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;
86 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
APA ethics code
|
-represents the consensus of the psychology profession about what is considered acceptable practice
|
|
What are the 6 general ethics "rule of thumb"
|
1. be explicit about research project
2. treat subjects w/ respect 3. find out about previous guidelines 4. don't lie about procedure b/c could be fined or have research abilit revoked 5. don't harm or put subjects at risk 6. dont' perform unnecessaryly hard/difficult procedure |
|
Institutional Review Board (IRB)
|
-appropiate constituted body of ppl that look through research project to decidie if appropriate
-studies present as little risk to subjects as possible and have scientific merit (risks and payoffs) -each institution has own and is required by federal govern if recieve federal funding |
|
Responsibilities of researcher
|
-see ethical principles are followed
-protect subjects from harm -protect subjects from stress -conflict bwt values of expanding knowledge and cost of research to participants |
|
What factors must be considered to protect participant from harm?
|
-any new situation is stressful and concievably could be harmful so impossible to aviod risk of harm entirely
-stress can physical or psychological (deceit, mental stress) -to judge acceptability of stress assess how stressful situation is likely to be compared w/ activities of everyday life |
|
Characterisitcs of informed consent
|
-ensures participant is taking part voluntarily and is aware of what is about to happen
-purpose of research, duration, and procedures, rights to decline or withdrawl and the consequences, potential risks, discomfort, or adverse effects, prospective benefits, limits of confidentiality, incentives, and whom to contact |
|
Privacy and freedom from coercion
|
-balance right to privacy against welfare of society as whole
-need to know individual subject results wont be released to the public -names must be kept seperate from subject's data/results -results can't be used against subject in any way -serious sums of money cannot be offered for participation and ppl cannnot be induced to participate w/ false promises |
|
When and what type of deception is permissible
|
-no alternative procedures are feasiblt and the payoffs exceed the risks
-deception cannot be used w/ research that may cause physical pain or severe emotional distress -explanation of deception must be given to participant as soon as feasible -have to tell what research is really about at end -if show emotional stimuli should give subset to see if subject is okay w/ them before |
|
confederate
|
-actors in expt
-form of deception -subject must be told about them at conclusion of experiment |
|
what is debriefing
|
-process of informing the subjects after the session of the experiment's true purpose to increase their understanding and to remove possible harmful effects of deception
|
|
What info is included in debriefing?
|
-general and theoritical debriefing
-how and why deception was used and its relation to the theoritical construct -contact info of researcher and reference list |
|
what is the role of the participant in research
|
-consent = contractial agreement so should do what expected to do
|
|
Guidelines for animal research and for insuring animal welfare
|
-usually not in psychology but different standards b/c can be invasive
-only 50% of legal dose can be given to animal -should be treated humanely (aniseptics, clean living conditions, can't be too stressed) |
|
animal rights
|
notion that animals have the same sort of rights as people, including legal rights (not generally accepted)
-unethical to use animals for research, food, pets, recreation, etc |
|
animal welfare
|
generally accepted term for concerns about the care and use of animals
-humane treatment of animals |
|
speciesism
|
term used by analogy w/ racism and sexism by those who claim that it is unethical to treat animals differently from humans, particularly in research
-reject any special moral status for humans |
|
invisible college
|
informal communication network of ppl having common scientific interests
-new ideas and results are usu. first discussed through this |
|
discourse community
|
group of ppl who share common goals, a public forum, common knowledge, and a specialized language
-psychologists (audience) |
|
Goals of scientific writing
|
-convey a message clearly, concisely, and interestingly
-persuade as well as inform |
|
agrument
|
a set of reasons in support of a proposition
|
|
thesis
|
the proposition that is supported by an agruement
|
|
Characterisitcs of good scientific writing
|
1. Clarity: say exactly what you mean as directly as possible
2. Brevity: brief (good communication) 3. Felicity: pleasingness of style (liveliness and grace) |
|
Heurisitcs for good writing (esp. clarity)
|
1. prepare outline
2. use technology (spell check) 3. be prepare to "kill your baby" b/c it'll take several tries to make it perfect 4. have someone else proofread 5. read paper aloud |
|
Science Journal
|
-includes many science areas like psychology and physics
-for up and coming research |
|
APA guidlines and their benefits benefits
|
-avoid sexist language and ethnic bias in writing (ambiguity and stereotyping)
-standardized format that's helpful for publisher -don't have to reformat for each journal |
|
Parts of APA paper
|
title page
abstract introduction method results discussion references foot notes/ author notes if any tables figure caption figures |
|
Title page
|
-title (centered, include keywords, convey main idea)
-author(s): listed in order of importance of their contribution and last author is usually most prestigious (money source) -affiliations -running head in upper right corner |
|
abstract
|
-summary of most important elements
-self-contained -max 120 words -block form, on pg 2, heading abstract centered |
|
Body
|
-intro, methods, results, discusion
-begin w/ title centered -centered heading organize subsections |
|
Introduction
|
-not labled, on pg 3
-state general problem examined -discuss relevant literature -indicate hypothesis -state how study will contribute to understanding the problem -expected results |
|
Method (heart of the paper)
|
-in past tense
-allows someone to repeat experiment exactly in all essential detials -judge validity of conclusions by comparing them w/ the method section -subheadings: participants, materials, design (logic/ varibales), procedure |
|
Results
|
-past tense (what you found)
-indicate any data transformations made before analysis -describe statistical procedures -displace/summarize data in table, figure, or graph |
|
Discussion
|
-state relationship bwt findings and hypothesis
-present tense -interperate results and relate them to literature (similiarities and differences) |
|
References
|
-ties paper to literature
-only lists papers cited in text -3 componets: author, title, yr -hanging indent -new page |
|
Author notes
|
-provide mailing address, acknowledgements (of financial supportors and technical assitance)
-distracting--aviod |
|
Foot notes
|
-content and copyright permission types
-aviod footnotes to content of paper -copyright footnotes are used for reprinted tables or figs |
|
Tables
|
-supplement material in text not duplicate material
|
|
Figure captions
|
-each figure has one
-describes content of figure -come after tables but before figures themselves |
|
Figures
|
-professionaly rendered (high quality)
-simple as possible (clear/brief) -aviod color -stylistically pleasing |
|
Steps in the publication process
|
1. before write manuscript
-decidie which journal going to submit to -impact factor of journal (circulation, how many ppl read it, how many submissions it receives, etc.) -choose journal that publishes articles similiar to yours and the one you cited the most 2. before submit manuscript -know requirements of journal (hard copy or electronic submission) -know turnaround time (how long it takes to review) -balance prestige of journal w/ difficulty of getting published -prepare cover letter |
|
Steps in publication process continued
|
3. after submission
-paper goes to reviewers (subjective process) -4 options -resubmittL need another cover letter and address every reviewers pts and whether followed suggestion and if not why |
|
cover letter
|
-addressed to editor
-include title and some details like theory, methods, results, significance -give return address and # |
|
If published what happens
|
-"in press"
-you get copyeditied version of manuscript and make corrections -get proofs of what paper will look like -can take 12-18 months from acceptance to publication |
|
Oral Presentations
|
1.Talks: shorten paper, simplify material, organize talk to main pts of paper w/ 1 or 2 pts in each section, most of time should be spent on results w/ emphasis on main findings
2. Posters: place copies of abstract or paper in pocket on board, stay near board to talk to ppl |
|
Validity
|
-an indication of accuracy in terms of the extent to which a research conclusion corresponds with reality
-truth of observations or experiment -dependent on validity and reliability |
|
Reliability
|
-observations were obtained on multiple samples (many times)
-only one measurement |
|
Internal Validity
|
-extent to which a study provided evidence for a cause-effect relationship bwt the IV and the DV
-degree to which 2 or more variables are related -variables important hypothesis must be controlled |
|
Confounding variables
|
-covaries w/ the IV
-their effects cannot be sorted out -big threat to validity in an experiment |
|
Subject variables
|
-differences bwt subjects that cannot be controlled but can only be selected
-gender, age |
|
Threats to internal validity
|
1. history: events that take place in time could change results
2. maturation 3. testing (order) effects 4. regression effects 5. selection-experimenter bias 6. mortality |
|
Construct validity
|
-extent to whcih the results support the theory behind the research
-measure what suppose to -experimental results have to support theory motivated by experiment -if measurement used in some research lacks construct validity the research as a whole will also -rule out other possible theoretical explanation |
|
auxilliary hypothesis
|
-better theory supports results
-theory x-hypothesis-expt-results -theory y supports hypothesis |
|
External Validity
|
-how well the findings of an experiment generalize to other situations or populations
-whole pt of research |
|
Statisitical Validity
|
-extent to which data are shown to be the result of cause-effect relationships rather than accident
-statistical tests guarantee only low probability not definite cause-effect relationship -statistical significance (type of test) |
|
Maturation
|
soure of error related to the amount of time bwt measurements
-development of subjects (esp w/ children) -subjects change |
|
Regression effects
|
tendency of subjects with extreme scores oon a first measure to score closer to the mean on a second testing
|
|
random error
|
that part of the value of a varibale that can be attributed to chance
|
|
Mortality
|
the dropping out of some subjects before an experiment is completed causing a threat to validity
|
|
Threats to construct validity
|
1. poor operational definitions
-loose connection bwt theory and method 2. ambiguous effects of IV's |
|
Examples of ambiguous effects of the IV's
|
1.Hawthorne effect: individuals behavior may be altered b/c somebody know they are being observed
2. good-subject tendency: participants act according to what they think the experimenter wants 3. evaluation apprehension (ie social desirability) -alter behavior to appear socially desirable (anxiety, want to look good) |
|
Threats to External Validity
|
1. population: generalizing from sample to population
2. time: population may change w/ time so conclusions not valid anymore 3. other settings: move from lab to another or real world setting |
|
Threats to statistical validity
|
1. erroneous stats (wrong tests, not correcting for multiple occurences)
2. not enough power (not enough subjects or observations to detect effect) |
|
Control
|
any means used to rule out threats to the validity of research
-not every experiment requires a control group -providing a standard against which to compare the effect of a particular IV -control for as many variables as possible for best validity (internal validity) -ability to restrain or guide sources of variability in research |
|
control conditions
|
-condition in a within-subject design experiment that does not contain the experimental manipulation
-serves as baseline |
|
experimental conditions
|
-treatment
-what you change to affect measurement -allows for strong inference about casaulity |
|
experimental group
|
subjects in an experiment who receive treatment
|
|
control group
|
subjects in a between-subjects design experiment who are like the experimental group in every respect except that they do not recieve treatment
|
|
With-In Subjects Experiment
|
-research design in which each subject experiences every condition of the experiment
|
|
Between-Subjects Experiment
|
-research design in which each subject experiences only one of the conditions in the experiment
|
|
Methods of Experimental Control
|
1. laboratory setting: control everthing in lab setting (social research is done in field setting)
2. laboratory preparatons: method/procedure is same for all subjects (also allows for replication) 3. instrumentation: make response reliable, improve the measurement of the behavior (DV) |
|
Modularity Theory (Fodor, 1983)
|
-mind is seperated into different processing modulars
-domain specific: incoming info is specific (1 type of processing ) -information encapslated: no other input from other modules -automatic: automatically process incoming visual info a specific way |
|
Design 1 : Between-Subjects
|
-2 conditions: control group and experimental group
-participant assignment: random to avoid confounds like order effect -instrumentation (how test) single trial or multiple trials -counter-balancing: order effects, control number of each type of response |
|
counterbalancing
|
controlling for order and sequence effects by arranging that subjects experience the various conditions in different orders
|
|
Design 2: Within-Subjects
|
-same ppl run through each condition
-powerful control technique b/c variation caused by differences bwt ppl is greatly reduced -basic logic: control condition vs experimental condition -pros: more power, more control for bwt subject variability -cons: not always feasible |
|
When to use subjects as own control
|
1.logically possible
2.participating in all conditions will not destroy the naivete of the subject 3.serious contrast effects bwt conditions will not be present |
|
Random Assignment
|
-unbiased assignment process that gives each subject an equal and independent chance of being place in every condition
-confounding of subject-related variables can only occur by chance w/ random assignment |
|
Design 3: Matched Design
|
-match participates on certain variables
-justification conditions 1. important variable subjects differ on that can be controlled by matching 2. feasible to present a pretest to the subjects before assigning them to the condition -still randomly allocate the members of the pair conditions |
|
Matching
|
-yolking
-control procedure to ensure that experimental and control groups are equated on one or more variables before the experiment |
|
Matched Design: pros/cons
|
pros: more statistically power
cons: more complicated, possibly less power when stats are based on fewer degrees of freedom |
|
nuisance variables
|
-a condition in an experiment that cannot easily be removed and so is made an IV as a means of control
|
|
Statistical Control
|
mathematical means of comparing subjects on paper when they cannot be equated as they exist in fact
-broadly synonymous w/ inferential statistics |
|
Replication
|
repeating an experiment to see if the results will be the same
-method of control |
|
Direct Replication
|
-someone repeats essentially the identical experiment in an attempt to obtain the same results
-seldom carried out |
|
Systematic Replication
|
-similiar experiment but with different type of subjects, different values of the stimulus, or with different ways of measuring the theoritical concept
-tests external validity |
|
Independent sample t-test
|
assume have different SD for 2 groups
-2 groups come from different populations |
|
Matched sample t-test
|
can relate SD b/c matched individuals
|