THANK

Research YOU
Philosophy
Lecture 1
Introduction to Scientific Research
Introduction to Scientific Research
Traditional Methods of Acquiring Knowledge (1 of 3)

• Authority – A basis for acceptance of information because it is acquired from a

highly respected source
• Problem – information or facts might be inaccurate especially if the
authority is not an expert in the area of inquiry
• Can be used when the problem is being identified and the hypothesis is
being formed
• Can be used in the design phase of a study
• Can be used when interpreting the data or how they fit with other data in
the field
• An authority is an expert whose facts and information are subject to
testing using the scientific process
Traditional Methods of Acquiring Knowledge (2 of 3)

• Rationalism – The acquisition of knowledge through reasoning

• approach claims that formal deductive reasoning can be used to arrive at new
knowledge
• assumes that valid knowledge is acquired only when the correct reasoning processes
are used.
• René Descartes (1596–1650)
• believed that knowledge derived from reason was just as valid as, and often superior to,
knowledge gained from observation
• Problem - it is not unusual for two individuals to use reasoning to reach different
conclusions.
• Scientists make use of reasoning
• to derive hypotheses and to identify the outcomes that would be required if the hypotheses
are true.
• Rationalism can be very important for science, but by itself it is insufficient.
Traditional Methods of Acquiring Knowledge (3 of 3)

• Empiricism – The acquisition of knowledge through experience

• A systematic and well-developed philosophy is traced to John
Locke (1632–1704) and David Hume (1711–1776)
• Argued that virtually all knowledge is based on experience.
• Locke - tabula rasa
• Problems if used alone
• Our perceptions are affected by a number of variables
• Our memory for events does not remain constant
• Must be conducted under controlled conditions
• Systematic strategies must be used to minimize researcher and
participant bias and to maximize objectivity
The Scientific Approach to Knowledge Generation (1 of 7)

• Science- The approach to producing knowledge used by

researchers employing the methods of science
• Ancient origins in the Latin verb scire, meaning “to know.”
• The English word “science,” coined by William Whewell
(1794–1866) during the 19th century

• Is designed to systematically produce reliable and valid

knowledge about the natural world.
• The enterprise of science relies on multiple logics,
strategies, and methods to produce scientific knowledge.
• Each scientific approach has its particular strengths and
limitations and is usable in certain situations.
The Scientific Approach to Knowledge Generation (2 of 7)

• Induction – A reasoning process that involves going from the specific to

general
• The use of statistical analysis in psychological research can be
considered inductive reasoning.
• When researchers rely on samples and generalize to populations
• A probabilistic form of reasoning provides statements of what is likely to
be true and/or occur in the future, based on current observations.
• Deduction – A reasoning process that involves going from the general to the
specific
• Classically defined by Aristotle
• When researchers develop hypotheses, they routinely deduce the
observable consequences that must occur if they are going to claim
(after collecting data) that the hypothesis is supported or not supported.
The Scientific Approach to Knowledge Generation (3 of 7)

• Science makes use of both inductive and deductive

thinking
• Induction drives the exploratory or discovery arm of
science
• Deduction drives the knowledge testing arm of
science.
The Scientific Approach to Knowledge Generation (4 of 7)

• Hypothesis testing - The process of testing a predicted relationship or

hypothesis by making observations and then comparing the observed
facts with the hypothesis or predicted relationship.
• Hypothesis testing relies on the logic of confirmation.
• Classical hypothesis testing occurs when the researcher hopes to
verify the hypothesis as true
• Criticized by the philosopher of science Karl Popper (1902–
1994).
• Popper pointed out that the verification of hypotheses was
based on a logical fallacy (known as affirming the
consequent).
• Popper argued that science should rest on a deductively valid
form of reasoning (1968).
The Scientific Approach to Knowledge Generation (5 of 7)

• Falsificationism- A deductive approach to science that focuses

on falsifying hypotheses as the key criterion of science
• strength - it helps eliminate false theories from science.
• criticisms- focus is only on falsification and completely
rejects induction and the logic of confirmation.
• Duhem–Quine principle - states that a hypothesis cannot be
tested in isolation from other assumptions
• Psychologists today rely on a hybrid (i.e., mixture) approach to
hypothesis testing that includes probabilistic thinking,
preponderance of evidence, and a mixture of classical
hypothesis testing and Popper’s falsification approach
The Scientific Approach to Knowledge Generation (6 of 7)

• Science in the 21st Century

• The job of a scientist continues to be to produce reliable and valid

knowledge about the natural world.
• Today’s science relies on many approaches that have been
shown to be useful in producing warranted and justified
knowledge.
• Science uses both inductive and deductive approaches.
• Science attempts to discover patterns and test hypotheses
about the patterns with new people in different places.
• Science also continues to look for new approaches to help the
advancement of knowledge.
The Scientific Approach to Knowledge Generation (7 of 7)

• Science in the 21st Century

• Scientists must be curious, skeptical, creative, and systematic.

• The scientist’s personal wishes and attitudes should not affect his
or her observations.
• Science is the preferred way of acquiring reliable, valid, and
practical knowledge (i.e., trustworthy knowledge) about the
natural world.
• Science must always conduct research ethically
• Objectivity- goal in science to eliminate or minimize opinion or
bias in the conduct of research
Assumptions Underlying Scientific Research (1 of 3)
• Regularity in Nature
• B. F. Skinner (1904–1990)
• science is “a search for order, for uniformities, for lawful relations among the events in
nature” (1953, 3).
• If there were no regularity in nature, there could be no understanding, explanation, or
knowledge about nature.
• Without regularity, we could not develop theories or laws or generalizations.
• Determinism – the belief that mental process and behaviors are fully caused by prior
natural factors
• In our efforts to uncover the laws of psychology, we attempt to identify the variables that
are linked together in a causal chain. These causal chains describe probabilistic causes
• Probabilistic causes – a weaker form of determinism that indicates regularities that
usually but not always occur
• The goal of science is to continue to investigate and increase understanding of these
complex patterns.
Assumptions Underlying Scientific Research (2 of 3)

• Reality in Nature- the assumption that the things we see,

hear, feel, smell, and taste are real
• In science, researchers check reality in many ways to
obtain objective evidence that what is claimed is true.
• Researchers interact with a natural world (that includes
social objects such as attitudes, beliefs, institutions), and,
in science, this reality must have primary say in our
scientific claims. This is why researchers collect and
analyze data.
Assumptions Underlying Scientific Research (3 of 3)

• Discoverability - the assumption it is possible to discover the

regularities that exist in nature
• Nature is very reluctant to reveal its secrets.
• Scientists have been working on discovering the cause and
cure for cancer for decades.
• An intensive effort is also taking place within the scientific
community to identify the causes of autism.
• Discoverability incorporates two components
• The first is discovery of the pieces of the puzzle
• The second is putting the pieces together, or discovery of
the nature of the total picture.
Characteristics of Scientific Research (1 of 7)

• Empirical - Research that is based on data

• Science relies on data collected using the tools of science such as
experiments and systematic observations.
• Two important points
• First, in scientific writing, the word data is usually used as the plural
form of datum.
• Researchers usually say “the data were” rather than “the data
was,” and they say “the data are” rather than “the data is.”
• Second, science sometimes relies on deductive logics such as
mathematics to provide answers to some of its questions.
• Even when mathematical conclusions are made, these
conclusions are then turned into predictions that are tested with
new empirical data.
Characteristics of Scientific Research (2 of 7)

• Control- holding constant or eliminating the influence of extraneous variables

so that you can make unambiguous claims about cause and effect
• Extraneous variable- a variable that might compete with the presumed
causal variable in explaining the outcome.
• One of the most important tasks of the psychological researcher is to
identify causal relationships, and without control for extraneous
variables, this is not possible.
• Experiments are the preferred research method when you need to
address the issue of cause and effect.
• Placebo effect- Improvement due to participants’ expectations for
improvement rather than the actual treatment
• Randomized controlled trials (RCT)- An experiment where participants
are randomly assigned to the groups
Characteristics of Scientific Research (3 of 7)
• Operationalization of Constructs
• It is absolutely essential that we have good empirical
measurement of the constructs in our research studies.
• Without good measurement, you cannot trust the results
reported in a research study.
• Operationalizing a construct- Identifying an instrument (or
set of instruments) to accurately measure a construct
• operational definition- The result of operationalizing a
construct
• Once this construct has been operationalized, meaning can
be communicated with minimal ambiguity and maximum
precision.
Example of an Operationalization of a Good Car Salesperson
Characteristics of Scientific Research (4 of 7)
• Replication - the reproduction of the results of a study in a new
study
• Key point: You should always be cautious when interpreting
findings from a single study in isolation from other research.
• To make a general claim, you must know whether the same
results will be found if the study is repeated.
• If the findings are not repeatable, they were either due to
chance or they operate differently in different contexts or
with different people.
• If the variables of interest operate differently in different
contexts, then contextual factors must be systematically
examined in additional research.
Characteristics of Scientific Research (5 of 7)

• Replication
• Although the need for replication is a central characteristic
of scientific research, few researchers devote their time and
energy to exact replication
• Open Science Collaboration (2015)
• Partial replication is seen when the key variables of interest
are included in multiple research studies that are slightly
different.
• Meta-analysis - a quantitative technique for describing the
relationship between variables across multiple research
studies
Characteristics of Scientific Research (6 of 7)

• Evidence not Proof

• Researchers rarely use the words prove or proof in regard
to their scientific claim. (You will hear advertisers claiming
proof.)
• Science provides evidence that varies from very weak to
very strong.
• In empirical research, we leave open the possibility that
future research could show that we have made a mistake
when viewed from a new perspective or with new data.
Characteristics of Scientific Research (7 of 7)

• Evidence not Proof

• The key point is that when you read published
scientific reports, you will not see researchers making
claims of proof—you will see researchers providing
and discussing the evidence for their probabilistic
claims.
• You should remove the word “proof” from your
discussion and replace it with the word “evidence.”