Comparing Psychology Students and Engineering Students on their Misconceptions About Psychology - Lab Report Example

? A Comparison of Misconceptions about Psychology held by of Introductory Psychology and of Introductory Engineering This study attempts to verify the findings of Martin et. Al. (1997) by testing the differences in scores on misconceptions about psychology of Introductory Psychology and Introductory Engineering students. It was expected that Psychology students would score higher (have less misconceptions) as compared to Engineering students. The study used a quasi-experimental, randomized two groups design; with one independent variable – the class attended by the student and one dependant variable – scores on the questionnaire on misconceptions about Psychology. The said questionnaire was adapted from the work of Best (1982) and consisted of 36 dichotomous items. The t-test value calculated showed a significant difference in the expected direction, validating the research hypothesis. [ t (675) = 19.25; p < 0.001, one tailed]. The effect size examined with the squared point-biserial correlation showed that a reasonable amount of variation was attributed to the factor. Keywords: Misconceptions, Psychology, Engineering, Students. A Comparison of Misconceptions about Psychology held by Students of Introductory Psychology and Students of Introductory Engineering Psychological research, regardless of the specific topic of study, is based upon the same scientific principles as the other “hard” sciences like physics and chemistry. Nevertheless, psychology has a long history of fighting a commonly held perception that it does not qualify as a scientific discipline and that it generates knowledge that is mere common sense. In many cases, however, common sense leads to an incorrect appreciation of phenomena that have been scientifically investigated by psychologists. Several studies have shown that undergraduate students and lay people alike hold many misconceptions about psychology. These misconceptions have been demonstrated in the United States and England and in several different courses of study. McCutcheon, Furnham, and Davis (1993) asked if there was a significant difference in the prevalence of misconceptions about psychology between American and English university students. They administered a 65 item multiple-choice questionnaire and found that English students generally did better than American students, though neither group answered more than half of the question correctly. While the authors offered no clear explanation for either the poor performance or the difference between the two groups, they speculated that selective reporting in the mass media may contribute to both the formation of misconceptions and their resolution. Martin, Sadler, and Baluch (1997) tested undergraduate students from psychology, sociology, business, English and engineering from Middlesex University, U.K. on their general knowledge of psychology. Questions on their test invited common sense but incorrect answers. Out of a possible score of 38, psychology students scored highest with an average score of 17.08 while engineering students scored lowest with 11.57. Martin et al. also found that engineering students were least likely to regard psychology as one of the hard sciences or even one of the social sciences. The present study followed up previous reports of students’ generally poor performance on tests of misconceptions about psychology. Specifically, we repeated a portion of Martin et al.’s (1997) study of misconceptions about psychology. We tested two Australian undergraduate classes, one introductory psychology class and one introductory engineering class, on a true/false test of common misconceptions about psychology adapted from Best (1982), a study that brought out the resistant nature of misconceptions held even by students of Psychology. This is an attempt at systematic replication of the Martin et al. (1997) study. The selected groups are ones that scored the highest and the lowest in the original study. The difference in their scores is the most distinct, and therefore has the highest likelihood of existing across populations. Using the Martin et. al. (1997) study as a precedent, it was possible to construct a directional hypothesis that: There will be a significant difference between the two groups; with the Psychology students having greater awareness and fewer misconceptions than the engineering students. That is, The scores of Psychology students would be significantly higher than those of Engineering students. Method Participants The study was conducted with a total of 677 participants; 318 (116 males) introductory Psychology students were in the first group, and 359 (264 males) introductory Engineering students were in the second. Subjects were chosen on the basis of their chosen course of study and their consent to be a part of the study. Materials A questionnaire containing 36 dichotomous true/false items testing for misconceptions about Psychology was adapted from Best (1982). The higher an individual scored, the greater was the awareness, and less the misconceptions. (see Appendix i) Design and Procedure The study follows a two group Quasi-Experimental design since random assignment of subjects was not possible. Subjects were assigned to one of the two groups on the basis of their belonging to one of two classes – Psychology or Engineering. There was no overlap between the two groups; making it a simple randomized two groups design. Students were approached during their tutorial classes and requested to participate in the study. Those who agreed were informed about the study, and then were asked to fill out their responses to the questionnaire. After the questionnaires were taken back, the subjects were debriefed and thanked. The data was tested for normalcy and independence to justify the use of parametric statistics. The t-test and the point-biserial r squared were computed in order to test the hypothesis. Results The study was conducted on a total of 677 students; of which 318 were students of an Introductory Psychology class and 359 were students of an Introductory Engineering class. Of the 318 Psychology students, 116 were male and 202 were female. The mean age of the group was 20.3 years with an S.D. of 5.5 years. In measuring central tendency, Psychology students were found to have a mean score of 19.544, a median of 19, and modal scores of 19 and 22. The scores ranged from 7 to 36; the range being 29. Inter-quartile range was from 16 to 29. Skewness was 0.549 and Kurtosis was 0.641. The SS calculated were 10449.905 and the SD was 5.7506. (see appendices ii, iii:A, iv and v:A) Of the 359 Introductory Engineering students, 264 were male and 95 female. The mean age of the group was 20 years, with a S.D. of 5.3 years. In measuring central tendency, Engineering students were found to have a mean score of 12.262, a median of 12, and a modal score of 11. The scores ranged from 0 to 30; giving a range of 30. Inter-quartile range was from 10 to 14. Skewness was 1.022 and kurtosis was 2.809. The SS calculated were 5831.387 and the SD was 4.0263. (see appendices ii, iii:B, iv and v:B) Since the data reasonably met the criteria for parametric statistics; an independent measures t-test was calculated to test the difference between the scores of the two groups; yielding a value of 19.25. Tested against the tables of significance (one tailed) for dof 675, this value was found to be significant beyond even the 0.001 level. [ t (675) = 19.25; p Read More