PSYC 3430 Lecture Notes - Lecture 3: Kurt Lewin, Inter-Rater Reliability, Group Dynamics
10 Jan 2016
School
Department
Course
Professor
PSYCH 3480 – LECTURE 3 (chap 2) 2015-09-29 12:47:00 AM
WHAT ARE THE CRITICAL REQUIREMENTS OF A SCIENTIFIC STUDY OF
GROUPS:
THE NEED FOR OBJECTIVITY: being able to understand the observations
1. Theories that organize knowledge of groups – detailed
questioning/observation and hypotheses regarding inds wi/ groups
2. Research procedures (i.e. effective experimental design) to test
hypotheses about groups – ex Kurt lewin believed that the creation of a
empirically verifiable theory was the essence of group science
3. reliable and valid measurement
→ starting from the 40s and 50s
→ lewin – still need theories to organize hypothesis and to allow to ask good
questions for a good study
→ research procedures – collect data that is reliable and valid
→ When we talk about research method → ways in which we collect data
→ challenging part of group dynamics – is difficult to study
→ group dynamics: when does leadership emerging change? It is the
conditions that keep changing – that either inhibit or benefical for creativity.
It is very hard to particularly tell what condition they are in.
→ RESEARCH FOR HISTROY OF GROUP DYNAMICS - has only started to
gained
1. kurt lewin
given as a father of group dynamics – very imp
2. kart
for groups, organization
studies part:
theory
research methods
data collection
→ 3 foundations of group dynamics
ASSESMENT & MEASUREMENT:
anything that exists – exists in some quantity
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
can we collect data – functioning within group of individuals and groups
functionality as a group
we have inds (microlevel) to study for a group
if it exists → (group exists) – elements of groups and function – we should
be able to collect data (#s)
ELEMENTS OF RELIABILITY:
Def: it is synonymous with consistency
is data consistent?
when making decisions in groups and inds – when collect data it is
consistent whether it is 1 person or 2 people look through it and when
repeated observations the data is consistent
several ways to test reliability.
the more times it is more consistent
1. internal consistency:
→ look at the way we collect the data - the measurement method collecting
data. It is internal to which the instrument that is being used.
all instruments used for testing the data
Oprah’s Are you happy test?
do all the items measure and connected to happiness? → internal
consistency
cannot trust → they are giving you data that is the same – but its data is not
defined enough to be understood.
always look at the internal consistency and instrument to be very important
We have to look at items within a test – should be connected at some way.
2. test/retest reliability
this is when multiple data points within inds or groups
reliability – coefficient is usually lower for test/retest reliability than internal
consistency
must have high test/retest reliability by testing within occasions
few variables that may influence test/retest reliaibility but there should be
some sort of consistency.
May not have a high reliability – diff situations and diff occasions
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
some group or inds context that would influence test/retest reliability:
→ time b/w tests (the longer period of times the more changes that the
groups and inds within group would change the groups)
→ practice effect that carries over – might have taken this exact test in the
past
3. interrater reliability
more than 1 person who is testing or evaluating the same construct
the more people – the more influence of consistency of the data that is
collected
for interrater it is the people and their observation
everything is structured within the methods – that is the people being the
factor that make it inconsistent.
those people are trained to collect data with consistency and reliability
Every test or instruments is flawed
VALIDITY:
refers is the instrument or test measuring – what it is suppose to measure
is it measuring cohesion or something else
is it measuring personality or something else
is it measuring attraction or something else ..
when you have an instrument – it is suppose to measure a certain way
validity is very imp – does it measure what it is suppose to measure?
emotions and moods are very similar
anxiety + depression are very similar – have a high overlap from each other
multiple ways to calculate VALIDITY:
1. PREDICITIVE VALIDITY:
- trying to use data for future outcome
look at the scores of the test taken at time and do those scores influence
future behaviour.
the more you can impact future behaviour with those scores – the more
valid the data
RELATIONSHIP B/W RELIABILITY & VALIDITY:
find more resources at oneclass.com
find more resources at oneclass.com
Document Summary
What are the critical requirements of a scientific study of. Lewin still need theories to organize hypothesis and to allow to ask good questions for a good study. Research procedures collect data that is reliable and valid. When we talk about research method ways in which we collect data. Challenging part of group dynamics is difficult to study. It is the conditions that keep changing that either inhibit or benefical for creativity. It is very hard to particularly tell what condition they are in. Research for histroy of group dynamics - has only started to gained: kurt lewin given as a father of group dynamics very imp, kart for groups, organization studies part: theory research methods data collection. Look at the way we collect the data - the measurement method collecting data. It is internal to which the instrument that is being used. all instruments used for testing the data.
