https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploratory_research
A Working Hypothesis is a hypothesis that is provisionally accepted as a basis for further research in the hope that a tenable theory will be produced, even if the hypothesis ultimately fails.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_hypothesis
A Pilot Study, pilot project or pilot experiment is a small scale preliminary study conducted in order to evaluate feasibility, time, cost, adverse events, and improve upon the study design prior to performance of a full-scale research project. Pilot studies, therefore, may not be appropriate for case studies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pilot_experiment
[ 3 Types of Experiment ]
3.1 Controlled experiments
3.2 Natural experiments
3.3 Field experiments
4 Contrast with observational study
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experiment#Types_of_experiments
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothesis#Scientific_hypothesis
Most formal Hypotheses Connect Concepts by specifying the expected relationships between propositions. When a set of hypotheses are grouped together they become a type of conceptual framework. When a conceptual framework is complex and incorporates causality or explanation it is generally referred to as a theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothesis#Hypotheses.2C_concepts_and_measurement
A Theory is not the same as a hypothesis. A theory provides an explanatory framework for some observation, and from the assumptions of the explanation follows a number of possible hypotheses that can be tested in order to provide support for, or challenge, the theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theories
A Scientific Theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method, and repeatedly confirmed through observation and experimentation. As with most (if not all) forms of scientific knowledge, scientific theories are inductive {based on probabilities} in nature and aim for predictive power and explanatory force.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory
An Experiment is an orderly procedure carried out with the goal of verifying, refuting, or establishing the validity of a hypothesis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Experiment
A Hypothesis is a proposed explanation for a phenomenon. For a hypothesis to be a scientific hypothesis, the scientific method requires that one can test it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothesis
A Working Hypothesis is a hypothesis that is provisionally accepted as a basis for further research in the hope that a tenable theory will be produced, even if the hypothesis ultimately fails. Like all hypotheses, a working hypothesis is constructed as a statement of expectations, which can be linked to the exploratory research purpose in empirical investigation. Working hypotheses are often used as a conceptual framework in qualitative research.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_hypothesis
Exploratory Research is a research conducted for a problem that has not been studied more clearly, intended to establish priorities, develop operational definitions and improve the final research design. Exploratory research helps determine the best research design, data-collection method and selection of subjects. It should draw definitive conclusions only with extreme caution. Given its fundamental nature, exploratory research often relies on techniques such as:
[-] secondary research - such as reviewing available literature and/or data [-] informal qualitative approaches, such as discussions with consumers, employees, management or competitors [-] formal qualitative research through in-depth interviews, focus groups, projective methods, case studies or pilot studies...
...When research aims to gain familiarity with a phenomenon or to acquire new insight into it in order to formulate a more precise problem or to develop a hypothesis, exploratory studies (also known as formulative research) come in handy. If the theory happens to be too general or too specific, a hypothesis cannot be formulated. Therefore, a need for an exploratory research may be realized and instituted to gain experience that may help in formulating a relevant hypothesis for more definite investigation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exploratory_research
...Convenience Sampling (also known as grab sampling, accidental sampling, or opportunity sampling) is a type of non-probability sampling that involves the sample being drawn from that part of the population that is close to hand. This type of sampling is most useful for pilot testing...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convenience_sampling
...Naturalistic Observation - Researchers study organisms in their natural environments or habitats without trying to manipulate or control anything. In this method, the researcher observes the behavior under study in its natural setting while attempting to avoid influencing or controlling it. The observations are done in a naturalistic setting without any preparation or participation of the researcher. Therefore, the behavior is observed in public places, streets, homes, and schools. Observing people from other cultures response in the same setting is a way to provide information for cross-cultural research...
https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Social_Psychology/Research_methods
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naturalistic_observation
How the Experimental Method Works in Psychology
How exactly do researchers investigate the human mind and behavior? While there are a number of different research techniques, the experimental method allows researchers to look at cause-and-effect relationships.
In the experimental method, researchers identify and define key variables, formulate a hypothesis, manipulate the variables and collect data on the results. Extraneous variables are carefully controlled to minimize a potential impact on the outcome of the experiment.
Experimental Method in Psychology
The experimental method involves manipulating one variable to determine if changes in one variable cause changes in another variable. This method relies on controlled methods, random assignment and the manipulation of variables to test a hypothesis.
Three Types of Research
1. Causal Research
When most people think of scientific experimentation, research on cause and effect is most often brought to mind. Experiments on causal relationships investigate the effect of one or more variables on one or more outcome variables. This type of research also determines if one variable causes another variable to occur or change. An example of this type of research would be altering the amount of a treatment and measuring the effect on study participants.
2. Descriptive Research
Descriptive research seeks to depict what already exists in a group or population. An example of this type of research would be an opinion poll to determine which Presidential candidate people plan to vote for in the next election. Descriptive studies do not seek to measure the effect of a variable; they seek only to describe.
3. Relational Research
A study that investigates the connection between two or more variables is considered relational research. The variables that are compared are generally already present in the group or population. For example, a study that looked at the proportion of males and females that would purchase either a classical CD or a jazz CD would be studying the relationship between gender and music preference.
The Purpose of Correlational Studies:
Correlational studies are used to look for relationships between variables. There are three possible results of a correlational study: a positive correlation, a negative correlation, and no correlation. The correlation coefficient is a measure of correlation strength and can range from –1.00 to +1.00.
Positive Correlations: Both variables increase or decrease at the same time. A correlation coefficient close to +1.00 indicates a strong positive correlation.
Negative Correlations: Indicates that as the amount of one variable increases, the other decreases (and vice versa). A correlation coefficient close to -1.00 indicates a strong negative correlation.
No Correlation: Indicates no relationship between the two variables. A correlation coefficient of 0 indicates no correlation.
Limitations of Correlational Studies:
While correlational studies can suggest that there is a relationship between two variables, they cannot prove that one variable causes a change in another variable. In other words, correlation does not equal causation. For example, a correlational study might suggest that there is a relationship between academic success and self-esteem, but it cannot show if academic success increases or decreases self-esteem. Other variables might play a role, including social relationships, cognitive abilities, personality, socio-economic status, and a myriad of other factors.
Types of Correlational Studies:
1. Naturalistic Observation
Naturalistic observation involves observing and recording the variables of interest in the natural environment without interference or manipulation by the experimenter.
Advantages of Naturalistic Observation:
- Gives the experimenter the opportunity to view the variable of interest in a natural setting.
- Can offer ideas for further research.
- May be the only option if lab experimentation is not possible.
Disadvantages of Naturalistic Observation:
- Can be time consuming and expensive.
- Does not allow for scientific control of variables.
- Experimenters cannot control extraneous variables.
- Subjects may be aware of the observer and may act differently as a result.
2. The Survey Method
Survey and questionnaires are one of the most common methods used in psychological research. In this method, a random sample of participants completes a survey, test, or questionnaire that relates to the variables of interest. Random sampling is a vital part of ensuring the generalizability of the survey results.
Advantages of the Survey Method:
- It’s fast, cheap, and easy. Researchers can collect large amount of data in a relatively short amount of time.
- More flexible than some other methods.
Disadvantages of the Survey Method:
- Can be affected by an unrepresentative sample or poor survey questions.
- Participants can affect the outcome. Some participants try to please the researcher, lie to make themselves look better, or have mistaken memories.
3. Archival Research
Archival research is performed by analyzing studies conducted by other researchers or by looking at historical patient records. For example, researchers recently analyzed the records of soldiers who served in the Civil War to learn more about PTSD ("The Irritable Heart").
Advantages of Archival Research:
- The experimenter cannot introduce changes in participant behavior.
- Enormous amounts of data provide a better view of trends, relationships, and outcomes.
- Often less expensive than other study methods. Researchers can often access data through free archives or records databases.
Disadvantages of Archival Research:
- The researchers have not control over how data was collected. * Important date may be missing from the records.
- Previous research may be unreliable.
http://psychology.about.com/od/eindex/g/experimental.htm
Science Is Self Correcting Yes, science is self-correcting. If you don’t believe science self-corrects, then you probably shouldn’t believe that evolution by natural selection occurs either – it’s basically the same thing.
https://neuroneurotic.net/2016/01/17/yes-science-is-self-correcting/
...Repetition of Experiments and the reproduction of results is the heart of making science accurate. The unambiguity of results doesn’t work very well in a lot of academic disciplines. But for questions about the natural world where human prerogatives aren’t a factor, it works exceedingly well.
Academic journals have actually stood in the way of self-correction because reproducing results is not considered publishable in many disciplines. Not being publishable is equivalent to not being funded and being a net negative upon the careers of the scientists involved. Peer review isn’t about reproducibility, it’s about making sure that the article is obviously up to the standards of the journal. That will catch some mistakes, but not all...
https://www.quora.com/How-is-science-self-correcting
...If a result piques the interest of other scientists, then their first step is usually to try to Repeat the Experiment, perhaps with a few changes to test alternative explanations for a finding. Because scientists are always repeating each other's experiments, it is hard for a fictitious result to hang on for very long. When the studies are fairly easy to conduct (as it is for many psychology studies run with university undergraduates), it quickly becomes clear when a finding is hard to obtain again...
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/ulterior-motives/201008/why-science-is-self-correcting
...Besides simple error correction, comments can bring in new perspectives. Cross-pollination of Ideas then increases. Exhausted research areas will be revitalized by the introduction of new approaches, and attacks by researchers from outside a field will break hardened orthodoxies...
https://www.edge.org/response-detail/25445
...A common claim about the superiority of science over other ways of knowing is that science is self-correcting; science may take wrong turns from time to time, but it eventually finds its way back on the right road. As a supporter of science, I believe in the power of the scientific method; and generally speaking, it’s true that science self-corrects. However, it’s important to understand how human limitations—scientists are human, after all—sometimes undermine the process of self-correction...
https://sixdayscience.com/2013/05/04/self-correction-in-science/
The Science-Is-Self-Correcting Fallacy
http://wmbriggs.com/post/13511/
The Scientific Method
Although procedures vary from one field of inquiry to another, the underlying process is frequently the same from one field to another. The process in the scientific method involves making conjectures (hypotheses), deriving predictions from them as logical consequences, and then carrying out experiments or empirical observations based on those predictions. A hypothesis is a conjecture, based on knowledge obtained while seeking answers to the question. The hypothesis might be very specific, or it might be broad. Scientists then test hypotheses by conducting experiments or studies. A scientific hypothesis must be falsifiable, implying that it is possible to identify a possible outcome of an experiment or observation that conflicts with predictions deduced from the hypothesis; otherwise, the hypothesis cannot be meaningfully tested.
The purpose of an experiment is to determine whether observations agree with or conflict with the predictions derived from a hypothesis. Experiments can take place anywhere from a garage to CERN's Large Hadron Collider. There are difficulties in a formulaic statement of method, however. Though the scientific method is often presented as a fixed sequence of steps, it represents rather a set of general principles.[8] Not all steps take place in every scientific inquiry (nor to the same degree), and they are not always in the same order.
No comments:
Post a Comment