CHAPTER 6: Formulating the Hypothesis Flashcards

(53 cards)

1
Q

refers to the thesis, or main idea, of an experiment or study consisting of a statement that predicts the relationship between at least two variables.

A

Hypothesis

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

a statement of predictions of how events, traits, or behaviors might be related, but not a statement about cause and effect (relationship).

A

Non-Experimental Hypothesis

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

it is a statement that explains/predicts the “effect” of specific antecedent conditions on a measured behavior.

A

Experimental Hypothesis

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

a statement that is always true.

A

Analytic Statement

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

a statement that can be either true or false, a condition necessary to form an experimental hypothesis.

A

Synthetic Statement

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

a statement that is always false - opposed each other. Need not to conduct experiments to test.

A

Contradictory Statement

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

a statement that can be tested because the means exist for manipulating antecedent conditions and for measuring the resulting behavior.

A

Testable Statement

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

a statement that is worded so that it is falsifiable, or disprovable, by experimental result/sresearch findings.

A

Falsified Statement

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

a statement that is simply and des not require many supporting assumptions.

A

Parsimonious Statement

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

a statement that leads to new studies.

A

Fruitful Statement

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

the process of reasoning from specific cases to more general principles to form a hypothesis.

A

Inductive Model

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

more likely to be false

A

A posterior

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

process of generalization.

  • we devise general principles and theories used to organize, explain and predict behavior until more satisfactory principles are found.
A

Induction/ Inductive reasoning

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

the process of reasoning from general principles to specific instances, most useful for testing the principles of theory.

  • rigorously test the implications of these theories.
A

Deductive Model

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

is the knack of finding things that are not being sought.

A

Serendipity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

a periodical that publishes individual research reports.

A

Psychological Journals

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

a statistical reviewing procedure that uses data from many similar studies to summarize and quantify research findings about individual topics.

A

Meta-Analysis

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

it is not affected by anything else that happens in the experiment.

A

Independent Variable (IV)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

a particular behavior we expect to change because of experimental intervention.

A

Dependent Variable (DV)

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

manipulating thru by giving subjects varying instruction leading them to believe that either they would be exposed and not to painful shock.

A

Anxiety

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

describes the operations involved in manipulating or measuring the variables in an experiment.

  • it specifies the precise meaning of a variable within an experiment.
A

Operational Definition

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

it defines exactly what was done to create the various treatment conditions of the experiment.

A

Experimental Operational Definition

23
Q

explain unseen processes postulated to explain observable behavior.

A

Hypothetical Constructs

24
Q

it is equally important when we are working with variables that can be observed more directly.

A

Non construct Variables

25
it is important that we know hoe to defined scale of measurement in setting up experiments and formulating operational definitions.
Scales of Measurements
26
different observers take measurement of the same responses.
Interrater Reliability
27
comparing scores of people who have been measured twice with the same instrument.
Test - Retest Reliability
28
is the extent to which different parts of the questionnaire or other instruments designed to assess the same variable attain consistent result.
Inter - Item Reliability
29
often use multiple choice to check if they reliably measures the same variable.
Internal Consistency
30
often split the test into halves at random and compute the coefficient reliability and correlate items measuring on the same variable on two halves.
Split Half Reliability
31
the most widely used method for evaluating inter item reliability, considers the correlation of each test item with every other item.
Chronbach's Alpha
32
it is the tests whose items are scored as right/wrong, or according to some other all-or-none system.
Coefficient Alpha/ Kuder Richardson
33
least likely to be a problem with variables that can be manipulated and measured fairly directly, it is the least stringent type of validity does not provide any real evidence.
Face Validity
34
depends on whether we are taking a fair simple of the quality we intend to measures.
Content Validity
35
is the predictive extend to which a scale predicts scores on some criterion measures.
Predictive Validity
36
compares scores on the measuring instrument with an outside criterion.
Concurrent Validity
37
deals with the transition from theory to research application.
Construct Validity
38
the test effectiveness in predicting behavior against a standard.
Criterion Related Validity
39
it is the certainty that the changes in behavior observed across treatment conditions in the experiment were actually caused by the independent variable.
Internal Validity
40
it is an outside event or occurrence that can produce effects on the dependent variable.
History Threat
41
produced by internal (psychological/physical) changes in subject as a function of the passage of time.
Maturation Threat
42
produced by a previous administration of the same test or other measures.
Testing Threat
43
produced by changes in the measuring instruments itself
Instrumentation Threat
44
occur when the subjects are assigned to conditions on the basis of extreme scores on the test.
Statistical Regression Threat
45
occur when the researcher does not assign subjects randomly to the different conditions of an experiments.
Selection Threat
46
produced by differences in dropout rates across the conditions of the experiments.
Subject Mortality Threat
47
family of threats, produced when a selection threat combines with one or more of the other threats to interval validity.
Selecting Interaction Threat
48
pretest might increase or decrease the respondent's sensitivity or responsiveness to the experimental variable.
Interaction Effect of Testing
49
interaction effect to the experimental variable; subjects selected are not susceptible to the effect of the experimental variable, the result will not be realizable to the larger group.
Selection Biases of Sampling
50
exact duplication of an investigation, but with a different sample selected from a popultaion.
Literal
51
duplication of investigation, using the same problem and methodology with some alteration in the procedures, measurement and analysis.
General Application
52
duplication of the investigation using the same problem but utilizing an entirely different methodology.
Triangulation
53
likely to occur whenever multiple treatments are applied to the same respondents, the effects to prior treatments are not erasable.
Multiple-Treatment Interference