Help
Options
Didn't know it?
click below
click below
Knew it?
click below
click below
Don't Know
Remaining cards (0)
Know
retry
shuffle
restart
0:00
Embed Code - If you would like this activity on your web page, copy the script below and paste it into your web page.
Normal Size Small Size show me how
Normal Size Small Size show me how
PSYC 204- ASSIGN1
In class assignment 1
| Term | Definition |
|---|---|
| Epistemology | A branch of philosophy that deals with knowledge, specifically: what can we know? How do we know what we know? How can we determine if what we know is true? |
| Empiricism | A philosophical position that contends that we can only know what we observe, and we can only be certain of sensory experience. |
| Problem of causality | How can someone determine that something actually causes another thing to happen? |
| Sensations | Raw, unfiltered sensory data |
| Perceptions | Inferences or interpretations of sensation/sensory data |
| Rationalism | Proposed we can only ever be certain of innate "rational" truth; "built in" truth. States: our senses can be deceived, logic and reason cannot, so what we "know" is independent from experience. |
| Kant's debate between empiricism and rationalism | Logic isn't empirical, but science (observation) forms/is the basis for acquiring or developing new knowledge. |
| Constructs | Ideas human beings develop to better understand, control, or predict the natural world- but in reality, constructs cannot establish certainty |
| David Mech | Studied wolf behaviour, proved bias because wolves were studied in captivity. Lesson: we shouldn't get too attached to a construct- if they don't stand up to a test of evidence, they need to be rejected or revised. |
| Evidence vs proof | Evidence is not proof, it can only support a conclusion or hypothesis. |
| Confidence vs certainty | Certainty can never be established in science, we cannot prove that evidence is consistent because we may not have discovered inconsistent evidence that undermines the validity. |
| Problem with Maslow | Pursuit of "higher order" needs can be at the expense of the more basic ones. |
| Falsifiability | Falsifying a claim |
| Pseudo-science | Based on scientific research, but makes unscientific speculative leaps. Seems science-y but isn't. |
| Hypothetico-Deductive research | Take established research findings and uses these to logically deduce a testable research hypothesis. |
| Theoretical model | Theory-> hypothesis -> test via observation -> theory |
| Inductive method research | Relies on logical induction: going from particular statement to more general hypotheses, always begins with observation. |
| Qualitative data | Richness of information. |
| Quantitative data | General findings based on amount of data collected, easier to obtain, focus on experimental variables. |
| Explanatory/Predictive Research | -Experimental Research -Correlational Research |
| Descriptive Research | -Subtype: Surveys -Subtype: Epidemiological Research -Subtype: Evaluation Research -Subtype: Longitudinal Research |
| Exploratory Research | -Subtype: Qualitative Interviews -Subtype: Field Research/Ethnography -Subtype: Factor Analysis |
| Sampling | Representative sampling, random sampling, strategic sampling |
| Variable | Anything that can vary in terms of one thing and only one thing. |
| Qualifier | Subscale for different features of a complex variable |
| Variable rules | 1. A variable can only describe one thing 2. Each case or participant can only have one "score" on a variable. |
| Independent variable | The variable that is hypothesized to cause variation in the dependent variable |
| Dependent variable | The outcome of introducing the independent variable |
| Experimental research | Research that seeks to establish the relationship between two or more variables |
| 3 things to establish causality | 1. Temporal order (cause before effect) 2. Correlation (covariation established in statistic calculation; directional) 3. Non-Spuriousness (non-false, correlation is not causation, no overlooked variables) |
| Confounding variable | Variable that gets in the way or hinders the integrity of the project. |
| Placebo effect | Belief that the treatment is effective is enough to feel effects of supposed treatment. |
| Hawthorn effect | People respond to being observed and studied |
| Realism | Social situations influence people's behaviour |
| Covert observation | Staged stunts and observing the response |
| Expectancy bias | Influencing one's own research, inadvertently |
| Double blind research | Conductors and participants are both unaware of who is in the control and experiment groups |
| Naturalistic experiments | Studying effects of natural disasters |
| Mixed methods research | Using more than one kind of research design in a study, costs time, effort, money. |
| Ethics review benefits | 1. Protects researchers from future lawsuits because they approved the experiment. 2. Greatly minimizes likelihood of causing harm. 3. Promote public confidence for scientific research |
| 3 Guiding principles to the Tri-council's code | 1. Respect for persons (rights) 2. Concern for welfare (refrain from causing harm) 3. Justice (burden is shared by all society- weigh the pros and cons of the research) |
| Nuremberg code | Research ethics code that contemporary codes are based on |
| Nuremberg code provisions | 1. Voluntary consent 2. Fruitful results for the good of society 3. Animal tested first 4. Avoid all harm 5. Risks should be balanced 6. Safeguards in place by qualified scientific researchers 7. Right to withdraw 8. Discontinue if harm predicted |
Created by:
user-1982862
Popular Psychology sets