PSYC100 WAQ.am (1) (1)

pdf

School

Queens University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

100

Subject

Psychology

Date

Feb 20, 2024

Type

pdf

Pages

Uploaded by MegaElementCheetah16

NOTE: This exam contains 2 written answer questions. There is one question on each page to help identify the start of a new question. Be sure to scroll down to see each of the 2 items. Please type your answers immediately below each question. These written answer questions are worth 2/3 of your exam grade. Written responses can be up to two pages double spaced maximum per question (12-point Times New Roman font). You may use point-form or full sentences for your responses, as long as all relevant information is present. A gentle reminder that responses should be in your own words — do not copy and paste answers from another source. *Note: It is not enough to answer a question by merely listing facts. You should present a coherent argument based on your critical analysis of the questions posed. *Note: This is a confidential exam. You may use your notes, but talking with others about your exam, or sharing these items with others, is considered a violation of academic integrity. Any violation of academic integrity will be reported to the Associate Dean in accordance with university policy.

1. Below is a hypothetical media article. Using what you know from PSYC100, choose 4 aspects of this article to critique based on what you have learned in PSYC100. You should choose the 4 aspects that you deem to be the most important. You do not need to cite your course content, but your critique should be aligned with PSYC100 content. Be sure to fully explain your critiques based on evidence from PSYC100. You do not need to cite your sources: it is assumed that your justifications are coming from PSYC100. Length: This response should be no more than 2 pages, double spaced, 12-point font. “Headline: Memory gene identified! Author: John Cuthbert, journalist After an in-depth investigation, scientists are certain: there is a memory gene, and memory is genetic. Indeed, almost all humans have memory, development occurs at a consistent age, and memory is universal. All humans have very similar methods for learning. Indeed, one of the most important aspects of memory is learning, and all humans have a need to do this. Causal (experimental) research has determined this to be true, as evidenced by the graph below. For example, parents who have strong memory scores tend to have children who also have strong memory scores. Figure caption: Evidence that high parent memory scores cause high child memory scores 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Parent score Child Score

2. You are a psychological scientist interested in learning about brain injury. Specifically, you are interested in how injury to the occipital lobe can influence vision. a) Based on what you know about the brain and vision from PSYC100, what you would hypothesize regarding the impact of damage to the occipital lobe and vision, and why? b) Design and describe a research study to test your hypothesis that includes neuroimaging in the methodology. The specific type of neuroimaging, and how it is used, is up to you, but be sure to explain why you are choosing this method. c) Design and describe a research study to test your hypothesis that uses a self-report measure in the methodology. The specific type of self-report measure, and how it is used, is up to you, but be sure to explain why you are choosing this method. Note: For this question, be sure to describe all of your variables, and research design. Be sure to also explain how the results are relevant for your hypothesis.

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

1. This article has many conclusive statements that lead to a decrease in reliability and validity. The title of the journal post is “memory gene identifie d !”, is proving that this is an unreliable source, since reading the article you understand that this is just a hypothesis and not a proven scientific fact. As well as the statement “ scientists are certain: there is a memory gene” is misleading. Science is a very broad spectrum of research, and it is very important to know that there are always wrong ideas and prejudices. Experiments involving data collection and observations may support hypotheses, but we cannot conclude something so certain such as memory being a gene after one experiment supporting this theory. This article also lacks validity, degree to which a measure is assessing what it is intending to measure, with a graph that does not correspond to the hypothesis. The hypothesis is that memory is a gene which is a very large declaration and must be supported with many experiments and observations from a ton of sources. Sinc the research was experimenting genetic similarities between just parents and their children; this is a very limited study of local distribution and only one ‘casual’ research experiment. Global distribution is very important in validity and drawing conclusions from the collected data. It is also important to retest this experiment over time to obtain new sets of data and observe the trends involved. Studies like these happen over the course of long periods of time with many participants, not one experiment with family members. A positive aspect of this article, the research is supported with experimental evidence. The graph shows what the experiment conducted, and the relationship involved. The issue with the graph is it shows a negative correlation, leading the reader to believe that t he relationship between the parent’s scores is moving in the opposite direction of the child’s scores and therefore ironically showing the opposite of what the

experiment is determining. The last aspect of this article is the conclusion, the journalist concluded this scientific discovery by stating that “parents who have strong memory scores tend to have children who also have strong memory scores”. Whether this sentence is experimentally true or not, the researcher did not draw conclusions based on what they learned from the data and if a cause-and-effect conclusion was drawn. It also does not include a factor such as confounding variables influencing the relationship between the independent and dependent variables. These confounds might include higher IQs in either the child or parent, how much practice an individual had with memory prior to the experiment, etc. Overall, the article is not scientifically reliable nor valid due to lack of correct statistical investigation. 2. A) Regarding the impact of damage to the occipital lobe and vision I would hypothesize the individual would have a loss in vision. The occipital lobe is responsible for housing visual structures and processing the images from our eyes to the optic nerve (and finally to the brain where we interpret this message). Our occipital lobe must be fully intact to control vision to the best of our ability. B) To test this hypothesis (damage to the occipital lobe will lead to vision problems) using neuroimaging methodology, we must start a statistical investigation. Planning the study involves creating a hypothesis and determining how data will be collected. In this case, I would decide to collect my data from case studies (past MRIs that include damage to the occipital lobe, and observations of the patient’s visual awareness before/after the incident). The reason for choosing case studies is a result of ethical experimenting as a researcher (not damaging someone’s occipital lobe yourself to measure the outcome) since we already have data from this similar

scenario and not forcing an outcome. It is important to gather data from many different sources to make this experiment more reliable and globally consistent. After gathering the data, we must observe the results, looking for patterns and deviations. If we obtained many case studies, we must prove how reliable our hypothesis is to the consistency of data (800/1000 of the case studies showed a decrease in visual function after injury to the occipital lobe). The results must also be valid; therefore, we know that the measure of decreasing visual function is assessing the hypothesis of occipital damage. Finally, we infer the data and draw conclusions to prove our hypothesis. The conclusion we might infer is that more people with damage had a higher probability of developing visual problems. This is based of scientific evidence and reasoning of neuroimaging and validity of measuring what the hypothesis indicated what would be measured. A cause-and-effect conclusion may be drawn from this experiment (cause; occipital damage, effect; visual problems) drawing a reliable conclusion from the data collected. C) A research study to test the hypothesis using a self-report measure in the methodology, would be using questionnaires, interviews, and diaries. We must plan the study by gathering groups of individuals to participate (including variables such as age, backgrounds, previous brain injury, etc.) and deciding how it will be conducted and for how long. In this case, I would create a questionnaire solely based on brain injury and the individual’s visual awareness (have you ever had brain damage, do you have any visual problems, etc.). Once the data is all collected over a greater period with large populations of individuals, we will examine the observations. It is important to look for patterns and deviations proving the correlation between damage and vision to support the hypothesis. We must also keep our experiment reliable and valid, so the measures must be consistent (common outcome for most of the questionnaires) and assess what they are intended to assess (the relationship). Finally, we must infer the data and draw conclusions. The

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help

conclusion we might infer is that more individuals answering the questionnaire with prior brain damage experience also had a higher probability of answering yes to visual problem questions. This is based on scientific evidence and reasoning of individual questionnaires and validity of previous experience of this intended hypothesis, indicating what would be measured and correlated. A cause-and-effect conclusion may be drawn from this experiment (the correlation between a cause; brain damage, and effect; vision problems).

Related Documents

Behavior Modification Project.docx

HU260_Wk4Discussion_Justice.docx

Quiz Spies, Colonialists, Rebuilders, and Neutral Parties 2nd Attempt.docx

WK3Assgn_Gordon_T.docx

Research Paper Proposal.docx

Exploring Maturation and Delinquency.docx

ADOLESCENT INTERVIEW Final .docx

Game Concepts.docx

Topic 8 DQ 2 (Obj. 8.2) Describe Stroebe.docx

PSY 215 Module Two.docx

Sim 1 Reflection.docx

NR305 Week 7 discussion post.docx

Recommended textbooks for you

Ciccarelli: Psychology_5 (5th Edition)

Psychology

ISBN:9780134477961

Author:Saundra K. Ciccarelli, J. Noland White

Publisher:PEARSON

Cognitive Psychology

Psychology

ISBN:9781337408271

Author:Goldstein, E. Bruce.

Publisher:Cengage Learning,

Introduction to Psychology: Gateways to Mind and ...

Psychology

ISBN:9781337565691

Author:Dennis Coon, John O. Mitterer, Tanya S. Martini

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Psychology in Your Life (Second Edition)

Psychology

ISBN:9780393265156

Author:Sarah Grison, Michael Gazzaniga

Publisher:W. W. Norton & Company

Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Research a...

Psychology

ISBN:9781285763880

Author:E. Bruce Goldstein

Publisher:Cengage Learning

Theories of Personality (MindTap Course List)

Psychology

ISBN:9781305652958

Author:Duane P. Schultz, Sydney Ellen Schultz

Publisher:Cengage Learning

SEE MORE TEXTBOOKS

Recommended textbooks for you

Ciccarelli: Psychology_5 (5th Edition)
Psychology
ISBN:9780134477961
Author:Saundra K. Ciccarelli, J. Noland White
Publisher:PEARSON
Cognitive Psychology
Psychology
ISBN:9781337408271
Author:Goldstein, E. Bruce.
Publisher:Cengage Learning,
Introduction to Psychology: Gateways to Mind and ...
Psychology
ISBN:9781337565691
Author:Dennis Coon, John O. Mitterer, Tanya S. Martini
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Psychology in Your Life (Second Edition)
Psychology
ISBN:9780393265156
Author:Sarah Grison, Michael Gazzaniga
Publisher:W. W. Norton & Company
Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Research a...
Psychology
ISBN:9781285763880
Author:E. Bruce Goldstein
Publisher:Cengage Learning
Theories of Personality (MindTap Course List)
Psychology
ISBN:9781305652958
Author:Duane P. Schultz, Sydney Ellen Schultz
Publisher:Cengage Learning