Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
T
2
Chapter summary
Understanding the history and the foundations of
cognitive psychology is essential for gaining a
broader perspective on the many methods and
explanations that have been developed in this
approach. The aim of this chapter is to provide you
with an understanding of the roots of cognitive
psychology, the significance of the computer
metaphor, its main underlying assumptions and the
logic of the experimental method.
Behaviourism
The work of Watson, Pavlov and Skinner became the
foundations of mainstream psychology up to the
1960s.
Watson
disliked
introspective
and
functionalist approaches and recommended that
mental concepts (thoughts, feelings and so on) be
dropped from the study of psychology since they
could not be studied objectively or directly. The most
objective and scientific approach, he argued, is to
examine behaviour because it is measurable and
often fall over or slightly miss the point of. The aim
here is to illustrate the use of statistics in the
experimental method and to help you avoid common
misconceptions. In an experiment we compare the
results of (at least) two groups. The tasks given to
the two groups are identical, except on one count.
This single difference is known as the independent
variable (IV). If a theory is valid then it should predict
that a particular IV would produce different results
between the two groups. For example, suppose I had
the theory that small groups of students learn better
than large groups because they are more likely to
ask questions. My theory predicts that, regardless of
class size, a student is more likely to learn if she asks
questions. I then set up an experiment consisting of
two groups of seven students to whom I deliver the
same lecture (but at different times). Group A are
told not to ask questions and group B are told that
they can ask questions. The IV here is whether the
students can ask questions or not. I predict that in a
later test of learning (e.g. a multiple-choice test)
group B will score higher marks on average than
group A. If the results of the tests confirm my
prediction then the experiment provides support for
my theory, otherwise I may have to rethink my
theory.
However, the average scores between the two
groups are unlikely to be exactly the same, even if
they differed by 1 point. Indeed, when we compare
the data from any two groups it is rare that the
scores are exactly the same. So, how does the
experimenter know if the difference in the scores is
due to the IV (being able to ask questions during a
Effect size
Often, the issue of effect sizes is raised at more
advanced levels in psychology, such as second- or
third-year undergraduate studies. However, the size
of an effect is important and journal editors are
becoming increasingly aware of its importance.
Returning to our choose a number between 10 and
20' exercise, suppose I asked two groups of 2,000
students to do this. Given such large groups, it is
likely that the difference between their average
scores will be very small (e.g. 14.9 and 15.1,with a
difference of 0.2). If we gave them multiple-choice
tests then we would have quite a small difference
between the scores of the two groups. However,
since our statistical test takes account of the number
of participants, it may turn out that this small
difference is statistically significant. In other words, it
may be that the probability of obtaining a difference
of, say, 0.9 between two large groups is extremely
low, in which case the experimental hypothesis is
supported.
We must remember that our experiments are used to
support a theory, and that a theory implemented in
applied settings can have important social
implications. So, the question we ask is, although a
small difference might be significant, is such a small
difference really that useful? Suppose you are an
advisor for a local college and you are asked to
evaluate the effectiveness of a new teaching
method, such as e-learning. You design an
experiment in which one group of students undergo
Eamon Fulcher
Chapter 1 : Foundations of Cognitive Psychology
Foundations of Cognitive Psychology 2003 E Fulcher
S
Http://www.democracynature.org/vol1/fotopoulos_objec
tivity.htm