{"panels":[{"content":{"params":{"text":"

Yes, you may write on the question booklet, in fact I would encourage you to do so if it helps you comprehend and answer test questions. E.g., You could underline key words, label terms, cross out answers you\u2019ve eliminated, circle correct answers, jot down things from memory that might be relevant to the question, etc. You will need to hand in your question booklet at the end of the exam, however nothing you write on it will be graded. Only the answers filled in the bubbles of the Scantron sheet will be graded (please use pencil only).<\/strong><\/p>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","subContentId":"a0956e94-7e83-4ec5-8b6c-e7c14735f1c3","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"}},"title":"Can we write on the question booklet?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"

Yes, simple foam earplugs are allowed. But headphones or earphones are NOT permitted (even if they are disconnected).<\/p>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","subContentId":"ec74dd31-8654-4093-a195-2e5889135ea8","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"}},"title":"Can we wear earplugs during the midterm?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"

If you accidentally rip, fold, or crumple the scantron sheet during the Midterm, please raise your hand and ask an invigilator for a new scantron sheet. You will need to hand in both the damaged and the good copies.<\/p>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","subContentId":"efb63332-fb75-4312-ab20-8578b601515f","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"}},"title":"What will happen if I mess up my scantron sheet?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"

Midterm grades will be posted on Blackboard approximately two weeks after the test. This is to allow sufficient time for all students to complete the test and for the teaching team to process test grades. We will send out an announcement when the Midterm results become available. At that time, Dr. O'Brien will set up test viewing sessions on campus, where you will be able to come in and take a look at your test answers and get some feedback on how to improve for the final exam.<\/p>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"},"subContentId":"4077734e-5812-434a-bb09-5eb819936082"},"title":"When will we know our Midterm grades?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"

Yes, Achieve <\/strong>comes with several study resources:<\/p>\n\n

\n\t
Learning Outcomes<\/em> questions at the start of each chapter section;<\/li>\n\t
List of Key Terms <\/em>at the end of each chapter;<\/li>\n\t
Interactive Flashcards<\/em> for each chapter;<\/li>\n\t
LearningCurve quizzes<\/em> for each chapter section.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n
Lectures <\/strong>provide additional ways of thinking about and organizing the material -- pay attention to lists, charts, concept maps, compare & contrast, pros & cons, keywords, and examples.<\/p>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"},"subContentId":"7bd6dac4-fee7-498a-bdd1-16b7b0047f65"},"title":"Is there a study packet for the Midterm test?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"
Passive study strategies (e.g., rereading, rewatching, rewriting, reviewing) are among the most commonly used but also the least effective (plus, they are also very time-consuming). To prepare adequately for the Midterm (and to spend your study time efficiently), aim to work actively<\/em> with the material. Here are some strategies that would encourage you to actively manipulate the information:<\/p>\n\n
\n\t
When you are solving practice multiple-choice questions (e.g., LearningCurves) -- do them entirely from memory, without reviewing the material first. Pick the best answer, explain why it fits, and also explain what the other three answer options refer to (e.g., What would the question have to be, for each of the other answer options to be the correct answer?).<\/li>\n\t
Organize the various concepts and theories into pairs, lists, processes, categories, themes, charts, maps<\/em> based on how they relate to each other and to the bigger picture. Explain the nature of these relationships (e.g., similarities and differences, constituent parts, alternative options, pros and cons, common bigger themes).<\/li>\n\t
Pick a random pair of items from the list of key concepts\/theories\/people for the topic, and explain how they go together (i.e., why are they both in that chapter? how do they both relate to the overall topic?) Also explain how they differ (i.e., what does each of them add, answer, or address that the other doesn't?). Then, pick a third item and relate & juxtapose it to the first two items in the same fashion. Then link in another item, and so on -- until you've built a comprehensive and inter-connected network of concepts for the topic.<\/li>\n\t
For each concept\/theory, generate a personal example that is meaningful and memorable to you. <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n
Another aspect that contributes to the difficulty of a test like the Midterm is that the questions cover multiple large topics and are presented in randomized order. This requires you to mentally jump back and forth between the topics, which is harder on memory than mentally staying within the same narrow sub-topic (such as on a single LearningCurve quiz). So simulate these conditions in the way you test yourself on the material, by interleaving questions from multiple topics. E.g., If you created physical flashcards for each topic, shuffle them all up and randomly draw cards to test yourself. Similarly, you can draw questions from different LearningCurve quizzes. Or mix up different questions from the Learning Outcomes lists from different chapters to test yourself.<\/p>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","subContentId":"408fcb4b-a836-4392-8715-0de60778aa9e","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"}},"title":"What is the best way to study for the Midterm?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"
Yes, any aspect of the assigned readings (as listed in the Syllabus) can be tested on the Midterm. So you are expected to know and understand all of the concepts, theories, and ideas that are in the assigned chapters, not just the content overlapping with the lectures or with the assigned LearningCurve quizzes. We simply don't have enough time in class to cover everything that's relevant, so some material will be left for you to study independently. If you have any questions about the material in the textbook or on Achieve, please feel free to email me (Prof. Keefer), come up to me during break in class, or drop by my office hours. I am here to help you master the material! (see also some concepts explained below)<\/p>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"},"subContentId":"f369a657-6493-48ea-b7a6-018680a03c55"},"title":"Do we need to study the textbook chapters in their entirety?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"
The Midterm questions will be equally distributed across the units and chapters. Within those topics, you should be focusing on those areas that you know least well. To find out what those areas are for you<\/em>, test your memory of the material without reviewing it first (e.g., you can test yourself using LearningCurve quizzes, Learning Outcomes questions, key terms or flash cards). Typically, the weakest areas for students are those sections of the chapters that weren't rehearsed in lectures or in the assigned LearningCurve quizzes. So we'd also recommend testing yourself using those optional LearningCurve quizzes in addition to the assigned ones.<\/p>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","subContentId":"a54c2f92-c73b-4dd5-8d26-50c8c0310ba2","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"}},"title":"Which topics should we focus on the most?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"
Chapter 1, plus the lecture portion on Psychology as a Science and Perspectives in Psychology. (The syllabus info will not be on the test).<\/p>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"},"subContentId":"87c710d3-d2ef-4895-9087-86143cbd2940"},"title":"What material from Unit 1 will be on the Midterm?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"
You should know Psychology's birthday<\/strong> (i.e., year and circumstances when it was officially established as an independent discipline). Beyond that, no need to remember exact dates, but you do need to know at least the general decade and century<\/strong> of when important discoveries\/events took place and when certain people\/ideas were influential. You also need to have a good grasp on the historical timeline and significance<\/strong> of various discoveries, events, people, and ideas: where did specific ideas\/perspectives originate from? who\/what influenced their development? how did they evolve\/change over time? when were they most\/least influential? did their influence ebb and flow over time, and why?<\/p>\n\n
\n\t
A note on citations: All textbooks include citations<\/em> throughout the text, in the form of names & dates in parentheses. These refer to the studies, books, and articles where that information comes from and are necessary part of scientific writing. But practically speaking, you can just glide right over them as you read the chapter -- you do not need to know the names & dates in the citations.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"},"subContentId":"b7772beb-898e-4f4f-b6e8-8dc5a4644221"},"title":"Do we need to know dates from Chapter 1?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"
Yes to names of major theorists (e.g., Wundt, Freud, Piaget, etc.) and their respective theories, ideas, discoveries. You will know they are important if the chapter says they were the first to propose a new theory, start a new filed of psychology, develop a new method, criticize another dominant theory, conduct a classic\/landmark study that changed how we understand things, and so on.
\n
\nYes to details of the classic\/landmark experiments that brought about important discoveries (e.g., Pavlov\u2019s dogs). In general, when you read about a study, focus on the concepts or ideas that the study illustrated, and how it illustrated them.<\/p>\n\n
\n\t
A note on citations: All textbooks include citations<\/em> throughout the text, in the form of names & dates in parentheses. These refer to the studies, books, and articles where that information comes from and are necessary part of scientific writing. But practically speaking, you can just glide right over them as you read the chapter -- you do not need to memorize the names & dates in the citations.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"},"subContentId":"93fdac25-2136-4fff-8327-c5ad1b1fa910"},"title":"Do we need to know names of researchers and details about specific studies?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"
No, you will not be asked to calculate any stats. All questions relating to statistical concepts will be conceptual, testing your understanding of what the numbers mean and how to interpret them (as practised in class).<\/p>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"},"subContentId":"1899d139-2d4c-4e2e-bc48-ba45d247afdb"},"title":"Do we need to know how to calculate statistics?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"
Correlation coefficient (r<\/em>) tells you about the quality of r<\/strong><\/em>elationship between a couple of variables.<\/p>\n\n
r<\/em> = .70<\/strong><\/p>\n\n
\n\t
A and B are a happy couple. Their relationship is positive (+ sign), they like each other and they tend to hang out in the same<\/em> places on campus. In fact, their feelings for each other are so strong<\/em> (.70) that they are practically inseparable, going everywhere together as a unit (r<\/em> closer to 1). If you see A at the gym, you can predict with high certainty that B will also be at the gym. <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n
r<\/em> = .25<\/strong><\/p>\n\n
\n\t
I and J live in the same college. Their relationship is positive (+ sign), they like each other and they tend to hang out in the same<\/em> places on campus. However, their feelings for each other are relatively weak<\/em> (.25), so they do many things independently of each other, although they do get together 0ccasionally (r<\/em> closer to 0). It is harder to predict where I will be, just from knowing where J is. <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n
r<\/em> = .05<\/strong><\/p>\n\n
\n\t
K and L are strangers. If they ever met, they would probably like each other (+ sign). However, they currently have near zero awareness of each other (.05), so even if you happen to see K and L in the same place, it\u2019s completely by chance. <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n
r<\/em> = \u2013.25<\/strong><\/p>\n\n
\n\t
N and O are from rival colleges. Their relationship is negative (\u2013 sign), they don\u2019t like each other and they tend to hang out on the opposite<\/em> sides of campus. However, their feelings for each other are relatively weak<\/em> (.25), so they are not particularly invested in the college rivalry, although they do end up on the opposite sides 0ccasionally (r<\/em> closer to 0). It is harder to predict where N will be, just from knowing where O is. <\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n
r<\/em> = \u2013.70<\/strong><\/p>\n\n
\n\t
X and Y are bitter ex\u2019s. Their relationship is negative (\u2013 sign), they don\u2019t like each other and they tend to hang out on the opposite<\/em> sides of campus. In fact, their feelings for each other are so strong<\/em> (.70) that they avoid seeing each other at all costs, like the polar sides of one coin (r<\/em> closer to 1). If you see X on the East bank, you can predict with high certainty that Y will be all the way on the West bank.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"},"subContentId":"8e867bba-23d3-4c0b-af85-1180e4a5e8ad"},"title":"Can you explain how to interpret a correlation coefficient?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"
Any study typically has descriptive aspects to it, reflected in descriptive statistics<\/em> such as means, ranges, and frequencies. The key question that determines a study's research design is whether it goes beyond the purely descriptive stage of describing each variable one at a time. As soon as a study starts making systematic connections between two or more variables (either through correlation or manipulation of cause-and-effect), then it's no longer a purely descriptive research design.<\/p>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"},"subContentId":"2046ad7e-3ea9-4033-856e-9033e1a7f493"},"title":"Can a study be both descriptive and correlational?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"
The purpose of a double-blind procedure is to reduce demand characteristics and observer bias, i.e., to reduce the influence of the participants' and researchers' expectations on the results of a study. Double-blind procedures are usually implemented in experiments where there is an experimental and a control group. Suppose the hypothesis is that caffeine heightens attention. The experimental group would be given a caffeinated drink, then perform an attention task. The control group would be given a non-caffeinated drink, then perform the same attention task. In order for the participants to be \"blind\" about which group they're in, the drink must look and taste the same in both groups, the only difference is whether it contains caffeine or not (and the participants must not be told which one they got). In order for the researchers to be \"blind\" about which group each participant is in, the research assistant who administers the drinks must be different from the research assistant who administers the attention task. This way, there is no risk that the researcher who's collecting measurements of the dependent variable (attention task performance) will be influenced by the knowledge of the independent variable (which drink the participants consumed).<\/p>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"},"subContentId":"3b21f472-575b-40bd-b388-14bcb88af667"},"title":"How does a double-blind procedure work?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"
Using the target practice analogy from lecture, think of reliability<\/strong> as how steady<\/em> your tool is. If you aim at the same target over and over, will your tool allow you to hit the same spot over and over? Or will your hits be all over the place? A tool with higher reliability will produce fewer off-target misses.<\/p>\n\n
Power<\/strong> is how much zoom<\/em> your tool has to detect differences. If you aimed at two targets that are different but close together, will your tool allow you to see the difference between them? Or will your tool be too fuzzy to tell them apart? A tool with higher power will detect smaller differences, producing more fine-tuned hits.<\/p>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"},"subContentId":"cc5273a2-1348-42a4-afc3-60ee18661fbf"},"title":"Can you explain reliability and power of measurement?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"
Validity is an important property of measurement, but it is different from reliability and power. Reliability and power are necessary for validity, but they are not sufficient. A tool can produce consistent measurements (high reliability) and can be fine-tuned enough to detect small differences (high power), but it can still be invalid. Validity refers to whether the tool actually measures the construct we intend to measure<\/strong>. E.g., Suppose we want to measure people's intelligence. To do so, we give them a survey that asks them to rate their intellectual abilities in verbal, math, visuospatial, memory, and other domains (e.g., \"On a 10-point scale, how good are you at math?\"). With enough questions and a well-designed rating scale, our survey may very well produce highly reliable and precise scores. But would those scores reflect people's intelligence? Unlikely, since people are often poor judges of their own abilities. This kind of survey would be a valid measure of people's perceptions<\/em> of their own abilities, but it would not be a valid measure of people's actual<\/em> intellectual abilities. Validity is always judged in reference to what the intended<\/em> target construct is.<\/p>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"},"subContentId":"d49374f6-8367-4abc-93d8-8f710a82d726"},"title":"What is Validity, as opposed to Reliability and Power?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"
Standard deviation (SD) is an index of variability<\/em> in individual measurements (i.e., data points) within a sample. In general, variability indices tell us the extent to which people's scores vary\/differ from one another. More specifically, SD is a statistic that indicates how much (on average) the individual measurements deviate from the mean\/typical score for the sample<\/strong>. The more spread-out the individual measurements are around the mean, the larger the SD. The more tightly clustered the individual measurements are around the mean, the smaller the SD.<\/p>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"},"subContentId":"63ecc016-239b-4bf7-9d83-c8a11e8c533c"},"title":"What is standard deviation?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"
\n\t
A normal<\/strong> distribution is symmetrical around its peak (Mode), which is also equal to the average score (Mean), and the Median (score that evenly splits the sample into the upper-scoring and the lower-scoring halves).<\/li>\n\t
A positively<\/strong> skewed<\/strong> distribution has a longer tail on the RIGHT side (i.e., pointing towards the positive direction on the number line). It has most scores bunched up at the lower end (Mode), with fewer scores at the upper end. The few extreme high-scoring cases bias\/pull the Mean towards them. The Median falls between the Mode and the Mean in a skewed distribution.<\/li>\n\t
A negatively<\/strong> skewed<\/strong> distribution has a longer tail on the LEFT side (i.e., pointing towards the negative direction on the number line). It has most scores bunched up at the upper end (Mode), with fewer scores at the lower end. The few extreme low-scoring cases bias\/pull the Mean towards them. The Median falls between the Mode and the Mean in a skewed distribution.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n
Check out this video for a handy mnemonic: https:\/\/youtu.be\/gzSbAkZE8jw<\/a><\/p>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"},"subContentId":"1e9780cc-a39f-4bc6-a132-eb9eafaafeb8"},"title":"How do you determine the direction of skew in a distribution?"},{"content":{"params":{"text":"
Internal and External validity are both concerned with what kinds of conclusions can and cannot be confidently drawn from a study, based on how the study was designed and conducted.<\/p>\n\n
Internal Validity<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n
Internal validity concerns conclusions about cause-and-effect<\/em> relationships within<\/em> the study. Does the research design and the methodological set-up used in the study allow us to draw causal conclusions from the study's results? I.e., Can we conclude that the observed changes in one variable caused<\/em> the observed changes in the other variable, and rule out all alternative explanations? If the answer is \"yes\", the study has high internal validity; if the answer is \"not necessarily\", then the study has low internal validity. <\/p>\n\n
By design, descriptive and correlational studies do not allow drawing conclusions about causation, so they have low internal validity. Only experimental studies have the potential to have high internal validity, provided that they implement proper controls over counfounding 3rd variables<\/em>. What are some of the features that increase internal validity of an experiment? i.e., that allow us to conclude that changes in the dependent variable (DV) can be attributed to changes in the independent variable (IV), and nothing else<\/strong>? Having a control group<\/em> in addition to the experimental group (to isolate the causal effect of IV), random assignment<\/em> of participants into groups (to equalize the groups on all 3rd variables prior to the manipulation), and double-blind <\/em>procedures (to minimize extraneous influences of demand characteristics and experimenter bias).<\/p>\n\n
External Validity<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n
External validity concerns conclusions about the generalizability<\/em> of the results outside<\/em> the study. Does the methodological set-up used in the study allow us to say that the relationships or effects observed in the study would also apply to real-life people, situations, and psychological phenomena<\/strong>? Constraints on generalizability can come from the participant samples used (e.g., causes of anxiety in a sample of undergraduate students may not be the same for adults diagnosed with a clinical anxiety disorders), operational definitions and short-term lab conditions (e.g., symptoms of a temporarily induced anxiety state in a lab may not be the same as symptoms of a long-standing anxiety disorder), and unrealistic manipulations (e.g., browsing one Instagram account for 10 minutes in a lab may not be a relalistic representation of how people usually use Instagram in everyday life). Experiments conducted in a lab would have lower external validity due to the tightly controlled conditions required to do a proper experiment. In constrast, descriptive and correlational studies would have higher external validity, because they measure people's typical naturally occurring behaviours.<\/p>\n\n
Trade-off<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n
In the end, the choice of a research design comes with the necessary trade-off between internal validity (i.e., control and causation) and external validity (i.e., realism and generalizability).<\/p>\n"},"library":"H5P.AdvancedText 1.1","metadata":{"contentType":"Text","license":"U","title":"Untitled Text"},"subContentId":"086e4d49-f299-4256-ba7a-da8136e9d502"},"title":"Can you explain internal and external validity?"}],"hTag":"h2"}