Research Methods

The four kinds of data, S, I, L, and B, examples of each one, and the relative advantages and disadvantages. Consider the types of personality variables each is especially good at measuring.

S: Self Reported Data

I: Informant Reported Data

Straightforward
May be one sided
Rely on the informant
Blind spots
Human memory
Accurate in someways
Casual forces
Definitional truth

L: Life Outcome Data

The Residue or Outcomes of PErsonality
Objective, verifiable
Could be affected by other factors

B: Behavioral Data.

Natural B data including diary and experience sampling, the (Electronically Activated Recorder) EAR, and social media analysis
Daily diaries (old school)
Apps that prompt you
These methods are advantageous because they eliminate the memory bias… but sometimes they can get quite annoying and affect participants answers
Laboratory B Data
Structured settings (in a lab..)
Controlled conditions allow for easier measurement but can not correlate to the real world

Megargee 1969 (Gender and DOminace

Needed a leader, make the box functioning
When people are in a same-sex group, if one person is more dominant, the social role is fairly simple, the dominant is the leader.
However, in co-ed groups, the man most of the time became the leader

Multi-method studies

Utilizes SILB to create the whole picture

Reliability, including sources of measurement error, and ways to improve reliability

Validity & its relation to reliability

Validity is the extent to which a test measures what it is supposed too\
A reliable measure can be invalid, but a valid measure must be reliable
Face, convergent, Discriminant, predictive validity

Different Types of Validity:

I learned these in Research Methods
Test-retest, internal consistency, inter-rater

Generalizability

Apply results to different populations

WEIRD participants

Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic
Not representative

The Scientific Method

Funder’s second law, and the similarities between a scientist and a detective

There are no perfect indicators of personality; there are only clues, and clues are always ambiguous.
There is no proof and no exact explanation of me personality
Like a detective, scientists need to look into the “clues”
Detectives takes action and gets confession

The distinction between scientific and technical training

Technical training is more applying (Learn by doing lmao)
Scientific training is primarily theoretical and done through gathering evidence
A doctor is not a scientist, they received technical training

Case Method

Indepth interview
Interview with their friends
Coding scheme to letters, emails, texts
Following sm1 with a camera

Know 1 or 2 examples, and their advantage as a source of ideas, and its main disadvantage. Understand why you would want to follow up a case study with an experimental or correlational study

Dodge Morgan
Made radar detectors, sold company to sail around company
Beat world record for fastest boating around the world
Lots of analysis on this one person
Gini
Abused as a child, always imobilized, father kept her alone and malnourished, without stimulation
CPS discovered her at 13 Years old (12 years of abuse)
It would be unethical to do this to someone in a lab, but since it already happened, scientists had the opportunity to study it

Correlational method

Correlation coefficient

Measures strength and direction of a relationship between 2 variables

Third variable problem

Can impact the correlation between two other variables

Direction of Causality problem

Correlation does not = causation, temporal precedence can be unclear from just a correlation. You must know which variable came first (which then influenced another)

Experimental method

Manipulating one variable to see if it has an effect on another
Variables: independent and dependent
Conditions: control and treatment
Assignment: random

importance of random assignment

Can eliminate bias in sorting (not selection

Problems and Complications

Manipulations may not have the intended effects
Manipulations may be unrealistic or cause states that rarely occur naturally
Impossibility of manipulating some variables
Reasons why correlational and experimental methods are both necessary
Similarities and differences between correlational and experimental
Correlational studies find correlations while experiments determine causes
Correlation is needed for causation, but it itself is not sufficient to show causation