|
1
|
|
|
2
|
- 1. Write a brief characterization
of each of the following professionals:
- A. Psychologist
- B. Astrologist
- C. Scientist
- 2. List the most interesting
psychologist or idea in psychology in the last 25 years. Think of ideas in classes you found
exciting or surprising, or important.
|
|
3
|
- What do you think it means that we can not agree about what is
interesting, exciting or important?
- Does it mean that psychology is in trouble because of the diversity of
ideas?
- Guess how many divisions that there are in APA? (Divisions)
- Guess how many journals APA publishes? (APA Journals)
- Do psychologists hold anything in common?
|
|
4
|
- Science is the tie that binds all psychologists:
- The application of science to answer questions about the mind and
behavior and to improve of the human condition.
- There are other non-scientific approaches to the study mind and
behavior
- Definitions of Astrology include the prediction and explanation of
behavior.
- Other sciences do not address mind and behavior or seek to improve the
human condition.
- Descriptions of scientists were as physical scientists
- Psychologists = Scientists > Astrologists
|
|
5
|
- So what are the essential characteristics of science?
- Science is a way of thinking about and observing the universe that
leads to a deeper understanding of its workings (Stanovich, p. 8).
- Stanovich discusses three characteristics of science.
- Systematic empiricism
- Publicly verifiable knowledge
- Address solvable problems
|
|
6
|
- 1. Systematic Empiricism
- Empiricism refers to finding evidence in the world
- Science involves answering questions empirically, by “taking a look”!
- Systematic Empiricism means that there are better and worse ways to
“take a look”.
- Not all evidence is created equal.
- Evidence is stronger when it is collected in a systematic way and
weaker when it is collected in an unsystematic way.
- But as everything else in Psychology, things get complicated in the
details, which we will consider.
- We will review the ways to “take a look” in Chapters 4, 5, and 6 in
Stanovich.
|
|
7
|
- 2. Publicly verifiable knowledge.
- Knowledge created in science is social knowledge in three ways:
- Open to scrutiny. Scrutinizing
one’s own or others’ knowledge claims is a critical component
- Replication: Try the same conditions as someone else and see if you
see the same things,
- Peer Review: All interpretations are open to review.
- We will consider the importance of publicly verifiable knowledge in
science in Chapter 3 in Stanovich when we consider “Operationalism”.
|
|
8
|
- 3. Addresses solvable problems
- Questions that can’t be answered by using the scientific method are
rejected as unscientific.
- Science can deal only with ideas that can be tested. But what is
“scientific” changes, as new technologies are used to measure
phenomena and test ideas.
- PET and fMRI techniques in brain research has lead to theories of the
neurological basis of consciousness.
- We will consider the concept of solvable problems in Chap. 2 in
Stanovich
- It will come up in Chaps. 8 and 9 when we consider how scientific
ideas change in psychology.
|
|
9
|
- There are no agreed upon one best procedure in scientific psychology.
- However, a central role is played by probability and statistics in
psychological research.
- Many who criticize psychology do not think probabilistically and so do
not understand research in the discipline.
- Similarly rather then relying on statistical information to make
decisions, people appear to prefer to make decisions on intuitive and
personal information
- We will consider the role of probability and statistics in psychology
in Stanovich’s chapters 10 and 11.
|
|
10
|
- There are two metaphors for science
- 1. Science is like a game of 20
Questions
- I have something in this bag: Try to guess what it is by asking me only
yes or no questions.
- Is this a good metaphor of science?
- It looks like science because you formulate ideas or hypotheses, test
them out by asking questions, and then revise them when you get an
answer.
- This is just like the “scientific method” you learned about since
elementary school.
|
|
11
|
- But the metaphor breaks down:
- Reality is never so honest about telling when you are on the wrong
track.
- Wrong explanations are held on to for years before being rejected.
- Reality is never so direct about giving you answers to your questions.
- Two competent researchers can disagree about evidential support for a
theory
- Reality is never so specific about whether or not you are right or
wrong.
- No theory is ever completely confirmed by evidence.
|
|
12
|
- 2. Producing and understanding variation
- This is what was in the bag. Try
to figure out what it is. What do you do?
- Cause the object to behave in different ways .
- This is like science because you produce variation in an object and try
to understand the changes you produce.
- Variation is another way of saying change or difference.
- From all that variation information you can understanding what the
object does.
|
|
13
|
- “Production and understanding variation” is a better metaphor of science
than “20 questions”
- In this case, reality is assumed not to give direct, honest, or
specific answers to questions.
- Researchers produce or observe variation in order to understand the
causes of or conditions associated with the variability.
- The creativity of the researcher in producing or observing variation
is the basis for how well understood the phenomenon is.
- Good research involves producing, observing, and understanding
variation in phenomena.
|
|
14
|
- To study aggression in children, researchers ask questions about
variation, such as:
- Do children who watch a lot of violent TV shows behave more
aggressively than children who watch few violent TV shows?
- Do children who had poor early environments behave more aggressively
than children who had good early environments?
- Do children who behave more aggressively have different in hormone
levels than children who behave less aggressively?
- In each case, variation in aggression is related to variation in
another feature (TV, poverty, biology).
|
|
15
|
- We will learn about this method of producing and understanding
variation.
- Read Stanovich’s very entertaining account of how psychologists produce
and understand variation.
- Read Borden’s and Abbott’s process account of how to produce and
understand variation.
- Produce and understand variation in our own study
- We will examine conditions related to variation in student’s algebraic
thinking skills. That is, are there conditions that we can vary to get
students to think like mathematicians about critical algebraic
concepts.
|
|
16
|
|
|
17
|
|
|
18
|
|