Objectivity task one booklet Task Write instructions for someone to recreate your given picture How does this link to research methods Replicability for reliability Standardised instructions Replicability ID: 387223
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Starter" 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
Starter
Objectivity task one- bookletSlide2
Task
Write instructions for someone to recreate your given pictureSlide3
How does this link to research methods?
Replicability for reliability
Standardised instructionsSlide4
Replicability
& Reliability
Sir Cyril Burt was accused of making up the data for his study that supported a genetic link in intelligence
This relates to the
reliability
of the findings: so, if it is possible to carry out the research again and find the same or similar results, the research is replicable. If it is replicable we can have confidence in the findings
If research is replicable it
guards against scientific fraud
(for instance, researchers may have simply made their findings up) and allows us to rule out that the finding was a one off caused by something about the original study, such as an atypical sample being testedSlide5
Replicability
& Reliability
To enable others to replicate a study, psychologists should publish
full and precise details
of their research
Replication is an important tool in the scientific method. It allows scientists to check findings and ensure that they are robust.
Which section of psychology research reports need to be very detailed to achieve this: the abstract, the method or the discussion?Slide6
Why do we dream?
Which is the best theory?
Why?Slide7
Freud’s Theory of Dreams
1900
Freud wrote the
interpretation of dreams
, suggesting that dreams were a “psychic safety valve” allowing us to discharge unacceptable,
unconscious
wishes and urges.
Dreams protected sleep by providing imagery that kept disturbing and
repressed thoughts out of our consciousness. The psychoanalyst uses free association, knowledge of dream mechanisms, (displacement/symbolism) and knowledge of recent events to uncover the
latent content of the dream from the manifest content (dream as reported by dreamer)For Freud, dreams were the “Royal road to the unconscious”. However absurd a dream may initially seem, Freud believed it always possessed meaning and logic. He considered that many aspects of a dream were symbolic, and in some cases would interpret the symbols as sexual, which was often seen as controversial.Slide8
Cartwright’s Problem Solving Theory
Cartwright (1988) sees dreams as a way of dealing with
problems
relating to work, sex, health etc. Like
freud
, she makes use of
metaphor
in dreams – e.g. dreaming of a colleague trying to stab you in the back could suggest that the person is undermining you at work.Slide9
Hobson &
McCarley’s
Activation-Synthesis Theory
This theory suggests that dreaming results from waves of activity which sweep up from the brainstem, through to several parts of the brain, including those involved in perception, action and
emotional
reactions.
This
activation is essentially
random: whilst body movements are inhibited, the brain still receives
signals and attempts to make sense (or synthesise) these random bursts of neural energy. Hobson (1988) argued “The brain is so bent upon the quest for meaning, that it creates meaning when there is little or none in the data it is asked to process”. Therefore, this theory sees dreams as the result of brain stem activity rather than
unconscious
wishes.Slide10
Empiricism
Read and answer
the questionsSlide11
Hypothetico- deductive
The
hypothetico
-deductive method is one of the mainstays of scientific research, often regarded as the only 'true' scientific research method.
T
he
method involves the traditional steps of observing the subject, in order to elaborate upon an area of study.
This
allows the researcher to generate a testable
and realistic hypothesis which the researcher can then use to support said theory.Slide12
The Scientific processSlide13
Look at the study and highlight the process
BookletsSlide14
Peer review task- Abstract
The team led by Professor
Pedley
sat two groups of 20 male students in a mini-cinema and played two films to them – one featuring alcohol drinking and one without
.
A fridge containing alcoholic and soft beverages was placed next to them and they were told they could pick any drink.
The group that watched the comedy American Pie, which featured 23 alcoholic scenes, along with drink ads in between, consumed three bottles of beer on average compared with 1.5 bottles drank by another group that watched the relatively dry film 40 Days and 40 Nights
with some
alcohol ad breaks. Slide15
Peer review
In
the peer review process, a paper is submitted to a journal and evaluated by several reviewers. (Reviewers are often individuals with an impressive history of work in the area of interest, that is, the specific area that the article addresses).
After
critiquing the paper the reviewers submit their thoughts to the editor. Then, based on the commentaries from the reviewers, the editor decides whether to publish the paper, make suggestions for additional changes that could lead to publication, or reject the paper
.
The primary purpose of peer review is to ensure that the papers published are valid and unbiased.Slide16
Why bother?
“Peer review is one way (replication is another) science institutionalizes the attitudes of objectivity and public criticism. Ideas and experimentation undergo a honing process in which they are submitted to other critical minds for evaluation. Ideas that survive this critical process have begun to meet the criterion of public verifiability” (
Stanovich
, 2007, p. 12
).
But really….why?Slide17
Why bother?
Research proposals will be scrutinized to check it is robust
To ensure it can contribute to already existing knowledge
Ethics approval
Encourages academic debate, openness and communication
Ensure there is no bias
Appropriateness of conclusions drawn
Ensure it is worth dissemination- journals
Consider wider implications
Find any errorsEnsure it can be repeatedSlide18
Peer reviewing your essays
I am going to ask an A2 student in the other group to mark your essays.
What might be the problems with this?Slide19
Bias
Reviewer
Publication
ReputationSlide20
Gender research topic ideas
Gender differences in memory
Gender differences in handwriting
Gender differences in answering questions in class
Gender differences in likeliness to be asked questions in class
Gender traits
Gender preferences in films/music
Gender differences in jealousy
Gender differences in mental healthGender preferences in choice of A level subjects
Gender differences in university decisionsGender differences in IQGender differences in spatial awarenessSlide21
Who is more likely to get published?
“Men are better at multi tasking than women”
(Foster 2015)
“Women are better at multitasking than men”
(
Fearon
2015)
“No difference found in ability to multi task”
(Pedley 2015)Slide22
Define the following
Objectivity
Empiricism
Hypothetico
- deductive
approach
Peer review