Psychology

Front 1

Orberg's Dictum

Back 1

"Premise that we should keep our minds open, but not so open that we believe anything."

Front 2

6 Principles of Critical Thinking

Back 2

1. Extraordinary Claims require Extraordinary Evidence
2. Falsifiability
3. Principle of Parsimony(Occam's Razor)
4. Replicability
5. Ruling out Rival Hypotheses
6. Correlation isn't Causation

Front 3

Pseudosciences

Back 3

EX: Astrology, ESP, Bermuda Triangle

Front 4

Heuristics

Back 4

Mental shortcuts. EX: ctr-alt-dl.

Front 5

Common Heuristics

Back 5

1. Representativeness-"like goes with like"
-Base Rate-how common a characteristic is in general population.
- Base Rate Fallacy-stereotyping
2. Availability-"Off the top of my head" EX: 911 and afraid to fly

Front 6

Cognitive Biases: Systematic errors in thinking

Back 6

1. Hindsight Bias-I knew it all along.
2. Overconfidence-tendency to overestimate out ability to make correct predictions.

Front 7

The Scientific Method

Back 7

Allows us to test specific hypotheses derived from broader theories of how things work.

Front 8

4 Basic Goals of Psychology

Back 8

1. Describe
2. Explain
3. Predict
4. Control or Influence

Front 9

Hypothesis

Back 9

A tentative statement about the relationship of two or more variables. Can be disconfirmed.

Front 10

Different Types of Research Designs

Back 10

1. Naturalistic Observation- observing and recording behaviors in natural settings. High degree of external validity-extent to which we can generalize our findings to real world. low degree internal validity-extent to which we can draw cause-and-effect.
2. Case Study- In depth investigation of individual used to investigate rare, unusual, and extreme conditions. EX- brain diseases.(you can't really prove anything b/c it's only done on a few people.)
3. Correlational Study- (next flashcard)

Front 11

Correlational Study

Back 11

No manipulation. Looking for relationships between variables. EX: height and weight. Deals with numbers. CORRELATION STUDIES CANNOT INFER CAUSATION.
- Correlation Coefficient- Ranges from -1 to +1 ( -.9 is stronger than -.1)
- Scatterplot- a grouping of points on a graph each dot representing a persons data.
- Positive and negative correlation- + EX: calories you take in, body fat %. - EX: distance you drive, gas in your tank
- Illusory Correlation- Perception of a statistical association where none exist. EX: number of pHD's granted and number of mules in a city.

Front 12

Random Assignment

Back 12

Experimenter randomly sorts patients into one of two groups. Ensures that the differences among participants are spread across all experimental conditions. Ensures unbiasism.

Front 13

Experimental Group

Back 13

Group of participants who are exposed to the independent variable. Group getting some type of treatment.

Front 14

Control Group

Back 14

No-treatment group who go through the experimental phases, but are not exposed to the independent variable.

Front 15

Manipulation of Independent Variable

Back 15

An experiment involving a varying factor, the independent variable, then measuring the changes producing a 2nd factor, the dependent variable.

Front 16

Confounds

Back 16

Any difference between experimental group and control group, other than the independent variable, makes i.v. effects uninterpretable.

Front 17

Cause and effect

Back 17

Possible to infer with random assignment and manipulation of independent variable.

Front 18

Random Variable

Back 18

Uncontrolled factors that effect the dependent variable instead of independent variable. How to control?= Random assignment

Front 19

Placebo Effect

Back 19

Improvement resulting from the mere expectation of improvement.

Front 20

Placebo Control Group

Back 20

A third group that is given a sugar pill to make sure the real pill is working.

Front 21

Experimenter Bias

Back 21

Experimenter Expectancy Effect (Rosenthal Effect) Researchers hypotheses leads them to unintentionally bias the outcome of the study.

Front 22

Double Blind Design

Back 22

Protects experiment. Neither the participants nor the researcher is aware of which condition each participant has been assigned to.

Front 23

Nocebo Effect

Back 23

Harm resulting from the mere expectation of harm. (EX: Voodoo doll phenomenon)

Front 24

Demand Characteristics

Back 24

Cues that participants pick up from a study that allow them to generate guesses regarding the researchers hypotheses. EX: Hawthorne Effect: phenomenon in which participants knowledge that they're being studied can effect their behavior. To minimize- convert observation and participation observation(the researcher becomes a participant)

Front 25

Sampling

Back 25

Process of selecting participants who are members of the population that the researcher wishes to study.

Front 26

Representative Sample

Back 26

Group of research participants whose characteristics fairly reflect the characteristics of the population from which they were selected.

Front 27

Random Selection

Back 27

Procedure that ensures every person in a population has an equal chance of being chosen to participate.

Front 28

Reliability

Back 28

Ability for a test to produce consistent results when administered on repeated occasions under similar conditions. Can still be completely invalid.

Front 29

Validity

Back 29

Ability of a test to measure what it is intended to measure.

Front 30

Halo Effect

Back 30

Tendency of ratings of one positive characteristic to spill over to influence the ratings of other positive characteristics.

Front 31

Leniency Effect

Back 31

Tendency of raters to be overly generous when providing ratings.

Front 32

Error of Central Tendency

Back 32

An unwillingness to provide extreme ratings (low or high)

Front 33

Descriptive Statistics

Back 33

Numerical characteristics of the nature of the data set.

Front 34

Inferential Statistics

Back 34

Mathematical methods that allow us to determine whether we can generalize findings from our sample to the population.

Front 35

Statistical Significance vs. Practical Significance

Back 35

S.S- used to describe research results when the outcome of a statistical test indicates that the probability of those results occurring by chance is small.
P.S- When there is real world importance.