Go to the Catalog
You are viewing a complimentary preview of this book. For options to unlock the full book, please login or visit our catalog to create a FlatWorld Account and see purchase options.
The Science of Psychology
Connections and Contemporary Issues

v1.0 Martin S. Shapiro
Request a Review Copy

1.6 End-of-Chapter Content

Best Online Content

The following are links to online videos, podcasts, or articles. They are educational, entertaining, and sometimes awe-inspiring. They can link the content in the chapter to real-world examples and innovators in the field.

  1. Intro to Psychology: Crash Course Psychology #1

    1. This Crash Course episode introduces the science of psychology and reviews different approaches (10:53). 

  2. Psychological Research: Crash Course Psychology #2

    1. An overview of different research methods used in psychology with Hank Green. It contains animated examples (10:50).

  3. The Top Ten Myths of Psychology 

    1. In this talk, Ben Ambridge gives examples of common myths in psychology. We’ll be addressing some of them in this textbook (15:22). 

Suggested Popular Science Books

This section has books written by science writers and researchers that are made for a general audience. 

  1. Anthropologist on Mars (2012) by Oliver Sacks. This is a great book by psychiatrist and science writer Oliver Sacks. Each chapter is a case study in neuroscience.

  2. Outliers: The Story of Success (2008) by Malcolm Gladwell. Each chapter in this book is a different story about important research in psychology. Like Oliver Sacks, Malcolm Gladwell is an excellent science writer with several books.

  3. Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst (2017) by Robert Sapolsky. Sapolsky is a primatologist and endocrinologist at Stanford University, and he has written several popular science books about psychology, neuroscience, and animal behavior.

Short Answer Questions

  1. Describe the difference between the dualistic and monistic approaches to the mind and the brain. Which of these approaches tends to be followed by modern psychologists?

  2. Compare and contrast structuralism and functionalism as ways of approaching the study of psychology.

  3. List characteristics of the following approaches to psychology:

    1. Psychoanalytic

    2. Behaviorism

    3. Cognitive

    4. Humanism

    5. Sociocultural

    6. Evolutionary

    7. Positive psychology

    8. Neuroscience

  4. Describe the differences between basic and applied approaches to psychology. Provide examples of each.

  5. List the five steps of the scientific method and provide examples of each step.

  6. Describe the WEIRD problem in psychology and efforts to remedy this problem.

  7. Describe ways that humans and other animals are used in psychological research. How are they chosen and treated ethically?

  8. Differentiate between independent and dependent variables.

  9. Suppose a psychologist is interested in studying age differences in symptoms of anxiety. Describe how they might do this study using a longitudinal research design or a cross-sectional design.

  10. Describe the difference between the reliability and the validity of an experiment.

Discussion Questions

  1. If you wanted a career in psychology, which approach would best suit your interest? If you were a researcher taking a basic approach, what would you study and why? If you would rather take more of an applied approach, which subdiscipline in applied psychology would you take and why?

  2. Do you think animals should be used in research in psychology or neuroscience? What are the advantages and disadvantages of using animals? Are there some types of animals that should not be used?

  3. Since you are likely just starting this course (or at the beginning of this textbook), what are your thoughts on the field of psychology? Do you think of psychology as a science? What misconceptions about psychology do you or others tend to have? What do you hope to learn?

References

  1. Arnett, J. J. (2009). The neglected 95%, a challenge to psychology’s philosophy of science. American Psychologist, 64(6), 571–74.

  2. Baker, M. (2015a). First results from psychology’s largest reproducibility test. Nature News. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2015.17433

  3. Baker, M. (2015b). Over half of psychology studies fail reproducibility test. Nature News. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature.2015.18248

  4. Baker, M. (2016). Biotech giant publishes failures to confirm high-profile science. Nature News, 530(7589), 141.

  5. Begley, C. G., & Ellis, L. M. (2012). Raise standards for preclinical cancer research. Nature, 483(7391), 531–33.

  6. Bitterman, M. E. (1975). The comparative analysis of learning. Science, 188(4189), 699–709.

  7. Brooks, M. (2009). Homeopathy: Sometimes a dose of nothing can do you a power of good. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/science/blog/2009/feb/06/homeopathy-homeopathic-nhs-placebo-effect

  8. Cattell, R. B. (1965). The Scientific Analysis of Personality. London: Penguin Publishing. 

  9. Center for Disease Control (2021). Autism and Developmental Disabilities Monitoring (ADDM) Network. https://www.cdc.gov/ncbddd/autism/addm.html

  10. Cherry, K. (2020). Can psychologists prescribe medication? Very Well Mind. https://www.verywellmind.com/can-psychologists-prescribe-medications-2795756

  11. Chmiel, N. (2008). History and context for work and organizational psychology. An introduction to work and organizational psychology. A European Perspective, 3–19. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.

  12. Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (2013). Evolutionary psychology: New perspectives on cognition and motivation. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 201–29.

  13. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (1979). The Belmont Report. https://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/regulations-and-policy/belmont-report/read-the-belmont-report/index.html

  14. Doyle, A. C. (2011). The Sign of Four. United Kingdom: Penguin UK.

  15. Ernst, E. (2002). A systematic review of systematic reviews of homeopathy. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 54(6), 577–82.

  16. Ghoneim, A., Salihudin, S., Thange, I., Wen, A., Oldedan, J., and Shapiro, J. (2020). Profiting from panic: The bizarre bogus cures and scams of the coronavirus era. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. https://thebulletin.org/2020/07/profiting-from-panic-the-bizarre-bogus-cures-and-scams-of-the-coronavirus-era/

  17. Gross, C. G. (1987). Neuroscience, early history of. Journal of Encyclopedia of Neuroscience, 843–47. Cambridge: Princeton University.

  18. Gurung, R. A., Hackathorn, J., Enns, C., Frantz, S., Cacioppo, J. T., Loop, T., & Freeman, J. E. (2016). Strengthening introductory psychology: A new model for teaching the introductory course. American Psychologist, 71(2), 112.

  19. Hahn, R. G. (2013). Homeopathy: Meta-analyses of pooled clinical data. Complementary Medicine Research, 20(5), 376–81.

  20. Hunkins, A. (2021). What a 115-Year-Old Academic Journal Can Teach You About Leading Change. Forbes Magazine. https://www.forbes.com/sites/alainhunkins/2021/02/15/what-a-115-year-old-academic-journal-can-teach-you-about-leading-change/?sh=39a7fdfb4850

  21. Hunt, M. (2009). The story of psychology. Palatine, IL: Anchor.

  22. James, W. (1892). A Plea for Psychology as a 'Natural Science'. The Philosophical Review. 1(2), p. 146. https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/2175743.pdf

  23. Jia, H. (2021). National and state trends in anxiety and depression severity scores among adults during the COVID-19 pandemic—United States, 2020–2021. MMWR. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 70.

  24. Kaplan, S. (2017). Hundreds of babies harmed by homeopathic remedies, families say. Scientific American. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/hundreds-of-babies-harmed-by-homeopathic-remedies-families-say/

  25. Komesaroff, P., Dodds, S. M., McNeill, P., Skene, L., & Thomson, C. (2002). Human research ethics handbook: Commentary on the national statement on ethical conduct in research involving humans. National Health and Medical Research Council.

  26. Korn, J. H., Davis, R., & Davis, S. F. (1991). Historians’ and chairpersons’ judgments of eminence among psychologists. American Psychologist, 46(7), 789.

  27. Lancet Editorial Staff (2005). The end of homeopathy. The Lancet, 366(9487), 690. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67149-8

  28. Letzter, R. (2017). What is ‘water memory’? Why this homeopathy claim doesn’t hold water. Live Science. https://www.livescience.com/61273-homeopathy-chemistry-water-memory.html

  29. Lilienfeld, S. O. (2017). Psychology’s replication crisis and the grant culture: Righting the ship. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(4), 660–64.

  30. MacDonald, P. S. (2007). Francis Bacon’s behavioral psychology. Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 43(3), 285–303.

  31. McLeod, S. A. (2007). What is reliability? Simply Psychology. www.simplypsychology.org/reliability.html

  32. National Research Council. (2012). International animal research regulations: Impact on neuroscience research: Workshop summary. Washington, D.C.: National Academies Press.

  33. NIMH.NIH.gov. Major depression. https://www.nimh.nih.gov/health/statistics/major-depression

  34. Prayogshala, M. (2020). Psychology’s WEIRD Problem: Often, WEIRD scientists conduct WEIRD experiments that are not generalizable. Psychology Today. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/non-weird-science/202004/psychologys-weird-problem

  35. Precedence Research. (2021). Homeopathic products market size to hit USD 19.7 Bn by 2030. https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2021/11/16/2335627/0/en/Homeopathic-Products-Market-Size-to-Hit-USD-19-7-Bn-by-2030.html

  36. Rad, M. S., Martingano, A. J., & Ginges, J. (2018). Toward a psychology of Homo sapiens: Making psychological science more representative of the human population. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 115(45), 11401–05.

  37. Sacks, O. (2012). An anthropologist on Mars: Seven paradoxical tales. New York: Vintage.

  38. SAMHSA. (2020). 2020 National Survey of Drug Use and Health (NSDUH) Releases. https://www.samhsa.gov/data/release/2020-national-survey-drug-use-and-health-nsduh-releases

  39. Segal, N. L. (2012). Born together—reared apart: The landmark Minnesota twin study. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  40. Skinner, B. F. (1984). Coming to terms with private events. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 7(4), 572–81.

  41. Song, F., Parekh, S., Hooper, L., Loke, Y. K., Ryder, J., Sutton, A. J., Hing, C., Kwok, C.S., Pang, C., & Harvey, I. (2010). Dissemination and publication of research findings: An updated review of related biases. Health Technol Assess, 14(8), 1–193.

  42. Stone, D. L., & Rosopa, P. J. (2017). The advantages and limitations of using meta-analysis in human resource management research. Human Resource Management Review. 27(1), 1–7.

  43. Stub, T., Musial, F., Kristoffersen, A. A., Alræk, T., & Liu, J. (2016). Adverse effects of homeopathy, what do we know? A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Complementary Therapies in Medicine, 26, 146–63.

  44. Teixeira, M. Z., Guedes, C. H., Barreto, P. V., & Martins, M. A. (2010). The placebo effect and homeopathy. Homeopathy, 99(02), 119–29.

  45. Thalmayer, A. G., Toscanelli, C., & Arnett, J. J. (2020). The neglected 95% revisited: Is American psychology becoming less American? American Psychologist. 76(1), 116–29. https://doi.org/10.1037/amp0000622

  46. Yong, E. (2012). Replication studies: Bad copy. Nature News, B(7398), 298–300.

  47. Yong, E. (2018). Psychology’s replication crisis is running out of excuses. The Atlantic. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2018/11/psychologys-replication-crisis-real/576223/