Reading...
Play button
Play button
Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
119 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
|
What is Scientific Thinking
|
A controlled method of inuiqry that does no harm excercised by the Scientist/Practitioner. This is a data based empirical method. General hypothesis based on dat
|
|
|
Five Ways of Knowing
|
Tenacity
Authority A Priori Method Scientific Method Direct Experience |
|
|
Tenacity
|
Belief in Truth, belief one firmly adheres to is truth
|
|
|
Authority
|
Higher authority. Stated from a person of higher authority is truth. Higher authority makes it truth.
|
|
|
A Priori Method
|
What agrees with reason makes sense
|
|
|
Scientific Method
|
Set of assumptions and rules about collecting and evaluating data that adds to credibility of the profession. Empirical tests of established facts
|
|
|
Direct Experience
|
Individual's construes a reality of the world
|
|
|
Scientific Method - Collection of Data
|
1. Empirically tested
2. Objective 3. Verifiable 4. Apart from researcher's bias 5. Findings confirm or disconfirm previous knowledge |
|
|
Goal of Scientific Method
|
1. Advance Knowledge
2 Make Discoveries 3. Acquire Facts about Counseling CAN'T LEAVE THE CLIENT OUT OF THE PROCESS |
|
|
Functions of a Scientific Research
|
To provide answers to problems.
To help explain & predict behavior and action. Adequacy of research - evaluated by how relevant findings are for practitioners |
|
|
What is Out of Context?
|
Research testing the adequacy of research methods does not prove which techniquw is better but provides evidence of the potential strengths and limitations of each. From this, researchers can determine when one of two approaches, or both, should be the method of choice.
|
|
|
Traditional View of Methodological Diversity
|
Traditional was assumption that the "best" knowledge (best research methodology: was experimentation.
|
|
|
Contemporary View of Methodological Diversity
|
Contemporary states that choice of research method is important for two main reasons: 1. Research method must fit the phenomenon under investigation
2. The type of information sought....Greater creativity and flexibility in using existing research methods is needed to examine important questions within counseling. |
|
|
Purposes of a Literature Review
|
1. Delimits the research problem
2. Leads to new lines of inquiry 3. Helps avoid dead-ends 4. Helps researchers choose methodology 5. Identifies recommended further research 6. Used to identify suppport for a gounded theory (grounded in a set of real world data) |
|
|
Strategies for Identifying Research Topics
|
1. General Broad Topics
2. Knowleadgeable about previous research 3. Previous Research Obstavles 5. Suggestions for future research 6. Advance knowledge by a new or fresh perspective |
|
|
Scientific Thinking Model - EMPIRICAL
|
-Generate hypothesis based on data presented by client
-Empirically Tested -Make predictions about the client -Reduces counselor bias or subjectivity |
|
|
SCIENTIST VS. PRACTITIONER
SCIENTIST APPROACH? |
SCIENTIST APPROACH -
a scientist looks for research and uses scientific thinking. -controlled method of inquiry and reasoning -crucial counselors integrate "scientific thinking" into daily practice |
|
|
PRACTITIONER APPROACH?
|
PRACTITIONER APPROACH
The practitioner applies or uses research finding in their practice -Do not always use research in their practice -Practitioner's think scientifically Practitioner's need to be researching to better assist clients |
|
|
Positivism?
|
Physical, medical, or biological sciences
-Draw conclusions - Data confirms truth or not "Looking for causality or truth" |
|
|
Post - Positivism?
|
Empirical / Social Sciences (counseling)
-Discovering truth or reality -Truth cannot be fully known -Inferences are probable NOT absolute |
|
|
Goal of Post-positivism?
|
To produce description that is close or approximate and then compare findings leading to closer causality - more probable.
|
|
|
Constructivism?
|
-Truth & reality abandoned
-Beliefs constructed in minds of individual -Interraction with physical & social environment -Constructs change over time |
|
|
Hermeneutics?
|
Activity of interpretation (journals, inerpreting language)
|
|
|
Dialectics?
|
Interaction between participant & investigator
|
|
|
Critical Theory?
|
-Social constructions shaped by social, political, cultural, & economic forces
-Socially constructed beliefs -Social action needed to change social order ex. Feminist Theory |
|
|
Effect Size?
|
Effect size is the EFFECT of the independent variable IV on the dependent variable DV
**Require for authors (practical significance) |
|
|
HIGH STATISTICAL OR LOW PRACTICAL?
|
Effect size can reveal this information.
|
|
|
What must be considered when examining individuals?
|
Worldview, data, environment, all-variables, own bias, historical events
*HUMAN BEHAVIOR IS MULTI-DETERMINED |
|
|
Traditional View
|
-Tightly controlled experimental research
-Radomization & control groups |
|
|
Contemporary View
|
-Methodological diversity essential
-Greater creativity & flexibility in use of research methods -Research Methods's must fit phenomenon under investigation - type of info. *NEW ETHICAL STANDARDS |
|
|
VIEW OF HUMAN NATURE
|
Counselor beliefs about how human beings operate and make decisions will effect research problems as examined in counseling
***important to avoid tunnel vision |
|
|
PURPOSES of LITERATURE REVIEW
|
1. Delimit the research problem (narrow problem)
2. Leads to new lines of inquiry (has research been done, research overlooked, new lines of inquiry, new study) 3. Helps avoid dead-ends - alerts us to studies that yeilded little conclusions How is research to add to body of literature?) 4. Helps researcher choose methodology |
|
|
MAJOR STEPS IN A LITERATURE REVIEW
|
1) Search Preliminary Sources
2) Review Secondary Sources - documents written by someone who did not actually conduct the research) 3) Read Primary Sources 4) Synthesize the Literature (alike disimilar, similar, consistent, not consistent - bring it together) 8 sources - gaps in literature |
|
|
RESEARCH TOPICS
|
1. Identify general topic
2. Read widely 3. Focus on literature reviews on specific topics 4. Think reflectively 5. What was omitted about a particular line of research (GAP) treatments? age, race, gender? 6. How could a study be improved? 7. Examine your own beliefs about a research topic |
|
|
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
|
Explore the relations among or between constructs - more general
|
|
|
RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS
|
States the expected relationship between the constructs
-Deduced from Theory -Constructs must be measured -Selection of constructs that are of interest to you |
|
|
NULL HYPOTHESIS
|
-Population means are equal
-No significant difference There is no significant mean difference in...... |
|
|
RESEARCH HYPOTHESIS OR ALTERNATE HYPOTHESIS
|
-Population means are in fact NOT equal
-Difference between or among means -Specific Direction -Reject the null hypothesis - Accept the alternate hypothesis |
|
|
TELL READER......
|
What is being done in study.
Who is being measured How it is being measured. |
|
|
TESTABLE RESEARCH QUESTION
|
Asks a question about....
-Relationships between two or more contructs -Must be measured or tested |
|
|
FUNCTION OF TESTABLE RESEARCH QUESTION OR HYPOTHESIS?
|
-Provide direction for experimental inquiry
-Identifies the topic -Identifies specific constructs |
|
|
RESEARCH QUESTIONS:
3 Categories: Descriptive, Difference, Relationship |
1. Descriptive - What phenomena or events are like (surveys, interviews, inventories)
2. Difference - Differences between or among groups of people or within individual participants (comparison, focus on groups) 3. Relationship - Explore the degree two or more constructs are related (correlation of regression analyses, canonical correlation analysis) - predict correlated conversely |
|
|
OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS
|
Each construct must be operationally defined.
-Constructs or variables must be defined concretely -Spells out how to measure or manipulate the variables -From general ideas to more specific, measurable events |
|
|
IV - Independent Variable
|
-Varied or altered or manipulated
-Presumed to cause, effect, or influence the outcome -Usually two or more levels (treatment & no treatment) |
|
|
DV - Dependent Variable
|
-Dependent on how the IV's are altered
-Outcome presumably depends on how the IV's are managed or manipulated |
|
|
ROLE OF ETHICS?
|
-Assist researchers to acheive goals while avoiding strategies that compromise their values
|
|
|
5 MORAL PRINCIPLES
based on Kitchner's Work |
1) Nonmaleficence - DO NO HARM
2) Beneficence - DO GOOD FOR OTHERS 3) Autonomy - Freedom of choice or action 4) Justice - FAIRNESS (rationale when treating others differently) 5) Fidelity - Faithfulness - Keeps promises or agreements |
|
|
AIM of RESEARCH
|
*Extend knowledge bases with accurate, reliable, & usable information
|
|
|
EHTICAL ISSUES RELATED TO SCHOLARLY WORK
|
EXECUTION of Research Study
-Accurate planning and conducting -Understanding of target population REPORTING of Results -Accurately & honestly -Clear & understandable -State limitations -Make original data available DUPLICATE & PIECEMEAL PUBLICATION -Do not republish original data PUBLICATION CREDIT -Adequately & accurately assign credit -PLAGARISM -Acknowledge original contributions |
|
|
ETHICAL ISSUES RELATED TO PARTICIPANTS
|
-Clear, fair, vonluntary & explicit agreement
-Code of Federal Regulations (1983) Institutional Review Boards (IRB's) |
|
|
KEY ISSUES IN EVALUATING THE ETHICALITY OF RESEARCH:
|
Risks & Benefits (identifying risks in my research participants: emotional, anxiety, anger, shame, guilt) Design study to remove risks
-Participants fully informed - voluntary participation |
|
|
ISSUES PROTECTING WELFARE & PARTICIPANTS
|
Risks & benefits - alleviate human suffering
|
|
|
ASSESS RISKS:
|
-Consult with colleagues
-Consult with professionals knowledgeable about individuals -Pilot study CONSENT -Voluntary participation -clarify obligations, risks, & responsibilities -Screen participants for certain characteristics |
|
|
THREE ELEMENTS FOR ASSESSING RISKS
|
-Capacity - Participants ability to process information
-Information - is completely jargon-free -Voluntariness - without coercion |
|
|
ISSUES PROTECTING WELFARE & PARTICIPANTS
|
1. Risks & benefits
2. Consent 3. Deception & Debriefing 4. Confidentiality & Privacy 5. Treatment Issues |
|
|
Why is assessing Risks & Benefits important?
|
TO alleviate human suffereing
|
|
|
What is Deception & Debriefing?
|
-misinformation or withholding information
-antithetical to fully informing participants -should be avoided |
|
|
How to protect confidentiality & privacy?
|
-Protect anonymity or confidentiality of participants
|
|
|
Treatment issues?
|
-withholding treatment
-assess potential risks |
|
|
What is the goal of Scientific Research & Essential Task?
|
To determine relation between two constructs & the essential task is to use constructs to draw conclusions about relationships
|
|
|
Research Design?
|
is a tool to examine research questions, a set of plans/procedures. The researcher then draws inferences or conclusions about constructs. Never rule out rival hypotheses.
|
|
|
Experimental Control:
|
Parameters under which experiment takes place
|
|
|
MAXMINCON principle:
|
MAXimize the variance of the variables pertaining to the research questions magnitude of effect f IV on DV. MINImize error variance on random variables (like participants). CONtrol variance of extraneous or unwanted variables.
|
|
|
INTERNAL vs. EXTERNAL validity
|
1. Descriptive lab studies have low external and low internal validity.
2. Designed field studies have high external validity and low internal validity 3. Experimental lab studies have low external validity and high internal validity, (makes inferences about causality) 4. Experimental field studies have moderate external and moderate internal validity. |
|
|
DESCRIPTIVE LAB STUDIES
|
LOW external, LOW internal validity
|
|
|
DESIGNED FIELD STUDIES
|
HIGH external and LOW internal validity
|
|
|
EXPERIMENTAL LAB STUDIES
|
LOW external validity
HIGH internal validity *makes inferences about causality |
|
|
EXPERIMENTAL FIELD STUDIES
|
MODERATE external and MODERATE internal validity
|
|
|
TYPE OF RESEARCH DESIGNS
|
1. One Shot pretest / post test design
2. Non- equivalent group post test design 3. Radomized post test only design |
|
|
USEFULNESS OF A RESEARCH DESIGN
|
1. Existing knowledge bases pertaining to the spefcific research question
2. Types of research designs used and inferences made to develop existing knowledge bases 3. Resources available to the researcher 4. Specific threats to the validity of the particular design being considered 5. Match or fit between previous research knowledge (factors 1/2), design considered (factors 4), resources (factor 3) |
|
|
TYPES of VALIDITY
|
1. Statistical Conclusions
2. Internal Conclusions 3. External Conclusions 4. Construct Validity |
|
|
STATISTICAL CONCLUSIONS VALIDITY
|
Correct conclusion about relationships
|
|
|
INTERNAL VALIDITY
|
Ability to draw conclusions about causal relationships
|
|
|
EXTERNAL VALIDITY
|
Extent to which the results can be generalized
|
|
|
CONSTRUCT VALIDITY
|
Variables chosen to represent the true hypothetical construct
|
|
|
What does the significance or alpha level .05 mean?
|
Statistical tests which are based in probability theory, are used to indicate whether one should reject the null hypothesis that there is not relationship and accept the alternative that there is a relationship.
|
|
|
A Statistically Significant t test with the p value set a p<.05 .....
|
would indicated that one could comfortably believe that a true relationship exists between teh independent and dependent variables.
****It is possible that this conclusion is an error; that is, the null hypothesis of no relationship may be true, even though statistically significant result was obtained. |
|
|
If a more exacting standard of significance is required the t test can be done with a the p value set at
|
p<.01
|
|
|
TYPE I ERROR
|
Incorrectly concluding that a true relationship exists
|
|
|
Type I errors are pernicious because....
|
they result in claims that something is going on when it is not.
|
|
|
TYPE II ERROR
|
incorrectly concluding that there is no relationship
|
|
|
POWER
|
Statistical Power - probablity of correctly deciding there is a true relationship.
|
|
|
LOW STATISTICAL POWER CAN BE OVERCOME BY....
|
increasing the sample size
|
|
|
POWER REFERS TO....
|
The probability of correctly deciding that there is a true relationship, if indeed a true relationship exists.
|
|
|
STUDIES WITH LOW POWER OFTEN.....
|
result in the conclusion that no relationship exist when in fact a true relationship exists.
|
|
|
INSUFFICIENT POWER MOST OFTEN RESULTS FROM....
|
using too few participants.
|
|
|
ONE-SHOT PRETEST / POST TEST DISGN
|
involves observing a sample of participants, administering some treatment, and then observing the participants afterward
|
|
|
NON-EQUIVALENT GROUP POST TEST ONLY DESIGN
|
there are two groups of participants; one group receives the treatment and one does not. After the treatment, observations are made
|
|
|
RANDOMIZED POST TEST ONLY DESIGN
|
involves two groups containing participants who were randomly assigned
|
|
|
THREATS TO INTERNAL VALIDITY
|
1. History
2. Maturation 3. Testing 4. Instrumentation 5. Statistical Regression 6. Selection 7. Attrition 8. Interactions with Selections |
|
|
HISTORY
|
an event that transpires during the time of the treatment is administered
|
|
|
Maturation
|
normal developmental changes in participants
|
|
|
Testing
|
changes in scores due to repeatedly taking a test
|
|
|
INSTRUMENTATION
|
changes in measuring device
|
|
|
STATISTICAL REGRESSION
|
tendency of scores to regress toward the mean
|
|
|
SELECTION
|
differences in existing groups before a study begins
|
|
|
ATTRITION
|
participants dropping out of a study
|
|
|
INTERACTIONS with Selections
|
already formed groups are used
|
|
|
THREATS TO EXTERNAL VALIDITY
|
1. Interaction of selection and treatment
2. Interactions of setting and treatment 3. Interaction of history and treatment 4. Experimenter effects 5. Reactive Arrangements |
|
|
INTERACTION OF SELECTION AND TREATMENT
|
generalizing ability across persons
|
|
|
INTERACTIONS OF SETTING AND TREATMENT
|
generalizing across settings
|
|
|
INTERACTION OF HISTORY AND TREATMENT
|
generalizing across time
|
|
|
EXPERIMENTER EFFECTS
|
researcher causes results to be different
|
|
|
REACTIVE ARRANGEMENTS
|
any factor that affects the way the study is conducted. example. HAWTHORNE EFFECT, JOHN HENRY EFFECT, NOVELTY EFFECT
|
|
|
HAWTHORNE EFFECT
|
Participants knowledge of experiment affects participation...for the better
|
|
|
JOHN HENRY EFFECT
|
Participants feel threatened and out perform
|
|
|
NOVELTY EFFECT
|
Increased interest because of different instructions
|
|
|
ETHICS
|
Ways of Understanding and Examining the Moral LIfe
|
|
|
ETHICAL PRINCIPLES
|
Assist researcher's effort to achieve goals while avoiding strategies that compromise their values
|
|
|
FOUR MAJOR VIRTUE ETHICS
|
1. PRUDENCE
2. INTEGRITY 3. RESPECTFULNESS 4. BENEVOLENCE |
|
|
PRUDENCE
|
use only what is necessary
|
|
|
INTEGRITY
|
pure and truthful as possible
|
|
|
RESPECTFULNESS
|
anonymity of participants
|
|
|
BENEVOLENCE
|
intention to do good
|
|
|
ETHICAL ISSUES RELATED TO SCHOLARLY WORK
|
1. Execution of research study itself
2. Understanding of target population 3. Accurate planning and conducting |
|
|
REPORTING OF RESULTS
|
1. Accurately and honestly
2. Clear and understandable 3. State limitations 4. Make original data available 5. Duplicate and piecemeal publication - don't republish original data (will look like more than one study) |
|
|
PUBLICATION CREDIT
|
adequately and accurately assign credit
|
|
|
PLAGARISM
|
acknowlege original contributions
|
|
|
DESIGN STUDY TO EVOKE MINIMAL RISKS....consider
|
1. LABELING
2. PRIVACY 3. HEALTH 4. EMOTIONAL 5. ANXIETY LEVEL 6. ANGER |
