BHS 204-01 Methods in Behavioral Sciences I June 6, 2003 Chapter 12 (Stanovich) Contributing to Society

Are Your Findings Publishable? Do they extend previous understandings or knowledge? Is the question important to current theory? Studies of gender differences, age differences, cultural differences must be related to theory. Are the effects strong enough? Are results consistent across measures and statistical tests?

Ticks and Buts A “tick” is a claim of a specific comparative difference, such as a treatment effect observed between two means. Ticks need to be qualified by a statement of the context in which the difference was observed. Do not describe or claim obvious differences, just interesting ones. A “but” relates to the context of the result and qualifies or limits it in specific ways. Too many buts weaken an argument. Interactions are buts.

Language to Avoid The result was significant at the .07 level… The result was marginally significant (p=.07). Although the result did not reach the conventional .05 level, it is nevertheless highly suggestive… Because of the limited number of subjects, the result just missed the .05 level, nevertheless…

Interestingness Scientific interest – does the finding have the potential to change what scientists believe? Interest arises from surprising results on an important issue. Wilson & Herrnstein – criminality is inherited. Papers with too many flaws are not interesting because they will not be believed.

Importance Importance is a direct function of the number of consequences for relationships between variables describing a construct. Importance depends on connections to other important issues. People differ on what they consider important. It is up to the author to explain the importance of the research presented.

Credibility Research claims lack credibility when: The claim is based on poor methodology. It contradicts a strongly held theory or world view (or common sense). Sometimes methodological criticisms are a screen for conceptual objections. “We are rejecting your article because we just don’t believe it.” Address such criticism by strengthening methods.

The “Rodney Dangerfield” of Sciences http://joecasaletto.com/jokes/rodney.htm

Sigmund Freud William James

Herbert Simon Roger Sperry Economics Physiology or Medicine David Hubel & Torsten Wiesel Physiology or Medicine

Dr. Laura Schlessinger Dr. Joyce Brothers

Psychology’s Image Problem The public expects “recipe knowledge”. The media expects strong findings because cautious ones are not news. Reported findings are over-generalized. People lose faith when findings are contradicted. Pseudoscience and frauds replace legitimate science in the media. Findings are contrary to public intuitions.

Our Own Worst Enemy? Antiscientific attitudes within the field must be addressed. The image of the field suffers when scientists are uncritical of their colleagues. We cannot mock the public for believing in pseudoscience if we do not also provide an alternative. Psychologists have a responsibility to communicate their findings to the public.