TEST BANK
RESEARCH METHODS, STATISTICS, AND
APPLICATIONS
,TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1 • Thinking Like a Researcher
Chapter 2 • Build a Solid Foundation for Your Study Based on Past Research
Chapter 3 • Measuring Your Variables
Chapter 4 • The Cornerstones of Good Research: Reliability and Validity
Chapter 5 • Basics of Research Design: Description and Sampling
Chapter 6 • Describing Your Sample
Chapter 7 • Beyond Descriptives: Making Inferences Based On Your Sample
Chapter 8 • Comparing Your Sample to a Known or Expected Score
Chapter 9 • Examining Relationships Among Your Variables: Correlational Design
Chapter 10 • Examining Causality
Chapter 11 • Independent-Groups Designs
Chapter 12 • Dependent-Groups Designs
Chapter 13 • Factorial Designs
Chapter 14 • Nonparametric Statistics
Chapter 15 • Focusing on the Individual: Case Studies and Single N Designs
Learning Objectives
Chapter 16 • How to Decide? Choosing a Research Design and Selecting the Correct
Analysis
,CHAPTER 1 • Thinking Like a Researcher
Multiple Questions
1. [MEDIUM] A researcher notices that students who sit in the front row tend to get better
grades. She concludes that sitting in front causes better academic performance. What critical
thinking error has she made?
a) Confusing correlation with causation
b) Using hindsight bias
c) Committing the confirmation bias
d) Engaging in pseudoscience
Answer: A
Explanation: The researcher observed a relationship (correlation) between seating and grades
but jumped to a causal conclusion without ruling out alternative explanations (e.g., motivated
students choose front seats). Correlation does not equal causation.
2. [HARD] A study claims that listening to Mozart increases IQ scores. Upon closer
examination, you find that the control group sat in silence while the experimental group was
engaged and stimulated by music. This represents a problem with:
a) Parsimony
b) Confounding variables
c) Operational definitions
d) Peer review
Answer: B
Explanation: The issue isn't just the music—it's engagement/stimulation. This confounding
variable (engagement) isn't controlled, making it impossible to determine if Mozart specifically
caused the effect. This violates internal validity.
3. [MEDIUM] Which of the following best exemplifies the scientific principle of falsifiability?
,a) "Meditation improves well-being in some unknown spiritual way."
b) "Prayer works, but only if you truly believe—and we can't measure belief."
c) "If sleep deprivation impairs memory, then sleep-deprived participants will recall fewer words
on a memory test."
d) "Astrology influences personality, but skeptics block the cosmic energy."
Answer: C
Explanation: Falsifiability means a claim can be tested and potentially proven wrong. Option C
provides a testable prediction with measurable outcomes. The others include unfalsifiable escape
clauses or unmeasurable constructs.
4. [HARD] A researcher believes that violent video games cause aggression. When reviewing
literature, she only cites studies supporting her view and ignores contradictory evidence. This is
an example of:
a) Parsimony
b) Confirmation bias
c) Authority bias
d) The scientific method
Answer: B
Explanation: Confirmation bias is the tendency to seek, interpret, and remember information
that confirms pre-existing beliefs while ignoring contradictory evidence. Good research requires
objectivity and consideration of all evidence.
5. [MEDIUM] The principle of parsimony suggests that:
a) Research should be expensive and complex to be credible
b) The simplest explanation that fits the data is preferred
c) All research must be replicated at least three times
d) Researchers should avoid statistical analysis
Answer: B
Explanation: Parsimony (Occam's Razor) means preferring simpler explanations over complex
,ones when both explain the data equally well. This doesn't mean research is simplistic, but
avoids unnecessary complexity.
6. [HARD] Dr. Smith reads that "85% of researchers agree that homeopathy is ineffective."
However, further investigation reveals most respondents were physicists, not medical
researchers. This illustrates a problem with:
a) Appeal to authority when authority lacks relevant expertise
b) Confirmation bias
c) Hindsight bias
d) Publication bias
Answer: A
Explanation: While physicists are experts, they may not be the most relevant authorities on
medical treatments. Critical thinking requires evaluating whether authorities have expertise in the
specific domain being discussed.
7. [MEDIUM] Which statement best reflects the scientific approach to knowledge?
a) "Once a theory is proven, it becomes absolute truth."
b) "Scientific knowledge is tentative and subject to revision based on new evidence."
c) "Personal experience is more reliable than empirical data."
d) "Authority figures determine scientific facts."
Answer: B
Explanation: Science is self-correcting and probabilistic, not absolute. Theories are supported
or refuted by evidence and can be revised or rejected as new data emerges. Science doesn't
"prove" things definitively.
,8. [HARD] A researcher pre-registers her hypothesis, methodology, and analysis plan before
collecting data. This practice primarily helps to:
a) Reduce publication bias
b) Prevent HARKing (Hypothesizing After Results are Known)
c) Increase sample size
d) Eliminate all confounding variables
Answer: B
Explanation: Pre-registration prevents researchers from changing hypotheses after seeing
results (HARKing), which inflates false-positive rates. It promotes transparency and
distinguishes confirmatory from exploratory research.
9. [MEDIUM] Peer review in the scientific process primarily serves to:
a) Guarantee that published research is completely error-free
b) Evaluate research quality before publication and identify flaws
c) Ensure all research supports the dominant theory
d) Prevent any controversial findings from being published
Answer: B
Explanation: Peer review is quality control where experts evaluate methodology, analysis, and
conclusions. It doesn't guarantee perfection or suppress controversy, but helps filter out flawed
research before publication.
10. [HARD] A psychologist conducts a study without informed consent, arguing the research
will benefit society. From an ethical standpoint, this is:
a) Acceptable because the ends justify the means
b) Unacceptable; ethical principles like respect for persons must be upheld
c) Acceptable if the study is observational
d) Only problematic if participants are harmed
Answer: B
Explanation: Ethical research requires informed consent (respect for autonomy), even if
,research might benefit society. Exceptions are very limited and require IRB approval. Utilitarian
"greater good" arguments don't override individual rights.
11. [MEDIUM] What is the primary difference between basic and applied research?
a) Basic research uses the scientific method; applied research does not
b) Basic research seeks general knowledge; applied research addresses practical problems
c) Basic research is always conducted in labs; applied research is always in the field
d) Basic research is easier to conduct than applied research
Answer: B
Explanation: Basic research aims to expand fundamental knowledge without immediate
application (e.g., studying memory processes). Applied research addresses specific practical
problems (e.g., improving classroom learning). Both use the scientific method.
12. [HARD] A researcher finds that her results contradict her hypothesis. She decides to publish
the findings anyway. This demonstrates:
a) Poor research skills
b) Scientific integrity and objectivity
c) Confirmation bias
d) A Type I error
Answer: B
Explanation: Publishing null or contradictory results demonstrates scientific integrity.
Suppressing such findings contributes to publication bias and the "file drawer problem," skewing
the literature toward positive results.
13. [MEDIUM] The replication crisis in psychology primarily revealed that:
,a) Psychology is not a real science
b) Many published findings could not be reproduced when studies were repeated
c) All psychological research is fraudulent
d) Statistical analysis is unnecessary
Answer: B
Explanation: The replication crisis showed that many published findings failed to replicate,
raising concerns about questionable research practices, small samples, publication bias, and
statistical issues. This prompted reforms, not abandonment of the field.
14. [HARD] A study finds that people who drink coffee live longer. However, coffee drinkers in
the study also exercised more and had higher incomes. This scenario illustrates the importance of
considering:
a) Third variables that might explain the relationship
b) The placebo effect
c) Demand characteristics
d) Social desirability bias
Answer: A
Explanation: Third variables (exercise, income/healthcare access) might explain both coffee
drinking and longevity, creating a spurious correlation. This highlights why correlation doesn't
imply causation—alternative explanations must be ruled out.
15. [HARD] Which scenario best demonstrates critical thinking in evaluating research?
a) Accepting findings because they were published in a journal
b) Rejecting findings because they contradict your personal beliefs
c) Examining the methodology, sample size, and potential confounds before drawing conclusions
d) Only trusting research conducted at prestigious universities
Answer: C
Explanation: Critical thinking requires evaluating the quality of evidence (methodology,
sampling, controls) rather than accepting claims based on publication, personal beliefs, or
institutional prestige. Evidence quality matters, not source status.
,CHAPTER 2 • Build a Solid Foundation Based on Past Research
Questions (15 MCQs)
1. [MEDIUM] Which of the following is a PRIMARY source in scientific research?
a) A textbook chapter summarizing depression research
b) A meta-analysis combining results from 50 studies
c) An original research article reporting new experimental data
d) A newspaper article describing a recent study
Answer: C
Explanation: Primary sources report original research conducted by the authors (e.g., journal
articles with new data). Secondary sources (textbooks, meta-analyses, news) summarize or
synthesize primary sources.
2. [HARD] You're researching the effects of mindfulness on anxiety. You find a meta-analysis, a
literature review, and three original studies. Which should you prioritize for understanding the
overall pattern of findings?
a) The most recent original study
b) The meta-analysis, as it quantitatively synthesizes multiple studies
c) The literature review, as it's easier to read
d) All three original studies equally
Answer: B
Explanation: Meta-analyses statistically combine results across studies, providing the most
comprehensive evidence about effect sizes and consistency. Literature reviews summarize
qualitatively. Individual studies show specific findings but not overall patterns.
3. [MEDIUM] When using PsycINFO or Google Scholar, which search strategy is most
effective?
, a) Typing a full question: "Does social media cause depression in teenagers?"
b) Using key terms with Boolean operators: "social media" AND depression AND adolescents
c) Searching for author names only
d) Using only very general terms like "psychology"
Answer: B
Explanation: Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT) with key terms efficiently narrow searches to
relevant articles. Full questions are too specific; general terms yield too many irrelevant results.
4. [HARD] You find a study published in the "Journal of Incredible Psychology" that lacks peer
review and is published by an unknown organization. This is a red flag for:
a) A predatory or low-quality journal
b) A top-tier scientific journal
c) A necessary source for your literature review
d) A journal using the gold standard of publication
Answer: A
Explanation: Lack of peer review, unknown publishers, and dubious journal names indicate
predatory or low-quality journals that publish without rigorous evaluation. Reputable journals
have established peer-review processes.
5. [MEDIUM] The introduction section of a primary research article typically:
a) Describes the statistical analyses used
b) Provides background and states the research hypothesis
c) Reports the main findings
d) Lists all materials used in the study
Answer: B
Explanation: Introductions review relevant literature, identify gaps, and present the research
question/hypothesis. Methods describe procedures, Results report findings, and Discussion
interprets them.
RESEARCH METHODS, STATISTICS, AND
APPLICATIONS
,TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1 • Thinking Like a Researcher
Chapter 2 • Build a Solid Foundation for Your Study Based on Past Research
Chapter 3 • Measuring Your Variables
Chapter 4 • The Cornerstones of Good Research: Reliability and Validity
Chapter 5 • Basics of Research Design: Description and Sampling
Chapter 6 • Describing Your Sample
Chapter 7 • Beyond Descriptives: Making Inferences Based On Your Sample
Chapter 8 • Comparing Your Sample to a Known or Expected Score
Chapter 9 • Examining Relationships Among Your Variables: Correlational Design
Chapter 10 • Examining Causality
Chapter 11 • Independent-Groups Designs
Chapter 12 • Dependent-Groups Designs
Chapter 13 • Factorial Designs
Chapter 14 • Nonparametric Statistics
Chapter 15 • Focusing on the Individual: Case Studies and Single N Designs
Learning Objectives
Chapter 16 • How to Decide? Choosing a Research Design and Selecting the Correct
Analysis
,CHAPTER 1 • Thinking Like a Researcher
Multiple Questions
1. [MEDIUM] A researcher notices that students who sit in the front row tend to get better
grades. She concludes that sitting in front causes better academic performance. What critical
thinking error has she made?
a) Confusing correlation with causation
b) Using hindsight bias
c) Committing the confirmation bias
d) Engaging in pseudoscience
Answer: A
Explanation: The researcher observed a relationship (correlation) between seating and grades
but jumped to a causal conclusion without ruling out alternative explanations (e.g., motivated
students choose front seats). Correlation does not equal causation.
2. [HARD] A study claims that listening to Mozart increases IQ scores. Upon closer
examination, you find that the control group sat in silence while the experimental group was
engaged and stimulated by music. This represents a problem with:
a) Parsimony
b) Confounding variables
c) Operational definitions
d) Peer review
Answer: B
Explanation: The issue isn't just the music—it's engagement/stimulation. This confounding
variable (engagement) isn't controlled, making it impossible to determine if Mozart specifically
caused the effect. This violates internal validity.
3. [MEDIUM] Which of the following best exemplifies the scientific principle of falsifiability?
,a) "Meditation improves well-being in some unknown spiritual way."
b) "Prayer works, but only if you truly believe—and we can't measure belief."
c) "If sleep deprivation impairs memory, then sleep-deprived participants will recall fewer words
on a memory test."
d) "Astrology influences personality, but skeptics block the cosmic energy."
Answer: C
Explanation: Falsifiability means a claim can be tested and potentially proven wrong. Option C
provides a testable prediction with measurable outcomes. The others include unfalsifiable escape
clauses or unmeasurable constructs.
4. [HARD] A researcher believes that violent video games cause aggression. When reviewing
literature, she only cites studies supporting her view and ignores contradictory evidence. This is
an example of:
a) Parsimony
b) Confirmation bias
c) Authority bias
d) The scientific method
Answer: B
Explanation: Confirmation bias is the tendency to seek, interpret, and remember information
that confirms pre-existing beliefs while ignoring contradictory evidence. Good research requires
objectivity and consideration of all evidence.
5. [MEDIUM] The principle of parsimony suggests that:
a) Research should be expensive and complex to be credible
b) The simplest explanation that fits the data is preferred
c) All research must be replicated at least three times
d) Researchers should avoid statistical analysis
Answer: B
Explanation: Parsimony (Occam's Razor) means preferring simpler explanations over complex
,ones when both explain the data equally well. This doesn't mean research is simplistic, but
avoids unnecessary complexity.
6. [HARD] Dr. Smith reads that "85% of researchers agree that homeopathy is ineffective."
However, further investigation reveals most respondents were physicists, not medical
researchers. This illustrates a problem with:
a) Appeal to authority when authority lacks relevant expertise
b) Confirmation bias
c) Hindsight bias
d) Publication bias
Answer: A
Explanation: While physicists are experts, they may not be the most relevant authorities on
medical treatments. Critical thinking requires evaluating whether authorities have expertise in the
specific domain being discussed.
7. [MEDIUM] Which statement best reflects the scientific approach to knowledge?
a) "Once a theory is proven, it becomes absolute truth."
b) "Scientific knowledge is tentative and subject to revision based on new evidence."
c) "Personal experience is more reliable than empirical data."
d) "Authority figures determine scientific facts."
Answer: B
Explanation: Science is self-correcting and probabilistic, not absolute. Theories are supported
or refuted by evidence and can be revised or rejected as new data emerges. Science doesn't
"prove" things definitively.
,8. [HARD] A researcher pre-registers her hypothesis, methodology, and analysis plan before
collecting data. This practice primarily helps to:
a) Reduce publication bias
b) Prevent HARKing (Hypothesizing After Results are Known)
c) Increase sample size
d) Eliminate all confounding variables
Answer: B
Explanation: Pre-registration prevents researchers from changing hypotheses after seeing
results (HARKing), which inflates false-positive rates. It promotes transparency and
distinguishes confirmatory from exploratory research.
9. [MEDIUM] Peer review in the scientific process primarily serves to:
a) Guarantee that published research is completely error-free
b) Evaluate research quality before publication and identify flaws
c) Ensure all research supports the dominant theory
d) Prevent any controversial findings from being published
Answer: B
Explanation: Peer review is quality control where experts evaluate methodology, analysis, and
conclusions. It doesn't guarantee perfection or suppress controversy, but helps filter out flawed
research before publication.
10. [HARD] A psychologist conducts a study without informed consent, arguing the research
will benefit society. From an ethical standpoint, this is:
a) Acceptable because the ends justify the means
b) Unacceptable; ethical principles like respect for persons must be upheld
c) Acceptable if the study is observational
d) Only problematic if participants are harmed
Answer: B
Explanation: Ethical research requires informed consent (respect for autonomy), even if
,research might benefit society. Exceptions are very limited and require IRB approval. Utilitarian
"greater good" arguments don't override individual rights.
11. [MEDIUM] What is the primary difference between basic and applied research?
a) Basic research uses the scientific method; applied research does not
b) Basic research seeks general knowledge; applied research addresses practical problems
c) Basic research is always conducted in labs; applied research is always in the field
d) Basic research is easier to conduct than applied research
Answer: B
Explanation: Basic research aims to expand fundamental knowledge without immediate
application (e.g., studying memory processes). Applied research addresses specific practical
problems (e.g., improving classroom learning). Both use the scientific method.
12. [HARD] A researcher finds that her results contradict her hypothesis. She decides to publish
the findings anyway. This demonstrates:
a) Poor research skills
b) Scientific integrity and objectivity
c) Confirmation bias
d) A Type I error
Answer: B
Explanation: Publishing null or contradictory results demonstrates scientific integrity.
Suppressing such findings contributes to publication bias and the "file drawer problem," skewing
the literature toward positive results.
13. [MEDIUM] The replication crisis in psychology primarily revealed that:
,a) Psychology is not a real science
b) Many published findings could not be reproduced when studies were repeated
c) All psychological research is fraudulent
d) Statistical analysis is unnecessary
Answer: B
Explanation: The replication crisis showed that many published findings failed to replicate,
raising concerns about questionable research practices, small samples, publication bias, and
statistical issues. This prompted reforms, not abandonment of the field.
14. [HARD] A study finds that people who drink coffee live longer. However, coffee drinkers in
the study also exercised more and had higher incomes. This scenario illustrates the importance of
considering:
a) Third variables that might explain the relationship
b) The placebo effect
c) Demand characteristics
d) Social desirability bias
Answer: A
Explanation: Third variables (exercise, income/healthcare access) might explain both coffee
drinking and longevity, creating a spurious correlation. This highlights why correlation doesn't
imply causation—alternative explanations must be ruled out.
15. [HARD] Which scenario best demonstrates critical thinking in evaluating research?
a) Accepting findings because they were published in a journal
b) Rejecting findings because they contradict your personal beliefs
c) Examining the methodology, sample size, and potential confounds before drawing conclusions
d) Only trusting research conducted at prestigious universities
Answer: C
Explanation: Critical thinking requires evaluating the quality of evidence (methodology,
sampling, controls) rather than accepting claims based on publication, personal beliefs, or
institutional prestige. Evidence quality matters, not source status.
,CHAPTER 2 • Build a Solid Foundation Based on Past Research
Questions (15 MCQs)
1. [MEDIUM] Which of the following is a PRIMARY source in scientific research?
a) A textbook chapter summarizing depression research
b) A meta-analysis combining results from 50 studies
c) An original research article reporting new experimental data
d) A newspaper article describing a recent study
Answer: C
Explanation: Primary sources report original research conducted by the authors (e.g., journal
articles with new data). Secondary sources (textbooks, meta-analyses, news) summarize or
synthesize primary sources.
2. [HARD] You're researching the effects of mindfulness on anxiety. You find a meta-analysis, a
literature review, and three original studies. Which should you prioritize for understanding the
overall pattern of findings?
a) The most recent original study
b) The meta-analysis, as it quantitatively synthesizes multiple studies
c) The literature review, as it's easier to read
d) All three original studies equally
Answer: B
Explanation: Meta-analyses statistically combine results across studies, providing the most
comprehensive evidence about effect sizes and consistency. Literature reviews summarize
qualitatively. Individual studies show specific findings but not overall patterns.
3. [MEDIUM] When using PsycINFO or Google Scholar, which search strategy is most
effective?
, a) Typing a full question: "Does social media cause depression in teenagers?"
b) Using key terms with Boolean operators: "social media" AND depression AND adolescents
c) Searching for author names only
d) Using only very general terms like "psychology"
Answer: B
Explanation: Boolean operators (AND, OR, NOT) with key terms efficiently narrow searches to
relevant articles. Full questions are too specific; general terms yield too many irrelevant results.
4. [HARD] You find a study published in the "Journal of Incredible Psychology" that lacks peer
review and is published by an unknown organization. This is a red flag for:
a) A predatory or low-quality journal
b) A top-tier scientific journal
c) A necessary source for your literature review
d) A journal using the gold standard of publication
Answer: A
Explanation: Lack of peer review, unknown publishers, and dubious journal names indicate
predatory or low-quality journals that publish without rigorous evaluation. Reputable journals
have established peer-review processes.
5. [MEDIUM] The introduction section of a primary research article typically:
a) Describes the statistical analyses used
b) Provides background and states the research hypothesis
c) Reports the main findings
d) Lists all materials used in the study
Answer: B
Explanation: Introductions review relevant literature, identify gaps, and present the research
question/hypothesis. Methods describe procedures, Results report findings, and Discussion
interprets them.
