Information

Resources for reliable psychology research

Resources for reliable psychology research


We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

I'm looking for resources of reliable research in psychology. I mean 'reliable' in the following two senses:

1. Replicability

It seems more and more of the famous effects that I, as a psychology-curious layman, learned about by watching intro psych lectures or in popular media fail replication. It starts to seem like anything one believes to know about psychology is as likely as not to be false. As a layman it is quite difficult to track down all of the possible effects and replications thereof. Is there some resource which tracks the replication status of psychological research and collects the different effects which are reproducible (and which aren't)?

EDIT: I was able to find the following which is actually pretty close to what I was looking for. This is not a complete list but it is the kind of thing that I am after.

https://osf.io/fgjvw/

I found this through the links in the accepted answer to this SE question, which was suggested by a commenter below. However, now the comment is gone for some reason so I cannot give credit.

2. "Bi-partisanship"

Some areas of psychology are politically charged. Things like gender, race, intelligence, etc., are understandably controversial. It seems that often professional psychologists fall down on either side of a given issue, each insisting that it was settled by the scientific community long ago in their favour. As a layman, this is rather frustrating to make sense of. Is there some "common ground" resource which tracks the research that all sides agree on?


'psychology' is too big for this in general. But lots of people do care a lot about replication and there have been some nice many-labs efforts to asses the state of replicability across the field. Klein, et al. (2014). was one attempt.

This study is taking the usual logic of inference about a population (in this case 'effects') from a small sample, so it has the usual problem of leaving uncertain how representative the sample is of the population. For what it's worth, I think their results suggest that the size of possible 'partisanship' bias mentioned in this question is small relative to 'some effects are small and unreliable but people chase them anyway'. Of course, science media may be choosing which of these leprechaun-chasing exercises they want to report on in a partisan way, but that's a different question.

As far as I know, there is NO common ground analogous to the standard model in physics. Although many smart people have tried, as of 2018 it's still the wild west out there. The linked project certainly isn't a common-ground reference, its scope is modest (ie realistic) and it's just one of a small family of similar studies, eg see also Open Science Collaboration (2015) or Ioannidis, et al. (2014).

References

Ioannidis, J. P., Munafo, M. R., Fusar-Poli, P., Nosek, B. A., & David, S. P. (2014). Publication and other reporting biases in cognitive sciences: detection, prevalence, and prevention. Trends in cognitive sciences, 18(5), 235-241.
DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2014.02.010
PMCID: PMC4078993
PDF: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4078993/pdf/nihms579109.pdf

Klein, R. A., Ratliff, K. A., Vianello, M., Adams Jr, R. B., Bahník, Š., Bernstein, M. J.,… & Cemalcilar, Z. (2014). Investigating variation in replicability: A “many labs” replication project. Social psychology, 45(3), 142.
DOI: 10.1027/1864-9335/a000178
PDF: http://psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/2014-20922-002.pdf
Updated 2017: https://osf.io/wx7ck/

Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349(6251), aac4716.
DOI: 10.1126/science.aac4716
PDF: https://osf.io/447b3/download?format=pdf


Short answer

There is no official database I can find that collects the different effects proposed in psychology and track how they replicate. However, reputable psychology papers are published in professional journals and are re-examined all the time with meta-analyses and further research, also published in professional journals.

Professional psychologists, psychiatrists and therapists are required to maintain an up-to-date knowledge of psychological research as part of their professional codes of conduct and ethics.

Long Answer

Replicability

With regard to replicability within your question, if I am not mistaken, you are referring to finding the demarcation between science and pseudoscience within psychology as referred to by Karl Popper, in his book The Logic of Scientific Discovery (1959)

I would like to first of all point out that although there is a lot of argument which states that a large proportion of psychology is non-scientific, I would direct you to Sven Ove Hansson (2013) who argues the fact that in order for any research in psychology to be non-scientific (pseudoscientific) it has to be non-scientific when a PsychologyToday article (2016) points out that

psychology was defined by the application of scientific method(s) and psychologists conduct valuable research and have developed some key insights into animal behavior, cognition, consciousness, and the human condition.

I would also point you to my extensive answer on the subject in meta which you can read alongside other's viewpoints.

"Bi-partisanship"

As for "Bi-partisanship", I would argue that professional psychologists, psychiatrists and therapists do not fall down on either side of a given issue as intimated in your question. Whilst there are a select few, those who do are unprofessional as they are prejudicial and therefore do not abide by professional codes of conduct and ethics, which include:

  • General Principle E: Respect for People's Rights and Dignity
    of the American Psychological Association (APA) Code of Conduct (APA, 2017)

    … Psychologists are aware of and respect cultural, individual, and role differences, including those based on age, gender, gender identity, race, ethnicity, culture, national origin, religion, sexual orientation, disability, language, and socioeconomic status, and consider these factors when working with members of such groups. Psychologists try to eliminate the effect on their work of biases based on those factors, and they do not knowingly participate in or condone activities of others based upon such prejudices.

  • Clause 22a-h of the Good Practice section
    of the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy (BACP) Ethical Framework for the Counselling Professions (BACP, 2018)
    1. We will respect our clients as people by providing services that:
      a. endeavour to demonstrate equality, value diversity and ensure inclusion for all clients
      b. avoid unfairly discriminating against clients or colleagues
      c. accept we are all vulnerable to prejudice and recognise the importance of self-inquiry, personal feedback and professional development
      d. work with issues of identity in open-minded ways that respect the client's autonomy and be sensitive to whether this is viewed as individual or relational autonomy
      e. challenge assumptions that any sexual orientation or gender identity is inherently preferable to any other and will not attempt to bring about a change of sexual orientation or gender identity or seek to suppress an individual's expression of sexual orientation or gender identity
      f. make adjustments to overcome barriers to accessibility, so far as is reasonably possible, for clients of any ability wishing to engage with a service
      g. recognise when our knowledge of key aspects of our client's background, identity or lifestyle is inadequate and take steps to inform ourselves from other sources where available and appropriate, rather than expecting the client to teach us
      h. are open-minded with clients who appear similar to ourselves or possess familiar characteristics so that we do not suppress or neglect what is distinctive in their lives. challenge assumptions that any sexual orientation or gender identity is inherently preferable to any other and will not attempt to bring about a change of sexual orientation or gender identity or seek to suppress an individual's expression of sexual orientation or gender identity
  • Delivering a Service section
    of National Counselling Society (NCS) Code of Ethical Practice (NCS, 2018).

    All Practitioners undertake to:

    1. Work in ways that promote client autonomy and well-being and that maintain respect and dignity for the client.
    2. Demonstrate a fully developed, professional awareness of diversity issues; and specifically not permit considerations of religion, nationality, gender, sexual orientation, marital status, age, disability, politics or social standing to adversely influence client treatment. (See Appendix B)

    Appendix B: Conversion (Reparative) Therapy
    We take the view that the practice of conversion therapy has no place in the modern world. It is unethical and harmful and not supported by evidence.

    Conversion Therapy is the term for therapy that assumes certain sexual orientations or gender identities are inferior to others, and seeks to change or suppress them on that basis.

    Sexual orientations and gender identities are not mental health disorders, although exclusion, stigma and prejudice may precipitate mental health issues for any person subjected to these abuses. Anyone accessing therapeutic help should be able to do so without fear of judgement or the threat of being pressured to change a fundamental aspect of who they are.

    1. The Society respects sexual diversity as part of our approach to diversity, equalities and social responsibility.
    2. The Society does not consider homosexuality, bisexuality, transsexual and transgendered states, or asexuality to be pathologies, mental disorders or indicative of developmental arrest. These are not 'symptoms' to be treated by counsellors in the sense of attempting to change or remove them. Counsellors must at all times respect the best interests of their clients.
    3. Practitioners must recognise the limits of their practice, training and experience in issues of sexuality and if necessary refer the client to an experienced therapist for specific help.
    4. If a practitioner's personal, theoretical or religious beliefs mean that they are unable to work in a non-judgmental way with a lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender client, or one who identifies as asexual, the client should be referred to another therapist.
    5. No member should offer counselling that seeks to change sexual orientation or influence gender identity (SOCE, reparative, conversion or reorientation therapy, or similar therapies by other names).
    6. Counselling should not be offered that seeks to eliminate or reduce same sex attraction in clients.

    Please contact the Society for further information if necessary.

Clause 22a-h of the Good Practice section of the BACP Ethical Framework for the Counselling Professions, and Appendix B of the NCS Code of Ethical Practice follows the UK Council for Psychotherapy (UKCP) Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on Conversion Therapy in the UK, signed by many professional registering bodies, including the NCS, BACP, NHS, The British Psychological Society, and the Royal College of General Practitioners (UKCP, 2017).

To summarise

Whilst there is no official database that would collect the different effects proposed in psychology and track how they replicate, reputable psychology papers are published in professional journals and are re-examined all the time with meta-analyses and further research, also published in professional journals.

References

APA (2017). Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct [Online]
Available at: http://www.apa.org/ethics/code
Free PDF: http://www.apa.org/ethics/code/ethics-code-2017.pdf

BACP (2018). Ethical Framework for the Counselling Professions [Online]
Available at: https://www.bacp.co.uk/events-and-resources/ethics-and-standards/introducing-the-new-ethical-framework-2018
Free PDF: https://www.bacp.co.uk/media/3103/bacp-ethical-framework-for-the-counselling-professions-2018.pdf

Hansson, S. O. (2013). Defining pseudoscience and science. In: Pigliucci, M. & Boudry, M. (Eds.) The philosophy of pseudoscience, Chicago IL: University of Chicago Press. pp. 61-77.
Fully Readable in: Google Books at https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=Pc4OAAAAQBAJ&lpg=PA61&dq=Hansson%2C%20S.%20O.%20(1996).%20Defining%20Pseudoscience.&lr&pg=PA61#v=onepage&q=Hansson,%20S.%20O.%20(1996).%20Defining%20Pseudoscience.&f=false

NCS (2018) Code of Ethical Practice [Online]
Available at: https://www.nationalcounsellingsociety.org/about-us/code-of-ethics
Audio Copy: https://youtu.be/zSjS0B7-sao
Copies in braille or large format available as required: https://www.nationalcounsellingsociety.org/about-us/equal-opportunities/accessibility/

Popper, K. R. (1959) The Logic of Scientific Discovery. New York: Routledge

PsychologyToday article (2016) The “Is Psychology a Science?” Debate [Online]
Available at:https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/theory-knowledge/201601/the-is-psychology-science-debate

UKCP (2017). Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) on Conversion Therapy in the UK. [Online]
Available at: https://www.psychotherapy.org.uk/about-ukcp/public-policy/conversion-therapy
PDF: http://www.psychotherapy.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/UKCP-Memorandum-of-Understanding-on-Conversion-Therapy-in-the-UK.pdf


Continuing Education for Therapists

All members of GoodTherapy can access hundreds of hours of continuing education events via GoodTherapy's Continuing Education Program. GoodTherapy offers live and recorded online events, all available at no additional cost to members with CE certificates. Additional continuing education opportunities not provided or endorsed by GoodTherapy are listed below.

The iNLP Center offers internationally recognized NLP certification, ICF accredited life coach training, and personal development programs. All programs are taught online and through live virtual classroom sessions or webinars. Case studies and coaching supervision are integrated into the training to create real world coaching and therapy skills. The iNLP Center is directed by Mike Bundrant, a retired mental health counselor and international NLP trainer. With over 20 years experience in the field Mike has been trained in multiple therapeutic modalities and worked with a wide variety of mental health populations. Members of GoodTherapy receive 10% off any iNLP training. Just mention GoodTherapy when you contact the iNLP Center.

The Center for Internet Addiction Recovery assesses and treats Internet Addiction for clients and families. Founded by Dr. Kimberly Young, the center provides family, couples, and individual counseling and therapy sessions. The site also provides testing tools, articles, and educational resources to learn more about the impact of Internet addiction and ways to treat this growing mental health issue. The center also provides Continuing Education and home study courses for therapists wishing to learn more about how to evaluate and treat Internet addiction.

The Glendon Association offers CE courses and webinars on topics including relationships/parenting, suicide, violence, and Voice Therapy. Dr. Lisa Firestone actively lectures on behalf of Glendon Association. Glendon.org supports a mission to save lives and enhancing mental health through addressing social issues related to suicide, child abuse, violence and other problematic issues occurring in relationships. The ways in which Glendon Association supports their mission includes research on these and other topics as well as through public outreach and workshops. Glendon Association's leadership is supported by Robert Firestone, PhD and Lisa Firestone, PhD, both of whom are accomplished psychologists, lecturers and authors on topics around Voice Therapy, suicide, child rearing and other important issues.

The Zur Institute, founded by Ofer Zur, PhD was brought to fruition and fueled by his passion for therapy and therapeutic practices. Dr. Zur was born and raised in Israel by a prominent psychologist mother of German decent and a Hungarian father who modeled gentleness, and sparked his interest in psychology. Dr. Zur, a well known, California based licensed psychologist, consultant, author, researcher and lecturer, is one of the forefathers in the development of ethical and effective managed care free psychotherapy practices. Today the Zur Institute offers a wide range of online and in person therapy related conference as well as providing access to online CE courses created by other leading therapists.

BehavioralHealthCE.com provides online continuing education for mental health professionals in the area of Behavioral Health. Behavioral Health is focused on integrating biomedical, behavioral, and psychosocial knowledge relevant to illness and health. Principles of behavioral health can be applied by a variety of professional mental health disciplines including counselors, social workers, psychologists, physicians, nurses, and others. BHCE holds a number of accreditation approvals including APA, ASWB, NBCC, CA-BBS (for MFT, MFCC, LCSW), CA-BRN (nursing), CA- BVMPT (vocational nursing, psychiatric technicians) and others. All courses are evidenced-based and written by expert authors in their fields. Just a few topics include pain management, motivational interviewing, ethics, hypnosis, disability management and coping, cancer survivorship, PTSD, weight loss, and healthcare collaboration. Unique to BHCE, you can view and complete any course for free and store it in your account before deciding to purchase your CE credits. GoodTherapy members receive a special discount on BHCE courses, which can be found in the Members Only area. Please check for the current code. The discount code can be used on as many courses as you like and is simply entered at checkout. Since all of our materials can be viewed for free, your satisfaction is guaranteed. Many clinicians will also use the materials for patient education. Please enjoy our materials at www.BehavioralHealthCE.com.


Top Psychology Magazines and Journals for Therapists

The field of psychology is fast-paced and constantly changing. Though this makes it an exciting field to study, staying up to date on the continuously evolving research can often prove to be overwhelming.

Doing a simple Google search for psychology magazines and journals returns hundreds of results and often leaves you wondering– “where do I even begin?” With thousands of new articles and papers being published each year in hundreds of different psychology journals and magazines, being well-read and up-to-date almost seems an impossible task.

Here at TheraNest we wanted to make it easier for you to stay on top of the research you need to know, that’s why we collected eight publications covering different aspects of the field of psychology that we think you should consider reading. Whether you are looking for a light read on topics that interest you or a deep dive into research-heavy perspectives, there is something for you on this list.


Chapter 2: Research in Psychology: Objectives and Ideals

7. After reading some research on the topic of students’ attitudes to university courses, Mark does a study to find out what students’ favourite subject at university is. In this he finds that final-year psychology students prefer studying psychology to any other subject. On this basis he concludes that psychology is the most popular subject. However, Jane argues that this conclusion is wrong as the research actually shows that students prefer the subject they end up studying. What is the basis of her objection to Mark’s research? [TY2.7]

  1. The study is invalid.
  2. The study is unreliable.
  3. The study is non-cumulative.
  4. The study is unparsimonious.
  5. None of the above.

8. If an experimental finding is valid, which of the following statements is true?

  1. It should be easy to replicate
  2. It supports a researcher's experimental predictions
  3. It supports a researcher's theory
  4. It occurred for the reason hypothesised by the researcher
  5. It will make a demonstrable contribution to scientific knowledge

9. Which of the following would not be of interest to a behaviourist?

  1. A person's reaction to a flashing light.
  2. Differences in various people's responses to a flashing light.
  3. The cognitive processes associated with reaction to a stimulus.
  4. The impact of a particular stimulus on behaviour.
  5. The different behaviours that arise from exposure to different stimuli.

10. Which of the following is a physiological measure?

  1. A measure of blood flow through a person's brain.
  2. Details of a person's family tree.
  3. A person's response to questions on a survey.
  4. A person's response to questions in an experiment.
  5. The preference a person shows for one stimulus rather than another.

11. Theory A explains phenomenon L, phenomenon M and phenomenon N using principles J and K. Theory B explains phenomenon L, phenomenon M, and phenomenon N using only principle K. Theory C explains phenomenon L and phenomenon N using principles J and K. Which of the following statements is true?

  1. Theory A is the most parsimonious.
  2. Theory B is the most parsimonious.
  3. Theory C is the most parsimonious.
  4. Theory A and Theory C are equally and most parsimonious.
  5. Theory A and Theory B are equally and most parsimonious.

12. “An argument in which the thing to be explained is presented as the explanation (e.g. where memory ability is used to explain memory performance).” What type of argument is this a glossary definition of?

  1. Conceptual argument
  2. Convenient argument
  3. Causal argument
  4. Circular argument
  5. Casual argument

13. “The goal of accounting for the maximum number of empirical findings in terms of the smallest number of theoretical principles.” This a glossary definition of which principle?


Access resources that are only available to Faculty and Administrative Staff.

Want to explore the book further?

This website may contain links to both internal and external websites. All links included were active at the time the website was launched. SAGE does not operate these external websites and does not necessarily endorse the views expressed within them. SAGE cannot take responsibility for the changing content or nature of linked sites, as these sites are outside of our control and subject to change without our knowledge. If you do find an inactive link to an external website, please try to locate that website by using a search engine. SAGE will endeavour to update inactive or broken links when possible.

Browser not supported

You are using a browser version that is no longer supported by this website and could result in a less-than-optimal experience.


Resources for reliable psychology research - Psychology

December 2020 update: There is a phishing email circulating about a paid position in Dr. Margaret Beier's lab that is a scam. Correspondence with Dr. Beier or her lab will take place via official Rice email addresses.

Our Psychological Sciences graduate programs are designed for students wishing to pursue the MA and Ph.D. degrees and continue on to university-level teaching and research, or to work in applied settings that require these degrees. Program flexibility and unprecedented collaborative opportunities result in our students' successful post-graduate placements and continued career achievements.

Our doctoral program is unique in that our faculty, together with our graduate students, work in Research Interest Groups (RIGs) allowing for tailor-made programs based on shared research interests. This collaborative environment encourages easy mentor/student interactions which our students continue to enjoy even after graduation.

Separate from our doctoral program, we also offer two different professional Master’s degrees:

Master (MA) of Human-Computer Interaction & Human Factors: This 2-year full-time program will expand students’ knowledge of critical concepts and methods in psychology, and how to apply those concepts to real-world problems. Graduates of the program will be well-positioned to lead human factors and human-computer interaction efforts across a broad range of industries, including IT/telecommunications, health care, defense, e-commerce, and energy.

Master (MA) of Industrial-Organizational Psychology: This 2-year full-time program offers students graduate-level training in an applied area of psychology for which there is a very high demand. Students are provided with scientific and practical knowledge about the nature of the psychology of work and the workplace, the future of work, and a deep set of methodological and statistical skills. Graduates of the program will be well positioned to work in a wide variety of corporate, nonprofit, and government settings, on projects ranging from medical safety to the promotion of inclusive cultures (and prevention of harassing ones).

We do NOT offer doctoral or master’s programs in:
- clinical psychology
- counseling psychology
- educational psychology
- school psychology
- forensic psychology
- sports psychology

We do NOT offer master’s degrees except as a step en route to the doctoral degree, or for students enrolled in our professional master’s programs in Human-Computer Interaction & Human Factors and Industrial-Organizational Psychology.

Research Interest Groups (RIGs) within the doctoral program

Cognitive & Affective Neuroscience: The Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience RIG seeks an understanding of the relationship between the human brain and higher forms of behavior, including sensation, perception, attention, memory, language, social cognition, emotion, emotion regulation, and health.

Health Psychology & Behavioral Medicine: The Health Psychology & Behavioral Medicine RIG examines the interplay of psychological, social, biological, and behavioral factors that enhance, preserve, or threaten mental and physical well-being.

Human Factors/Human-Computer Interaction: The Human Factors/Human-Computer Interaction RIG investigates interactions among humans and other elements of a system. We are especially concerned with the interaction of humans with computer systems.

Industrial/Organizational Psychology: The Industrial and Organizational (I/O) RIG studies human behavior in organizational and work situations. Topics include motivation at work, the aging workforce, discrimination in the workplace, job performance, and team training.

Psychometrics & Quantitative Psychology: Psychological science critically depends on data that are reliable, accurate, valid, and fair. Serving this purpose, Ph.D. students in the Psychometrics and Quantitative Psychology RIG obtain specialized skills related to the substantive development statistical modeling and analysis and resulting interpretation of psychological measures, experiments, and interventions.

The doctoral program has a strong research orientation, and whether or not students plan to pursue a research career, they are expected to spend a large portion of their graduate years actively engaged in research.

Master of Arts in Human-Computer Interaction & Human Factors

For more information about our new professional master’s program, please visit: https://psychology.rice.edu/MHCIHF.

Master of Arts in Industrial-Organizational Psychology

For more information about our new professional master’s program, please visit: https://psychology.rice.edu/MIOP.

Outside Collaborations

Students engage in interdisciplinary coursework and participate in research opportunities through collaborative links with nearby world-renowned medical institutions in the Texas Medical Center (TMC) and NASA.


Continuing Education for Therapists

All members of GoodTherapy can access hundreds of hours of continuing education events via GoodTherapy's Continuing Education Program. GoodTherapy offers live and recorded online events, all available at no additional cost to members with CE certificates. Additional continuing education opportunities not provided or endorsed by GoodTherapy are listed below.

The iNLP Center offers internationally recognized NLP certification, ICF accredited life coach training, and personal development programs. All programs are taught online and through live virtual classroom sessions or webinars. Case studies and coaching supervision are integrated into the training to create real world coaching and therapy skills. The iNLP Center is directed by Mike Bundrant, a retired mental health counselor and international NLP trainer. With over 20 years experience in the field Mike has been trained in multiple therapeutic modalities and worked with a wide variety of mental health populations. Members of GoodTherapy receive 10% off any iNLP training. Just mention GoodTherapy when you contact the iNLP Center.

The Center for Internet Addiction Recovery assesses and treats Internet Addiction for clients and families. Founded by Dr. Kimberly Young, the center provides family, couples, and individual counseling and therapy sessions. The site also provides testing tools, articles, and educational resources to learn more about the impact of Internet addiction and ways to treat this growing mental health issue. The center also provides Continuing Education and home study courses for therapists wishing to learn more about how to evaluate and treat Internet addiction.

The Glendon Association offers CE courses and webinars on topics including relationships/parenting, suicide, violence, and Voice Therapy. Dr. Lisa Firestone actively lectures on behalf of Glendon Association. Glendon.org supports a mission to save lives and enhancing mental health through addressing social issues related to suicide, child abuse, violence and other problematic issues occurring in relationships. The ways in which Glendon Association supports their mission includes research on these and other topics as well as through public outreach and workshops. Glendon Association's leadership is supported by Robert Firestone, PhD and Lisa Firestone, PhD, both of whom are accomplished psychologists, lecturers and authors on topics around Voice Therapy, suicide, child rearing and other important issues.

The Zur Institute, founded by Ofer Zur, PhD was brought to fruition and fueled by his passion for therapy and therapeutic practices. Dr. Zur was born and raised in Israel by a prominent psychologist mother of German decent and a Hungarian father who modeled gentleness, and sparked his interest in psychology. Dr. Zur, a well known, California based licensed psychologist, consultant, author, researcher and lecturer, is one of the forefathers in the development of ethical and effective managed care free psychotherapy practices. Today the Zur Institute offers a wide range of online and in person therapy related conference as well as providing access to online CE courses created by other leading therapists.

BehavioralHealthCE.com provides online continuing education for mental health professionals in the area of Behavioral Health. Behavioral Health is focused on integrating biomedical, behavioral, and psychosocial knowledge relevant to illness and health. Principles of behavioral health can be applied by a variety of professional mental health disciplines including counselors, social workers, psychologists, physicians, nurses, and others. BHCE holds a number of accreditation approvals including APA, ASWB, NBCC, CA-BBS (for MFT, MFCC, LCSW), CA-BRN (nursing), CA- BVMPT (vocational nursing, psychiatric technicians) and others. All courses are evidenced-based and written by expert authors in their fields. Just a few topics include pain management, motivational interviewing, ethics, hypnosis, disability management and coping, cancer survivorship, PTSD, weight loss, and healthcare collaboration. Unique to BHCE, you can view and complete any course for free and store it in your account before deciding to purchase your CE credits. GoodTherapy members receive a special discount on BHCE courses, which can be found in the Members Only area. Please check for the current code. The discount code can be used on as many courses as you like and is simply entered at checkout. Since all of our materials can be viewed for free, your satisfaction is guaranteed. Many clinicians will also use the materials for patient education. Please enjoy our materials at www.BehavioralHealthCE.com.


Access resources that are only available to Faculty and Administrative Staff.

Want to explore the book further?

This website may contain links to both internal and external websites. All links included were active at the time the website was launched. SAGE does not operate these external websites and does not necessarily endorse the views expressed within them. SAGE cannot take responsibility for the changing content or nature of linked sites, as these sites are outside of our control and subject to change without our knowledge. If you do find an inactive link to an external website, please try to locate that website by using a search engine. SAGE will endeavour to update inactive or broken links when possible.

Browser not supported

You are using a browser version that is no longer supported by this website and could result in a less-than-optimal experience.


Chapter 2: Research in Psychology: Objectives and Ideals

7. After reading some research on the topic of students’ attitudes to university courses, Mark does a study to find out what students’ favourite subject at university is. In this he finds that final-year psychology students prefer studying psychology to any other subject. On this basis he concludes that psychology is the most popular subject. However, Jane argues that this conclusion is wrong as the research actually shows that students prefer the subject they end up studying. What is the basis of her objection to Mark’s research? [TY2.7]

  1. The study is invalid.
  2. The study is unreliable.
  3. The study is non-cumulative.
  4. The study is unparsimonious.
  5. None of the above.

8. If an experimental finding is valid, which of the following statements is true?

  1. It should be easy to replicate
  2. It supports a researcher's experimental predictions
  3. It supports a researcher's theory
  4. It occurred for the reason hypothesised by the researcher
  5. It will make a demonstrable contribution to scientific knowledge

9. Which of the following would not be of interest to a behaviourist?

  1. A person's reaction to a flashing light.
  2. Differences in various people's responses to a flashing light.
  3. The cognitive processes associated with reaction to a stimulus.
  4. The impact of a particular stimulus on behaviour.
  5. The different behaviours that arise from exposure to different stimuli.

10. Which of the following is a physiological measure?

  1. A measure of blood flow through a person's brain.
  2. Details of a person's family tree.
  3. A person's response to questions on a survey.
  4. A person's response to questions in an experiment.
  5. The preference a person shows for one stimulus rather than another.

11. Theory A explains phenomenon L, phenomenon M and phenomenon N using principles J and K. Theory B explains phenomenon L, phenomenon M, and phenomenon N using only principle K. Theory C explains phenomenon L and phenomenon N using principles J and K. Which of the following statements is true?

  1. Theory A is the most parsimonious.
  2. Theory B is the most parsimonious.
  3. Theory C is the most parsimonious.
  4. Theory A and Theory C are equally and most parsimonious.
  5. Theory A and Theory B are equally and most parsimonious.

12. “An argument in which the thing to be explained is presented as the explanation (e.g. where memory ability is used to explain memory performance).” What type of argument is this a glossary definition of?

  1. Conceptual argument
  2. Convenient argument
  3. Causal argument
  4. Circular argument
  5. Casual argument

13. “The goal of accounting for the maximum number of empirical findings in terms of the smallest number of theoretical principles.” This a glossary definition of which principle?


Top Psychology Magazines and Journals for Therapists

The field of psychology is fast-paced and constantly changing. Though this makes it an exciting field to study, staying up to date on the continuously evolving research can often prove to be overwhelming.

Doing a simple Google search for psychology magazines and journals returns hundreds of results and often leaves you wondering– “where do I even begin?” With thousands of new articles and papers being published each year in hundreds of different psychology journals and magazines, being well-read and up-to-date almost seems an impossible task.

Here at TheraNest we wanted to make it easier for you to stay on top of the research you need to know, that’s why we collected eight publications covering different aspects of the field of psychology that we think you should consider reading. Whether you are looking for a light read on topics that interest you or a deep dive into research-heavy perspectives, there is something for you on this list.


The Open Access Journal of Forensic Psychology

Launched in 2009, The Open Access Journal of Forensic Psychology is a professional, peer-reviewed journal created by and for forensic psychologists. It is free to anyone with Internet access.

You can access every article published in the The Open Access Journal of Forensic Psychology by਌licking Here 


Research Participant Pool

Research is an important component of the science of psychology. Students gain a better understanding of the discipline through direct experience with psychological research.

Information for Participants

Introduction to Psychology (PSYC101) Students

All PSYC101 students must complete a research requirement. The Intro (I) Pool consists of students in Psyc 101 courses seeking to fulfill the research requirement via research participation. To find “I” study opportunities, visit the Research Participant Pool Website or download the free Sona Mobile app. See course materials for more information.

General Participants

The General (G) Pool consists of students enrolled in psychology courses that offer extra credit for research participation. This includes most, but not all, psychology courses in a given semester.

We know not everyone needs extra credit, so please keep in mind that participation in these studies allows you to gain invaluable first-hand experience with psychological research. In some cases, it may give you ideas for a research project that you may pursue in upper division lab courses or in independent research. It also will give you tangible examples of some of the research techniques that you may be studying in your class.

To find “G” study opportunities visit the Research Participant Pool Website or download the free Sona Mobile app. See course materials for more information.

Earning Credit

Current credit totals and credit status are available any point in the semester by logging in to the Research Participant Pool Website and viewing the “My Schedule and Credits” area.

The Research Participant Pool Manager plans to update credit totals each Monday throughout the semester. In some cases there may be an extended delay, but the system, by design, does not “miss” sending you study reminders or any of the record of your participation if you did indeed participate and correct codes are provided. Your research credit information will automatically be sent to your instructor at the end of the semester.

Psychology Research Data Collection Raffle

Students who are not in a class that offers extra credit for research participation but still want to participate in research can enter the Psychology Research Data Collection Raffle. For each study completed, one can choose to be entered in a raffle to win one of three $50 prizes.

Throughout the academic year, the research participant pool manager will send all-student emails to recruit participants for research opportunities. Most projects will be online studies a link to the study will be included in the recruitment notice. Other projects may involve an in-person session the recruitment notice will include instructions for study sign-up. One to two raffle entries will be earned per online survey and four or more raffle entries will be earned per standard lab study (final # is dependent on study length.)

Who can participate?

Restrictions
  • One must be 18 or older to participate in research studies or have a parental consent form on file with the Research Participant Pool Manager.
  • Some studies have eligibility requirements (e.g., females only, males only, part of a military family, certain majors) please note and adhere to them
  • Students in eligible psychology classes may complete the announced studies for extra credit only if they sign up for a study time-slot using the Research Participant Pool Website
  • Those who are eligible to earn extra credit may not enter the raffle instead
Participant Rights

Rest assured that every study has been approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB).

  • One has the right to choose not to participate you are volunteering
  • One has the right to an explanation including questions of any study before agreeing to participate. If you decide to take part in the study, you will be asked to sign the informed consent form. Please take your time and read over this document carefully so that you understand the potential benefits and risks associated with participating in the study.
  • Everything said or done during a research project is strictly confidential. Information will be given only to the researchers who carry out the study or to those who make sure that the study is safe and carried out the way it was planned.
  • If, for any reason, one suddenly decides that they would rather not participate in a research project, they can just notify the researcher and leave.
  • Please take participation in research seriously. Pay attention to instructions and put forth your best effort.
  • If you are completing online studies, make sure that you do so in an environment that is not distracting and that you have the time and energy to undertake the task (i.e, be sure you can complete the survey in one sitting- not starting it going off to dinner and then finishing it afterwards, do not take surveys if you are under the influence or if you are extremely tired).
  • After participating in a study, be sure to read the debriefing information carefully. Some will ask this of you explicitly, but in general do not discuss the content you completed with other students who could be potential participants.

Get the Most Out of Your Research Participation

All participants will be provided with feedback concerning the purposes and expectations of the studies in which they participate during a debriefing period. Participants are strongly encouraged to ask questions during this time. Often one gets as much out of the discussion following the experiment as during their actual study participation. Researchers will be more than happy to discuss any aspect of their study (some aspects might not be able to be divulged at the time the study is being conducted but you can request follow-up information when the study is completed). Basically, one will get as much out of the experience as they put into it.

Many advances in knowledge would not have been possible without individuals willing to participate. Participants can help scientists find out more about how the human body and mind work and help other people. By participating in research, students provide a very valuable service to the psychology department. Their contribution in this regard is highly valued and much appreciated.


Features of Science

The general scientific approach has three fundamental features (Stanovich, 2010) [1] . The first is systematic empiricism. Empiricism refers to learning based on observation, and scientists learn about the natural world systematically, by carefully planning, making, recording, and analyzing observations of it. As we will see, logical reasoning and even creativity play important roles in science too, but scientists are unique in their insistence on checking their ideas about the way the world is against their systematic observations. Notice, for example, that Mehl and his colleagues did not trust other people’s stereotypes or even their own informal observations. Instead, they systematically recorded, counted, and compared the number of words spoken by a large sample of women and men. Furthermore, when their systematic observations turned out to conflict with people’s stereotypes, they trusted their systematic observations.

The second feature of the scientific approach—which follows in a straightforward way from the first—is that it is concerned with empirical questions. These are questions about the way the world actually is and, therefore, can be answered by systematically observing it. The question of whether women talk more than men is empirical in this way. Either women really do talk more than men or they do not, and this can be determined by systematically observing how much women and men actually talk. Having said this, there are many interesting and important questions that are not empirically testable and that science is not in a position to answer. Among these are questions about values—whether things are good or bad, just or unjust, or beautiful or ugly, and how the world ought to be. So although the question of whether a stereotype is accurate or inaccurate is an empirically testable one that science can answer, the question—or, rather, the value judgment—of whether it is wrong for people to hold inaccurate stereotypes is not. Similarly, the question of whether criminal behavior has a genetic basis is an empirical question, but the question of what actions ought to be considered illegal is not. It is especially important for researchers in psychology to be mindful of this distinction.

The third feature of science is that it creates public knowledge. After asking their empirical questions, making their systematic observations, and drawing their conclusions, scientists publish their work. This usually means writing an article for publication in a professional journal, in which they put their research question in the context of previous research, describe in detail the methods they used to answer their question, and clearly present their results and conclusions. Increasingly, scientists are opting to publish their work in open access journals, in which the articles are freely available to all – scientists and nonscientists alike. This important choice allows publicly-funded research to create knowledge that is truly public.

Publication is an essential feature of science for two reasons. One is that science is a social process—a large-scale collaboration among many researchers distributed across both time and space. Our current scientific knowledge of most topics is based on many different studies conducted by many different researchers who have shared their work publicly over many years. The second is that publication allows science to be self-correcting. Individual scientists understand that, despite their best efforts, their methods can be flawed and their conclusions incorrect. Publication allows others in the scientific community to detect and correct these errors so that, over time, scientific knowledge increasingly reflects the way the world actually is.

A good example of the self-correcting nature of science is the “Many Labs Replication Project” – a large and coordinated effort by prominent psychological scientists around the world to attempt to replicate findings from 13 classic and contemporary studies (Klein et al., 2013) [2] . One of the findings selected by these researchers for replication was the fascinating effect, first reported by Simone Schnall and her colleagues at the University of Plymouth, that washing one’s hands leads people to view moral transgressions—ranging from keeping money inside a found wallet to using a kitten for sexual arousal—as less wrong (Schnall, Benton, & Harvey, 2008) [3] . If reliable, this effect might help explain why so many religious traditions associate physical cleanliness with moral purity. However, despite using the same materials and nearly identical procedures with a much larger sample, the “Many Labs” researchers were unable to replicate the original finding (Johnson, Cheung, & Donnellan, 2013) [4] , suggesting that the original finding may have stemmed from the relatively small sample size (which can lead to unreliable results) used in the original study. To be clear, at this stage we are still unable to definitively conclude that the handwashing effect does not exist however, the effort that has gone into testing its reliability certainly demonstrates the collaborative and cautious nature of scientific progress.


PsychTeacher

Reliability
It is important that psychology research can easily be repeated and yield the same results each time. Reliability refers to the extent to which the measurement of a particular behaviour is consistent.

Assessing and improving reliability
In order to be able to class a test or research method as reliable, it must yield consistent results each time it is used. Of course, the exact same results will not be obtained each time as participants and situations vary, but a strong positive correlation between the results of the same test will indicate reliability.

Assessing and improving reliability of observers
An observational research study using more than one observer needs to be assessed for reliability. If different observers provide significantly different observations of the same behaviour, then the data provided by those observers is unreliable. Observer reliability can therefore be assessed by correlating the data provided by the observers.

  • Training observers in the observation techniques being used and making sure everyone agrees with them.
  • Ensuring behaviour categories are correctly and objectively operationalised. This means that the behaviour being observed can only be that behaviour. For example, &ldquoaggressive behaviour&rdquo is subjective and not operationalised, but &ldquopushing&rdquo is objective and operationalised.
  • The split-half method involves randomly choosing half the questions on the test and comparing the results with the other half. If there is a significant positive correlation between the two halves then the questions are reliable. Using the split-half method means the same participant can be used without having to wait for them to &lsquoforget&rsquo the questions between the two halves of the test, and it is therefore a quick and easy way to establish reliability. However it can only be effective with large questionnaires in which all questions measure the behaviour being researched.
  • The test-retest method involves administering an entire test to a participant, waiting for them to &lsquoforget&rsquo the questions (which could take several months), and then readministering the test. If the results from both presentations of the test significantly positively correlate then it is a reliable test. The disadvantages of the test-retest method are that it takes a long time for results to be obtained, and if too long an interval has been used then the participant may have changed in themselves which may mean a test is declared unreliable when it is in fact reliable. The advantage is that every question is checked for reliability.


Validity
Validity refers to the extent to which a research technique actually measures the behaviour it is claimed to measure. For example, a relationship questionnaire is not a valid measure of aggression.

  • Population validity refers to the extent to which the results can be generalised to groups of people other than the sample of participants used. Much psychological research uses university students as participants, e.g. Asch (1959), and it is difficult to say for sure that the results can be generalised to anyone other than university students.
  • Ecological validity refers to the extent to which the task used in a research study is representative of real life. Research into eyewitness testimony, for example, has generally lacked ecological validity as participants viewed incidents on video screens rather than in real life.
  • Face validity is a subjective assessment of whether or not a test appears to measure the behaviour it claims to. It is subjective and therefore not a particularly strong method with which to assess validity.
  • Content validity is an objective assessment of the items in a test to establish whether or not they all relate to and measure the behaviour in question.
  • Concurrent validity is a comparison between two tests of a particular behaviour. One test has already been established as a valid measure of the behaviour, and the other test is the new one. If the results from both old and new tests significantly correlate then the new test is valid.
  • Predictive validity refers to how well a test predicts future behaviour. An example of this is a diagnostic test for a mental health problem such as depression. If the test is a valid measure of depression and accurately diagnoses depression, then there will be a significant positive correlation between the test scores and the outcome for the patient.

A Level exam tips
Answering exam questions (PSYA1 AQA A specification)
These tend to be 1 or 2 mark questions focused on showing you understand how to assess and improve reliability or validity. If the questions states &lsquoDescribe one method of assessing and improving the validity of (the test in the question stem)&rsquo then it would be perfectly adequate to give the answer, &ldquoA valid test is one that measures the behaviour it is supposed to. It can be assessed using concurrent validity in which the test is compared with an established one, and if there is a significant positive correlation then the new test is probably a valid one.&rdquo



Comments:

  1. Mac Artuir

    I would like to know how to thank them for their assistance in this matter.

  2. Sterlyn

    Make mistakes. I am able to prove it. Write to me in PM, speak.

  3. Jarrell

    remarkably, very funny opinion

  4. Grolmaran

    I congratulate this idea just about

  5. Ulz

    Reading the theme?

  6. Corbmac

    I'm sorry, but in my opinion, you are wrong. I'm sure. Write to me in PM, speak.

  7. Shakazuru

    Completely I share your opinion. In it something is also to me it seems it is excellent idea. I agree with you.



Write a message