You know you just can't wait to get back!

So, another term and a new year – decade even!

New fascia for the PsychoSpace blog as well!

Trouble is, as I write this (Sunday evening) it looks as though some of my students may have difficulty getting to the college.  I am relying on you to go to PsychoSpace if you can’t make it.  Please keep a regular watch here for messages and lesson exercises if the weather gets much worse.  Two snowflakes and a sparrow fart and Boston grinds (slides?) to a halt!

The plan for the next couple of weeks is to look at some theories of forgetting and how they are applied to the Criminal Justice System.  In particular, eye-witness testimony and interviewing.  You can find this in Focus Chapter 3 pages 34-47.  Assignment 6 is based on this.  Talking about assignments, if you are snowed in over an assignment deadline, email it to me.

I’ve marked Assignment 4 for those who were able to submit on time.  Those of you who missed the deadline, please try and get it in as soon as you can.

Many of you have to resubmit some questions.  These are the main problems, and some hints if you’re still stuck:

Questions 1 to 8 are about correlation. 

The graph associated with correlation is a scattergram.  Please don’t join the dots, because then it isn’t a scattergram any more.  It’s a line graph.  Here’s a scattergram.

Correlation invites a particular terminology for hypotheses.

“There will be a positive/negative correlation between (variable 1) and (Variable 2)” and the null hypothesis “There is no (or zero) correlation between (Variable 1) and (Variable 2)”

Remember that GSR measures emotional arousal, not just fear!

Strengths and weaknesses for correlation can be found in the Focus book, page 240.

Questions 9 to 21 are about Experiments.

The Experiment is a separate research method in its own right.  Don’t confuse with correlation.  Yes, they are connected.  A frequent research story will start with observation, then be tested with a correlational study, and finally with experiments where the intervening variables are controlled.  So yes, questions 9 to 21 do continue the story.

Most people managed the calculations.

Most people described the results.  “The results showed that (Dependent variable) was (higher/lower) under condition 1 than condition 2.”

Very few people got the bar chart correct.  KISS never was more important than here!  Why are you producing a graph of the results?  To make the results easy to understand, using a graphic image rather than words.  You described the results.  The graph should be just as simple.  TWO BARS.  How many times have you done this?  So why oh why were you fannying about with multi column charts and such like?  When did you see me using them?  Truth is, the charts you have produced are not summary charts, but pictorial representations of raw data.  In this case, waste of ink.

 Rant over.

Remember me drawing two column bar charts and saying “If you do it this way, you will always get IV and DV the right way round?  Say no more…

Hypotheses for experiments are slightly different from correlational hypotheses.   We did a practical memory experiment and wrote down a specimen hypothesis.

Experimental design is a subject apart.  See Focus pages 253-254, or follow this link to my website.  Page 5 has experimental design. Read the whole document if you can, it is interesting and informative and I wrote it.

Extraneous variables are linked with correlation intervening variables. (In this case they’re almost the same.)  You should identify them, describe them, say what the effect would be on the results if they were not controlled, and then how you would control them.

Ethics is a subject apart;  we do more on this later in the year, but for now see page 259 Focus for a short summary.

Hope all this helps.