Research methods: a process of inquiry

430 Pages·83.384 MB·English

by  Graziano, Anthony M;Raulin, Michael L

Pearson New International Edition

Research Methods
A Process of Inquiry
Anthony M. Graziano Michael L. Raulin
Eighth Edition
International_PCL_TP.indd 1 7/29/13 11:23 AM
ISBN 10: 1-292-04216-8
ISBN 13: 978-1-292-04216-9
Pearson Education Limited
Edinburgh Gate
Harlow
Essex CM20 2JE
England and Associated Companies throughout the world
Visit us on the World Wide Web at: www.pearsoned.co.uk
© Pearson Education Limited 2014
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted
in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without either the
prior written permission of the publisher or a licence permitting restricted copying in the United Kingdom
issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency Ltd, Saffron House, 6–10 Kirby Street, London EC1N 8TS.
All trademarks used herein are the property of their respective owners. The use of any trademark
in this text does not vest in the author or publisher any trademark ownership rights in such
trademarks, nor does the use of such trademarks imply any affi liation with or endorsement of this
book by such owners.
ISBN 10: 1-292-04216-8
ISBN 10: 1-269-37450-8
ISBN 13: 978-1-292-04216-9
ISBN 13: 978-1-269-37450-7
British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Printed in the United States of America
Copyright_Pg_7_24.indd 1 7/29/13 11:28 AM
1112222333792570369351517117755917
P E A R S O N C U S T O M L I B R AR Y
Table of Contents
1. Curiosity, Creativity, and Commitment
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 1
2. Research is a Process of Inquiry
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 35
3. The Starting Point: Asking Questions
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 71
4. Data and the Nature of Measurement
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 97
5. Statistical Analysis of Data
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 121
6. Correlational and Differential Methods of Research
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 151
7. Field Research: Naturalistic and Case Study Research
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 177
8. Hypothesis Testing, Validity, and Threats to Validity
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 207
9. Controls to Reduce Threats to Validity
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 235
10. Single-Variable, Independent-Groups Designs
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 265
11. Correlated-Groups and Single-Subject Designs
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 299
12. Factorial Designs
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 331
Note to Students on the Nature of Scientific Discoveries
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 357
I
333334445678901195537517
Appendix: Using the Student Resource Website
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 359
Appendix: Writing a Research Report in APA Publication Style
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 365
Appendix: Conducting Library Research
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 375
Appendix: Selecting Statistical Procedures
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 383
Appendix: Research Design Checklist
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 397
Appendix: Meta-Analysis
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 405
Appendix: Random Numbers
Anthony M. Graziano/Michael L. Raulin 411
Index 417
II
cuRiosity, cReativity,
and coMMitMent
Among scientists are collectors, classifiers, and compulsive tidiers-up; many are
detectives by temperament, and many are explorers; some are artists, and others arti-
sans. There are poet-scientists, philosopher scientists, and even a few mystics.
—Peter Bryan Medawar, The Art of the Soluble, 1967
Classic Studies 1:Kitty Genovese and Bystander The Scientific Revolution
Apathy The Goals of Science
active leaRning Psychology
The History of Psychology
science
Structuralism
Science Is a Way of Thinking
Functionalism
Asking Questions
Psychodynamics
Historical Lesson 1: The Three Princes of Serendip
Gestalt Psychology
Science and Art
Behaviorism
Historical Lesson 2: Leonardo da Vinci
Humanistic Psychology
acquiRing KnoWledge Cognitive Psychology
Tenacity Women and Minorities in Psychology
Intuition Modern Psychology
Authority The Science of Psychology
Rationalism The Cost of Neglect 1: Science and Pseudoscience
Empiricism ethical PRinciPles
Science
using the ResouRces of this text
eMeRgence of science Exploring the Student Resource Website
Early Civilization suMMaRy
Greek Science
Putting it into PRactice
Medieval Science
exeRcises
Web ResouRce MateRial
see the following sections on the website for expanded material.
01 A Primer on Logic 05 APA Divisions
02 History of Science 06 PASW Tutorials
03 History of Psychology 07 Study Guide/Lab Manual
04 Evolution and Psychology 08 Links to Related Internet Sites
From Chapter 1 of Research Methods: A Process of Inquiry, Eighth Edition. Anthony M. Graziano and Michael L.
Raulin. Copyright © 2013 by Pearson Education, Inc. All rights reserved.
1
CuRIoSITy, CREATIvITy, AnD CoMMITMEnT
For us, research is the most fascinating, engaging, challenging, and rewarding part of psychology.
Perhaps you might not share our enthusiasm and are even a little wary of a course on research
methods. However, consider this idea: you conduct informal psychological research every day.
Each time you observe people and try to figure out what they are thinking and what they are going
to do next, you are conducting psychological research. Whenever you try a new strategy to lose
weight, improve your study habits, or impress someone, you are conducting informal psychological
research. Think about it.
In this course, you will learn about the formalized research strategies that psychologists use
to answer questions about behavior, and you will discover that research questions are endless. For
example, Darley and Latané (1968) wanted to know when people are most likely to come to the aid
of someone in need of help. Ainsworth (1993) asked how parents could build a secure relationship
with their children. Barlow (2002) wanted to know who is most likely to develop a panic disorder.
Mroczek and Avron (2007) asked if increasing neuroticism in older men is related to a lower sur-
vival rate. Damisch et al. (2010) asked if common superstitious behavior, like knocking on wood,
helps to improve performance. Lammers et al. (2010) wondered if moral hypocrisy increased with
elevated social power, and van Kleef et al. (2008) asked if elevated social power makes people less
compassionate toward others.
These are only a few of the thousands of issues studied by psychologists. you could create
your own interesting questions. Try it. What questions are interesting to you?
Darley and Latané (1968) opened a classic line of research that was stimulated by a particu-
larly gruesome crime with a shocking twist. The crime, the twist, and the research are discussed in
Classic Studies 1 as an illustration of the kinds of questions addressed in psychological laboratories.
classic studies 1 Kitty genovese and bystandeR aPathy
She was a young lady simply walking home when she also a more puzzling one, defying common sense, and
was attacked. She was stabbed repeatedly and died. It it may have been the unfathomable idea that so many
was a senseless tragedy that on its own would have people could have ignored the fate of this young lady
warranted psychological scrutiny. But it was not the that cried out for an answer. If you cannot be safe with
murder that shocked people, which by itself might say so many people around, you can never be safe.
something about our society. It was the fact that at As you think about this event and try to under-
least 38 known witnesses observed the attack, which stand it, you will likely find yourself with lots of ques-
took place over several minutes, and not one person tions and no basis in your own experience to begin to
came to Ms. Genovese’s aide. no one even called answer those questions. you are likely to come back
the police. Most of the witnesses were in their own to the number of 38—the number of known witnesses
apartments, safe from the knife-wielding attacker who did nothing.
and just feet from a telephone. Moreover, there was one you might understand; even 2 or 3, but 38?
no evidence that the witnesses were callous; no evi- It was that fact that intrigued two psychologists:
dence that they thought Ms. Genovese got what she Darley and Latané. Logic might dictate that the more
deserved; in fact, many were terribly distressed by that people around to help, the higher the probability that
event. yet no one even called the police. Why? someone in need will get help. Surely some of those
Admittedly, this is a more dramatic question 38 people would be good Samaritans. But Darley and
than the ones typically faced by psychologists. It is Latané (1968) wondered about that logic, and they used
2
CuRIoSITy, CREATIvITy, AnD CoMMITMEnT
the science of psychology to test some of their specula- There are so many questions—important
tions. What they found in a series of studies was coun- questions—for psychologists to address. We do not
terintuitive, but not without its own logic. Instead of the just need answers; we need good answers that will
probability of getting help increasing when the number help us to understand, and more importantly, help
of witnesses to the event increases, it decreases, and us to overcome problems. Good answers are the re-
it decreases dramatically. They explained this finding
sult of good questions and careful research to answer
with a concept called diffusion of responsibility. If you
these questions. Darley and Latané asked the right
are the only one who can help, you are likely to feel a
question; they translated that question into clever,
responsibility to help. If there are several other people
well-designed, and ethical research. They helped us
available to help, you might reason that someone else
to understand something that seemed incomprehen-
will help. unfortunately, everyone is thinking the same
sible. That is why their study is a classic in the field
way, and so no one helps. It was not an accident that
of psychology.
the witnesses to Ms. Genovese’s murder were aware
that there were many other witnesses. They probably
thought that someone else had called for help.
active leaRning
Before you get into the main content of this chapter, we want to pass on some ideas we have gained
over the years about effective studying. Consider this scenario; we have all experienced it. you
block out time to study, make yourself comfortable, and start to read a couple of chapters of your
psychology text. over several hours, you dutifully read every page of those two chapters. Shortly
after you finish, you realize that you have no idea what you read. you have read every word, and
not one sunk in!
Is that a familiar event? So, why did it happen and how can you prevent it from happening
again? Let’s face it, you do not have study time to waste.
The principle of what happened is simple. By the time you have reached college, you are so
good at reading that it has become an overlearned, fully automatic behavior that you can carry out
without much thought. Most of us can read automatically, as well as walk, drive, or ride a bicycle.
However, when you were learning these things, they were not automatic and so they required a lot
of attention. If you are learning a foreign language, you know that reading in your native language
may be automatic, but reading in a new language is anything but automatic. The advantage of au-
tomatic behavior is that it takes little of our cognitive capacity, and thus, much of that capacity is
available to do other things. A good typist thinks the words and they appear on the screen. Weak
typists have to think about the words, and hunt for and peck the letters. Because they are using so
much cognitive capacity typing, they often lose their train of thought.
We can easily read without thinking, but we cannot learn new concepts without thinking. Sure,
you read every word, but that is all you did. you did not think about what you read. you did not learn
the material. If instead, you had stopped after each paragraph and asked what you had read, what it
meant, and if you understood it, you would have remembered it, or at least remembered more of it.
Granted, it takes you longer to read this way, but you will learn far more in each pass.
Students tend to read chapters by skipping over the “unimportant” stuff, which for most
students seems to include the chapter outlines, chapter summaries, footnotes, and exercises. The
3
CuRIoSITy, CREATIvITy, AnD CoMMITMEnT
students’ reasoning is that these sections are superfluous, containing nothing different from the ma-
terial in the chapter. However, these sections are there to facilitate active learning.
Before plunging into the chapter, take 60 seconds to go over the chapter outline and you will
have a sense of what to expect in the chapter. This preparation gives you a structure for organizing
and learning the new material as you read it. If you concentrate on the summaries, carefully ask-
ing yourself if you understand every point, you will identify what you do not understand and your
studying will be more effective. Take the time to do the exercises, and you will find that you will
learn the material at a level impossible to reach by just reading. you will also remember it longer,
will be able to recall it in more situations, and will be able to use it, for example, in examinations.
How many times have you faced an exam question that you knew you knew, but you could not re-
member it in time to get the question correct? When you actively use ideas in different ways, you
will recall them more easily in different situations.
Active learning has two advantages. The first is that ideas or procedures that seem clear when
you read them may not be at all clear later when you try to use them. Active learning can tell us
when we really do not understand a concept, thus allowing us to go back to clear up our confusion.
The second advantage is that active learning is more dependable. you learn things better, sometimes
dramatically better, when you learn actively. We hope that this brief aside at the beginning of this
text will help you to use the text more effectively.
science
Psychology is the scientific study of behavior. To understand the science of psychology, you need
to know something of science. The following text offers you a background on the history and phi-
losophy of science and research.
science is a Way of thinking
science, one of several ways of learning about the world, uses systematic observation
and rational processes to create new knowledge. Scientists seek knowledge through a re-
fined process of questioning. We want you to know that in science, knowing how to ask
questions is as crucial as knowing how to answer them. Keep this basic idea in mind:
scientific research is a process of creating specific questions and then systematically finding
answers. Science is a process of inquiry—a particular way of thinking.
This process of inquiry generates useful tools and products, such as laboratory equipment,
statistical procedures, computers, medicines, and consumer goods. Too often, people mistake the
tools and products of science for its essence, but that view is inaccurate; the essence of science is
the scientist’s ways of thinking—the logic used in systematically asking and answering questions.
A scientist can operate scientifically while sitting under a tree in the woods, thinking through a
problem, and using apparatus no more technical than paper and pencil. It is not the bubbling liquids
and laboratory equipment that make a discipline like chemistry scientific. Likewise, knowing how
to use an electron microscope or run a computer program does not make one a scientist. The im-
age of the white-coated laboratory worker surrounded by complex machines is a common visual
metaphor, but it does not portray the essence of science any more than a skyscraper really scrapes
4
CuRIoSITy, CREATIvITy, AnD CoMMITMEnT
the sky. The essence of science is its way of thinking and the disciplined ways in which scientists
pose and answer questions. Logical processes and demands for evidence, not technologies, lie at
the center of science. Keep this in mind: science is an intellectual process aimed at understanding
the natural universe.
asking questions
Asking questions is not new. Socrates and his students asked sophisticated questions over two
thousand years ago. A question is one side of an idea; on the other side is an unknown—a potential
answer. Every question points to an unknown, to some area of human ignorance or uncertainty.
Socrates knew, apparently to his delight, that posing sharp questions about religion, politics, and
morality could reveal the ignorance and uncertainties of even the most dignified citizens. unfortu-
nately for Socrates, the good citizens were made so uncomfortable that they executed him as a sub-
versive and corrupter of youth. It was thus established early in history that asking questions could
be hazardous to one’s health.
nevertheless, risk taking is part of science. Those who raise questions and expose ignorance
create social and political strains, and often these people suffer reprisals. nicolaus Copernicus
(1473–1543) and Galileo Galilei (1564–1642) challenged church dogma concerning the nature of
the solar system. Copernicus knew the risk of church reprisals, and he delayed the publication of
his work showing that the Earth revolved around the sun. It was finally published after his death,
although many scientists already had clandestine copies. nearly a century later, Galileo was more
outspoken and endured years of house arrest by the church for “blasphemy.”
In the 1860s, Charles Darwin, Alfred Russel Wallace, and others implicitly challenged the
biblical account of creation, asserting that the earth was millions of years old and that creatures
evolved over time. However, such conflicts are not limited to the distant past. Consider the trial of
John T. Scopes in 1925 (the “Monkey Trial”). Scopes, a public school science teacher, was con-
victed of violating a Tennessee law that prohibited teaching Darwinian evolution in public schools.
The guilty verdict was later voided on a technicality, but the scripture-based Tennessee law re-
mained until 1965. The debate continues. For example, some public school boards and some ad-
ministrators have tried to suppress the teaching of evolution in high school biology texts (Matus,
2008). In an important decision, however, a federal judge ruled it unconstitutional to teach intel-
ligent design as an alternative to evolution in high school biology classes, arguing that it was a
religious belief rather than a scientific theory (Goodstein, 2005).
Governments often try to suppress scientific knowledge. For example, in 2003, the u.S. De-
partment of the Treasury ruled that American researchers could no longer edit scientific papers
written by scientists from Iran, although the government later softened this stance (Bhattacharjee,
2003, 2004). Some states, caught up in political controversy, have proposed outlawing some types
of stem cell research (Belluck, 2005). More recently, the union of Concerned Scientists (2005,
2010) has expressed its concerns about governmental interference with science.
Although scientific information upsets some people, scientists thrive on new knowledge.
Scientists are pervasive skeptics, challenging accepted wisdom in their search for more complete
answers. They are willing to tolerate uncertainty, and they find intellectual excitement in raising
questions and seeking answers about nature (Sternberg & Lubart, 1992). Asking a question is a
creative endeavor, allowing scientists the personal satisfaction of exercising their curiosity. “What,”
“how,” and “why” are critical words in the scientist’s vocabulary. Curiosity may have killed the cat,
5