Swedish web site
Research quality in empirical studies with human participants2023HT
|
|
Course plan
No of lectures
Eight lectures/seminars
Recommended for
Ph D and master's students who do studies with human participants as part of their thesis work, or anyone that is interested in quality aspects other than those usually adressed in courses in research methods
The course was last given
This is the first time
Goals
To be able to reflect on how seemingly external factors and "irrelevant" influence the results and the generalizability of the obtained results of a study.
Prerequisites
No formal requirements but some familiarity with quantitative and/or qualitative research methods is probably necessary.
Organization
A series of combined lectures and seminars, where the first part is primarily devoted to discusing the texts for the seminar, and the first time is devoted on how the arguments apply or not apply to the partiticipants' own research
Content
Factors that often are not discussed inpublished papers but which are known (or suggested) to influence the participants be3havior and/or the validity of the generalizations from the obtained results.
Literature
Curent and classical papers on quality aspects of empirical research. P
AND THEIR IMPLICATIONS
reliminary literature list:
Dahlbäck (2003) If cognitive science is multidisciplinary, which are the
disciplines
Dahlbäck (2016) Tvärvetenskapens kvalitetsproblem
Orne (1962) On the social psychology of the psychological experiment With
particular reference to demand characteristics and their implications. American
Psychologist, 17(11), 776–783
Rosenthal (1967) Covert communication in the psychological experiment.
Psychological Bulletin, 1967, Vol 67, No. 5, 356-367
• Stroebe et al (2012) Scientific misconduct and the Myth of
self-correction in science
Nosek et al (2012) Scientific utopia: II. Restructuring incentives and
practices to promote truth over publishability
Ioannidis (2012) Why science is not necessarily self-correcting
Nils Dahlbäck and Arvid Karsvall, Personality Bias in Volunteer Based User
Studies? Proceedings of HCI 2000
Heinrich et el (2010) The Weirdest People in the World? Behavioral and Brain
Sciences
Michael Buhrmester, Tracy Kwang, and Samuel D. Gosling (2011) Amazon’s
Mechanical Turk: A New Source of Inexpensive, Yet High-Quality, Data?
Perspectives on Psychological Science 6(1) 3–5
Gabriele Paolacci1 and Jesse Chandler (2014) Inside the Turk: Understanding
Mechanical Turk as a Participant Pool
Clark, H. (1973) The language as fixed-effect fallacy
Ioannidis, J. (2005) Why most published research findings are false
Yarkoni, T (2022) The Generalizability Crisis. Behavioral and Brain Sciences
Lectures
1. Different explicit or implcit quality criteria in different scientific
fields.
2. Demand characteristics of the experimental situation
3. Why self-correction does not work as it should i today's research
4. Problems with non-statistical generalizations I
5. Problems with non-statistical generalizations II
6. Problems with statistical generalizations
8. The replication crisis
9. The generalization crisis.
10. Course summary and evaluation
Examination
Two questions submitted to each seminar
A written ezam
Examiner
Nils Dahlbäck & Fredrik Stjernberg (IKOS)
Credits
6 p
Comments
We are a bit uncertain on how many credit points the students should receive
and would appreciate comments on this before making this final.
We plan to build a home page for the course that we aim to have ready before
the start of the fall semester, or earlier if deemed necessary
Page responsible: Anne Moe
