Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • Chapter 1 Kazdin

    Uploaded by

    Giovanni Balderas
    2 views7 pages

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    2 views7 pages

    Chapter 1 Kazdin

    Uploaded by

    Giovanni Balderas

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 7
    Chapter 1 [ee | Introduction (CHAPTER OUTLI Methodology and Research Design Philosophy of Science, Research Methodology, and Statistical Inference Characteristics of Research in Clinical Psychology ‘The “Psychology” of Research Methodology Overview of the Book ‘The general purpose of science is to establish knowledge. Although many areas cof scientific investigation, stich as the stucly of the stars, weather, plants, and an- imals, are familia to us, the systematic methods of investigation in scientific re- search and how these methods improve on casual observation are not widely appreciated. Indeed, occasionally the public is skeptical about scientific re~ search and frustrated with the yield. For example, the seemingly frequent find: ings that various foods or food additives may cause cancer in animals has raised! public disenchantment with scientific research, Products and materials present in everyday life (eg, asbestos, radon) continue to be shown in research to con- tribute to cancer risk in humans. The disenchantment is reflected in the quip that “the only thing that causes cancer is scientific research!” The disenchantment also helies frustration with research findings that often conflict with each other. For example, various foods (e.g., eggs, butter, meat, coffee) have been shown at various points in time to be harmful, helpful, and neutral in relation to particular health outcomes (e.g, forms of cancer, heart dis- cease). Moreover, the simple findings or rules we would like (e.g., X is “bad” for us) are often sabotaged by nuances and qualifiers. Thus, we have learned that a litle wine is good for us but a fot is bad and that some wines (e.g,, red) more than others seem to be better. Interpretation of such findings and trying to act on them could lead one to drink! When the scientific verdict seems relatively clear and has broad consensus (eg, cigarette smoking contributes to many untoward health outcomes), many of us seem to know someone who is an exception (e.g. a 90-year-old uncle who 1 2 GHapmee 1 's very healthy and smokes two packs a day immediately after eating his favorite breakfast—lard souffle). inconsistencies in scientific findings and counter instances of a given finding in everyday life are not part of the problem of sc entific research. Rather, they reflect the complexities of empirical relations. It is ‘ot the scientists fault, for example, that high cholesterol is associated with an ‘increased risk for heart disease but a decreased risk for cancer (West, 1995). Even though many findings ae incomplete and there are complexities with incomplete knowledge, enormous advances have been made that we take for granted in cceeryday life Ce. vaccines for diseases, predictions of weather, dangers of pol Juants in he drinking water, medications, psychotherapies for depression), Scientific esearch is essential for understanding natural phenomena and for ‘making advances in knowledge. although a number of research methods are available, they have in common careful observation and systematic evaluation ‘of the subject mater under varying conditions. The diverse methods constitute special arrangements and plans of observation that are designed to uncover re lations berween variables ina relatively unambiguous fashion. The relations may seem apparent in nature when a pafticular phenomienon is observed casually ‘Yet, many relations are obscured by the complex interrelations and combina: tions of many variables as they normally appear. The task of identifying relations 's compounded by the characteristics and limits of our perception. Among com. plex relations, iis easy and natural for us to connect variables perceptually and conceptually and to then integrate them into our belief systems. The relations can be firmly entrenched independently of whether the variables genuinely go together or ae related in fact. Scientific research attempus ro simplify the complexity of neture and to iso late 2 particular phenomenon for careful scrutiny, The phenomenon is exam ined by manipulating or varying values of the variable of interest ‘while ‘controling extraneous factors that might otherwise influence the results. By con. twoling or holding constant sources of influence that might vary under oedinary circumstances, the relation between the variables of interest can be examined. In addition to arranging features of nature, science also provides methods to aid perception. The methods consist of dverse practices, procedures, and decision. rules to aid in drawing conclusions and in reaching a consensus about relations ‘observed in research. Among the interesting features of scientific research is that the methods used to reveal nature can contnbute significantly to the results, That 's, how a study is conducted, the measures that are used, and how the data are analyzed are just afew ofthe aspects of methodology that influence the specific conclusions the investigator will draw. Consequently, the study of methodology and the underpinnings of decision making is essential. Inthe present book, we discuss several research methods that are designed to address specific concerns, potential problems, artifacts, and biases and that serve as impediments to knowledge. I is important to understand these imped. ments because they foster an appreciation ofthe rationale of methods and en- Courage one to handle difficult situations in novel ways. In areas of research such as clinical psychology, psychiatry, counseling, social work, educational and Iniroduction school paychology, and other dspines that span theory, research, and pllaton, major challenges derive from adressing question ouside the lh Oratory. Drawing valid inferences isnot sacrificed when one leaves th Imethodolgial comfons of the boro. However, thougful and cea spplication of design strategie assumes greater importance to ensure tat i inerenes canbe dened METHODOLOGY AND RESEARCH DESIGN _ Methodology refers tote divers principles, procedures, nd practices that gov fem research, Within that general domain isthe concept of research desi ‘which refers to the plan or arrangement tha is used to examine the question of interest These tems tend to focus on the specie practices and options that characterize research. The focus ofthis book ison methodology and research design and hence covers diverse practices and procedures. Yet, the focus on concrete methods and practices asthe danger of emphasizing ingredients fr seatch and pethaps conlring up a cookbook forthe desig of enperinents, Re search design i nota compilaion of spect paces, procees,or tates Even highly revered practices (eg, random assignment of subjects or pai pants, use of large sample sizes) may be unnecessary to reach valid inferences inva given sudy.' The ise is one of understanding both the rationale for methodological practices and the practices themselves Methodology safer toa wey of hining und, ae uch, i is beneficial to avoid overemphass of concrete practices invlved in research proces. Design and methodology ale us tothe issues that aflect how we examine and inter. pret phenomena, Consider an example of the ype of thinking that methodol ogy foster. Sir Francs Calton 1822-1910, the Bish sles, investigated the extent to which prayer increases longevity. Specifically, he was interested in ‘whether praying for the heath and longevity of other persons in fact added! Yyearto the lves of those persons. The hypothesis woul be one of grea he Tec and applied interest to say te last Calfon reasoned tha if prayer wer tffeive, then kings, queens, nd other royalty would Ive longer than ees ‘feral ther health and longevity are consitenly the objects of prayer Ca tested to by frequent exhorations, Long live the Queen," in contt othe rat and ess fair, Long lve the beggar) Galton selected and compared diferent groups who were presumed ovary in the extent to which people prayed for their health and longevity alton. 1672). The results indicated that royalty died at an ear age han that of non royal. Specifically, the mean average) age a the time of death for royalty w= 6580 year,» number lower than that for other groups including men of ere ‘ure and science (67.6 years) and the gentry 702 years). Clea, royalty died 1 4 younger age. Does this study show that prayer was ineffective in increasing the longevity f royal? OF couse not 4 carer ‘Methodology teuches us ways to think about the relations between variables, about causes and effects, and about conclusions drawn from theory, research, ancl experience. In the case of Galton’s study, methodology draws our attention to the hypothesis, findings, how the phenomenon was studied, and alternative explanations ofthe dits. Consider the following, 1 might be that at the time of Galton, royalty without dhe benefit of other people's prayers would have died at an earlier age than the mean of 64.0 years. Pethaps the sedentary schedule, rich food, weighty responsbility Frequent guest appearances, and tight iting, heavy, fevelladen clothes of royalty would have conspired to produce a much earlier death, Let us say, for hypothetical purposes, that royalty during the time of Gal ton normally lived to be 55 years of age, on average. Its quite possible that prayer dic in fact increase longevity from, say, 55 to 64 years forthe royalty in cluded in Galton’s study. The data show only that royalty died at a younger age than that of comparison samples. Yet, the hypothesis was not whether royalty live Jonger than nonroyalty but whether prayer increases longevity. It is quite possible that prayer increases longevity (number of years of living) without mak- ing one group of persons actually live longer than another group. The original hypothesis remains unscathed and in need of further testing, All sors of research possibilities might be generated to clay the results We might, for example, wish to examine the extent to which royalty are prayed for and their longevity Presumably "more might be better; pethaps all royally are not prayed for equally. Groups within the overall royal class might be ‘matched on health characteristics related to longevity (eg. age, sex, blood pres- sure, family history of disease and family longevity) but vary in the extent to which they are the object: of prayer. To encure that they difered in the extent to which they were prayed for, perhaps we could survey the public to identify the persons for whom their prayers are directed. Also, itis possible that mem: bers of royalty themselves engage in more (or less) praying than ethers. Pechaps praying rather than being prayed for is ertcal. In general, we would wish to Control for or assess several variables that plausibly relate to longevity to ensure that these variables did not vary between groups and were taken into account ‘when comparing groups. 1's important not to belabor the example, At the same time, how a study is conducted very much determines the extent to which the conclusions can be interpreted. Methodology is a way of thinking about phe- nomena because it alens us tothe types of questions to ask and, as importantly tothe practices designed to obtain enlightened answers Incidentally, there has been other testing of the relation of prayer to longevity and to physical and mental health. One controlled study that has re ceived considerable public attention found that being prayed for improved re- covery of hospitalized patients in a coronary care unit, even though the patients ‘were not aware of prayers in their behalf (Byrd, 1988), The resuits have been subject to many different interpretations (Dossey, 1993), More well documented is the role of religion on physical and mental health. Among the findings aze studies showing that participation in religion (e.g., belief in god, attending Introduction 5 church regularly, and being committed to religion) is associated with reduced rates of suicide, death from hear disease, depression, and higher levels of over all well-being (Levin, 1994, McCullough, 1995). Designing research often is presented asa straightforward enterprise. At th most rudimentary level, in an experiment the design includes an experimental and a control group. The experimental group receives a form of the exper ‘mental condition or intervention and the control group does not. Differences between groups are considered to reflect the effect of the experimental manip ulation, Although the basic comparison is well intentioned in principe, it greatly ‘oversimplifes the bulk of contemporary research and the type of control prc ‘cedures requited in most studies in clinical psychology. Research design is a fas inating topic because of the many different ways in which investigations are completed, the advantages and disadvantages associated with the available de sign options, and the contribution of different designs to the results, Scientific hypotheses are attempts to explain, predict, and explore specific relations. When hypotheses are formulated, they represent “if-then’ statements about a particular phenomenon. The "i portion ofthe hypothesis often refers to the independent varable that is manipulated or varied in some other way; the “then” portion refers to the dependent variable or resulting data, Findings cor sistent with an experimental hypothesis do not necessarily prove the hypote sis, Data can only be taken as proof of a hypothesis if no conceivable alternative hypothesis can account for the results or if the predicted relations would be ob tained if and only i the hypothesis were true. Yet, these requirements are more likely to be met by logic and deductive reasoning than by scientific research. Whether another hypothesis conceivably could account for the results may he 4 matter for future investigators to elaborate. Also, whether a finding would re sult only from a particular hypothesis cannot be known with certainty. The con fidence of certainty provided in logical deductions isnot available in science, OF course, this fact refers tothe logical bases of scientific conclusions. As scientists. we often fee! quite certain about our conclusions. The experience or feeling o! certainty is quite separate from the logical status and truth value of scientific propositions ‘Not all experiments are conducted to test particular prediction or an “if then” relation, Many experiments explore the relations of variables and are 1 formulated as tess of hypotheses. Yet, the tenuous nature ofthe conclusions stil applies. The findings, however systematic, do not necessarily reflect the elfects of the independent variables, The findings may be a function of unspecified fac tots extraneous to the experimental manipulation itself. A number of these fac ‘ors may be uncontrolled variables within or outside of the experiment anc! serve as explanations ofthe findings. ‘Although many extraneous factors can be recognized and controlled in ac vance of an experiment, others cannot. It may take years of research to recog: nize that something in the experiment other than the variable of interest con: tributed to the original findings. For example, in human drug research, a routine 6 quer) practice is to keep the hospital staff or investigators naive so that they do not know who is receiving the experimental (treatment) drug and who is receiving placebo. Keeping staff naive is now recognized to be important because their beliefs and expectancies can influence patients’ behavior independently of the effects of the drugs. In years past, many drug studies lacking this precaution ‘were completed and can now be only regarded as inconclusive. Methodology is directed at planning an experiment in such a way as tore ‘out or to make implausible competing explanations ofthe results. The better an experiment is designed, the fewer the alternative plausible explanations that can be advanced to account for the findings. Ideally, only the effec of the inde. pendent variable can be advanced as the basis forthe results. Several method- logical features we discuss are designed to maximize darity of the findings. PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE, RESEARCH METHODOLOGY, AND STATISTICAL INFERENCE Experimentation encompasses three broad interrelated topics: philosophy of sc ence, research methodology, and statistical inference. Philosophy of science considers the logical and epistemological underpinnings ofthe scientific method in general. Historically, experimentation has been closely tied t0 philosophical ‘thought. Topics such asthe basis of knowledge, the organization and limitations of perception, the nature and perception of causal relations, methods and limi- tations of inductive reasoning, the conditions required for testing and verifying predictions, and indeed the very notion of a hypothesis all rever to philosophy. The philosophy of science reveals, among other things, fundamental limitations in the logical underpinnings of observational and experimental methods, Ex perimental methods rely on several presuppositions and assumptions about the ature of the world and our knowledge ofthat world, and they cannot be log ically justified, The philosophical challenge points to the tenuous nature of empirical knowledge. Yet, the challenge has not deterred research from pro- gressing to elaborate natural phenomena. The day-to-day business of the researcher requires planning investigations so tha conceptual, interpretive, and practical problems are minimized. Research methods, rather than philosophy of science, enter at this point to provide op- lions that maximize the clarity of the results. Broadly conceived, methodology encompasses the procedures and practices of conducting and designing re search so tat lawful relations can be identified. Results of research by theie very nature are tentative because any particular finding may depend on unique fes- tures of the setting and experimental arrangement in which the Finding Was ob- tained. Findings may also be ambiguous because the relaions might be due 10 influences thatthe investigator did not know, acknowledge, or identify. Tents- tiveness and ambiguity of research findings can never be completely eliminated. Atthe same time, the accumulation of mukiple investigations can increase the clarity of the findings. Introduction 7 Statistical inference is integrally related to experimentation because of the ‘extensive reliance on statistical tess in reseatch to draw conclusions from data Also, statistical techniques can be used to focus the interpretation of the findings of a particular study. Statistical controls or analyses of variables within the study that might contribute to or be confounded with the independent variable can help t0 reduce the plausibility of rwal interpretations of the results, For exam ple, socioeconomic disadvantage (eg, poverty, receipt of social assistance) is related to many variables of interest in psychological research (e.g, physical anc ‘mental health, child-rearing practices, sess). Data-analytc strategies can play ‘major role in examining the separate and combined influences of socioeco- nomic disadvantage and these other variables and hence play @ major role in drawing inferences about substantive issues. Thus, stastical analyses often work in concert with methodology. Statistical evaluation provides agreedon decision rules so that there is some uniformity in the criteria used to draw conclusions. Ironically the crite: ria for making statistical inferences themselves often are based on arbitrary de- cisions. For example, the precise point that a finding is called statistically reliable or significant is purely a matter of convention, rather than being a sta Uistically of logically justifiable criterion or, ina given situation, well advised ‘The manner in which experimental data ought to be analyzed statistically and the advantages and disadvantages of different analyses are widely discussed and debated. Developments in mathematics and statistics have made the area Of statistical inference extremely important in its own right in understanding how data are to be interpreted and how experiments are to be designed to ‘maximize interpretability ‘The philosophy of science, research methodology, and statistical inference overlap considerably. This book generally focuses on research methods. The focus requires excursions fo issues related tothe basis of knowing and interpre- tation, but clearly not into epistemological discussions. Similarly, we address se- lected statistical issues in which research design is inextricably bound but eschew the underpinnings of data analysis, The excursions into other topics are all de- signed to serve the central goal, namely, to examine research methodology. CHARACTERISTICS OF RESEARCH IN CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY Clinical psychology embraces standard features of scientific research, such 35

    You might also like