[Behavioral Approach to Experimental Research] Science and the Scientific Method

Science and the Scientific Method Science

Is the systematic gathering of data to provide descriptions of events taking place under specific
conditions. It is a tool that aids us in organizing, categorizing, and understanding our universe.

There are five main tools of scientific approach which are also the basic tools of the experimental
psychologist. These are: observation, measurement, experimentation, good thinking, and replication.

1. Observation is the systematic noting and recording of events. Only events that are observable
can be studied scientifically. Non-observable events such as thinking and feeling can be studied by
means of defining these in terms of events that can be observed.

2. Measurement is the determination of the dimensions of an event or behavior. Aside from

physical dimensions such as height, width, or length, we may also describe the measure of behaviors
on dimensions such as feelings or social style. Standards are used to make measurements
meaningful.

3. Experimentation is a process undertaken to discover something new or to demonstrate that

events which have already been observed will occur again given a particular set of conditions. When
we experiment, we systematically manipulate aspects of the settings to verify our predictions about
behavior under particular conditions. In doing an experiment, our predictions must be testable. Two
minimum requirements must be met: first, we must have procedures for manipulating the setting
and, second, the predicted outcome must be observable.

4. Good thinking means approaching the collection and interpretation of data in an organized and
rational manner. Good thinking follows the rule of logic. Conclusions are based on the data,
whether or not we are in agreement with our findings. An important aspect of good thinking is the
principle of parsimony.

5. Replication is repeating procedures and getting the same results. If we have used observations,
measurement, and experimentation objectively, and if we followed good thinking, we should be able
to replicate our original findings. It should also be possible for other researchers to follow our
procedures and get the same results.

In scientific context, an explanation is best defined as specifying the antecedent conditions

of an event or behavior. Antecedent conditions are the circumstances that come before the event or
behavior to be explained. In psychology, antecedent conditions may include food deprivation or
childhood experience. In a psychology experiment we create specific sets of antecedent conditions
called treatments. We use different treatments to test our explanations of behavior systematically and
scientifically. If we are able to specify the antecedents or treatment conditions leading to a behavior,
we have essentially explained the behavior.
 [Behavioral Approach to Experimental Research] Science and the Scientific Method

Scientific observations must satisfy three requirements:

First, the observations must be empirical. The scientist records relative observations of the
events. Basic scientific information cannot be composed of speculations about unobserved events.
In psychology, leaming has never been directly observed but has been inferred from changes in the
behavior of an organism.

A second requirement is that the basic events and the observations of those events must be
public. The observed events must occur in a manner, time, and place that allows the possibility of
the observation by others. The subjective observation of what is happening in one's own "mind"
cannot be called scientific observation.

A third requirement is that the observation must be repeatable. An observation by a single

individual is not scientific unless it can be repeated. The details of the situation and the elements of
the observation procedure must be specific in a scientific report.

Two types of observation are used in the scientific approach: naturalistic observation and
experimental observation. Both types satisfy the above requirements.

Naturalistic Observation

The observation of events in their natural setting is called naturalistic observation.

Naturalistic observers examine empirical, public events. Theoretically, these observations are
repeatable given that the events "naturally" occur more than once. The occurrence of the events is
independent of the observer's behavior. For example, astronomers are naturalistic observers. The
movement of the stars is not under the control of the observer, but they are empirical, public events,
and the movement usually recurs within a time span that allows a second observation.

Experimental Observation

The observation of events in a restricted setting is called experimental observation.

Experimental observers make empirical observations from repeatable public events. In addition,
experimental observations are made under controlled conditions where an experimental scientist
manipulates the environment so that the critical events occur at a specified time and place.
Manipulation allows the scientist to be fully prepared for precise observation. The experimenter is
also assured that events will occur a second time allowing verification of the observation under the
same conditions. Finally, the experimental scientist can systematically vary the physical conditions to
discover what changes occur.
 [Behavioral Approach to Experimental Research] Science and the Scientific Method

Fallacious methods of research

There are three diverse and unprofitable fallacious methods which plague all attempts to arrive at
facts:

1. Method of Authority

This method involves the statement that something is true simply because someone says
so. That person may be a well-known authority in the field and, therefore, must know what is
true. However, this appeal to authority only assumes but does not ensure that the authority has
sufficient evidence to make the statement. The average person depends upon authorities for
much of their knowledge. Thus, if the authority is in error, so are those who cite them. In
attempting to find facts, the method of authority must not be used blindly. The evidence
backing the authority's statement must be known and accepted, otherwise the authority's
statement should not be accepted.

2. Method of Tenacity

This method accepts that something is true simply because one has always believed
it. This method affects orderly thought because: Continued belief in something does not
make it true; and b. Belief in one proposition for a long time may make one oblivious to any
contradictory evidence. Anyone who attempts to find solutions to problems should avoid
this method.

3. Method of Intuition

This method involves the tendency of some thinkers to make statements which they
claim are self-evident. They feel anyone who understands the propositions put forth must
agree because the proposition is undeniably and obviously true. Intuition is not necessarily
true but must be tested as any hypothesis. To allow these self-evident truths to serve as basic
premises in a deductive procedure is to court error.
 [Behavioral Approach to Experimental Research] Science and the Scientific Method

Laws of Thought

When one reasons, one thinks. The action of the thought processes involved may be
described by several laws. Philosophers have for a long time denoted certain fundamental principles
in reasoning and called them the laws of thought. They have held these laws to be logic itself and
central to sound thinking.

1. The Principle of Identity

If something is X, it is X, meaning a cow is a cow. The main objection to this principle is

not its statement but its frequent misapplication. A cow this instant is not the same cow as it was
an hour ago because not only has the cow changed physiologically but your attitude toward it
has also changed. In order to use this law of thought properly, one must always give a time and
place reference. In describing events, stating laws, or in any type of communication or reasoning,
it is essential to give a complete statement involving context so that the law of identity may
apply.

2. The Principle of Contradiction

A thing cannot be both X and not X. Those who object to this principle would do so
by pointing out that a man can be both short and tall at the same time. The objection to this
law of thought is removed if the user again supplies a frame of reference involving time and
place of reference.

3. The Principle of Excluded Middle

Anything must be either X or not X. For many persons, this is the most
objectionable of the three principles. They would argue that nowhere in nature do you find
that things are one way or another with a gap in between There is always areas of overlap.