Key Methodologies in Psychology
Empiricism in Psychology
Psychology is empirical and science-driven, not based on common sense or personal fairness.
Overviews of research methods focus on how we obtain knowledge about behavior and mental processes.
Methodologies (from weakest to strongest)
Case study
Definition: In-depth analysis using multiple data sources to build a case.
Weakness: Low generalizability; findings may not generalize to other cases.
Typical use: Practice settings (e.g., child custody evaluations); not usually published as standalone journal studies.
Example notes: In custody evaluations, data come from interviews, records, testing, home visits; reports can be lengthy (often 50–75 pages).
Access issues: Often requires a court order or stipulation; confidentiality and privilege protections apply.
Ethnography
Definition: Qualitative design focused on lived experiences and rich narratives.
Weakness: Limited generalizability; highly contextual; often narrative rather than numerical data.
Common in: Sociology, anthropology; less common in psychology but used for descriptive insight.
Descriptive research
Definition: Describes phenomena using numerical data but does not infer causation.
Purpose: Describe what A looks like and what B looks like; summarize data with statistics.
Key metrics: measures of central tendency and dispersion (mean, median, mode, range).
Correlational research
Definition: Examines relationships between variables but does not establish causation.
Strength: Moves beyond description to identify associations.
Experimental research
Definition: Manipulates one or more independent variables while controlling others to test causal effects.
Strength: Best for inferring causation under controlled conditions.
Case studies (in more detail)
Generalizability issue
Generalizability = the spread of findings across populations or situations.
Case studies provide depth in a single case but offer little assurance that results apply elsewhere.
Forensic and custody contexts
Example: Custody evaluations include testing, records access via court orders, and home/educational interviews.
Professionals: Licensed clinicians with specialized training; confidentiality and professional ethics govern practice.
Reports: Often comprehensive and used in court, not just for research publication.
Ethnography (in more detail)
Purpose: Capture rich, contextual narratives about a group or setting.
Examples discussed:
Therapist offices as ethnographic subjects (capturing how environment conveys healing).
Classic ethnography examples (e.g., Rosenhan-inspired field notes) illustrate dehumanization and hospital dynamics.
Limitations: Generalizability is limited; findings are context-specific; typically qualitative data (interviews, observations).
Descriptive statistics (essentials)
Describes a phenomenon using numbers; does not imply causation.
Averages and spread
Mean: \bar{x}=\frac{1}{n}\sum{i=1}^n xi
Range: \text{range}=x{\max}-x{\min}
Mode: most frequent value; if two values tie, data are multimodal.
Median: the middle value when data are ordered.
Example ( exam grades )
Suppose:
Mean = 85\%
Min = 75, Max = 95
If two values tie as most frequent (e.g., 75 and 95), the data are multimodal with modes 75 and 95.
Milgram and landmark obedience research
Stanley Milgram (late 1950s–1960s)
Question: How far would ordinary people go in following authority to harm another person?
Setup: Teacher and learner; shocks administered for wrong answers; an authority figure urged continuation.
Result: Approximately two-thirds (\approx 0.67) of participants continued to the highest shocks despite the learner's distress.
Design notes: Deceptive setup; a white-coated experimenter conveyed authority; procedures included staged signage and staged learning tasks.
Ethical considerations: Controversy over deception and potential psychological distress; led to later updates in APA ethics codes.
Career impact: Milgram’s work shaped discussion of ethics in research; tenure and reputation were affected at times.
David Rosenhan and Rosenhan-style experiments
David Rosenhan (Being Sane in Insane Places, 1973)
Pseudopatients admitted to psychiatric hospitals; clinicians often misdiagnosed or dehumanized patients.
Lesson: Diagnostic labels can be fragile; hospital environment can influence judgments of clinicians.
Forensic/custody evaluations and ethics (summary)
Forensic evaluations
Involve capacity, undue influence, etc.
Usually require licensure and clinical qualifications; involve access to records via court orders; confidential files are privileged.
Ethical considerations
Truthfulness in testimony; avoid conflicts of interest; maintain professional ethics even under pressure.
Historical cautionary notes (e.g., researchers facing ethical scrutiny for methods).
Takeaways for quick recall
Empiricism: Psychology prioritizes evidence from systematic observation.
Methodologies vary in strength and generalizability; order from weakest to strongest roughly: case studies → ethnographies → descriptive → correlational → experimental.
Descriptive statistics summarize data; mean, median, mode, range are basic tools.
Milgram demonstrated strong obedience to authority; ethical debates continue.
Rosenhan highlighted issues with psychiatric labeling and hospital practices.
Forensic/custody work requires licensing and strict ethical safeguards; court orders enable data access.