Unit 2 Mod 6

Front 1

Correlation

Back 1

A measure of the extent to which two variables change together, and thus of how well either variable predicts the other

Front 2

Correlation coefficient

Back 2

A statistical index of the relationship between two variables (from -1.0 to +1.0)

Front 3

Scatterplot

Back 3

A graph cluster of dots, each of which represents the values of two variables. The slope of the points suggests the direction of the relationship between the two variables. The amount of scatter suggests the strength of the correlation (little scatter indicates high correlation)

Front 4

A positive correlation

Back 4

If two sets of scores, such as height and weight, tend to rise or fall together

Front 5

True

Back 5

True or false, saying that a correlation is negative says nothing about its strength or weakness.

Front 6

Negative correlation

Back 6

Two sets of scores relate inversely, one set goes up as the other goes down.

Front 7

Statistics

Back 7

What can help us see what the naked eye sometimes misses?

Front 8

False, that is really the case in psychology. Positive and negative before only to the direction of the correlation. They say nothing about whether the relationship is desirable or not.

Back 8

True or false, if something in psychology is "positive" its good and if it's negative it's "bad."

Front 9

Predict

Back 9

Correlations help us ______.

Front 10

And nearly irresistible thinking error is assuming that an occasion, sometimes percentage as a correlation coefficient, proofs causation. But no matter how strong the relationship, it does not.

Back 10

What is a common error when one thinks about association and causation?

Front 11

True true true

Back 11

True or false, association does not prove causation. Correlation indicates the possibility of cause effect relationship but does not prove such.

Front 12

True

Back 12

True or false, when we believe there is a relationship between two things, we are likely to notice and recall instances that confirm our belief.

Front 13

Illusory correlation

Back 13

The perception of a relationship where none exists.

Front 14

True. Illusory correlations help explain many superstitious beliefs, such as the presumption that infertile couples who adopt become more likely to conceive. Couples who can see after adopting capture attention. We're less likely to notice those who adopt and never conceive, or those who conceive without adopting.

Back 14

True or false, because we are sensitive to dramatic or unusual events, we are especially likely to notice and remember the occurrence of two such events and sequence.

Front 15

True

Back 15

True or false, when we noticed random coincidences, we may forget that they are random and instead see them as correlated. Thus, we can easily deceive ourselves by seeing what is not there.

Front 16

Experiment / experiments

Back 16

Define answers to questions - - to isolate cause and effect - - researchers can _______. __________ enable researchers to isolate the effects of one or more variables by manipulating the variables of interest and holding constant other variables. To do so they often create an experimental group and a control group.

Front 17

Experimental group

Back 17

In an experiment, the group exposed to the treatment, that is, to one version of the independent variable.

Front 18

Control group

Back 18

In an experiment the group not exposed to the treatment; contrast with the experimental group and serves as a comparison for evaluating the effect of the treatment.

Front 19

Random assignment

Back 19

Assigning participants to experimental and control groups by chance, the minimizing pre-existing differences between the different groups.

Front 20

False

Back 20

True or false, a single experiment is conclusive

Front 21

Correlation studies uncover naturally occurring relationships, and experiments manipulate a variable to determine its effect.

Back 21

How are correlation studies and experiments different?

Front 22

Double-blind procedure

Back 22

An experimental procedure in which both the research participants and the research staff are ignorant (blind) about whether the research participants have received the treatment or a placebo. Commonly used in drug-evaluation studies.

Front 23

Placebo effect

Back 23

Experimental results caused by expectations alone; any effect on behavior caused by administration of an inert substance or condition, which the recipient assumes is an active agent.

Front 24

Independent variable

Back 24

The experimental factor that is manipulated; the variable whose effect is being studied.

Front 25

Confounding variable

Back 25

A factor other than the independent variable that might produce an effect in an experiment. For example, age, intelligence, and memory.

Front 26

Dependent variable

Back 26

The outcome factor; the variable that may change response to manipulations of the independent variable.

Front 27

Yes

Back 27

Can there be more than one independent variable?

Front 28

Validity

Back 28

The extent to which a test or experiment measures or predicts what it is supposed to do.

Front 29

Case studies require only one participant; naturalistic observations may be done when it is not ethical to manipulate variables; surveys may be done quickly and inexpensively compared with experiments

Back 29

What are the strengths of descriptive research

Front 30

Works with large groups of data, and maybe used in situations where an experiment would not be ethical or possible

Back 30

What are the strengths of correl ational research

Front 31

Specifies cause and effect, and variables are controlled

Back 31

Where did the strengths of experimental research

Front 32

Uncontrolled variables mean cause and effect cannot be determined; single cases may be misleading

Back 32

Weaknesses of descriptive method

Front 33

Does not specify cause and effect

Back 33

Weaknesses of correlational method

Front 34

Sometimes not feasible; results may not generalize to other context; not ethical to manipulate certain variables

Back 34

Weaknesses of experimental method