cornell psych 205: day12
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
1/42
Psychology 205Perception
Day 12
27 Feb 03
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
2/42
Parapsychology
mediumship -- magicians vs. physicistspsychokinesis -- Uri Geller & James Randiprecognition -- seerstelepathy -- 1975, J.B. Rhine
AAAS accepts in 1969clairvoyance -- autoganzfeld experiments
case studies vs. scientific methodreplicability
probability & statistics - a priori - chance- a posteriori - base rate
Does use of the scientific method imply that theresearch is science?
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
3/42
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
4/42
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
5/42
Why is extrasensory perception (ESP) interestingtheoretically?
1. the role of belief in science (and all of academia)
2. Johannes M llers Doctine :peripheral nervous system (PNS) --> CNSESP would bypass PNS
no known receptors
direct knowledge of the world without sensory information3. relation of scientific methods to science
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
6/42
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
7/42
Scientific Methods
null hypothesis -- H 0experimental hypothesis -- H 1
Logic: 3 steps
1. devise situation for statistical test2. test H o; that is, assess its probability
3. if improbable, assume H 1 is truecriterion --> p < .05
if not improbable, assume H o is true
criterion --> p > .05
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
8/42
One can never prove the experimental hypothesis true.
Results corroborate theories;they do not prove them true or false
Proof of truth is possible only in sufficiently closed systems,such as math and logic.
Why?
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
9/42
Issues:
1. many H 1s (or H 1, H 2, H 3, H 4)There are an indefinitely large number of theories that can account for any set of data.
2. occurrence of logical error in step 3
.if improbable, assume H 1 is trueif not improbable, assume H 0 is true
Type 1 error - reject H 0 when it is trueType 2 error - accept H
0when it is false
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
10/42
Example of multiple H 1s:
Linear induction 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, .....
k = place in sequence
n = number in that place
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
11/42
Linear induction 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, .....
k = place in sequencen = number in that place
Theory 1: n = k = 6
Theory 2: n = (k-1)(k-2)(k-3)(k-4)(k-5) + k
= 126
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
12/42
How to assess hypotheses (theories)
data (generated in some systematic way)
statistics (N>>1, not case studies)
our rhetorical devices
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
13/42
The sign test:z = x - 0.5 - NP__
sqrt[NP (1-P)]
z = measure of distribution on a normal (bell-shaped) curve (like a standard deviation, sameunits as measured with d)
x = number of occurrences of a particular patternof interest
0.5 = "correction for continuity" (magic)N = number of observationsP = the a priori probability of that pattern
know this
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
14/42
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
15/42
Examples: coin flips, expectation = 0.5 Heads 6/10 ---> z = 0.31 p ~ .75Heads 12/20 ---> z = 0.67 p ~ .50
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
16/42
Examples: coin flips, expectation = 0.5 Heads 6/10 ---> z = 0.31 p ~ .75Heads 12/20 ---> z = 0.67 p ~ .50Heads 60/100 ---> z = 1.90 p < .055
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
17/42
Examples: coin flips, expectation = 0.5 Heads 6/10 ---> z = 0.31 p ~ .75Heads 12/20 ---> z = 0.67 p ~ .50Heads 60/100 ---> z = 1.90 p < .055Heads 600/1000 --> z = 6.29 p < .0000001
Law of Large Numbers:likely occurrences converge rapidlytowards expected probabilities
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
18/42
A Sample ESP Study
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
19/42
The sign test:z = x - 0.5 - NP__
sqrt[NP (1-P)]
z = x - 0.5 - N/10__sqrt[N*.1 *.9]
z = x - 0.5 - N/10__.9 sqrt[N]
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
20/42
Reject H0 : null hypothesis is (incredibly) unlikely,assume null hypothesis is not true
Accept H 1 : ESPtelepathy
or something else?
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
21/42
chance vs. base rate
a priori vs. a posteriori probabilities
example: live births, male or female
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
22/42
chance vs. base rate
a priori vs. a posteriori probabilities
example: live births, male or femalechance: 50%base rate: ~52%
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
23/42
stacking effect
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
24/42
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
25/42
The sign test:z = x - 0.5 - NP__
sqrt[NP (1-P)]
z = x - 0.5 - .28N__sqrt[N*.28* .72]
z = x - 0.5 -.28N__.45 * sqrt[N]
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
26/42
Pick a number between 0 and 9, like 7
15% pick 715% pick 3
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
27/42
R.D. Laing Knots (1974)
They are playing a game. They are playingat not playing a game. If I show them I seethey are, I shall break the rules I must play
their game of not seeing I see the game.
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
28/42
Paraphrase of Laing
Professor Cutting is playing a game [of spontaneouschoices]. And he is also playing at not playing a game.If I show him I understand his game [of spontaneity], Ishall break the rules I must choose my spontaneouspattern carefully.
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
29/42
One must be wary of stacked situations inmethodologies of all experiments, not just in thoseinvestigating the paranormal. Questionnaire studiesare particularly susceptible.
Another set of studies on clairvoyance
Autoganzfeld experimentsBem and Honorton, 1994results favor the existence of some form of psianomalous information transfer
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
30/42
Methodology: not flawed
Results: more than reasonable toreject the null hypotheses
chance 25%results ~30-55%
does one have to accept the
experimental hypothesis of anomalous information transfer?
A framework
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
31/42
Response Yes No
Yes Hit MissStimulus
No False CorrectAlarm Rejection
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
32/42
Response Yes No
Yes Hit MissStimulus No False Correct
Alarm Rejection
Experimental results
positive negative(H o rejected) (H o accepted)
Exists "progress" Type II errorPhenomenon
Does Not Exist Type I error not part of science
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
33/42
Experimental resultspositive negative
(H o rejected) (H o accepted)
Exists psi exists Type II errorPhenomenon
Does Not Exist Type I error ------
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
34/42
Type I error - one says the phenomenonexists, but it doesnt [false alarm]
Type II error - one says the phenomenon doesnot exist, but it does [miss]
the practice of science deplores (has a bias against)Type I errors when a result does not mesh with anexisting fabric of logic and research;
in such situations it would rather make Type II errors
Why?
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
35/42
what are therelativecosts?
not settlable, yeta different venue
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
36/42
How to chose among theories ?
Thomas Kuhn (1977)
Theories should be:
1. accurate in predictions(across replications)
2. relatively simple3. broad in scope4. internally consistent5. able to generate new research and
new findings
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
37/42
Theories should be:
1. accurate in predictions(across replications)*2. relatively simple --> linear induction3. broad in scope4. internally consistent
*5. able to generate new research andnew findings
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
38/42
We are on the verge of breakthroughs in psychical phenomena.--- William James, 1890
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
39/42
We are on the verge of breakthroughs in psychical phenomena.--- William James, 1890
We are on the verge of vast development in psychic research.--- Lord Rayleigh, 1919
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
40/42
We are on the verge of breakthroughs in psychical phenomena.--- William James, 1890
We are on the verge of vast development in psychic research.--- Lord Rayleigh, 1919
Parapsychology appears ready to make startling advances.--- Time Magazine, 1974
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
41/42
Parapsychology
-
8/14/2019 Cornell Psych 205: day12
42/42
Parapsychology
mediumship -- magicians vs. physicists --> not fashionablepsychokinesis -- Uri Geller & James Randi --> not fashionable precognition -- seers --> not fashionable, outside of
supermarket checkout lines telepathy -- 1975, J.B. Rhine --> not fashionable
AAAS accepts in 1969
clairvoyance -- autoganzfeld experiments --> fashionable
case studies vs. scientific methodreplicabilityprobability & statistics - a priori - chance
- a posteriori - base rate--> role of belief in science
Does use of the scientific method imply that the research is science?