Unit 2: Research Methods

1. Introduction
1. People turn to psychology in many ways and for many different
reasons. The trick, though, is to distinguish fact from opinion.
2. Many people and world leaders believe in their instincts and go by their
“gut feeling”.
3. Many times our instincts are wrong, however. People tend to repeatedly
over-estimate their ability to go by gut feelings.
2. Did we know it all along? Hindsight bias

1. People often have hindsight bias – looking back in time makes an

event seem as though it were inevitable to happen. This is like saying, “I knew it all
along,” or, “Hindsight is 20-20.”

1. After something happens, it just seems so obvious. What’s

more, people tend to believe that they actually saw it coming.

2. Hindsight bias seems to be common sense. But, it goes both ways.

People can have “common sense” in opposite or conflicting directions. Thus, there’s a
problem.
3. Psychological studies often oppose “common sense” and our body
determines much about what we do and feel.

2. Overconfidence

1. People are often overconfident. Overconfidence occurs when we are

more confident that we know something than we are correct.

1. An example study had people unscramble jumbled words. Once

they saw the word unscrambled, hindsight bias made them think they knew it all along
and that the task was easy.
2. People predicted they’d unscramble the word in a few
seconds. In actuality, it was minutes—overconfidence.

1. The scientific attitude

1. The main principle of science is to let the facts speak for themselves.
There are 3 underlying parts to science…

1. Curiosity – you need to really want to find the truth.

2. Skepticism – scientists don’t take people merely at their claims,
scientists seek factual proof.
3. Humility – a scientist has to be able to admit when he or she is
proven wrong by the facts.

1. Critical thinking

1. Scientists always ask questions, the top questions being, “What

evidence do you have to support that?” or “Are there any possible alternative
explanations?”

1. The scientific method

1. The basic steps of the scientific method are:

1. Hypothesis – a statement predicts the outcome.

2. Procedure – decide on a research method and a procedure to
carry it out.
3. Observation – recording the results by letting the results speak
for themselves.
4. Conclusion – measuring the observed results against the
hypothesis’ prediction.
5. Report findings – by reporting results to others, they can
replicate the experiment if desired.

2. A theory is an explanation that organizes observations and tries to

predict outcomes.
3. A hypothesis is a prediction that can be tested.

1. Experimenter bias can be a problem when testing a hypothesis.

If not careful, they can see what they expect to see.

4. To cut down on bias, an operational definition is formed. An

operational definition has two parts: (1) a precise statement of the experimenter’s
procedures and conceptsand (2) something that is measured numerically.
1. We need numbers because otherwise there’s no way to be sure
about things. This is the subjective vs. objective problem.

1. Subjectivity is a judgment based on or including a

person’s opinion or emotions – “A rose is a beautiful symbol of love.”
2. Objectivity is a judgment that has had opinion or emotion
stripped away from it. – “A rose is a plant, normally 6 to 24 inches tall. It often has a
thorny stem, serrated leaves, and a large-petal flower that issues a scent.”
3. Suppose someone was to say, “Person A is happier than
person B, I can just tell” (subjective statement). But it’s better to say, “Person A smiled
5.8 times more per hour than person B and, according to our definition that smiling is
a sign of happiness, person A is therefore happier than B.”

2. A good operational definition should be detailed enough to

enable other scientists to replicate the experiment if they wished. This way, other
scientists can replicate the experiment and either support the hypothesis or debunk it.
5. The 3 main types of methods of research used by psychologists are:

1. Description

1. Case study

1. A case study is a thorough study of one person in

hopes of learning about people in general. Think of a manila folder stuffed with
everything about a person – letters written, photos, researcher’s notes, interviews, 3rd
grade test scores, etc.
2. A problem with case studies is that of numbers –
studying only one person then applying the results to all people is risky. The person
may not exemplify all people.
3. Case studies can lead psychologists to other, more
reliable, types of studies.

2. Survey
1. A survey asks questions and deals with many more
people (cases), but in much less depth.
2. Surveys can easily gather info from a large number
of people. They can easily quantifydata (turn something into numbers) whereas a
case study may have trouble doing this. This is critical to meet the operational
definition.
3. Surveys often have problems…

1. Wording – the results of the survey

can be dramatically different depending
on the wording of the survey and/or the
question order. Here, the survey itself is
changing its own results.
2. Random sampling – surveys must
be from a representative sample of
whatever group they’re trying to
represent. To get a representative sample
(where the small group truly represents
the whole group), the survey-takers must
come from a random sample. A random
sample is where every person in the
 group has the same chance of being
selected for the survey.
1. Getting a random sample, is
trickier than it sounds, but there
are two main ways to do it: (1)
the bigger the number in the
original group of people the
better, and (2) use a computer or
machine to do the picking.
2. Non-examples: standing on
the corner asking people to do
the survey is not random (some
people won’t walk by), giving
everyone a questionnaire is not
random (some will/won’t return
it).
3. A representative sample can
be very accurate at predicting the
entire population. A non-
representative sample can be
very wrong. So, how to tell if we
have a representative
sample? Random sampling!

3. Naturalistic observation

1. A naturalistic observation is watching a person or

animal behave in its normal surroundings. Think of a person squatting in a jungle
taking notes on gorillas.
2. The idea is to be as little intrusive as possible so the
subject will behave normally, then record only what is observed. The explanation, the
why? must come from another source.

2. Correlation

2. When two things are related or they go together, they are

said to correlate.
3. Statisticians use a correlational coefficient to measure
how closely two things go together (or not). This coefficient is usually seen in two
ways:

1. Numerically – The correlation coefficient is on a

scale from 1.0 down to -1.0
 1. A coefficient of say 0.95 is very high
(it’s close to 1.0) and would look like the
bottom-left to top-right graph.
2. A coefficient of say -0.87 is very high
as an inverse relationship (it’s close to -
1.0) and would look like the top-left to
bottom-right graph.
3. A coefficient of 0 is exactly no
correlation at all (random pattern of
dots).

2. In scatterplots – Graphs with the two things on the

X and Y axes and dots scattered throughout the graph.

1. The tighter the dots line up from

bottom-left to top-right, the higher the
two things have a positive correlation.
Like
this:

2. In real life, things usually don’t

correlate that highly. The dots may line
up much more generally. Like this
scatterplot that would have a correlation
of about 0.6 or
so:

3. If the dots line up the other way (top-

left to bottom-right), they have a
high inverse correlation or negative
correlation. Be aware, just because
it’s negative, it’s still a high correlation if
it’s close to -1.0. Like
this:

4. If the dots are splotched everywhere

in no pattern, there is a very low
correlation or none at all. Like
 this:

4. Correlation and causation

1. Correlations have a trap – suppose A and B correlate

very highly. Just because the two things correlate, it’s incorrect to say A causesB.
A might cause B, but we can’t prove that just from a correlation. There might be a
third or fourth factor involved that is the cause.
2. Traps like these are reported all the time. For
example, you may hear a report that says, "People who eat French fries at least twice
a week are 3 times more likely to become obese." It's tempting to say, "Eating fries
causes obesity," but, it's incorrect to say that. It's correct to say, "Eating fries 3 times
a week and obesity have a positive correlation" (the two go together).
3. Only an experiment shows causation because it
isolates one variable to be tested.
4. An example: a person’s shoe size and their
vocabulary correlate very highly – the larger the shoe size, the greater number of
words the person knows. Why is this? Does a larger foot cause a person to know more
words? Of course not, there is another factor involved – age or time.

5. Illusory correlations

1. People often see correlations that are notthere. If

two things happen that seem out-of-the-ordinary, we link them together. Such as an
astrology prediction that seems to come true. However, we ignore them when they
don’t pan out.
2. The result is that we remember the times things
work and forget the times they don’t. Then we wrongly conclude they actually
correlate.

3. Experimentation
2. The gold-standard research method is the experiment. All of
the other methods have their pluses, but experiments alone show cause-and-effect.
3. Parts of a good experiment…

1. Random selection – The participants come from a

large population and are randomly selected to be involved.
2. Random assignment – Once chosen to be in the
study, participants are randomly assigned to either the control or experimental group.
3. Double-blind procedure – A technique where the
participants and researchers don’t know which group they’re in and/or the hypothesis
being tested. Having participants and researchers "blind" is to cut down on any bias.

1. Placebo effect – People are often

given a placebo (a fake drug that’s just a
sugar pill) in double-blind experiments.
Though fake, they think it’s real and have
real positive benefits.

4. Independent variable (“IV”) – The IV is what the

experimenter manipulates. This is the only thing different between the experimental
and control groups.
5. Dependent variable (“DV”) – The DV is what the
IV supposedly affects. The DV is what is measured.
6. Confounding variables – These are other factors
that might make the experiment go wrong. Specifically, these are factors that might
affect the DV. We want an experiment where only the IV affects the DV. Otherwise, we
don’t know what caused the effect. Our results are said to be “confounded”.

1. Random selection, random

assignment, and good procedures filter
out confounding variables.

4. A simple example experiment…

1. Suppose a student wants to measure reaction time

differences between students chewing sugar-free gum and chewing gum with sugar.
From a list of every student in her school, the experimenter has a computer generate
a list of 50 people. They all agree to be in the study. A coin flip determines if they will
be in the sugar-free or sugar group. They’re not told which group they’re in. With their
hand flat on a table, the students chew gum, then when a light comes on, they smack
a switch. The reaction time is measured.
2. The parts of this experiment would be…
 1. Random selection – The
experimenters started with a large list
and had a computer randomly generate
50 names. To be even better, the
experimenters would use an
even larger list, say of every student in
the county.
2. Random assignment – The coin flip is
random assignment, this will cancel out
confounding variables.
3. IV – Type of gum, sugar or sugar-free
(this is what’s different between the
groups, it’s what the experimenters
manipulated).
4. DV – The reaction time (this is what is
measured; it’s what the type of gum
supposedly affects).
5. Summary and strengths/weaknesses
of methods of research (see chart at the
bottom of this page).

1. Describing data

1. When reviewing data, it’s important to look at things carefully and

critically. Things like the scale of graphs can influence how they’re perceived.
2. Measures of central tendency – Central tendency refers to the center
of a bunch of numbers. There are three usual measurements of central tendency:

2. Mode – The number which occurs most frequently.

3. Mean – The average.
4. Median – The middle number, once they’ve all been listed from
lowest to highest. This is also the 50th percentile (50% are lower and 50% are higher).

3. Measures of variation

1. Range – Is the distance between the lowest and highest

numbers in a group.
2. Standard deviation – A measurement of how much the
numbers vary from the mean (average). Just realize that if the numbers are all pretty
close, the standard deviation will be low. It the numbers have a wide range, the
standard deviation will be high.
3. Normal curve – Also called a “bell curve”, is a graph that often
occurs in nature with things like height and intelligence scores on tests. Look at this
graph of IQ
scores. We

see the median IQ is 100 (also the 50th percentile is 100). The break-point scores are
the standard deviations. So, at -1 standard deviation a person scored at 85. Notice the
percentages. 68.2% of people score within 1 standard deviation (between 85 and
115). And almost 96% score within 2 standard deviations (between 70 and 130).
These percentages are amazingly stable in nature.

1. Making inferences

1. This will be covered later (Unit 11: Testing and Individual

Differences), but it should be mentioned here. There are two pillars of measurement:

1. Validity – A test or bit of research measures what it’s

supposed to measure. If you took a test called “The Geography Assessment” but the
questions were all algebra word problems, your score wouldn’t reflect your geography
knowledge at all. The test would not be valid.
2. Reliability – The test yields the same results over and over.
If you took a “U.S. Literature” test and scored a 97. Then took the “U.S. Literature”
test twice more and scored a 57 and a 83, you’d say the results are not very reliable.
But if you scored a 97, then a 94, then a 95, the test would be pretty reliable. Ways to
make tests as reliable as possible:

1. Representative sampling – This is done with random

selection of participants.
2. Low variability – Results with low ranges and low
standard deviations are more reliable than high ones.
3. More is better – The more numbers we have, the
better the results.

2. Statistical significance – The observed difference between

two numbers is not due to chance. Usually statistical significance is measured by a "p-
value" and goes by the 5% rule. A p-value is normally shown like 0.04 (or 4%), for
example. Scientists will say the numbers are statistically significant if there is less
than a 5% chance that they were caused by chance (in other words, the p-value is
0.05 or lower). For example, in an experiment, we're at least 95% certain that the
Dependent Variable’s numbers were caused by Independent Variable.

1. Psychology applied

1. Research in a laboratory can test principles that can be applied

to everyday life.
2. Culture comes into play during research.

1. Due to cultural differences, a study in one culture may or

may not be able to be applied to another culture.
2. In some ways, humanity is united in certain ways across
cultures. For instance, smiles and frowns are universal.

3. Gender differences, and similarities, are real as well.

1. Ethics in research

1. Scientists often study animals for many reasons such as…

1. Their biological systems are often simplified versions of

humans'.
2. Their life-cycles are often short so it’s faster to study life
spans and generations.
3. It’s not ethical or moral to do certain things to humans.

2. Animal research

1. Using animals in research is sometimes controversial. The

arguments center on the morality of using animals to hopefully better humankind (and
animalkind).
2. Over time, we’ve developed an unofficial ranking of
animals: (1) humans, (2) primates and household pets, (3) mammals, (4) birds, fish,
reptiles, (5) insects.

3. Human research

1. When using humans in research there are ethical stop-signs.

It would be wrong to electrically shock people in a study. But would it be okay to fake a
shock? To put people through stress? (The general consent is, "No, that’s not ethical").
2. The APA (American Psychological Association) suggest two
things:

1. Informed consent – This means participants (1)

know what’s going on and (2) they give their permission to be in the study.
2. Debriefing of participants – When the study’s
finished, researchers and participants go back over the whole thing.

3. Values still work their way into studies. For instance, our
values impact the decision of what to study (and what not to study). And values affect
the way we word things, like asking if you think a person is “cheap” (negative
connotation) or “penny-wise” (positive connotation).

Type of
Researc Purpose Strengths Weaknesses
h
Inexpensive.
Requires only one Individual
participant. Can cases can be
Case To gather
often be done misleading.
study information.
when ethical Doesn’t show
factors won’t allow causation.
experiments.
Inexpensive. Can Wording and
gather lots of info personal bias
To gather fast. Can often be can severely
Survey
information. done when ethical alter results.
factors won’t allow Doesn’t show
experiments. causation.
Inexpensive. Can Individual
Naturalist
often be done cases can be
ic To gather
when ethical misleading.
observati information.
factors won’t allow Doesn’t show
on
experiments. causation.
Can handle large
numbers of
To find out if
people/data. Can
Correlatio two things go Doesn’t show
often be done
n together, if they causation.
when ethical
co-relate.
factors won’t allow
experiments.
More costly.
Ethical factors
Experime To find cause- Shows cause-and-
may make
nt and-effect. effect.
experiments
impractical.
page revision: 36, last edited: 3 May 2018, 09:00 (1038 days