week 3 discussion

docx

School

Yorkville University *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

PSYC 6213

Subject

Psychology

Date

Dec 6, 2023

Type

docx

Pages

2

Uploaded by DukeHeat4119

Report
DQ 3.1 From this experience, and drawing from the readings for this week, assess some of the strengths, weaknesses, and caveats related to correlational research. As a researcher, suppose you are interested in the extent to which biological factors are associated with shyness in females. Assume you have access to 20 adopted children, all females, and you give each a shyness test. The test yields scores from 0-20 and the higher the score, the greater the degree of shyness. You also test the biological mothers and the adoptive mothers. Justify the values of the correlation coefficients that you might expect to see if: (a) shyness is at least partially inherited (i.e., if shyness is inherited, (1) What would you expect the correlation to be between children and biological mothers on the test? (2) What would you expect the correlation to be between children and adoptive mothers on the test) and if; (b) shyness seems to be primarily a function of the environment (i.e., if shyness is due to the environment, (1) What would you expect the correlation to be between children and biological mothers on the test? (2) What would you expect the correlation to be between children and adoptive mothers on the test). If shyness was somewhat inherited, I would expect to see a positive correlation between shyness scores in the children and the shyness scores in the biological mothers. The Pearson’s coefficient would be +1.00 if this was a perfect positive correlation (Goodwin & Goodwin, 2017). In this study I would expect to see no or weak correlation, the Pearson’s coefficient would be close if not zero for adoptive mothers. But if shyness is a product of the environment, the adoptive mother would have more of a correlation on the shyness because of parenting and family experiences. I would expect the correlation for biological mothers to decrease but not be zero because the child and bio mom may have still had some shared environment experience prior to adoption that contributes to shyness. Unfortunately, we cannot guarantee that there are no confounding or external factors that is affecting the correlation direction and the strength. What are some other confounding or external factors that you think can affect this study? And what can we do to account for these or avoid them if possible? Word count: 180 Goodwin, K. A., & Goodwin, C. J. (2017). Research in psychology: Methods and designs (8th ed.). John Wiley & Sons. (Knekt et al., 2011) DQ 3.2 The readings in this unit enhance our understanding of quasi-experimental designs. Evaluate an example of appropriate use of this methodology, especially as it might pertain to a counselling environment. The example can be one that you find in the literature or one that you make up. Assess some of the strengths, weaknesses, and ethical considerations that the researcher uses to decide whether or not to employ this type of design.
Quasi-experiments have a lot of value despite being lower in status in “true” experiments, they can help researcher achieve their goals when ethical problems or practical problems make it so random assignment is not possible (Goodwin & Goodwin, 2017). Especially in counselling psychology research I think that Quasi-experiments can be more generalizable because there aren’t randomized groups. In a 2011 Quasi-experimental study done by Knekt et al., on the effectiveness of psychotherapy on psychiatric symptoms, ability to work and functional capacity, the researchers used a pretest- protest design with a 5 year follow up. The participants were not randomly selected, at the time they were outpatients with long standing disorder that affect their ability to work and had meet DSM-IV criteria for anxiety or mood disorder. The therapy groups that the participants were assigned to were random, the researchers were looking at the effectiveness of solution-focused therapy, short-term psychodynamic and long-term psychodynamic psychotherapies. Due to the 5 years follow up and no non-treatment control group, the researchers could not control possible reductions in symptoms due to other external factors (Knekt et al., 2011). A benefit highlighted by the authors on using a Quasi-experimental design in this study was that due to the large amount of outcome measures made it easier to look at the effectiveness of psychotherapy from many perspectives. Is there more benefits to using a quasi-experimental design for a study of this nature? Would you change, remove or add anything to this study? How is the validity and reliability affected? (Word count: 251) Goodwin, K. A., & Goodwin, C. J. (2017). Research in psychology: Methods and designs (8th ed.). John Wiley & Sons. Knekt, P., Lindfors, O., Laaksonen, M. A., Renlund, C., Haaramo, P., Härkänen, T., & Virtala, E. (2011). Quasi-experimental study on the effectiveness of psychoanalysis, long-term and short- term psychotherapy on psychiatric symptoms, work ability and functional capacity during a 5- year follow-up. Journal of Affective Disorders , 132 (1-2), 37–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2011.01.014
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