© cengage learning 2016 eric j. mash david a. wolfe research 3

© Cengage Learning 2016 © Cengage Learning 2016

Eric J. MashDavid A. Wolfe

Research

3

© Cengage Learning 2016

A Scientific Approach

• Requires that a claim be based on theories backed up by empirical evidence from well-designed studies before conclusions are drawn

• Is especially important in abnormal child psychology– A simple connection between cause and

effect may be obscured by complex interactions and a combination of variables

© Cengage Learning 2016

A Scientific Approach (cont’d.)

• Reasons for skepticism about research in abnormal child psychology– Experts frequently disagree

– Studies appearing in mainstream media are oversimplified

– Findings often conflict with one another

– Research has led to different treatments— some have been helpful; some have had no effect; and some have been harmful

© Cengage Learning 2016

When Science is Ignored

• Ineffective practices not based on scientific evidence may be used with potentially damaging effects

• Pseudoscience demonstrates benefits through anecdotes or testimonials

• The difference between science and pseudoscience is:– The quality of the evidence, how it was

obtained, and how it is presented

© Cengage Learning 2016

• Research in abnormal child psychology is a multistage process:1. Developing a hypothesis on the basis of

observation, theory, and previous findings

2. Identifying the sample to be studied, selecting measurement methods, and developing research design and procedures

3. Gathering and analyzing the data and interpreting the results

The Research Process

© Cengage Learning 2016

The Research Process (cont’d.)

© Cengage Learning 2016

Nature and Distribution of Childhood Disorders

• Epidemiological research is the study of incidence, prevalence, and co-occurrence of disorders– Incidence rates: the extent to which new

cases of a disorder appear over a specified time period

– Prevalence rates: all cases (new and existing) observed during a specified time period

© Cengage Learning 2016

Correlates, Risks, and Causes

• Correlates: variables associated at a particular point in time – No clear proof that one precedes the other

• Risk factors: variables that precede an outcome of interest– Increase the chance of a negative outcome

• Protective factors: variables that precede an outcome of interest– Decrease the chance of a negative outcome

© Cengage Learning 2016

• Moderating variables influence the direction or strength of the relationship of variables of interest– Have an independent effect on the existing

relationship between two variables

• Mediating variables impact the process, mechanism, or means through which a variable produces a particular outcome– Account for some or all of the apparent

relationship between two variables

Moderating and Mediating Variables

© Cengage Learning 2016

Example of a Moderator Variable

© Cengage Learning 2016

Mediating Variables

© Cengage Learning 2016

Interventions

• Randomized controlled trials (RCTs)– Children are randomly assigned to different

treatment and control conditions

• Treatment efficacy – Whether a treatment can produce changes

under well-controlled (research) conditions

• Treatment effectiveness– Whether the treatment can be shown to work

in clinical practice

© Cengage Learning 2016

• Standardization – A process that specifies a set of standards or

norms for a method of measurement

• Reliability: the consistency or repeatability of results– Internal consistency: measurement method

remains the same

– Interrater reliability: agreement of observers

– Test-retest reliability: results between tests are stable over time

Methods of Studying Behavior

© Cengage Learning 2016

Methods of Studying Behavior (cont’d.)

• Validity– Face validity: the extent to which a measure

appears to assess the construct of interest

– Construct validity: whether scores on a measure behave as predicted

– Convergent validity: reflects the correlation between related measures

– Discriminant validity: the degree of correlation between unrelated measures

© Cengage Learning 2016

Validity (cont’d.)

• Criterion-related validity: how well a measure predicts behavior in specific settings – At the same time (concurrent validity)

– In the future (predictive validity)

© Cengage Learning 2016

Value of Methods and Measurement

© Cengage Learning 2016

• Interviews

• Questionnaires

• Checklists and rating scales

• Psychophysiological recordings

• Brain imaging

• Performance measures

Measurement Methods

© Cengage Learning 2016

• Direct observations of behavior

• Intellectual, academic, and neuropsychological tests

Measurement Methods (cont’d.)

© Cengage Learning 2016

Interview, Questionnaire, and Observation

© Cengage Learning 2016

Reporting Methods

• Assess perceptions, thoughts, behaviors, feelings, and past experiences of the child, parents, and teachers– Includes unstructured clinical interviews,

highly structured diagnostic interviews, and questionnaires

– A self-report measure provides information about one’s own behavior, feelings, and thoughts

© Cengage Learning 2016

Reporting Methods (cont’d.)

• Informant-report measure - someone who knows the child well provides information based on observation– Inaccuracies may occur - failure to recall

events, selective recall or bias, etc.

– Requires verbal ability - not reliable with young children

– Must be sensitive to the language and cultural background of person being evaluated

© Cengage Learning 2016

• Assess the relationship between physiological processes and behavior– Autonomic nervous system activity

• Examples: heart rate, blood pressure, respiration, pupil dilation, and electrical skin conductance

– Limitations• Inconsistent findings; inference often involved; and

susceptibility to extraneous influences

– Electroencephalogram (EEG) measures the brain’s electrical activity

Psychophysiological Methods

© Cengage Learning 2016

Neuroimaging Methods

• Structural brain imaging procedures study brain anatomy– Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) - radio

signals produce fine-grained analyses of brain structures

– Coaxial tomography (CT) scan reveals various brain structures

© Cengage Learning 2016

Neuroimaging Methods (cont’d.)

• Functional brain imaging procedures study brain functioning– Functional magnetic resonance imaging

(fMRI) registers neural activity in functioning areas of the brain

– Positron emission tomography (PET) scans assess cerebral glucose metabolism

– Diffusion MRI produces images showing connections between brain regions

© Cengage Learning 2016

Observational Methods

• Benefits of structured observations– Are cost-effective

– Allow for focused attention

– Are useful for studying infrequent behavior

– Allow for greater control over the situation

• Limitation of structured observations– Uncertainty of whether the observations are a

representative sample of behavior

© Cengage Learning 2016

Research Strategies

• Internal validity– The extent to which a particular variable,

rather than extraneous influences, accounts for the findings

• External validity– The degree to which findings can be

generalized to other people, settings, times, measures, and characteristics

© Cengage Learning 2016

Research Strategies (cont’d.)

• Identifying the sample– A careful definition of the sample is critical

– Comorbidity: the simultaneous occurrence of two or more disorders

– Random selection is rare in child psychopathology studies

– Child studies often use samples of convenience

© Cengage Learning 2016

General Research Strategies

• Nonexperimental and experimental research– One goal is to simplify and isolate variables to

study them more closely

– Characteristics of true experiments• Researchers have maximum control over the

independent variable

• Subjects are randomly assigned

• Needed control conditions are applied

• Possible bias sources are controlled

© Cengage Learning 2016

Nonexperimental and Experimental Research (cont’d.)

• Correlational studies examine relationships among variables– Causality cannot be determined

• Random assignment of participants to treatment conditions:– Helps control for participant characteristics

• Natural experiments involve comparisons between conditions that already exist

© Cengage Learning 2016

Prospective and Retrospective Research

• Retrospective designs– Sample is identified at the current time and

asked for information relating to an earlier time

– Data are highly susceptible to bias and distortion in recall

© Cengage Learning 2016

Prospective and Retrospective Research (cont’d.)

• Real-time prospective designs– Sample is identified and followed over time

• Data is collected at specified time intervals

– Problems related to bias and distortion in recall are minimized

– These designs are time consuming and susceptible to sample attrition

© Cengage Learning 2016

Analogue Research

• Evaluates a specific variable under conditions that approximate the situation for which one wishes to generalize

• Focus is on a circumscribed research question under well-controlled conditions

• It is difficult to know if similar effects would occur in real-life circumstances

© Cengage Learning 2016

Research Designs

• Case Study– Involves an intensive, anecdotal, observation

and analysis of an individual child

– Rich source of descriptive information

– Viewed as unscientific and flawed • Characterized by uncontrolled methods and

selective biases; by inherent difficulties integrating observations and drawing valid inferences; and by generalizations from one child to other children

© Cengage Learning 2016

Research Designs (cont’d.)

• Single-Case Experimental Designs– Applicable in evaluating the impact of a

clinical treatment

– Involves systematic repeated assessment of behavior over time

• The subject serves as own control

– Limitations• Possible interactions between treatment and

subject characteristics; limited generalization of findings; and subjectivity in evaluating the data

© Cengage Learning 2016

A-B-A-B (reversal) design

© Cengage Learning 2016

Multiple-Baseline Design Across Situations

© Cengage Learning 2016

Research Designs (cont’d.)

• Between-group comparison designs compare experimental and control groups

• Cross-sectional/longitudinal studies look at change over time– Cross-sectional: individuals at different ages

or periods of development are studied at the same point in time

– Longitudinal: individuals are studied over time at different ages or periods of development

© Cengage Learning 2016

• Qualitative Research– Focuses on narrative accounts, description,

interpretation, context, and meaning

– Purpose is to describe, interpret, and understand the phenomenon of interest

• In the context in which it is experienced

– May be biased by researcher’s values and preferences

– Findings cannot be generalized to other individuals

Research Designs (cont’d.)

© Cengage Learning 2016

• Informed consent– Before agreeing to participate, all participants

must be fully informed of the nature of the research, including:

• Risks, benefits, expected outcomes, alternatives, and option to withdraw from the study at any time

– Minor’s consent must be obtained from parents or legal guardian

Ethical and Pragmatic Issues

© Cengage Learning 2016

• Assent – The child agrees to participate

– Must be obtained if a child is around age 7 or older

Ethical and Pragmatic Issues (cont’d.)

© Cengage Learning 2016

Ethical and Pragmatic Issues (cont’d.)

• Voluntary Participation– Participation in research must be voluntary

– Researcher must balance successful recruiting with not placing pressure on potential participants

© Cengage Learning 2016

Ethical and Pragmatic Issues (cont’d.)

• Confidentiality and anonymity– Disclosed information must be kept

confidential

– Individuals must be advised about any exceptions

– Disclosures of abuse are a common problem in child research

• Nonharmful procedures– Should not cause physical or psychological

harm

© Cengage Learning 2016

Ethical and Pragmatic Issues (cont’d.)

• Other ethical and pragmatic concerns– Ethical concerns

– Longitudinal research - may involve unexpected crises, unforeseen consequences of research, and issues about continuing the research that affect a child’s well-being