Social

Psychology
NIMRAH AHMED
4/ OCTOBER/ 2016
THE FIELD OF
SOCIAL
PSYCHOLOGY -
Research
Correlational Research:
detecting natural
associations (p.18 - 28 )

THE STUDY OF THE

NATURALLY OCCURRING
RELATIONSHIP AMONG
VARIABLES
Social psychological research varies by:

LOCATION METHOD

CAN BE FIELD OR LABRATORY CAN BE CORRELATION OR EXPERIMENT

CORRELATION: TWO OR MORE FACTORS ARE NATURALLY RELATED

OR NOT

EXPERIMENT: MANIPULATING SOME TO SEE EFFECT ON ANOTHER

Case e.g. 1. Carroll, Smith and Bennet (1994):
The Socioeconomic status-longevity correlation

Variables in a natural setting

Besides this study, several other

supported the status longevity
correlation
But why are we calling it a
correlation?
Status longevity relation:
Status might promote long life, provide with better health care
options. Status can lead to a healthier longer life.

AGREED?

Or is it the other way around where health that helps one earn a
better status?

OR is a third factor effecting these two?

Correlation allows us to predict, but
cannot tell whether changing one will
cause a change in the other
CORRELATION CAUSATION CONFUSION
Case e.g. 2. Self esteem-academic achievement
correlation

This can also go

the other way
around
Correlation and causation further
explained
Why do we say its a common confusion?
X -> Y or Y -> X ? OR X -> Y -> Z?

Mathematical extractions: removing intelligence and family status

(correlation evaporated)

Self esteem Achievement

Intelligence and family status

Disadvantage of Correlational
Research
Ambiguity of results
Knowing that two variables change together (correlate) enables
us to predict one when we know the other, but correlation does
not specify cause and effect.
Advanced correlation

Suggests cause and effect relationships

Time lagged correlations: they reveal the sequence of events
(discovering which precedes one or the other)

Since it is advance, researchers can statistically remove the

effect of confounding variable (third variable)
Status Longevity

Removing cigarette smoking allowed the

relationship between the two variables to Cigarette smoking
stay
Survey Research

RANDOM SAMPLING:
SURVEY PROCEDURE IN WHICH
EVERY PERSON IN THE POPULATION
BEING STUDIED HAS AN EQUAL
CHANCE OF INCLUSION
Potentially biasing influences of surveys
1. Unrepresentative samples: opinion poll was collected, one
candidate won by a landslide over the other, voter information taken
from phonebook and car registration only
2. Order of questions: if first asked about gay marriage and then
about civil unions of gays and lesbians -> support, rather than when
phrased in another way
3. Response options: energy from nuclear power (41%) vs three
options (21%)
4. Wording of questions: too much spent on assistance to the
poor (23%) vs too much spent on welfare (53%) OR cutting foreign aid
(favored) and increasing spending to help hungry people in other
nations (favored)
Framing: The way a question or an issue
is posed -> influences peoples decisions
and opinions
30% fat (YES) vs 70% lean, 30%
fat (NO) for ground beef

With an option to opt in, where everyone else

was not a donor, only a few people choose to
Application:organ donation be donors,
(yes, opting out)
Experimental Research: Searching
for Cause and Effect
Experiments analogy to aeronautical engineers
What is an Experiment?

Upcoming slides- experiments that suggest cause-effect

explanations of correlational findings
Correlational and experimental studies of
prejudice against the obese
Experiment 1: Steven Gortmaker and colleagues (1993), obese women.
7 years later, the ones who were still obese -> less likely to be married or earning
high salaries as compared to the comparison group
Correcting for differences such as race, aptitude, parental income etc, there was
still a link between OBESITY and LOWER STATUS.
After controlling for everything else
figured that prejudice was related to this

Phone call experiment. PREJUDICE was having an effect.

Experiments that suggest cause-effect explanations of correlational findings

Correlational and experimental studies
of TV violence viewing
Experiment 2: An experiment here as well helped clarify causation
More violent tv watching, more aggressive or is it the other way round? Or is
there a third confounding variable involved?
Chris Boyatzis and his colleagues (1995), experiment with school children. Power
rangers shown to some but not all.
Results: viewers acted aggressively
Ingredients of an experiement

1. Control
Holding everything constant

2. Random Assignment
Experimental conditions and
random assignment

Difference between random

assignment and random sampling?
The Ethics of Experimentation

Mundane Realism- behaviors not the same as everyday behaviors. If

mundane realism is high, external validity is low.
Experimental realism- degree to which the experiment involves the
participant
Deception definition?
Demand Characteristics- telling the participant what is expected of
them
Informed consent- agreement to participant knowing information
about the experiment
Debrief- post-experimental explanation, involving disclosure of
deception
Experimental realism and the
necessity of deception
Class exercise: