research methods exam 1

What are the three main components of communication research?

(three different world views, process of epistemologies) 1. Problem posing- research questions do not arrive "pre-posed"- have to decide what the question is- once you have clearly defined the question, the rest of your research falls into place usually- very hard human process involving personal interest in the topic, the feasibility of doing research, tangible and intangible 2. Problem solving- having posed a question, we face the problem of how best to answer it- more than selecting a research method and using it- it can involve amending your methods as they prove to be inappropriate, discovering other questions that must be answered before your "real" question can be answered- changing your research altogether when someone published a "breakthrough" study that gives you a whole set of new ideas about your research- finding new questions about opening up 3. Peer persuasion- trying to position ourselves as being credible on the subject, going to a conference- research has no value to the world unless the world knows about it- academic publication is a process of persuasion- journal and book editors and reviewers must be persuaded that your research is to gain recognition- process of persuasion and argumentation even though it is couched in the language of scholarship and conducted via the printed or electronic page- researchers can be prone to error and to ethical lapses

Interpretive research perspective

-*Observe*, interpret from *participants' perspectives.* -*Nothing real or true about this world, nothing is objective, entirely subjective*- -finding people's truths as a researcher, *very involved*

What are the two ways to cite in-text? What do you include?

-APA uses an "author-date" style in the body of the text: (D'Alton, 2018) -In-text citations include the last names of the author(s) and the year of publication 1. Parenthetical: Disclosure of bipolar disorder can be a significant turning point in romantic relationships (Yoshimura & Parrish, 2018). 2. Woven: Yoshimura and Parrish (2018) found that disclosure of bipolar disorder can be a significant turning point in romantic relationships, and Petronio (2002) has identified multiple rules that individuals follow in choosing when and how to disclose private information.

Critical research perspective

-Ask *whose interests are advanced by communication*. -Takes interpretation one step further -now looking for what is *implicit or unsaid* -*skewed towards one group with a power dynamic*, works from a basic assumption that communication maintains and promotes power structures in society -*focus is on relationship, implicit or explicit*, between the message source and recipient than just one component of the communication process -a researcher many discover that anti-texting advertising more frequently portrays young woman as more likely to text while driving then young men: so researcher asks: "who's interests are advanced by such portrayals?"

What are the ethical issues involved in honesty?

-Deception can be part of legitimate and ethical studies, even though honesty is always the best policy -to be honest and reveal the "deception" up front may weaken the whole research design -professional codes of ethics allow deception by allowing deception in some research designs as long as the participants are made aware of the deception immediately after the study is concluded -also researchers have to report possible flaws in your research and negative results as well as the good news, researchers have a section where possible weakness are discussed in the study

Operationalizing constructs EX

-EX: you are interested in the relationship between video games and academic performance. You observe individuals who are heavily involved in such games. You conclude inductively that such people keep weird hours and some have peculiar personal habits, but that could be true for any group of people. Deductively, you reason through to two contrary conclusions: First, time spent on video gaming must detract from time spent on studying, therefore gaming must be detrimental to academic success. Second, gaming appears to need mental agility, the ability to think fast, make decisions, and imagination: Deductively, it seems gaming ought to have a particular effect on academic performance. -you have identified two important constructs: involvement in gaming and academic performance- you think there is a relationship between them, not sure what it is -operationalize them, you must define them in a way other researchers could replicate your study Involvement in gaming: Time spent on gaming, money spent on gaming, number of friendships in gaming clubs, number of online personas or avatars, etc Academic performance: class rank, number of academic awards, current GPA, class attendance, etc -some will be better measures than others -at the heart of many studies is what measures will be

What are the elements of the Declaration of Helsinki?

-Following Tuskgee study, established by World Medical Association in 1964 -established international ethical guidelines for medical professionals researching human subjects -continues to be revised but emphasizes: Research protocols must be *reviewed* by an independent committee prior to research *Informed consent* must be obtained from research participants Research must be conducted by medically or scientifically *qualified individuals* Research *risks should not exceed the benefits*

What is the IRB and why is it important?

-Institutional Review Board -used in formal reviewing, reviewing with respect to ethics and treatment of human participants -panel used specifically to review research proposals for their impact on human participants -IRB in some form on almost every campus -Communication research that does not involve physical impact on humans is not exempt from the IRB, protection involved physical just as much as psychological

What are the elements of the Belmont report?

-National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioral Research made this in 1979 -outlines three basic ethical principals in research with human subjects: Autonomy(self rule): Individuals should be treated with respect, persons with diminished autonomy are entitled to protection, applied through informed consent: subjects must be given the opportunity to choose what shall or shall not happen to them -informed consent must include: 1. information, 2. comprehension 3. Voluntariness Beneficence: research should maximize benefits and reduce harm, human subjects must not be harmed and efforts should be made to secure their well-being, applied through assessment of risks and benefits being assessed systematically Justice: The benefits and risks of research must be distributed fairly, everyone has an equal chance of getting picked for the study, applied through fair procedures and outcomes in the selection of research participants

Empirical research perspective

-Observe, *measure* from *researcher's perspective*. -"if i structure the research in the right way I can find something true about humans"- -uncertainty reducing - *objective* - *researcher getting out of way*

What are APA conventions for the formatting of a title page?

-Running head: TITLE OF PAPER- flush left, first page only, all caps -number in top right, flush right -upper middle of paper, centered, double spaced: Title of paper, Author, Affiliation(university of Montana)

What are the "overall formatting" rules for APA that I taught in class?

-Typed in 12 pt Times New Roman font -Double-spaced -1'' margins throughout -Printed on 8.5'' x 11'' paper -Header aligned to the left in the page header (Title of the paper, written in all caps) -Page number aligned to the right in the page header

starting points for research

-What? interest/area -Why? Reasons for research -How? Method decision -World view- basic assumptions:(empirical, interpretative, critical) -Research questions -hypotheses -work of others- make sure we aren't doing something someone else already did

When is it appropriate to cite using "et al." and what does that phrase mean?

-When there are 3-5authors -"and others" -If there are 3-5 authors for the source subsequent citations can be abbreviated: Additionally, Ngai et al. (2010) found that.... ...intercultural communication competence is paramount (Ngai et al., 2010). -If there are more than five authors the source can be referenced throughout the paper with only the first author's name, et al., and the date.

What are Boolean operators? How do they factor into literature searches?

-and/or/not -put them in search terms to put together terms we know are important to study, get rid of things we don't want to research -"communication" by itself is unwise, you would drown in all the articles but "communication and Smith" would reduce the number of results significantly, "communication or telecommunication" would expand your search results if you need to, "communication not telecommunication" would narrow your results

1. Objective research approaches

-assume that theres something that can be known, if i can get myself out of the picture without my biases and lenses, I will find something true about human behavior -Empirical component -rules or generalizations -social scientists bring the assumption that the external "real" world can be observed, understood, and agreed on to the study of human interaction -social scientists assume that concepts such as intelligence or loyalty can be found across all people and measured objectively with an "instrument" that will apply universally and perhaps predict human behavior

What is peer review and why is it important?

-consists of qualified researchers with similar interests assessing each other's work, those best equipped to evaluate your work and its *impact on human participants* and are *appropriately qualified* people doing *similar work* to your own -broken down into two reviewing ways: formal and informal informal review: hit or miss operation through interaction of researchers providing some kind of informal peer review: networking, conferences, brainstorming over coffee, etc. Formal review: required when researchers undertake any human subjects research for the federal government or are employed by any institution that receives federal funding: IRB, it is an editorial process

What are confederates?

-decide to expose speakers participating in your study -participants in a particular study who have been briefed to behave in a certain way -confederates in research: person who's an actor in the study, but to the participant it looks like another participant -approaches the ethical area of research: is this okay to do this to a participant in a study? -at the end of there research the participants finds out they were dooped -we always want to debrief at the end of research to make sure our research is good and ethical, you will want to debrief here

Generalizations?

-ethical issues involved and how far you can generalize an assumption, ethical if the assumption does not apply to some people -generalizations can only be made to the type of individual that participated in your study -you cannot make statements about the likely effect of the research on the people that did participate in your study

What is generalization?

-grouping -we only studied one group of people, who else can we generalize and say that this applies to? -cuz we didn't study everyone in the world, we just studied one certain group of people, not the entire population -saying this is probably true about a pattern of these people -ethical issue comes in when saying how far you can apply it, saying that it only applies to these people, -assumptions and guesses come in at certain levels, ethical issue comes in to see how far you can generalize something based on groups of people -always a section about limitations, "this is where we weren't perfect" -certain groups of students doing this one type of thing, students at the University, college students in the United States

What is an impact factor?

-how often a piece of research(scholarly journals) is cited and used by other scholarly journals -journals that have a high impact factor publish research that people cite more and people use it more -popularity factor in scholarly journals --impact factor of 2: on average the article was cited twice by other other authors, etc. -high impact factors indicate, at least, the article published is influential in the field -impact factor is irrelevant if the content does not relate to your interests

What does it mean to operationalize constructs?

-how we define variables -required in getting started in research -constructs are ideas or concepts -Operationalizing them means to define them in such a way that they can be measured -we need to build parameters and definitions that make the idea clear to ourselves/readers/other researchers -be specific: 1. For quantitative research makes it measurable 2. For qualitative research make it explicit(clear) -In either case, make it observable- -when you do research you wanna add to a conversation researchers are already having about it -could be as simple as gender: defining by look, birth certificate putting the cases into variables based on how you define the variable

Debriefing?

-if your participants have been exposed to deception, you have an ethical obligation after the study is over to debrief them -explain the deception and invite any follow-up questions they may have -failure to do so is a major ethical problem and your participants will leave the research assuming they have been involve in a real event when they really have not

2. Description

-in depth so you're able to describe exactly what its like- quantitative or qualitative- description of the subject you're researching -describing the way in which your variables are connected but not why -leaves us wanting more, in particular wanting to answer the "why" question -"reporting that women are more likely than men to discuss their grades or to blog regularly is informative but does leave us wondering why

2. Subjective research approaches

-isnt any real reality we can know -every is co-creative, we need to understand the process of how people come together without using something that is already known -interpretative component -individualistic and can be described as much- -phenomenologists and ethnographers try to understand people's subjective worlds through an interpretative perspective by all seeking to understand how humans interpret and make sense of events in their lives -these researchers assume concepts such an intelligence or loyalty are indeed just concepts, and that such concepts are defined subjectively by the people they are researching, not to mention the researchers themselves -such concepts vary from culture to culture, individual to individual -interpersonal behaviors such as holding hands, kissing, or embracing may have widely different interpretations from culture to culture -phenomenologists may observe a behavior such as kissing but really want to know what action means for the individuals involved, no assumptions such behavior has a universal

Language use?

-members of research community will want to see research article written in completely professional scholarly style, but this becomes unethical when your research participants cant understand the language -seeking permission from and communicating results to participants needs to be done at their level of understanding -informed consent documents must be written in "lay language"(understandable to the people being asked to participate): implies language but also the level of language so they must be written at the level of comprehension of the participant

What is epistemology?

-method decisions rooted in epistemology -how we know what we know, how we come to know things -world views tend to feed into how we come to know things -The study of knowledge (how we know what we know)

The literature review?

-not citing things correctly, not only putting in formation that only argues your side, things that are not up to date -using secondary sources (not good) -using sources that are relevant but you don't have permission to use them: proprietary information(owned typically by corporations and may not be published without their permission) -have to represent current state of knowledge by using some form of current research -using abstracts (not good) -articles that do not support your idea must be used because readers need to be aware of any debates and controversies current

What are variables?

-once you have constructs that are operationalized you have transformed them into variables -something that can change or vary -the aspects of a construct that are capable of being measured or taking on a value -research is based on learning when, why, and/or how this vacation occurs between variables -when we have evidence to predict this variance we set up hypothesis -without previous evidence to guide us we set up research questions -The constructs "gaming" and "academic performance" cannot be measured, but "time spent on gaming" and 'GPA' can, so they are considered variables

From which areas cant you cite and should go to other areas to cite?

-only cite after the lit review, cant site from abstract, introduction or lit review -should never cite from literature review because it is often cited itself, go to the articles in which the information is cited from to properly cite

What are the elements of the Nuremberg Code?

-outcome of the 1948 Nuremberg Trails, following WWII -first international code that emphasizes 1. research subjects must consent to the research in which they are involved and 2. the benefits of the research must outright the risks -people should be getting some kind of beneficence as a participant, beneficence is important to reduce lack of harm

From which areas should you cite?

-participants: who or what was studied -results: what was discovered? -conclusions: so what? -method: how research was conducted -unique aspects of the study: what is special about the study

What is the difference between a primary and secondary source? When is it appropriate to use a secondary source?

-primary source: an original article, several pages in length, has all the typical headings of scholarly research papers, has references and method detail -secondary source: another author's summary of the primary source, gets right to the point, summarizes the original short and sweet with no subheadings, oftentimes not credible in academics, lacks the original detail -when it is appropriate: when primary use is not accessible anymore, so we try to find a credible secondary source, means absolutely nobody could get to that source

Acknowledging others?

-rare that one person can take full credit for a research project, so authorship implies more than one person, so you must list coauthors or at least acknowledge others contribution to your work -others are considered researchers that work closely with one or two collaborators you want to acknowledge the collaborators, but may be unable to do so if they have been promised anonymity -researchers reporting summary data for hundreds of survey respondents are unlikely to acknowledge specific individuals

Deduction

-reasoning from a theory to observations that will make you test the theory for correctness. -what we start with is a theory we already believe to be true EX: you have the theory that women are more likely than men to discuss grades and academic performance. you would then design a study to capture the conversations of both and women and counting for each group the number of times word such as grade, grade point average, or assignment occur-then show the frequency of these words is greater in woman's conversations then in men's, your theory would be supported -two big "ifs" need to make sure your statement is true for all female students; make sure that the pattern you observed is true at all times

What are the three types of research questions, and how should they be written?

-research question is more speculative and senses that something is going on 1. Open ended(non-directional)(two-tailed): ask simply whether there is a relationship between variables "Is there a relationship between video gaming and academic performance?" 2. Close ended(directional)(one-tailed): focus on a direction of a relationship -"Does academic performance decline as involvement in video gaming increases?" 3. Descriptive- asks a question about something, not indicating a direction between variables -"How do students use video games?" -"What happens when children go to fetch water?"

What is the process of triangulation?

-researchers use multiple methods providing multiple perspectives to ensure they have a good "fix" on the problem -triangulation is the most obvious blending approach to provide multiple perspectives so they make sure they have a balanced perspective on the issue -EX: in trying to understand how family life interacts with TV viewing, a researcher might survey several families on their use of and attitudes towards TV, interview a few family members in depth, live with one family member as they watch TV, and conduct a content analysis of TV content to determine how content shapes the family's interactions and visa versa. -Advertising executives will often pretest or run a pilot commercial with a focus group before running the advertisement and then assessing results with a large-scale survey

What are the major components of human communicative interaction?

-simplistic model of human communications 1. Source- the provider or initiator of content 2. Message or messages- the content of communication 3. Channel or medium- the vehicle for communication content; for example, social media 4. Receiver or receivers- the recipients or consumers of information 5. Noise- extraneous information or distractions that can disrupt an interaction -source and receiver may swap roles as a discussion proceeds- does not indicate some possible major entry points into the study of human interaction

What is the purpose of a literature search?

-start framing what were doing in the first place for research -to answer what is it I should study? What is the question I should answer ? -where is the topic within the field right now as far as being researched and studied currently What we want from a literature search: relevant information for insight on your research interest, and quality information that is credible, reliable and written to scholarly standards

What are APA conventions for the formatting of a reference page?

-title of paper on top, flush left -page number on top, flush right -references is centered up top -each source is in alphabetical order, with a handing ident in the second line, all flush left -Last name, middle initial, first initial. (Year). Title of article in no caps except for the first word. Title of Journal in all appropriate caps and italicized, issue(vol), page numbers.

What are APA conventions for the formatting of an abstract page?

-title of paper, flush left heading, not all caps, same one from here on out -page number flush right -Abstract heading, centered, top of page -150-200 word summary, double spaced, left aligned

What is the purpose of a literature review?

-to argue your research, especially to your peers -argument, saying this topic is important, why you're studying and the way you're studying it -Narrative that pulls together research you have read into a rationale for your study -test a hypothesis/research question, describe or explain a phenomenon, develop a critical insight, explore a new research method -some lit reviews say just say the state of current research, but most argue to as of why this should be researched according to current research, and research on both sides of the argument

Plagiarism?

-unethical and illegal representation of others' work as your own -from point of view of research colleagues, plagiarism also represents "used goods": readers may end up reading both the original and the plagiarist's form of that research- does a disservice to readers because as they are trying to stay current they might be misled into reading two different versions of the same research

What is the difference between confidentiality and anonymity?

-used to protect individuals who may be giving you personal information 1. Confidentiality: you wont release any information that identifies your participants even if as the researcher you know what information each participant provided you 2. Anonymity: to fully protect and reassure participants, you may need to offer this -goes a step further than confidentiality in protecting people in that the data you collect from participants absolutely does not identify them -even you as the researcher does not know what participant said what -typically doing so by instructing respondents to not put their names on anything, any consent forms they turn in with their names on it must be turned in separately -violating any confidentiality or anonymity agreements the reporting your research results is an ethical issue and might become a legal one: -researchers protect participants in qualitative studies by referring to them as "respondent A", quantitative studies typically report statical summaries for a group of people so there is no need to identify them

When should you use direct quotes? How should these be formatted in-text using APA?

-when it is something you are not well able to paraphrase. Perhaps it is very technical, or very profound, or a definition that is important to relay word for word. Most things should be paraphrased instead. -It is then necessary to quote the words exactly and to provide the specific source and page number(s) (identified by "p.") where the quote can be found -For quotes of less than 40 words: Hayden (2004) reported that messages about family from parents to adult children are interpreted in a variety of ways, noting particularly that "adult children who are childfree by choice may interpret family messages from parents through a lens of differentiation and pride" (p. 83). -For quotes of more than 40 words, use a block quote, which requires indentation on both the left and right sides of the quote, no quotation marks, and the inclusion of a page number. According to Rowden and Organ (2015), Historically, the nature/nurture issue as it relates to communication style and human behavior more generally has had scholars placing themselves in an "either/or" camp. There have been advocates of behavior as inborn traits and advocates of behavior as learned experiences. While the debate continues, as in explaining intelligence for example, most researchers today accept behavior as a product of both nature and nurture—genetics and environment. (p. 15)

What is hermeneutics?

-when we are engaging in an area of research, it is useful to cycle between inductive and deductive perspectives of our variables and our research, need to look at it in an overall contextual state, going to specific variable then going back to the overall whole -moving in a hermeneutic circle -holds the part that may not be understood without reference to the whole, and visa versa - by moving back and forth between the specific and general, we gain a better understanding of both -cautions us that no observation or interpretation is free from the effects of an observer's own experiences, values and expectations EX: you develop an interest in how and why individuals purchase new technologies such as smart watches. A study of how and why people adopt new technologies might be theoretically informed by earlier studies on how farmers adopt new agricultural technologies. But your study of how and why people adopt smart watches may reshape our initial understanding of the concept of adoption itself. This way of thinking about adoption may then (re)frame research questions about new wearable technologies, and so on.

What are the main sections of a research article?

1. Abstract: very beginning, preview piece, what theory they used, what method, found something based off their findings 2. Introduction: thing between abstract and first heading, tells you nothing about findings, gives you a frame of what they set out to do, variables clear 3. Literature Review: state-of-art in terms of what we know relevant to the topic, theoretical frame work, should be something linked to each variable, research question or hypothesis in there, none of what they've done as far as research at this point, 4. Methods: Participants, procedures, measurement inductive coding: starting with the data and seeing what emerges from the data, look at data, see patterns and look at those patterns as codes deductive coding: have this code already and apply it to the data 5. Analysis/Results: now you start to pull things you found as unique from your data -descriptive analysis: putting it into percentages, descriptive statistics -regression analysis: statical interpretation 6. Discussion: heres why this matters and heres where we want to go from here

Internet

1. Advantages -Rapid access to large numbers of research participants. -Low cost. 2. Disadvantages -Conceptual problems defining the Internet (tool or topic) -Practical problems of sampling, obtaining consents & establishing authenticity of participants

Research specializations include:

1. Mass and social media 2. Organizational/group 3. Interpersonal 4. rhetoric and persuasion

What are the two ways that the Internet can be viewed for research, and how does each view point us to a different set of ethical considerations?

1. Process: process of interaction or a virtual space within which human interaction occurs, then argument is made that social science Research standards apply because the communication behaviors of individuals are being studied, meaning humans are being studied and approval and consent are required -Human participants are being studied. -Consent of participants is therefore required. 2. Content: internet is fundamentally text or visual content and that researchers studying web behavior are simply studying published content; raises the proposition that individuals are not being studied directly, the researcher has no impact on their lives and therefore no research approvals are required -The web sites are published content. -Research is essentially content analysis. -Consent of participants is therefore not required.

Quan. vs. qual

1. Quantitivae: numbers, measured, how often 2. Qualitiatve: How does this work for you? What is it like? giving us a sense of what is important to that person out experience

What are the three types of hypotheses, and how should they be written?

1. Two tailed(non-directional): "For students there is a relationship between number of speeches given and their level of speech anxiety" -state that there is a relationship between two variables but do not specify the direction of the relationship 2. One tailed(directional)- "As the number of speeches students give increases, the level of speech anxiety that students experience decreases" -require extra confidence because you commit to predicting the direction of the relationship between the variables 3. Null- no relationship, H0, specify that there is no relationship between variables -"there is no relationship between the number of speeches students give and level of speech anxiety for student public speakers" -proposes there is no relationship between variables other than what we would find by chance -makes clear the notion that we are always working with two hypothesis: the first is that the relationship we suspect exists, and second, that it does not

What are the main purposes of research we discussed in class?

1. exploration 2. description 3. explanation 4. prediction 5. control 6. interpretation 7. criticism

How do scholarly journals, popular press, and trade publications differ?

1. scholarly journals are peer reviewed, written by academics with advanced degree in that topic and to be published, must pass through one editor and two other peers with advanced education in that topic -peers read scholarly articles to make sure the research has been done according to professional standards and the article makes a contribution to knowledge, and that there are no apparent ethical violations such as plagiarism 2. popular press(popular articles): stuff you can just go buy at Barnes and Nobel, not peer reviewed, hasn't passed by any criteria of being assessed by other people in the field, author doesn't have to have expertise in that field -assigned by an editor -published without referring process, typically in daily or weekly media, and are targeted to a lay audience -do not have formal subheadings noted above or a list of references as scholarly articles do -newspaper and magazine stories 3. trade publications: particular area or trade or occupational area that authors may have some occupational or practical experience but not expert based, assigned by an editor, not peer reviewed or referenced -between the two extremes above -written by experts but the experts are practitioners, not academics

Categorical imperative

By Kant: a behavior is valid if you are willing to see it applied to a universal rule, for example: if you are willing to use deception as part of a research design, then you ought to be prepared to accept deception as a universal value

What is the difference between objective and subjective approaches to research?

Generally, researchers conclude that either human communication is objectively measurable and can summarized in rules or generalizations or it is subjective and individualistic and can be described as much -not necessarily tied to quantitative or qualitative research -more about your orientation as a researcher

Veil of ignorance

Philosopher John Rawl: asks us to take a dispassionate approach, reviewing all sides of a decision equally. We are asked to wear a "veil" that blinds us to all information about ourselves that might cloud our judgment. -For eX: suppose our research design has the potential to cause severe psychological distress to research participants and we need an ethical decision to whether its acceptable or not. The veil of ignorance blinds us to the role we would be playing in the research, that is, we would be the researcher or the participant, and we recognize that psychological distress is undesirable and we would not want it to happen us, therefore researchers decide that the research is unethical and it should not cause any distress to research participants

Strong hypotheses include:

The variables, population, the predicted relationship between variables

Principle of utilitarianism

associated with philosophers Bentham, Mill and Hume: argues for greatest good for greatest number, suggest that research designs that may hurt a minority of people are justified if there is an overall greater good -for example: we might argue in communication research misfiring a few people via a false rumor is defensible if out of that research emerges a fuller understanding of how best to use informal communication networks in an emergency

7. Criticism

at the core of this is exposing power- where is the power now? Critiquing the status quo -understand and explain the way in which communication is used to exercise and maintain power -researchers could look at the way in which organizational structures and processes prevent and facilitate the progress of certain groups within the organization -assumption that power structures in society or organizations are reinforced and perpetuated by language and behavior -"What rhetorical strategies are used in employee magazines and newsletters to promote loyalty to the organization?(the assumption here is that the content of employee communication is controlled by management" "Leaders perceived as democratic will use the term we more frequently than the term I when addressing employees"

Milgrim experiment-

authority figure played by scientist, teacher is the participant, and learner which is the paid actor, every time learner got word pair wrong the teacher pressed a button which shocked the learner, teacher could hear this over microphone: subject believed they were actually shocking the learner and listened to intense reactions to being shocked, eventually going silent -ended when teacher gives the maximum shock three times in a row or they refuse to continue: 65% of subjects gave out the max shock 3 times -shows how people will listen to a figure in authority wearing a white lab coat -unethical: feeling like they just killed someone doesn't protect their well-being, couldn't have gotten informed consent since warning participants about the study would have ruined it

5. Control

control the variable by figuring out variables that will impact that- can do this with people: persuasion -researching with a view to being able to predict and manipulate physical processes -research questions and hypotheses here will be written specifically as those written under the umbrella of prediction -"Direct mail recipients are more likely to open mail pieces that resemble official government mail" "Students are more likely to attend early morning classes if a tuition discount is offered for those classes" -EX: advertisers want to be able to control audience responses to advertising, broadcasting or direct mail: their interest is in knowing how to best motivate viewers to watch a particular program, purchase a product or open a piece of direct mail- some industry journals contain such advice on how to "control" audiences, frequently in the form of "if-then" ideas: "if your make your direct mail piece an unusual shape, then it will attract more readers" -human behavior is a function of many influences, risky putting all this on human behavior in order to control

3. Explanation

gives reason to "why?"- gives a reason for why the variables go together -your observation might indicate that women are more likely than men to socialize over coffee after class, then your interviews might lead you to the discoveries that more woman than men live off campus and that socializing after class if the easiest way to get group projects organized -Use research questions and hypothesis here to explain the focus of research in the explantation stage: wording has become more specific than those questions under that of "exploration", research may be in a position to propose possible explanations before the research begins "Are patterns of student social life on campus related primarily to the residence status of the student?"

6. Interpretation-

interpret for people whats going on- different than description because there is no objectivity here- full on joining within- loosing objectivity as engaging -placing yourself in another person's shoes -researcher attempts to understand human connection from the point of view of the people doing it -not imposing our own interpretation as researchers but to capture the interpretations of those involved in a way that readers will get an accurate understanding. -"what metaphors and analogies are most commonly used by students to describe and explain classroom assignments?"

1. exploration

of an idea, curiosity based -may lead us to understanding things and being able to jump research off of this- want to figure out whats going on- good in new things/un-researched things -typically results in descriptions of what you're interested in -leads us to research questions, Arise from a researcher's initial, exploratory interest -"how do the patterns of social life on campus differ from dorm to dorm? "What factors explain students' use of social media?" -research questions in the exploratory level are of necessity and rather general

self plagiarism

once its been published you cant use that information again

Bystander study

placed volunteers alone in rooms and gave them headphones and told them a false purpose of the study, students on the other line were actually recordings and one of the students early on mentioned they had occasional seizures- eventually this voice would have trouble speaking and would ask for help, saying they were having a seizure -researchers measured how long it took the subjects to go look for help, found that it took longer when people thought there were more people in the convo, less likely to do something when they believe there are there are other people involved -unethical: benefits do not outweigh the risks

Abduction -

reasoning from an observation/effect to possible causes. -forming a theory based on what fits best -dont need many cases -use this in bigger research situations because it is hard to prove in academic research -more like a brainstorming approach -your starting point is an effect from which you reason back to possible causes -EX: a large group of young children in the campus coffee bar would be an unusual sight, you think it might be bring your kid to work day, so you try to find out whether there is such an event on campus that explains your observation or if there are other events that offer a more plausible explanation

Induction

reasoning from observations to a theory that explains the observations. -starting with the observations to instead of and making the theory from these observations -EX: observation: males are more likely to sit with males, females are more likely to sit with females; Theory: students have a greater comfort level with same-sex than with opposite-sex conversations, male students have more in common with each other than they do with female students visa versa, Male and female students have already formed separate social groups by virtue of being in separate camping housing units -EX: observation: upper-class students are more likely to be found socializing in the coffee bar than first year or second year students; theory: Upper class students are more likely to have jobs, grants, and can afford to socialize and drink handcrafted coffees, Upper-class students are more likely to live off campus and meeting on campus is the only way to get projects done, upper class students are more stressed as graduation approaches and feel a greater need to "unwind" by socializing with friends

Stanford prison experiment

simulated a prison and casts white males into roles of prisoners and prison guards with the equipment of the roles- prison guards were told to do whatever they had to do to maintain power over prisoners, giving them a sense of superiority- supposed to last for two weeks but called off after just 6 days -prisoners started revolt because guards treated them so badly, after that guards became more and more physically and mentally abusive -subjects internalized their roles, guards became abusive and aggressive while prisoners became submissive -unethical: guy who created the study acted as the superintendent and it was therefore impossible for him to stay impartial, participants were subjected to serious physical and emotional abuse which may have caused them real, permanent harm

Monster study:

took kids from orphanage and and split them into two groups: kids in one group were told they didn't have a stutter and were given positive feedback while the other group was told that they did have a stutter and were given negative reinforcement, told they should never speak unless they could do it right -different feedback had huge effect on kids' self esteem whether or not the kids had a stutter to begin with -unethical: none of them could consent to research as minors, the people in the orphanage didn't protect them from potential harm in the study, children were never debriefed, no real follow-up on how they may have been affected by the study long term

Little Albert:

wasn't clear they got informed consent from the mother, Albert was never reconditioned to not be afraid: wasn't debriefed so there was longing negative effects of the study on him, -classically condition a nine month old baby with animals and loud noises- as he reached out to pet the animal scientists would make a loud noise, eventually became very scared of animals

4. Prediction

we know why these variables are connected and so we predict through research whether or not they will be connected in the future -intellectual satisfaction in obtaining research results that accurately predict human behavior and confirm a theory -theory is even more impressive if it could predict this behavior -hypotheses are written here to predict our research goal -"Patterns of interaction within student work groups are predicted primarily by the residence status of the students in the group" -written in an hypothesis in an attempt to relate two or more variables, which need to be specified in advance of the research

Judeo-Christian ethic:

would you be willing to be a participant in your own study? If not, your project may be ethically suspect as it affects other people