University Psychology: Design and Methodology Essay - Semester 1

This essay comprehensively addresses key aspects of research design and methodology in psychology. The first section critically examines the scientific method, contrasting it with causal relationships and highlighting its importance in establishing reliable knowledge. The second part delves into intervention studies, differentiating between retrospective and prospective approaches and emphasizing the advantages of prospective designs. The essay then explores the concepts of validity and reliability, illustrating their relationship with examples such as brain mapping. Finally, the essay discusses the ethical considerations of deception in psychological research, analyzing when and why it is permissible, and referencing historical debates and ethical guidelines. The essay provides a detailed overview of the core concepts essential for understanding and conducting psychological research.

1

Question 1
The statement where we say that "explain the causal relationships in nature and test
the effectiveness of the treatment," certainly gives us a lead towards a scientific way of
learning. Under the capacity of a psychological researcher, any individual would like to
explore the efficacy of treatment with the help of a "learning based on the example" model.
However, this model is only capable of giving us an incomplete knowledge (Reiss, 2014). The
addition of a scientific approach in the research can be obtained with the help of the model
that follows the procedures of “man and machine acquiring the knowledge and refining the
knowledge.”
The causal relationship between two events can give us a surface knowledge. Just like
any other science, psychology also demands the same path that other streams follow. The
standardized path for gaining knowledge with the help of scientific research goes asunder.
In the first step, we establish a causal relationship between the events; in the second
step, we try to establish a hypothesis based upon that. Let's assume that under the clinical
conditions when we administer Modafinil (an alertness promoter) to cure the jet-lag
syndrome. A causal relationship gives us the idea that it works. We further develop a
hypothesis where we say that Modafinil can be used in other conditions like dementia,
performance anxiety and others. This hypothesis may go wrong or sometimes a result can be
falsified because it is dependent upon a causal relationship (Sargeant, 2014).
Now let’s try the same research under a scientific method where we apply the
knowledge acquisition model of man, machine and scientific methods. Under this model, we
will administer Modafinil to a jet-lagged individual and apply a pre-test and post-test model
of research. In this case, we will go for a body scan to check its impact over the cognitive
function and other functions (Altman, 2014). Let’s assume that our finding says that
2

Modafinil works well on a person suffering from a jet-lagged person. When we will apply the
same procedure over a person suffering from dementia then, we can match the results of the
body scan and figure out the factors behind the success or the failure of Modafinil.
While studying the causal relationship between the events we only check the impact
of the events it can move on both sides. On the other hand, while acquiring the empirical
results of the same research with a scientific method we always get an opportunity to explain
our findings and apply them as a base in the other researches as well (Fraser, 2010).
Just like every other stream of science, Psychology is always seeking for evidence-based
practices and this is where scientific research based on empirical findings score over the
methods causal relationship are applied (Chandler, 2016).
Question 2
Broadly we can define two types of intervention studies. The first type of studies is
based on the retrospective models where a researcher tries to take the support of some past
researches and findings to draw new conclusions after launching a fresh series of the tests.
The second type of studies is prospective studies (Klick, 2012). Under this kind of a research
pattern, a researcher can work under a loop and check the main hypothesize for the best
results. The prospective model is the best model because, by the time a researcher reaches
near the conclusion, he finds that he has already removed most of the biases. In the case of
retrospective research programs, sometimes the biases become a barrier in the path of the
researcher (Anderson, 2015).
We can understand it with the help of a research design to check the half-life of a
vaccine designed to prevent the attack of the Flu. Many medicine brands have already done
researches of this nature where they tried to figure out the half-life. A retrospective based
3

research confines us in a domain where we can first collect the data presented by the past
researches and then confirm or decline this data for a new setup (Howard, 2015). For instance,
let's assume that a certain medicine maker has tested the half-life of his flu vaccine during the
flu outbreak that took place in winter. If we will launch research to compare the performance
of the same vaccine in the rainy season then, in this case, the weather will become a variable
and it can affect the accuracy of the findings (Laajaala, 2016).
An intervention based study always relies more on its own internal fact findings.
Every intervention during the course of the study is an attempt to collect data that we can fit
into other parts of processing. Most of the prospective studies follow a randomized controlled
sample; the formation of a controlled group also allows a researcher to remove the biases up
to a great extent. Under this type of a framework of prospective research; our focus remains
more on the causative factors rather than the previous data (Kumar, 2014).
A prospective independent research plan for the same efficiency test can be done with
the help of four KPI's of the flu vaccine. Let's assume that increasing the immunity, killing
certain bacteria, prevention of the growth of the bacteria and decomposition rate of the drug
are four fields. Under a prospective design of research, we can compare the tests of a single
research program and act in a loop because the findings are independent. The breakdown of
the KPI’s and regular interventions after a particular timing brings down the biases because
we are dealing with the same subject, or we can say that there are more common fields to
compare and contrast (Thiese, 2014).
An intervention study based on the prospective research model moves on its own data
collection and thus allows a researcher to explore the subject more freely. The biggest
advantage of this structure lies in the fact that it has the potential to figure out the factors
behind the causation more independently (Lawrence, 2013).
4

Question 3
When we see it, from the perspective of research in psychology, validity refers to the
accuracy of the results, it also means that the validity is a dependent variable where we prefix
certain norms or values of a performance (Tai, 2012). If our test meets with those values then
the validity of the test is high and if it doesn’t meet with the hypothesis or the previous values
that are benchmarked then the validity is low (Fraser, 2010).
The reliability of a test is dependent on the performance of the validity. For instance,
we can take the case of the use of an alertness promoter over the subjects that are jet-lagged.
If an alertness promoter is repeating its performance with many subjects then it will ascertain
validity for the value. When we find that this validity is repeating itself consistently then it
will become reliability.
Let's take the case of brain mapping. It is a test which is dependent on the target
stimuli mechanism. Certain parts of the human brain react differently when it encounters
certain familiar grounds. In the year 1995 psychologists did many experiments to check the
validity of brain mapping test.
Brain mapping test is completely dependent on reliability. Let's assume a hypothetical
situation. A convict is claiming that he has never seen the murder site before. Under a brain
mapping test, this convict can be subject to similar types of images where one image belongs
to the actual murder site. If the theories associated with the brain mapping tests are correct
and the convict is making a false statement then the brain mapping test will register no
movement when they will show him the pictures of the murder site. In the second step, they
can go for a round of confirmatory tests. In each confirmatory test, they will first check the
validity of the first finding, after witnessing substantial numbers of the validity they can say
that the findings are reliable because of the high reliability of the tests.
5

A psychometric analysis of any subject prior to any experimental study or a fact-finding
study is very important. We can understand it with the help of the case of brain mapping.
The mental orientation of the subject, which is a convict, in this case, can change the validity
and reliability of the brain mapping test results. Let's assume that the patient is suffering from
a Post-traumatic stress disorder. A psychometric test can be done on two levels. First when
the subject is facing an episode caused by PTSD and second when he is calm after having
medication. A psychometric analysis can help us in checking the psychophysiological state of
the subject with the help of this analysis we can bring down the number of the variables.
Question 4
There are many conditions when deception is allowed in scientific and psychological
researches. When we have a look at the various ethical code of conducts associated with the
research programs we find that deception is allowed under the conditions when the use of the
deceptive technique is an optimum best option for the best results. If any deception feature is
an integral phase of the design then again deception is allowed. If deception is the best and
feasible method then it can be applied. For instance, we can take the example of shock
therapy where they reconstruct an incident with an intention to give a shock to a subject so
that he or she can come out of their trauma. The same principle can be applied to
psychological researches. If such type of researches can support in generating some wisdom
that can be considered as a greater good for the society or the science then up to some extent
a deception based research is applicable. Sometimes a conscious individual can create a bias
in the result by not responding in his natural flair. A psychologist can take support of
deception in this condition.
During the era of the '60s, many psychological types of research were conducted
where the researchers kept their subjects under painful conditions. These studies are also
6

known as obedience studies. Researchers faced a lot of criticism for these research programs.
However, during the same period, another school of thoughts came in existence, according to
this scientist, a deception based research is fine if the researcher is doing it for the greater
interest of the society or the greater interest of the science. In order to bring more order in the
field of obedience research or deception based research. Scientists added a code of conduct
with obedience researches. There were two major points that were added in the main list of
the ethics of psychological research.
The first point was related to the administration of the pain. According to this new
ethical framework that was introduced in the early '70s, it was clearly mentioned that any
type of pain should not be inflicted on the subjects. The second main point was related to the
use of the data. It was said in the case of obedience research if deception persists then in this
case a respondent or the subject has all the rights to gain his privacy back. It means that a
researcher cannot publish or use that data or the findings based on that data anywhere else
(Chandler, 2016).
During the year 1965 social scientist Stanley Milgram conducted psychological
research where he subjected many individuals to tortures conditions and emotional pains.
Many other experts of that era like Edgar Vinacke raised serious issues on this treatment.
According to him, this type of research programs can destroy the trust of the society over the
psychological research. He suggested that even if it necessary then, in this case, a subject
should have this right to withdraw him from a research program if he is not comfortable
about it (Anderson, 2015).
7

References
Altman, D. (2014). Introduction to study design. EQUATOR, Retrieved from:http://www.equator-
network.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Introduction-to-study-design-Doug-Altman.pdf.
Anderson, S. (2015). Shaping the Social: design of a settings-based intervention study to improve
well-being and reduce smoking and dropout in Danish vocational schools. BMC, Retrieved
from https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-015-1936-6.
Chandler, C. (2016). Examining Intervention Design: Lessons from the Development of Eight Related
Malaria Health Care Intervention Studies. Tandonline, Retrieved from
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/23288604.2016.1179086.
Fraser, M. (2010). Steps in Intervention Research: Designing and Developing Social Programs. Sage
Journals, Retrieved from https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1049731509358424?
journalCode=rswa.
Howard, D. (2015). Optimizing the design of intervention studies: critiques and ways forward.
Macquarie University, Retrieved from
https://researchers.mq.edu.au/en/publications/optimising-the-design-of-intervention-studies-
critiques-and-ways-.
Klick, B. (2012). Optimal Design of Intervention Studies to Prevent Influenza in Healthy Cohorts.
PIOS One, Retrieved from
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0035166.
Kumar, R. (2014). Types of observational studies in medical research. Department of community
studies New Delhi, Types of observational studies in medical research. Retrieved from
http://www.astrocyte.in/article.asp?issn=2349-
0977;year=2014;volume=1;issue=2;spage=154;epage=159;aulast=Kumar
8

Laajaala, T. (2016). Optimized design and analysis of preclinical intervention studies in vivo.
Scientific Reports, Retrieved from https://www.nature.com/articles/srep30723.
Lawrence, P. (2013). Ethical judgments of deception in psychological. IOWA State University,
Retrieved from https://lib.dr.iastate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=4234&context=etd.
Reiss, J. (2014). Scientific Objectivity. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Retrieved from
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/scientific-objectivity/.
Sargeant, J. (2014). Study Designs and Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Zoonoses & Public
Health, Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/zph.12127.
Tai, M. (2012). Deception and informed consent in social, behavioral, and educational research
(SBER). Tzu Chi Medical Journal, Retrieved from
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1016319012000468.
Thiese, M. (2014). Observational and interventional study design types; an overview. Biochem Med,
Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4083571/.
9