12 18 14 No screens in class including phones turn it off and put it away i gt Clicker Register your i gtclicker on both Blackboard and the i gtclicker web site ID: 566729
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Introduction to research in psychology." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Introduction to research in psychology.
12 / 18 / 14
No screens in class (including phones): turn it off and put it away!
i
>
Clicker:
Register your
i
>clicker on
both
Blackboard
and
the
i
>clicker web site!
Students who fail to correctly register will not get lecture credit.
See if you are correctly registered by whether you are getting lecture credit on Blackboard.
Make sure your frequency is set to ‘AA’.
When you click, make sure the green light shows you were received.Slide2
What is science?
Beliefs v. facts
Science, anti-science, pseudoscience.Where does knowledge of the world come from?
Introductory lectures
Cranach,
Tree of Knowledge
[of Good and Evil] (1472)
© Dr
. David J.
McKirnan, 2015
The University of Illinois Chicago
McKirnanUIC@
gmail.com
Do not use or reproduce without permissionSlide3
Core components of science
What is science?
Values:Science combines Critical thought with EmpiricismWe are interested in the
Natural
W
orld
The
core
purpose of scientific study is Theory: how do natural processes work?
Theory development rests on
Evidence: How do you know?Slide4
Core components of science
What is science?
ContentEmpirical findings: FactsWays of classifying nature
Well supported theories
Science is public
Methods
Objective approaches
Basic experimental design
Specific research
procedures
Values:
Critical thought + Empiricism
Understand the
N
atural
W
orld
Theory: How
o
r Why?
Evidence: How do you know?Slide5
Core components of science
What is science?
ContentEmpirical findings: FactsWays of classifying nature
Well supported theories
Science
is public
Methods
Objective approaches
Basic experimental design
Specific research
procedures
Values:
Critical thought + Empiricism
Understand the Natural World
Theory: How or Why?
Evidence: How do you know?Slide6
Critical thinking
Values:
Critical thought + EmpiricismUnderstand the Natural WorldTheory: How or Why?
Evidence: How do you know?
How do you know that?
What empirical evidence is there?
How do you know if the evidence is valid and reliable?
Does it make sense?
Is it logically coherent?
Does it jibe with what we already know about the world?
What other explanation or interpretation may make more sense?Slide7
What is critical thinking?
ActiveSeek (new & diverse) information rather than passively accepting an existing or traditional conclusion.
Skeptical; Suspend belief until there is evidenceMake judgments about whether something…Is plausible & rationalIs supported by evidenceBe clear on the limitations of your and others’ knowledge
Be prepared to change in the face of new evidence or theoryCreative
Develop and consider alternative explanations or interpretations
Imagine different ways to evaluate or test a claim
(
Not
simply doubting everything)
Values:
Critical thought +
EmpiricismSlide8
What is critical thinking?
ActiveSeek (new & diverse) information rather than passively accepting an existing or traditional conclusion.
Skeptical; Suspend belief until there is evidenceMake judgments about whether something…Is plausible & rationalIs supported by evidenceBe clear on the limitations of your and others’ knowledge
Be prepared to change in the face of new evidence or theoryCreative
Develop and consider alternative explanations or interpretations
Imagine different ways to evaluate or test a claim
(
Not
simply doubting everything)
Values:
Critical thought +
Empiricism
This is covered in the Critical Thinking focus modules!Slide9
How does critical thought map on to science?Here is the model of the scientific process we will use (and that you will use for your paper!)
:
PhenomenonTheory
Hypothesis
Methods / Data
Values:
Critical thought +
Empiricism
C
ritical thinking & ScienceSlide10
Critical thinking in science
One model of the scientific process:
PhenomenonValues:
Critical thought + Empiricism
What do we not understand about some important part of the world?
What needs to be explained?Slide11
Critical thinking in science
One model of the scientific process:
PhenomenonTheory
Explain the phenomenon?C
oherent & logical principles?
Basic physical, social or psychological processes?
Values:
Critical thought +
EmpiricismSlide12
One model of the scientific process:
Phenomenon
TheoryConcrete & specific prediction flows from – and tests – theory?
If I manipulate…If I am observing…
Hypothesis
Critical thinking in science
Values:
Critical thought +
EmpiricismSlide13
One model of the scientific process:
Phenomenon
TheoryWhat empirical evidence will test the hypothesis?What must I measure or observe?
Ensure evidence is unbiased & objective?
Hypothesis
Methods / Data
Critical thinking in science
Values:
Critical thought +
EmpiricismSlide14
Phenomenon
Theory
Active; Actively seek new or better explanations…Skeptical;
Theories must be coherent and logical.
New
evidence can always overturn our theories or beliefs
.
H
ypotheses must be specific enough to be tested.Without valid empirical evidence all beliefs are tentative.Creative
;
Every stage benefits from innovation.Alternate explanations.
Hypothesis
Methods / Data
As critical thought,
scientific
process is:
Critical thinking in science
Values:
Critical thought +
EmpiricismSlide15
Core components of science
What is science?
ContentEmpirical findings: FactsWays of classifying nature
Well supported theories
Science is public
Methods
Objective approaches
Basic experimental design
Specific research
procedures
Values:
Critical thought + Empiricism
Understand the Natural World
Theory: How or Why?
Evidence: How do you know?Slide16
Core components of science
Empirical findings
Scientific discoveries produce knowledgeEarth is 4.5 billion years old.
The hippocampus is crucial for memory.Stereotypes induce biased memories.Slide17
Core components of science
Empirical findingsClassifying nature
Taxonomies or classification systems are important scientific products:
Diagnostic systems.Evolutionary / biological category systems
Personality “types”
…Slide18
Core components of science
Empirical findings Classifying nature
Theory
Facts / findings
Taxonomies
…a
re interpretable only through a more general theory
What basic physical,
ψ or social processes underlie our findings?How (why) does nature work the way it does?
Slide19
Core components of science
Empirical findings Classifying nature
TheoryScience is public
All true scientific findings can be understood and replicated
(repeated)
by others.
“Mystical”, supernatural or intuitive sources of knowledge are not scientific.Slide20
Core components of science
What is science?
ContentEmpirical findings: FactsWays of classifying nature
Well supported theories
Science
is public
Methods
Objective approaches
Basic experimental design
Specific research
procedures
Values:
Critical thought + Empiricism
Understand the Natural World
Theory: How or Why?
Evidence: How do you know?Slide21
Core components of science
How do we address basic questions about how the natural world works?
How do we state an issue as a research question?
Phenomenon
Theory
Hypothesis
MethodsSlide22
Core components of science
How can we address basic questions about the world?How do we ensure our research is ethical?
We balance the cost or
risks of research against its scientific
benefits
.
We have developed common guidelines or ethical standards across areas of research.Slide23
Core components of science
How can we address basic questions about the world?
How do we ensure our research is ethical?How do we gather data that is reliable and valid?Two major streams:
Observation /
measurement
S
ystematically assess phenomena without altering them
Experiments
Control
Independent Variable, assess affect on Dependent Variable.Slide24
Core components of science
How do we address basic questions about the world?
How do we ensure our research is ethical?How do we gather data that is reliable and valid?Who or what do we study, and why?
We must ensure that our
sample
well
represents the population we hope to address.P
opulation: historical events, people, brain cells…
Sample: archival documents, research subjects, cell lines…Slide25
Core components of science
How do we answer basic questions about the world?How do we ensure our research is ethical?
How do we gather data that is reliable and valid?Who or what do we study, and why?How are statistics important to science?
Quantitative
studies: numerical data for statistical analysis.
Qualitative
research: text or other media.
C
an be quantified.
Statistical Reasoning rests on the normal distribution.Slide26
Core values of Science
Critical thought is a central value in knowledgeActive
understanding and questioningSkepticism; seeking logical coherence and empirical evidenceCreative seeking for alternative explanations or evidence.Science maps directly onto critical thought
SUMMARY
We
actively
seek
better understanding of natural phenomena.
Theory must be coherent and generate logical hypotheses.
Hypotheses must be empirically tested; belief requires evidence
Creativity is an integral part of each element of the scientific method.Slide27
Core values of Science
Key constituents of scientific understanding
SUMMARY
Phenomenon
Theory
Hypothesis
Methods
What is the larger question?
What do we need to know more about?
Coherent explanation of how the phenomenon works
A testable prediction that allows us to evaluate the theory
Our empirical – factual – results.Slide28
Introduction to science, 1
What is science?
Beliefs v. factsScience, anti-science, magical thought.Where does our knowledge of the world come from?
Slide29
How do we know things?
We should [not] open diplomatic relations with Cuba.
12 people died in the Charlie Hebdo attack in France.Each of us has an intrinsic purpose that we must discover.
The earth is 4.5 billion years old.
Belief
o
r
Opinion
Empirical Statement or
Fact
How do we distinguish…
f
romSlide30
How do we know things?
Each of us has an intrinsic purpose that we must discover.The earth is about 3.5 billion years old.
What research
could
you do on this statement?
Opening diplomatic relations with Cuba is a great idea.
Over 200,000 people have died in the Syrian conflict.Slide31
All ideas have some merit and should be considered equally.
Let’s answer some belief & fact questions… using your iClickers
Most any idea is worthy of study.Scientific acceptance
of ideas is not
egalitarian;
Ideas:
coherent
+ empirical support
.
A = True
B = I’m not sure
C = FalseSlide32
Knowledge attitudes, 2
If a lot of people believe something there is probably something to that.
Science is not democratic;
data “win”,
not
the majority of believers
Many foolish or dangerous ideas
are accepted until
countered by empirical evidence.
A = True
B = I’m not sure
C = FalseSlide33
Intuition:
important source of hypotheses or theories
Describes emotions, not necessarily real world.
Emotionality & subjectivity not scientific until
empirically
tested.
Knowledge attitudes, 3
I can just sense when something is true or false.
A = True
B = I’m not sure
C = FalseSlide34
Knowledge attitudes, 4
Everyone is biased, even scientists, so why shouldn’t I just believe what makes sense to me?
A = TrueB = I’m not sureC = False
Every person has
biases
Science is
not
person based:
…about
methods
, not people,
…specifically
works to lessen personal bias
.Slide35
Some ideas are “better” than others.
Science: core values
Is it logically coherent?
Is it supported by evidence?
Does it make sense with what is already known?Slide36
Some ideas are “better” than others.
Science is based on methods and evidence, not people.
Objective methods are specifically designed to overcome our natural biases.
Core valuesSlide37
Some ideas are “better” than others.
Science is based on methods and evidence, not people.
Evidence from the natural world trumps personal biases or beliefs. Core values
Evidence from the
“real world”
has the final say.
Not OK
to “Cherry pick” confirmatory or self-serving evidence.Slide38
Some ideas are “better” than others.
Science is based on methods and evidence, not people.
Evidence from the natural world trumps personal biases or beliefs. Logic or rational thought are (generally) more important than intuition or emotions.
Is it logically coherent?Is it supported by evidence?
Does it make sense with what is already known?
Core valuesSlide39
The values of science & empiricism
Critical thoughtHow does it work? Theories:
Coherent: internally consistent & clearly explains the phenomenon Articulate with what is knownHow do you know?
What is the evidence for or against a hypothesis or theory?
Focus on the natural world
.
Science:
evidence
& objective methods, not individual people or ideologies.Science is an open system:
Our theories & knowledge base must accommodate new / different findings
SUMMARYSlide40
What is science?
Beliefs v. facts
Science, anti-science, magical thought.Where does our knowledge of the world come from?
Introduction to science, 2
Slide41
Are we rational?
Are people “rational”?Are our beliefs generally scientific?
Irrational beliefs have increased in the U.S. in the 21
st
CenturySlide42
Beliefs…
About 50% of Americans believe in ESP
Despite consistent failures to demonstrate it scientifically.Slide43
Beliefs, 2…
37% of Americans believe in haunted houses(54% believe or not sure)
% of people believe / not sure about haunted houses
% of people who believe global warming is influenced by human activity.Slide44
Irrational beliefs
A
Washington Post overview is here.The original study is here.Americans in general harbor many irrational beliefs
70%: influence the world via positive thought.M = 60%: positive thought
changes w
orld, Atlantis, Dreams tell the future, Hauntings.
52%: vaccines are safe.
≈ 30% accept human-based climate change / evolution.
% who accept Big Bang theory = % believe in Bigfoot.Slide45
Why do we reject scientific explanations?
When they conflict with intuition or popular opinion.Scientific explanations abstract & difficult; intuition easier / “feels better”C
onformity pressure of popular opinionMisunderstanding of chance & coincidence;Spurious correlationsWe see correlations even in nonsense dataIntuitive
rather than logical interpretationSlide46
Example of (silly) spurious correlation.
http://tylervigen.com/view_correlation?id=2948, 4/9/15
r = .87
EXAMPLE
Basic (perceptual) fallacy; if B follows A, A must cause B.Slide47
Spurious correlations
R = .95
r = .666http://tylervigen.com/view_correlation?id=359, 4/9/15
EXAMPLESlide48
3rd variables in spurious correlations
Spurious correlations…often a
3rd variable actually causes both terms in the correlation.
Shoe size and reading performance for elementaryschool children
Age: Older children have larger shoe sizes and
read better
.
Number of police officers and number of crimes
(Glass & Hopkins, 1996)
Population density
: dense areas have more police
officers and more crimes.
Number of storks sighted and the population
of Oldenburg
, Germany, over a six-year period
(Box
, Hunter
, & Hunter, 1978)
Time: Both variables were increasing over
time.
Correlation
Cause
EXAMPLE
Age
Population density
Time
Tea drinking and lung cancer
Smoking: Tea drinkers smoke less.
Smoking:Slide49
Interpreting correlations
What else could be going on?
Most fat & cancer
wealthier, urbanized, industrialized.
Less
exercise
/ more prepared
(“factory”)
food consumption.Wealth and urbanization increase exposure to carcinogens other than fat?
“Obvious” causal link is questionable / incomplete if it relies on correlational data only.
FIGURE 3 | Association between fat intake and breast cancer.
From: Diet and cancer — the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition. S. Bingham & E.
Riboli
, Nature Reviews Cancer 4, 206-215 (March 2004).
doi
:10.1038/nrc1298,
http://
www.nature.com
/
nrc
/journal/v4/n3/
fig_tab
/nrc1298_F3.html
appears to
cause
cancer.
F
at
Total dietary fat intake (g day
-1
)
Age-adjusted death rate per 100,000 people
T
he
chart
makes this causal explanation
visually compelling
…
The
3
rd
variable
problem.Slide50
Why do we reject scientific explanations?
Why do people reject scientific explanations?When they conflict with intuition or popular opinion.Misunderstanding of chance and coincidence;
Confirmatory bias:We notice, recall, over-weight info. that confirms our beliefs or ideologies.Emotionally we seek consistency…A thought or belief dissonant with evidence is uncomfortable; We may seek to reduce dissonance by seeking confirmatory information…Slide51
Why do we reject scientific explanations?
Why do people reject scientific explanations?When they conflict with intuition or popular opinion.Misunderstanding of chance and coincidence;
Confirmatory bias:You meet a Canadian who is friendly and hates hockey.You meet a Mexican who loves Tejano music and cannot stand spicy food.Which of these pieces of information are you more likely to recall later?
We are more sensitive to information that confirms our stereotypes (or expectations).Slide52
Why do we reject scientific explanations?
Why do people reject scientific explanations?When they conflict with intuition or popular opinion.Misunderstanding of chance and coincidence;
Confirmatory bias Emotional needs & “the will to believe”; Superstitions provide a sense of control over the world.We want to believe in ‘myths’ that make the world seem manageable
(“The Secret”)Slide53
Intuition & Magical Thought
Brain evolved toward snap judgments about causation: Leap to conclusions via fast emotional processing.
Emotional needs distort perceptions before logic kicks in…Our need to feel in control can lead to imagine cause and effect when there really is none (…The Secret, “magic” foods or diets, rituals).
We experience emotions faster than we can thinkSlide54
Intuition & Magical Thought
Brain evolved toward snap judgments about causation: Leap to conclusions via fast emotional processing.
Emotional needs distort perceptions before logic kicks in…Our need to feel in control can lead to imagine cause and effect when there really is none (…The Secret, “magic” foods or diets, rituals).
A
rational, empirical
approach
Takes more cognitive effort
Can require us to suppress our intuitions or emotionsSlide55
Why do we reject scientific explanations?
Why do people reject scientific explanations?When they conflict with intuition or popular opinion.Misunderstanding of chance and coincidence;Confirmatory bias.
Emotional needs & “the will to believe”; Cultural patterns(Intentional) Confusion of opinion with fact (Political pundits..).Uncritical media coverage of non-factual explanations.Slide56
Why do we reject scientific explanations?
Cultural patterns(Intentional) Confusion of opinion with fact (Fox news..).Uncritical media coverage
Magical thought woven into consumer products…
The “secret” / mystical self-help.
Useless “Miracle” products.
D
ietary supplements.Slide57
Sources of irrational beliefs
Key terms:Illusionary correlation
Two events that coincide are not necessarily meaningfully “correlated”. Illusory causationCorrelation ≠ causalitySocial consensus
Beliefs are not necessarily ‘true’ because many people hold them.Confirmatory
bias
We seek – or are more sensitive to – information that confirms our bias’
Affect-driven beliefs
Emotionality or wishful thinking drive may irrational beliefs.
r = .666Slide58
Introduction to science, 3
Woman with book, Pablo Picasso.
What is science?
Beliefs v. facts
Science, anti-science, magical thought.
Where does our knowledge of the world come from? Slide59
How do we know things?
How do we know things?Authority / Tradition
IntuitionsEmpiricism; direct experienceRationalism / theory
Section OverviewSlide60
Sources of knowledge
Authority: “I believe what experts tell me”
Credible / powerful people Institutions & traditions
Culturally important texts: Bible, Quran…Slide61
Intuition:
“I believe my Gut feelings”
Emotionality or a “hunch”Authority:
“I believe what experts tell me”
Sources of knowledge, intuitionSlide62
Intuition:
“I believe my Gut feelings”
Empiricism: “I believe what I can see”
Simple sensation or perception
Direct observation; data
Authority:
“I believe what experts tell me”
Sources of knowledge, EmpiricismSlide63
Intuition:
“I believe my Gut feelings”
Empiricism: “I believe what I can see”
Authority: “I believe what experts tell me”
Sources of knowledge, Rationalism
Rationalism
:
“
I believe what makes sense.”
Logical coherence
Articulation with other ideasSlide64
Intuition:
Emotionality or a “hunch”
Empiricism: Simple sensation or perception Direct observation; data
Authority: Credible / powerful people
Important social institutions
Sources of knowledge, Science
Rationalism
:
Logical coherence
Articulation with other ideas
Most central to ScienceSlide65
AuthoritySlide66
Authority-based belief
Key distinction:
AuthorityBeliefs derived from experience or accumulated knowledge“Expertise”
Designated by, e.g., Educational or other credentialsAuthoritarianism
Beliefs derived institutional position
Interpreter of ‘sacred texts’
Bible, Quran, prophet
Ideological or political leader
Political
Talk show host…Slide67
Authority-based belief
Key distinction:
AuthorityBeliefs derived from experience or accumulated knowledgeAuthoritarianism
Beliefs derived institutional position, ‘sacred text’, ideological leader
Source of authority is typically
evidence-based.
…derived from a history of studies in a field.
Amenable to new or conflicting evidence.
Source of authority is typically
person-based.
…sacred text, ideologue…
Rarely amenable to new or conflicting evidence.
Strong leaders can change authoritarian systems; c.f. Pope Francis.Slide68
Authority-based belief…
Provides a stable core of principles; knowledge & beliefs…
People with extensive experience & knowledge have important insights.Can move a field beyond the data; visionaries, revolutionaries…
What are some advantages of authority – based belief? Slide69
Authority-based belief…
Disadvantages?
Can be insensitive to proof or evidenceCan be misused for financial / political ends…Highly susceptible to political bias
Can require evidence / science be corrupted, distorted or ignored.
Ignore or circumvent normal scientific procedures (e.g., Intelligent Design content in biology instruction).Slide70
Authority-based belief
Psychoanalysis is based on the writings of key authorities rather than actual psychological evidence, but did contribute to psychology.
E X A M P L E
Christian “conversion therapies” continue to try and turn gay men straight, despite evidence that they are destructive. Slide71
2: Intuition, emotion, superstition
IntuitionSlide72
Intuition, emotion, superstition…
Advantages
? Can provide emotional or personal insight
Origin of novel hypotheses or theories Can move
a field beyond the data
Disadvantages
?
Magical thinking:
often explicitly non-empirical
Emotion (e.g., fear) can outweigh
rationality or evidenceSlide73
Intuition
Intuition can be invaluable to science. Werner Heisenberg, a key developer of quantum theory, wrote that his musical training helped him appreciate scientific theory.
E X A M P L E
“New age” therapies and products flourish because they satisfy our emotional wishes, not necessarily by doing anything…Slide74
3. Empiricism: Directly observing the natural world
EmpiricismSlide75
Empiricism or simple exposure
Advantages?
Grounds knowledge in “real world”.Confirm intuition by observation
Makes knowledge public
(e.g., Copernican revolution)
Disadvantages /
limitations
?
Simple illusions / misperceptions / measurement error
Confirmatory bias
Oversensitive to emotional / perceptual salience
Spurious correlations
Anti-science use of naïve empiricism
Slide76
Limitations to empiricism
Illusions
Confirmatory bias Emotional salienceSpurious correlations
N
aïve
empiricism
Why is it difficult for us to use empirical evidence in our decision making?
Our perceptions of the world can be simply mistakenSlide77
Limits of empiricism: 1. Simple illusions
Akiyoshi
KITAOKA, Psychology, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto, Japan http://www.ritsumei.ac.jp/~akitaoka/index-e.html Slide78
How many Fs do you see in this passage?
FINISHED FILES ARE THE RE-SULT OF YEARS OF SCIENTIF-
IC STUDY COMBINED WITH THEEXPERIENCE OF YEARS.A = 2 B = 3 C = 4 D = 5 E = 6Slide79
Limitations to empiricism: Confirmatory Bias
Illusions
Confirmatory bias Emotional salienceSpurious correlations
N
aïve
empiricism
Why is it difficult for us to use empirical evidence in our decision making?
Our perceptions are often biased by what we
expect to see…Slide80
Limits of empiricism: 2. Confirmatory bias
Cops and doughnuts
Cop?
= memorability
subjective co-occurrence matrix.
Doughnut?
Yes
No
Yes
NoSlide81
Limitations to empiricism; Emotional Salience
Illusions
Confirmatory bias Emotional salienceSpurious correlations
N
aïve
empiricism
Why is it difficult for us to use empirical evidence in our decision making?
Our memories of what we see can be biased by emotions or simple salience
(we remember dramatic events better…)Slide82
Limits of empiricism: 3. Emotional Salience
Perceptually salient
Address our emotional needs
Salience effects: Which kills more women, breast cancer or cardiovascular disease?
Fear arousal
: Is the deficit a genuinely serious
economic
issue?
Conspiracy theories:
Could Kennedy have been killed by a single person?
(law of effect)Fear based attitude change
:
Democracy is threatened by phony voters
we need to make voting much more difficult…
W
e
pay attention to & remember
stimuli that are:Slide83
Limitations to empiricism; Spurious correlations
Illusions
Confirmatory bias Emotional salienceSpurious correlations
N
aïve
empiricism
Why is it difficult for us to use empirical evidence in our decision making?
We can easily think one event caused the other just because they co-occur [see: Magical Thought]Slide84
4. Spurious (naïve empirical) correlations:
The Japanese eat very little fat and suffer fewer heart attacks than the British or Americans.
The French eat a lot of fat and also suffer fewer heart attacks than the British or Americans.The Japanese drink very little red wine and suffer fewer heart attacks than the British or Americans. The Italians drink lots of red wine and suffer fewer heart attacks than the British or Americans.
Conclusion: Eat & drink what you like. It's speaking English that kills you. Slide85
Limitations to empiricism
Illusions
Confirmatory bias Emotional salienceSpurious correlations
N
aïve
empiricism
Why is it difficult for us to use empirical evidence in our decision making?
“
Mindless” or Naïve Empiricism can reflect anti-scientific bias
I
won’t believe it unless I can directly see it myself…Slide86
Limits to empiricism: 5. Anti-science & naïve empiricism
The sun obviously goes around the earth; humans must be the center of the universe.
We had a record cold winter; global warming must be a myth.The “big bang” makes no sense; we clearly are not moving in space.We cannot “see” things evolving
The world just looks
“designed”
Evolution
must
be falseSlide87
5. Anti-science & naïve empiricism
Naïve Empiricism
Science asks “why?”, not simply “what?” Testing hypotheses and developing theories is more important than raw data
Empirical observations must be put into a larger, theoretical context
We cannot directly “see” even the most basic of scientific principles or
processs
(e.g., gravity…).Slide88
Theory / RationalismSlide89
Advantages / purpose?
Develop coherent principles or theories
.
Articulate
hypothetical constructs
that underlie behavior.
Make our conclusions correspond
to other knowledge
Disadvantages?
Do we show bias in the data we use to support the theory?
Are our theories influenced by ideological
bias or
authority-based
belief
systems?
RationalismSlide90
Rationalism
Science has advanced via clear and strong theories, that..Organize our understanding of a field
Guide us toward new hypotheses and research questionsSummarize empirical data
E X A M P L E
The theory of evolution
Social – cognitive theories in psychology
Basic learning theorySlide91
How do we “Know” something?
Science: Integration of..
Rationalism TheoryHypothesis
Empiricism
Objective observation
Control
Operational definitions
Replication
Developing
theories
– explanations of how or why behavior works – is a core purpose of research.
Empirical data
helps us:
describe the world
test hypotheses & develop theory
.Slide92
How do we know things, review 1
An important source of novel hypotheses, theories or scientific approachesA = Authority
B = IntuitionC = EmpiricismD = RationalismSlide93
How do we know things, review 2
Grounds knowledge in “real” world, provides an important hypothesis-testing perspectiveA = AuthorityB = Intuition
C = EmpiricismD = RationalismSlide94
How do we know things, review 3
Provides stable, core principles or beliefs, but can limit empirical evidence or alternative viewsA = Authority
B = IntuitionC = EmpiricismD = RationalismSlide95
How do we know things, review 4
Central purpose of science: coherent explanation of “why” or “how” nature works. A = Authority
B = IntuitionC = EmpiricismD = Rationalism & theorySlide96
Sources of knowledge
Multiple cognitive & emotional biases impede empiricism:
IllusionsConfirmatory bias Emotional salienceSpurious correlations
Naïve empiricism
SUMMARY
Stable beliefs. Biased / limiting?
Authority
Intuition
Empiricism
Rationalism
Important source of ideas. Rational?
Points us toward the Natural World.
We strive to explain nature; why / how.Slide97
Glossary
Theory
Proposition linking two or more (psychological) processes. Addresses “how” or “why” a natural process works.
Hypothesis
Specific, theory-based prediction about the effect of one variable on another, or of the results of a measurement or observational study. Tests the theory.
Operational Definition
Specific procedures specifying how a variable will be modified or measured.
Quasi-Experiment
Experimental design, where researcher does not have complete control over the
Independent Variable
,
Dependent Variable
, or
Experimental Procedures.
Replication
Repeating a study in a different research setting and/or by using different research methods.
SUMMARY