Resume
Samenvatting KOM + hoorcolleges
- Cours
- Établissement
KOM + hoorcolleges volledig
[Montrer plus]
Vendeur
S'abonner
abcdenizz
Aperçu du contenu
SPICE (kwalitatief: 1-9), PAC (correlationeel: 9-18), PICO (experimenteel: 18-24), integriteit24-rest)
PLAN
KOM blz 1 t/m 52
Psychologists are empiricists conclusion based on systemic observation.
Both producing and consuming knowledge within psychology.
Critical eye needed. Knowledge behind evidence-based treatments.
The scared straight program doesn’t cause decrease but increase in crime.
Mindfulness did increase grades, nutrition course didn’t.
Psychologist:
1. Systematically observe the world
2. Test theories through research, revise theory based on resulting data
3. Empirical approach to applied research (real world problems) & basic research
(general knowledge)
4. They go further to discover the ‘why?’
5. Publicize work
Empiricism = senses & instruments. Rigorous, systemic & verifiable.
Cupboard theory = baby attaches to mother because she’s associated with food.
Comfort theory = Harry Harlow: attached to mother because coziness of touch.
Research shows clearly comfort theory is true.
Theory-data cycle:
1. Theory = set of statements general principles about how variables relate.
2. Hypothesis = prediction
3. Data = set of observations that support or challenge theory
Good theory:
1. Supported by data: from variety of studies & different methods
2. Falsifiable: could fail. Taking risks
3. Parsimony: need for simplicity
In science nothing is ‘proven’. Data simply is consistent with theory.
Translational research bridge between applied & basic research.
Articles in scientific journals are peer-reviewed improves quality.
Journalists aren’t scientist and focus more on mainstream public.
Journalist could publish studies that aren’t peer-reviewed yet and spread bs.
‘mozart effect’: better at spatial intelligence test.
Lots of scientific ‘facts’ will be twisted by journalists.
H2.
Is catharsis healthy way of dealing with anger?
Research needs comparison group as reference point.
Bleeding cure for illness in 1700.
Problem with conclusion from personal experience: you have no comparison. Knee band
might feel better but you don’t know how you would’ve felt without it.
You need systemic comparison.
Also too much going on in daily life for legitimate conclusion.
Confound = alternative explanation: painkiller instead of knee band decreased pain.
Hard to isolate variables.
Confederate = actor playing role in research.
,Bushman study: confederate made students angry (stupid essay) 3 groups: sit quietly 2
min, punching bag 2 min, punching bag imagining confederates face 2 min.
Group 3 gave loudest noise, against hypothesis. Group 1 least noise.
Venting & aggression only creates more anger.
Research is probabilistic: legitimate in most cases most of the time.
Intuition might make less effective decisions (lolllll xD)
Humans naturally biased sometimes, and unaware of it.
Freud proponent of catharsis.
Intuition + good metaphors might be misleading.
Availability heuristic = things that pop up easily (corona) tend to guide thinking
overestimate fear.
Information that isn’t there (the students that don’t use phones) easily ignored =
present/present-bias = failure to consider appropriate comparison groups.
How to avoid?: ask ‘in comparison to what?’
Confirmation bias: to look for info that agrees with current beliefs.
Students trying to figure out in research whether others were either intro or extro asked
hypothesis-confirming questions.
Bias blind spot = belief we’re not biased.
Scientific thinking > intuition (LOLLLL xD)
Empiricism needs to be guarded for biased thinking.
Data > own ideas ability to accept disconfirming evidence.
Authority isn’t always right.
Research often published in scientific journals.
Empirical journal articles (often part of theory) report results of an empirical research study
for the first time.
Review journal articles (entire theory) provide summary of all the published studies that
have been done in one research area.
Both type of articles prestigious because always peer-reviewed.
Meta-analysis: combines result of many studies to give number (effect size) of relationship.
Sometimes edited book every chapter different writer (not fully peer-reviewed).
Sometimes full-length books more common.
P45. Table with tips to search in PsycINFO.
Google scholar more general yet free.
Most empirical journal articles include:
1. Abstract: summary of article (120 words) like hypothesis, method, result.
2. Introduction: explain topic, what theory & result, why relevant, hypothesis etc.
3. Method: how researchers conducted study.
4. Results: quantitative & relevant qualitative results.
5. Discussion: reflect hypothesis with data, importance, explanations.
6. References: all sources/bibliographies.
Read with a purpose. Read abstract first.
Important questions:
1. What is argument?
2. What evidence supports this?
Then read end of introduction. Also first paragraph discussion. Evidence in method section.
, Wiki’s democratic source. Wiki’s aren’t comprehensive. Also references not comprehensive.
Also (intentional) errors in info. Overall not really credible for academic assignments.
Hoorcollege 1
Kwalitatief onderzoek:
⁃ Sociale fenomenen begrijpen in natuurlijke context
⁃ Empirische patronen vinden
⁃ Nieuwe of bestaande theorie +
⁃ Via specifieke observaties sociale werkelijkheid omschrijven en
algemeenheden zoeken die theorieën vormen
Sociale fenomenen: interacties, gebeurtenissen, hulpvaardigheid, migratie
etc.
Focus op context. In relatie tot omgeving.
Inductie: specifieke observatie —> algemene uitspraak
Wensen bejaarde vrouwen anders dan mannen (traditioneler).
Onderzoeksvraag: SPI(C)E
⁃ Setting: waar, welke context?
⁃ Perspective/Population: voor wie?
⁃ Interest: wat?/fenomeen
⁃ Comparison
⁃ Evaluation: wat wordt er onderzocht? welk resultaat?
Kwalitatief Interview vragen over;
⁃ Ideeën
⁃ Motieven
⁃ Ervaring
⁃ (Gedraging)
Interview is eenrichtingsverkeer
Onderzoeker is bij dataverzameling aanwezig, kan beïnvloeden.
Onderzoeker is instrument van dataverzameling. Survey is meer
kwantitatief, kwalitatief is minder gestructureerd: interview
Steekproef (representatief deel populatie) uit populatie nodig (bij kwali en
kwanti)
Doelgerichte steekproef:
1. Case study logic: specifieke individuen zoeken —> in depth
bestuderen
2. Sample for range: zo breed mogelijk scala aan ervaring
Kwalitatief inductief onderzoek geen hypothese afleiden. Bij correlationeel
onderzoek wel hypothese.
Dataverzameling: interview uitgetypt in letterlijke transcript = letterlijke
weergave
Ook woordelijk transcript hebben (geen euh of pauzes).
Transcriptie 4,5x zo lang
Field notes: informeel, alle notities, indruk, locatie, ideeën.
Betrouwbaarheid; interviewer moet bewust zijn van eigen rol. Als te veel
variatie tussen verschillende onderzoekers dan niet betrouwbaar & niet
Les avantages d'acheter des résumés chez Stuvia:
Qualité garantie par les avis des clients
Les clients de Stuvia ont évalués plus de 700 000 résumés. C'est comme ça que vous savez que vous achetez les meilleurs documents.
L’achat facile et rapide
Vous pouvez payer rapidement avec iDeal, carte de crédit ou Stuvia-crédit pour les résumés. Il n'y a pas d'adhésion nécessaire.
Focus sur l’essentiel
Vos camarades écrivent eux-mêmes les notes d’étude, c’est pourquoi les documents sont toujours fiables et à jour. Cela garantit que vous arrivez rapidement au coeur du matériel.
Foire aux questions
Qu'est-ce que j'obtiens en achetant ce document ?
Vous obtenez un PDF, disponible immédiatement après votre achat. Le document acheté est accessible à tout moment, n'importe où et indéfiniment via votre profil.
Garantie de remboursement : comment ça marche ?
Notre garantie de satisfaction garantit que vous trouverez toujours un document d'étude qui vous convient. Vous remplissez un formulaire et notre équipe du service client s'occupe du reste.
Auprès de qui est-ce que j'achète ce résumé ?
Stuvia est une place de marché. Alors, vous n'achetez donc pas ce document chez nous, mais auprès du vendeur abcdenizz. Stuvia facilite les paiements au vendeur.
Est-ce que j'aurai un abonnement?
Non, vous n'achetez ce résumé que pour €5,39. Vous n'êtes lié à rien après votre achat.
Peut-on faire confiance à Stuvia ?
4.6 étoiles sur Google & Trustpilot (+1000 avis)
73314 résumés ont été vendus ces 30 derniers jours
Fondée en 2010, la référence pour acheter des résumés depuis déjà 14 ans