Read the summary and the most important questions on Tutorials

• 1 Tutorials

  This is a preview. There are 14 more flashcards available for chapter 1
  Show more cards here

• Describe the parts of a scientific article and which information generally is contained in those parts.

  Abstract: Short summary of the article.
  Introduction: The research question or the problem where the research deals with, the background of this problem, why is the research important / what does it add.
  Method: How is the research conducted, the research design (selection and assignment of subjects, treatment of subjects), how are the several concepts measured (operationalization).
  Results: Outcomes.
  Discussion: Conclusions, how much confidence do the researchers have in these conclusions (often alternative explanations are given), doubts or problems are expressed, possibilities for future research are given.
  References: The cited materials. 

• Give a description of internal and external validity. What is the difference? 

  Internal validity: How sure can we be that for these subjects, this treatment does have effects in this study? (In other words: The degree of correct operationalizing and reasoning within the research).
  
  
  External validity: Are the results of the research also applicable on other settings/populations? (Is it generalizable?) 

• Below you find 2 statements from which it must be indicated each time whether or not they are true. Motivate your answer each time. In social-scientific research, it is not only important to know which conclusions a researcher draws, but also how he has reached these conclusions. A theory is scientific if it is been proven by research. Scientific knowledge ('theory') is 100% infallible/certain knowledge.

  • In social-scientific research, it is not only important to know which conclusions a researcher draws, but also how he has reached these conclusions. 

  True, because you must be able to replicate a research study from somebody for checking the outcomes. Replication research also takes care of falsifiability.
  
  

  • A theory is scientific if it is been proven by research. Scientific knowledge ('theory') is 100% infallible/certain knowledge.

  
  False, when is research 'proven'? A researcher must be falsifiable and is never 100% proven. The theory exist as long as it is not falsified by another (better) theory.

• Below you can find 4 statements. Indicate if you can use scientific research to indicate whether this statement is correct or not. Note that we are never 100% sure, so the question is whether we can do research to say something about the statement. By drinking a glass of wine each day, you have less chance of getting a heart attack.It is the government's task to avoid aggressive programs on television. Biologist show more resistance against cloning than geologists do. It's morally correct to observe people without their knowledge. 

  1. By drinking a glass of wine each day, you have less chance of getting a heart attack. Yes it is possible to do research. 
  2. It is the government's task to avoid aggressive programs on television. No, it's a normative statement, so it's not possible to do research on this statement. 
  3. Biologist show more resistance against cloning than geologists do. Yes, it is possible to do research. 
  4. It's morally correct to observe people without their knowledge. No, it's a normative statement, so it's not possible to do research on this statement. 

• Suppose that you have a clear definition of a swan and that you suspect that all swans are white. Can you prove this suspicion by establishing for a large number of swans that they are all white?

  No, you cannot prove this. There is always a probability that an unobserved swan is not what (induction problem). There is always a probability that the outcomes are caused by chance. If you want to exclude this, then you must observe all swans, but this is not feasible. 

• Suppose that from a theory a prediction is derived that does not turn out at all. What should be done according to the most simple interpretation of the 'falsification principle' with such a theory. Do we also handle always like this in practice. Why yes / why not?

  Falsification principle: 
  Reject (verwerp) hypothesis/theory, but: 
  

  • Are the observations correct?
  • Are the concepts correctly operationalized? 
  • Is the prediction correctly derived from the theory?
  • Probability on wrong decisions in using statistics.
  • False assumptions that don't make part of the theory ('initial conditions' are incorrect)
  • Adjusting theory 'on the outside' instead of rejecting ('ad hoc adoptions' not desirable)

• What is meant in the empirical sciences with a theory? Elaborate!

  Dooley: Theories state suspected relations among concepts... Concepts are abstract aspects of reality... Good theories have coherence, logic and internal consistency... Good theories run the risk of being wrong. 
  
  De Groot: System of logical coherent...statements,... concepts regarding an empirical area,... from which testable statements can be derived. 

• Put the next stages on the right place in the Empirical cycle of De Groot: Evaluation, Observation, Testing, Deduction, InductionConsider a scientific article in which a theory is explained and in which subsequently it is indicated how the theory is tested by means of empirical research. Assume that the article has the standard composition, which is discussed in Ch. 3 of the book of Dooley. Indicate in which sections of the article you can find information about each phase of the empirical cycle of De Groot. Describe hereby each time which information it concerns. 

  1. Observation = introduction
  2. Induction = introduction formulating theory not always very explicit
  3. Deduction = prediction from theory, operationalization (end of introduction) + method part
  4. Testing = results (APA: discussion of the results does not apply here; but in Evaluation)
  5. Evaluation = discussion 

• TPB is in the social-cognitive approach of psychology a frequently applied model for both conducting research and establishing interventions (ZIE TUTORIAL 1: VRAAG 12)Which variable(s) is/are in this model an independent/exogeneous variable(s)?Which variable(s) is/are in this model a dependent/endogeneous variable(s)?Which variable(s) is/are in this model an intervening/indirect/mediator variable(s)?

  1. indepent/exogeneous: attitude, subjective norm, perceived behavioral control 
  2. dependent/endogeneous: behavior, behavioral intention
  3. intervening/indirect/mediator: behavioral intention 

• What do we mean with 'content validity'?What do we mean with 'experimental construct validity'?

  Content validity: 
  How well does the content of the test represent the complete construct? 
  
  Experimental construct validity: 
  How well does the measurement fit within the theory? (e.g. Placebo effect)
  (If the difference in treatments that both groups have been exposed to in reality, are a good operationalization of the independent variable from which the influence is investigated.)