Revisit and Respond 1.3
Explain the value of common sense in posing research questions.
Explain the difference between a law, a theory, and a hypothesis.
Explain the qualities of theories, such as scope and parsimony.
Describe what makes something a good research question; give an example of what you think might be a good research question and another example of a poor research question.
Summary
We have considered in depth the qualities of thinking that both may help (schema development; common sense) and hurt (stereotypes; heuristics) our approach to the research process. You have observed the kinds of cognitive shortcuts or heuristics that characterize some decision-making situations and can recognize when those biases may come into play. Exposure to Shermer’s (1997) list of how thinking goes wrong should have made you more attentive to the decisions you will make in your own research. But as researchers likely at the start of your investigative career, you are in a good position to think innovatively because you are less likely than some of your professors to be constrained by a particular way of doing research. You understand the different levels of predictability and generalizability related to laws, theories, and hypotheses. You are ready to begin your journey to combine tradition and innovation.
If you have not had time to consider them earlier, here is the list of Revisit and Respond questions from this chapter.
1.1Explain what it means to say humans are limited information processors.Describe the concept of a schema and its adaptive and maladaptive implications for research.Define heuristics and give examples of representativeness and availability.Explain the Wason Selection Task and what it shows about the difference between confirming and disconfirming hypotheses.
1.2Give an example from each one of Shermer’s (1997) categories:Problems in scientific thinkingProblems in pseudoscientific thinkingLogical problems in thinkingPsychological problems in thinkingOf these four categories, which do you think has the most potential to undermine the research process and why?Explain why science is a combination of tradition and innovation.
1.3Explain the value of common sense in posing research questions.Explain the difference between a law, a theory, and a hypothesis.Explain the qualities of theories, such as scope and parsimony.Describe what makes something a good research question; give an example of what you think might be a good research question and another example of a poor research question.
Practice Quiz
1 Which of the following is a potentially harmful way we humans think?Category formationCommon senseHeuristicsFlexibility
2 A theory is a proposed explanation for the relationship between variables that must be tested.TrueFalse
3 Our tendency to categorize information facilitates our ability to make predictions.TrueFalse
4 In terms of sample, the _________ reflects the extent to which an array of events or objects or people reflects the characteristics of its parent population.availability heuristicconfirmation biaslogical fallacyrepresentativeness heuristic
5 One of the problems with the _______ is that we may not know the characteristics of the whole population when we think the sample doesn’t look random.availability heuristicconfirmation biaslogical fallacyrepresentativeness heuristic
6 The availability heuristic suggests that we make decisions to some extent based on how easy it is for us to think of examples from that domain.TrueFalse
7 Which heuristic was studied by asking: in words with three or more letters in English text, does the letter K appear more frequently in the first or third position?Availability heuristicConfirmation biasLogical fallacyRepresentativeness heuristic
8 When social media sites use an algorithm to post ads that agree with an individual’s political views, they are supporting the confirmation bias.TrueFalse
9 Observations lead to theories; theories can’t affect what we perceive.TrueFalse
10 What is the term for something that sounds like science but has no scientific support or evidence?Pseudoscientific thinkingGambler’s fallacyBase rateCoincidence
11 If we flip a coin and get heads, we’re more likely to get tails the next time we flip the same coin.TrueFalse
12 Superstitions are an example of the correlation does not equal causation problem.TrueFalse
13 The _______ is the frequency with which an event occurs in the population.base ratecoincidenceschemasample
14 Hasty generalization is also known as stereotyping.TrueFalse
15 Science should involve both tradition and innovation.TrueFalse
16 A schema is a mental representation of knowledge.TrueFalse
17 Scope and parsimony describe the same aspects of a theory.TrueFalse
Build Your Skills
1 Think of a situation in your life where you reached an incorrect conclusion, and explain how “your thinking went wrong.”
2 The Atlantic is a monthly magazine that often has a section featuring research findings. Locate the magazine online and the short section for May 2016 titled “Brag Better: How to Boast Without Seeming To.” From the descriptions, select a study you think falls into the category of “common sense” and one that does not. Explain your answers.
Chapter 2 Generating and Shaping Ideas: Tradition and Innovation
Chapter highlights
Overview
Sources of ideas
Using library resourcesReference materials, Library of Congress classification systemKeywords—what they are and how to use themUsing PsycINFO (truncation, subject headings, times cited)Google Scholar® versus the Web
Kinds of useful articles (primary vs. secondary sources; reviews, meta-analyses)
How journals differ in quality (including predatory publishers)Journal publication practicesFile drawer effect
How to obtain an article physically
Reading an article: What to note in the Introduction, Method, Results, and Discussion
Research questions and the role of confounding (third variables); refining the research question and closing the gap
Suggested semester timeline
Academic fraud; steps toward transparency
Overview
As indicated in Chapter 1, research in science acknowledges the past as it looks to the future. These two views, one back and one forward, take the form of reviewing the literature (looking back) and then generating hypotheses that advance literature (looking forward). The research should enable us to answer the question, “What’s new and noteworthy here?” Thus, research combines tradition and innovation.
In building on a theme of Chapter 1, it is useful to try to generate some ideas before you consult the literature. Why? Because once you look at what other people have done, that information may influence how you think about a particular topic. In other words, consulting the literature as your first step may limit the range of ideas you consider. After you have generated possible research areas, consulting the literature is next.