Openstax Psychology - Ch2 - Psychological Research
Summary
TLDRDr. Market Alum's lecture in the Open Stax Psychology textbook delves into the significance of psychological research, distinguishing it from opinions with empirical evidence. It explores research methods like induction and deduction, and various approaches including case studies, surveys, and observational studies. The lecture addresses ethical considerations in research, such as informed consent and the use of animals, emphasizing the importance of objectivity and the scientific method in understanding human behavior.
Takeaways
- 🔬 Research in psychology is crucial for gaining an objective understanding of human behavior and mental processes, moving beyond personal opinions and cultural superstitions.
- 🌐 Scientific knowledge in psychology is empirical, relying on observable evidence, but challenges arise with internal mental states that aren't directly observable.
- 📺 The impact of media violence on aggression and the effectiveness of prevention programs like DARE are examples where research is necessary to test claims and separate facts from opinions.
- 🔍 Deductive reasoning starts with a generalization and moves to specifics, while inductive reasoning builds theories from observations and tests them, highlighting the importance of both in psychological research.
- 🧠 Theories like Freud's psychoanalytic theory explain observed phenomena, but hypotheses derived from them must be testable and falsifiable to be scientifically valid.
- 📝 Clinical or case studies provide in-depth data on individuals but may not generalize well to the broader population, pointing to external validity concerns.
- 🐵 Naturalistic observation, such as Jane Goodall's chimpanzee studies, offers ecological validity but can be limited by observer effects and high resource investment.
- 📊 Surveys and archival research allow for the collection of large datasets but come with challenges in external validity and potential biases in existing records.
- 📉 Longitudinal and cross-sectional research designs help understand changes over time or differences between age groups, respectively, but each has its own set of limitations and biases.
- 🔗 Correlation indicates a relationship between variables but does not imply causation, often confounded by external factors or misinterpreted due to illusory correlations.
- 🔬 Experimental designs involve control and experimental groups, with operational definitions and manipulations of variables, aiming to eliminate bias and placebo effects for reliable results.
- 📋 Ethics in research are paramount, with Institutional Review Boards (IRB) and Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUC) ensuring the protection of human and animal participants.
Q & A
Why is psychological research important?
-Psychological research is important because it allows us to gain an objective understanding of ourselves and our world by divesting ourselves of preconceived notions and superstitions through systematic scientific research.
What is the difference between empirical knowledge and the study of the mind in psychology?
-Empirical knowledge is grounded in objective, observable evidence, but the study of the mind in psychology is challenging because behaviors are observable, while the mind is not.
How does research help differentiate between facts and opinions?
-Research helps differentiate between facts and opinions by examining claims through systematic investigation. Facts are observable realities, while opinions are personal and may not be accurate.
What is the difference between deductive and inductive reasoning in psychological research?
-Deductive reasoning is top-down, starting with a generalization and testing it against real-world observations. Inductive reasoning is bottom-up, using empirical observations to formulate theories and generate hypotheses that are then tested through deduction.
Why might a clinical or case study be conducted in psychological research?
-A clinical or case study is conducted to gain an enormous amount of data and insight into specific individuals or a small group, although it may have issues with generalizing to a larger population.
What are the advantages and disadvantages of naturalistic observation in psychological research?
-Naturalistic observation has the advantage of high ecological validity as it observes behavior in its natural context. The disadvantages include potential changes in behavior due to awareness of being observed and issues with observer bias.
How do surveys contribute to psychological research?
-Surveys contribute to psychological research by allowing researchers to collect data from a subset of the population through a list of questions answered by research participants.
What is archival research and what are its potential issues?
-Archival research uses existing records to answer research questions without direct interaction with participants. Potential issues include lack of control over data collection and inconsistency between datasets.
What is the difference between longitudinal and cross-sectional research?
-Longitudinal research involves data gathering repeatedly over time from the same subjects, while cross-sectional research compares multiple segments of the population at the same time.
Why is correlation not the same as causation in psychological research?
-Correlation is not the same as causation because correlation only indicates a relationship between variables, but does not imply that one causes the other, due to the possibility of confounding variables.
What is the role of an Institutional Review Board (IRB) in psychological research?
-An IRB is a committee that reviews proposals for research involving human participants to ensure ethical standards are met, including obtaining informed consent and protecting participants' rights.
Outlines
🔬 Importance and Methods of Psychological Research
Dr. Market Alum introduces the second chapter of the Open Stax psychology textbook, emphasizing the significance of psychological research. Research is crucial for an objective understanding of human behavior and the mind, grounded in empirical evidence. The paragraph distinguishes between observable behaviors and the non-observable mind, highlighting the challenges in psychological research. It discusses the link between media violence and aggression, questioning the impact of TV on children's violence and the effectiveness of programs like DARE. The importance of differentiating facts from opinions is stressed, with a focus on the scientific method involving induction and deduction. The paragraph also explains the development and testing of theories and hypotheses, and the challenges of falsifiability in theories like Freud's psychoanalytic theory. Finally, it touches on different research methods, including clinical studies, which provide deep insights into individual cases but may not be generalizable to larger populations.
🌿 Observational and Survey Research Methods
This paragraph delves into various research methods, starting with naturalistic observation, which involves studying behavior in natural settings but may be affected by observer bias. It mentions Jane Goodall's extensive research on chimpanzees, noting the controversy over assigning names to subjects and the high ecological validity of such studies. The paragraph then discusses surveys, emphasizing the importance of sample size and representativeness for external validity. Archival research, which uses existing records, is introduced, noting the lack of control over data collection and potential inconsistencies across datasets. Longitudinal and cross-sectional research designs are compared, with the former tracking the same subjects over time and the latter comparing different age groups simultaneously. The paragraph concludes with a discussion on correlation, explaining the difference between positive and negative correlations and the concept that correlation does not imply causation due to potential confounding variables.
🧬 Experimental Designs and Research Bias
The focus of this paragraph is on experimental designs, beginning with the distinction between experimental and control groups and the importance of operational definitions. It addresses the issue of experimenter bias and how blind studies can mitigate it. The placebo effect is introduced as a phenomenon where expectations can influence outcomes. The paragraph explains the roles of independent and dependent variables in experiments and the challenges of generalizing from college student participants to the broader population. It also touches on the importance of random sampling and assignment for valid experimental design. Statistical analysis is discussed in the context of determining significant differences between groups, with an emphasis on the alpha level. The paragraph concludes with a mention of the APA style manual and the process of peer review, which ensures the replicability and validity of research findings.
📜 Research Ethics, Reliability, and Validity
This final paragraph addresses ethical considerations in research, including the role of Institutional Review Boards (IRBs) in protecting human participants. It discusses the process of informed consent and the importance of debriefing participants, especially when deception is used. The paragraph also covers research ethics concerning animals, mentioning the use of rats, mice, and birds, and the function of Institutional Animal Care and Use Committees (IACUC). The concepts of reliability and validity in research instruments are explained, with examples to illustrate the difference between consistent but incorrect measures and accurate measures. The paragraph ends by promoting the speaker's resources on learning APA style for writing in psychology and social sciences, reinforcing the importance of ethical and methodologically sound research practices.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Psychological Research
💡Empirical
💡Deduction
💡Induction
💡Hypothesis
💡Case Study
💡Naturalistic Observation
💡Survey
💡Archival Research
💡Longitudinal Research
💡Correlation
Highlights
Psychological research is crucial for gaining an objective understanding of human behavior and the mind.
Scientific knowledge in psychology is empirical, grounded in observable evidence.
Research helps to differentiate between facts and opinions, with facts being observable realities.
Deductive reasoning starts with a generalization and applies it to a specific case, as illustrated by Socrates' mortality.
Inductive reasoning involves formulating theories and hypotheses from empirical observations.
Theories in psychology, such as Freud's psychoanalytic theory, aim to explain observed phenomena.
Hypotheses are testable predictions that bridge the gap between ideas and reality.
Falsifiability is a key criterion for a scientific hypothesis, allowing it to be proven incorrect.
Clinical or case studies provide in-depth data on individuals but have limitations in generalizing to larger populations.
Naturalistic observation occurs in the subject's natural context, offering high ecological validity.
Surveys allow researchers to gather data from a subset of the population, with larger samples improving external validity.
Archival research uses existing records to answer research questions without direct interaction with participants.
Longitudinal research tracks the same subjects over time, useful for studying developments like diseases.
Cross-sectional research compares different age groups at the same time, limited by cohort differences.
Correlation indicates a relationship between variables but does not imply causation due to potential confounding variables.
Experimenter bias can skew study results, and blind studies help mitigate this by concealing group assignments.
The placebo effect demonstrates how expectations can influence outcomes in studies.
Random assignment to experimental groups is critical for sound experimental design and external validity.
Statistical analysis determines if differences between groups are significant, using the alpha level to assess chance.
Peer review ensures that research can be replicated, a fundamental aspect of the scientific method.
Reliability refers to the consistency of a measure, but consistency does not guarantee accuracy.
Validity is about the accuracy of a measure, and a valid measure must first be reliable.
Ethical considerations in research include obtaining informed consent and the use of deception and debriefing.
Animal research is regulated by IACUC to ensure humane treatment and is often a substitute for unethical human research.
Learn APA style is recommended for mastering APA formatting and writing in psychology and social sciences.
Transcripts
I'm dr. market alum and I want to
welcome you to the second chapter of the
open Stax psychology textbook today
we'll be discussing psychological
research why it's important approaches
to research analyzing findings and
ethics so let's get started with why is
research important well through
systematic scientific research were able
to divest ourselves of preconceived
notions and superstitions our goal is to
gain an objective understanding of
ourselves and our world now scientific
knowledge is empirical which means that
it's ground in objective observable
evidence the problem for psychology
though is that while behaviors
observable the mind is not so for
example you might see someone crying and
you don't know if they're crying because
they're happy if they're sad or if
they're in pain you need that sort of
insight into their mind the use of
research information well what is the
link between exposure to media violence
and later aggression this has been
argued for over 60 years
so does television make kids violent or
our kids who are prone to violence drawn
to violent TV shows similarly do
programs such as dare actually have any
effect on whether or not someone uses
alcohol or other drugs the data just
don't support the DARE program when
someone makes a claim they have to it
has to be examined through research and
this is a difference between facts and
opinions facts are observable realities
whereas opinions are personal and may or
may not be accurate as Senator Daniel
Patrick Moynihan once said you're
entitled to your own opinion but you're
not entitled to your own facts well
what's the difference between induction
and deduction deduction is top down
whereas induction is bottom up or
data-driven so deduction starts with a
generalization that is tested against
real-world observing
so that is Socrates in that picture it's
actually the death of Socrates
his last words famously being I drink
what but he came up or there's a
syllogism about Socrates that all men
are mortal Socrates is a man therefore
Socrates is mortal and that is an
example of deductive reasoning because
it starts with a generalization and it
ends with something specific
induction uses empirical observations to
formulate theories which generate
hypotheses that are tested through
deduction so BF Skinner or Jean Piaget
their theories were developed through
induction and then tested through
deductions a theory is a well developed
set of ideas that explain an observed
phenomena and so for example we can talk
about psychoanalytic theory now Freud
has a theory that you can divide the
mind into the it'd the ego and the
super-ego you can also have a hypothesis
which is a testable prediction often
word worded as an if-then statement and
it bridges the gap between ideas in
reality so I could say due to gravity I
would hypothesize that if I drop my pen
it'll hit my desk if you heard that that
is a confirmed hypothesis it's tougher
to make hypotheses about the it'd the
ego and the super-ego and a scientific
hypothesis is falsifiable which means
that it's capable of being shown to be
incorrect that's a problem with Freudian
theory it's difficult to disprove it or
make it falsifiable but if a theory is
or excuse me if a hypothesis is
falsifiable that provides us with some
confidence that the information is
correct a clinical or case study focuses
on one person or a small group of people
now why would you do this well when you
focus on just a few individuals you get
an enormous amount of data and insight
into those particular cases however
there may be issues with generalizing
from case studies to
general population and this is what we
would call an external validity issue
for example Freud studied hysteria which
we would now label as conversion
disorder and that's when you have a limb
that doesn't work but the cause is
psychological rather than physical
now Freud generalized from his hysteric
passions to everybody else and that is a
generalizability issue and as I said
earlier a issue of external validity
when you observe a behavior in its
natural context that's naturalistic
observation a problem is that people
might change their behavior if they know
they're being observed now Jane Goodall
spent five decades observing chimpanzee
behavior and she was criticized though
that forgiving the chimps names that
match their personality so she named one
Frodo and he eventually became an alpha
male and became aggressive with her
probably not due to the name though her
favorite chimp was named David Greybeard
and he was friends with another chimp
named Goliath today chimps would be
identified by numbers and letters
you wouldn't assign names based on their
personality now naturalistic observation
has a high degree of ecological validity
because it's better to observe chimps in
their natural environment than in the
zoo but the downside is that there's a
huge investment of time and money and
also issues with observer bias meaning
that people may unconsciously alter
their observations to fulfill their
hypotheses surveys are lists of
questions answered by research
participants a sample is a subset of the
population that researchers are
interested in studying larger samples
are likely to be better because they
begin to approximate the population of
interest which is again an external
validity issue so the more people you
have the more likely they are to match
the characteristics in the population
that you're going to study for example
you might talk to or ask
and 40 people about their prejudicial
attitudes and the book talks about a
study that was done a decade after 9/11
and they found lingering prejudices
about some groups of people archival
research is something that I do quite a
bit of I study personal ads that people
place in online and used to be in
newspapers and I study things like the
way older people are portrayed in the
media now this is when you use existing
records to answer research questions
researchers doing archival research
never directly interact with research
participants so for example we've
studied the portrayal of Aging in
birthday cards and I can tell you that
older people are apparently the only
group that you can still mock about
issues that have to do with getting
older so issues of memory mobility and
sexual functioning it's very
inappropriate but it's still done a
problem with archival research actually
two problems one is that researchers
have no control over how the data was
collected and there's no guarantee of
consistency between datasets from one
source to another so in terms of the
datings research that I do and personal
ads some free sites may attract
different kinds of people than paid
personal ad sites might longitudinal
research is a design where data
gathering occurs repeatedly over time so
you might survey the same people about
their dietary habits at 30 then at 40
then at 50 but it's the same people
cross-sectional research is when
multiple segments of the population are
compared at the same time so a group of
people in who are 20 are compared to a
different group of people who are 30 and
to a different group of people who are
40 etc cross-sectional research is
limited by differences between cohorts
and because different people in
different generations go through
different social and cultural
experiences longitudinal research is
used or is best used in studying things
like disease and risk factors because
you can see how they develop over a
lifetime
how if however issues with time meaning
that they take a lot of time money they
cost a lot of money
attrition people drop out of
longitudinal studies all the time and
survivor bias which is when you
generalize from people who make it all
the way through a longitudinal design
are all issues with this research
correlation means that there's a
relationship between two or more
variables and that it's not necessarily
causal a correlation coefficient known
as Pearson's R is bounded by negative
one which means a perfect negative or
inverse correlation and plus one which
is a perfect positive or direct
correlation zero means no correlation so
a positive correlations that direct
relationship and a negative correlation
is an inverse relationship and an
example would be the relationship
between height and weight which is in
the figure to the right that's a
positive or direct relationship because
in general taller people weigh more so
I'm six-two and I weigh 180 which is
probably more than someone who's 5:2
correlation does not imply causation due
to the possibility of a confounding
variable so for example there is a
relationship a positive correlation
between ice cream and drowning the more
ice cream that's sold the more people
drown now that's not because ice cream
causes people to drown it's because both
are related to summertime where people
are swimming more people are eating ice
cream you might also find illusory
correlations those occur when people
believe relationships exist between
variables so some people think that
there's a relationship between the moon
phase and mood and the DA P is the draw
person test which is also an illusory
correlation i always remember and it
Stroeve peanuts cartoon where Charlie
Brown tells Linus that he drew his hands
behind his back because he's insecure
and Linus says no it's because he can't
draw hands that's illusory correlation
so why does this occur well one answer
is confirmation bias and this is when we
believe something to be true we seek
supportive evidence and ignore non
supportive evidence so for example
research shows that an automotive
shopping people do research after they
buy a car to confirm that they made a
good choice when obviously you should do
the research before you go shopping most
basic experimental designs have two
groups an experimental group in a
control group and they're treated the
same except for the experimental
manipulation an operational definition
is the precise meaning of a variable
within an experiment now operational
definitions are necessary but they're
always insufficient so if we are
studying something like violent behavior
we might include hitting and kicking but
not abusive verbal behavior which is
certainly a violent act but again that's
why these are necessary but always
insufficient where do you draw the line
at what is a violent act or violent
behavior experimenter bias is when
researchers expectations may skew the
results of the study and so a way to
deal with experimenter bias is through
single or double blind studies in a
single blind study participants don't
know what group they're in so they don't
know if they're in the experimental
group of the control group in a
double-blind study neither the
participants nor other researchers know
the group that the participants are in
the placebo effect is shows that
expectations can influence outcomes so
if you're given a pill and told that
it'll make you drowsy you might actually
fall asleep
an independent variable is manipulated
by the experimenter and a dependent
variable is measured by the experimenter
so one of the reasons why it's called a
dependent variable is because its value
is thought to be dependent on whether
you receive the independent variable or
not
participants are often college students
and this leads to what's called the
volunteer problem because college
students tend to be younger more
educated more broad-minded and less
diverse than the general population
so again this is an external validity
issue ideally we like to work from a
random sample and that's when every
member of the population has an equal
chance of being selected for being in
the study but those really occur only in
textbooks much more common is random
assignment and this is when all
participants have an equal chance of
being assigned to either group in an
experiment and that's really critical
for sound experimental design once your
data is collected a statistical analysis
is conducted to see if there are
meaningful differences between your
groups differences are significant if
there's a 5% or less likelihood that
that result is due to chance and that's
what's known as the alpha level
experiments assert that significant
differences are due to the impact of the
independent variable now
the APA publishes a style manual for
submitting your paper for peer review
and that's the book that I wrote on how
to teach to teach students how to write
in APA style these peers anonymously
judge the value of your research and
they're usually professionals and
scholars who are actively involved in
research themselves one of the reasons
why they are studying or examining your
research is due to their replication so
peer review makes sure that other
scientists can replicate the research
which means that they can repeat it and
get the same results which is crucial to
the scientific method
reliability is all about consistency but
being consistent is not the same as
being correct so for example as I said
earlier I weigh a hundred and eighty
pounds but I may get on a scale that
says I weigh 130 pounds that I might
step off it again and step on it again
and it says I weigh 130 degrees 30
degrees 130 pounds again now that scale
is reliable because it's giving me the
same weight over and over again but it's
not valid at least unless I've lost
several limbs and suddenly weigh 50
pounds less validity is all about truth
so the extent to which a given
instrument accurate accurately measures
what it's supposed to measure is its
validity for a measure to be valid it
has to be reliable but like I said
before with weight a reliable measure
doesn't have to be valid so a legitimate
question to ask is to the acct and SAT
correctly measure scholastic aptitude
are they reliable and valid measures
let's talk about ethics and research so
an IRB is an institutional review board
and that's a committee that reviews
proposals for research involving human
participants now the in Fort you'll have
to sign an informed consent form and
that tells you what participants can
expect including the risks and
implications of the research and you're
also informed of your rights such as the
the fact that your participation is
completely voluntary and that you're
free to withdraw from the study at any
time
deception involves purposely misleading
participants and so the picture is
actually from the Milgram obedience
experiment where participants were told
that they were shocking people to death
now they weren't really they were being
deceived
debriefing happens at the conclusion of
a study and it tells participants what
the purpose of the experiment was how
the data was used
and if deception was used why it was
necessary let's talk about research with
animals - researchers often use rats
mice and birds as research subjects in
the APA estimates that 90% of animals
that are used in research are in fact
rats mice and birds they're considered
to be substitutes for research that
would be unethical if it was done to
human participants and you would have an
IACUC which is an institutional Animal
Care and Use Committee and that's
basically what an animal research IRB is
and they ensure the humane treatment of
animal research subjects well to finish
up I will remind you again that all your
APA problems can be solved through learn
APA style so when you want to learn to
write correctly or write write you can
consult my book and videos on learn APA
style which are about writing in
psychology and the social sciences
thanks for listening
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)