scientific Attitude Part 1: Curiosity
Hypothesis: Curiosity, if not guided by caution, can lead to the death of felines and perhaps humans.
Definition: always asking new questions
“That behavior I’m noticing in that guy… is that common to all people? Or is it more common when under stress? Or only common for males?”
Page 12:
Scientific Attitude Part 2: Skepticism
Definition: not accepting a ‘fact’ as true without challenging it; seeing if ‘facts’ can withstand attempts to disprove them
Skepticism, like curiosity, generates questions: “Is there another explanation for the behavior I am seeing? Is there a problem with how I measured it, or how I set up my experiment? Do I need to change my theory to fit the evidence?”
Page 13:
Scientific Attitude Part 3: Humility
Humility refers to seeking the truth rather than trying to be right; a scientist needs to be able to accept being wrong.
“What matters is not my opinion or yours, but the truth nature reveals in response to our questioning.” - David Myers
Page 14:
Critical thinking refers to a more careful style of forming and evaluating knowledge than simply using intuition.
Along with the scientific method, critical thinking will help us develop more effective and accurate ways to figure out what makes people do, think, and feel the things they do.
“Think critically” with psychological science… does this mean “criticize”? Why do I need to work on my thinking? Can’t you just tell me facts about psychology?
The brain is designed for surviving and reproducing, but it is not the best tool for seeing ‘reality’ clearly.
Page 15: Critical Thinking
Analyzing information, arguments, and conclusions
Look for hidden assumptions and decide if you agree
Look for hidden bias, politics, values, or personal connections
Put aside your own assumptions and biases, and look at the evidence
See if there was a flaw in how the information was collected
Consider if there are other possible explanations for the facts or results
Page 16: The Scientific Method
The process of testing ideas about the world
Turning theories into testable predictions
Gathering information related to predictions
Analyzing whether the data fits with ideas
Modifying hypotheses if the data doesn't fit
Page 17: Scientific Method: Tools and Goals
Research findings revealed by the scientific method
The brain can recover from massive early childhood brain damage
Sleepwalkers are not acting out dreams
Our brains do not have accurate memories locked inside like video files
There is no "hidden and unused 90 percent" of our brain
People often change their opinions to fit their actions
Research goals/types
Description
Correlation
Prediction
Causation
Experiments
Page 18: Theory
A set of principles that explains a phenomenon and predicts its future behavior
Example: "All ADHD symptoms are a reaction to eating sugar"
Page 19: Hypotheses
Informed predictions consistent with our theory
"Testable" means that the hypothesis can be observed to find out if it is true
Example hypothesis: "If a kid gets sugar, the kid will act more distracted, impulsive, and hyper"
To test the theory, "ADHD symptoms will continue for some kids even after sugar is removed from the diet"
Page 20: Danger when Testing Hypotheses
Theories can bias our observations
We might select data or interpretations that support what we already believe
Safeguards against bias
Hypotheses designed to disconfirm
Operational definitions
Guide for making useful observations
How to measure "ADHD symptoms" in observable terms
Impulsivity = # of times/hour calling out without raising hand
Hyperactivity = # of times/hour out of seat
Inattention = # minutes continuously on task before becoming distracted
Page 21: Replication
Introducing a small change in the study to see if the same results happen
Trying the methods of a study again with different participants or situations
Page 24: Research Goal and Strategy: Description
Strategies for gathering information
Case Study: observing and gathering information about one individual
Naturalistic Observation: gathering data about behavior without intervening
Surveys and Interviews: having people report on their own attitudes and behavior
Descriptive research is a systematic, objective observation of people
The goal is to provide a clear, accurate picture of people's behaviors, thoughts, and attributes
Page 25: Case Study
Examining one individual in depth
Can be a source of ideas about human nature in general
Example: cases of brain damage have suggested the function of different parts of the brain
Danger: overgeneralization from one example
Page 26: Naturalistic Observation
Observing "natural" behavior without trying to change anything
Can be used to study more than one individual and find truths that apply to a broader population
Page 27: The Survey
Gathering information about many people's thoughts or behaviors through self-report
Be careful about the wording of questions
Only question randomly sampled people
Page 28: Psychology Science Mistake
The mistake made in the survey example
Hint #1: Harry Truman won
Hint #2: The Chicago Tribune interviewed people about whom they would vote for
Hint #3: In 1948
Hint #4: By phone
Page 29:
Random Sampling
If you want to find out something about men, you can’t interview every single man on earth.
Sampling saves time.
You can find the ratio of colors in this jar by making sure they are well mixed (randomized) and then taking a sample.
Random sampling is a technique for making sure that every individual in a population has an equal chance of being in your sample.
“Random” means that your selection of participants is driven only by chance, not by any characteristic.
Page 30:
Correlation
General Definition: an observation that two traits or attributes are related to each other (thus, they are “co”-related)
Scientific definition: a measure of how closely two factors vary together, or how well you can predict a change in one from observing a change in the other
In a case study: The fewer hours the boy was allowed to sleep, the more episodes of aggression he displayed.
In a naturalistic observation: Children in a classroom who were dressed in heavier clothes were more likely to fall asleep than those wearing lighter clothes.
In a survey: The greater the number of Facebook friends, the less time was spent studying.
Page 31:
Correlation Coefficient
The correlation coefficient is a number representing how closely and in what way two variables correlate (change together).
The direction of the correlation can be positive (direct relationship; both variables increase together) or negative (inverse relationship: as one increases, the other decreases).
The strength of the relationship, how tightly, predictably they vary together, is measured in a number that varies from 0.00 to +/- 1.00.
Close to +1.0 (strong negative correlation) (no relationship, no correlation)
Guess the Correlation Coefficients (strong positive correlation)
Height vs. shoe size
Years in school vs. years in jail
Height vs. intelligence
Close to 0.0
Close to -1.0
Page 32:
If we find a correlation, what conclusions can we draw from it?
Let’s say we find the following result: there is a positive correlation between two variables, ice cream sales, and rates of violent crime
How do we explain this?
Page 33:
Correlation is not Causation!
“People who floss more regularly have less risk of heart disease.”
“People with bigger feet tend to be taller.”
If this data is from a survey, can we conclude that flossing might prevent heart disease? Or that people with heart-healthy habits also floss regularly?
Does that mean having bigger feet causes height?
Page 34:
If self-esteem correlates with depression, there are still numerous possible causal links:
(1) could cause Depression Low self-esteem
(2) could cause Low self-esteem Depression or Low self-esteem
(3) Distressing events could cause and or biological predisposition Depression
Page 35:
So how do we find out about causation? By experimentation
Testing the theory that ADHD = sugar: removing sugar from the diet of children with ADHD to see if it makes a difference
The depression/self-esteem example: trying interventions that improve self-esteem to see if they cause a reduction in depression
Experimentation: manipulating one factor in a situation to determine its effect
Page 36:
The Control Group
If we manipulate a variable in an experimental group of people, and then we see an effect, how do we know the change wouldn’t have happened anyway?
We solve this problem by comparing this group to a control group, a group that is the same in every way except the one variable we are changing.
Example: two groups of children have ADHD, but only one group stops eating refined sugar.
By using random assignment: randomly selecting some study participants to be assigned to the control group or the experimental group.
How do make sure the control group is really identical in every way to the experimental group?
Page 37:
To clarify two similar-sounding terms…
First you sample, then you sort (assign)
Random assignment of participants to control or experimental groups is how you control all variables except the one you’re manipulating.
Random sampling is how you get a pool of research participants that represents the population you’re trying to learn about.
Page 38:
Placebo effect
Placebo effect: experimental effects that are caused by expectations about the intervention
How do we make sure that the experimental group doesn’t experience an effect because they expect to experience it?
How can we make sure both groups expect to get better, but only one gets the real intervention being studied?
Working with the placebo effect: Control groups may be given a placebo – an inactive substance or other fake treatment in place of the experimental treatment.
The control group is ideally “blind” to whether they are getting real or fake treatment.
Many studies are double-blind – neither participants nor research staff knows which participants are in the experimental or control groups.
Page 39:
The variable we are able to manipulate independently of what the other variables are doing is called the independent variable (IV).
If we test the ADHD/sugar hypothesis:
Sugar = Cause = Independent Variable
ADHD = Effect = Dependent Variable
The variable we expect to experience a change which depends on the manipulation we’re doing is called the dependent variable (DV).
Did more hyper kids get to choose to be in the sugar group? Then their preference for sugar would be a confounding variable. (preventing this problem: random assignment).
The other variables that might have an effect on the dependent variable are confounding variables.
Naming the variables
Page 40
An experiment is a type of research in which the researcher carefully manipulates a limited number of factors (IVs) and measures the impact on other factors (DVs).
In psychology, the effect of the experimental change (IV) on a behavior or mental process (DV) is examined.
Page 41
Correlation vs. causation: the breastfeeding/intelligence question
Studies have found that children who were breastfed score higher on intelligence tests, on average, than those who were bottle-fed.
Cannot conclude that breastfeeding causes higher intelligence due to confounding variables such as genes.
Confounding variable: intelligence test scores of the mothers might be higher in those who choose breastfeeding.
Experiment is a way to deal with confounding variables.
Page 42
Ruling out confounding variables: experiment with random assignment
An actual study in the text: women were randomly selected to be in a group in which breastfeeding was promoted.
Page 43
Comparing Research Methods
Descriptive: To observe and record behavior
Correlational: To detect naturally occurring relationships
Experimental: To explore cause-effect
Page 44
Drawing conclusions from data: are the results useful?
After finding a pattern in the data, questions can be asked about reliability and significance of the difference.
Reliability can be achieved through nonbiased sampling, consistency, and many data points.
Statistically significant difference is found when the data is reliable and the difference between the groups is large.
Page 45
Question: How can a result from an experiment give us any insight into real life?
By isolating variables and studying them carefully, general principles that might apply to all people can be discovered.
Question: Do the insights from research really apply to all people?
Research can discover human universals and study how culture and gender influence behavior.
Generalization should be done cautiously, considering the representation of the general population in the studies.
Page 46
Question: Why study animals?
Biologically related creatures are sometimes less complex than humans and easier to study.
Insights from animal research can benefit all creatures.
Question: How do we protect the safety and dignity of human subjects?
People in experiments may experience discomfort, and sometimes deceiving people yields insights into human behavior.
Human research subjects are protected by guidelines for non-harmful treatment, confidentiality, informed consent, and debriefing.
Page 47
Question: How do the values of psychologists affect their work?
Researchers' values affect their choices of topics, interpretations, labels, and advice generated from their results.
Value-free research is an impossible ideal.