University of Phoenix Material
Understanding the Research Process

Resources: Ch. 1, 2, and & 7 of Psychology

This required Portfolio assignment will provide you with the opportunity to practice and hone your research skills. It has been designed to help you think scientifically about real world problems and issues and to apply your knowledge of the research process to various topics in Psychology. This assignment accomplishes that goal by challenging you to:

• Differentiate between the common use of the word research and the use of the word research in the social and behavioral sciences • Identify the major steps in the research process using a classic study in Psychology as an example.

Part I: Defining Research
The word research is used in many different ways. Consider the following examples: • Your friend tells you that he intends to research different hair products before deciding on one to buy. • A real estate agent advises you to research home values in your neighborhood before putting your house on the market. • A police officer reports that she is doing ‘some research’ on possible motives for a crime that was committed. • A writer states that he does ‘extensive research’ before beginning his fictional works.

Answer the questions below:

1. How is research defined in the social and behavioral sciences?

Behavior science is area of the science which concerns with the studying of human and animal behaviors. Behavior science observes a individual and his or her behaviors along with the behaviors of society, a group, and culture, and will process which contributes to a particular behavior. There is a substantial amount of overlapping between this area and the social science, which occasionally leads to misunderstanding: social science tends to be focusing more on the structure system and culture, while behavior sciences tend to focus at the reaction within and between a organism which dictates a behavior trend.

2. What makes scientific research different from the examples provided above? In your response, be sure to address the characteristics of ‘good’ psychological research.

Scientific research involves the use of the scientific method, wherein data is collected by empirical methods, and then statistically tested to prove or disprove the hypotheses. The traditional concept of scientific method involves five steps, generally in the following order. Theory construction, Derivation of theoretical hypotheses, Operationalization of concepts, Collection of empirical data, Empirical testing of hypotheses (Maxfield & Babbie, 1998, p. 61)

Part II: Understanding the research process
Researchers in Psychology follow a systematic process of investigation. Carefully read Chapter 2 of your textbook, paying special attention to the section on Experimental Research. Then go to Chapter 7 in your textbook and read the following section: Research In-Depth: Counterfactuals and “If Only…” Thinking. Answer the questions below, using Medvec & colleagues’ first study as an example:
1. What hypothesis did Medvec & colleagues set out to test in their first study of the ‘near miss’ phenomenon? Describe the theory associated with this hypothesis.

To test the thoughts of human mind to see if it produces an emotional reaction such as taking the alternate route home and having an accident ?If only I had taken the usual route home, then this wouldn't of happened (Kowalski & Westen, [ 2011).? A tendency to imagine an alternate outcome known as counter factual thinking is the ability to think of alternative outcomes. To test the hypothesis of the ?near miss? phenomenon ?that the ease of generating counter factuals could lead some individuals with more positive objective outcomes to actually feel worse about their situation compared to some whose objective situation was actually worse (Kowalski & Westen, 2011).?

2. Identify the variables in the study and describe how they were measured. How did the researchers operationalize (test or measure) affective response upon winning a bronze or silver medal? The tendency to imagine alternative outcomes is referred to as counterfactual thinking or the simulation heuristic, the ability to simulate alternate outcomes. This “near miss” phenonmenon led researchers to hypothesize that the ease of generating counterfactuals could lead some individuals with more positive objective outcomes to actually feel worse about their situation compared to someone whose objective situation was actually worse. To examine this they studied the affective reactions of bronze and silver medalist during the summer Olympic games. The Olympics was aired on television so the researchers were able to two videos one including segments showing silver and bronze medalist at the moment that they heard the outcome of there competition and another showing the medalist on the medal stand

In the first study researchers showed vidieo tapes of silver and bronze medalist in the 1992 summer Olympic game to college students , who evaluated how happy the atheletes appeared using a 10 point scale from agony to ecstasy. The responses were averaged across participants to provide an overall index of how satisfied each of the athletes appeared. In the second study researchers conducted a study in which a different set of college judges watched a video tape of interviews of silver and bronze medalist. The judges rated the degree to which the medalist thoughts focused on how they did perform verses how they almost performed using a 10 point scale. In the third study the researchers got direct feedback from the athletes themselves opposed to having college students judge how satisfied the athletes appeared to be. 115 Empire State Game bronze and silver medalist were approached following their competitive events. They were asked to rate their thoughts using the same 10 point scale used in the second study.

3. Who were the participants in the study and what did they do? In the first study researchers Medvec and colleagues showed vidieo tapes of silver and bronze medalist in the 1992 summer Olympic game to college students , who evaluated how happy the atheletes appeared using a 10 point scale from agony to ecstasy. The responses were averaged across participants to provide an overall index of how satisfied each of the athletes appeared. In the second study Medvec and collegues conducted a study in which a different set of college judges watched a video tape of interviews of silver and bronze medalist. The judges rated the degree to which the medalist thoughts focused on how they did perform verses how they almost performed using a 10 point scale. In the third study the researchers got direct feedback from the athletes themselves opposed to having college students judge how satisfied the athletes appeared to be. 115 Empire State Game bronze and silver medalist were approached following their competitive events. They were asked to rate their thoughts using the same 10 point scale used in the second study. The participants in the study were silver and bronze medalist in a 1992 olympic summer game.

4. Describe the data that were collected and analyzed. In the first study the researchers showed the video tapes to colleges students who evaluated how happy the athlete appeared using a 10 point scale ranging from agony to ecstasy. The responses were averaged across participants to provide an overall index of how satisfied each of the athletes appeared. The results of the study confirmed the research hypothesis. Bronze medalist appeared significantly more satisfied than the silver medalist, even though objectively they were worse off. The silver medalist was standing on the stand thinking of how close she came to receiving the gold medal, sometimes coming within 1 second. Her thoughts may have been if I had ran a little bit faster or if I had stuck the landing following the vault, Thus for the silver medalist, the alternative outcome was winning the gold medal. For the bronze medalist the alternative was not being on the medal stand at all. Her thoughts might have been what if she would have been a tad slower or had she not stuck the landing. To provide additional validity to their finding, Medvec and colleagues conducted another study in which a different group of judges watched a video tape with the silver and bronze medalist. The judges rated the degree to which the medalist thoughts focused on the thoughts in which they actually did perform ( at least I…) versus how they almost performed (I almost..) using a 10 point scale. Not surprisingly the silver medalist showed more concern with almost was (M= 5.7) than did the bronze medalist (M = 4.4). In the third study the researchers decided to get feedback from the athletes as opposed to having college students judge how satisfied the athletes appeared to be. 115 Empire State game silver and bronze medalist were approached following their competitive events. They were asked to rate their thoughts using the same 10 point scale used in the second study. 1 = at least I and 10 = I almost replicating the finding of study 2, the thoughts of silver medalist reflected more I almost (M = 6.8) compared to the bronze medalist (M = 5.7).

5. Describe the results of the study. What did the researchers conclude? The results of all three studies converged to illustrate that how people think about particular situations In this case the athletes that were objectevly the better off by winning the silver appeared more dejective than the athletes who won the bronze medal. Lest you think that these results apply just to the athletes then you can easily bring it home. Imagine a student who misses an A in class by six- tenth of a point, instead earning a B plus. Compare his affective response to the classmate who final average is an 85 earning her a solid B. Although the first student is objectively and better off with a B-plus all bets are on that he would appear more dejected because of the near miss of the student who earned a B. The magnitude of difference in the affective responses of those who almost won and those who at least made the medal stand would soon seemingly depend on the value of the outcome. Winning the gold at an Olympic game hold a huge significance in terms of recognition and endorsements. Getting an A instead of a B+ is more important if that particular grade determines if one graduate with honors or not.

6. If you were to design a follow-up experiment on this subject, what might it be?

Is people are more upset when they lose the lottery by one number than opposed to than opposed to losing by all six numbers. This shows the exact situation can produce very different emotional reactions as a function of the ease in which people can imagine alternative outcomes. People who miss winning by one number, think if only I had that one number , I could have been a millionare. People loosing by all six numbers can not easily imagine an alternative scenario such that they would say if only I had those other six numbers I could have been a millionare. Near misses more readily trigger the generation of counterfactual thinking than far out misses.The near miss phenomenon led researchers to hypothesize that the ease to lead counterfactuals could leave some individuals with more positive objective outcomes to actually feel worse about their situation compared to someone whose objective situation was actually worse.

References
Kowalski, R., & Westen, D. (2011). Psychology (6th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. Retrived from : https://portal.phoenix.edu/classroom/coursematerials/psy_300/20130910/OSIRIS:45398118
Sullivan, L. E. (Ed.). (2009). The SAGE glossary of the social and behavioral sciences. (Vols. 1-3). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc. doi: http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.apollolibrary.com/10.4135/9781412972024 Shuttleworth, M. (2009, November). Scientific Research. Explorable.com Retrieved from http://explorable.com/what-is-research