Fall 2008 Completed Research Projects

Here's another batch of student research projects. This particular class did a very good job planning and executing their research over a two-semester time span.

• Does noise affect the concentration and response time of college students? (A classic lab experiment in which participants had to complete a reading test while either listening to the sound of a jackhammer at 75db. No significant difference found.)
• Baptist feelings toward science at a small Southern college over a 47-year span (A replication of a survey conducted in the early 1960s. Interestingly, 2008 respondents were significantly less likely to believe that: "It is possible to harmonize modern scientific findings with religious concepts?")
• Reasons Facebook users accept friend requests from strangers (A low response rate led to insignificant results, nonetheless this remains an important topic.)
• What makes a woman stay with her abuser? (Women from a local shelter and college students who responded to an e-mail request were surveyed. A small N led to nonsignificant results.)
• Female perceptions of male intelligence based on first names (A partial replication of a 1993 study discovered that men with younger generation names [e.g., Matthew, William, and Ethan] were perceived as more intelligent than men with older generation names [e.g., Harry, Don, and Fred].)
• Are cigarettes purchased more by males or females: Age and race effects (A field experiment at a local convenience store found that older, White males purchased the most cigarettes, younger, White males the most Skoal, and younger, Black males the most cigars.)
• Who are more depressed: Black or White men? (A survey study using the Beck Depression Inventory found no differences with two groups of 25 male colleges students.)
• A small campus study on classroom seating due to student gender (An observational study of where students sit in class by instructor gender, student gender, instructor race, and student race found that females are more likely to sit near the front of the class and more so when the instructor, too, is female.)
• Are children in two-parent households more academically successful? (Conducted at a local school system, the research found no difference in student GPAs by household type.)
  

Please contact me if you are interested in further information about any of these research projects.

An Academic Pack Rat

I was reading Mischel's column in the November APS Observer. In that column, Mischel speculated about why psychologists reviewing grants are so tough on each other. He noted that it is relatively easy to judge the methodology of a study, but that it is a lot more difficult to judge the importance of the work within the larger context.

Mischel referenced a 1973 American Psychologist article by Cartwright, Determinants of scientific progress. So, I walked out of my office into the lounge where we keep our American Psychologists and picked up Volume 23, Number 3 (March, 1973) and opened it up to page 222. Our in-house collection goes back to 1955 and is largely complete. It represents the personal collections of several faculty over many years.

Next, I read Cartwright's article which is about the risky shift and how it became an important topic in social psychology. Cartwright wrote (p. 223), "Interest in the field [the risky shift] was heightened further by the publication of a popular social psychology text by Brown (1965), which devoted an entire chapter to this research and proposed an ingenious explanatory scheme to account for the major results known at the time."

It just so happens that when I took social psychology in 1970 as my second-ever psychology course, Brown's text was the one used. I walked over to my bookshelf, picked up the volume and found the chapter, Group Dynamics, and read the several pages on Stoner's original research on what is now called the risky shift.

Then, I went to my one of my file cabinets and retrieved my notebook from that 1970 class. On May 4, 1970 we discussed in class what Brown called Stoner problems in the text. Certainly, I did not recall that class or our discussion. A few pages later, I noted Stoner's name among the others the class was supposed to know for the final exam. (The other names for that chapter were Sherif, Asch, and Bales.)

While scanning my old notebook I was struck by how many topics that had been covered in that class were now totally familiar to me: Calhoun's rat crowding study, LeBoeuf's elephant seals, Harlow's attachment research, Heider's balance theory, Gestalt psychology, the founding of the Royal Society, and many more.

When I first read Mischel's column and Cartwright's article, I wondered what I was doing in March, 1973. I recall I was a senior finishing up my undergraduate degree in psychology at the University of Baltimore. Certainly, I was not thinking about what makes a particular piece of scientific research important. The other thing I thought of was how nice it is to have old materials at hand. It reinforces my pack rat tendencies.

New-ro Psychology

An article by David Glenn in the Chronicle of Higher Education, Psychology departments are changing their behavior (December 5, Volume 55, Issue 15, Page A1) discusses how research in psychology is changing because of neuroscience.

As we have noted earlier, the practice of science has become more of a team sport. Neuroscience is suited to groups of scientists working together because of its inherent complexity, large equipment costs, and necessity for specialization.

Like physics and biology before, psychology is now becoming "big science" and directors of research projects manage large budgets and supervises teams of scientists and assistants. Fortunately, according to Glenn, the emergence of neuroscience has, mostly, led to cooperation with older, traditional forms of behavioral psychology.

One exception, however, has been grant funding. Since 2004, the National Institute for Mental Health has changed its research priorities and now tends to fund research that has neuropsychological or genetic components. (Here is an article from APA on that topic.)

Glenn quotes Alan Kraut, APS's executive director, "Everybody, I think, would recognize that behavior is ultimately the result of biological, environmental, and genetic processes...But that doesn't mean that every study needs to have a biological component."

Clearly, psychology has entered a new era, one characterized by the search for the neurological causes of behavior. This is not a bad thing. However, it means that those who wish to research psychology will have to adapt and learn new ways to work together.