Application of Scientific Principles and Critique of Research Methods

This report critically examines the application of scientific principles, such as falsifiability and overreliance on anecdotes, and evaluates research methods, including the use of representative samples and control groups, within the context of psychological studies. It contrasts two studies: a 2016 Swedish research project on Yoga's effect on mindset, which is critiqued for its small sample size and lack of a control group, and a 2018 study investigating the relationship between Yoga and creativity, which demonstrates improved methodology through a larger, more representative sample and the inclusion of a control group. The analysis emphasizes the importance of adhering to scientific rigor to ensure the credibility and applicability of research findings in psychology, highlighting how studies can be strengthened by addressing methodological weaknesses and embracing core scientific principles. Desklib provides access to similar assignments and resources for students.

Running head: PSYCHOLOGY 1
Psychology
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation

PSYCHOLOGY 2
Scientific Principles
Falsifiability
The principle of falsifiability states that, a theory or a preposition is presumed scientific if
researchers can prove the likelihood of it being false (Lilienfeld et al., 2014). Therefore, the
ability to disapprove specific claims makes them falsifiable. According to the case scenario, the
Swedish researchers investigated to prove that Yoga calms and focuses the mind of an
individual. Yoga practices make an individual to maintain a steady and a slow breathing rate
which in-turn eases the mind (de Manincor, Bensoussan, Smith, Fahey, & Bourchier, 2015).
However, there is no sufficient evidence to prove that the effects of Yoga distract the mindset of
people. Therefore, the investigations by the Swedish researchers are not falsifiable. The 2018
study aimed to demonstrate that the practice of Yoga improves the thinking and creativity of
individuals. The investigators compared the creativity of the experiment group (those practising
Yoga) and the control (those not practising Yoga). The findings indicated that the individuals
undergoing Yoga practices are more creative than those not practising Yoga. Like the 2016 study
by the Swedish researchers, no data proves that the results are false. A show that some
individuals who underwent Yoga did not experience improved creativity would have made the
scientific claims falsifiable.
Overreliance on Anecdotes
Pseudoscience refers to practices, beliefs, or statements that individuals perceive to be
factual and scientific but do not follow scientific methods (Lee, & Hunsley, 2015). The scientific
principle of overreliance on anecdotes requires investigators to prefer statements that have a data
proof to those that lack proof (Bedi, 2016). Comments by single individuals can be biased and
lack concrete evidence like data. In the case scenario, the Swedish researchers present data to

PSYCHOLOGY 3
prove that the practice of Yoga focuses the mindset of an individual. The ten volunteers stated
that a calm mindset was due to steady and slow breathing whereas irregular and fast breathing
begets anger and distraction. The data by the researchers prove that their study is scientific as it
adhered to scientific methods. The research on the relationship between Yoga and creativity by
the 2018 investigators is also scientific as it has sufficient data to prove the claims. The
investigators recruited two-hundred volunteers for the creativity study. The researchers further
divided the groups into n experiment and a control team. Those that practised Yoga indicated
enhanced creativity and thinking in comparison to the control group. Therefore, the readers of
the 2018 study can conclude that it is scientific due to the available data to prove the claims.
Research Methods
Unrepresentative or biased sample
A biased or unrepresentative sample is one that the number of participants in a study does
not indicate a logical representation of the total population (Gosling, & Mason, 2015). The
sample size can be biased or small to represent the target population. In the 2016 research by the
Swedish investigators on the benefits of Practicing Yoga, the researchers recruited ten
participants. The sample size of ten individuals is small and does not depict a realistic
representation of people. Therefore, the researchers should increase the sample size to enhance
the credibility of their research. Unlike the 2016 investigation, the 2018 investigators recruited
two-hundred individuals to investigate the correlation between Yoga and creativity. Two-
hundred is an improvement of the ten individuals hired by the Swedish investigators. Therefore,
the 2018 research is more credible than the 2016 study. The 2018 researchers recruited an
adequate sample size thereby eliminating the fears of improper representation and biases. Small
sample size makes a study to be biased while a significant number of participants lead to

PSYCHOLOGY 4
unbiased results. Researchers should strive to use sufficient sample sizes to improve the
applicability and the credibility of their various experiments.
Lack of a Control Group
A practical experiment should have both the research and a control group. A control
group is one that lacks the parameter that the experimenters are testing (Mertens, 2014). The
control is a benchmark for measuring the findings of the experiment group. The control group
helps investigators to monitor the impact of a given variable on the experiment group. In the case
scenario, the Swedish researchers only recruited an experiment group consisting of ten people
but did not draft a control group. The omission of the control group makes their experiment to
lack the verifiability factor thereby rendering it inadequate. Unlike the 2016 study by the
Swedish researchers, the 2018 investigation on the relationship between Yoga and creativity has
a control group. The investigators recruited two-hundred individuals to prove the fact that
practising Yoga improves the thinking and creativity of an individual. Out of the recruited
individuals, half practised Yoga while the remaining half did not undergo the Yoga exercise. The
experiment group indicated increased thinking and creativity after the exercise while the control
showed limited creativity. The 2018 research is more credible than the 2016 study due to the
inclusion of the control group for verifiability.

PSYCHOLOGY 5
References
Bedi, R. P. (2016). A detailed examination of Canadian counselling psychology doctoral
programs. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 57(2), 83.
de Manincor, M., Bensoussan, A., Smith, C., Fahey, P., & Bourchier, S. (2015). Establishing
critical components of yoga interventions for reducing depression and anxiety, and
improving well-being: a Delphi method study. BMC complementary and alternative
medicine, 15(1), 85.
Gosling, S. D., & Mason, W. (2015). Internet research in psychology. Annual review of
psychology, 66.
Lee, C. M., & Hunsley, J. (2015). Evidence-based practice: separating science from
pseudoscience. The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 60(12), 534-540.
Lilienfeld, S. O., Lynn, S. J., Namy, L. L., Woolf, N. J., Cramer, K. M., & Schmaltz, R. (2014).
Psychology: From Inquiry to Understanding, Second Canadian Edition, DSM-5 Update
Edition. Pearson Education Canada.
Mertens, D. M. (2014). Research and evaluation in education and psychology: Integrating
diversity with quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Sage publications.