module 4 - MIDTERM 2

Question 1

internal validity

Answer 1

• how much you can trust that the findings of the study are due to the factors explored in the study
• confounding variables/lurking variables
• control groups and randomization
• clinical sample vs. non-clinical sample vs. analogue sample

Question 2

confounding variables/lurking variables

Answer 2

• factors that you did not explore
• can potentially affect findings/results but you did not include them in your study (“oopsies”)

Question 3

control groups and randomization

Answer 3

• control group can be used as a comparison group
• randomization involves randomly assigning individuals to groups and it is used to eliminate systematic differences

Question 4

clinical sample

Answer 4

involved in a clinic study where participants may be diagnosed as a part of the study

Question 5

non-clinical sample

Answer 5

everyday folk, general public, undergrad students

Question 6

analogie sample

Answer 6

• experimental design where the procedures or participants used are similar but not identical to the situation of interest
• e.g. recreating situations as similar as possible; simulated scenarios; mundane realism

Question 7

external validity

Answer 7

• do these results actually apply to the real world? Are they generalizable?
• high external validity = highly applicable to the real world
• statistical and clinical significance
• completer analysis vs. intent-to-treat analyses
• effect sizes

Question 8

statistical significance

Answer 8

• a result or difference is meaningful enough/mathematically meaningful enough between variables that wasn’t caused solely by chance
• e.g. Does this treatment work more than that treatment?
• affected by sample size and type of statistical test used

Question 9

completer analysis

Answer 9

• any one dropped it is not included at all; only include those who completed treatment are included in the analysis
• assumed people who dropped out wouldn’t have responded to treatment anyway
• often times overestimates the efficacy of a treatment because it only included people who stayed throughout the study

Question 10

intent-to-treat analysis

Answer 10

• the people who dropped out would not have changed anymore since they dropped out
• assume that the person didn’t change since dropping out so whatever scores they had when dropping out will be used at the end for the analysis

Question 11

effect sizes

Answer 11

• pearson’s correlation
• looking at the relationship between to variables
• if one variable increases what will happen to the other?
• a perfect correlation is 1; as one variable goes up by one so does the other variable

Question 12

interpretation of correlations

Answer 12

• 0 → .10 = no relationship
• R = .10 → .30 = weak correlation
• R = .30 → .50 = moderate correlation
• R = .50+ = strong correlation

Question 13

clinical significance

Answer 13

• if expert in the field believes a statistically significant finding is large enough/meaningful enough to be clinically important and should therefore direct the course of patient care
• we decide the difference is great enough we should change the way we treat
• just because something is statistically significant doesnt mean its going to be clinically significant/clinically meaningful or important

Question 14

correlational research

Answer 14

data from how things naturally occur

Question 15

cross-sectional designs

Answer 15

data from one time point

Question 16

cohort effects

Answer 16

• gathering information from different groups
• e.g. gathering information of marijuana use from 22 year olds and 80 year olds today

Question 17

longitudinal designs

Answer 17

• data at multiple time points over a period of time from the same group (typically years)
• make inferences about cause and effect
• expensive, take a long time and are rare

Question 18

cross-generational effects

Answer 18

• cohort effects but in longitudinal research
• e.g. if you followed a group of 20 year olds for 20 years would the next group of 20 year olds be the same

Question 19

epidemiological research

Answer 19

• correlational research that involves studying the prevalence, distribution and consequences of disorders in populations
• prevalence and incidence

Question 20

prevalence

Answer 20

• percentage of the population that have the disorder
• 12 month prevalence: % of population that have had the disorder in the past year
• lifetime prevalence: % that has ever had the disorder in their life

Question 21

incidence

Answer 21

• number of new cases of the disorder in a specific time
• typically in the past year
• incidence is normally lower than prevalence

Question 22

treatment outcome research

Answer 22

• experimental research involves manipulation
• outcome research is interested in the effects of research and treatment

Question 23

open label trials

Answer 23

participants know what they are signing up for and what treatment they are getting

Question 24

randomized control

Answer 24

randomly assign people to a control trial; treatment or no treatment, they don’t know what they will get

Question 25

single-blind vs. double-blind studies

Answer 25

- single-blind: just the participant is blind to the treatment - double-blind: neither the research or participant knows who is getting what treatment

Question 26

waitlist-control studies

Answer 26

someone its on a waitlist the same amount of time as the treatment; but receive treatment after serving as the comparison group

Question 27

placebo-control studies

Answer 27

- comparison can be treatment vs. placebo - psychotherapy vs. support group for psychotherapy vs. component of therapy (homework) that is believed to not make a change

Question 28

comparison studies

Answer 28

- compare treatment A to B to C - randomly assigned to various treatment conditions

Question 29

process studies

Answer 29

- what part of treatment helps - e.g. What part of CBT works? Why? - e.g . systematic desensitization is it the relaxation or hierarchy that helps?

Question 30

community-based studies

Answer 30

- applying treatment to the real world - will results change? Will they be applicable or generalizable?

Question 31

experimental research - prevention research

Answer 31

- health promotion - universal prevention strategies - selective prevention strategies - indicated prevention strategies

Question 32

health promotion

Answer 32

- focuses on giving something to everyone to prevent layer problems - skills building rather than fixing - e.g. canada's food guide; inform on 4 food groups in order to prevent later health issues

Question 33

universal prevention strategies

Answer 33

- offered to an entire population regardless of their level of risk, to try and address/reduce a specific risk factor - e.g. reducing tobacco or alcohol use

Question 34

selective prevention strategies

Answer 34

- targeting groups within a population identified as having an increased risk, with specific interventions - e.g. D.A.R.E programs is geared towards teens to prevent drug use

Question 35

indicated prevention strategies

Answer 35

- offered/target to people experiencing early/subclinical symptoms of a disorder with specific interventions - e.g. screening a highschool for depressive symptoms and identifying students with symptoms of depression who may be at risk of major depressive disorder and now targeting them with specific intervention like CBT

Question 36

family studies

Answer 36

- examining symptoms in proband, then first degree relatives and then more distant relatives - connecting if other relatives also have this disorder to see if there is any levels of heritability or genetic influence - the more distant the relative the less likely they are to have the disorder

Question 37

limitation of family studies

Answer 37

- people are more likely to live with people they are closely related to - makes it hard to separate the nature vs. nurture influence and determine the true cause of the disorder

Question 38

twin studies

Answer 38

- examining symptoms in MZ twins and same-sex DZ twins - disorders should occur more often in MZ twins if the disorder is more genetic based compared to DZ because of genetic similarity

Question 39

advantage of twin studies

Answer 39

any difference between MZ twins and DZ twins is due to genetics, meaning they grew up with similar environments in utero and life, meaning an easier separation of environmental influence

Question 40

adoption studies

Answer 40

- examining symptoms in the adopted child, the adoptive parents and biological parents - if a disorder is based on genes it should occur most often in bio parents - if a disorder is based in an environment it will occur most often in adoptive parents - major advantage: separating genes from environment

Question 41

twins reared apart studies

Answer 41

- combines adoption and twin studies - direct test of heritability; if its based in genetics, even reared apart the disorder is more likely to co-occur - generally, the likelihood if developing disorders is as similar as twins reared together - highlights the huge genetic component to psychological disorders

Question 42

cross-cultural research

Answer 42

- interpreting incongruent findings from different cultures because there are a lot of complexities in interpreting findings that are different from one place to another - differences in manifestation of symptoms across locations and cultures - differences in cultural acceptability; what cultures deem appropriate - differences in treatment due to areas of competence and priority