prpnw

http://amw1992.wordpress.com/2012/03/15/the-cons-of-the-peer-review-system-and-how-to-improve-it/#comment-57

http://te9192.wordpress.com/2012/03/25/should-psychological-research-be-written-for-the-layman-or-the-scientist/#comment-105

http://scarlettrose23.wordpress.com/2012/03/25/final-blog/#comment-122

http://psychblogld.wordpress.com/2012/03/25/does-correlation-imply-causation/#comment-59

Thank you 😀

Since the mid 1990’s the internet has become a worldwide phenomena impacting on cultures, societies and general communication. It is estimated that in 1993 the internet carried only 1% of the information flowing through two-way telecommunication but by 2007 this had increased to 97% (Hilbert & Lopez, 2011). The internet is a fast growing and fast changing source of information and so it is a great way for researchers to carry out qualitative studies using the data they find online. However, this has been a controversial topic so I am going to cover the positives and negatives of using this form of data.

Of course one of the primary advantages of using the internet to acquire participants and data is that there is a lot of it. With so many people using the internet a diverse range of participants are easy to find and access…much easier than trying to recruit participants through advertisements etc. This can obviously save a lot of time and money as it can take some researchers’ months to find participants (Johnson, 2009).

Following on from the previous advantage; using data from the internet is also cheap because fewer materials are needed. For example the internet is accessible from anywhere in the world so there is no need for a lab setting. Researchers who are on a low budget would benefit from the internet in this way. Also there will be no advertising costs to recruits participants as the participants are already there. However having said this, the more specialized data has to be paid for if you want to access it.

Using the internet for research prevents experimenter demand effects; participants do not come into contact with the experiment and so participants are less likely to act in a way or say things that they think the experimenter will find desirable.

Chat rooms and forums are frequently used for qualitative research and the advantage of this is that the data is up to date…individuals are constantly writing opinions and anecdotes online. On the other hand the fact that the internet is constantly updating and changing can be a bad thing. Some sites are transient and web addresses get changed and sites get deleted. This means that data may be lost so there is no concrete evidence that it even existed at all.

When psychological research is being conducted the ethical guidelines state that informed consent needs to be given. A disadvantage of using participants from the internet is that this informed consent cannot be obtained. If your study is looking at opinions into a certain subject and you use forum history to gain these opinions you would not be able to get the author’s permission to use what they have wrote in something different than the forum context. Mann and Stewart (2000) states that researchers should distinguish between private and semi-private data sources, for example, private and open chatrooms. It has been argued however, that the internet is a public place and if you post in forums and chat sites you should be aware that in can be accessed. This blog for example, can be accessed by anyone who wanted to read it and therefore I know to be careful with what I write. Owners of Facebook have admitted to selling information about its users to the government and this is of course is without our consent. We have put our information and pictures etc on the Facebook site and therefore this is essentially allowing the owners to access it (Schneier, 2006).

Another disadvantage is that the data collected from the internet may not be truthful and there is not a process that can be carried out to see if it is accurate. How can you know if someone’s “opinion” is real or not?  If you collect false data it could cause a Type 1 or Type 2 error and these are something that you want to be avoided.  Also children are told (for protection reasons) to lie about their ages and geographical location so this may mean the results are not valid or cannot be generalised.

In conclusion I think that internet data sources are not unethical but perhaps do not follow the ethical guidelines to a strict manner – mainly because it is not really possible. I think it takes mutual understanding from those who post on the internet and researchers who use the sources. Individuals should be aware that what they post is public and accessible and so are responsible for what they write. Also researchers need to use their common sense and respect people’s privacy and use their own judgement on what data to use.

http://pipwinstone.wordpress.com/2012/03/10/case-studies-advantages-and-disadvantages/#comment-45

http://psud63.wordpress.com/2012/03/10/the-role-of-peer-review/#comment-60

I have commented on these two blogs but for some reason I cannot link you directly to the comments so I will copy and paste the comments here too in case you have any problems finding them 🙂

http://vanilla85.wordpress.com/2012/03/11/is-it-ethically-ok-to-use-internet-sources-as-data-for-qualitative-studies/
And the comment said: Using the internet as a source of research has the advantages that it provides access to a very large number of participants with very little cost. Also with the massive number and variety of people using the internet it means that populations with certain characteristics can be found. Smith & Leigh (1997) carried out a study that compared an internet mediated questionnaire and a pen and pencil version. Smith and Leigh compared the demographic characteristics of the two groups and found that they differed in age and gender but not significantly in marital status, ethnicity or education. From this they concluded that the internet samples were representative of the general population and that there was no disadvantage of using the internet in this aspect. Although there is the disadvantage that some people can lie about certain things on the internet some studies have actually found increased levels of disclosure when questionnaires on personal topics were administered over the internet (Locke & Gilbert, 1995). In conclusion I think that the ethical considerations and threats of reliability and validity need to be explored further as the internet is such a tricky subject and so many individuals have different opinions of it.

http://vanilla85.wordpress.com/2012/02/05/type-1-and-type-2-error-which-one-is-worse/
The comment said: I think that Type 1 error is much more important to avoid as I feel that this has the most significant consequences. Saying something works/does something when in actual fact it does not can cause real controversy and confusion. Like you said in the example of cancer…it would be devastating to find out that a so called ‘breakthrough’ was no real breakthrough at all. If you say something works, it has to. You expect this in everday life…a conditioner for you hair apparently makes your hair softer and nourished, you buy it expecting this outcome. You buy a product to “make your house cleaning easier”, you buy it thinking it will. Type 1 error, to me, needs to be avoided like the plague otherwise you are publishing false results and essentially lying to the people who read the publication and believe the findings. Even when the probability is less than 1%, out of 100 experiments at least 1 will contain a false result (Shuttleworth, 2008). I liked an idea that I found on the internet whilst researching type 1 and 2 errors and that is: neither statistical testing or the legal system is perfect and type 1 errors can occur. Juries sometimes make an error and innocent people go to jail, Statisticians would call this a Type 1 error whereas society call it a travesty.

Thank you 🙂

When there is a relationship between two variables it is known as a correlation. So for instance when variable A increases so does variable B; this is a positive correlation.  However there is a well known saying when it comes to correlations and this is “Correlation does not mean causation”. Therefore yes, there may be a relationship between variable A and variable B but this does not mean that one causes the other.

Insurance companies charge male drivers more for their insurance as males have been correlated with road accidents. However how can we say that gender causes these accidents? There may be a relationship between the two but it does not necessarily mean it is due to gender…what if there is a confounding third variable?

Take a look at this graph:

The graph shows a negative correlation between accidents on the US highway and the amount of lemons being imported from Mexico to the USA. We CANNOT say that this shows that when more lemons are being imported it causes less accidents. What about a third variable? Every single factor would have to be ruled out before we can say one thing causes another…and this can never be possible.

Here’s an absurd but fascinating study on the idea that “every time Wales win the rugby grand slam, a Pope dies, except for 1978 when Wales were really good, and two Popes died” http://www.bmj.com/content/337/bmj.a2768.abstract.

Knowing that we can never confidently say that one thing causes another doesn’t this make you think hard and question what we believe as true in our daily lives. We see adverts on the television that so cleverly portray a product that we do not even question the claims. For some people who have no background in psychology and so have never come across the idea correlation and causation would not, whilst watching a new hair shampoo advert, stop and think: ‘Are these results of glossy and soft hair really due to the new shampoo or in fact a third variable?”

However, I am not saying that correlation studies are a waste of time. Although they do not show causes they do show a relationship and sometimes this can still be useful. For example, McNeal and Cimbolic (1986) carried out a study and found a relationship between low serotonin levels in the brain and depression. From this correlation antidepressant drugs were introduced that stop serotonin reuptake. So although causation could not be established McNeal and Cimbolic were able to identify that maybe serotonin levels were a contributing or resulting factor of depression.

“Correlation is not causation, but it sure is a hint” (Tufte, 2003).

In conclusion, when there is a correlation between variable it does not mean that one causes another. Nevertheless correlation studies can still be useful to psychological research as long as the researcher does not report causation.

http://psychblogld.wordpress.com/2012/02/04/research-ethics/#comment-32

http://psud5c.wordpress.com/2012/02/05/can-correlation-show-causality/#comment-31

http://emilyheg.wordpress.com/2011/12/09/must-the-need-for-documented-ethics-procedures-hinder-research-progress/#comment-33

http://prpsjj.wordpress.com/2012/02/16/why-is-the-file-drawer-problem-a-problem/#comment-43

Psychology is a diverse and fascinating topic that can not only be of interest to scientists but to people who have no specific knowledge of the subject. Psychological research can have real world applications and so it can be argued that it should be written for the layman as well as professionals in the field.

When there has been a major advance into medical research it is written up and reported in a way that other medical associates can understand. They do not simplify medical terminology such as “p53-negative tumor, derived cell lines, wild-type p53, extensive apoptosis”. If people who had no knowledge in the medical field wanted to understand this then they would be required to learn and further their knowledge – isn’t this what education is for? Not everyone knows everything, but if you want to know more than the average Joe than you need to research and learn it.  Medical terminology is around for a reason – specific terms are needed to differentiate from the usual everyday lexis. Psychology, like medicine, is a professional field and therefore shouldn’t research also be presented in this specialized way?

Yes psychological research has real world applications…after all the field of psychology is a way of exploring human behavior and feelings, that is real world enough right? And of course every researcher strives for external validity; they want to be able to apply their findings to the population. Therefore surely the research should be written for the layman as it can be helpful to them? Developmental research for example can be helpful for mothers who want to identify behaviors in their children.

However, psychology has proved to be controversial for many years…many do not think that it is a field that can be classed as remotely scientific. So if researchers already have such a tough time convincing other professional fields that it is scientific is it such a good idea to write it in layman terms? Yes doctors have extremely important roles in society but it cannot be said that psychologists do not. If a man comes back for war with severe injuries a doctor would give him treatment to help him get better, however a psychologist would also counsel the patient so that he is able to come to terms with not only the impact his injuries had on him but the impact of war itself. Surely these two roles have equal importance to this man’s life.

In conclusion psychology should not be written in layman terms in journals and publications of research…it should be kept scientific in terms of literature. If people want to be able to understand psychological terms they should look into it and further their knowledge like you would have to for any other specialized subject. Not all of psychological literature will be hard to understand, just certain terms may be ambiguous to the everyday reader and surely if you are interested enough to begin reading the literature you should make the time to understand it…even if these means doing a bit of extra research!

http://amw1992.wordpress.com/2011/12/09/ethics/#comment-27

http://scarlettrose23.wordpress.com/2011/11/20/qualitative-vs-quantitative/#comment-64

http://amw1992.wordpress.com/2011/11/25/the-process-of-interpretative-phenomenological-analysis/#comment-28

http://prpsjj.wordpress.com/2011/11/22/can-the-qualitative-method-ever-be-as-scientific-as-the-quantitative-method/#comment-27

Thank you 🙂

Controversially I am going to say yes it is as scientific…words can show just as much as statistical numbers.

Qualitative data includes virtually any information that can be gathered which is not numerical. For instance the information gathered from interviews, direct observation or written documents form qualitative data. It has been described as an attempt to analyse and explain behavior in a rich and understanding way (Exeter University, 2011.

In contrast, quantitative research uses numerical data and usually takes the form of structured techniques…for example questionnaires or computer tasks. Findings are conclusive and usually descriptive in nature.

 Quantitative research aims to or support or disprove a hypothesis and to generalise the results to the wider population. However, qualitative research aims to gain an understanding and uncover trends in thought and opinion.

To many, quantitative research is seen as more scientific hands down. However it certainly can’t be said that qualitative research has not helped towards science or psychological research. Just because it doesn’t include statistical analysis does not mean the findings aren’t valid, right? Take Stainton and Besser’s (1998) qualitative study….that had very positive practical implications on research. It enabled them to gain in depth knowledge into the impact of children with an intellectual disability on their families.

Qualitative research provides detail and richness into what is being researched. Say for example two researchers are looking into the effects of drinking alcohol. One researcher uses a quantative method: an online questionnaire, the other researcher users a qualitative method: a semi structured interview. The second researcher, using the qualitative method will gain more of an insight into the research question. They will be able to ask the participant to expand on certain points, or give reasoning for their answers. The first researcher however will be limited on how much detail they can gain from the answers on their questionnaire.

Yes qualitative research has been scrutinized for being subjective and open to interpretation, however methods have been brought in like the inter-rater reliability test. This is when transcriptions of data are checked by others in order to balance out any biases that may occur.

All in all I do not think that the qualitative method is any less scientific that the quantitative method, it is just another method of collecting data.

http://cmroberts87.wordpress.com/2011/10/28/%e2%80%9cis-it-possible-to-prove-a-research-hypothesis%e2%80%9d/#comment-20

http://prpdh.wordpress.com/2011/10/28/%e2%80%9cwhat-role-does-the-null-hypothesis-really-play-in-the-scientific-process%e2%80%9d/#comment-20

http://scarlettrose23.wordpress.com/2011/10/25/are-ethical-guidelines-there-to-be-broken/#comment-42

http://kfh1991.wordpress.com/2011/11/23/qualitative-research-isnt-as-scientific-as-quantitative-methods/#comment-22

Thanks 😀

Before the British Psychological Society adopted the ‘Code of Conduct’ in 1985 research had no guidelines or restrictions. Researchers were essentially allowed to do what they wanted without the concern for participant’s welfare. The introduction of ethical considerations has been a controversial topic and I am going to discuss this in my blog.

The Code of Conduct concentrates on four ethical principles: responsibility, respect, competence and integrity. It stresses the importance of protecting the participants who take part in the experiments.

The Code of Conduct has had a large influence on psychological research for example experiments that took place 50 years ago would not be allowed to be carried out today. In many ways this is for the better. Experiments like Zimbardo’s Standford Prison experiment (1971) caused participants harm in the way that they were subject to torture and psychological distress so much so that the experiment had to be stopped. Without the input from the British Psychological Society experiments like these would still be able to continue despite the lack of rigour surrounding participant’s interests.  If the Code of Conduct didn’t exist, surely people would stop volunteering and signing up to participant in experiments if there was a risk of harm. Isn’t it the researcher’s job to look after their participants anyway? They are enabling you to carry out the experiment after all.

Although there are clearly many benefits to having ethical considerations and guidelines some feel like it has become a hindrance when carrying out research. It can be argued that it restricts experiments and limits its findings. For example take the guidelines for deception, isn’t this a little hard to follow? We need to deceive participants to a certain degree in order to keep the aims of the study under wraps. If Milgram’s (1963) shocking experiment hadn’t used deception (the deception was pretending the participants were actually being shocked) the only way around it would be that shocks were actually given! Surely that is much worse than being deceived?

In conclusion I think that the Code of Conduct is an extremely important and essential set of guidelines for all researchers. If they hadn’t been put into place, experiments like Zimbardo’s may still be being carried out as the idea of right and wrong (in respect to experiments) won’t have been challenged before. Researchers need to actively accept their responsibility to protect participants and carry out ethical pieces of research.