View Single Post
  #7  
Old 2006-02-12, 08:15
far_beyond_sane's Avatar
far_beyond_sane far_beyond_sane is offline
You gamma-minus fucktards
Forum Leader
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Sydney.
Posts: 4,674
There are three big recurring methodological problems I see with experimental psychology.

1) Demand characteristics/the placebo effect - does the environment or design of the experiment suggest, consciously or unconsiously, how people should behave in it?

2) Construction of variables - for example, exactly what is 'verbal reasoning'? Or 'intelligence'? Or any number of other skills, qualities, states of mind etc. that we are quite comfortable with as concepts but have great difficulty in quantifying?

3) Correlative-causative fallacy - a fancy-arse way of saying that things that co-occur may do so because of a third unrelated factor.

Now, cast your stupid fat eyes over this.

Of course, you can't tell exactly how the research was conducted without reading it and journalism concerning science is almost always hammered shit (a source of unending frustration to me), but which of the above problems does the article suggest this study committed?
__________________
far_beyond_sane - contributing to the moral decay of your children since 1982

"It was some kind of evolutionary glitch, she figured; no different than the other unreasonable side effects of consciousness and emotion, like religion and rap music."
Reply With Quote