Psychologists Major Approaches
Structuralism - the structure (parts and how they fit together) of the mind, accomplished through introspection (self-reflection)
- introduced by Wilhelm Wundt and other early psychologists
Functionalism - what does the mind do and allow the person to do? also concerned with adaptation and survival (influenced by Darwin)
- introduced by William James as a response to structuralism
Psychodynamic - division of consciousness into conscious and subconscious
- emphasizes that subconscious thoughts and conflicts are at the root of most problems
- Major Psychologists: Sigmund Freud, Alfred Adler, Carl Jung
Behaviorism - studying outward behavior, learning, and condition
de-emphasizes thoughts and free will
Major Psychologists: John B Watson, Ivan Pavlov, B F Skinner, Edward Thorndike
Biological - the biological influences (mostly brain, genetics, and nervous system) on thoughts and behavior
- emphasizes nature over nurture
- Major Psychologists: Wilhelm Wundt, Ivan Pavlov
Cognitive - the encoding/processing/storing/retrieval of memories and thought patterns
- emphasizes our interpretations of situations and our ability to change those thoughts
- Major Psychologists: Jean Piaget, Lawrence Kohlberg, Erik Erikson, Mary Calkins
Evolutionary - natural selection of behaviors and genes that led to ancestors’ survival
- emphasizes biological processes but can also include cognitive processes
- ex. Jung’s collective unconscious
- Major Psychologists: Charles Darwin, Carl Jung
Humanistic - positive aspects of humanity, how we strive to meet our needs for love, acceptance, self-esteem
- led to major strides in therapy and treatment of disorders
- Major Psychologists: Abraham Maslow, Carl Rogers, Martin Seligman
Socio-cultural - differences in behavior and thinking across cultures
- emphasizes nurture over nature
- Major Psychologists: Stanley Milgram, Solomon Asch, Philip Zimbardo
Bio(psycho)social approach - combines the 3 into 1 approach to work together
Types of Psychological Research
The Case Study - study one person/small group in detail, over a long period of time; apply conclusions from that person/group to a whole population
- the oldest form of psychological research but is not used much anymore
- PROS:
- cheap and easy, can reveal directions for further research, engaging and interesting
- CONS:
- what if the person you’re researching is atypical, applying conclusions from one person to the whole population is basically stereotyping
Naturalistic Observation - observing/recording behavior while watching a normal situation
- great for describing behavior but can’t explain why the behavior is occurring
- PROS:
- cheap and easy, more honest picture of behavior, engaging and interesting
- CONS:
- can’t explain behavior, ethically questionable, lack of control conditions
Surveys - questioning a random sample of people that represents the group you’re trying to study; looks at lots of cases with less depth
- PROS:
- easy and cheap, thousands of data points simultaneously, can establish correlations between variables
- CONS:
- lack of depth, validity, reliant on self-reporting (problems with lying)
Framing - refers to the wording of a question or the way it’s presented and can have effects on the way people answer
Random Sampling - every person in the target population has an equal chance of being selected
- used to reduce sampling bias - the possibility that the group of people selected doesn’t accurately represent the population of interest
Experiments - usually done in a lab, the research manipulates one or more factors (independent variables) and observes their effect on something else (dependent variable)
- one group (experiment group) receives the treatment while the other (control group) does not
Double-blind procedure - neither the experimenter nor the participants know who is receiving the actual treatment and which is receiving the placebo
Placebo - people in control groups are given a false treatment and don’t know its false
- Placebo effect - if a person believes they got the real treatment sometimes they feel as if it’s real
- PROS:
- clearly illustrate correlations between variables, considered most scientifically rigorous, anything can be studied
- CONS:
- more expensive and time-consuming, more potential for ethical problems
Metanalysis - a “study of studies” in which a researcher takes data from several completed studies and looks for new patterns in the data
Ethics in Research
APA Guidelines:
Coercion - participants have to be volunteers and are allowed to leave the study
Informed Consent - must inform participants of all aspects of the study before it begins (within reason)
- with written or verbal consent from participants
Anonymity/Confidentiality - keep personal information confidential
- if possible participants should be anonymous
Risk/Harm - the amount of physical/emotional/psychological harm done to participants should be kept to a minimum
Deception - researchers have to be very careful about how much to deceive their participants
Debriefing - after the study is done the researcher has to sit down with the participants and debrief all aspects of the study
- the participants can ask questions
- meant to reduce/eliminate lasting psychological effects
Animal research - must be guaranteed health, comfort, and humane treatment and must minimize infection, illness, and pain
The IRB - (institutional review board) at every uni with psychological research; oversees/approves/denies research
- studies won’t be published without approval
Validity & Reliability
Validity - how well does a test measure what it says it measures?
- Face validity - does the material on the test appear to measure what it’s supposed to? can someone look at it and tell what it’s testing?
- Construct validity - how well does the test measure a construct (theoretical or hypothetical idea)?
- Criterion-related validity - how well do the scores on this test correlate to another established test?
- Predictive validity - how well does the test predict/forecast performance on a future task or test?
Reliability - does a test produce consistent results?
- Test-retest reliability - can the test produce consistent scores in at least 2 administrations?
- Parallel/Alternative form reliability - can 2 different versions of the test produce consistent results?
- Inter-Rater/Grader reliability - can 2 different people interpreting the test come to consistent conclusions?
- Internal consistency reliability - do different questions on the same test that measure the same concepts obtain similar results?
\