M

Chapter 2: Methodology – Quick Reference Notes

How to Use These Slides

  • Check reading comprehension by reading a section, then answering the questions in this document.
  • Assess whether you stayed focused and understood the content; identify areas needing help.
  • Compare your notes with the document to ensure coverage of topics.
  • Use as a study guide for exams; define terms, apply theories, and generate examples.
  • Test memory before quizzes/exams; reread as needed.

The Big Questions

  • How researchers develop hypotheses and theories.
  • Strengths and weaknesses of social-psychology research designs.
  • Impact of cross-cultural studies and social neuroscience on investigating social behavior.
  • Open science movement and its influence on research methods.
  • Ensuring participant safety/welfare while testing hypotheses about social behavior.

Social Psychology: An Empirical Science

  • Some study results may seem obvious due to familiarity with the subject matter.
  • Hindsight bias: tendency to see outcomes as predictable after they occur; relates to how construal shapes interpretation of events.

Formulating Hypotheses and Theories

  • Hypotheses: testable predictions.
  • How hypotheses are generated; theories: broader explanations refined over time.
  • The process to refine theories.
  • Kitty Genovese case and Latane & Darley (1960s): diffusion of responsibility.

Stop 1: Review and Apply

  • Hindsight bias: explain what it is and how it relates to construal.
  • Provide two examples of hindsight bias.

Research Designs

  • Observational method: systematic observation of behavior.
  • Naturalistic observation: observing in real-world settings without interference.
  • Ethnography: in-depth study of a cultural or social group; example: detailed study of daily life.
  • Avoid imposing preconceived notions on participants; ensure observer accuracy.
  • Interrater reliability: agreement between observers; measures accuracy.
  • Measurement reliability vs validity: reliability is consistency; validity is accuracy.
  • Archival analysis: use existing records; example: historical data analysis.
  • Limitations of the observational method: observer bias, limited control, ethical concerns, etc.

Stop 2: Observational Method Review

  • Conceptual definition of behaviors (e.g., aggression) before observation.
  • Operational definition: specify observable criteria for aggression.
  • Train observers; use systematic recording.
  • Interrater reliability: assess agreement between observers.
  • Measurement reliability vs validity: reliability is consistency; validity is accuracy of measurement.

Correlational Method

  • What is the correlational method? Its focus/goal.
  • Correlation coefficient: r; direction from the sign of r; strength from the magnitude.
  • Positive correlation: as one variable increases, the other tends to increase; negative correlation: as one increases, the other decreases.
  • Range of correlation coefficients: r \,\in\,[-1,1]; perfect relation: |r|=1; no relation: r=0.
  • Scatterplots to examine relationships between variables.

Surveys

  • What surveys are and what they are used for.
  • Descriptive vs. correlational research.
  • Random selection: how it is carried out; why it is ideal.
  • Representative sample: every member of the population has an equal chance of selection.
  • The Literary Digest 1936 presidential poll as an example of survey limitations.
  • Advantages and limitations of survey methods.

Limitations of the Correlational Method

  • Correlation does not imply causation.
  • Three possible causal relations when a correlation is found:
    • X \rightarrow Y (X causes Y),
    • Y \rightarrow X (Y causes X),
    • A third variable causes both X and Y.
  • When variables are measured simultaneously, we cannot determine:
    • Temporal direction: does X\rightarrow Y or Y\rightarrow X?
    • Third-variable causality: potential unmeasured confounds.

Stop 2: Review and Apply

  • Draw a scatterplot for hours spent studying vs. class performance; decide if positive or negative.
  • Provide examples of both a positive and a negative correlation.
  • Select a correlational finding and generate 2–3 alternative interpretations.

Experimental Method

  • Key features: manipulation of an independent variable (IV) and measurement of a dependent variable (DV).
  • Latane & Darley (1968) study: methods and primary results (conceptual familiarity).
  • Factorial design: multiple IVs; main effects and interaction effects.
  • Main effect: effect of one IV averaged across levels of other IVs.
  • Interaction effect: effect of one IV depends on the level of another IV.

Internal Validity

  • Internal validity: confidence that observed effects are due to the IV and not confounds.
  • Confounding variables: uncontrolled factors that could explain results.
  • Techniques to increase internal validity: random assignment, control conditions, standardized procedures, etc.
  • High internal validity conditions.

Random Assignment

  • Random assignment: placing participants into conditions by chance.
  • Purpose: ensure groups are comparable and reduce selection bias.

Probability Level (p-value)

  • p{\text{-value}}: probability of obtaining data as extreme as observed under the null hypothesis.
  • Interpreting p-values: significance when p < \alpha (commonly 0.05).
  • Null hypothesis: no effect or no relationship between variables (e.g., H0:\,\mu1=\mu_2).
  • Relationship: a small p value leads to rejecting the null; a large p value suggests insufficient evidence to reject H_0$$.

External Validity

  • External validity: generalizability across situations and across people.
  • Psychological realism: how well a study mirrors real-life psychological processes.
  • Cover story: a deceptive narrative to maintain realism; used for ethical reasons.
  • Random selection: relates to external validity; most social psychology studies avoid random selection due to practical reasons.
  • Field experiments: conducted in real-world settings; impact on external validity; examples.

Internal and External Validity

  • The basic dilemma for social psychologists: trade-off between internal and external validity.
  • Resolution: multiple studies; replication; meta-analysis.
  • Replications: benefits and potential problems; meta-analyses synthesize multiple studies.
  • How replications and meta-analyses relate to internal/external validity.

Basic Versus Applied Research

  • Basic research: aims to expand knowledge and theory.
  • Applied research: aims to solve real-world problems using existing theory.
  • Theory development links to both; which is more important depends on goals.

Stop 3: Review

  • Create a table for each research method (observational, correlational, experimental):
    • Definition, key characteristics, focus, example, typical internal validity, typical external validity.
  • Create a concept map linking chapter terms; identify umbrella terms and subterms; show relationships with arrows.

New Frontiers

  • Cross-cultural Research:
    • Involves comparing social processes across cultures; important for generalizability.
  • Social Neuroscience:
    • Links social psychology with neuroscience methods to study brain mechanisms.
  • Open Science Movement:
    • Focus on replication and transparency; concerns about large-scale replication projects; avoid overstating single findings; meta-analyses as synthesis.
  • Take-home points for new students: emphasize critical evaluation, replication, and synthesis across studies.

Ethical Issues in Social Psychology

  • Dilemma: balancing scientific goals with participant welfare and autonomy.
  • Informed consent: participants understand study and agree to participate; problematic in some social-psychology contexts.
  • Deception in research:
    • Why: to preserve realism or prevent biased behavior.
    • Why problematic: potential harm or misrepresentation; debriefing often required.
  • Debriefing: explanation of deception and study purpose; important beyond deception studies.

Guidelines for Ethical Research

  • Institutional Review Board (IRB): reviews and approves research proposals; ensures safety and dignity of participants.
  • IRB composition: at least one scientist, one nonscientist, and one unaffiliated member.
  • Procedures judged to be overly stressful or upsetting must be revised or removed before conduct.
  • Ethics training: required for researchers submitting proposals.
  • APA ethical principles: summarized in Figure 2.3 (refer to text for specifics).

Understanding the Chapter

  • Review the big questions and your understanding of them.
  • Review key terms from the chapter.
  • Check notes for gaps; consider creating a concept map of chapter concepts.
  • Test understanding by generating your own questions.
  • Reach out to peers or the instructor for terms, theories, studies, or other information you don’t understand.