Research Methodology (Developing Ideas)

Brian J. Piper, Ph.D.

Goals

• Types of Research• Idea Generation

– Luck– Theory– Literature

Basic (Preclinical) Research

• Addresses fundamental questions• Laboratory based (Simple, Controlled)• Experimental Psychology Areas

– Cognitive Psychology– Social Psychology– Biopsychology

Applied (Clinical) Research

• Addresses “real world” questions• Non-laboratory based (Complex, Non-

controlled)• Example areas:

– Educational psychology– Industrial-Organizational psychology– Neuropsychology

Memory Island

Piper et al. (2010) Pharmacology, Biochemistry & Behavior, 98, 432-439.

Quantitative Research

• Involves numbers & statistics• Majority of psychological research• “Top-down”• Example: polls

Qualitative Research

• Non-numerical, themes (but rigorous!)• Minority of psychological research• “bottom up”• Example focus group

Operational Definitions

• Concept is defined based on the operation used for measurement

• Height, weight, humor• Intelligence exercise

Developing Research Ideas: Serendipity

• Monoamine-Oxidase Inhibitor (iproniazid) a treatment for tuberculosis and later depression

• Dose response effects of prenatal nicotine

Piper & Corbett (2011). Nicotine & Tobacco Research.

Developing Ideas: Theory

• Theory: a set of logically consistent statements about phenomenon

• Micro-Theory: specific, e.g. monoamine & depression

• Macro-Theory: Skinner, Piaget, Freud

Evaluating Theories

• Productive: does this generate research?• Falsifiable: can the theory be disproved• Parsimonious: contains minimum assumptions

– Lloyd Morgan’s Canon: in no case may we interpret an action as the outcome of an exercise of a higher faculty if there is a lower one

– Example: cat and faucet

Evaluating TheoriesEvolution(Darwin)

Psychoanaltysis (Freud)

Cognitive Development(Piaget)

Behaviorism(Skinner)

Productive +++ + ++ +++

Falsifiable +++ --- +++ +++

Parsimonious +++ --- ++ +++

Strong Inference

• Programmatic Research:– Study 1 (Outcome A) -> Study 2 (Outcome B)– Used to exclude possibilities

Platt, J.R. (1964). Science, 146, 347-353.

Ideas: Literature Search

• Wikipedia (preliminary only, variable quality)• Google (heavy on $)• Pubmed (Backward Search)• Psych Info (Backward Search)• Specialized databases (Backward Search)• Google Scholar (Forward Search)• Direct contact

Pubmed

• Developed by National Library of Medicine (NIH)• http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed

Pubmed

Keywords are Important

Free is For Me!

Google Scholar

Specialized Databases

• Manage to bypass copyright law (how?)• Example: Psychedelic Bibliography• http://www.maps.org/sys/w3pb.pl?face=simple/

All Journals Aren’t Created Equal

Great! Not Great!Psychological Science (5.1) Psychological Reports (0.3)

Science (30.1) Perceptual & Motor Skills (1.2 )

Nature (29.8) J of Applied Communication Res (0.7)

Psychological Bulletin (12.9) Legal & Criminological Psych (0.4)

J Personality Social Psych (5.2) Psychology & Psychotherapy (0.6)

J of Abnormal Psychology (4.5) American J of Psychology (0.3)

Annual Review of Psychology (22.8) Computers in Human Behavior (0.3)

J Amer Med Association (30.0) Journal of Applied Social Psychology (0.7)

Neuropsychopharmacology (6.7 ) International J of …. , SW Missouri Newsletter

Impact Factor: # citations per manuscript per year

Replication

• Repeating a study and getting similar outcomes

Overall (I-squared = 28.6%, p = 0.181)

Study

Nilsson

Piper

NACC African Americans

Kwon

UCDADC

Deary

Gaynor

Bloss

NACC Caucasians

Taylor

0.92 (0.79, 1.08)

OR (95% CI)

0.94 (0.60, 1.46)

0.70 (0.09, 5.72)

0.95 (0.42, 2.14)

0.95 (0.29, 3.12)

0.37 (0.14, 1.03)

1.13 (0.52, 2.43)

1.13 (0.51, 2.48)

4.65 (1.56, 13.87)

0.93 (0.72, 1.20)

0.83 (0.62, 1.11)

0.92 (0.79, 1.08)

OR (95% CI)

0.94 (0.60, 1.46)

0.70 (0.09, 5.72)

0.95 (0.42, 2.14)

0.95 (0.29, 3.12)

0.37 (0.14, 1.03)

1.13 (0.52, 2.43)

1.13 (0.51, 2.48)

4.65 (1.56, 13.87)

0.93 (0.72, 1.20)

0.83 (0.62, 1.11)

1.05 .1 10 20

Piper et al. (2012). Laterality.

Replication Example #2: Mozart Effect

• College students (N=36) completed a spatial reasoning task after listening to Mozart, relaxation tape, or silence.

Rauscher et al. (1993). Nature, 365, 611.

Replication Example #2: Mozart Effect

• College students (N=36) completed a spatial reasoning task after listening to Mozart, relaxation music, or silence.

• Governor Zell Miller (GA) wanted to give all kids classic CDs.

• Finding repeatedly not replicated.

Rauscher et al. (1993). Nature, 365, 611.

Summary

• Types of Research– Preclinical & Clinical– Quantitative & Qualitative

• Idea Generation (luck, literature, theory)• Replication