©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall CHAPTER 2 Choosing Topics and Methods for Research

©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall Sources of Research Ideas Your own experience and knowledge. Brainstorming Pros? And Cons? Prior research findings. Pros and Cons? Using existing theories. Pros and Cons?

©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall Reviewing the Literature Why? –Be informed! Don’t want to duplicate pre-existing research. Where the topic currently is. –Help choose and construct a research design. E.g., operational definitions of variables.

©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall Types of Literature Scholarly versus General Sources –Scholarly: For professionals and students. Written by expects or researchers Cite references Little or no general advertising in the source. –General: For general public. Written by professional writers in well-known sources (e.g., magazine). Little referencing of sources Lots of general advertising (e.g., cars)

©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall Scholarly Sources Scholarly Sources are Peer Reviewed! –Other experts or researchers check over the papers of their colleagues before the are published. Primary Source –Original, firsthand account of an idea or research finding. –E.g., Journal article of a research report. Secondary Source –Secondhand information, usually based on the primary source. –E.g., Text book, newspaper article.

©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall Scholarly Research Reports Most research reports (primary sources) will contain the following sections: –Abstract –Introduction –Method Participants Apparatus and Materials Procedure –Results –Discussion

©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall Where Do I Find Scholarly Research? Abstracts –Psychological Abstracts Older research. Not a lot of fun – tedious, but builds character. Electronic Databases –PsycINFO (web-based) –PsychLIT (CD-ROM version of PsycINFO) –MEDLINE –EBSCOhost

©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall References In Hand, Now What? Even before you start reading (or have only read the abstracts) – organize them in some fashion (e.g., methods employed, results found) Read the “Introduction” sections of each paper noting theories, other references, definitions of variables. Read the “Discussion” sections of each paper looking for strengths and weaknesses of the methods employed. Now read the “Method” sections. Which methods do you think are best? Do the different methods explain conflicting results? What needs to be done? Maybe even come up with a hypothesis.

©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall Hypotheses Good Hypotheses –Make Explicit Predictions –Are Testable and Falsifiable –Provide clear “operational definitions” of variables.

©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall Match Hypothesis to a Research Strategies Once a hypothesis is in place – which research strategy should you employ? –This will depend on factors like: The topic and participants you choose The variables you use How much control you can have over the situation and variables –There 4 Research Strategies available to you. Experimental Quasi-experimental Correlational Descriptive

©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall Experimental Strategy If you want to draw a cause-effect conclusion then you must run an experimental design or strategy. Key features include: –Manipulation of a independent variable –Control Condition –Random assignment of participants to groups

©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall Quasi-Experimental Very similar to experimental except a required element to make a cause-effect conclusion is absent. –e.g., no random assignment to groups, or no manipulation of the independent variable. Cannot draw cause-effect conclusions with quasi-experimental designs.

©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall Correlational Usually participants are measured on two variables and the relationship between the two variables is measured. –Usually no assignment to groups –No manipulation of the independent variable (sometimes called predictor variable). Hypotheses state a relationship will exist between the variables. Cannot draw cause-effect conclusions. Can state relationship exists between variables but little more.

©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall Descriptive Strategy Often used to detail or categorize events. A hypothesis may be absent. –Descriptive strategies often help to generate hypothesis for correlational, quasi- experimental, or experimental studies. Cannot draw cause-effect conclusions. Conclusions are descriptive (for lack of a better word) in nature.

©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall Who Will I Study: Participants Population: entire set of people or animals (the participants) of interest. Sample: a representative subset of the population that is being studied. –What does representative mean? –How might you go about this? We’ll have much more to say about this in future chapters.

©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall Materials and Procedures The materials and procedures you use will depend on a number of factors: –What you want to accomplish? Cause-and-effect relationship or a relationship? –What materials and procedures been done before and how effective was it. Do you have access to similar materials? How expensive is it? Can I control the variables better?

©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall Applied Vs. Basic Research Applied Research: –Trying to solve a practical problem. E.g., Does a certain nutrient increase immune function? Basic Research –Tries to answer fundamental or theoretical questions. No focus on practical application. E.g., What is the impact of stress on memory?

©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall Laboratory Vs. Field Research Laboratory Research –A research setting with a high degree of control over: Who and what is present How data are collected What the participants experience Field Research –Research that occurs in real life situations thus there is less control. Speculate on the pros and cons of each. –Mundane realism vs. experimental realism.

©2005, Pearson Education/Prentice Hall Generalizability Will you results stand up if: –You use a different group of participants? –Change the circumstances slightly? –You run the study at a different time (e.g., winter vs. summer)? If they do, then your results have “External Validity” or are considered generalizable. How far should you generalize? –Most psychologists begin with the “continuity assumption” – results are likely to be similar across different individuals, situations, and time periods unless there are substantive reasons to believe otherwise.