Ψ 101/101 Sep THINKING CRITICALLY: Part 1. Learning Objectives. Learning Objectives cnt. Overview

Transcription

1 THINKING CRITICALLY: Part 1 Ψ 101/101 Sep Learning Objectives Understand hindsight bias, and explain how it can make research findings seem like mere common sense. Understand Overconfidence and its possible effects Understand the scientific attitude Understand the different functions of theories Understand the advantages & disadvantages of case studies, survey studies, naturalistic studies, and experiments Explain positive & negative correlations, the role of correlation research, and its failure to reveal cause-effect relationships Understand illusory correlations Explain why the double-blind procedure and random assignment build confidence in research findings Understand the ethical issues involved in research with humans as well as in research with animals Overview Learning Objectives cnt Scientific method & why we need it Study methods/types: Uses, advantages & disadvantages Understanding experiments Confounds & how to deal with them Ethical principles for researchers The publication circuit/circus & components of journal articles Video: Understanding research (Annenberg) Understand the following measuring scales: nominal, ordinal, interval & ratio Explain the difference between independent, dependent, controlled and noise variables Explain how bar graphs can be used to misrepresent data Describe and use three measures of central tendency, and tell which is most affected by extreme scores Describe and use two measures of variability: range & standard deviation Identify factors that affect generalizability of findings Explain how psychologists decide whether differences are meaningful Explain the value of simplified laboratory conditions in discovering general principles of behavior

2 The Scientific Method Why do we need the scientific method What is the scientific method A method for gaining knowledge a way of knowing Why We Need the Scientific Method Hindsight bias or the I-knew-it-all-along phenomenon: The tendency to exaggerate one s ability to have foreseen how something would turn out after learning how it has turned out The overconfidence phenomenon: The tendency to overestimate the accuracy of our current knowledge 1977: There is no reason for anyone to have a computer in their home 1895: Heavier-than-air flying machines are impossible 1957: Man will never reach the moon, regardless of all future scientific advances 1955: Nuclear powered vacuum cleaners will probably be a reality within 10 years Why We Need the Scientific Method The Scientific Method Making Decisions about Proverbs The grass is greener on the other side of the street A chain is no stronger than its weakest link Absence makes the heart grow fonder All that glitters is not gold Bad news travels fast Curiosity killed the cat Intuition and Illustrative Cases are not a Strong Foundation for Science or Practice Requires the proper attitude The scientific method is an approach to making observations (collecting data), under the guidance of theories, and with data used to refine their theories The scientific method is a self-correcting process for asking questions and observing nature s answers

3 The Scientific Attitude The Scientific Method The scientific attitude is characterized by regarding the world with curious skepticism & humility, with a passion to explore and to understand (curiosity) with insisting on evidence with humility, i.e., the conviction that our understanding of nature is incomplete, that new things remain to be explored and understood with engaging in critical thinking, which is: Open minded Aware of inherent biases and assumptions Skeptical Alert to the distinction between opinion versus fact Unwilling to oversimplify Insist on logic & systematic review Involves a series of steps: identify a problem you would like to solve formulate a hypothesis test the hypothesis collect and analyze the data make conclusions A Self-Correcting Process Identify a Problem Theory Casual Observation Hypothesis Pose a question that can be answered by the scientific method Not all question can be addressed by the scientific method Experimental Research Correlational Research Descriptive Research Operationalize critical parts To operationalize = To give an exact description of how to derive a value for the variable being manipulated and/or measured

4 Formulate a Hypothesis The Case Study A hypothesis is a scientist's best estimation or guess, based on evidence and/or theories, of the outcome of an experiment H 0 = New study method has no effect on test scores H 1 = New study method will make a difference to test scores H 1 = New study method will improve test scores H 0 = Drug X will not affect illness H 1 = Drug X will affect illness H 1 = Drug X will decrease illness A case study is a detailed study of one individual, group, device, event, etc. Advantages of case studies: Taking advantage of unique cases (e.g., HM, Piaget) To gain ideas, insights To obtain illustrative anecdotes, illustrative examples Limitations of Case Studies: Virtually useless for testing theories Study may not be replicable Research Methods: Overview Design & carry out a study Case study Survey study Naturalistic observational study Survey & correlational studies Experimental study Summarize, analyze & interpret the data, write a report, and get it in print The Survey Study A survey is a method for ascertaining the selfreported attitudes, emotions, preferences, behaviors, habits, etc. of individuals or of groups of individuals Advantages of survey studies: Easy/cheap/quick to obtain large amount of data Can be used learn about any type of issue/question High in ecological validity Limitations of survey Studies: Wording of questions/items and ordering of questions/items affects results Respondents may not be honest, may fake positive Very difficult to obtain a representative sample

5 Naturalistic Observation The Experiment Naturalistic observation involves observing and recording behavior in naturally occurring situations, without manipulating, controlling, influencing the situation Advantages of naturalistic observation: High in ecological validity May spark new research May complement experimental/lab research Limitations of naturalistic observation: Used for describing behavior, not for explaining it Often difficult to obtain a complete description of all variable that influence behavior An experiment is a research method in which one or more variables is/are manipulated and the effects on one or more events/behaviors is/are measured Advantage of experimental studies: Provides insight into cause-effect relationships Limitations of experimental studies: Very difficult to control all variables other than those being manipulated Experimental situation may be artificial, lacking in ecological validity Experimental situation itself may affect outcome (Hawthorne effect) Results may not generalize to real-world context The Correlational Study Critical Concepts A correlational study is a systematic assessment of the relationship between two or more variables Related to (often the same as) the survey study May involve an examination of existing records Purpose is to learn about the relationship between two or more variables, to make predictions from one to the other variable Advantages of correlational studies: Easy/cheap/quick to obtain large amount of data Can be used address nearly any events/behaviors High in ecological validity Limitations of correlational studies: Cannot provide information about cause-effect links Types of variables/factors Independent Dependent Control Noise Operationalizing variables Conditions of experiments Experimental versus control within or between subjects Blinding: Single-blind, double-blind

6 An Experiment Famous Confounds Experimental Group Control Group Mnemonic present Mnemonic absent Experimenter manipulates & controls variables Learn & Recall List Learn & Recall List The subject does the experiment & determines outcome Is there a performance difference between groups? Self-fulfilling prophecy The prediction of events that do in fact come about, because of one's belief in the prediction and enactment or lack of enactment on that belief, thus reinforcing the belief The finding that a person or group predicts and deeply believes that certain events will come about, that person or group will (sometimes unconsciously) modify behaviors or engage in those behaviors that will create those situations that will cause the predicted events to come about. "If men define things as real, they are real in their consequences (W. I. Thomas). Famous Confounds Common Confounds The Hawthorne effect An Initial improvement in a process of production caused by the obtrusive observation of that process. A distortion of research results caused by the response of subjects to the special attention they receive from researchers. The designation "Hawthorne" derives from a number of studies which were performed on workers at the Western Electric Plant in Cicero, Illinois, in One of the studies was in regard to improved lighting which was found to significantly improve worker productivity. Rather than simply accept this data one investigator decided to repeat the study with decreased lighting and found that this also improved productivity. The conclusion was that it was the attention itself which was the important factor, not the lighting. Goal of study: To find out how bird in cage reacts to different types of stimulus birds IV: Identity of bird-pictures used as stimuli DV: How bird reacts when each stimulus is shown (what do we measure?) Confound: Effect of birdidentify on DV may be due to order in which pictures are presented

7 Counterbalancing Research Ethics Counterbalancing is a method used for removing the confounding influence due to stimulus/condition order Counterbalancing does not remove the influence due to stimulus/condition order; it transforms this influence into noise Related research tactics: Random assignment of subjects, stimuli or conditions All research with humans or animals must undergo an ethics review In Canada, research with humans must comply with the tri-council policy statement The people of Canada, through Acts of Parliament have created and funded the MRC, NSERC and SSHRC, to promote, assist and undertake research in the domains indicated by their names. In discharging our mandates, the Councils wish to promote research that is conducted according to the highest ethical standards. The Councils have therefore adopted this policy as our standard of ethical conduct for research involving human subjects. As a condition of funding, we require, as a minimum, that researchers and their institutions apply the ethical principles and the articles of this policy. Using Placebos UBC Policies Experimental Group Control Group Drug Placebo Experimenter manipulates & controls variables Learn & Recall List Learn & Recall List The subject does the experiment & determines outcome Is there a performance difference between groups? The UBC ethics boards ( Human Subjects: Any project carried out by a person connected with the University, which involves human subjects, must conform to University Policy #89: Research and Other Studies Involving Human Subjects. Animal Care: Any research or teaching conducted at UBC facilities, or by persons connected to the University, involving the use of animals (including fish and invertebrates) must conform to the University Policy on Research and Teaching Involving Animals and must have the approval of the UBC Committee on Animal Care.

8 The Ethics Framework Ethics Principles The need for research Research involving human subjects is premised on a fundamental moral commitment to advancing human welfare, knowledge and understanding, and to examining cultural dynamics. Researchers, universities, governments and private institutions undertake or fund research involving human subjects for many reasons, for example: to alleviate human suffering, to validate social or scientific theories, to dispel ignorance, to analyze policy, and to understand human behavior and the evolving human condition. Respect for free and informed consent Individuals are generally presumed to have the capacity and right to make free and informed decisions. Respect for persons thus means respecting the exercise of individual consent. In practical terms within the ethics review process, the principle of respect for persons translates into the dialogue, process, rights, duties and requirements for free and informed consent by the research subject. Ethics Principles Ethics Principles Respect for human dignity An ethic of research involving human subjects should include two essential components: (1) The selection and achievement of morally acceptable ends, and (2) the morally acceptable means to those ends. It is unacceptable to treat persons solely as means (mere objects or things), because doing so fails to respect their intrinsic human dignity and thus impoverishes all of humanity. Respect for vulnerable persons Respect for human dignity entails high ethical obligations towards vulnerable persons -- to those whose diminished competence and/or decision-making capacity make them vulnerable. Children, institutionalized persons or others who are vulnerable are entitled, on grounds of human dignity, caring, solidarity and fairness, to special protection against abuse, exploitation or discrimination. Ethical obligations to vulnerable individuals in the research enterprise will often translate into special procedures to protect their interests.

9 Ethics Principles Ethics Principles Respect for privacy and confidentiality Respect for human dignity also implies the principles of respect for privacy and confidentiality. In many cultures, privacy and confidentiality are considered fundamental to human dignity. Thus, standards of privacy and confidentiality protect the access, control and dissemination of personal information. In doing so, such standards help to protect mental or psychological integrity. Balancing harms and benefits The analysis of the balance and distribution of harms and benefits is critical to the ethics of human research. Modern research ethics, for instance, require a favorable harms-benefit balance -- that is, that the foreseeable harms should not outweigh anticipated benefits. Harms-benefits analysis thus affects the welfare and rights of research subjects, the informed assumption of harms and benefits, and the ethical justifications for competing research paths. Because research involves advancing the frontiers of knowledge, its undertaking often involves uncertainty about the precise magnitude and kind of benefits or harms that attend proposed research. Ethics Principles Respect for justice and inclusiveness Justice connotes fairness and equity. Procedural justice requires that the ethics review process have fair methods, standards and procedures for reviewing research protocols, and that the process be effectively independent. Justice also concerns the distribution of benefits and burdens of research. On the one hand, distributive justice means that no segment of the population should be unfairly burdened with the harms of research. It thus imposes particular obligations toward individuals who are vulnerable and unable to protect their own interests in order to ensure that they are not exploited for the advancement of knowledge. On the other hand, distributive justice also imposes duties neither to neglect nor discriminate against individuals and groups who may benefit from advances in research. REB Approval Research that has been approved by the REB will receive a Certificate of Approval. Provided there is no modification of procedures, a completed Certificate of Approval will be valid for one year at the end of which time (or earlier if any modification is introduced) a new protocol must be submitted and the procedures re-examined by the REB.

10 SA Questions Elements of Reports What is the hindsight bias, the overconfidence phenomenon, the confirmation bias What is the scientific attitude What is the scientific method Why do researchers do case studies What are 3 advantages of survey studies What are 2 limitations of naturalistic observation studies Why do researchers carry out correlation studies What is an experiment What does it mean to operationalize a variable What is a placebo; what is a placebo effect What is the Hawthorne effect What is meant by the ethics principle respect for vulnerable persons Name one type of individual who may not be able to give informed consent and explain why not Title page: Authors, affiliations, funding sources Abstract & Introduction Gives overview & sets the stage for the project Motivates the project Reviews the relevant literature (theory, methods, findings) States hypothesis, explains how core variables were operationalized, and gives overview of study Method Gives a detailed description of the steps that were taken to conduct the study the goal is to enable replication Subjects & Design Materials & Aparatus Procedure Data analysis strategies FROM THE LAB TO LIBRARY Elements of Reports MS of Project Submit to Journal MS in press Galley proofs MS in print Editor Reviewer A Editor Decision Reviewer B Revise MS Reviewer C Request Revisions Results Reviews hypothesis and critical Independent Variables (IVs) and Dependent Variables (DVs) Describes how data were prepared Describes the findings (tables and figures) Reports stats analysis methods and results Discussion Summarizes core findings Discusses generalizability of findings (related to prior research) Discusses implications of findings for core hypothesis (theoretical implications) Discusses new ideas raised by findings Discusses limitations of findings and study