{"id":72,"date":"2020-04-29T13:55:04","date_gmt":"2020-04-29T13:55:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/intropsychneuro\/?post_type=chapter&#038;p=72"},"modified":"2021-09-03T16:32:49","modified_gmt":"2021-09-03T16:32:49","slug":"why-is-research-important","status":"publish","type":"chapter","link":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/intropsychneuro\/chapter\/why-is-research-important\/","title":{"raw":"Why is Research Important?","rendered":"Why is Research Important?"},"content":{"raw":"<div class=\"PageContent-ny9bj0-0 iapMdy\">\r\n<div id=\"main-content\" class=\"MainContent__HideOutline-sc-6yy1if-0 bdVAq\">\r\n<div id=\"1db17970-a37e-48e8-b20c-941b52ce73ef\">\r\n<div id=\"79920\" class=\"ui-has-child-title\"><header><\/header>\r\n<div class=\"textbox textbox--learning-objectives\"><header class=\"textbox__header\">\r\n<p class=\"textbox__title\"><span style=\"color: #ffffff\">Learning Objectives<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/header>\r\n<div class=\"textbox__content\">\r\n<div id=\"79920\" class=\"ui-has-child-title\"><section>By the end of this section, you will be able to:\r\n<ul>\r\n \t<li>Explain how scientific research addresses questions about behaviour<\/li>\r\n \t<li>Discuss how scientific research guides public policy<\/li>\r\n \t<li>Appreciate how scientific research can be important in making personal decisions<\/li>\r\n<\/ul>\r\n<\/section><\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<p class=\"indent no-indent\"><span style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\">Scientific research is a critical tool for successfully navigating our complex world. Without it, we would be forced to rely solely on intuition, other people\u2019s authority, and blind luck. While many of us feel confident in our abilities to decipher and interact with the world around us, history is filled with examples of how very wrong we can be when we fail to recognize the need for evidence in supporting claims. At various times in history, we would have been certain that the sun revolved around a flat earth, that the earth\u2019s continents did not move, and that mental illness was caused by possession (<\/span><a class=\"autogenerated-content\" style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\" href=\"https:\/\/openstax.org\/books\/psychology-2e\/pages\/2-1-why-is-research-important#CNX_Psych_02_01_trephining\">Figure PR.2<\/a><span style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\">). It is through systematic scientific research that we divest ourselves of our preconceived notions and superstitions and gain an objective understanding of ourselves and our world.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n<div id=\"CNX_Psych_02_01_trephining\" class=\"os-figure\">\r\n<figure>\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"325\"]<img id=\"20141\" src=\"https:\/\/openstax.org\/resources\/5a71230040990c825014c89e729d23c06f4174d3\" alt=\"A skull has a large hole bored through the forehead.\" width=\"325\" height=\"325\" \/> Figure\u00a0PR.2\u00a0Some of our ancestors, across the world and over the centuries, believed that trephination\u2014the practice of making a hole in the skull, as shown here\u2014allowed evil spirits to leave the body, thus curing mental illness and other disorders. (credit: \u201ctaiproject\u201d\/Flickr)[\/caption]<\/figure>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<p id=\"fs-idp5561792\" class=\"indent no-indent\">The goal of all scientists is to better understand the world around them. Psychologists focus their attention on understanding behaviour, as well as the cognitive (mental) and physiological (body) processes that underlie behaviour. In contrast to other methods that people use to understand the behaviour of others, such as intuition and personal experience, the hallmark of scientific research is that there is evidence to support a claim. Scientific knowledge is\u00a0<span id=\"term45\" class=\"no-emphasis\">empirical<\/span>: it is grounded in objective, tangible evidence that can be observed time and time again, regardless of who is observing.<\/p>\r\n<p id=\"fs-idp12552816\" class=\"no-indent\">While behaviour is observable, the mind is not. If someone is crying, we can see behaviour. However, the reason for the behaviour is more difficult to determine. Is the person crying due to being sad, in pain, or happy? Sometimes we can learn the reason for someone\u2019s behaviour by simply asking a question, like \u201cWhy are you crying?\u201d However, there are situations in which an individual is either uncomfortable or unwilling to answer the question honestly, or is incapable of answering. For example, infants would not be able to explain why they are crying. In such circumstances, the psychologist must be creative in finding ways to better understand behaviour. This chapter explores how scientific knowledge is generated, and how important that knowledge is in forming decisions in our personal lives and in the public domain.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<section id=\"fs-idp9845952\">\r\n<h3>Use of Research Information<\/h3>\r\n<p id=\"fs-idp47768912\" class=\"indent no-indent\">Trying to determine which theories are and are not accepted by the scientific community can be difficult, especially in an area of research as broad as psychology. More than ever before, we have an incredible amount of information at our fingertips, and a simple internet search on any given research topic might result in a number of contradictory studies. In these cases, we are witnessing the scientific community going through the process of reaching a consensus, and it could be quite some time before a consensus emerges. For example, the explosion in our use of technology has led researchers to question whether this ultimately helps or hinders us. The use and implementation of technology in educational settings has become widespread over the last few decades. Researchers are coming to different conclusions regarding the use of technology. To illustrate this point, a study investigating a smartphone app targeting surgery residents (graduate students in surgery training) found that the use of this app can increase student engagement and raise test scores (Shaw &amp; Tan, 2015). Conversely, another study found that the use of technology in undergraduate student populations had negative impacts on sleep, communication, and time management skills (Massimini &amp; Peterson, 2009). Until sufficient amounts of research have been conducted, there will be no clear consensus on the effects that technology has on a student's acquisition of knowledge, study skills, and mental health.<\/p>\r\n<p id=\"fs-idp19976256\" class=\"no-indent\">In the meantime, we should strive to think critically about the information we encounter by exercising a degree of healthy skepticism. When someone makes a claim, we should examine the claim from a number of different perspectives: what is the expertise of the person making the claim, what might they gain if the claim is valid, does the claim seem justified given the evidence, and what do other researchers think of the claim? This is especially important when we consider how much information in advertising campaigns and on the internet claims to be based on \u201cscientific evidence\u201d when in actuality it is a belief or perspective of just a few individuals trying to sell a product or draw attention to their perspectives.<\/p>\r\n<p id=\"fs-idp52899376\">We should be informed consumers of the information made available to us because decisions based on this information have significant consequences. One such consequence can be seen in politics and public policy. Imagine that you have been elected as the Premier of your province. One of your responsibilities is to manage the provincial budget and determine how to best spend your constituents\u2019 tax dollars. As the new Premier, you need to decide whether to continue funding early intervention programs. These programs are designed to help children who come from low-income backgrounds, have special needs, or face other disadvantages. These programs may involve providing a wide variety of services to maximize the children's development and position them for optimal levels of success in school and later in life (Blann, 2005). While such programs sound appealing, you would want to be sure that they also proved effective before investing additional money in these programs. Fortunately, psychologists and other scientists have conducted vast amounts of research on such programs and, in general, the programs are found to be effective (Neil &amp; Christensen, 2009; Peters-Scheffer, Didden, Korzilius, &amp; Sturmey, 2011). While not all programs are equally effective, and the short-term effects of many such programs are more pronounced, there is reason to believe that many of these programs produce long-term benefits for participants (Barnett, 2011). If you are committed to being a good steward of taxpayer money, you would want to look at research. Which programs are most effective? What characteristics of these programs make them effective? Which programs promote the best outcomes? After examining the research, you would be best equipped to make decisions about which programs to fund.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<div id=\"fs-idm67030016\" class=\"psychology link-to-learning ui-has-child-title\"><section>\r\n<div class=\"os-note-body\">\r\n<div class=\"textbox textbox--key-takeaways\"><header class=\"textbox__header\">\r\n<p class=\"textbox__title\"><span style=\"color: #ffffff\">LINK TO LEARNING<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/header>\r\n<div class=\"textbox__content\">Watch this\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/openstax.org\/l\/programeffect\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">video about early childhood program effectiveness<\/a>\u00a0to learn how scientists evaluate effectiveness and how best to invest money into programs that are most effective.<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/section><\/div>\r\n<p id=\"fs-idm20281584\" class=\"indent no-indent\">Ultimately, it is not just politicians who can benefit from using research in guiding their decisions. We all might look to research from time to time when making decisions in our lives. Imagine you just found out that a close friend has breast cancer or that one of your young relatives has recently been diagnosed with autism. In either case, you want to know which treatment options are most successful with the fewest side effects. How would you find that out? You would probably talk with your doctor and personally review the research that has been done on various treatment options\u2014always with a critical eye to ensure that you are as informed as possible.<\/p>\r\n<p id=\"fs-idp16594336\" class=\"no-indent\">In the end, research is what makes the difference between facts and opinions.\u00a0<strong><span id=\"term46\">Facts<\/span><\/strong>\u00a0are observable realities, and\u00a0<strong><span id=\"term47\">opinions<\/span><\/strong>\u00a0are personal judgments, conclusions, or attitudes that may or may not be accurate. In the scientific community, facts can be established only using evidence collected through empirical research.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/section><section><\/section><section><\/section><section><\/section>\r\n<h3 id=\"zip-idm230789632\">The Process of Scientific Research<\/h3>\r\n<section id=\"fs-idp52883024\">\r\n<p id=\"fs-idp31033904\">Scientific knowledge is advanced through a process known as the\u00a0<span id=\"term48\" class=\"no-emphasis\">scientific method<\/span>. Basically, ideas (in the form of theories and hypotheses) are tested against the real world (in the form of empirical observations), and those empirical observations lead to more ideas that are tested against the real world, and so on. In this sense, the scientific process is circular. The types of reasoning within the circle are called deductive and inductive. In\u00a0<strong><span id=\"term49\">deductive reasoning<\/span><\/strong>, ideas are tested in the real world; in\u00a0<strong><span id=\"term50\">inductive reasoning<\/span><\/strong>, real-world observations lead to new ideas (<a class=\"autogenerated-content\" href=\"https:\/\/openstax.org\/books\/psychology-2e\/pages\/2-1-why-is-research-important#CNX_Psych_02_01_Reasoning\">Figure PR.3<\/a>). These processes are inseparable, like inhaling and exhaling, but different research approaches place different emphasis on the deductive and inductive aspects.<\/p>\r\n\r\n<div id=\"CNX_Psych_02_01_Reasoning\" class=\"os-figure\">\r\n<figure>\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"649\"]<img id=\"17923\" src=\"https:\/\/openstax.org\/resources\/b330da2563ea2702d5a6bbaab972be7fa518fe54\" alt=\"A diagram has a box at the top labeled \u201chypothesis or general premise\u201d and a box at the bottom labeled \u201cempirical observations.\u201d On the left, an arrow labeled \u201cinductive reasoning\u201d goes from the bottom to top box. On the right, an arrow labeled \u201cdeductive reasoning\u201d goes from the top to the bottom box.\" width=\"649\" height=\"351\" \/> Figure PR.3\u00a0Psychological research relies on both inductive and deductive reasoning.[\/caption]<\/figure>\r\n<div class=\"os-caption-container\"><\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n&nbsp;\r\n<p id=\"fs-idm13871408\" class=\"indent no-indent\">In the scientific context, deductive reasoning begins with a generalization\u2014one hypothesis\u2014that is then used to reach logical conclusions about the real world. If the hypothesis is supported, then the logical conclusions reached through deductive reasoning should also be correct. A deductive reasoning argument might go something like this: All living things require energy to survive (this would be your hypothesis). Ducks are living things. Therefore, ducks require energy to survive (logical conclusion). In this example, the hypothesis is correct; therefore, the conclusion is correct as well. Sometimes, however, an incorrect hypothesis may lead to a logical but incorrect conclusion. Consider this argument: all ducks are born with the ability to see. Quackers is a duck. Therefore, Quackers was born with the ability to see. Scientists use deductive reasoning to empirically test their hypotheses. Returning to the example of the ducks, researchers might design a study to test the hypothesis that if all living things require energy to survive, then ducks will be found to require energy to survive.<\/p>\r\n<p id=\"fs-idm17434880\">Deductive reasoning starts with a generalization that is tested against real-world observations; however, inductive reasoning moves in the opposite direction. Inductive reasoning uses empirical observations to construct broad generalizations. Unlike deductive reasoning, conclusions drawn from inductive reasoning may or may not be correct, regardless of the observations on which they are based. For instance, you may notice that your favourite fruits\u2014apples, bananas, and oranges\u2014all grow on trees; therefore, you assume that all fruit must grow on trees. This would be an example of inductive reasoning, and, clearly, the existence of strawberries, blueberries, and kiwi demonstrate that this generalization is not correct despite it being based on a number of direct observations. Scientists use inductive reasoning to formulate theories, which in turn generate hypotheses that are tested with deductive reasoning. In the end, science involves both deductive and inductive processes.<\/p>\r\n<p id=\"fs-idm35855312\">For example, case studies, which you will read about in the next section, are heavily weighted on the side of empirical observations. Thus, case studies are closely associated with inductive processes as researchers gather massive amounts of observations and seek interesting patterns (new ideas) in the data. Experimental research, on the other hand, puts great emphasis on deductive reasoning.<\/p>\r\n<p id=\"fs-idp26993328\">We\u2019ve stated that theories and hypotheses are ideas, but what sort of ideas are they, exactly? A\u00a0<strong><span id=\"term51\">theory<\/span>\u00a0<\/strong>is a well-developed set of ideas that propose an explanation for observed phenomena. Theories are repeatedly checked against the world, but they tend to be too complex to be tested all at once; instead, researchers create hypotheses to test specific aspects of a theory.<\/p>\r\n<p id=\"fs-idp19981728\">A\u00a0<strong><span id=\"term52\">hypothesis<\/span><\/strong>\u00a0is a testable prediction about how the world will behave if our idea is correct, and it is often worded as an if-then statement (e.g., if I study all night, I will get a passing grade on the test). The hypothesis is extremely important because it bridges the gap between the realm of ideas and the real world. As specific hypotheses are tested, theories are modified and refined to reflect and incorporate the result of these tests\u00a0<a class=\"autogenerated-content\" href=\"https:\/\/openstax.org\/books\/psychology-2e\/pages\/2-1-why-is-research-important#CNX_Psych_02_01_Method\">Figure PR.4<\/a>.<\/p>\r\n&nbsp;\r\n<div id=\"CNX_Psych_02_01_Method\" class=\"os-figure\">\r\n<figure>\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"975\"]<img id=\"65311\" src=\"https:\/\/openstax.org\/resources\/d961aca4fe0109c144b2cf02d83d988fe8fcd4b6\" alt=\"A diagram has seven labeled boxes with arrows to show the progression in the flow chart. The chart starts at \u201cTheory\u201d and moves to \u201cGenerate hypothesis,\u201d \u201cCollect data,\u201d \u201cAnalyze data,\u201d and \u201cSummarize data and report findings.\u201d There are two arrows coming from \u201cSummarize data and report findings\u201d to show two options. The first arrow points to \u201cConfirm theory.\u201d The second arrow points to \u201cModify theory,\u201d which has an arrow that points back to \u201cGenerate hypothesis.\u201d\" width=\"975\" height=\"517\" \/> Figure PR.4\u00a0The scientific method involves deriving hypotheses from theories and then testing those hypotheses. If the results are consistent with the theory, then the theory is supported. If the results are not consistent, then the theory should be modified and new hypotheses will be generated.[\/caption]<\/figure>\r\n<div class=\"os-caption-container\"><span style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\">A scientific hypothesis is also\u00a0<\/span><strong style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\"><span id=\"term53\">falsifiable<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\">, or capable of being shown to be incorrect. Recall from the introductory chapter that Sigmund\u00a0<\/span><span id=\"term54\" class=\"no-emphasis\" style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\">Freud<\/span><span style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\">\u00a0had lots of interesting ideas to explain various human behaviours (<\/span><a class=\"autogenerated-content\" style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\" href=\"https:\/\/openstax.org\/books\/psychology-2e\/pages\/2-1-why-is-research-important#CNX_Psych_02_01_freud\">Figure PR.5<\/a><span style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\">). However, a major criticism of Freud\u2019s theories is that many of his ideas are not falsifiable; for example, it is impossible to imagine empirical observations that would disprove the existence of the id, the ego, and the superego\u2014the three elements of personality described in Freud\u2019s theories. Despite this, Freud\u2019s theories are widely taught in introductory psychology texts because of their historical significance for personality psychology and psychotherapy, and these remain the root of all modern forms of therapy.<\/span><\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<div id=\"CNX_Psych_02_01_freud\" class=\"os-figure\">\r\n<figure>\r\n\r\n[caption id=\"\" align=\"aligncenter\" width=\"649\"]<img id=\"82257\" src=\"https:\/\/openstax.org\/resources\/a5062a5f223bf832ee19dc50ba96cf3b13e9ef36\" alt=\"(a)A photograph shows Freud holding a cigar. (b) The mind\u2019s conscious and unconscious states are illustrated as an iceberg floating in water. Beneath the water\u2019s surface in the \u201cunconscious\u201d area are the id, ego, and superego. The area just below the water\u2019s surface is labeled \u201cpreconscious.\u201d The area above the water\u2019s surface is labeled \u201cconscious.\u201d\" width=\"649\" height=\"426\" \/> Figure PR.5\u00a0Many of the specifics of (a) Freud's theories, such as (b) his division of the mind into id, ego, and superego, have fallen out of favour in recent decades because they are not falsifiable. In broader strokes, his views set the stage for much of psychological thinking today, such as the unconscious nature of the majority of psychological processes.[\/caption]<\/figure>\r\n<div class=\"os-caption-container\"><span style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\">Scientific research\u2019s dependence on falsifiability allows for great confidence in the information that it produces. Typically, by the time information is accepted by the scientific community, it has been tested repeatedly.<\/span><\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/section><\/div>\r\n<\/div>\r\n<\/div>","rendered":"<div class=\"PageContent-ny9bj0-0 iapMdy\">\n<div id=\"main-content\" class=\"MainContent__HideOutline-sc-6yy1if-0 bdVAq\">\n<div id=\"1db17970-a37e-48e8-b20c-941b52ce73ef\">\n<div id=\"79920\" class=\"ui-has-child-title\">\n<header><\/header>\n<div class=\"textbox textbox--learning-objectives\">\n<header class=\"textbox__header\">\n<p class=\"textbox__title\"><span style=\"color: #ffffff\">Learning Objectives<\/span><\/p>\n<\/header>\n<div class=\"textbox__content\">\n<div class=\"ui-has-child-title\">\n<section>By the end of this section, you will be able to:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>Explain how scientific research addresses questions about behaviour<\/li>\n<li>Discuss how scientific research guides public policy<\/li>\n<li>Appreciate how scientific research can be important in making personal decisions<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/section>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p class=\"indent no-indent\"><span style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\">Scientific research is a critical tool for successfully navigating our complex world. Without it, we would be forced to rely solely on intuition, other people\u2019s authority, and blind luck. While many of us feel confident in our abilities to decipher and interact with the world around us, history is filled with examples of how very wrong we can be when we fail to recognize the need for evidence in supporting claims. At various times in history, we would have been certain that the sun revolved around a flat earth, that the earth\u2019s continents did not move, and that mental illness was caused by possession (<\/span><a class=\"autogenerated-content\" style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\" href=\"https:\/\/openstax.org\/books\/psychology-2e\/pages\/2-1-why-is-research-important#CNX_Psych_02_01_trephining\">Figure PR.2<\/a><span style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\">). It is through systematic scientific research that we divest ourselves of our preconceived notions and superstitions and gain an objective understanding of ourselves and our world.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div id=\"CNX_Psych_02_01_trephining\" class=\"os-figure\">\n<figure>\n<figure style=\"width: 325px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" id=\"20141\" src=\"https:\/\/openstax.org\/resources\/5a71230040990c825014c89e729d23c06f4174d3\" alt=\"A skull has a large hole bored through the forehead.\" width=\"325\" height=\"325\" \/><figcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Figure\u00a0PR.2\u00a0Some of our ancestors, across the world and over the centuries, believed that trephination\u2014the practice of making a hole in the skull, as shown here\u2014allowed evil spirits to leave the body, thus curing mental illness and other disorders. (credit: \u201ctaiproject\u201d\/Flickr)<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n<\/div>\n<p id=\"fs-idp5561792\" class=\"indent no-indent\">The goal of all scientists is to better understand the world around them. Psychologists focus their attention on understanding behaviour, as well as the cognitive (mental) and physiological (body) processes that underlie behaviour. In contrast to other methods that people use to understand the behaviour of others, such as intuition and personal experience, the hallmark of scientific research is that there is evidence to support a claim. Scientific knowledge is\u00a0<span id=\"term45\" class=\"no-emphasis\">empirical<\/span>: it is grounded in objective, tangible evidence that can be observed time and time again, regardless of who is observing.<\/p>\n<p id=\"fs-idp12552816\" class=\"no-indent\">While behaviour is observable, the mind is not. If someone is crying, we can see behaviour. However, the reason for the behaviour is more difficult to determine. Is the person crying due to being sad, in pain, or happy? Sometimes we can learn the reason for someone\u2019s behaviour by simply asking a question, like \u201cWhy are you crying?\u201d However, there are situations in which an individual is either uncomfortable or unwilling to answer the question honestly, or is incapable of answering. For example, infants would not be able to explain why they are crying. In such circumstances, the psychologist must be creative in finding ways to better understand behaviour. This chapter explores how scientific knowledge is generated, and how important that knowledge is in forming decisions in our personal lives and in the public domain.<\/p>\n<section id=\"fs-idp9845952\">\n<h3>Use of Research Information<\/h3>\n<p id=\"fs-idp47768912\" class=\"indent no-indent\">Trying to determine which theories are and are not accepted by the scientific community can be difficult, especially in an area of research as broad as psychology. More than ever before, we have an incredible amount of information at our fingertips, and a simple internet search on any given research topic might result in a number of contradictory studies. In these cases, we are witnessing the scientific community going through the process of reaching a consensus, and it could be quite some time before a consensus emerges. For example, the explosion in our use of technology has led researchers to question whether this ultimately helps or hinders us. The use and implementation of technology in educational settings has become widespread over the last few decades. Researchers are coming to different conclusions regarding the use of technology. To illustrate this point, a study investigating a smartphone app targeting surgery residents (graduate students in surgery training) found that the use of this app can increase student engagement and raise test scores (Shaw &amp; Tan, 2015). Conversely, another study found that the use of technology in undergraduate student populations had negative impacts on sleep, communication, and time management skills (Massimini &amp; Peterson, 2009). Until sufficient amounts of research have been conducted, there will be no clear consensus on the effects that technology has on a student&#8217;s acquisition of knowledge, study skills, and mental health.<\/p>\n<p id=\"fs-idp19976256\" class=\"no-indent\">In the meantime, we should strive to think critically about the information we encounter by exercising a degree of healthy skepticism. When someone makes a claim, we should examine the claim from a number of different perspectives: what is the expertise of the person making the claim, what might they gain if the claim is valid, does the claim seem justified given the evidence, and what do other researchers think of the claim? This is especially important when we consider how much information in advertising campaigns and on the internet claims to be based on \u201cscientific evidence\u201d when in actuality it is a belief or perspective of just a few individuals trying to sell a product or draw attention to their perspectives.<\/p>\n<p id=\"fs-idp52899376\">We should be informed consumers of the information made available to us because decisions based on this information have significant consequences. One such consequence can be seen in politics and public policy. Imagine that you have been elected as the Premier of your province. One of your responsibilities is to manage the provincial budget and determine how to best spend your constituents\u2019 tax dollars. As the new Premier, you need to decide whether to continue funding early intervention programs. These programs are designed to help children who come from low-income backgrounds, have special needs, or face other disadvantages. These programs may involve providing a wide variety of services to maximize the children&#8217;s development and position them for optimal levels of success in school and later in life (Blann, 2005). While such programs sound appealing, you would want to be sure that they also proved effective before investing additional money in these programs. Fortunately, psychologists and other scientists have conducted vast amounts of research on such programs and, in general, the programs are found to be effective (Neil &amp; Christensen, 2009; Peters-Scheffer, Didden, Korzilius, &amp; Sturmey, 2011). While not all programs are equally effective, and the short-term effects of many such programs are more pronounced, there is reason to believe that many of these programs produce long-term benefits for participants (Barnett, 2011). If you are committed to being a good steward of taxpayer money, you would want to look at research. Which programs are most effective? What characteristics of these programs make them effective? Which programs promote the best outcomes? After examining the research, you would be best equipped to make decisions about which programs to fund.<\/p>\n<div id=\"fs-idm67030016\" class=\"psychology link-to-learning ui-has-child-title\">\n<section>\n<div class=\"os-note-body\">\n<div class=\"textbox textbox--key-takeaways\">\n<header class=\"textbox__header\">\n<p class=\"textbox__title\"><span style=\"color: #ffffff\">LINK TO LEARNING<\/span><\/p>\n<\/header>\n<div class=\"textbox__content\">Watch this\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/openstax.org\/l\/programeffect\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener nofollow\">video about early childhood program effectiveness<\/a>\u00a0to learn how scientists evaluate effectiveness and how best to invest money into programs that are most effective.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n<\/div>\n<p id=\"fs-idm20281584\" class=\"indent no-indent\">Ultimately, it is not just politicians who can benefit from using research in guiding their decisions. We all might look to research from time to time when making decisions in our lives. Imagine you just found out that a close friend has breast cancer or that one of your young relatives has recently been diagnosed with autism. In either case, you want to know which treatment options are most successful with the fewest side effects. How would you find that out? You would probably talk with your doctor and personally review the research that has been done on various treatment options\u2014always with a critical eye to ensure that you are as informed as possible.<\/p>\n<p id=\"fs-idp16594336\" class=\"no-indent\">In the end, research is what makes the difference between facts and opinions.\u00a0<strong><span id=\"term46\">Facts<\/span><\/strong>\u00a0are observable realities, and\u00a0<strong><span id=\"term47\">opinions<\/span><\/strong>\u00a0are personal judgments, conclusions, or attitudes that may or may not be accurate. In the scientific community, facts can be established only using evidence collected through empirical research.<\/p>\n<\/section>\n<section><\/section>\n<section><\/section>\n<section><\/section>\n<h3 id=\"zip-idm230789632\">The Process of Scientific Research<\/h3>\n<section id=\"fs-idp52883024\">\n<p id=\"fs-idp31033904\">Scientific knowledge is advanced through a process known as the\u00a0<span id=\"term48\" class=\"no-emphasis\">scientific method<\/span>. Basically, ideas (in the form of theories and hypotheses) are tested against the real world (in the form of empirical observations), and those empirical observations lead to more ideas that are tested against the real world, and so on. In this sense, the scientific process is circular. The types of reasoning within the circle are called deductive and inductive. In\u00a0<strong><span id=\"term49\">deductive reasoning<\/span><\/strong>, ideas are tested in the real world; in\u00a0<strong><span id=\"term50\">inductive reasoning<\/span><\/strong>, real-world observations lead to new ideas (<a class=\"autogenerated-content\" href=\"https:\/\/openstax.org\/books\/psychology-2e\/pages\/2-1-why-is-research-important#CNX_Psych_02_01_Reasoning\">Figure PR.3<\/a>). These processes are inseparable, like inhaling and exhaling, but different research approaches place different emphasis on the deductive and inductive aspects.<\/p>\n<div id=\"CNX_Psych_02_01_Reasoning\" class=\"os-figure\">\n<figure>\n<figure style=\"width: 649px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" id=\"17923\" src=\"https:\/\/openstax.org\/resources\/b330da2563ea2702d5a6bbaab972be7fa518fe54\" alt=\"A diagram has a box at the top labeled \u201chypothesis or general premise\u201d and a box at the bottom labeled \u201cempirical observations.\u201d On the left, an arrow labeled \u201cinductive reasoning\u201d goes from the bottom to top box. On the right, an arrow labeled \u201cdeductive reasoning\u201d goes from the top to the bottom box.\" width=\"649\" height=\"351\" \/><figcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Figure PR.3\u00a0Psychological research relies on both inductive and deductive reasoning.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n<div class=\"os-caption-container\"><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<p id=\"fs-idm13871408\" class=\"indent no-indent\">In the scientific context, deductive reasoning begins with a generalization\u2014one hypothesis\u2014that is then used to reach logical conclusions about the real world. If the hypothesis is supported, then the logical conclusions reached through deductive reasoning should also be correct. A deductive reasoning argument might go something like this: All living things require energy to survive (this would be your hypothesis). Ducks are living things. Therefore, ducks require energy to survive (logical conclusion). In this example, the hypothesis is correct; therefore, the conclusion is correct as well. Sometimes, however, an incorrect hypothesis may lead to a logical but incorrect conclusion. Consider this argument: all ducks are born with the ability to see. Quackers is a duck. Therefore, Quackers was born with the ability to see. Scientists use deductive reasoning to empirically test their hypotheses. Returning to the example of the ducks, researchers might design a study to test the hypothesis that if all living things require energy to survive, then ducks will be found to require energy to survive.<\/p>\n<p id=\"fs-idm17434880\">Deductive reasoning starts with a generalization that is tested against real-world observations; however, inductive reasoning moves in the opposite direction. Inductive reasoning uses empirical observations to construct broad generalizations. Unlike deductive reasoning, conclusions drawn from inductive reasoning may or may not be correct, regardless of the observations on which they are based. For instance, you may notice that your favourite fruits\u2014apples, bananas, and oranges\u2014all grow on trees; therefore, you assume that all fruit must grow on trees. This would be an example of inductive reasoning, and, clearly, the existence of strawberries, blueberries, and kiwi demonstrate that this generalization is not correct despite it being based on a number of direct observations. Scientists use inductive reasoning to formulate theories, which in turn generate hypotheses that are tested with deductive reasoning. In the end, science involves both deductive and inductive processes.<\/p>\n<p id=\"fs-idm35855312\">For example, case studies, which you will read about in the next section, are heavily weighted on the side of empirical observations. Thus, case studies are closely associated with inductive processes as researchers gather massive amounts of observations and seek interesting patterns (new ideas) in the data. Experimental research, on the other hand, puts great emphasis on deductive reasoning.<\/p>\n<p id=\"fs-idp26993328\">We\u2019ve stated that theories and hypotheses are ideas, but what sort of ideas are they, exactly? A\u00a0<strong><span id=\"term51\">theory<\/span>\u00a0<\/strong>is a well-developed set of ideas that propose an explanation for observed phenomena. Theories are repeatedly checked against the world, but they tend to be too complex to be tested all at once; instead, researchers create hypotheses to test specific aspects of a theory.<\/p>\n<p id=\"fs-idp19981728\">A\u00a0<strong><span id=\"term52\">hypothesis<\/span><\/strong>\u00a0is a testable prediction about how the world will behave if our idea is correct, and it is often worded as an if-then statement (e.g., if I study all night, I will get a passing grade on the test). The hypothesis is extremely important because it bridges the gap between the realm of ideas and the real world. As specific hypotheses are tested, theories are modified and refined to reflect and incorporate the result of these tests\u00a0<a class=\"autogenerated-content\" href=\"https:\/\/openstax.org\/books\/psychology-2e\/pages\/2-1-why-is-research-important#CNX_Psych_02_01_Method\">Figure PR.4<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>&nbsp;<\/p>\n<div id=\"CNX_Psych_02_01_Method\" class=\"os-figure\">\n<figure>\n<figure style=\"width: 975px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" id=\"65311\" src=\"https:\/\/openstax.org\/resources\/d961aca4fe0109c144b2cf02d83d988fe8fcd4b6\" alt=\"A diagram has seven labeled boxes with arrows to show the progression in the flow chart. The chart starts at \u201cTheory\u201d and moves to \u201cGenerate hypothesis,\u201d \u201cCollect data,\u201d \u201cAnalyze data,\u201d and \u201cSummarize data and report findings.\u201d There are two arrows coming from \u201cSummarize data and report findings\u201d to show two options. The first arrow points to \u201cConfirm theory.\u201d The second arrow points to \u201cModify theory,\u201d which has an arrow that points back to \u201cGenerate hypothesis.\u201d\" width=\"975\" height=\"517\" \/><figcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Figure PR.4\u00a0The scientific method involves deriving hypotheses from theories and then testing those hypotheses. If the results are consistent with the theory, then the theory is supported. If the results are not consistent, then the theory should be modified and new hypotheses will be generated.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n<div class=\"os-caption-container\"><span style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\">A scientific hypothesis is also\u00a0<\/span><strong style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\"><span id=\"term53\">falsifiable<\/span><\/strong><span style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\">, or capable of being shown to be incorrect. Recall from the introductory chapter that Sigmund\u00a0<\/span><span id=\"term54\" class=\"no-emphasis\" style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\">Freud<\/span><span style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\">\u00a0had lots of interesting ideas to explain various human behaviours (<\/span><a class=\"autogenerated-content\" style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\" href=\"https:\/\/openstax.org\/books\/psychology-2e\/pages\/2-1-why-is-research-important#CNX_Psych_02_01_freud\">Figure PR.5<\/a><span style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\">). However, a major criticism of Freud\u2019s theories is that many of his ideas are not falsifiable; for example, it is impossible to imagine empirical observations that would disprove the existence of the id, the ego, and the superego\u2014the three elements of personality described in Freud\u2019s theories. Despite this, Freud\u2019s theories are widely taught in introductory psychology texts because of their historical significance for personality psychology and psychotherapy, and these remain the root of all modern forms of therapy.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div id=\"CNX_Psych_02_01_freud\" class=\"os-figure\">\n<figure>\n<figure style=\"width: 649px\" class=\"wp-caption aligncenter\"><img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" id=\"82257\" src=\"https:\/\/openstax.org\/resources\/a5062a5f223bf832ee19dc50ba96cf3b13e9ef36\" alt=\"(a)A photograph shows Freud holding a cigar. (b) The mind\u2019s conscious and unconscious states are illustrated as an iceberg floating in water. Beneath the water\u2019s surface in the \u201cunconscious\u201d area are the id, ego, and superego. The area just below the water\u2019s surface is labeled \u201cpreconscious.\u201d The area above the water\u2019s surface is labeled \u201cconscious.\u201d\" width=\"649\" height=\"426\" \/><figcaption class=\"wp-caption-text\">Figure PR.5\u00a0Many of the specifics of (a) Freud&#8217;s theories, such as (b) his division of the mind into id, ego, and superego, have fallen out of favour in recent decades because they are not falsifiable. In broader strokes, his views set the stage for much of psychological thinking today, such as the unconscious nature of the majority of psychological processes.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/figure>\n<div class=\"os-caption-container\"><span style=\"text-align: initial;font-size: 1em\">Scientific research\u2019s dependence on falsifiability allows for great confidence in the information that it produces. Typically, by the time information is accepted by the scientific community, it has been tested repeatedly.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/section>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"author":13,"menu_order":2,"template":"","meta":{"pb_show_title":"on","pb_short_title":"","pb_subtitle":"","pb_authors":[],"pb_section_license":""},"chapter-type":[],"contributor":[],"license":[],"part":21,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/intropsychneuro\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/72"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/intropsychneuro\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/intropsychneuro\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/chapter"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/intropsychneuro\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/13"}],"version-history":[{"count":19,"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/intropsychneuro\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/72\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2050,"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/intropsychneuro\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/72\/revisions\/2050"}],"part":[{"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/intropsychneuro\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/parts\/21"}],"metadata":[{"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/intropsychneuro\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapters\/72\/metadata\/"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/intropsychneuro\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=72"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"chapter-type","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/intropsychneuro\/wp-json\/pressbooks\/v2\/chapter-type?post=72"},{"taxonomy":"contributor","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/intropsychneuro\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/contributor?post=72"},{"taxonomy":"license","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/digitaleditions.library.dal.ca\/intropsychneuro\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/license?post=72"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}