Written Assignment #8 How to think critically about psych sci.docx

Written Assignment #8: How to think critically about psych
science
DUE DATE: July 3, 2019 before 11:59 PM.
READING
a. To appreciate why critical thinking is crucial to
understanding psychological
science,
1. Watch Crash Course’s (2014) YouTube, “Psychological
Research.”
Because the narrator of the video speaks quite rapidly, you
might need to
watch the video at least twice (or use the speed-controller on
YouTube).
2. Read Halonen’s (1996) article, “On Critical Thinking [in
Psychology].”
In this assignment, we will be working on what Halonen refers
to as
“Methodological” critical thinking skills.
3. Read the first page of Dewey’s (2007) chapter, “Critical
Thinking [in
Psychology].”
4. Read Stafford’s (2014) article, “What It Means To Be
Critical [about
Psychological Research],” which is more about how to be

critical of
psychological science than why it’s important to be critical, but
Stafford’s
article will prepare you for the rest of this assignment.
WRITING ASSIGNMENT
b. To continue developing your skill for writing five-paragraph
essays, write a five-
paragraph essay of 400 to 500 words arguing either in favor of
or against the
statement, “Critical thinking is crucial to understanding
psychological science.”
1. You may write either a Reasons/Arguments essay OR an
Examples
essay.
2. For either type essay:
▪ Remember to begin by jotting down somewhere your three
Reasons/Arguments or your three Examples.
▪ Next, you should write your three Reasons/Arguments
paragraphs
or your three Examples paragraphs.
▪ Then, you should write your Thesis Statement
▪ Next, write your Introduction Paragraph, including a hook.
▪ The last step is to write your Conclusion Paragraph, in which
you
restate your Thesis Statement and end with something witty or
profound
3. Remember that each of your three Reasons/Arguments
Paragraphs or

each of your three Examples Paragraphs needs to have
▪ a Topic Sentence;
Part 1: Why critical thinking is crucial to psych science
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFV71QPvX2I
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uqfznir2ob5xrf4/PSY430_Adjusting
Speed.pdf?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/a0q6dogr3s45a1u/Halonen_Observe
r_1996.pdf?dl=0
https://online225.psych.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/225-
Master/225-UnitPages/Unit-04/Dewey_Chapter_2007.pdf
https://www.dropbox.com/s/5iztdxz08ztyln2/Stafford_Critical_2
014.pdf?dl=0
014.pdf?dl=0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hFV71QPvX2I
https://www.dropbox.com/s/uqfznir2ob5xrf4/PSY430_Adjusting
Speed.pdf?dl=0
https://www.dropbox.com/s/a0q6dogr3s45a1u/Halonen_Observe
r_1996.pdf?dl=0
014.pdf?dl=0
014.pdf?dl=0
▪ three or so Supporting Sentences; and

▪ a Conclusion Sentence.
c. Save your essay as PDF and name the
file YourLastname_CriticalThinkingEssay.pdf.
d. Go to Written Assignment #8, Part 1: Critical Thinking Essay
and attach your
essay, saved as a PDF. Remember to “Attach” your essay’s PDF
(don’t embed
your file or use the “File” tool; instead, use the “Attach” tool).
READING
a. To learn the critical questions that should be asked about
psychological science
(or any type of science) reported in the news:
1. Read about the first (“Sensationalized Headlines”), second
(“Misinterpreted Results”), third (“Conflicts of Interest), and
twelfth (“Non-
Peer Reviewed Material”) indicator of bad science in Compound
Interest’s
(2015) infographic “A Rough Guide to Spotting Bad Science.”
2. To see examples of the first (“Sensationalized Headlines”)
and twelfth
(“Non-Peer Reviewed Material”) indicators of bad science,
watch Above
the Noise’s (2017) YouTube, “Top 4 Tips To Spot Bad Science
Reporting.”
3. Read Ossola’s (2017) article, “Can You Tell If a Health Story
Is Total
BS?” Ossola’s indicators of “Check the Label” and “Control the
Spin” are

like Compound Interest’s “Sensationalized Headlines”
indicator; however,
Ossola presents a novel indicator “Beware the Animal Study.”
4. To see examples of these indicators of bad science, watch
Last Week
Tonight with John Oliver’s (2016) YouTube, “Scientific
Studies.”
Warning: John Oliver is a late-night comedian/TV host.
Therefore, this
video contains adult content, adult language, and extreme
irreverence
toward a wide swath of people. The video presents numerous
examples of
bad science indicators; however, if you’d prefer not to watch
the video,
then please don’t.
b. From the Internet, find three news reports, each of which
reports a different
study that is characterized by at least one of these indicators of
bad science:
1. “Sensationalized Headlines”
2. “Misinterpreted Results”
3. “Non-Peer Reviewed Material”
4. “Beware the Animal Study”
5. “Conflicts of Interest”
c. Be sure to find three different news reports, each of which
reports a different
study, rather than three news reports all of which report the
same study.
Part 2: Learn the critical questions to be asked in psych science

https://bbhosted.cuny.edu/webapps/assignment/uploadAssignme
nt?content_id=_40854586_1&course_id=_1731833_1&group_id
=&mode=cpview
014.pdf?dl=0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZZYSBlLRxfs
https://www.dropbox.com/s/768pkhn8xi746w0/Ossola_Tonic_20
17.pdf?dl=0
17.pdf?dl=0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Rnq1NpHdmw
=&mode=cpview
014.pdf?dl=0
17.pdf?dl=0
17.pdf?dl=0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Rnq1NpHdmw
WRITING ASSIGNMENT
d. Go to the discussion board forum Written Assignment #8,
Part 2: bad science

journalism and make a new thread of at least 200 words. In your
post:
1. Describe each of the three news reports, preferably each in its
own
paragraph.
2. Identify which indicator of bad science characterizes each
news report.
3. Provide for each news report either its URL (using the
technique you
learned from the Course How To) or, if a video, its YouTube or
Vimeo link.
READING/VIEWING
a. This assignment will focus on the fourth indicator of bad
science in Compound
Interest’s (2015) infographic, which is confusing “Correlation
with Causation.”
1. Watch TEDxDelft’s (2012) YouTube, “The Danger of Mixing
Up
Causality and Correlation.”
2. Watch PsychU’s (2015) YouTube, “Correlation vs. Causation
– PSY
101.”
3. Because PsychU momentarily confuses the term “hypothesis”
with the
term “theory,” watch PBS’s (2015) YouTube “Fact vs. Theory
vs.
Hypothesis vs. Law … Explained!“

4. Make sure you know the meanings of, and differences among,
the four
terms: Fact, Theory, Hypothesis, and Law. Not only will you
will need to
know these terms and their differences throughout the rest of
this course,
but everyone should know these terms and their differences.
b. Back to understanding the problem of confusing “Correlation
with Causation”:
1. Watch AsapScience’s (2017) YouTube, “This ≠ That.”
2. Watch Khan Academy’s (2011) YouTube, “Correlation and
Causality.”
WRITING ASSIGNMENT
c. Make sure you understand what correlation means, what
causation means, and
why correlation cannot be used to prove causation.
1. Jot down at least six examples of correlation not proving
causation from
the videos you watched. One example is the correlation between
the
amount of ice cream purchased (during each month of the year)
and the
number of drowning deaths (during each month of the year) not
proving
that ice cream causes drowning.
2. Make sure you understand that two variables (e.g., ice cream
purchases
per month and drowning deaths per month) might both be
caused by

Part 3: Confusing correlation with causation
https://bbhosted.cuny.edu/webapps/discussionboard/do/forum?a
ction=list_threads&course_id=_1731833_1&nav=discussion_bo
ard_entry&conf_id=_1887652_1&forum_id=_1974448_1
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ji8ccb5awl5v29m/CompoundInteres
t_Infographic_2015a.pdf?dl=0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8B271L3NtAw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HSNp5MlTE-c
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lqk3TKuGNBA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxSUqr3ouYA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROpbdO-gRUo
https://www.dropbox.com/s/ji8ccb5awl5v29m/CompoundInteres
t_Infographic_2015a.pdf?dl=0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gxSUqr3ouYA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROpbdO-gRUo

another variable (e.g., season of the year). That other variable is
often
called a confounding variable.
3. Make sure you understand that the correlation between two
variables
(e.g., pool drownings per year and Nicholas Cage films per
year) might
simply be due to coincidence.
4. Make sure you understand that rather than one variable (e.g.,
skipping
breakfast) causing another variable (e.g., obesity), the causation
might be
reversed.
d. Teach two separate people (family, friends, etc) why they
should not confuse
correlation with causation. You can teach each person via email,
phone, text,
Facebook, Skype, in person, or any other communication
medium (parents,
grandparents or siblings could be a good choice). But you must
teach two
separate people at two separate times why they should not
confuse correlation
with causation.
1. When you are teaching each person, provide examples of
correlations that
do not prove causation, using the examples you saw in the
videos.
2. To make sure that each of the two people learned why

correlation should
not be interpreted as causation, ask each person to tell you
another
example (an example that you did not tell them) of correlation
not
proving causation.
e. Go to the discussion board forum Written Assignment #8,
Part 3: Correlation is
not causation and make a new post of at least 250 words in
which you
1. List the six examples you jotted down from the videos
2. describe how you taught the two persons that correlation
cannot be
interpreted as causation;
3. state each of the two persons’ initials (e.g., MG) and their
approximate
age; and
4. report the examples each person told you of correlations that
should not
be confused with causation.
READING
a. To understand what is often referred to as the “Hierarchy of
Scientific Evidence,”
1. download (to your own computer) and save The Logic of
Science’s (no
date) Hierarchy of Scientific Evidence graphic, and

2. read Brunning’s (2015) article, “A Rough Guide to Types of
Scientific
Evidence.”
b. Identify where on the Hierarchy of Scientific Evidence case
reports (which are
also called case studies) lie.
Part 4: The Hierarchy of Scientific Evidence
Master/225-UnitPages/Unit-
04/LogicScience_Hierarchy_NoDate.pdf
04/Brunning_CompoundInterest_2015.pdf
04/LogicScience_Hierarchy_NoDate.pdf

1. Then, read about some of the most famous psychology case
reports in
Jarrett’s (2015) article, “Psychology’s Greatest Case Studies –
Digested.”
2. Think about why it was important for the various scientists
who reported
these case studies to report these case studies.
c. Identify where on the Hierarchy of Scientific Evidence
randomized controlled
studies lie.
1. Then, read about an example of a randomized controlled
study in
Fradera’s (2017) article, “How Much Are Readers Misled by
Headlines that Imply Correlational Findings Are Causal?”
2. Think about why it was important for these scientists to
conduct a
randomized controlled study on this topic.
d. Identify where on the Hierarchy of Scientific Evidence meta-
analyses and
systematic reviews lie.
1. Then, to see an example of a journal article reporting a meta-
analysis,
read the abstract of Hyde and Lynn’s (1988) article, “Gender

Differences
in Verbal Ability: A Meta-Analysis.”
2. Think about why it was important for these scientists to
conduct a meta-
analysis on this topic.
WRITING ASSIGNMENT
e. Write a five-paragraph essay of 400 to 500 words arguing
either in favor of or
against the statement, “All scientific evidence is equally
strong.”
1. You may write either a Reasons/Arguments essay OR an
Examples
essay. For either type essay, remember the following steps:
▪ Begin by jotting down your three Reasons/Arguments or your
three
Examples.
▪ Then, write your three Reasons/Arguments Paragraphs or your
three Examples Paragraphs.
▪ For each of your three Reasons/Arguments Paragraphs or each
of
your three Examples Paragraphs, write a Topic Sentence, three
or
so Supporting Sentences, and a Conclusion Sentence.
▪ Then, write your essay’s Thesis Statement.
▪ Then, write your essay’s Introduction Paragraph, including a
hook.
▪ Then, write your essay’s Conclusion Paragraph, in which you

restate your Thesis Statement and end with something witty or
profound.
2. Save your essay as a PDF and name the
file YourLastname_EvidenceEssay.pdf.
f. Go to Writing Assignment #8, Part 4: Evidence Essay and
submit your essay.
Master/225-UnitPages/Unit-04/Jarrett_BP_2015.pdf
Master/225-UnitPages/Unit-04/Fredera_BPS_2017.pdf
Master/225-UnitPages/Unit-04/Hyde_Meta-Analysis_1988.pdf
=&mode=cpview

=&mode=cpviewPart 1: Why critical thinking is crucial to
psych sciencePart 2: Learn the critical questions to be asked in
psych sciencePart 3: Confusing correlation with causationPart
4: The Hierarchy of Scientific Evidence

Written Assignment #8 How to think critically about psych sci.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to Written Assignment #8 How to think critically about psych sci.docx

Similar to Written Assignment #8 How to think critically about psych sci.docx (19)

More from jeffevans62972

More from jeffevans62972 (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Written Assignment #8 How to think critically about psych sci.docx