-
The American Psychologist Oct 2019The Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) is one of psychology's most famous studies. It has been criticized on many grounds, and yet a majority of textbook authors have...
The Stanford Prison Experiment (SPE) is one of psychology's most famous studies. It has been criticized on many grounds, and yet a majority of textbook authors have ignored these criticisms in their discussions of the SPE, thereby misleading both students and the general public about the study's questionable scientific validity. Data collected from a thorough investigation of the SPE archives and interviews with 15 of the participants in the experiment further question the study's scientific merit. These data are not only supportive of previous criticisms of the SPE, such as the presence of demand characteristics, but provide new criticisms of the SPE based on heretofore unknown information. These new criticisms include the biased and incomplete collection of data, the extent to which the SPE drew on a prison experiment devised and conducted by students in one of Zimbardo's classes 3 months earlier, the fact that the guards received precise instructions regarding the treatment of the prisoners, the fact that the guards were not told they were subjects, and the fact that participants were almost never completely immersed by the situation. Possible explanations of the inaccurate textbook portrayal and general misperception of the SPE's scientific validity over the past 5 decades, in spite of its flaws and shortcomings, are discussed. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
Topics: Adult; Data Collection; History, 20th Century; Humans; Interpersonal Relations; Prisons; Psychology, Social; Reproducibility of Results; Research; Social Behavior; Young Adult
PubMed: 31380664
DOI: 10.1037/amp0000401 -
Perspectives on Psychological Science :... Nov 2017Psychology has historically been concerned, first and foremost, with explaining the causal mechanisms that give rise to behavior. Randomized, tightly controlled... (Review)
Review
Psychology has historically been concerned, first and foremost, with explaining the causal mechanisms that give rise to behavior. Randomized, tightly controlled experiments are enshrined as the gold standard of psychological research, and there are endless investigations of the various mediating and moderating variables that govern various behaviors. We argue that psychology's near-total focus on explaining the causes of behavior has led much of the field to be populated by research programs that provide intricate theories of psychological mechanism but that have little (or unknown) ability to predict future behaviors with any appreciable accuracy. We propose that principles and techniques from the field of machine learning can help psychology become a more predictive science. We review some of the fundamental concepts and tools of machine learning and point out examples where these concepts have been used to conduct interesting and important psychological research that focuses on predictive research questions. We suggest that an increased focus on prediction, rather than explanation, can ultimately lead us to greater understanding of behavior.
Topics: Humans; Machine Learning; Psychology
PubMed: 28841086
DOI: 10.1177/1745691617693393 -
Annual Review of Psychology Jan 2018In 2010-2012, a few largely coincidental events led experimental psychologists to realize that their approach to collecting, analyzing, and reporting data made it too... (Review)
Review
In 2010-2012, a few largely coincidental events led experimental psychologists to realize that their approach to collecting, analyzing, and reporting data made it too easy to publish false-positive findings. This sparked a period of methodological reflection that we review here and call Psychology's Renaissance. We begin by describing how psychologists' concerns with publication bias shifted from worrying about file-drawered studies to worrying about p-hacked analyses. We then review the methodological changes that psychologists have proposed and, in some cases, embraced. In describing how the renaissance has unfolded, we attempt to describe different points of view fairly but not neutrally, so as to identify the most promising paths forward. In so doing, we champion disclosure and preregistration, express skepticism about most statistical solutions to publication bias, take positions on the analysis and interpretation of replication failures, and contend that meta-analytical thinking increases the prevalence of false positives. Our general thesis is that the scientific practices of experimental psychologists have improved dramatically.
Topics: Humans; Psychology; Publishing
PubMed: 29068778
DOI: 10.1146/annurev-psych-122216-011836 -
Western Journal of Nursing Research Mar 2019The Modified Erikson Psychosocial Stage Inventory (MEPSI) is an 80-item, comprehensive measure of psychosocial development based on Erikson's theory with published... (Review)
Review
The Modified Erikson Psychosocial Stage Inventory (MEPSI) is an 80-item, comprehensive measure of psychosocial development based on Erikson's theory with published reliability and validity data. Although designed as a comprehensive measure, some researchers have used individual subscales for specific developmental stages as a measure; however, these subscale reliability scores have not been generally shared. This article reviewed the literature to evaluate the use of the MEPSI: the major research questions, samples/populations studied, and individual subscale and total reliability and validity data. In total, 16 research articles (1990-2011) and 28 Dissertations/Theses (1991-2016) from nursing, social work, psychology, criminal justice, and religious studies met criteria. Results support the MEPSI's global reliability (aggregate scores ranged .89-.99) and validity in terms of consistent patterns of changes observed in the predicted direction. Reliability and validity data for individual subscales were more variable. Limitations of the tool and recommendations for possible revision and future research are addressed.
Topics: Humans; Nursing Research; Psychology; Psychometrics; Reproducibility of Results; Surveys and Questionnaires
PubMed: 29676219
DOI: 10.1177/0193945918770457 -
Journal of the History of the... 2015The American-Canadian psychologist Mary Ainsworth (1913-1999) developed the Strange Situation Procedure (SSP) to measure mother-child attachment and attachment theorists...
The American-Canadian psychologist Mary Ainsworth (1913-1999) developed the Strange Situation Procedure (SSP) to measure mother-child attachment and attachment theorists have used it ever since. When Ainsworth published the first results of the SSP in 1969, it seemed a completely novel and unique instrument. However, in this paper we will show that the SSP had many precursors and that the road to such an instrument was long and winding. Our analysis of hitherto little-known studies on children in strange situations allowed us to compare these earlier attempts with the SSP. We argue that it was the combination of Ainsworth's working experience with William Blatz and John Bowlby, her own research in Uganda and Baltimore, and the strong connection of the SSP with attachment theory, that made the SSP differ enough from the other strange situation studies to become one of the most widely used instruments in developmental psychology today.
Topics: History, 20th Century; Humans; Infant; Mother-Child Relations; Object Attachment; Psychological Theory; Psychology, Developmental; United States
PubMed: 25990818
DOI: 10.1002/jhbs.21729 -
Palliative & Supportive Care Apr 2017
Topics: Alchemy; Humans; Psychology
PubMed: 28351444
DOI: 10.1017/S1478951517000189 -
Integrative Psychological & Behavioral... Dec 2022When they discuss the Danish academic situation, Szulevicz, Lund and Lund (2021) address three questions about the academic training of psychology researchers: (a) why...
When they discuss the Danish academic situation, Szulevicz, Lund and Lund (2021) address three questions about the academic training of psychology researchers: (a) why do Danish master's students in psychology more frequently choose the qualitative method for their research?; (b) what are psychology students working on?; and (c) what are they interested in? These three questions have led us to reflect on researcher training and the political and educational model universities adopt for psychology master's courses, not only in the Danish context, but also in other general contexts. In this commentary, we will discuss one strictly normative issue: what should the scientific ideal be for training researchers in psychology? Or more accurately: how can psychology contribute to discussions about the scientific ideal of researcher training in this knowledge area?
Topics: Humans; Universities; Psychology; Biomedical Research; Denmark; Education, Graduate; Students, Health Occupations; Psychology, Educational; Models, Educational; Politics
PubMed: 36284070
DOI: 10.1007/s12124-022-09715-2 -
The Clinical Neuropsychologist Nov 2016This invited paper explores the diverse pathways that have led to the development of neuropsychology in Mexico. (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
This invited paper explores the diverse pathways that have led to the development of neuropsychology in Mexico.
METHOD
The authors conducted a review of the literature and their own experiences to describe the seminal events and people relevant to the development of this area of research and practice.
RESULTS
The master's degree is the usual level of educational attainment for those who wish to practice clinical neuropsychology. As of now, there is not a board certification process in neuropsychology, although there is one in clinical psychology.
CONCLUSIONS
Neuropsychology and other mental health disciplines in Mexico and Latin America have historically been poorly funded, and have lacked optimal means of communication as to research findings and clinical initiatives and standards. However, there is reason to think that this will be improved upon in coming years.
Topics: Certification; Humans; Mexico; Neuropsychological Tests; Neuropsychology; Psychology; Psychology, Clinical
PubMed: 27603048
DOI: 10.1080/13854046.2016.1226387 -
The Behavioral and Brain Sciences Dec 2020Most theories and hypotheses in psychology are verbal in nature, yet their evaluation overwhelmingly relies on inferential statistical procedures. The validity of the...
Most theories and hypotheses in psychology are verbal in nature, yet their evaluation overwhelmingly relies on inferential statistical procedures. The validity of the move from qualitative to quantitative analysis depends on the verbal and statistical expressions of a hypothesis being closely aligned - that is, that the two must refer to roughly the same set of hypothetical observations. Here, I argue that many applications of statistical inference in psychology fail to meet this basic condition. Focusing on the most widely used class of model in psychology - the linear mixed model - I explore the consequences of failing to statistically operationalize verbal hypotheses in a way that respects researchers' actual generalization intentions. I demonstrate that although the "random effect" formalism is used pervasively in psychology to model intersubject variability, few researchers accord the same treatment to other variables they clearly intend to generalize over (e.g., stimuli, tasks, or research sites). The under-specification of random effects imposes far stronger constraints on the generalizability of results than most researchers appreciate. Ignoring these constraints can dramatically inflate false-positive rates, and often leads researchers to draw sweeping verbal generalizations that lack a meaningful connection to the statistical quantities they are putatively based on. I argue that failure to take the alignment between verbal and statistical expressions seriously lies at the heart of many of psychology's ongoing problems (e.g., the replication crisis), and conclude with a discussion of several potential avenues for improvement.
Topics: Humans; Intention; Psychology
PubMed: 33342451
DOI: 10.1017/S0140525X20001685 -
The American Psychologist Nov 2022Field social psychology is a conceptual and methodological approach to describe, examine, and explain psychological phenomena at multiple levels of analysis with...
Field social psychology is a conceptual and methodological approach to describe, examine, and explain psychological phenomena at multiple levels of analysis with emphasis on the sociocultural environments in which people are embedded, the unfolding of psychological processes over time, and the use of ecologically valid multiple methods in conjunction. In this essay, we first define a contemporary form of field social psychology from its roots in the history of psychological study. Second, we argue for the necessity of the reemergence of this approach given the limitations of the dominant current social psychological paradigm exposed by the replication crisis. Third, we outline an integrative and actionable model of field social psychological research. We describe two contemporary examples of field social psychological research concerning climate change protests in Norway and restorative justice in the U.S.A. to illustrate this framework. We end with implications of field social psychology for developing psychological science. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
Topics: Humans; Psychology, Social; Social Justice; Psychology
PubMed: 34807631
DOI: 10.1037/amp0000931