Terms/concepts Definitions/examplesEmpiricism -the belief that accurate knowledge can be acquired through observationScientific method & 4 main goals -a set of principles about the appropriate relationship between ideas and evidence-4 goals:o Description (what happens)o Prediction (when it happens)o Causal control (what causes it to happen)o Explanation (why it happens)Theory -a hypothetical explanation of a natural phenomenaHypothesis -a falsifiable prediction made by a theoryVariable -a property whose value can vary across individuals or over timeMain issue with the scientific method-implementing research:- How to measure variables- Who to sample- How to avoid measurement bias- How to avoid sampling biasReliability -you will get the same results if you measure the same thingPower -the ability to detect differencesSampling bias -having a problematic sample (that isn’t random enough)- e.g. testing drugs only on males (when intended for both genders)Random sampling -a sampling method in which everyone has an equal chance ofbeing in the studyCase method -a method of gathering scientific knowledge by studying a single individualRepresentative populations -the sample and the populations are similar (the sample represents the population)Convenience sample -a poor method of sampling in which the subjects are chosen out of convenience/easeExpectancy bias -expectations of the experiment influence the resultsObserver/experimenter expectancies- they expect a certain outcome which skews their observationSubject/research respondent expectancies- they attempt to understand what the research is about which skews their responseBlindness (experimenters, subjects, or double blind (both))- when not much is known about the experiment-its purposes to prevent expectancy biasDescriptive research methods -observe & classify data-case studies, naturalistic observation & surveysCase studies -careful description based on repeated observations of 1 subjectNaturalistic observation -a technique for gathering scientific information by unobtrusively observing people in their natural environments -an outsider perspective, (but sometimes they manipulate the conditions and observe how the subjects respond naturally)Ecological validity The environment is natural (b/c people behave differently in lab settings, for example)Correlational research methods -measure how variables are correlatedExperimental research method features-the ONLY method that can determine the cause of a relationship/prove causality-involves manipulating conditions & behavior-one independent variable (IV; the variable being manipulated)-one dependent variable (DV)-random sampling-random assignment to treatments/conditions-try to control extraneous or irrelevant factorsConfounds - anything that may unintentionally vary between different experiments (that may affect the dependent variable)-different but similar to the third variable problemDemand characteristics - those aspects of an observational setting that cause people to behave as they think they should-E.g. the Hawthorne effectThe Hawthorne effect -researchers were testing whether the amount of light affected productivity, but because the workers knew they were being watched productivity went way up at all light levels and the researchers had gained no information on their theoryObserver bias - expectations can influence observations & influence perceptionsof realityObservational techniques -response to a stimulus (can measure bias we are unaware of- because the subjects must respond immediately there are no demand characteristics); e.g. the implicit association test-Stroop test: names of colors are written out in colored type. Inthe first few lines the colors match the words, yet in the last few they do not. People are asked to name the color each word is, and generally people respond slower to the last lines because the written words distract us from naming the contrasting colors-PET scans: show us where the blood flows in the brain, and therefore where brain activity is- MRIs- (not used much in psychology) show the structure of the brain- FMRIs- allows us to look at the brain in an active state, and see what parts “light up” with certain tasksDiallo case - The police believed they saw a man who was a rapist they were looking for & told him to freeze, however he was actually a recentimmigrant and couldn’t understand them. As he reached into his pocket the police thought he was reaching for a gun and shot him.-Illustrates implicit association- Research suggests we can work to undo these biases with trainingAnger venting experiment -2 groups of people were asked to write an essay, and then read responses from others (which were actually written by the experimenter, and were very critical and mean)-the control group was asked to sit quietly-the other group hit a punching bag to vent their anger-afterwards, both groups played a game and if they won theyshocked their opponent-the intensity and duration of the shock were recorded and used to measure the anger level of each subject-subjects that had “vented” their anger were actually more angry afterwards than those that sat quietlyCorrelation (positive, negative, zero)-reflects the association between 2 variables-expressed as a coefficient of association (r) which varies from -1 to +1-the closer to -1 or 1 & the further away from 0, the stronger the correlation-correlation does NOT necessarily imply causation-positive correlation: variables move in the same direction (e.g. GPA & SAT score)-negative correlation: variables move in opposite directions (e.g. age & amount of sleep)-zero correlation: no correlation (e.g. number of house plants andhow often you brush your teeth)2 problems with inferences of causation from correlational data-directionality problem: what causes what? (e.g. does depression cause impaired sleep or does impaired sleep cause depression?)-third variable problem: is a third variable involved? (e.g. do family conflicts cause both depression & impaired sleep?)Statistical significance -there must be a p value of <0.05 (meaning there is less than a 5%chance that the findings are a coincidence, or that they are 95% confident the findings are accurate)Internal validity -when the research was designed validly/wellExternal validity -when the experiment applies to real lifeHallmarks of good research -systematic data collection (standardized, reliable & replicable)-careful specification of theoretical terms-careful