Chapter 1: Science and Psychology

A. LEARNING OUTCOMES. After studying this chapter students should be able to: Explain how tenacity, authority, reason, and empiricism differ from one another as methods of

acquiring knowledge and beliefs. Illustrate the difference between everyday empiricism and systematic empiricism. Discuss four goals of science. Describe the concepts of distal and proximal causation as well as criteria for drawing a causal

inference. Describe two contexts in which prediction and control are scientific goals. Identify several scientific assumptions about the natural world. Describe eight other characteristics of science. Distinguish between empirical and nonempirical questions. Describe the primary purposes of basic and applied research. Discuss relations between basic and applied research. Describe several benefits of learning about research methods. Discuss why skepticism and critical thinking are important in science and daily life. Describe basic critical thinking questions that we should ask when a claim is presented

B. KEYWORDSApplied research EmpiricismAuthority FalsifiabilityBasic research HypothesisCausal inference OperationismConfirmation bias Peer-reviewed journalControl Proximal causesDistal causesEmpirical knowledge

SkepticismTheory

Empirical question

C. BRIEF CHAPTER OUTLINE

I: How Do We Know?A. The Three-Door ProblemB. TenacityC. AuthorityD. ReasonE. EmpiricismF. Science

1

2 CHAPTER 1: Science and Psychology

II. Goals of ScienceA. DescriptionB. ExplanationC. PredictionD. Control

III. Characteristics of ScienceA. Science Involves AssumptionsB. Science Is Empirical and SystematicC. Science Focuses on Testable QuestionsD. Science Strives for Accuracy and ObjectivityE. Science Requires Clear Definitions and OperationismF. Science Involves Public ReportingG. Scientific Knowledge Is Tentative, Not AbsoluteH. Science Is Self-CorrectingI. Science Has Limitations

IV. Basic and Applied Research

V. Benefits of Learning about Research MethodsA. Reading About, Evaluating, and Conducting Research in Other CoursesB. Reading About and Evaluating Research in a Nonresearch careerC. Preparing for a Research CareerD. Gaining Entrance to Graduate SchoolE. Learning More About Psychology SubfieldsF. Enhancing Critical Thinking Skills

VI. Skepticism, Science, and Everyday LifeA. What Is Skepticism?B. Evaluating Claims

D. EXTENDED CHAPTER OUTLINE*Much of this summary is taken verbatim from the text.

IntroductionThe chapter begins with a hypothetical game show scenario called the three-door problem. In this

problem, a contestant (Sarah) is asked to choose one of three doors, with the promise that behind one of the doors is great prize. Once Sarah selects a door the game show host opens one of the remaining doors. This door will never have the prize behind it. Sarah is then asked whether she wants to keep the door she picked first or switch to the remaining unopened door. Ask students what they would do and why, and what would be the probability of winning the prize based on whether Sarah stays with her first choice or switches. This introduction is used throughout the chapter to help students understand the best way to acquire knowledge about the world.

CHAPTER 1: Science and Psychology 3

Part I: How Do We Know?A. The Three-Door Problem. Most students will state that there is an equal probability of winning the

great prize whether Sarah stays with her door or switches to the other. This is a problem that has sparked much debate among mathematicians and other scientists, suggesting that the answer is not quite that simple.

B. Tenacity is the idea that our knowledge is based on force of habit, that is, knowledge based simply on what we have long thought to be true. People who have tenacious beliefs do not explore the bases of those beliefs and do not consider opposing viewpoints. Their comment, “I don’t care what you say, it’s like flipping a coin. There are two possible outcomes, and it has to be 5 –50…,” lends 0 0̵itself well to the idea of tenacity.

C. Authority involves relying on other people as our source of knowledge and beliefs. Examples of authority include our parents, the clergy, and university professors. Many PhDs are on the record as stating that there is a 50–50 chance of winning the prize whether one switches doors or stays with the one he or she initially selected. People with PhDs.are often thought of as authority figures, and as such, many people tend to believe that this outcome must be true because it was stated by that authority. The power of authority is especially great when these people are perceived as (1) having expertise on the subject , and (2) as being trustworthy.

D. Reason is knowing something through logic and rationality and is integral to science. But, reason alone is not sufficient to truly know something. It is limited in that you can draw different logical conclusions depending on the premises you begin with. For example, if you begin with the premise that object permanence occurs when a child is 9 months old, is the logical conclusion that Seth, an 8-month-old child, capable of object permanence? On the other hand, will the answer be much different if you begin with the premise that object permanence is established by 7 months of age? Pure logic, in other words, can lead to erroneous conclusions. The three-door problem, however, can be solved with logic, as long as everyone understands (1) the probability associated with selecting the grand prize if it is behind Door 1, Door 2, or Door 3, and (2) understanding which door the game show host will reveal, based on the contestant’s initial selection (see Table 1.2 for more detailed discussion on how to solve the three-door problem with logic).

E. Empiricism, like reason, is an integral part of knowing scientific truth. Empirical knowledge is knowledge based on the senses, or experiences with the world. Empiricism is the process by which empirical knowledge is obtained. Obtaining empirical data is a key element of science, but an inherent issue with relying on empiricism alone is the fact that one person’s perception of the world—which is based on his or her very specific and personal experience—may be very different than another person’s perception of the world. In that regard, empiricism can be haphazard, and as such is a poor way to truly know the world. A person who claims that there is a 50–50 chance of winning the prize whether you “switch” or “stay,” based on her experience of playing the game twice during which she stayed twice and only won the prize once, is a truth for her. However, another person who may have also played the game twice, stayed both times, and won both times may have a different personal truth. Another issue when relying on empiricism as “knowing” is that people tend to have a confirmation bias, a tendency to selectively seek information that supports their views. People will believe something is true if they find other people whose experiences confirm theirs.

F. Science is a process of systematically gathering and evaluating empirical evidence to answer questions and test ideas. This statement suggests that:

4 CHAPTER 1: Science and Psychology

a. science relies on empirical evidence,b. empirical evidence is gathered in an orderly manner, and c. reasoning is required for one to evaluate and draw conclusions based upon the evidence

collected. After the reader outrage over vos Savant’s solution to the three-door problem (see the textbook for details), many individuals tested it empirically. A specific group of students performed 400 trials. In half of the trials they “stayed” and in the other half they “switched.” They found, after collecting and analyzing the data, that switching doors produced the prize 67% of the time.

Part II: Goals of ScienceThis section discusses how scientists seek to describe, explain, predict, and control events. Of these

goals, description, explanation, and control are often considered to be the three fundamental objectives of science, with prediction (as we’ll see) serving the goal of explanation.

A. Description. A fundamental task of science is identifying behavior and describing it. Description often includes developing coding systems to identify different types of behavior that could occur in a particular situation. For example, one may describe (1) the frequency of bullying during recess (or lunch, or after school), (2) the sex of the bully (or one being bullied), or (3) the form of bullying.

B. Explanation. In addition to identifying and describing behavior, psychologists want to also know why that behavior occurs. A second goal of science, then, is to explain behaviors.a. A hypothesis is a scientific way of stating an explanation for behavior. Hypotheses are tentative

propositions about the causes or outcomes of an event, and they are subject to empirical tests.b. A theory is a set of formal statements that specifies how variables or events are related.

Theories are broader than hypotheses. A single theory, in fact, may generate many different hypotheses.

Explaining behavior is often difficult for the following reasons.

a. Causes of behaviors are often viewed from many different perspectives. For example, stress may be examined from a biopsychological, environmental or social point of view.

b. Any given behavior may have any number of causes. Stress, for example, may be caused by one’s genetic makeup or by a particular event.

c. In addition, a behavior may also have both proximal and distal causes. As illustrated in Figure 1.3, schizophrenia may be caused by something as remote as a prenatal insult (distal causes), or something as immediate as neuropathology in young adulthood (proximal cause).

d. In addition, two conditions are required in order for causal inference to occur:i. Covariation: As X changes, Y changes.

ii. Temporal order: The change in X always precedes the change in Y.

CHAPTER 1: Science and Psychology 5

e. Prediction. Prediction plays two major roles in scientific research: hypothesis testing and theory testing. Prediction is the strongest means by which we determine whether explanations for events are true. Scientists do this by forming “if–then” statements that can be empirically tested. For example, if you observe that frustration and aggression tend to occur together, you might hypothesize that if someone is frustrated, then he or she will become aggressive. Next, if–then statements can be extended to develop research studies to test hypotheses. If frustration does lead to aggression, then those who are not frustrated will not become aggressive. You could develop a research study, for example, that examines both frustrated and nonfrustrated people to test the if–then prediction of frustration and aggression. Research studies are a very important part of the prediction process because they enable scientists to collect evidence that could either support, or not support, research hypotheses.

C. Control. The last goal of science is control. When scientists discuss control they use the term to mean the extent to which other potential causes of behavior have been eliminated as an explanation for why a behavior occurs. For example, if a scientist or psychologist wants to know whether frustration causes aggression, he or she will need to control for other factors that could potentially cause one to behave aggressively. Since many things might lead a person to behave aggressively, if these other “things” are not controlled for in an experiment, the cause-effect relationship specific to the X and Y variable of interest cannot be stated. The issue of control is also important in the application of scientific knowledge to improve people’s lives. For example, knowing specifically what things cause job satisfaction, or knowing what things are known to prevent HIV/AIDS, that knowledge can be used to significantly benefit the general public.

Part III: Characteristics of ScienceThe scientific method is not a single method of conducting research. Rather, it’s a set of

characteristics that typify how scientists collectively go about acquiring and applying knowledge.

A. First, science involves three assumptions about the natural world that indicate the truth is out there and it’s waiting to be discovered.a. Events are not random but rather demonstrate regularity or pattern.b. These patterns have underlying causes.c. It is possible to discover these causes.

B. Science is also empirical and systematic. Claims are based on evidence that has been gathered in a very precise and orderly manner and are then evaluated thoroughly.

C. Unlike other methods of knowing, science focuses on testable questions, ones that can be evaluated within the limits of current technology. They are empirical questions that can be tested through observation. That said, there are some questions that simply cannot be answered using systematic empirical methods. For instance, it is impossible to test the claim that the “the natural balance of forces in the universe have been ruined,” because, first, we don’t know what the “forces” are, and, second, we don’t know what the “natural state” is. The statement is far too vague to enable one to develop a systematic way to examine its merit. Karl Popper suggested that falsifiability is the criterion for a question’s ability to be tested empirically. In essence, if a question is testable, it could potentially be falsified through the acquisition of empirical data. According to Popper, if a question cannot be falsified, it cannot be tested. (Table 1.3 provides a list of questions that you may ask students to identify as being empirical or not.)

6 CHAPTER 1: Science and Psychology

D. Science strives for accuracy and objectivity. The scientific method is designed to ensure that evidence is collected accurately and that personal bias is reduced. These important elements help ensure that the knowledge obtained is the best reflection of what is true.

E. Science requires clear definitions and operationism. For instance, most people understand what “exercise” and “motivation” are in general terms. However, when people are asked to describe each concept, the definition one person gives is usually quite different from another’s definition. Science seeks to clarify definitions through operationism, defining a concept in terms of the specific procedures used to represent it. For example, an operational definition of exercise could be 30 consecutive minutes of walking on a treadmill at a rate of 3.2 mph on a 15 percent incline.

F. Science involves public reporting. Those who conduct science communicate their results publically. Public reporting enables other scientists to not only critically evaluate the claims made, but to also replicate the results by conducting their own study. Peer-reviewed journals require that original research undergo the peer-review process before it is published. In other words, when a scientist submits a research study to a peer-reviewed journal, he or she invites other qualified scientists to scrutinize the work and decide whether it should be published.

G. One of the greatest things about science is that scientific knowledge is tentative, not absolute. For instance, although today it is well established that the mammalian brain retains the ability to produce new neurons throughout life, prior to the 1990s it was believed that the phenomenon of neurogenesis was limited to the developing organism. The advent of new technologies enable scientists to discover new things every day, and this new knowledge is used to revise and update scientific knowledge accordingly.

H. Science is also self-correcting. That is, our understanding of the natural world and human behavior has corrected older understandings, just as some of our current understandings will be corrected by future discoveries.

I. Finally, science has limitations. Although science is the “gold standard” by which knowledge is obtained, its rigor often makes it difficult—if not impossible—for one to use in everyday situations. That said, “knowing” through other methods such as authority and experience, for example, do play an important role in our understanding of the world.

Part IV: Basic and Applied ResearchBasic research seeks to examine the fundamental nature of phenomena. In contrast, applied

research focuses directly on solving or evaluating a specific real-world problem. Although research can be classified as being either basic or applied, many studies encompass both. Thus basic and applied research occur across a continuum rather than being mutually exclusive categories.

Part V: Benefits of Learning About Research MethodsThis section emphasizes the importance of research in everyday life and how a basic knowledge of

research benefits a student far beyond the scope of an undergraduate research methods class. There are a variety of benefits to learning about research methods. A few benefits include:

A. reading about, evaluating, and conducting research in other coursesB. reading about and evaluating research in nonresearch careersC. preparing for a research careerD. gaining entrance into a graduate school

CHAPTER 1: Science and Psychology 7

E. learning more about psychology subfieldsF. enhancing critical thinking skills

Part VI: Skepticism, Science, and Everyday LifeThis section helps the student understand how to evaluate claims and how to determine whether

the claims have merit. A. In science, skepticism is an outlook that involves questioning the validity of claims before deciding

whether to accept them. While that may seem cynical, one must be open to accepting claims that are supported by empirical data.

B. Inherent to skepticism is the evaluation of claims. It is very important to scientists—and should also be important for ALL people—to ensure that false claims or misrepresented claims are not disseminated or perpetuated. To that end, one must critically evaluate all claims to determine whether they have merit. Questions that may be asked when evaluating a claim include, but are not limited to, “what evidence is provided?”, “what is the quality of evidence?”

E. LECTURE AND CLASSROOM ENHANCEMENTS

PART I: How Do We Know?

A. Lecture/Discussion Topics Using Nonempirical Ways to Know. When HIV first appeared many erroneous conclusions were

made about the disease and the ways in which it was spread. One pervasive misconception in the early 1980s was that HIV could be transmitted through saliva. Because most people believed that casual contact, such as kissing or touching, could spread the HIV virus, those with the disease became isolated from the general population. Today we know that HIV is not spread through casual contact, and we know that this is true because research using scientific methods have disproved it. Ask students to reflect on how information about HIV acquired through nonempirical methods likely impacted those affected by the disease. Have students discuss why “knowing” something based on such methods can potentially do serious harm both physically and psychologically.

The Power of Authority. Prior to class recruit a student-confederate to help demonstrate the power of authority. Have the student casually ask students around him or her if they knew that classes were cancelled tomorrow because the university had opted to take one of its optional holidays. When you come into the classroom, students will immediately ask you whether this is indeed true, and after you confirm the holiday they will likely erupt in celebration. Of course, there is no optional school holiday, and you’ll want to quickly dispel the rumor and the celebration. Although this may appear to be mildly devious, it will clearly demonstrate how information from an authority figure (you) is often considered true. Discuss with the class how they were hesitant to believe their peer, but that they readily accepted the information when you confirmed it. This can naturally lead into a discussion about how so much of our knowledge base is derived from authority but that it nonetheless must be critically evaluated before we accept the information as truth.

B. Classroom Exercise Using Various Methods to Know. Pose a question to the students, such as “How many licks does it

take to get to the tootsie-roll center of a Tootsie Pop?”; have them talk about how they would use

8 CHAPTER 1: Science and Psychology

tenacity, authority, reason, and empiricism to answer the question. This can be a great way for students to understand that although science is the best way of knowing, it can also often be an inefficient way, and for that reason alone people tend to seek other sources of knowledge. The exercise will also challenge students to develop ways of answering the question aside from the most common (and tenacious) answer of “a whole lot.” Tootsie Roll Industries has developed a specific website on this question, by the way. Located at http://www.tootsie.com/gal_licks.php, it provides information on actual research studies conducted to find the answer.

C. Web Resources Monty’s Dilemma: The Three-Door Problem. http://mste.illinois.edu/reese/monty/monty.htm.

This web resource provides a brief description of the problem, a link to a simulation of the problem, instructions on how to work the simulation, and a brief summary of the problem’s solution. The simulation allows the viewer to perform manual trials during which he or she selects a door, and after one of the other two doors is revealed, has the opportunity to either stick with that door or switch to the other. Over multiple manual trials, or by asking the simulator to run X number of randomly generated trials with either the “switch” or “stick” strategy, the instructor can demonstrate how the probability of winning the prize is much greater if one chooses the switch strategy over the stick strategy. The simulation and summary of the solution clearly and concisely illustrate how, since it is most probable that a person’s initial door selection does not contain the prize, Monty is forced to open the second incorrect door, leaving unopened the remaining door with the prize behind it.

D. Film Suggestions What Is Science? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tw5Bg0CJYs0. This video can help define

what science is and how it is a process of knowing that is superior to any other method. Science Is Everywhere. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E-5sWfqa6wM. This brief video

identifies dozens of areas of study that use science as their way of knowing about the world.

E. Additional References On Empiricism:

Images of Science: Essays on Realism and Empiricism (1985). Churchland, P. & Hooker, C.A.

Spelke, E.S. (1998). Nativism, Empiricism, and the Origins of Knowledge. Infant Behavior Development, 21, 181–200.

CHAPTER 1: Science and Psychology 9

PART II: Goals of Science

A. Lecture/Discussion Topics Testable Questions. Begin by asking students to indicate, by a show of hands, whether they believe

in ghosts. Despite having already discussed the ways of knowing, some students will most likely say they do, because they, or someone they know, has experienced an event that suggests such a phenomenon. If no one admits to believing in ghosts, bring up that many people, such as the hosts of television programs Paranormal State and Ghost Hunters, do believe that ghosts exist. Discuss the scientific merit of the question “Do ghosts exist?” based on the characteristics of science. After demonstrating that this question is not a testable question, ask the class why they think some people still believe in ghosts.

Understanding the Goals of Science. Discuss the goals of science in the context of house-training a dog. During the process of training you observe the dog barking at the door, which it has never done before. You then also observe that when you let the dog outside it relieves itself. Based on these observations you explain that barking at the door is the dog’s way of telling you it needs to relieve itself. To determine whether the dog’s barking at the door does indeed predict that need, you make multiple observations of what the dog does when it barks and you then open the door to let it outside. If the majority of the time the dog relieves itself relatively quickly after being let out, you’ve found evidence to support your prediction. If, on the other hand, half of the time the dog doesn’t do anything at all, your prediction that its barking at the door predicts its need to relieve itself is not supported. The issue of control can be introduced by discussing how in this example there is very little control over the dog’s barking. You can then describe how you might design an if–then statement to not only test, but also have control over.

B. Classroom Exercise Creating Testable Questions. Divide students into small groups and give each group the same set of

three questions. Ask the groups to rephrase the question in a way that makes it testable, and then describe what specifically about the statement makes it so. Have the groups share their statements and descriptions with the rest of the class. This exercise will help students understand how it is not always easy to translate a general question into a testable statement, and it will also illustrate how several testable statements can be generated from a single question. You may consider making one of these questions nontestable to further challenge the students’ thinking.

Goals of Science in Empirical Research Articles. Select several abstracts to distribute to groups of students. Have the students determine which goal of science (describe, explain, predict, control) each abstract aims to achieve.

10 CHAPTER 1: Science and Psychology

C. Web Resource Characteristics of Science:

o http://www.storybehindthescience.org/pdf/characteristics.pdf Goals of Science:

o http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2011/04/17/understanding-research-methodology- 3-goals-of-scientific-research/

o http://psychology.about.com/od/psychology101/f/four-goals-of-psychology.htm o http://education-portal.com/academy/lesson/psychology-is-a-science.html

Making Testable Statements:o http://bml.ucdavis.edu/wp-content/pdf/cameos/

CAMEOS_FormingAnswerableScientificQuestionswnotes.pdfo http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/SommerB/sommerdemo/intro/hypotheses.htm

D. Film Suggestions The Power of Belief:

Baker, A., Ellis, B., Golden, M., Matthews, R., Neufeld, V., Phillips, M., Pomerantz, S., Seavey, T., Stone, D. (Producers). Goodman, R. (Director). The Power of Belief, with John Stossel. (1998). ABC: Los Angeles, CA.

The Science of Psychology:“Unraveling the Mysteries of the Mind.” From The Mind: Teaching Modules (accessed without cost

via learner.org). Describes the many ways psychologists conduct both basic and applied research.

E. Additional References On Knowing Through Science:

Lederman, N. G. and O'Malley, M. (1990). Students' perceptions of tentativeness in science: Development, use, and sources of change. Sci. Ed., 74: 225–239. doi: 10.1002/sce.3730740207

Barufaldi, J. P., Bethel, L. J., and Lamb, W. G. (1977), The effect of a science methods course on the philosophical view of science among elementary education majors. J. Res. Sci. Teach., 14: 289–294. doi: 10.1002/tea.3660140404

PART III: Characteristics of Science

A. Lecture/Discussion Topics What We “Know” Now May Not Be the Truth. During the mid- to late 1800s the reticular theory

dominated our understanding of the nervous system. This theory held that the brain was a web-like network of cells fused to one another, enabling communication to simply flow continuously across neuronal pathways to evoke behavior. Just prior to the turn of the century Camillo Golgi developed a novel method of staining nervous system tissue that revealed that neurons did not physically touch one another. Instead, each neuron was its own distinct unit separated from others by a tiny gap, or synapse. This updated understanding of the nervous system came to be known as the neuron doctrine, which still dominates today. This story illustrates that science is tentative and self-

CHAPTER 1: Science and Psychology 11

correcting. It also provides an opportunity to discuss what we currently know about the world and how it could, in fact, change as new technologies are developed.

Ethics in Publishing One’s Work. Introduce the phrase “publish or perish.” Discuss how the publication of scientific data is critical in order to know more fully the world around us, and that this onus is placed heavily on academic researchers. Describe how the pressure to publish is related to ethics and what the impact of unethical behavior is on science as a way of knowing. This can also be a segue into the peer-review process and why peer-reviewed papers are generally better than those that do not undergo a rigorous review process.

B. Classroom Exercises The Importance of Operationism.

o In order to illustrate the importance of operationism in science, provide groups of students with a list of words (i.e., memory, exercise, stress) and have them generate (1) a general, everyday definition, and (2) a specific, operationally defined definition. Have each group state to the class their definitions (general and operational) for each term. The general definitions of each term should be relatively similar, but the operational definitions should be quite different depending on the particular perspective of the group. This exercise helps students to more fully understand why science requires such precision.

o Another way to demonstrate how operationism helps scientists communicate with one another is to ask students to count the number of aggressive acts in a video. (I like to show a clip from Tom & Jerry; you can find many 5-minute clips on YouTube.) After the video talk with the class about their results. Because no clear definition of aggression was provided, you will find that the number of aggressive acts reported will vary. Next have the class work together to develop an operational definition of “aggressive acts” and watch the video again. There will still be some variation, but the number of aggressive acts is much more consistent now that the group has a clear understanding of what aggression is.

C. Web Resources Science Is Self-Correcting:

o http://www.labtimes.org/labtimes/issues/lt2012/lt01/lt_2012_01_3_3.pdf o http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/ o http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/sep/05/publish-perish-peer-review-science

Assumptions of Science:o http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/basic_assumptions

D. Additional References Operational Definitions:

Boring, E. G. (1945). The use of operational definitions in science. Psychological Review, 52, 243–245.

Ribes-Iñesta, E. (2003). What is defined in operational definitions? The case of operant psychology. Behavior and Philosophy, 111–126.

12 CHAPTER 1: Science and Psychology

PART IV: Basic and Applied Research

A. Lecture/Discussion Topics Distinguishing Between Basic and Applied Research. Students often have a difficult time

distinguishing between applied and basic research and how the two are intimately related. You can help them understand better by discussing specific research topics and identifying the various types of basic and applied research that have been conducted in relation to them. For example, neurobiologists are very interested in knowing what genes are involved in learning and memory mechanisms. After mice have performed some learning task, their brains are analyzed to examine gene expression. Those genes that are significantly altered from those in a control mouse are considered putative learning and memory genes. Knowing what genes are involved in cognitive processes can be used in applied research. If gene X is enhanced in the “learned” mouse, then perhaps it can someday be altered in the Alzheimer’s patient to attenuate memory dysfunction associated with that disease. Although this is a very oversimplified example, it illustrates how basic research typically conducted “at the bench” can be used in everyday life to have a positive effect on humankind.

B. Classroom Exercise Generating Ideas for Basic and Applied Research. Provide students with several topics and have

them generate both basic and applied research ideas related to them. For example, if the topic is “deafness,” an idea for basic research would be to understand the neurobiology of audition, while an applied research study might ask whether electrical stimulation of auditory receptors can produce the perception of sound. Likewise, studying the behavior of people in overcrowded areas (basic research) could be used to implement policy to prevent overcrowding (applied research). This exercise should emphasize that the two types of research impact one another and are equally important.

C. Web Resource Applied and Basic Research:

o http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-the-difference-between-basic-and-applied-research.htm o https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2J7Xnxtue3o o http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2011/05/12/understanding-research-methodology-5-

applied-and-basic-research/o http://psych.csufresno.edu/psy144/Content/Design/Types/appliedvsbasic.html o http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/publications/observer/2012/march-12/a-

dangerous-dichotomy-basic-and-applied-research.html

CHAPTER 1: Science and Psychology 13

D. Film Suggestion Outbreak is a feature film starring Dustin Hoffman, Renee Russo, and Cuba Gooding Jr. The premise

of the film is that there is a deadly disease outbreak that will erase humankind unless a cure can be developed. During this film the characters make systematic observations that ultimately help them perform experiments in the lab (basic research) to find a cure. The putative cure is given to one human (applied research), with the result that she recovers fully. The antidote is then given to all those infected.Brown, S., Greenwald, N., Henderson, D., Katz, G., Kopelson, A., Kopelson, A., Panitch, S. & Petersen,

W. (Producers). Petersen, W. (Director). (1995). Outbreak. Warner Bros Films: California.

E. Additional References Basic and Applied Research:Solomon, G. (1987). Basic and applied research in psychology: Reciprocity between the two worlds.

International Journal of Psychology, 22, 441–446.Choh, V. & Priolo, S. (1999). Relating clinical study design to basic research. Optom Vis Sci, 76, 462–467.

PART V: Benefits of Learning About Research Methods

A. Lecture/Discussion Topics Research in Everyday Life. Some psychology undergraduates do not understand the relevance of

research methods to their everyday life, let alone to the field of psychology. Many of my students tell me “I don’t ever plan on doing research” as an explanation of why it’s not important to them. While many of our students will not go on to actually produce research, they will consume the results of research on a daily basis! Every day we are bombarded with information and it is our job to understand how that information was obtained in order to have an educated opinion about that information.

B. Classroom Exercise Understanding the Importance of Knowing Research Methods. Rather than telling students how

they will benefit from knowing research methodology, ask students to come up with a list of three things that they think they will benefit from by learning about research methods. By promoting active learning and reflection the understanding of how important research methods go beyond the scope of this class is more likely to be attained.

C. Web Resource http://www.spring.org.uk/2007/07/10-practical-uses-for-psychological.php

D. Film SuggestionUnderstanding Research. Discovering Psychology, Updated Edition (accessed freely via learner.org) describes the many ways psychologists conduct both basic and applied research.

14 CHAPTER 1: Science and Psychology

E. Additional ReferencesNayak, B. N. (2009). Why learn research methodology? Indian Journal of Opthamology, 57, 173–174.

PART VI: Skepticism, Science, and Everyday Life

A. Lecture/Discussion Topics Evaluating Claims in Media. Identify a popular product that makes a claim. An example I like to use

is SENSA, a heavily advertised diet product. The product claims that when it is sprinkled on a person’s food, she or he will lose weight. The advertisements “support” this claim with data from a “study” in which people who used SENSA for six months lost an average of 30 pounds. Ask students whether they believe that SENSA causes weight loss and why they hold that belief. At this point in the lecture, students should know that science is based on systematic empirical observations. Discuss how the makers of SENSA provide “evidence” that their product works. After talking about how evidence is an important element in evaluating anything, describe how the evidence cited by the makers of SENSA is actually based on a research study that was presented at a professional meeting, but that the article describing the work has not been published in a peer-reviewed forum. Now what do they think of the evidence? Do they believe the claim that SENSA causes weight loss? You can use this example to describe pseudoscience, and how many times manufacturers or producers will try to trick someone into thinking their results are based on science by their use of science-like terms. As it turns out, from what I can gather about the study on which SENSA’s results are based, there was a huge lack of control. Half of the participants used the product and half used nothing. Knowing that the placebo effect is a real phenomenon, it is totally plausible that the act of using this product—SENSA or any other diet product— contributed to the weight loss observed in the “stud.” That celebrities are used to push the product can also be discussed as a means to illustrate the previously discussed idea of authority.

B. Classroom Exercise Evaluating Claims in Media. Break students into groups and provide each group with an article that

makes a grandiose claim. Alternatively, bring in a current copy of Star, The National Inquirer, or another tabloid magazine that is notorious for making lofty statements (i.e., Aliens Invade Earth!). Ask students to read the article, and based upon it, answer the questions posed by Bernstein, Clarke-Stewart, Penner, Roy and Wickens (2000) listed in the text. Do the claims made in the article pass the test of scientific scrutiny? This is a fun, albeit extreme, way to convey the importance of skepticism in everyday life.

C. Web Resource Is SENSA Legit?

http://www.sensa.com/ http://www.sensa.com/media/pdf/Abstract_Poster_Use_of_Stimuli_for_Weight_Loss.pdf

http://www.webmd.com/diet/features/truth-about-sensa http://www.sensa.com/doctor-formulated.htm

CHAPTER 1: Science and Psychology 15

What to ask when Evaluating Claims. http://philanthropy.com/article/5-Simple-Questions-to-Ask/137743/

16 CHAPTER 1: Science and Psychology

D. Film Suggestion Evaluating Claims about UFOs:

Jones, S., Kent, N. & Werbe, S. (Producers). Hearle, A. (Director). (2005). UFOs: The Secret Evidence. Oxford Film and Television Production.

E. Additional references Skepticism

Woloshin, S., Schwartz, L. M., & Kramer, B. (2009). Promoting healthy skepticism in the news: Helping journalists get it right. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 101, 1596–1599.

Green, G. (1996). Evaluating claims about treatments for autism. Behavioral intervention for young children with autism: A manual for parents and professionals, 15–28.