PSYC 217 - EXAM 1 STUDY GUIDE
logic - Answer -a tool that scientific method relies on; knowledge derived from rules of
logical thinking
pros and cons of logic - Answer -pros: leads to internally consistent lines of thought
(reasonably go from one idea to the next); easy to analyze and critique
cons: may be used on incorrect premises/information (Asians shouldn't play sports
because they don't have muscles); what may be logically consistent may differ from
what is actually true in the world
unscientific ways of knowing - Answer -experience - relies on personal experiences to
make decisions, often at the expense of paying attention to broader norms
folk wisdom/common sense - appealing to what one expects everyone else to know
(idioms, cultural phrases)
authority - deriving knowledge from someone you believe is credible
intuition - unquestioning acceptance of own judgment/single experience
four norms that characterize scientific inquiry - Answer -universalism - scientific
observations are structured and evaluated using accepted methods of the discipline
communality - methods and results are to be shared openly so others can replicate the
methods used + results of many studies can be combined in meta-analyses
disinterestedness - scientists should search for observations that help them make
accurate discoveries about the world; honest and careful quest for truth, not motivated
for personal gain
organized skepticism - evidence and theories should be evaluated based on scientific
merit, even those that challenge previous beliefs
canons of science - Answer -determinism - idea that things don't completely happen at
random, there are predictable, meaningful, systematic causes that lead to certain
behaviors
empiricism - making use of controlled, systematic observations and collecting data to
understand the world (develop hypothesis, collect data to evaluate accuracy of the
hypothesis, account for data using parsimony)
parsimony - when there are competing explanations accounting for the same data, we
go with the simpler (fewer conceptual assumptions/jumps + fewer adjustments to
already established relationships in science)
testablity - any scientific explanation must be testable and falsifiable, that way we can
collect data that either supports or refutes that explanation
basic psychological research - Answer -attempts to answer fundamental questions
about the nature of behavior; studies are designed to test aspects of theories about
phenomena
, 4 goals: describe behavior (observation and measurement), predict behavior (≠
causation; possible to anticipate events once two events are observed to be
systematically related), determine causes of behavior (3 criteria of making causal
claims), understand/explain behavior (why events occur; additional research often
needed)
3 criteria of making causal claims/establishing internal validity - Answer -covariation of
cause and effect - when the cause is present the effect occurs, when the cause isn't
present the effect does not occur; must know that there is a relationship between two
variables, if no relationship then there is no causality to explore
temporal precedence - one variable has to have preceded another variable; what you
think is the cause should have happened before what you think is the result
elimination of alternative explanations - nothing other than a causal variable could be
responsible for the observed effect
forms of logical reasoning - Answer -theory - overarching framework that encapsulates
phenomenon and data collected
hypothesis - created so you can test the boundaries of a theory; tentative statement
about a relationship that may or may not be true
prediction - specific statement regarding the expected outcome of a study
deduction - Answer -going from general statement to specific prediction (theory >
hypothesis > prediction)
induction - Answer -series of observations over time > generate hypothesis > create
theory/general hypothesis
abduction - Answer -specific observation > trying to determine best explanation for
single observation; no involvement of theory
non-experimental designs - Answer -relationships are studied by observing or
otherwise measuring variables of interest; observations, correlations
correlational designs - Answer -measuring variables that already exist (no
manipulation); R - correlation coefficient, indexes the degree of linear relationship
between two variables
problems: cannot establish cause-effect (third-variable problem, bidirectionality
problem), low in internal validity - ability to infer that changes in one variable cause
changes in another
mediating variable/mediated relationship - Answer -psychological process that occurs
between two variables that helps to explain the relationship between them; A leads to B
but the relationship exists because of C; can have multiple
logic - Answer -a tool that scientific method relies on; knowledge derived from rules of
logical thinking
pros and cons of logic - Answer -pros: leads to internally consistent lines of thought
(reasonably go from one idea to the next); easy to analyze and critique
cons: may be used on incorrect premises/information (Asians shouldn't play sports
because they don't have muscles); what may be logically consistent may differ from
what is actually true in the world
unscientific ways of knowing - Answer -experience - relies on personal experiences to
make decisions, often at the expense of paying attention to broader norms
folk wisdom/common sense - appealing to what one expects everyone else to know
(idioms, cultural phrases)
authority - deriving knowledge from someone you believe is credible
intuition - unquestioning acceptance of own judgment/single experience
four norms that characterize scientific inquiry - Answer -universalism - scientific
observations are structured and evaluated using accepted methods of the discipline
communality - methods and results are to be shared openly so others can replicate the
methods used + results of many studies can be combined in meta-analyses
disinterestedness - scientists should search for observations that help them make
accurate discoveries about the world; honest and careful quest for truth, not motivated
for personal gain
organized skepticism - evidence and theories should be evaluated based on scientific
merit, even those that challenge previous beliefs
canons of science - Answer -determinism - idea that things don't completely happen at
random, there are predictable, meaningful, systematic causes that lead to certain
behaviors
empiricism - making use of controlled, systematic observations and collecting data to
understand the world (develop hypothesis, collect data to evaluate accuracy of the
hypothesis, account for data using parsimony)
parsimony - when there are competing explanations accounting for the same data, we
go with the simpler (fewer conceptual assumptions/jumps + fewer adjustments to
already established relationships in science)
testablity - any scientific explanation must be testable and falsifiable, that way we can
collect data that either supports or refutes that explanation
basic psychological research - Answer -attempts to answer fundamental questions
about the nature of behavior; studies are designed to test aspects of theories about
phenomena
, 4 goals: describe behavior (observation and measurement), predict behavior (≠
causation; possible to anticipate events once two events are observed to be
systematically related), determine causes of behavior (3 criteria of making causal
claims), understand/explain behavior (why events occur; additional research often
needed)
3 criteria of making causal claims/establishing internal validity - Answer -covariation of
cause and effect - when the cause is present the effect occurs, when the cause isn't
present the effect does not occur; must know that there is a relationship between two
variables, if no relationship then there is no causality to explore
temporal precedence - one variable has to have preceded another variable; what you
think is the cause should have happened before what you think is the result
elimination of alternative explanations - nothing other than a causal variable could be
responsible for the observed effect
forms of logical reasoning - Answer -theory - overarching framework that encapsulates
phenomenon and data collected
hypothesis - created so you can test the boundaries of a theory; tentative statement
about a relationship that may or may not be true
prediction - specific statement regarding the expected outcome of a study
deduction - Answer -going from general statement to specific prediction (theory >
hypothesis > prediction)
induction - Answer -series of observations over time > generate hypothesis > create
theory/general hypothesis
abduction - Answer -specific observation > trying to determine best explanation for
single observation; no involvement of theory
non-experimental designs - Answer -relationships are studied by observing or
otherwise measuring variables of interest; observations, correlations
correlational designs - Answer -measuring variables that already exist (no
manipulation); R - correlation coefficient, indexes the degree of linear relationship
between two variables
problems: cannot establish cause-effect (third-variable problem, bidirectionality
problem), low in internal validity - ability to infer that changes in one variable cause
changes in another
mediating variable/mediated relationship - Answer -psychological process that occurs
between two variables that helps to explain the relationship between them; A leads to B
but the relationship exists because of C; can have multiple
