Stimulating Critical Thinking, Creativity, and Active Learning The Design Critique: Stimulating Critical Thinking, Creativity, and Active Learning in Research Ethics and Methodology Richard W. Bowen Department of Psychology Loyola University Chicago Chicago, Illinois 60660

The Design Critique, A Learning Tool for Research Methods in Psychology 1. Design Critique is a one-page description of a hypothetical research scenario that is deliberately flawed in various ethical and technical ways. 2. “Design Critiques” are a pedagogical and learning evaluation feature of the course. 3. My students create Design Critiques for in-class presentation, with the class identifying flaws, and suggesting ways of correcting them during subsequent discussion. 4. They also respond to instructor-created Design Critiques in essay-format quizzes. 5. As a pedagogical exercise, the Design Critique is intended to deepen understanding of the essential ethical and technical considerations in psychological research. 6. Design critiques are also an opportunity for students to exercise their creativity and writing skills in applying knowledge from the course to plausible research scenarios.

The Two “Golden Rules” of Experimental Methodology and Ethics Randomize, Manipulate, Measure, and Control Minimize Risk to Participants and Protect Dignity and Privacy

Two Examples of Student-Generated Design Critiques Design Critique #1 Due Tuesday of week 4, two class sessions devoted to presenting and criticism. Intended to be primarily ethical in nature. Design Critique #3 Due Tuesday of the last week of class, two sessions. Intended to be primarily technical in nature.

file:///.file/id=6571367.13186481

Two Examples of Design Critiques Used for Student Evaluation in Essay Quizzes The first example is from an early-semester Design Critique Quiz and emphasizes ethical flaws. The second example is from a late-semester Design Critique Quiz and emphasizes technical flaws. In each case, the instructions were: “Identify Technical and Ethical Defects in the research and suggest ways, if any, to correct these flaws.”  

A social psychologist conducts a field study at a local bar that is popular with college students. The investigator is interested in observing flirting techniques, and instructs his two male and two female confederates to smile and make eye contact with others (of the opposite sex) at the bar for varying amounts of time (2 seconds, 4 seconds, or 16 seconds) and varying numbers of times (once, twice, four times). The investigator observes the responses of those receiving the gaze using a behavioral check list. He shows that making eye contact for 2 seconds just twice is enough to elicit reverse eye contact (participant looks confederate in the eye). Each observation ends when reverse eye contact occurs. In the course of the observations, several of the participants actively pursued their confederate, both male and female, and several offered to buy the confederate a Cosmo.

A 2 X 3 factorial design was used to evaluate the effectiveness of an experimental drug (NEWOB) on the treatment of schizophrenia. Two patient classifications were used: (1) new admissions to a particular mental hospital, and (2) patients who had been institutionalized at the same hospital for at least two years. Patients received one of three levels of drug dosage, either 3, 6, or 9 grams per day. There were 20 patients in each of the six resulting groups. In addition to administering the drug, the experimenters rated each patient each week as to the presence or absence of schizophrenic symptoms. After two months, it was found that very few (5-10%) of long-term patients had improved, regardless of dosage level. It was also found that approximately 50 percent of the newly arrived patients had improved in each of the three dose levels. The researchers concluded that (1) NEWOB is effective only for new arrivals and not for chronic cases and (2) a dosage of 3 grams a day is sufficient to maximize the effectiveness of the drug.