Psych 325 1st Edition Lecture 5-Festinger example: cognitive dissonance--attitude changeoResearchers asked participants how much they liked the experimentoMore attitude change with crappy incentiveoDissonance reduction: you have to convince yourself of positives when your reward is less desirable -Validation approach to hypothesis testingoTrying to gather evidence to support your theoryoNeed to establish that theory is correct in some circumstancesoCould this be a problem?-Positive test bias (behavioral confirmation)-Common way to thinkLook for ways to validate hypothesisCommon way to think-Test in way to support theory-Fail to acknowledge problemsoProtections-Peer review system-Research standards-Falsification approach to hypothesis testingoTrying to gather evidence that disconfirms theoryoImportant part of theory development (Popper)oMost psychologists don't want to do thisoSystem promotes falsification-Adversarial theory developmentEach part of the brain has specific functions vs. any part of the brain can do anything-Competing theorists may try to invalidate theory-Bem: questioned the motivational aspect of cognitive dissonance-->attributionoAsked participants of the Festinger study asked them how much more they'd like the study with a different amount of moneyoArgued that motivation has something more than attribution so he applied self-perceptionoBem's model is more logical. Don't have to get participants emotional, just activate logical parts of the brain-Qualification approach to hypothesis testingoTrying to identify boundary conditions for a theoryoIncreasingly popular among psychologistsoAdvantages-Validation and falsification-Can integrate competing theoriesThese notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute.oComplicated approach-Requires advanced theories-Sophisticated thinking -Complex statistical analysesoAdvantage-Closer to "truth"-Best route to psychological lawsoNo such thing as a perfect theory-Fazio: neither cognitive dissonance nor self-perception exclusively account for attitude changeoDo they interact with each other?oTheory: the precise degree to which behavior is inconsistent with original attitude may explain differenceowrote a highly or minimally attitude discrepant essay – some sat in a booth described as very intimidating!o Results: booth used as a cognitive dissonance reduction (no attitude change) only by people who wrote attitude discrepant essays-People in booth could use it as an excuse for any tension under the condition that they have been hypocritical-People in the tense booth: almost no attitude changeoSame logic as the Festinger study-Asked how much has your attitude changedoIf a theory survives falsification, it is likely true, Use validation approach to establish a theory, fine-tune theories with qualification approachPart Three: Ethics of Scientific Discovery-Do the benefits of the experiment outweigh the risks?-Stanley Milgram's memory/shock experimentoInformed consentoFreedom from coercionoConfidentialityoDebriefing -Rule 1: Informed consentoWritten description of what will happen during the study-Participants' rights-Potential risks/dangers-Benefits or payments for participationoParticipant must read and "offer" IC in order to participate in studyoWe sometimes don't tell the whole truth about the study in IC-Explanation of full purpose and hypotheses may bias responses-Deception about the true nature of the study may be required-Tell as much as we can-Rule 2: Freedom from CoercionoParticipation in research should be voluntary and not forcedoPotential sources of pressure-Threat-Guilt-Embarrassment-Big payments-Sense of obligationoParticipants are free to withdraw-Can leave study at any time-No negative consequences-Informed of this early in studyoSyphilis study: didn't tell the men what they were getting into-Told them they had "bad blood"-Did not let them leave the study-Went on for 40ish years-Why should you be concerned with ethics?oYou will need to address ethics if you ever do researchoRespect for participants' rights-Freedom to choose-Right to privacy-Preserving