Test 1 Flashcards
(91 cards)
Sociology
-Scientific study of human behaviors in/an human groups in their environments
Lay Knowledge - Weaknesses vs. Scientific Knowledge - Strengths
- Lay Knowledge Weaknesses (type of non-scientific knowledge; includes ego (= conscious and unconscious needs, desires, anxieties, etc.; ego-defense mechanisms), casual observation (=brain, senses, mind), and common sense (= lazy thinking):
- Limits ability to think, to imagine
- Limits critical thinking
- Increases vulnerability to fundamentalist thinking
- Common sense traps= premature; mystification; premature close of inquiry; wrong
- Ego traps = illogical reasoning; distorted thinking/perception
- Casual observation weaknesses= sloppy; inaccurate; biased; incomplete (⅕); overregulated; overgeneralize (making grand claims on the basis of a few observations); selective
- Common Sense + Ego = narcissistic bias; confirmatory bias; increases vulnerability to self-centered thinking and logical fallacies
- (Based on tradition and authority)
- (Lazy thinking)
Scientific Knowledge Strengths: (scientific theory includes theory and research)
- Reduces sloppiness, bias partiality
- Disciplined, conscientious purposeful activity
- Systematically collect observations on attendance and grade
- Reduces overgeneralization
- Specify a number of cases to be observed
- Collect observations on attendance and grade for a predetermined number of students
- Reduces selective perception
- Specify range and variety of cases to be observed
- Collect a representative number of students, not just those you verify hypothesis
- Theory:
- Every truth can be challenged
- Everything is potentially knowable
- Ego Removal:
- Logical reasoning
- Disciplined mind
- Research:
- Systematic and conscious
- Specify number of cases
- Specify a range of cases
- Commitment to reason, logic, discipline
- Rejection of claims based on faith, beliefs, gut feelings, intuition, tradition, superstition, authority, prejudice, charisma, etc.
- Secular social order
-In science, for a claim to be considered true, it must be logical/make sense, and be supported by empirical observations
2 Pillars of Scientific Knowledge
- Mechanics = How to?
- Design
- Build
- Use
- Calibrate
- Fix
- Understand
- Logic = When and why?
- Appropriateness
- Usefulness
- Quality, strengths, weaknesses
- Risks
4 Main Assumptions of Social Sciences Research
-aka 4 foundations of social science thinking
- (1) Theory, not Belief or Philosophy
- (2) Patterns and Regularities
- (3) Aggregates, Not Individuals
- (4) Variable Language
- Dependent and independent variables
- Attributes
- Positive/direct and inverse/negative relationships
Dependent and Independent Variable
- Variable - logical grouping of attributes (ex: class, education, income, age)
- DV: Variable assumed to depend on or be caused by another =
- IV: Variable with values that are not problematic in an analysis but are taken as simply given. Presumed to cause or determine a dependent variable
Attributes
-Quality or characteristic of a phenomenon, person, group, or object
- Ex:
- Education Attributes: PhD, high school graduate
- Class Attributes: upper class, middle class, lower class
- Age Attributes: 11, 12, 31, 97, 40, 15, 21
Positive/Direct and Inverse/Negative/Indirect Relationships
- Positive/Direct:
- As x increases, y increases
- As x decreases, y decreases
- Ex: from left to right, gets higher
- Ex: watching violent movies and a mean-world outlook
- Negative/Indirect:
- As x increases, y decreases
- As x decreases, y increases
- Ex: from left to right, goes lower
- Ex: Education and prejudice
- ”Positive” and “negative” have nothing to do with values
- Relationship/association is not causation
- A variable language is the hallmark of quantitative sociology, not of qualitative one
Article by Judson
-”Wanted: Intelligent Aliens, for a Research Project
- Humans are good at seeing other people clearly, but not ourselves
- We rate ourselves higher on good qualities and lower on bad qualities
-Aliens would help give us objective view of humans and hopefully they have longer lifespans (practical problem - flies live much shorter lives, so we can study them effectively, but no one human can outlive other humans to study them effectively because our lifespans are long)
- Humans consistently overestimate human uniqueness and underestimate abilities of other animals
- We forget planet was without us for 2 billion years
- Constantly surprised by other animals
- ”Mask of humanity”
- Tendency towards bias, flattering illusions we like to maintain – easier to guard against problem and assess ourselves more clearly
-Only humans can deny resemblance between humans and primate cousins
Article by Pinker
- ”Reason is non-negotiable”: Steven Pinker on Enlightenment
- Kant
- 4 themes tie everything together: reason, science, humanism, and progress – author adds peace, gentle commerce (prosperity?)
- Focus on Age of Reason and Enlightenment
- If you praise reason, then what matters is integrity of the thoughts, not the personality of the thinkers
- The thinkers were racists, sexists, antisemites, slaveholders…
-If there’s anything the Enlightenment thinkers had in common, it was an insistence that
we energetically apply the standard of reason to understanding our world, and not fall
back on generators of delusion like faith, dogma, revelation, authority, charisma,
mysticism, divination, visions, gut feelings or the hermeneutic parsing of sacred texts.
Article by Fernbach and Sloman
-”Gray Matter”
- On their own, individuals are not well equipped to separate fact from fiction, and they never will
be. Ignorance is our natural state; it is a product of the way the mind works.
-Secret to our success: ability to jointly pursue complex goals by dividing cognitive labor
-Consequence of the fact that knowledge is distributed is that being part of a community of knowledge can
Make people feel as if they understand things they don’t
- Ex: of glowing rocks study – but didn’t work when researchers said information was secret
- The understanding others have, or claim to have, makes us feel smarter
- Better understanding of how little is actually inside our own heads would serve us well
2 Main Areas of Ethical Violations
- Ethical violations towards research subjects
- Ethical violations towards public
Ethical Violations Towards Research Subjects - Types and Examples
- Types:
- Social Psychological Harm
- Subsections: Methods, publication (confidentiality is important; use pseudonyms), and privacy
- Ex: Milgram, Zimbardo (related to method)
- Social Psychological Harm
- Deception
- Subsections: Identity, purpose, procedure
- Ex: Humphries (gay), Rosenhan (schizophrenia) (related to identity)
- Ex: Jacobson & Rosenthal (how results affect how teacher treats students), Milgram (lied about purpose) (related to purpose)
- Ex: Waldman (FB experiment) (related to procedure)
- Deception
- Coercion
- Subsections: Explicit, implicit
- Ex: Zimbardo (Ex: no, you can’t leave, and no food for you today) (related to explicit)
- Ex: Milgram (we have to continue emotional pressure) (related to implicit)
- Coercion
- Physical Harm
- Ex: Risen: psychologists and torture
- Physical Harm
Ethical VIolations Towards Public - Types and Examples
- Types:
- Fraud
- Inaccurate, invented, incomplete, exaggerated, manipulated findings
- Ex: Bartlett: Michael Lacour
- Ex: Carey: Psychiatry’s Giant - Robert Spitzer
- Ex: Schuessler: Alice Goffman
- Ex: Cyrril Burt (fake twin studies)
- Ex: Carlos Castanada
- Ex: Bayer pharmaceuticals: Negative cases
- Ex: Purdue Pharmaceuticals ($12 billion)
- Fraud
- Plagiarism
- Using the words or ideas of another, from the Internet or any source, without proper citation of the sources
- Stealing another person’s ideas
- Utilizing other people’s ideas, insights, observations, conclusions without giving them due credit
- Passing other people’s ideas as one’s own
- Intellectual theft- Ex: UNLV professor
- Plagiarism
- Reporting
- Faulty design, methods weakness- Ex: Carey: Psychiatry Giant
- Conflicts of interest - Psychiatry and psycho-pharmacology (studies about illness and medication show that the pharmacies paid researchers - bias)
- Psychiatry and anti-gay organizations
- Psychologists and federal agencies
- Surprises
- Audit
- Ex: Carey: Psychiatry Giant
- Reporting
- Other
- Neighborhood, community- Ex: Alice Goffman and community
- The discipline - Ex: psychologists and torture
- Ex: Alice Goffman and sociology/ethnography
- Ex: Michael Lacour and survey research
- Society at large - Ex: psychologists and torture
- Ex: anthropology and war
- Ex: Alice Goffman and community
- Other
What is informed consent? How does it protect research subjects against ethical violations?
-It is a norm in which subjects base their voluntary participation in research projects on a full understanding of the possible risks involved
- Basics:
- Description of research purpose, subject’s participation, procedures
- Risks and discomforts
- Any benefit to subject or others that can be expected from research
- Maintenance of confidentiality
- Description of compensation, if any
- Researcher’s identity, affiliation, contact info
- Voluntariness of participation, right to discontinue
-It protects the subjects by providing the information of any deception (with identity, purpose, procedure, emotions)
- It is NOT enough to communicate to the subjects their rights, we need to make sure they understand them
- Individuals who do not understand the language
- Mentally impaired (schizophrenics study)
- Children
What are the ethical problems discussed in the article by Carey?
- Faulty research design, method weakness
- Unwarranted conclusions
What are the ethical problems discussed in the article by Waldman?
-Experiment subjects were not told they were participating in an experiment; deception
What are the ethical problems discussed in the article by Schuessler?
- ”Alice Goffman Disputed”
- Inaccurate, invented, incomplete, exaggerated, manipulated findings
- Lied about findings to neighborhood, community, and discipline
- Misuse of professional authority (go after someone as a prosecutor on a fragment of evidence and push them to provide more evidence to defend themselves; driving getaway car
What are the ethical problems discussed in the article by Bartlett?
- ”New Question is Raised about Michael Lacour: What else did he make up?
- Faking data; fabricating data (running numbers didn’t work)
- Inaccurate, invented, incomplete, exaggerated, manipulated findings
- Lied about the existence of certain television and radio shows
- Lied on CV and tried to “fix” it
- Lied to public
What are the 4 different ways that politics enter the research process?
- What can be known
- Promotion and suppression of knowledge
- Deviances, pathologies, negative effects
- Blum: “Controversy in the Wind”
- Bush Administration
- Evolution vs. creationism
- Banned books
- Schweder: “Anthropologists in Afghanistan”
- Murphy: “Intellectual collaboration”
- What can be known
- How and what to think
- Psychology in the USSR
- Psychiatry and mental disorders (nothing important environmentally)
- Psychiatry and homosexuality
- Quantitative and qualitative research- Big data
- Marxism in the McCarthy era
- Marxism vs. Korea
- Sociology in El Salvador
- Critical theory in Greece
- Crtiical Race theory, LatCrit Theory, Queer theory, postcolonia theory, postcolonial methods, feminism
- Big data
- How and what to think
- Power in research
- Relationship with subjects/status
- Responsibilities - power of representation
- Authority to represent
- Power dynamics among researchers
- Notes: Power is not always in the hands of the researcher; power is dynamic and negotiated throughout the research process
- Ex: American Swastika study
- Power in research
- Purpose of knowledge
- 3 kinds of research;
- (1) That which supports the status quo
- (2) That which criticizes, empowers, demystifies, questions, raises awareness, promotes social change, social justice, human rights
- (3) That which fails to make a meaningful difference
- MODE 1 Science/Knowledge
- Produced by the theoretical experimental activities of experts operating in isolation within monolithic and centralized institutions with little regard for broader social concerns
- MODE 2 Science/Knowledge (CORE)
- Produced “in the context of application” by trans-disciplinary collaborations
- Is “socially robust” (public sociology)
- Its validity is not dependent on the laboratory and has value outside of it
- Its legitimacy is achieved by an “extended group of experts” (including lay expertise)
- More likely to weather the storm of intense critique
- Is best characterized by its diversity and inclusivity
- 3 kinds of research;
What are the political issues suggested by the article by Lichtblau?
-The Bush administration attempted to conceal research findings about racial profiling
What are the political issues suggested by the article by Murphy?
- ”Note to ASA Section Chairs”
- Bush administration warms publishers may face serious legal consequences if they edit manuscripts from “disfavored” nations, including Iran, Cuba, North Korea, and Sudan
- Suppression of knowledge
- Anyone who publishes material from a country under trade embargo is trading with an enemy of the U.S.
- NO simple editing
What are the political issues suggested by the article by Shweder?
- ”A True Culture War”
- How our profession [anthropology] is going to begin to play a far more significant educational role in the formulation of foreign policy, in the hope that anthropologists won’t have to answer some patriotic call late in a sad day to become an armed angel riding the shoulder of a misguided American warrior.
- Political and moral opposition to the war, to the Bush administration, to capitalism, to neo-colonialism, and to the corrupting influence of the Pentagon and the C.I.A. on professional ethics.
- Promotion of knowledge? Or suppression?
- Ethical violation against society at large
What are the political issues suggested by the article by Blum?
- ”Controversy in the Wind”
- Nevada Department of Health forced epidemiologist to withdraw a presentation of the findings at scientific conference about asbestos and cancer findings and revoked her access to the state cancer registry
- Suppression of knowledge
Major differences between the deductive and inductive paths to research?
- Deduction:
- Asks: Is it true that?
- From abstract to concrete
- Attempt to prove
- From thoughts to observations (theory to observation)
- Paradigm → Theory → Axioms/Laws → Propositions → Hypotheses → Observations
- We do not conduct research to “prove a theory” but to test hypotheses derived from it
- If it has “hypothesis” = deductive
- Induction:
- Asks: What is the truth about?
- From concrete to abstract
- Attempt to find, to discover
- From observations to thoughts (observation/research to theory)
- Paradigm/theory → Research/observations → Finding Patterns → Organizing Patterns
- Typically seeks to answer: What? How Why? In this order of complexity