Читать книгу Abnormal Psychology - William J. Ray - Страница 112

In many ways, those who study psychopathology are faced with dilemmas similar to those that faced Semmelweis. We can observe and describe the various disorders. However, researchers are still trying to determine which are the most important factors that likely cause psychological disorders and which factors they can rule out. The best method for doing this is a scientific approach, which I will describe in this chapter. What are some of the characteristics of the scientific approach?

science: a process of understanding the world through observation and research, which includes developing theories

First, science involves detective work. An important aspect of both science and good detective work is careful observation. In his case, Semmelweis observed how doctors in different hospitals went about their day and what experiences preceded other experiences. In addition, he observed others such as midwives who were also involved with births. Thus, careful observation is an important first step.

Second, science involves valid logic. In this case, Semmelweis reasoned that if food, water, or flowers were involved, then they should have affected all of the mothers. However, since there were other mothers who did not get sick and ate the same food and water and were around the same flowers as the mothers who did, it was possible for Semmelweis to conclude this assumption was not supported.

Third, luck often plays a role in science. In this case, the bit of luck was the fact that the assistant cut his hand during an autopsy and had similar symptoms as the mothers who died. Although this was unlucky for the assistant, his death gave Semmelweis an important clue as to which variables were involved.

Fourth, science involves hypothesis testing. Semmelweis had the hypothesis that the disease was carried on the hands of the physicians. To test this hypothesis, he had the physicians wash their hands, and then he determined how this influenced the wellness of the mothers. If washing the hands of the physicians did not make a difference, then this hypothesis could be determined false. However, washing did make a difference, which allowed for further experimentation as well as establishing techniques for the prevention of the disease.

Careful observation is an important aspect of both science and good detective work.

© iStockphoto.com/nicolas_

You may find it surprising that the physicians at first did not believe Semmelweis. Although we do not know if they did not believe that a doctor could be responsible for a patient’s death, one key ingredient in psychological research is the need to understand how other people see themselves and their world.

hypothesis: a formally stated expectation

In designing research in psychopathology, we need to take human nature into account. One important aspect of the human experience is that we tend to think and recall things in a psychological way rather than a logical way. For example, most of us tend to remember good times better than bad times. However, in terms of mental illness, some individuals such as those with depression tend to remember the bad times more often. We also remember events that put us in a good light rather than in a bad one. Sometimes we remember things differently from the way they may have happened or perform differently if we know we are being observed. Thus, psychological researchers look for a variety of techniques for obtaining information including self-report, direct observations, and reports of mental health workers, as well as indirect measures such as neuroscience techniques.

facts: general conclusions drawn from observations

scientific knowledge: the known facts about a particular subject derived from the scientific method

doubt: to question ideas and research and ask whether factors other than the ones that were originally considered might have influenced the results

falsification: the scientific approach by which a claim or hypothesis is shown to be wrong

In general, there is no single scientific method, yet there is a general process called science. This process consists of experiencing the world and then drawing general conclusions (called facts) from observations. Sometimes these conclusions or facts are descriptive and can be represented by numbers. For example, we say that the moon is 238,000 miles from the earth or that the average human heart rate is 72 beats per minute. Other times, these facts are more general and can describe a relationship or a process. For example, we say that it is more difficult to learn a second language after puberty than before puberty or that as we age we can hear fewer high-frequency sounds. Whatever the topic, the known facts about a particular subject are called scientific knowledge (see Ray, 2012, for more on this).

There is another aspect to science that many people do not think about. This is the aspect of doubt. In science, we use doubt to question our ideas and our research and ask whether factors other than the ones that we originally considered might have influenced our results. By doing this, we come to see that science is a combination of interaction with the world and logic.

The logic of science leads us to the realization that one of the real strengths of science is showing us when we are wrong. If someone says that all swans are white, for example, seeing a white swan—or seeing 500 swans, all of which are white—does not actually prove this to be the case. However, seeing just one black swan would clearly show that the statement was wrong. In this spirit, Einstein is reported to have said, “No amount of experimentation can ever prove me right; a single experiment can prove me wrong.” The philosopher of science Sir Karl Popper referred to this approach as falsification. Thus, one important aspect of doing science is to ask yourself, how would I know if I was wrong?

The methods of science closely parallel our ways of learning about the world. We can think about these in terms of three stages.

First, scientists begin with an idea or expectation. A formally stated expectation is called a hypothesis. The scientist says, “I expect this to happen under these conditions,” and thus states the hypothesis.

Second, scientists look to experience to evaluate the accuracy of their ideas or expectations about the world. That is, they try to find or create the situation that will allow them to observe what they are interested in studying. Through observation and experimentation, scientists can begin to evaluate their ideas and expectations about the world. Learning about the world through observation and experimentation is an example of empiricism.

empiricism: the process of understanding the world through observation and experimentation

Third, on the basis of their observations and experiments, scientists seek to draw conclusions or inferences about their ideas and expectations. They reorganize their ideas and consider the impact of the new information on their theoretical conceptualizations.

Overall, science is a way of determining what we can infer about the world. In its simplest form, the scientific method consists of asking a question about the world and then experiencing the world to determine the answer. When we begin an inquiry, what we already know about our topic leaves us in one of a number of positions. In some cases, we know little about our topic, or our topic may be very complex. Consequently, our ideas and questions are general. For example, how does our memory work? What causes mental illness? What factors make a fruitful marriage? How can we model the brain? Can experience change our brain?

This chapter will focus on the methods of a psychological science. I begin with case study approaches and then move to more experimental approaches. These include correlational approaches and more formal experimental designs. The chapter ends with a consideration of ethics as applied to research.