Opening Remark: Unit 1: Chapters 1, 2, and 3 Dr. Joseph A. Mayo Professor of Psychology HUSV Chapter 1: Research in the Human Services

Transcription

1 Unit 1: Chapters 1, 2, and 3 Dr. Joseph A. Mayo Professor of Psychology HUSV 3001 Chapter 1: Research in the Human Services Opening Remark: Designing research is not a series of isolated tasks; it is a process of interconnected parts (Loseke, 2013, p. 81). 1

2 Social Research Approach Exploration: Empirical Systematic Focuses on human social life Basic (pure) vs. applied research Goals of Social Research 1. Description 2. Prediction 3. Explanation 4. Evaluation Therefore, there is a cumulative approach to social research in this ascending order 1. Descriptive 2. Relational 3. Causal 2

3 Chapter 2: The Logic of Social Research How Do We Come to Know the World? Epistemology: The philosophy of knowing (sources of knowledge) Common-Sense Approach Practical experience Talking with people we know Information from people we do not know: Bloggers Anonymous web-page authors Authors of non-scholarly printed and electronic media Journalists Talk-show hosts Public speakers Social and community organizations Conventional wisdom Traditional practices Pure logic Class Activity: Common Sense vs. Research- Based Knowing 3

4 Common Sense vs. Research-Based Knowing Common Sense: Research: Unless we decide not to, we usually observe inaccurately. We consciously decide what and how to observe. Common sense: Research: We observe selectively to find what we re seeking. Once again, we consciously decide what and how to observe. Common sense: We usually generalize from only a few cases. Research: We explicitly sample for generalizing. 4

5 Common sense: Research: We make things up to fill in the gaps. (1) (2) (3) We base conclusions only on supporting evidence. Common sense: We believe in luck. Research We have to document and back up conclusions. Common sense: Research: We get personally and emotionally involved. We have to respect scientific norms, regardless of our personal opinions. 5

6 Common sense: Research: We form our views prematurely with little or no revision. We can constantly revise our views. Common sense: Research: Some things we just can t know. We can t rule out any area as unknowable (e.g., ESP). Therefore, compared to common-sense knowing, research knowledge Is more conscious. Is more careful. Often refutes common sense. Is not generated by the same methods or evaluated by the same criteria. 6

7 The Study of Social Research 1. Social research design: Forming research questions Showing why these questions are important Conceptualizing and operationalizing major concepts Choosing a sample Selecting techniques for data collection and analysis Writing a report of results Hourglass Metaphor for Research Methods 2. Methodological thinking: Think critically. Treat all knowledge as tentative. Understand importance of each element of research design. Think both as scientist and artist. Know appropriate uses of research tools. Understand characteristics and consequences of methodological diversity 7

8 Components of social research: 1. Data o Content o Origin o Form 2. Concepts 3. Theories Direction of Reasoning between Data and Concepts/Theories Deduction (theory testing) Induction (grounded theory) Deductive Thinking Theory Hypothesis Observation Confirmation 8

9 Inductive Thinking Theory Tentative hypothesis Pattern Observation Interconnected Framework for Social Research Models of social life Research designs 1. Positivist 1. Qualitative 2. Interpretive 2. Quantitative 3. Critical 4. Pragmatist Research methods 1. Research questions 2. Data collection 3. Data analysis 4. Interpretation 5. Validation Competing Models of Social Life Underlying Human Service Research Eclecticism Four models: 1. Positivist/Postpositivist 2. Interpretive/Constructivist 3. Critical/Transformative 4. Pragmatist 9

10 The Positivist/Postpositivist View of Research Social science = natural science (naturalistic) Objective and value-free Empirical observation and measurement Theory verification Rejecting absolute truth of knowledge Gaining knowledge to improve the world Social world = deterministic Predictable order and cohesion Causes determining effects or outcomes The Interpretive/Constructivist View of Research Social science = rooted in humanities Max Weber Anti-positivist Personal values and biases Understanding complexities of human experience Social world = natural world Focusing on personal meanings Cognitive and social constructivism The Critical/Transformative View of Research Social science = driven by social inequality Derived from critical theorists Participatory action research Conflict and domination Society s material conditions Social world = oriented around power relations Oppressors and the oppressed Value-engaged research aimed at reform 10

11 The Pragmatist View of Research Social science = applied and utilitarian Charles S. Peirce, William James, George Herbert Mead, & John Dewey Selecting varied research designs to best meet needs Truth = what works at any given time Social world = context-specific Research occurring in multiple contexts Open to both qualitative and quantitative methods Two Research Designs 1. Qualitative research (interpretive & critical): Individual meanings Open-ended questions (see Q-chart) Data collection in participant s setting Induction Words as preferred data type Social complexity and what is distinctly human Final report flexible 2. Quantitative research (positivist): Testing relationships among measurable variables Closed-ended questions Numbered data Statistical analysis of data generated Deduction for theory testing Discovering social patterns/relationships Predicting causes & consequences of behavior Final report structured NOTE: Qualitative & quantitative designs can be mixed (pragmatist). Criteria for Selecting a Research Design Qualitative approach is best when: Researcher uncertain about importance of variables New topic Unexplored sample of population Dominant explanations not applying to sample of population Quantitative approach is best when: Testing causal relationships Evaluating success of intervention Establishing which factors best predict an outcome Testing theories 11

12 Types of Variables Independent variable: Leads to or causes an observed outcome/effect (often called the treatment) Dependent variable: Is potentially affected by the independent variable Independent Dependent Not manipulable Manipulable Family structure Economic status Schooling Special tutoring Academic achievement Dimensions in Defining Variables Socioeconomic Status Dimension 1: Income Dimension 2: Education 12

13 SAT Scores: Correlation vs. Causation Types of Relationships between Variables Positive Negative None A Positive Relationship 13

14 A Negative Relationship No Relationship Correlation Coefficient 14

15 Class Activity: Correlation vs. Causation Types of Hypotheses Null hypothesis = predicts no observed change or effect (presumed true until evidence refutes it) Alternative (directional) hypothesis = predicts the direction of an observed change or effect (onetailed) Alternative (nondirectional) hypothesis = predicts an observed change or effect, but not its direction (two-tailed) One-tailed hypothesis: Null hypothesis: Employee training program will reduce employee absenteeism. There will be no change in absenteeism due to employee training. 15

16 One-Tailed (Directional) Hypothesis Two-tailed hypothesis: Null hypothesis: Our new drug treatment will lead to an observed change in depression. There will be no change in depression as a result of treatment. Two-Tailed (Nondirectional) Hypothesis 16

17 Statistical Hypothesis Testing Types of statistical errors: Type I error = probability of rejecting a true null hypothesis Type II error = probability of failing to reject a false null hypothesis Alpha level (α)= probability at which null hypothesis will be rejected ( statistical significance usually expressed in & set at p <.05 or <.01) Setting alpha levels too low (.10 or.20) increases likelihood of a Type I error Setting extremely rigorous alpha levels (.001) increases the likelihood of a Type II error Chapter 3: Ethical Issues in Social Research Historical Context: Why Do Human Research Subjects Need Protection? Infamous trigger events: o Watson s (1920) early psychological study of Little Albert o Nazi experiments (WW II) o Tuskegee syphilis study (1932 early 1970 s) Controversial social psychological research involving intentional deception: o Stanley Milgram s shock experiment o Philip Zimbardo s Stanford prison experiment Deception in contemporary social and behavioral research: o Hawthorne effect o Debriefing 17

18 NOT JUST AN ISSUE OF THE DISTANT PAST. On April 20, 2010, Arizona State University (ASU) agreed to pay $700,000 to 41 members of the Havasupai Indian tribe to settle legal claims that university researchers improperly used tribe members' blood samples in genetic research. Source: Ethical Issues Voluntary participation Ethical Issues Voluntary participation Risk of harm 18

19 Ethical Issues Voluntary participation Risk of harm Anonymity Ethical Issues Voluntary participation Risk of harm Anonymity Confidentiality Ethical Issues Voluntary participation Risk of harm Anonymity Confidentiality Right to services Tuskegee syphilis study 19

20 Ethical Issues Voluntary participation Risk of harm Anonymity Confidentiality Right to services Informed consent Informed Consent Process Informed consent is information exchange including subject recruitment materials, verbal instructions, written materials, question and answer sessions, and signature documenting consent with date. Subjects are given opportunity to choose involvement based on information, comprehension, and voluntariness. Is the key to respecting autonomy Provides a reasonable assurance that the subject has not been deceived or coerced Special considerations required with those who are considered vulnerable Vulnerable Populations & Informed Consent Persons who may not be able to make free and informed decisions about their participation in research or medical care are considered vulnerable. Vulnerable populations may be easily coerced or have limited freedom to choose. Persons identified as vulnerable require additional safeguards in the research informed-consent process: Pregnant women and fetuses Children and wards of the state (e.g., foster children) Prisoners Cognitively impaired Non-English speaking persons Illiterate persons Terminally ill Financially impaired 20

21 Steps in the Informed Consent Process 1. Starts with an exchange of essential information about the research (e.g., interview) 2. Allows an opportunity for the subject to ask questions and have them answered 3. Is evidenced by the signing of an informed consent form 4. Is documented in record 5. Requires giving a copy of the informed consent form to the subject 6. Continues at each interaction by providing the subject new information as it develops before, during, and after the study Required Elements of Informed Consent Statement that the study involves research Description of research Description of potential risks Description of potential benefits Financial compensation to participant (if applicable) Disclosure of alternatives (if applicable) Guarantee of privacy Participation voluntary Parental/guardian permission if subjects are legal minors Whom to contact [include name and contact information for principal investigator & faculty supervisor (if applicable)] Additional Elements of Informed Consent Unforeseeable risks Early termination Additional costs to subjects Consequences of a subject's decision to withdraw from study participation Disclosing new findings that may impact a subject's willingness to continue participation Number of subjects involved 21

22 Generic Sample: Informed Consent Form Institutional Review Boards (IRB) Reviewing proposed research Protecting participants, institution/organization, and researcher IRB has authority to Approve the research. Require modifications before approving the research. Disapprove the research. Table the research protocol until changes are made. 22

23 Criteria for IRB Approval 1. Risks minimized 2. Risks reasonable relative to anticipated benefits and importance of knowledge to be gained 3. Subject selection equitable 4. Informed consent sought & properly documented 5. Data collection monitored to ensure safety 6. Protecting subject privacy Common Mistakes to Avoid When Submitting IRB Applications Indicating that data is anonymous when it is actually confidential. Stating that there are no risks involved in the activity. Even though the risks may be low, they need to be listed in the application. Consent form, survey, and/or interview instruments are not attached for review. Ethical Issues in Sponsored Research Third-party sponsors controlling release of collected data Researcher heavily modifies the study to examine matters not in the research agreement Revealing the sponsor s identity as part of informed consent 23

24 Ethical Challenges in Internet-Based Research Public and private as a continuum: o Public o Semipublic o Semiprivate o Private Important considerations: o Intrusiveness o Perceived privacy o Vulnerability and harm o Confidentiality and anonymity 24