Chapter 2 - Reading and Evaluating Scientific Research

Question 1

Objective measurements

Answer 1

The measure of an entity or behaviour that, within an allowed margin of error, is consistent across instruments and observers

Question 2

Variable

Answer 2

The object, concept, or event being measured; eg. behavioural measures, MRI, blood or saliva, self-reporting

Question 3

Operational definitions

Answer 3

Statements that describe the procedures (or operations) and/or specific measures that are used to record observations; careful, strict and precise

Question 4

Reliability

Answer 4

When a measure provides consistent and stable answers across multiple observations and points in time

Question 5

Test-retest reliability

Answer 5

Be able to give tea more than once and receive the same result

Question 6

Alternate-forms reliability

Answer 6

The first test may influence the result of the second one so have different forms

Question 7

Inter-rater reliability

Answer 7

Multiple observers of a behaviour should come to the same conclusion

Question 8

Validity

Answer 8

The degree to which an instrument or procedure actually measures what it claims to measure

Question 9

Generalizability

Answer 9

The degree to which one set of results can be applied to other situations, individuals or events (study large groups (sample to population); critical evaluation of findings; beware of cases of over-generalization (“Mozart effect”))

Question 10

What contributes to generalizability?

Answer 10

Sample time and location of study

Question 11

Random sample

Answer 11

Every individual of a population has an equal chance of being included

Question 12

Convenience sample

Answer 12

Samples of individuals who are the most readily available

Question 13

Laboratory vs. naturalistic research

Answer 13

Laboratory research is generally harder to apply than naturalistic research which can be applied to people in the natural environment

Question 14

Ecological validity

Answer 14

The degree to which the results of a laboratory study can be applied to or repeated in the natural environment

Question 15

Researcher bias vs. subject bias

Answer 15

Researcher bias is when the researcher does something in order to change results whereas subject bias is when the subject behaves unnaturally during a study

Question 16

Hawthorne effect

Answer 16

Term used to describe situations in which behaviour changes as a result of being observed; unnatural behaviour when you know you are being watched

Question 17

Demand characteristics

Answer 17

Inadvertent cues given off by the experimenter or the experimental context that provide information about how participants are expected to behave (Clever Hans effect)

Question 18

What was involved in the Clever Hans experiment?

Answer 18

Hans the horse was thought to be able to perform math questions when actually it was a response to the applause he was receiving; Hans and the questioner were isolated from any spectators; they used people other than his owner to ask the questions; Hans was tested with blinders; varied weather the questioner knew the answer to the question in advance

Question 19

Social desirability responding

Answer 19

Research participants respond in ways that increase the chances they will be viewed favourably; can minimize through assurances of anonymous/confidential questioning

Question 20

Observer expectancy effect

Answer 20

Researcher’s expectations can influence subject’s behaviour; eg. teacher ‘favouritism’ (children given label of having ‘extra potential’ actually improved more due to teacher’s high expectations) or ‘bright’ rats vs. ‘dull’ rats (‘bright’ labelled rats did better due to high researcher expectations/care)

Question 21

Placebo effect

Answer 21

A measurable and experienced improvement in health and behaviour that cannot be attributable to a medication or treatment; ‘all in their head’ vs. actual physiological response (some evidence of physiological pain relief and changes in brain activation; conditioning effects such as learning associate the ‘pill’ with feeling better; nocebo effect - when those who are very worried about side effects are actually more likely to experience them)

Question 22

What are the 5 techniques that reduce bias?

Answer 22

Anonymity, confidentiality, inform participants, single-blind study and double-blind study

Question 23

Anonymity

Answer 23

Each individual’s responses are recorded without any name or other personal information that could link a particular individual to specific results; often makes people more likely to participate

Question 24

Confidentiality

Answer 24

The results will only be seen by the researcher

Question 25

Informing participants

Answer 25

Reducing participant's anxiety and social desirability bias

Question 26

Single-blind study

Answer 26

The participants don't know the true purpose of the study, or else do not know which type of treatment they are receiving (i.e. placebo or treatment drug)

Question 27

Double-blind study

Answer 27

Study in which neither the participant nor the experimenter knows the exact treatment for any individual; researcher gains access to conditions after experiment is complete

Question 28

Peer review

Answer 28

A process in which papers submitted for publication in scholarly journals are read and critiqued by experts in the specific field of study to determine whether the paper should be published or not

Question 29

Replication

Answer 29

The process of repeating a study and finding a similar outcome each time even in a different lab by a different researcher

Question 30

What is the replication crisis?

Answer 30

Chance results can and do happen; publication bias results in studies with affirmative evidence being more likely to be accepted into academic journals; how do we know whether to believe the original report or the failed evidence? (studies can fail to be replicated for any number of reasons; we must base our belief on the entirety of the evidence)

Question 31

What are the weak forms of evidence?

Answer 31

Anecdotal evidence, appeal to authority, appeal to common sense, and selective use of data

Question 32

Anecdotal evidence

Answer 32

An individual's story or testimony about an observation or event that is used to make a claim as evidence; trusting you to just believe what you see with no other evidence

Question 33

Appeal to authority

Answer 33

The belief in an "expert's" claim even when no supporting data or scientific evidence is present; a biased expert

Question 34

Appeal to common sense

Answer 34

Tradition (the way things have always been done) vs. novelty (everyone is trying something)

Question 35

Selective use of data

Answer 35

Statistics are often inappropriately used to bolster weak arguments; data can be distorted to show the results that you want to see

Question 36

Descriptive data

Answer 36

From observations; no attempt to explain the 'why' (not testing any predictions or hypotheses); generated from case studies, naturalistic observation and surveys and questionnaires

Question 37

Case studies

Answer 37

In-depth reports about the details of a specific case; difficult to generalize findings; eg. Phineas Gage (had traumatic brain injury and experienced drastic personality changes; went from calm and reasonable to impulsive and more careless)

Question 38

Naturalistic observation

Answer 38

When psychologists unobtrusively observe and record behaviour as it occurs in the subject's natural environment without influencing behaviour

Question 39

Surveys and questionnaires

Answer 39

Participant makes the observations

Question 40

Correlational research

Answer 40

Involves measuring the degree of association between two variables; correlation has direction and magnitude

Question 41

Correlational direction

Answer 41

Positive (++ or - -; same direction) vs. negative (+- or -+; opposite directions)

Question 42

Correlational magnitude

Answer 42

Correlation coefficient (-1 to +1); very high + or very low - show stronger relation; closer to 0 shows low correlation

Question 43

What does it mean by 'correlation doesn't equal causation'?

Answer 43

Just because two things are correlated doesn't mean one definitely causes the other; third variable problem (external factor, an intermediate)

Question 44

Illusory correlations

Answer 44

Correlations where it is somewhat easy to find two variables that follow the same pattern by chance by have no relation; relationships that really exist only in the mind rather than in reality; eg. stereotypes, opposites attract

Question 45

Experimental group

Answer 45

Receives special treatment in regard to the independent variable

Question 46

Control group

Answer 46

Similar subject to experimental group that do not receive the special treatment

Question 47

Random assignment

Answer 47

A technique for dividing samples into two or more groups (experimental vs. control)

Question 48

Experimenter control

Answer 48

Variables are manipulated; allows us to confer causation

Question 49

Independent variable

Answer 49

Variable that we are changing; presumed cause

Question 50

Dependent variable

Answer 50

Variable that we are measuring; presumed effect

Question 51

Between-subjects design

Answer 51

Participants who are in different groups are compared (totally different people in each group); a large sample and random assignment makes equal groups likely, but not guaranteed

Question 52

Confounding variables

Answer 52

Variables outside of the researchers control that might affect the results

Question 53

Within-subjects design

Answer 53

All participants respond to all types of stimuli or experience all experimental conditions (same people make up both groups); order effects (order of conditions can impact results; separating measurements in time; counterbalancing)

Question 54

Quasi-experimental research

Answer 54

A research technique in which two or more groups that are compared are selected based on predetermined characteristics rather than random assignment; eg. comparing men and women; cannot determine cause-and-effect (may be other factors present)

Question 55

Research ethics board (REB)

Answer 55

A committee of researchers and officials at an institution charged with the protection of human research participants; evaluate whether risks outweigh the benefits

Question 56

What are some examples of things that may cause potential stress to patients?

Answer 56

Physical stress; cognitive and emotional stress (writing about traumatic experiences); stress is usually minor, benefits need to outweigh the risks

Question 57

Informed consent

Answer 57

A potential volunteer must be informed of the purpose, tasks, and risks involved in the study, and give consent to participate based on the information provided (topic, nature of stimuli, nature of tasks, duration, risks, steps taken to minimize risks)

Question 58

Deception

Answer 58

Misleading or only partially informing participants of the true topic or hypothesis under investigation (given enough information to consent); can only be considered ethical to a certain point

Question 59

Full consent

Answer 59

Can refuse participation without fear of penalty; given equal opportunities; the right to withdraw; withhold responses

Question 60

Debriefing

Answer 60

The researchers should explain the true nature of the study, and especially the nature of and reason for the deception

Question 61

When are animals used in research?

Answer 61

When treatments cannot be applied to humans for ethical reasons; heritability studies require species with short lifespans (nature vs. nurture); examining evolutionary origins of behaviour and cognition by comparing species

Question 62

What do committees that oversee ethical treatment do?

Answer 62

Ensure given appropriate housing, feeding and sanitation (studies of sick or stressed animals do not provide generalizable results); risk and discomfort needs to be justified and managed humanely

Question 63

Ethical collection, storage and reporting of data

Answer 63

Data is kept for 3-5 years to ensure other researchers can obtain the same result (replication); honesty with data paramount (acknowledge conflicts of interest; scientific misconduct has lasting repercussions such as the unfounded panic surrounding vaccines and autism)

Question 64

Descriptive statistics

Answer 64

A set of techniques used to organize, summarize and interpret data (fequency, central tendency, variability)

Question 65

Frequency

Answer 65

The number of observations that fall within a certain category or range of scores

Question 66

Negatively skewed distribution

Answer 66

Arrow points to the left, peak is on the right

Question 67

Positively skewed distribution

Answer 67

Arrow points to the right, peak is on the left

Question 68

Central tendency

Answer 68

A measure of the central point of a distribution (mean, median, mode)

Question 69

Mean

Answer 69

Average of all the data in a distribution

Question 70

Median

Answer 70

Halfway between the lowest and highest numbers in a distribution

Question 71

Mode

Answer 71

Most frequent number in a distribution

Question 72

Variability

Answer 72

The degree to which scores are dispersed in a distribution; how spread out the values are

Question 73

Standard deviation

Answer 73

A measure of variability around the mean; units of distance away from the central tendency; 68-95-99.7% rule

Question 74

Hypothesis test

Answer 74

A statistical method of evaluating whether differences among groups are meaningful, or could have been arrived at by chance alone

Question 75

Statistical significance

Answer 75

Implies that the mean of the groups are farther apart than you would expect them to be by random chance alone

Question 76

What does testing more people in an experiment do?

Answer 76

Makes significant results more likely, even for meaningless differences

Question 77

What does the calculated value in a hypothesis test indicate?

Answer 77

The degree of difference between groups rather than reducing the significance to a yes/no decision