Analysis of Psychological Research - Assignment Example

? Research in Psychology Question Research in psychology can either be done in one of two ways. The method could either be qualitative or quantitative. Denzin and Lincoln give a functional definition of qualitative research in their book: Qualitative research is multi-method in focus, involving an interpretive, naturalistic approach to its subject matter. This means that qualitative researchers study things in their natural settings, attempting to make sense of, or interpret, phenomena in terms of the meanings people bring to them. (1998, p. 3) There are many considerations that go into the analyses that could be qualitative in nature. In psychology, there is need for study of behaviour in human beings to understand what causes these behaviours and how they are influenced by the many different cues within the person and the environment. In conducting psychological research, one can use personal histories of the subjects, narratives, focus groups, essays that are photographic in nature, films and ethnographic analyses. Qualitative research methods require a lot of data which is collected through an avalanche of means including experiments, interviews and questionnaires. An experiment is a procedural activity aimed at verifying a particular hypothesis. It is a test aimed at verifying a hypothesis reality. An experiment may either be formal or informal. Formal experiments are usually carried out for their scientific value and are carried out in a controlled environment so as to obtain acceptable data. Informal experiments are of a personal or social nature for example taking to a particular diet in order to test whether it will achieve a reduction in weight. In formal experiments, data is obtained and analyzed then a conclusion is drawn and the results are shared with the interested parties in form of publications. Interviews are a personal form of interaction between an interviewer and an interviewee. The purpose is to derive information about the interviewee or a related or unrelated topic which the interviewee may have some information about. The intentions of interviews, besides scientific may include recruitment into the workplace, criminal investigation or counseling. Questionnaires on the other hand, are a list of questions, either open or close ended, designed with the purpose of obtaining information about a particular topic. The questionnaires are distributed to the scientifically selected population either physically or electronically. The answers to the questions form a basis of the data analyzed and conclusions made thereafter. Quantitative research is different from qualitative research. While qualitative research is aimed at extracting the rich details that constitute individual experiences, the quantitative research identifies characteristics in the data that are general meaning that they are exhibited by many individuals in varying situations. Kazdin gave a definition of quantitative research where he states that it is a research where “one tries to devise investigations to rule out threats to validity, to experiment, to identify the impact of variables on some outcome of interest, and to analyze the data statistically” (2003, p. 328). Quantitative research is mainly characterized by surveys and experiments. In a scientific research, observation is a method of data collection. A question about a scientific phenomenon is formulated then data about that question collected through observation under controlled conditions. The data so collected is analyzed and compared to a particular standard and a conclusion made upon that observation. The major setback facing observation as an experimental technique is observation bias. This can be avoided by use of well calibrated equipment and increasing the number of observations. Alternatively, different observers should be used and their data and results compared. The observer effect, where a different outcome other than that which would have been achieved had the observation not been done, has been identified as a setback too. Researchers should view both Quantitative and qualitative research as being complementary to each other. In reality, any research that is done can only be considered conclusive if both approaches are used to arrive at the desired result. In psychology in particular, it is of utmost importance that a researcher uses both Quantitative and qualitative research approaches so as to come to a conclusion that is biased towards a certain outcome. The preferred method of observation in quantitative research is referred to as naturalistic observation. Here, the observer will not be part of the experience but rather observes an occurrence that is taking place in the natural setting albeit with a little measure of control that is aimed at narrowing the scope of behaviour so that fewer variables are observed to have a more conclusive result. Other observational methods include those where the observer is an active participant in the research and his bias is reflected in the final results. Question 2 Mary Ainsworth conducted a study on security of attachment in children aged between 1-2 years. In her study, the Psychologist designed a technique of assessment which she called the SSC (Strange Situation Classification). This technique was used to investigate how variant attachments might be between different children (types of attachment and nature of attachment behaviors). For purposes of observing the variety of attachment behaviors demonstrated between infants and mothers, Mary Ainsworth (1970) designed an experimental procedure which was set in a small room having one way glass for easy observation of infant behavior. The sample included 100 American middle class families with infants aged between 12-18 months. The Strange Situation’ procedure was carried out by observing the infant behavior in a sequence of seven 3-minute scenes. Four types behaviors were considered and observed and they included: (1) the willingness of an infant to explore, (2) separation anxiety: the unease exhibited by an infant after being left by the caregiver, (3) stranger anxiety: the response of an infant to the strangers’ presence, and (4) behavior of reunion: the way an infant greet the return of the caregiver. The investigator then recorded the exhibited behaviors and scored them in accordance with their intensity on a designed scale of 1 to 7. De Rivera conducted a study on anger in people. Here, he employed the method of qualitative research that entails a theoretical encounter. “This approach explicitly employs bottom-up and top-down analyses in a formal dialectic between specific, situated instances of a phenomenon and higher-order conceptualizations” (Fischer 2006). Practically, the study used the normal methods of interviewing the subjects and gauging their reactions towards certain questions as well as their responses on the things that usually make them angry. The conceptual encounter employed by De Rivera involves an encounter between the investigator (the person conducting the research) and the individual who accepts to act as partner in research. The person investigating study some concepts of human experience, for instance falling in love, making a decision or even getting angry. He (the investigator) attempts to fully understand the experience in which human lives are structured in the in instances when we are in love or angry. This helps the investigator to know what options are in disposal to enable him sketch an abstract account of the general observable fact that shed light on our specific experiences as well as improve our understanding of life (De Rivera, 2006). The conceptualization that de Rivera responds with is not only aimed at the participants that undertook the study but also the findings that had been previously published by researchers. This method of research was the fittest since it examined numerous factors that were responsible for conclusions that had the potential for universal applicability. In the study, de Rivera concludes that “anger is a universal attempt to cope with a discrepancy between what is and what ought to be rather than a cultural invention” (Fischer 2006). Question 3 The code of conduct for psychologists was adoption for purposes of deterring professional misconduct especially against the society members. Following several complaints from the members of the society about professional misconduct a committee was formed to come up with such laws that would provide a guideline on which Psychologists should conduct themselves. “Psychologists value the dignity and worth of all persons equally, with sensitivity to the dynamics of perceived authority or influence over others and with particular regard to people’s rights including those of privacy and self-determination” (Code of Ethics and Conduct 2009, p.10). Psychology is a part of academia that focuses on people as the primary subjects. Psychologists have been working for a long time in trying to come up with viable theories that explain behaviours in human beings. The studies especially in cognitive psychology and psychodynamic psychology have unearthed therapies that are crucial to treatment of people with various psychological problems. This point in the code of ethics is important because it obligates psychologists to adhere to the concept of moral rights which is aimed at the protection of dignity of subjects and patients. The laws protect the rights to privacy, personal liberty, self-determination and natural justice. Therefore, psychologists must ensure that these rights of the individuals that they base their research on are respected at all times for the sake of protection against abuse and for success of future ventures. The importance of protecting personal privacy is to develop confidentiality. While conducting a research there are a number of procedures that should be followed. These include seeking consent from the relevant authorities and subjects, maintaining confidentiality in matters that are revealed by subjects, retaining and reserving details that may lead to the violation of anonymity expected in research, treating the subjects in a fair manner and following of due process that is aimed at rights protection. For research to be successful, the researcher must respect the individuals willing to be test subjects and must also respect the cultural and role differences that exist between him and the subjects. The rational for complying with ethical code is to help a researcher obtained the relevant data with full cooperation from the entities involved. Regardless of age, gender, education, ethnicity, religion, sexuality, socio-economic status, disability and marital or family situation, the principles laid out in the code of conduct should be applied for purposes of better results in the research Principle 3 in the code of conduct states that: “Psychologists should consider all research from the standpoint of the research participants, with the aim of avoiding potential risks to psychological well-being, mental health, personal values, or dignity”. It goes without saying that this code of conduct is paramount in ensuring that the individuals who participated in the research process are not negatively affected by the process in any way. This point is important because psychologists have an obligation of ensuring that the benefits that arise from the research are maximized in the course of conducting the research right from the point of inception to eventual dissemination. Additionally, no harm should come to those subjects that form the basis of the study. The researcher should be on hand to develop and comply with risk assessment and management protocols in the event that an unavoidable risk was to occur in the course of the research. The parameters of the risks that are tolerable have been defined and participants in the research must under no circumstance whatsoever face a risk that is greater than that which they would have experienced naturally outside the research setting and in the course of normal living. Risks that is inevitable after reasoned judgment has been applied between the avoidance of risks and the legitimate needs of the research, assessment of the severity should follow with an aim of putting measures that manage, minimize and obviate them. Physical harm as well as emotional harm is envisaged in this principle. Therefore, psychologists must pay attention to their actions so as not to instill self-doubt and other negative feelings to the participants. In conclusion, consideration of the cost to individual participants and the benefits to society that will accrue from the research must be balanced, a fete that is easier said than done. References Ainsworth, M., & Bell, S. 1970. Attachment, exploration, and separation: Illustrated by the behavior of one-year-olds in a strange situation. Child Development, 41, 49-67. Code of Ethics and Conduct 2009. Code of Ethics and Conduct. The British Psychological Society, Leicester De Rivera, J. (2006). Qualitative research methods for psychologist: Introduction through empirical studies.(pp. 213-245)San Diego, CA, US: Elsevier Academic Press Fischer, Constance T. (Ed), (2006). xlii, 461 pp. Denzin, N. & Lincoln, Y. 1998. The Landscape of Qualitative Research. Sage Publications, Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA Fischer, C. 2006. Qualitative Research Methods for Psychologists: Introduction through Empirical Studies. Academic Press, Boston. Kazdin, A.E.2003. “Spanking children: Evidences and issues.” Current Directions 12, 299-403. Read More