Class Notes (903,845)
CA (538,103)
Western (51,517)
Psychology (6,402)
2800E (123)
Lecture

Research Methods Class 2.docx

9 Pages
137 Views

Department
Psychology
Course Code
Psychology 2800E
Professor
Doug Hazlewood

This preview shows pages 1-3. Sign up to view the full 9 pages of the document.
Research Methods Class 2 9/13/2012 9:31:00 AM
Ways of Knowing
- Part 1: How do we know?
- Part 2: The scientific way of knowing
PART 1: How do we know?
Charles Peirce’s question in his essay (1877): “The Fixation of Belief”
- described several ways of fixated belief
how we come to know things
A. Authority
But, authorities can be wrong
Just cuz authority says it must be true doesn’t necessarily mean it
is true…
B. Logical Discourse (the “a priori” method)
Results in knowledge that’s “agreeable to reason”
o E.g. the use of deductive logic (syllogisms):
Begin with general premises (believed, a priori, to be
true);
Deduce specific conclusions (new knowledge)
Premise and conclusion together form the
syllogisms
Example: Do Kangaroos have livers?
Premise 1: All kangaroos are mammals.
Premise 2: All mammals have livers.
Conclusion: All kangaroos have livers!
Problem #1: The premises might not be true:
Consider this… P1: Socrates was a dog
P2: Dogs are not human
C: Socrates was not human
Problem #2: “Logical errors”: we often make logical errors when trying to
think logically.
P1: All welfare is “giving to the poor”
P2: All charity is “giving to the poor”
C: All welfare is charity. But is it?
Consider this:
P1: All Canadians are people
P2: All Egyptians are people
C: All Canadians are Egyptians???
C. Empiricism: Relying on direct experience and observations (to
gain knowledge of the world)
Problems occur when we rely too much on “subjective empiricism”:
Relying on our informal, “intuitive” experiences and observations
1. Knowledge we gain is too general (it describes everything; but predicts
nothing).
E.g. Common Sense (conventional wisdom)
- “haste makes waste”, BUT “he who hesitates is lost”
- “two heads are better than one”, BUT “too many cooks spoil the soup”.
Note: It’s not that common sense is wrong; instead, we don’t know when it’s
right.
- don’t know specific conditions when it applies
- as such, it can never be discomfirmed.
2. Subjective experience and observations are often biased:
(e.g. The philosopher that doesn’t rely on authority said lets rely on direct
experience, counting the teeth on horses… but the philosopher might have
been misled of certain things.. perhaps the horse had gum disease and lost
teeth years ago.. its not fair to say that this generalizes to how many teeth a
horse has).
The availability bias: events that are available in memory are
judged to be more frequent. It occurs when we’re making these
frequency judges. But we’ll see that that’s not only the case. Just
because something is available in memory doesn’t necessarily mean
its more frequent. And if we say it is, then we are incorrect.
Example 1: (1) Words beginning with “k” or (2) words with “k” as third letter
Q: Which contains more words.
Most ppl would guess that it is (1). Our reasoning is that its easier to
retrieve from memory words beginning with “k”. Words beginning with letter
k are easier to retrieve, and we judge this as more frequent, BUT words with
letter k beginning are actually LESS frequent.
Therefore, Most ppl choose 1 b/c easy to retrieve, but 2 is twice as frequent
in reality!
Example 2: Some events are easier to imagine (makes them available in
memory, so judged to be more frequent ).
E.g. (1) Being killed by “shark attack: OR (2) Being killed by “falling airplane
part”
Which is more frequent?
Well, more ppl would say (1) cuz its easier to imagine being killed by a
shark. Actually, the chances of being killed by falling airplane part are 30x
greater than by shark.
Example 3: We’re exposed to biased samples of events (which makes them
more available)
E.g. smokers overestimate the number of people who smoke (because they
see more smokers). They have a bias sample of people likely to smoke cuz
of lets say the environment theyre in.
NOTE THE ROLE OF THE MEDIA IN THESE EXAMPLES

Loved by over 2.2 million students

Over 90% improved by at least one letter grade.

Leah — University of Toronto

OneClass has been such a huge help in my studies at UofT especially since I am a transfer student. OneClass is the study buddy I never had before and definitely gives me the extra push to get from a B to an A!

Leah — University of Toronto
Saarim — University of Michigan

Balancing social life With academics can be difficult, that is why I'm so glad that OneClass is out there where I can find the top notes for all of my classes. Now I can be the all-star student I want to be.

Saarim — University of Michigan
Jenna — University of Wisconsin

As a college student living on a college budget, I love how easy it is to earn gift cards just by submitting my notes.

Jenna — University of Wisconsin
Anne — University of California

OneClass has allowed me to catch up with my most difficult course! #lifesaver

Anne — University of California
Description
Research Methods Class 2 9/13/2012 9:31:00 AM Ways of Knowing - Part 1: How do we know? - Part 2: The scientific way of knowing PART 1: How do we know? Charles Peirce’s question in his essay (1877): “The Fixation of Belief” - described several ways of fixated belief  how we come to know things A. Authority  But, authorities can be wrong Just cuz authority says it must be true doesn’t necessarily mean it is true… B. Logical Discourse (the “a priori” method)  Results in knowledge that’s “agreeable to reason” o E.g. the use of deductive logic (syllogisms):  Begin with general premises (believed, a priori, to be true);  Deduce specific conclusions (new knowledge)  Premise and conclusion together form the syllogisms Example: Do Kangaroos have livers?  Premise 1: All kangaroos are mammals.  Premise 2: All mammals have livers.  Conclusion: All kangaroos have livers! Problem #1: The premises might not be true:  Consider this… P1: Socrates was a dog  P2: Dogs are not human  C: Socrates was not human Problem #2: “Logical errors”: we often make logical errors when trying to think logically. P1: All welfare is “giving to the poor” P2: All charity is “giving to the poor” C: All welfare is charity. But is it? Consider this: P1: All Canadians are people P2: All Egyptians are people C: All Canadians are Egyptians??? C. Empiricism: Relying on direct experience and observations (to gain knowledge of the world) Problems occur when we rely too much on “subjective empiricism”:  Relying on our informal, “intuitive” experiences and observations 1. Knowledge we gain is too general (it describes everything; but predicts nothing). E.g. Common Sense (conventional wisdom) - “haste makes waste”, BUT “he who hesitates is lost” - “two heads are better than one”, BUT “too many cooks spoil the soup”. Note: It’s not that common sense is wrong; instead, we don’t know when it’s right. - don’t know specific conditions when it applies - as such, it can never be discomfirmed. 2. Subjective experience and observations are often biased: (e.g. The philosopher that doesn’t rely on authority said lets rely on direct experience, counting the teeth on horses… but the philosopher might have been misled of certain things.. perhaps the horse had gum disease and lost teeth years ago.. its not fair to say that this generalizes to how many teeth a horse has).  The availability bias: events that are available in memory are judged to be more frequent. It occurs when we’re making these frequency judges. But we’ll see that that’s not only the case. Just because something is available in memory doesn’t necessarily mean its more frequent. And if we say it is, then we are incorrect. Example 1: (1) Words beginning with “k” or (2) words with “k” as third letter Q: Which contains more words. Most ppl would guess that it is (1). Our reasoning is that its easier to retrieve from memory words beginning with “k”. Words beginning with letter k are easier to retrieve, and we judge this as more frequent, BUT words with letter k beginning are actually LESS frequent. Therefore, Most ppl choose 1 b/c easy to retrieve, but 2 is twice as frequent in reality! Example 2: Some events are easier to imagine (makes them available in memory, so judged to be more frequent ). E.g. (1) Being killed by “shark attack: OR (2) Being killed by “falling airplane part” Which is more frequent? Well, more ppl would say (1) cuz its easier to imagine being killed by a shark. Actually, the chances of being killed by falling airplane part are 30x greater than by shark. Example 3: We’re exposed to biased samples of events (which makes them more available) E.g. smokers overestimate the number of people who smoke (because they see more smokers). They have a bias sample of people likely to smoke cuz of lets say the environment theyre in. NOTE THE ROLE OF THE MEDIA IN THESE EXAMPLES  Media reports car accidents more often for example, but more ppl die from stomach cancer. Above example: stomach cancer vs car accident. For additional examples of biases see: 1. Stanovich - Ch. 4: the “viv
More Less
Unlock Document


Only pages 1-3 are available for preview. Some parts have been intentionally blurred.

Unlock Document
You're Reading a Preview

Unlock to view full version

Unlock Document

Log In


OR

Don't have an account?

Join OneClass

Access over 10 million pages of study
documents for 1.3 million courses.

Sign up

Join to view


OR

By registering, I agree to the Terms and Privacy Policies
Already have an account?
Just a few more details

So we can recommend you notes for your school.

Reset Password

Please enter below the email address you registered with and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Add your courses

Get notes from the top students in your class.


Submit