Tuesday, May 22, 2007

Narrative Psychology and Methodology

Another New York Times article nicely illustrates the interplay of qualitative and quantitative research in exploring a complex psychological topic: whether or not personality can be explored via first-person accounts. This is, of course, a throwback to some of the earliest ideas in scientific psychology.

The research summarized in the article and further elaborated upon below re-opens many questions asked by early psychologists. However, the methodological lessons learned since psychology's early days are fully understood by these researchers.

Thus, McAdams et al. (2006) (see full references below) find that narrative accounts of one's life show evidence of continuity. In other words, they check to be sure that the phenomenon they are studying is reliable over time. McAdams and his co-workers report on research in which college students write detailed accounts about their lives three times (initially, at three months, and at three years). They found continuity for "narrative complexity, and...emotional tone."

Similarly, McLean and Pasupathi (2006) find that extraverts were more likely to engage in collaborative narration. They test an independent variable (extraversion/introversion) and find that it predicts an effect under two separate conditions. McLean and Pasupathi report on two studies, the first on self-defining memories and the second on everyday narration. Their hypothesis, that extraverts were more likely to engage in collaborative narration was supported by both studies.

Adler et al. (2006) show that depressive thinking and concern over contamination each independently predicted depression. They, too, examine independent variables (self-thoughts about depression and contamination) and find that each predicted depression. Adler and his collaborators used the CAVE (the Content Analysis of Verbatim Explanations) to evaluate 70 life interviews from midlife adults. They found that depressogenic attributional style and themes of contamination each independently predict depression and low satisfaction with life.

Kross et al. (2005) attempt to look at the difference between rumination and adaptive reflection. Here, the independent variable was created by dividing participants into two groups depending on whether they asked themselves 'Why' questions. Those who did ask themselves 'Why' experienced cooler emotional reactions when thinking about past memories. In two experiments, the authors attempt to "disentangle" rumination from adaptive reflection. Their results suggest that individuals who ask 'Why?' were more able to re-experience emotional experiences in a cooler manner and without reliving the experience.

Finally, Libby et al. (2005) examine first-person and third-person memories of emotional events. They find that change is more likely to accompany third-person retrospective accounts. Again, they used participants' self-selection of first- or third- person accounts to create groups. Libby and her colleagues studied first-person vs. third person memory perspectives in five separate studies (looking at motivation, goals, instructions, and self-esteem). They found that third-person perspectives were more likely to produce judgments of self-change in the context of looking for change. However, third-person judgments were less likely to produce judgments for self-change in contexts looking for continuity.

For further reading:

Adler, J. M., Kissel, E. C., & McAdams, D. P. (2006). Emerging from the CAVE: Attributional style and the narrative study of identity in midlife adults. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 30, 39-51.

Kross, E., Ayduk, O., & Mischel, W. (2005). When asking 'Why' does not hurt: Distinguishing rumination from reflective processing of negative emotions. Psychological Science, 16, 709-715.

Libby, L. K., Eibach, R. P., & Gilovich, T. (2005). Here's looking at me: The effect of memory perspective on assessments of personal change. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 88, 50-62.

McAdams, D. P., Bauer, J. J., Sakaeda, A. R., Aniyidoho, N. A., Machado, M. A., Magrino-Failla, K., White, K. W., & Pals, J. L. (2006). Continuity and change in the life story: A longitudinal study of autobiographical memories in emerging adulthood. Journal of Personality, 74, 1371-1400.

McLean, K. C., & Pasupathi, M. (2006). Collaborative narration of the past and extraversion, Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 1219-1231.

Sunday, May 20, 2007

Two new Einstein biographies reviewed

In chapter 1, Science, we discuss Albert Einstein and his scientific works. His research illustrates the relationship between theory and experimentation (Einstein being primarily a theorist).

The books reviewed in the New York Times offer fresh insight into how Einstein formulated his theories. They also shed light on his personal life.

One of the points we raise in chapter 1 is the human element in scientific theorizing and in empirical data collection. Scientists are more similar to their fellow humans than they are different. The two biographies reviewed show Einstein's scientific side and his human side.

The books are:

Isaacson, W. (2007). Einstein: His life and universe. New York: Simon & Schuster. (First chapter)

Neffe, J. (2007). Einstein: A biography. (S. Frisch, Trans.). New York: Farrar, Straus, & Giroux. (Original work published 2005) (First chapter)

Monday, May 14, 2007

Unfairness and heart attacks

A recent article in the Los Angeles Times discusses the relationship between believing one was treated unfairly and subsequent heart attacks and angina (chest pain).

Civil servants in England were asked, "I often have the feeling that I am being treated unfairly." At the time of surveying, none of the approximately 6000 respondents were in poor health or showed signs of heart disease.

Ten years later, for those who reported high levels of unfair treatment, 387 had either died or had been treated for angina or other heart problems.

Respondents who reported less unfair treatment had lower levels of cardiac events.

The authors interpret these results as evidence for a possible relationship between cardiovascular and mental health. The mechanisms for the relationship are indirect. People who believe they have been treated unfairly are more likely to drink, smoke, overeat, and engage in other similar risky behaviors.

Thursday, May 10, 2007

Reasons to adopt Spatz & Kardas

Here are 15 reasons to adopt our book:
  1. It brings a fresh approach to research methods texts emphasizing the empowering of students as budding researchers. Our approach treats students much like apprentice scientists working in collaboration with master scientist.
  2. It offers a simpler framework toward understanding the nature of research. We divide science into three main categories: experimental, correlational, and meta-analytic. Experimental methods are broadly defined.
  3. It shows the differences in theory construction in psychological theory and physical science. We use Mjöset’s classification of social science theories: law-oriented, ideal, critical, and constructivist (Ch. 1) to provide students with a sophisticated understanding of recent social science theorizing.
  4. It provides a step-by-step framework for understanding research methodologies. We use two chapters (11 & 12) to walk students through the entire research process from getting an idea to writing the final report and presenting it.
  5. It emphasizes the central nature of ethics in psychological research. We make ethics a topic that is totally interwoven into the fabric of research and cover ethics with an entire chapter (3) that spans a gamut of topics including the IRB, scientific misconduct, and Nuremberg Code.
  6. Spatz & Kardas reproduce the entire Ethics Code of the American Psychological Association. We take students through Section 8 (Research and Publication) of APA’s Ethics Code using responsibility to participants, responsibility to psychology, and animal research as conceptual guides. Informed consent and other ethical topics are fully explained and a sample consent form is provided. APA’s entire Ethics Code is reproduced as Appendix B.
  7. It covers non-experimental approaches to psychological research. Chapter 10 covers naturalistic and participant observation, qualitative research (interviews, focus groups, oral history, archival research), and small-N research (case studies, AB, and ABA designs).
  8. It provides examples of research conducted by undergraduate students. We use examples of psychological research conducted by undergraduate students and published in undergraduate journals to inspire budding researchers.
  9. It leads students through the process of research from start to finish. Chapters 11 and 12 gently lead students through the research process from selecting original research topics to publishing research in undergraduate journals.
  10. It provides comprehensive coverage of data exploration and statistics. Chapter 5 emphasizes modern exploratory data analysis (descriptive and inferential) and graphs. Chapter 6 covers traditional NHST statistical tests. Effect size and meta-analysis are fully covered.
  11. The Stop & Think feature used by Spatz & Kardas adds to the interactive feel of the text. The Stop & Think questions (immediately followed by answers) are interspersed throughout the text, helping students see the authors’ pedagogy as they read.
  12. It places glossary items in the margins and as a separate section makes the text easier to use. All glossary items appear in the margins and in a separate glossary. Glossary items are bolded the first time they appear in the text.
  13. Spatz & Kardas’ use In the Know boxes helps students see the bigger picture easily. The In the Know boxes succinctly explain “inside information” similar to what we would share with a student during a conversation.
  14. We replicate our engaging classroom styles in our writing. The text reads easily, it's a conversation. Students are directly addressed and treated as engaged learners.
  15. It introduces extraneous variables gradually and logically. Extraneous variables are introduced gradually over three chapters (7 to 9), as are methods for their control. Students more easily learn how to handle extraneous variables through design.

Research: The 5 second rule

Here is some whimsical research. The research question is: Is it safe to eat food dropped on the floor if you pick it up within five seconds?

Interestingly, this topic has been researched. A recent New York Times article, summarizes those efforts.

All of this goes to show that nearly any topic can be researched!

Wednesday, May 2, 2007

Wagging Tails

A recent New York Times article summarizes research on differences in tail wagging by dogs. The article was published in the journal Current Biology recently. This link gives the doi locator for the article. Here is the citation:

Quaranta, A., Siniscalchi, G., & Vallortigara, G. (2007). Assymmetric tail-wagging responses to different emotive stimuli. Current Biology, 17, R199-R201.

Because we each first came to psychology as animal researchers, we naturally perk up when we find articles that stimulate our original interests. This particular article describes observational research conducted on pet dogs which indicates that their tail wagging direction differs depending of whether the stimulus causing the wagging is familiar or unfamiliar.

The 30 dogs observed were more likely to wag their tails to the right when presented with a familiar stimulus (their owner), but when presented with a large, dominant dog (a Belgian Malinois ) they were more likely to wag their tails to the left. The two other stimuli used, an unfamiliar human and a cat also led to right-side tail wagging, but with a lower amplitude.

Also of interest here is their method, naturalistic observation. From initial, unstructured observations, the authors conducted a more formal and controlled experiment. Their research serves as a good example of how scientists move from observation to experimentation.