1. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Chapter 11 The Ecology of the Experiment: The Scientist and Research Participant in Relation to Their Environment @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning

2. Topics 1.Ecology 2.Experimenter Factors 3.Subject Factors 4.Cultural and Social Bias

3. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Ecology

4. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Ecology Scientific study of the relationship of living organisms with each other and their environment (Miller, 1988) Ecology of the psychological experiment – Examine the relationships among: The scientist The research participant The experimental situation

5. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Ecology (cont’d.) Ecological validity – Seeks to determine whether the impacts of the important relationships among the scientist, the participant, and the context have been considered fully in evaluating a given piece of research Our goal in science: – Use science to ask questions and to increase our understanding of a given phenomenon Not to perform a perfect experiment

6. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Experimental Factors

7. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Experimenter Factors Experimenter effects: portion of the results of an experiment affected by the attitudes or behavior of the experimenter Two types of experimenter effects: – Those due to biased data collection by the experimenter – Those stemming from the experimenter’s biasing the participant’s performance

8. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Biased Data Collection Potential source of bias: individuality Two experimenters may see the world differently Astronomer named Bessel – One of the first researchers to point out the effect that inherent differences in experimenters can have on the data they record

9. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Biased Data Collection (cont’d.) Personal equation: the constant error in the observations of different scientists Common procedure in an observational or rating experiment – Use two or more independent observers Correlation between two raters: interrater reliability

10. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Biased Data Collection (cont’d.) The higher the correlation between the ratings of two independent observers – The less the ratings represent inconsistent subjective factors of the raters Source of experimenter bias: personality If an experimenter makes an error recording a single piece of data – That error is most likely to be in support of the research hypothesis (Rosenthal, 1979)

11. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Biased Data Collection (cont’d.) A scientist can influence the outcome – Barber (1976) suggests that some of our more famous scientists may have presented their data as being more precise than was possible during the time in which they lived Commission on Research Integrity – Established by the National Institutes of Health

12. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Biased Data Collection (cont’d.) Experimenter bias can: – Affect the data the experimenter records – Exert a strong influence on the theoretical interpretation of the finding Scientists may choose to view their own and other scientists’ results from a biased position

13. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Biased Interactions With Research Participants Consider yourself a participant – Hypothesis: more college men than women dream about violating social taboos Imagine what type of person you would be: – Most willing to tell your uncommon dreams – Least likely to tell your dreams Research participants might react differently to different experimenters

14. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Biased Interactions With Research Participants (cont’d.) Classic study: Rosenthal and Jacobson (1966) – Teachers were told that certain students (chosen at random) had shown great promise on an IQ test – Students did show increased achievement gains 8 months later – Teachers treated the randomly selected group in a different manner than those who were not named by the researchers as having great promise

15. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Biased Interactions With Research Participants (cont’d.) Task of the scientist and the witness – To ask whether experimenter bias might influence either the treatment of participants or the collection of the data Examine human behavior and experience in its complexity – Including the manner in which scientists and participants interact

16. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Some Ways to Avoid Experimenter Bias Use several different experimenters Keep the person who is interacting with the participants blind to: – The hypothesis and – The particular groups with which he or she is working Try consciously to see the experiment from varying perspectives

17. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Subject Factors

18. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Subject Factors Potential source of misinterpretation Present when the research participants are not behaving in the way we expect them to behave – Highly motivated – Behave in a way that will support or sabotage the experiment

19. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Subject Factors (cont’d.) Experiment conducted in the 1930s – Hawthorne plant of Western Electric Determine how factors such as lighting and working hours affect productivity – Participants were a group of women – In many cases, the productivity increased – Even increased under a condition in which the lighting in the experimental condition was not as good as that in the actual plant

20. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Subject Factors (cont’d.) Women had been given special attention just by being in an experiment Hawthorne effect – Warning to experimenters that humans may respond differently to the knowledge that they are part of a research study

21. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Placebo Factors Potential problem in an experiment Placebo: from the Latin verb placere, “to please” Phenomenon that some people show physiological changes just from the suggestion that a change will take place

22. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Placebo Factors (cont’d.) Double-blind experiment – One group is given the actual treatment – The other is given a treatment exactly like the experimental treatment, but without the active ingredient The term double-blind – Indicates that the physicians or nurses giving the medication also do not know which medication is experimental and which is placebo

23. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Demand Characteristics Occur when a participant’s response is influenced more by the research setting than by the independent variable Pose a significant threat to internal validity Offer an alternative explanation for understanding the influence of the independent variable

24. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Cultural and Social Bias

25. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Cultural and Social Bias Science is not immune to a shared cultural view People who go to an outpatient psychiatric facility for intervention – Often receive treatment based on factors such as their ethnic backgrounds – African Americans: psychopharmacological interventions – Caucasians: verbal psychotherapy

26. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Cultural and Social Bias (cont’d.) In 1994, the U.S. National Institutes of Health implemented a policy – Required all federally funded research involving human participants to include women and members of minority groups Paradigm – An accepted worldview – Ideas about the value of what one is doing – Specific assumptions about how the world operates

27. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Cultural and Social Bias (cont’d.) At one time, it was considered impossible to have a scientific study of consciousness – Consciousness has now become an important focus for the neurosciences Previous paradigm emphasized the negative and pathological – Today’s view includes a positive psychology

28. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Cultural and Social Bias (cont’d.) We introduce a bias into our scientific research by – Letting the believed limitations of our time restrict the scope of our vision Every scientist holds limited views of the world – This is not the issue – The point is to realize that this is the case

29. @ 2012 Wadsworth, Cengage Learning Summary Experimenter effects: changes in the dependent variable produced by the attitude or behavior of the experimenter Research participants may bias an experiment Placebo effect: a suggestion of change actually produces a change Demand characteristics: research participants’ being more influenced by the experimental setting than by the independent variable