Doing Social Psychology Exploring Social Psychology by David G. Myers, 4/e Doing Social Psychology Module 1 Copyright © 2005 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

BA 1201 Principles of Behavioral Sciences What is social psychology? Psychologists have shown that we are organized by our attachments (bağ). Sociologists have shown the power of social networks to affect individual behavior.

Jean-Paul Sartre “We cannot be distinguished from our situations, for they form us and decide our possibilities.”

Allport Social Psychology is an attempt to understand how the thought, feeling and the behavior of individuals are influenced by the actual, imagined or implied presence of others (other people people) Allport (1954) proposed a unidirectional process Kenrick et al (people other people) Allport (2008, 1974) expanded definition http://gakushuu.org/article/elusive-definition-social-psychology

.. While establishing “influence” as a common theme throughout all definitions of social psychology, the classical definitions are insufficient for understanding the dynamic and reciprocal process of human interaction.  people <----> others

Social Psychological Questions How and what do people think of one another? How, and how much, do people influence one another? What shapes the way we relate to one another?

What Is Social Psychology? Social psychology is the scientific study of how people think about, influence, and relate to one another. D. Myers

INTERPERSONAL TRUST Data collected between 1995-2009 period

What is science? It is a way of knowing that includes observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of things. Guesses-theories-facts

What is a theory? Karl Popper (1998) A theory must be refutable, testable or falsifiable. Also verifiable by observation (Thagard (1998)

Forming and Testing Theories Theory-integrated set of principles Hypotheses-testable predictions - Test a theory - Direct research - Practical

A Good Theory… Effectively summarizes a wide range of observations Makes clear predictions

What Makes a Good Theory? Predictive Accuracy: Can it reliably predict behavior? Internal Coherence: Are there any logical inconsistencies between any of the theoretical ideas? Economy: Does it only contain what is necessary to explain the phenomenon in question? Fertility: Does it generate research and can it be used to explain a wide variety of social behavior? (Generalizability – Does it apply to many situations?)

Thomas Kuhn (1998) Characteristics of a good scientific theory: It should be accurate within its domain It should be consistent within itself and with other accepted theories that are related to the same phenomena It should have broad scope with explanations that go beyond those it was initially used to explain It should be simple and make sense of seemingly disparate parts; and It should be fruitful of new research findings

Correlational Research: Detecting Natural Associations Correlational research asks whether two or more factors are naturally associated Experimental research manipulates some factor to see its effect on another https://www.simplypsychology.org/correlation.html

Correlation If an increase in one variable tends to be associated with a decrease in the other then this is known as a negative correlation. Example : height above sea level and temperature. As you climb the mountain (increase in height) it gets colder (decrease in temperature). Positive correlation Zero correlation

What does this chart reveal What does this chart reveal? Does more education generally cause higher family incomes?

WARNING!! It is important to remember that correlations show us a relationship between variables or factors, but not cause-effect relationships. https://www.simplypsychology.org/correlation.html

Experimental Research: Searching for Cause and Effect Independent variable Dependent variable

RANDOM ASSIGNMENT Randomizing allows us to assume that these “natural” differences will appear equally in both conditions, and so will not affect our results, when we compare measurements for our experimental and our control condition.

UM Study 52 nations representing 90% of world’s population Average sample size 1400 respondents 1981 to 2007

.. During the past 26 years, the World Values Surveys have asked more than 350,000 people how happy they are, using the same two questions. "Taking all things together, would you say you are very happy, rather happy, not very happy, not at all happy?" And, "All things considered, how satisfied are you with your life as a whole these days?"

.. Combining responses to these two questions, Ronald Inglehart and colleagues constructed an index of subjective well-being that reflects both happiness and general life satisfaction.

UM Study Economic growth, democratization and rising social tolerance have all contributed to rising happiness, with democratization and rising tolerance having even more impact than economic growth. All of these changes have contributed to providing people with a wider range of choice in how to live their lives- which is a key factor in happiness.

UM Study "The results clearly show that the happiest societies are those that allow people the freedom to choose how to live their lives," Inglehart said. Harvard research on good relationships: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8KkKuTCFvzI

A simple experiment Population S’s Experimental Group Factors: A, B, C, D, E Population S’s Control Group Factors: A, B, C, D

Why randomize S’s assignment to the Experimental or the Control Group? Because different people may “naturally” have a variety of different reactions to Factor E. For example, some people may have a tendency to have powerful reactions to Factor E. Others may have a tendency to have no reaction at all to Factor E. This could affect the outcome of our experiment if all or most of one type of person was in the experimental condition, and few of the same type was in the control condition. By randomly assigning S’s to the experimental or the control condition, both types of people have an equal chance of being assigned to each condition.

Field Experiments Field experiments do not take place in a lab, but in natural settings. In natural settings, we cannot control the factors that may influence behavior as much as we can in the laboratory. So we have to be a bit cautious when interpreting field experiments.

We evaluate theories based on the evidence to support them. What is evidence? Evidence is data that we believe supports an argument, position, or interpretation of reality. Any good theory is based on reasonable evidence.

We often have disagreements, debates in science. Our obligation in science is to be as objective as we can, and to try to reduce our subjectivity as much as we can, in our experiments, observations and discussions. This requires what we call critical thinking—exploring the assumptions we take for granted and how they impact our work.

. What is objectivity?(nesnellik) “being true to the object” What is subjectivity?(öznellik) It is the distortion of objects that is involved in our sensing them and representing them as mental images. Subjectivity is involved every time we perceive reality and every time we communicate. Subjective research is generally referred to as phenomenological research. This is because it is concerned with the study of experiences from the perspective of an individual, and emphasises the importance of personal perspectives and interpretations. Subjective research is generally based on data derived from observations of events as they take place or from unstructured or semi-structured interviews. In unstructured interviews the questions emerged from the discussion between the interviewer and the interviewee. In semi-structured interviews the interviewer prepares an outline of the interview topics or general questions, adding more as needs emerged during the interview. Structured interviews include the full list of questions. Interviewers do not deviate from this list. Subjective research can also be based on examinations of documents. The researcher will attribute personal interpretations of the experiences and phenomena during the process of both collecting and analysing data. This approach is also referred to as interpretivist research. Interpretivists believe that in order to understand and explain specific management and HR situations, one needs to focus on the viewpoints, experiences, feelings and interpretations of the people involved in the specific situation. Conversely, objective research tends to be modelled on the methods of the natural sciences such as experiments or large scale surveys. Objective research seeks to establish law-like generalisations which can be applied to the same phenomenon in different contexts. This perspective, which privileges objectivity, is called positivism and is based on data that can be subject to statistical analysis and generalisation. Positivist researchers use quantitative methodologies, which are based on measurement and numbers, to collect and analyse data. Interpretivists are more concerned with language and other forms of qualitative data, which are based on words or images. Having said that, researchers using objectivist and positivist assumptions sometimes use qualitative data while interpretivists sometimes use quantitative data. (Quantitative and qualitative methodologies will be discussed in more detail in the final part of this course.) The key is to understand the perspective you intend to adopt and realise the limitations and opportunities it offers. Table 1 compares and contrasts the perspectives of positivism http://www.open.edu/openlearn/money-management/understanding-different-research-perspectives/content-section-1 and interpretivism.

The Ethics of Experimentation Mundane realism Experimental realism

Ethical Principles Informed consent Be truthful Protect Confidentiality Debrief

Scientific Misconduct at Harvard Marc Hauser Case In 2007, Harvard University announced an internal investigation of alleged scientific misconduct by Hauser. In August 2010, the investigators found him solely responsible for eight counts of misconduct, and he took a year's leave of absence. In July 2011, Hauser resigned his faculty position at Harvard, effective August 1, 2011.

University of Groningen, Tilburg Diedrik Stapel Case His 2011 suspension happened as a direct result of pretty much all of it being straight-up garbage. More than 30 publishing outfits found themselves duped by falsified research, fabricated data and plagiarism. Meat eaters are more selfish than vegetarians, which was widely publicized in Dutch media, was suspected and later turned out to be based on faked data

Website visit: http://socialnomics.net/2012/06/07/the-10-biggest-research-scandals-in-academic-history/