Презентация на тему Qualitative and Quantitative Research Methods

Содержание

2. Course outlineHuman being as a challenge: Research
3. Course evaluation Coursework = 0.5 * H
4. “Automatic” pass policy Option 1) Those students
5. SEE AGGRESSION . . . DO AGGRESSION!Bandura,
6. Questions for discussion: What did this study
7. The 2 paradigms (McGrath & Johnson, 2003)
8. Seminar referencesAbout Stapel: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/magazine/diederik-stapels-audacious-academic-fraud.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1
9. Скачать презентацию
10. Похожие презентации

Course outlineHuman being as a challenge: Research paradigms in psychology. Introduction to Q&Q research methods. Planning your research: theories, hypothesis, and potential pitfallsGetting your data: Sources and samplesPsychological measurement: Psychometrics and psychophysicsModule 1 (September-October)

Qualitative & Quantitative Research MethodsSeminar tutor: Tatiana Ryabichenko – tanarimail@gmail.com

Course evaluation Coursework = 0.5 * H + 0.3 * T +

“Automatic” pass policy Option 1) Those students whose average score on the

SEE AGGRESSION . . . DO AGGRESSION!Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross,

Questions for discussion: What did this study reveal, why is it a

The 2 paradigms (McGrath & Johnson, 2003)

Seminar referencesAbout Stapel: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/magazine/diederik-stapels-audacious-academic-fraud.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1

ReferencesRecommended reading: Sheldon, K. (2004). Optimal Human Being: An Integrated Multi-Level Perspective. Mahwah,

Слайды презентации

Слайд 2 Course outline
Human being as a challenge: Research paradigms

Course outlineHuman being as a challenge: Research paradigms in psychology. Introduction

in psychology. Introduction to Q&Q research methods.
Planning your

research: theories, hypothesis, and potential pitfalls
Getting your data: Sources and samples
Psychological measurement: Psychometrics and psychophysics

Module 1
(September-October)

Слайд 3 Course evaluation
Coursework = 0.5 * H +

0.3 * T + 0.2 * S
Final Score =

0.6 * Coursework + 0.4 * FinalExamScore
H - home assignments
T - end-of-the-module test
S - class involvement on seminars

Слайд 4 “Automatic” pass policy
Option 1) Those students whose

“Automatic” pass policy Option 1) Those students whose average score on

average score on the end-of-module tests equals 7.5 or

above, have the option of having this score counted as final exam score.
Option 2) Those students whose Coursework score (H, T, S combined) equals 7.5 or above, have the option of having this score counted as course final score.
No-fail exam policy: If a student who is eligible to get an “Automatic pass” (Option 1 or Option 2) chooses to take the final exam, his/her exam score will only be counted in case it makes the exam / course total score higher, compared to the “automatic pass” score.

Слайд 5

SEE AGGRESSION . . . DO AGGRESSION!
Bandura, A.,

SEE AGGRESSION . . . DO AGGRESSION!Bandura, A., Ross, D., &

Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of

aggression through imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63, 575-582.
I CAN SEE IT ALL OVER YOUR FACE!
Ekman, P., & Friesen, W. V. (1971). Constants across cultures in the face and emotion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 17,124-129.
THE ONE, THE MANY
Triandis, H., Bontempo, R., Villareal, M., Asai, M., & Lucca, N. (1988). Individualism and collectivism: Cross-cultural perspectives on self-ingroup relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 323-338.
TO HELP OR NOT TO HELP
Darley, J. M., & Latané, B. (1968). Bystander intervention in emergencies: Diffusion of responsibility. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 377-383.

Слайд 6 Questions for discussion:
What did this study reveal, why

Questions for discussion: What did this study reveal, why is it

is it a ground-breaking study that changed psychology?
What were

the authors’ hypotheses? How were the hypotheses justified? How did the results support or not support the authors’ hypothesis?
3) What traits of positivist or alternative paradigm do you see in this study?
4) What kind of flaws do you see in this study? What did the authors miss? If you were doing this study what would you improve?
40 Studies That Changed Psychology (Hock, 2009)