Study your flashcards anywhere!
Download the official Cram app for free >
 Shuffle
Toggle OnToggle Off
 Alphabetize
Toggle OnToggle Off
 Front First
Toggle OnToggle Off
 Both Sides
Toggle OnToggle Off
 Read
Toggle OnToggle Off
How to study your flashcards.
Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key
Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key
H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key
A key: Read text to speech.a key
97 Cards in this Set
 Front
 Back
type II error

may fail to reject Ho when it is false
BETA LEVEL:prob type II error (.20 or 20%)more willing to accept 

power

degree to which research design sensitive to effects of IVdetect effects IV more easily than less powerful designs
 #participants in study < # < detect effects IV on DV(magnitude) 

power analysis

determine # participants needed order detect effect IV
aim exceed .80 

effect size

proportion variability in DV that is due to IV
.00 to 1.00 

Ttest

analyze data from 2 group randomized exper./its error/variance we see random?


1. directional hypoth and 2. non directional hypoth

1.states which of 2 conditions means is expected to be larger
2.states 2 means are expected to differ, no prediction which is larger 

1.one tailed test vs. 2.two tailed test

1.used to test directional hypoth.
2.hypoth is nondirectional 

paired ttest

used when exper. involves matched subj. or w/ in subj. design
participants 2 conditions similar if not identical related to DV 

paired ttest
1.matched subj design 2.w/ in subj design 
1.randomly assign matched pairs to two conditions
score up DV in one then score up DV other situation 2.same participants serve in both conditions  (+) corr. obtained btw. matched scores 

stat. significance affected by 3 factors

1.SAMPLE SIZE:larger size more stat sig.
2.MAGNITUDE CORR:larger value r less likely be .00 3.NOT DRAW IN CORRECT CONCLUSIONS:sig. diff from 0 if there is >5% chance corr. as large as one obtained could have come from pop. w/ true corr. zero >.16 corr. could be 0 .10 weak magnitude/.30 moderate/.50 strong 

deonotology

ethical approach maintaining right and wrong be judged according to universal moral code


ethical skepticism

denies exist concrete and inviolate moral codes
relative culture and time 

utilitarian

judgement action depend on consequences of that action
APA uses this 

costbenefit analysis

weigh pros and cons fo study


benefits behavioral research

when cost benefit analysis is conducted


basic knowledge

up risk and cost ok when research up


improve research/assessment techniques

moe research like this improve research itself/ more reliable, valid,useful/efficient methods


practical outcomes

up welfare subjects
better drugs/treatments 

benefits researchers

education function first hand research


cost

balance risk and cost
$ involved conduct actual research deception=distrust toward research 

balance benefits and cost

down benefit down cost and vice versa
research approved by IRB 

IRB

proposal=purpose research, procedures, potential risks participants
no research unless approved 

informed concent

inform nature study and agree to participate
inform about features research influencce willingness to participate pain discomfort IC form usually used IC given orally some cases only if witness present 

?IC

COMPROMISING VALIDITY STUDYact diff if watched
UNABLE GIVE ICchild, mental handicapped/ parent/legal guradian give IC GREATER BURDEN OBTAIN IT THAN NOT intersection street! min. risk, not affect rights &welfare, not carried out if required 

invasion privacy

no strict guidelines
study w/ out person knowledge judgements left to investigator 

coercion participate

prof. require students participate research studies
paper option=research time lab 

physical and mental stress

difficult study when expose small amounts phy. mental stress
lead beleive dying=NO!! decisions made costbenefit analysis research 

deception research

use confederate
false feedback related studies as unrelated incorrect info reguarding stimuli materials 

objections deception

lying and deciet immoral?
ends justify means violation moral rules widely used enter knowing this suspicious researcher tell them right away distrust behavioral scientist & research in gen. participants do not view decep. as same as lying! informed after ok!! 

debriefing

when deception used must use this!
1. clairfy study explain reasons deception occured 2. remove excess stress or ()consequences 3. obtain participants reactions/feedback on study 4. leave feeling good about study 

confidentiality

only purpose for research
ensure responses anonymous give codes label data ex:milgram exper= obedience 

reserach with animals

same as humans only different guidelines to follow


scientific misconduct

ethical standards memb. guard against this
1. fabrication, falisfication, and plagiarism 2. fail report data not with their own views or making data availiable who wish to varify their data 3.research participants that are problematic (what order authors go) 4. sexual harrasment/abuse power, discriminate, or failure follow gov. regulations 5. conduct poorly designed research 

factors distort corr. coefficients

1.RESTRICTION RANGE:narrow rep. data
misleading or weak corr? 2.OUTLIERS:deviant from remainder of data further 3 SD away from mean 3.RELIABILITY MEASURES:>reliable measure, down corr. coeff. will obtain 

corr. and causality

CORR. DOES NOT IMPLY CAUSALITY!!
even if perfectly corr. basis tobacco company claim against cigs and lung cancer 

partial corr.

can conclude particular causal explaination of relatiohship btwn variables more likely be correct than are other causal explainations
x and y corr =x may cause y/vice versa/some ther var. cause x and y corr. btwn variables stat. removed eliminate 3rd variable possible influnece see if x and y stil corr. 

analyzing experimental data

diff. group ave. suggest IV had an effect
can not draw conclusions about effects IV simply by looking only at means of experimental conditions 

IRB

Function:look @research and judge what does and what doesnt
COMPOSITION:1020 members accidemic community/outsiders/lay persons/religious officials ROLE:thumbs up or down/ request revision HOW WORK:where go covers everything/ protect subj./jurisdiction over everything 

crosssectional survey

single group
char. that group/various groups differ 

sucessive indep. samples survey

2 or more samples of respondents answer same ? at different pts. in time
validity on if each selected same way 

longitudinal

single group/ long time
changes in behavior studied 

demographics

describe patterns basic life events and experiences
birth, marriage, employ, migration, death 

epidemiological research

study occurances disease diff. groups people
info groups at risk illness/injury 

surveys

all pic. how large groups tend think, feel and behave


sampling

way select people for study from population of interest


representative sample

one which can draq accurate, unbiased est. char. larger pop.


sampling error

cause reseults obtained sample diff. entire population


error estm.

(margin error) degree data obtained sample expected deviate from pop. as whole
condfidence expressed in term error estm. down error estm. more close resuls from sample estm behavior large pop. function sample size, pop size, variance data 

economic sample

reasonably accurate estm. of pop. reasonable ost and effort
error estm down when pop. up larger variance up sample must be 

probability sample

prop and indiv in pop. will be included


epsem design

specifies all cases in pop have= prob. being chosen for sample
"equal prob. selection method" 

simple random sampling

every possible sample desired size same chance being selected from pop.


sampling frame

list pop. sample comes from


table random #'s

use with large pop


stratified random sampling

variation SRS divide pop. into 2 or more strata


stratum

subset pop. shares particular char.
compare 2 group with in this 

cluster samp

sample group participant based naturally occuring groups/get list/randomly select list from that group


multi stage process

no sample frame needed
less time/ effort needed contact participants 

error variance cause mean diff

means may differ even if IV does not have an effect
CONFOUNDING VAR:portion total variance in set scores due to extraneous variable that differ systematically between experimental groups (2ndary variance) error variance in data ave recall 2 groups of participants likely differ slightly even if treated the same indiv. differences 

nonresponse problem

failure obtain responses indiv researches select from sample
data may be bias was impossible determine representativeness of sample compromised same with tele surveys 1.take steps to increase response rate 2.if respondents and nonrespondents differ in any systematic ways 

non prob samples

no way knowing prob. a particular case will be choosen for sample
not calculate error estm. limit ability generalize test how variable relate to research test hypoth. external validity assessed through replication sim. findings validity up 

convenience sampling

readily avaliable used
prob. using college students more intell. than gen. pop. 

quota sampling

certian kind participants obtained particular proportions


purpose sampling

use judgements decide which participants include in sample
try get respondents typical of pop. elections use this 

describing and presenting data
critera good one 
accuracy, conciseness, and understandability
RAW DATAall participants scores on all measures selecitve data present=clearly describe results description understood 

numerical methods

sum data from # as % or means


graphical methods

present data graphically or pictorial form (graphs)


frequency distributions

table sum raw data # scores fall with in each several categories


simple frequency distrib.

# participants who obtained each score
up or down 2nd column frequency 

inferential stats
(solution to error variance cause mean diff) 
conclude independ. var. has effect when diff. btw means experimental conditions larger we expect to be when diff due solely to effects of error variance
compare diff btwn means of exper. condition of diff. expect to obtain based on error var. never know for sure can specify probability 

group frequency distrib.

frequency subset of scores
break range scores several subsets(class interval)=size 

hypothesis testing

Ho:IV no effect on DV
H1:IV did have effect of DV REJECT Ho:IV did have effect on DV FAIL TO REJECT:IV did not have effect of DV 

relative freq.

proportion total # scores tells each class interval freq. class interval % total # scores
class interval are ME capture all possible reponses all class interval same size freq. info=histogram/bargraphs/ freq. polygon 

type I error

researcher concludes IV had effec on DV when the observed diff. btwn means of experimental conditions actually due to error variance
ALPHA LEVEL:prob. making type 1 error .05 or 5% (>.05 reject) STAT SIGNIF:when reject Ho with low prob. making type 1 error refer diff. btw means 

measures central tendency

convey info. about distrib. providing info about ave/ most typical
MEAN:ave (can be misleading) MEDIAN:middle MODE:most often 

measure variablility

know how much scores distrib. vary
descriptive stat convey info. spread/ var. set data RANGE:least useful set on two extremes VARIANCE:takes into account all of scores when calc. variability of set of data SD= it's square root index ave. amount variability in set data purpose stat. analysis 

zscore

particular participants score relative to rest of data (standard score)
z=(y1y)/s 

SD and normal curve
normal distribution 
having mean and SD estm. percent participants who obtained certian scores
tell distrib. across various ranges of scores useful identify extremes/outliers very high or very low zscore (3.00 or +3.00) 

sucessive independent

crosssection with time component
different people/repeatedly 

SD

I 34.13%68%
II 13.6%94% III 2.14%98% IV .13%99% 

corr. research

determine one vari is related to another by seeing whether scores 2 var. covary
or vary together up x down y (relationship) up x up y = no relationship 

corr. research

whether var. are related to one another
relatiohship btw. 2 or more naturally occuring variables 

Pearson CC

(r)
interp. consider 1.sign and 2.magnitude 1.direction (+) positive relationship(up and up) optimism and health corr. ()=inverse or negative relationship btw 2 var (up and down) 2.numerical value ignore sign strength relation between variables .00 not linerly related 

corr. coeficients

1 to +1
strength and direction relationship only requirement obtain scores on 2 var. for each participant in our sample 

1.scatter plot, 2.perfect corr, 3.zero corr.

1.graph representation participants scores 2 variables
2.(1.00 to +1.00) 3.no pattern 

coefficient of determination

x2 of corr. coefficient; indicated proportion of variance 1 var. can be accounted for by other var.


1.variance
2.systematic variance 3.error variance 
1.amount var. in set data
2.part total var. in participants responses related var. researcher is investigating 3.portion total variance unrelated to variables under investigation 

stat. significance of r

corr. coeff. calculated on a sample has very low prob. being zero in pop.
b/c sampling error never get r=.00 even though true corr. pop is zero >.05 stat signif. 

Joe Brady:
executive monkeys experiment 
Type II error
monkeys first group moved on to the second group only if did good in phaseI actually looked at two diff populations of monkeyes confounding variables found monkey A (the boss) had more ulcers 

Weis

same study as brady but found opposite
monkey b more than monkey A got ulcers 

Jarrard:
LSD experiment 
rats press for food (motivation)
problem results: could be a build up of LSD in system cause drastic decline btwn .2 and .4 better:take 6 diff rats and give them each dose (use latin square) 

counter balancing

procedure used within subj. designs in which diff participants recieve the levels of IV in different orders
used to avoid systematic order effects 

btw group:
1.pros and 2.cons 
1. faster, someone drops out find another just like them, everyone diff indiv impact
2. more $, less power, very difficult match subjects 

w/ in groups:
pros and cons 
1. more power, every person own control group, removes error from indiv variability
2. longer, slower, when someone drops out problematic 

1.carryover effect and 2.order effect

1.a situation in w/in subj. designs in which the effects of one level of the IV are still present when another level of IV is introduced
2.an effect on behavior produced by specific order in which levels of the IV are administered in a w/in subj design 

Greene 1996 Memory Test
study list>delay (5sec and 20sec) *do both with in and between subj. designs* 
results: with in better becasue found diff where as with between found no difference
WITH IN BETTER!!!!! 

counterbalancing:
complete and incomplete 
complete= what lit for levels?
3 conditions incomplete= latin squares doesnt count for all possibilities 