Psy Chapter 1

Science is a systematic formof inquiry, based onobservation, prediction,reasoning, and testing

• a subject matter.
• Science is a method!

• Test our hypotheses
• -can be refuted or accepted
• Scientific knowledge is refined/altered
• Science should be self-correcting

• Intuition
• -Thoughts and preferences that come to mindquickly and without much reflection
• -Based on common sense or experience
• -Going with your gut feeling
• Authority
• -Teachers, religious leaders, politicians,celebrities, etc.E.g. – “The sun revolves around the earth.”

• Scientists reject intuitionand blind acceptance ofauthority
• Empiricism - knowledgethrough direct observationand experience
• Reason - use logic todeduce what is true
• - Relies on premises to beaccurate

• 1) Scientists make observations that areaccurately reported- Allow for scrutiny/replication
• 2) Search for observations that will verifytheir theories
• - Conduct research to build
• 3) Open system for exchange of ideas
• - Different points of view must befunded/protected
• 4) Peer review—before findings are published,they must be evaluated by other experts
• - Prevent flawed research from being published

• The science of human behavior and mental processes
• Science is not a subject matter
• Science is a method, a way ofanswering questions

• techniques for acquiring newknowledge
• - Must beobservable/measurable(empirical)
• - Must use logical reasoning
• - Claims must be justified
• -Scientific method embodiesrules for collecting and evaluating data

• 1) Ask a question / Define a problem
• - May require skepticism
• - Often based on observation
• Start with empirical questions
• - those that can be answered with the scientific method
• 2) Do background research- May require skepticism
• 3) Construct a hypothesis- Based on observation or past research findings- Involves a specific relationship

• 4) Collect data? Measuring the variables of interest? Study design differs depending on what you arestudying
• 5) Analyze results? Use statistics to test hypotheses and makeconclusion
• 6) Evaluate hypothesis? Supported? Not supported?
• 7) Report results? Peer review

• Ask questions; be willing to wonder
• - Be curious
• Define the problem
• - Be clear on all of the terms
• Examine the evidence.- Be skeptical of “self-reports.”
• Analyze assumptions and biases.- Are there unsupported assumptions or biases?
• Avoid emotional reasoning.- “I just know it. I feel it. It’s instinct.
• ”Don’t over generalize or use “either/orthinking”.- All Muslims are terrorists. All or nothing. Black or white.
• Tolerate uncertainty.- Don’t make a decision just for the sake ofmaking a decision.

• Biases:
• Belief perseverance- Tendency to hold doggedly onto a belief, even inthe face of evidence that would convince mostpeople that the belief is false
• Confirmation bias- Tendency to seek out information that supportsone’s beliefs while ignoring contrary information
• Availability heuristic- Experiencing an unusual or very memorable event and then overestimating how often it occurs

• Appears to look like science, but…
• -Rely on non-scientific authorities/anecdotes tosupport theories
• Hypotheses aren’t really testable
• Methodology is not reported or is not scientific
• Ignore conflicting claims/evidence
• Claims never revised

• • Description– Observational research
• • Prediction– Correlational research
• • Explanation– Experimental research
• • Change/Application– Real world uses

• Basic research tries to answer basicquestions about the nature of behavior - Basic behavioral processes
• Do shared negative beliefs facilitatebonding more than shared positivebeliefs?
• Does testosterone predict statusseekingbehavior?

• Applied research addresses issues inwhich there are practical problems and potential solutions
• Do dopamine levels shape the severityof schizophrenia?
• Can measurable personality traitspredict workplace behavior?

If you want to use psychology in yourwork, you must be use the research appropriately

• Learn how to ask critical questions
• Learn how to distinguish between goodscience and bad science