(eBook PDF) Psychological Discovery

Readings (Custom) 2nd Edition

Go to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-psychological-discovery-readings-custom
-2nd-edition/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Progress in Heterocyclic Chemistry Volume 29 1st

Edition - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/progress-in-heterocyclic-
chemistry-ebook-pdf/

(eBook PDF) Translational Medicine in CNS Drug

Development, Volume 29

http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-translational-medicine-
in-cns-drug-development-volume-29/

Cardiology-An Integrated Approach (Human Organ Systems)

(Dec 29, 2017)_(007179154X)_(McGraw-Hill) 1st Edition
Elmoselhi - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/cardiology-an-integrated-
approach-human-organ-systems-dec-29-2017_007179154x_mcgraw-hill-
ebook-pdf/

Netter Atlas of Human Anatomy-Classic Regional

Approach, 8e (Mar 29, 2022)_(0323793738)_(Elsevier) NOT
TRUE PDF 8th Edition - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/netter-atlas-of-human-anatomy-
classic-regional-approach-8e-mar-29-2022_0323793738_elsevier-not-
true-pdf-ebook-pdf/
(Original PDF) Psychological Science: Modeling
Scientific Literacy 2nd Edition

http://ebooksecure.com/product/original-pdf-psychological-
science-modeling-scientific-literacy-2nd-edition/

(Original PDF) Psychological Testing and Assessment 2e

2nd Edition

http://ebooksecure.com/product/original-pdf-psychological-
testing-and-assessment-2e-2nd-edition/

(eBook PDF) An Introduction to Psychological Science,

2nd Canadian Edition

http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-an-introduction-to-
psychological-science-2nd-canadian-edition/

Imidazole-Based Drug Discovery (Heterocyclic Drug

Discovery) 1st Edition - eBook PDF

https://ebooksecure.com/download/imidazole-based-drug-discovery-
heterocyclic-drug-discovery-ebook-pdf/

(eBook PDF) Population and Society: Essential Readings

2nd Edition

http://ebooksecure.com/product/ebook-pdf-population-and-society-
essential-readings-2nd-edition/
一、 AUS八l 2nd Edition
“雷比

.p

.
 STATISTICAL NOTATION AND FORMULAE

n number of scores (in a sample or treatment condition)

N total number of scores (in a population or data set)
f frequency (i.e., number of times a score occurs)
X raw score (i.e., a participant's original score on a measure)
IX sum of X (i.e., sum of all the Xvalues)
SS sum of squared deviations
z standardised score
p probability

MEASURES OF CENTRAL TENDENCY

Mdn median
µ population mean µ=望
N
XorM sample mean

MEASURES OF VARIABILITY (DISPERSION)

Range highest score - lowest score

CJ2 or CJx
2 population variance
ss ss = L(X -µ)2
护＝— where
N

cr or crx population standard deviation

ss
o- fi or a= 岳

s 2 or sx2 sample variance s2 = where ss = I(X -X)2

n-1

s or sx or SD sample standard deviation

s- 巨 or s= 汇

z-SCORE (FOR LOCATING AN XVALUE)

z=
X-µ
for a population z=
x-x
— for a sample
CJ s -X
=
z-SCORE (FOR LOCATING A SAMPLE MEAN; z-TEST)
rx_n
x-µ(J
z= where ax =—一
ax 双

HYPOTHESIS TESTING USING THE z-TEST

crg or crM standard error of the mean
Zobt obtained value of z-test
Zcrit critical value of z-test
H。 null hypothesis
Ha or H1 alternative hypothesis
a alpha; theoretical probability of making a Type I error
~ beta; theoretical probability of making a Type II error
1-~ statistical power
mean difference
d Cohen's d (measure of effect size) d=
standard deviation
PSYCHOLOGY 1B
(PSYl 022 / PSY 4122)
PSYCHOLOGICAL
DISCOVERY READINGS 2E

for
MONASH UNIVERSITY

Compiled by Eloise Perini

Sherri L Jackson
Gary Heiman
Frederick J Gravetter
Lori-Ann B Forzano
Larry B Wallnau

. . ,# CENGAGE
#·- Learning·
Australia• Brazil • Japan• Korea•Mexico• Singapore• Spain• United Kingdom• United States
-•~CENGAGE
~,- Learning·

Psychology 1B (PSY1022/PSY4122): Psychological Discovery Readings
2nd Edition
Sherri LJackson, Gary Heiman, FrederickJ Gravetter, Lori-Ann B Forzano,
Larry B Wallnau
Enterprise solutions manager: Margo Griffit h
Production controller: EePin Pang
Developmental ed itor: Dale Weber
Cover: Cover image by iStock.com/iMrSquid
Typeset by Cenveo Publis hing Services
Any URLs contained in this publication were checked for currency during the
production process. Note, however, that the publisher cannot vouch for the
ongoi ng currency of URLs.
©2016 (engage Learning Australia Pty Limited
Copyright Notice
This Work is copyright. No part of this Work may be reproduced, stored in a
retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means without prior
written permission of the Publisher. Except as permitted under the
Copyright Act 7968, for example any fair dealing for the purposes of private
study, research, crit icism or review, subject to certain limitations. These
limitations include: Restricting the copying to a maxi mum of one chapter or
10% of this book, whichever is greater; providing an appropriate notice and
warning with the copies of the Work disseminated; taking all reasonable
steps to limit access to these copies to people authorised to receive these
copies; ensuring you hold the appropriate Licences issued by the
Copyright Agency Limited ("CAL"), supply a remuneration notice to CAL and
pay any required fees. For details of CAL licences and remuneration notices
please contact CAL at Level 15,233 Castlereagh Street, Sydney NSW 2000,
Tel: (02) 9394 7600, Fax: (02) 9394 7601
Email: info@copyright.com.au
Website: www.copyright.com.au

For product information and technology assistance,

in Australia call 1300 790 853;
in New Zealand call 0800 449 725

For permission to use material from this text or product, please email
aust.permissions@cengage.com

ISBN 978 0 17 039233 4

CPlllS

Cengage Learning Australia

Level 7, 80 Dorcas Street
South Melbourne, Victoria Australia 3205

Cengage Learning New Zealand

Unit 48 Rosedale Office Park
331 Rosedale Road, Albany, North Shore 0632, NZ

For learning solutions, visit cengage.com.au

Printed in Australia by Ligare Pty Limited.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 20 1918 1716
Table of Contents

Psycholo罚 1B (PSY1022/PSY4122): Psychological Discovery Readin芹

Chapter 1: Psychology and the Scientific Method

Extract 1 Thlnldng Like a Scientist 2 Extract 2 Thinking Like a Scientist 4

Chapter 1, Jackson [2016] Chapter 1, Jackson [2016]
Research Methods and Statistics: A Critical Thinking Approach, Research Methods andStatistics: A C.斤tica/ Thinking Approach,
5th Edition, Wadsworth (9781305257795) 5th Edition, Wadsworth (9781305257795)

Extract 3 Introduction, Acquiring Knowledge, and the Scientific Methodl4 Extract 4 Research Ideas and Hypotheses 22
Chapter 1, Gravette r/ Forzano [2016] Chapter 2, Gravetter/Forzano [2016]
Research Methods for the Beha vioralSciences, Se, Wadsworth Research Methods for the Behavioral Sciences, Se, Wadsworth
(9781305104136) (978130510 4136)

Extract 5 Getting Started: Ideas, Resources, and Ethics 27 Extract 6 Research Ideas and Hypotheses 29
Chapter 2, Jackson [2016] Chapter 2, Gravetter/Forzano [2016]
Research Methods andStatistics: A Critical Thinking Approach, Research Methods for the BehavioralSciences, Se, Wadsworth
5th Edition, Wadsworth (9781305257795) (9781305104136)

Chapter 2: Beginning Research: Ethics, Variables, and Measurement

Extract 7 Getting Started: Ideas, Resources, and Ethics 39 Extract 8 Oetlnlng. Measuring. and Manipulating Variables 50
Chapter 2, Jackson [2016] Chapter 3, Jackson [2016]
Research Methods andStatistics: A Critical Thinking Approach, Research Methods and Statistics: A Critical Thinking Approach,
5th Edition, Wadsworth (9781305257795) 5th Edition, Wadsworth (9781305257795)

Chapter 3: Sampling Procedures, Descriptive and Correlational Research Methods

Extract 9 Descriptive Methods 68 Extract 10 Introduction, Acquiring Knowledge, and the Scientific Method72
Chapter 4, Jackson [2016] Chapter 1, Gravetter/ Forzano [2016]
Research Methods andStatistics: A Critical Thinking Approach, Research Methods for the BehavioralSciences, Se, Wadsworth
5th Edition, Wadsworth (9781305257795) (9781305104136)

Extract 11 Research Strategies and Validity 74 Extract 12 Thinking Like a Scientist 75

Chapter 6, Gravetter/Fo rzano [2016] Chapter 1, Jackson [2016]
Research Methods for the Behavioral Sciences, Se, Wadsworth Research Methods andStatistics: A Critical Thinking Approach,
(9781305104136) 5th Edition, Wadsworth (9781305257795)

Extract 13 Descriptive Methods 82 Extract 14 Correlatlonal Methods and Statistics 103

Chapte r 4, Jackson (2016] Chapter 6, Jackson [2016)
Research Methods andStatistics: A Critical Thinking Approach, Research Methods andStatistics: A Critical Thinking Approach,
5th Edition, Wadsworth (9781305257795) 5th Edition, Wadsworth (9781305257795)

Extract 15 Correlatlonal Methods and Statistics 112

Chapter 6, Jackson [2016]
Research Methods andStatistics: A Critical Thinking Approach,
5th Edition, Wadsworth (9781305257795)
Chapter 4: Experimental and Quas卜Experimental Research Methods

Extract 16 Introduction to Statistics 115 Extract 17 Introduction to Statistics 116

Chapter 1, Gravetter/Wallnau [2017] Chapter 1, Gravetter/Wall nau [2017]
Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences, /Oe (9781305504912) Statistics for the BehavioralSciences, 10e (9781305504912)

Extract 18 Experimental Design and Analysis I: Between-Subjects Designs Extract 19 Experimental Design and Analysis II: Correlated-Groups Designs
121 135
Chapter 9, 丿ackson [2016] Chapter 1 0, 」 ackson [2016)
Research Methods andStatistics: A Critical Thinking Approach, Research Methods andStatistics: A Critical Thinking Approach,
勋助tion, Wadsworth (9781305257795) 勋 Edition, Wadsworth (9781305257795)

Extract 20 Quasi-Experimental and Single-Case Designs 140 Extract 21 Quasi-Experimental and Single-Case Designs 148
Chapter 13, Jackson [2016] Chapter 13, Jackson [2016]
Research Methods andStatistics: A Critical Thinking Approach, Research Methods andStatistics: A C:斤tical Thinking Approach,
5th Edition, Wadsworth (9781305257795) 5th Edition, Wadsworth (9781305257795)

Extract 22 Quasi-Experimental and Single-Case Designs 149 Extract 23 Quasi-Experimental and Single-Case Designs 153
Chapter 13, Jackson [2016) Chapter 13, Jackson [2016]
Research Methods andStatistics: A Critical Thinking Approach, Research Methods andStatistics: A Critical Thinking Approach,
5th Edition, Wadsworth (9781305257795) 5th Edition, Wadsworth (9781305257795)

Chapter 5: Summarising Data Using Descriptive Statistics

Extract 24 Statistical Evaluation of Data 155 Extract 25 Statistics Demonstrations and Statlstlcal Tables 164
Chapter 15, Gravetter/Forzano [2016] Chapter AP: B, Gravetter/ Forzano [2016]
Research Methods for the BehavioralSciences, Se, Wadsworth Research Methods for the Behavioral Sciences, Se, Wadsworth
(9781305104136) (9781305104136)

Extract 26 Data Organization and Descriptive Statistics 166 Extract 27 Probablllty and Hypothesis Testing 180
Chapter 5, Jackson [2016] Chapter 7, Jackson [2016]
Research Methods andStatistics: A Critical Thinking Approach, Research Methods and Statistics: A Critical Thinking Approach,
5th Edition, Wadsworth (9781305257795) 5th Edition, Wadsworth (9781305257795)

Chapter 6: Drawing Conclusions using Inferential Statistics

Extract 28 Introduction to Statistics 185 Extract 29 Probabllity 187

Chapter 1, Gravetter/Wallnau [2017] Chapter 6, Gravetter/Wall nau [2017]
Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences, /Oe (9781305504912) Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences, /Oe (9781305504912)

Extract 30 Describing Data with z-Scores and the Normal Standard Curve Extract 31 Using Probability to Make Decisions about Data 195
189 Chapter 6, Heiman [2015]
Chapter 5, Heiman [2015] Behavioural Sciences STAT, 2e [Brooks/ Cole/(9781285458144)
Behavioural Sciences STAT, 2e [Brooks/Co/e] (9781285458144)

Extract 32 Overvl如 of Statlstlcal Hypothesis Testing: The z-Test 206 Extract 33 Statistical Evaluation of Data 224
Chapter 7, Heiman [2015] Chapter 15, Gravetter/Forzano [2016]
Behavioural Sciences STAT, 2e [Brooks/Co/ej (9781285458144) Research Methods for the Behavioral Sciences, Se, Wadsworth
(9781305104136)
Appendix: Standard Normal Curve Table (z-Table)

Extract 34 Statlstlcal Tables 228

Chapter AP: A, Jackson [2016]
Research Methods andStatistics: A Critical Thinking Approach,
5th Edition, Wadsworth (9781305257795)

Appendix: Statistical Notation and Formulae

Extract 35 Statlstlcal Notation and Formulae 233

Index

Extract 36 Index 235

Chapter 1: Psychology and the Scientific Method

1
2• • CHAPTER 1

W三五三：：三三~~江~~尸~:i~三三产三
why you have to take it. Most psychologists and the American Psychological
Association (APA) consider the research methods class especially important
in the undergraduate curriculum. In fact, along with the introductory psy-
chology class, the research methods class is one of the courses required by
most psychology departments (Messer, Griggs, & Jackson, 1999). Why is this
class considered so important, and what exactly is it all about?
Before answering these questions, I will ask you to complete a couple of
exercises related to your knowledge of psychology. I usually begin my re-
search methods class by asking my students to do these exercises. I assume
that you have had at least one other psychology class prior to this one. Thus,
these exercises should not be too difficult.
Exercise 1: Try to name five psychologists. Make sure that your list does
not include any "pop" psychologists such as Dr. Ruth or Dr. Laura. These
individuals are considered by most psychologists to be "pop" psycholo-
gists because, although they are certified to do some sort of counseling,
neither actually completed a degree in psychology. Dr. Ruth has an Ed.D.
in the interdisciplinary study of the family, and Dr. Laura has a Ph.D. in
physiology and a postdoctoral certification in marriage, family, and child
counseling.
Okay, whom did you name first? If you are like most people, you named
Sigmund Freud. In fact, if we were to stop 100 people on the street and ask
the same question of them, we would probably find that, other than "pop"
psychologists, Freud would be the most commonly named psychologist
(Stanovich, 2007). What do you know about Freud? Do you believe that he
is representative of all that psychology encompasses? Most people on the

2
 Thinking Like a Scientist• • 3

street believe so. In fact, most of them believe that psychologists "do" what
they see "pop" psychologists doing and what they believe Freud did. That
is, they believe that most psychologists listen to people's problems and try
to help them solve those problems. If this represents your schema for psy-
chology, this class should help you to see the discipline in a very different
light.
Exercise 2 (taken from Bolt, 1998): Make two columns on a piece of pa-
per, one labeled "Scientist" and one labeled "Psychologist." Now, write five
descriptive terms for each. You may include terms or phrases that describe
what you believe the "typical" scientist or psychologist looks like, dresses
like, or acts like, as well as what personality characteristics you believe these
individuals have. After you have finished this task, evaluate your descrip-
tions. Do they differ? Again, if you are like most students, even psychology
majors, you have probably written very different terms to describe each of
these categories.
First, consider your descriptions of a scientist. Most students see the sci-
entist as a middle-aged man, usually wearing a white lab coat with a pocket
protector on it. The terms for the scientist's personality usually describe
someone who is analytical, committed, and introverted with poor people/
social skills. Are any of these siinilar to your descriptions?
Now let's turn to your descriptions of a typical psychologist. Once
again, a majority of students tend to picture a man, although some picture a
woman. They definitely do not see the psychologist in a white lab coat but
instead in some sort of professional attire. The terms for personality char-
acteristics tend to describe someone who is warm, caring, empathic, and
concerned about others. Does this sound siinilar to what you have written?
What is the point behind these exercises? First, they illustrate that most
people have misconceptions about what psychologists do and about what
psychology is. In other words, most people believe that the majority of psy-
—
chologists do what Freud did try to help others with their problems. They
also tend to see psychology as a discipline devoted to the mental health pro-
fession. As you will soon see, psychology includes many other areas of spe-
cialization, some of which may actually involve wearing a white lab coat
and working with technical equipment.
I asked you to describe a scientist versus a psychologist because I hoped
that you would begin to realize that a psychologist is a scientist. Wait a
呻ute, you may be saying. I decided to major in psychology because I don't
like science. What you have failed to recognize is that what makes some-
thing a science is not what is studied but how it is studied. This is what you
will be learning about in this course—how to use the scientific method to
conduct research in psychology. This is also why you may have had to take
statistics as a prerequisite or corequisite to this class and why statistics are
—
covered in this text because doing research requires an understanding of
how to use statistics. In this text, you will learn about both research methods
and the statistics most useful for these methods.

3

knowledge via superstition
Knowledge that is based on
subjective feelings, inte「p「eting
「andom events as nonrandom
events, o 「 believing in magical
events.
knowledge via intuition
Knowledge gained without
being consciouslyaware of its
sou 「ce.
knowledge via authority
Knowledge gained from those
viewed as authority figu 「es
Thinking Like a Scientist• • 7
Sources of Knowledge
There are many ways to gain knowledge, and some are better than others.
As scientists, psychologists must be aware of each of these methods. Let's
look at several ways of acquiring knowledge, beginning with sources that
may not be as reliable or accurate as scientists might desire. We will then
consider sources that offer greater reliability and will ultimately discuss
using science as a means of gaining knowledge.
Superstition and Intuition
Gaining knowledge via superstition means acquiring knowledge that is
based on subjective feelings, interpreting random events as nonrandom
events, or believing in magical events. For example, you may have heard
someone say "Bad things happen in threes." Where does this idea come
from? As far as I know, no study has ever documented that bad events occur
in threes, yet people frequently say this and act as if they believe it. Some
people believe that breaking a mirror brings 7 years of bad luck or that
the number 13 is unlucky. Once again, these are examples of superstitious
beliefs that are not based on observation or hypothesis testing. As such, they
represent a means of gaining knowledge that is neither reliable nor valid.
When we gain knowledge via intuition, it means that we have knowl-
edge of something without being consciously aware of where the knowledge
came from. You have probably heard people say things like "I don't know,
it's just a gut feeling" or "I don't know, it just came to me, and I know it's
true." These statements represent examples of intuition. However, some-
times we intuit something based not on a "gut feeling" but on events we
have observed. The problem is that the events may be misinterpreted and
not representative of all events in that category. For example, many people
believe that more babies are born during a full moon or that couples who
have adopted a baby are more likely to conceive after the adoption. These
—
are examples of illusory correlation the perception of a relationship that
does not exist. More babies are not born when the moon is full nor are cou-
ples more likely to conceive after adopting (Gilovich, 1991). Instead, we are
more likely to notice and pay attention to those couples who conceive after
adopting and not notice those who did not conceive after adopting.
Authority
When we accept what a respected or famous person tells us, we are gaining
knowledge via authority. You may have gained much of your own knowl-
edge through authority figures. As you were growing up, your parents pro-
vided you with information that, for the most part, you did not question,
4
8• • CHAPTER 1
knowledge via tenacity
Knowledge gained from
「epeated ideas that a「e
stubbornly clung to despite
evidence to the contra「y.
knowledge via rationalism
Knowledge gained through
logical 「easoning.
especially when you were very young. You believed that they knew what
they were talking about, and thus you accepted the answers they gave you.
You have probably also gained knowledge from teachers whom you viewed
as authority figures, at times blindly accepting what they said as truth. Most
people tend to accept information imparted by those they view as authority
figures. Historically, authority figures have been a primary means of infor-
mation. For example, in some time periods and cultures, the church and its
leaders were responsible for providing much of the knowledge that indi-
viduals gained throughout the course of their lives.
Even today, many individuals gain much of their knowledge from
authority figures. This may not be a problem if the perceived authority fig-
ure truly is an authority on the subject. However, problems may arise in
situations where the perceived authority figure really is not knowledgeable
about the material he or she is imparting. A good example is the information
given in "infomercials." Celebrities are often used to deliver the message or
a testimonial concerning a product. For example, Cindy Crawford may tell
us about a makeup product, or Jessica Simpson may provide a testimonial
regarding a an acne product. Do Cindy Crawford or Jessica Simpson have
degrees in dermatology? These individuals may be experts on modeling or
singing, but they are not authorities on the products they are advertising.
Yet many individuals readily accept what they say.
In conclusion, accepting the word of an authority figure may be a reli-
able and valid means of gaining knowledge, but only if the individual is
truly an authority on the subject. Thus, we need to question "authoritative"
sources of knowledge and develop an attitude of skepticism so that we do
not blindly accept whatever is presented to us.
Tenacity
Gaining knowledge via tenacity involves hearing a piece of information so
often that you begin to believe it is true, and then, despite evidence to the
contrary, you cling stubbornly to the belief. This method is often used in
political campaigns, where a particular slogan is repeated so often that we
begin to believe it. Advertisers also use the method of tenacity by repeat-
ing their slogan for a certain product over and over until people begin to
associate the slogan with the product and believe that the product meets its
claims. For example, the makers of Visine advertised for over 40 years that
"It gets the red out," and, although Visine eventually changed the slogan,
most of us have heard the original so many times that we probably now
believe it. The problem with gaining knowledge through tenacity is that we
do not know whether the claims are true. As far as we know, the accuracy of
such knowledge may not have been evaluated in any valid way.
Rationalism
Gaining knowledge via rationalism involves logical reasoning. With this
approach, ideas are precisely stated and logical rules are applied to arrive at
5

Knowledge via empi 『icism
Knowledge gained through
objectiveobservations of
。「ganisms and events in the
「eal wo「Id
knowledge via science
Knowledge gained th「ough
acombination of empirical
methods and logical 「easoning
hypothesis A p「edict 1on
「ega「ding the outcome of a
study involving the potential
relationship between at least
two va「iables.
Thinking Like a Scientist• • 9
a logically sound conclusion. Rational ideas are often presented in the form
of a syllogism. For example:
All humans are mortal;
I am a human;
Therefore, I am mortal.
This conclusion is logically derived from the major and minor premises
in the sy且ogism. Consider, however, the following syllogism:
Attractive people are good;
Nellie is attractive;
Therefore, Nellie is good.
This syllogism should identify for you the problem with gaining knowl-
edge by logic. Although the syllogism is logically sound, the content of both
premises is not necessarily true. If the content of the premises were true, then
the conclusion would be true in addition to being logically sound. However,
if the content of either of the premises is false (as is the premise Attractive
II
people are good"), then the conclusion is logically valid but empirically false
and therefore of no use to a scientist. Logic deals with only the form of the
syllogism and not its content. Obviously, researchers are interested in both
form and content.
Empiricism
Knowledge via empiricism involves gaining knowledge through objec-
tive observation and the experiences of your senses. An individual who
says "I believe nothing until I see it with my own eyes" is an empiricist. The
empiricist gains knowledge by seeing, hearing, tasting, smelling, and touch-
ing. This method dates back to the age of Aristotle. Aristotle was an empiri-
cist who made observations about the world in order to know it better. Plato,
in contrast, preferred to theorize about the true nature of the world without
gathering any data.
职mpiricism alone is not enough, however. Empiricism represents a col-
lechon of facts. If, as scientists, we relied solely on empiricism, we would
have nothing more than a long list of observations or facts. For these facts to
be useful, we need to organize them, think about them, draw meaning from
them, and use them to make predictions. In other words, we need to use
rationalism together with empiricism to make sure that we are being logical
about the observations that we make. As you will see, this is what science
does.
Science
Gaining knowledge via science, then, involves a merger of rationalism and
empiricism. Scientists collect data (make empirical observations) and test
hypotheses with these data (assess them using rationalism). A hypothesis is
a prediction regarding the outcome of a study. This prediction concerns the
6
10• • CHAPTER 1

variable An event o「
behavio「 that has at least two
values.
theory An organized system
of assumptions and p 「incip les
that attempts to explain certain
phenomena and how they are
「elated
potential relationship between at least two variables (a variable is an event
or behavior that has at least two values). Hypotheses are stated in such a
way that they are testable. By merging rationalism and empiricism, we have
the advantage of using a logical argument based on observation. We may
find that our hypothesis is not supported, and thus we have to reevaluate
our position. On the other hand, our observations may support the hypoth-
esis being tested.
In science, the goal of testing hypotheses is to arrive at or test a theory—
an organized system of assumptions and principles that attempts to explain
certain phenomena and how they are related. Theories help us to organize
and explain the data gathered in research studies. In other words, theories
allow us to develop a framework regarding the facts in a certain area. For
example, Darwin's theory organizes and explains facts related to evolution.
To develop his theory, Darwin tested many hypotheses. In addition to help-
ing us organize and explain facts, theories help in producing new knowl-
edge by steering researchers toward specific observations of the world.
Students are sometimes confused about the difference between a hypoth-
esis and a theory. A hypothesis is a prediction regarding the outcome of a
single study. Many hypotheses may be tested and several research studies
conducted before a comprehensive theory on a topic is put forth. Once a
theory is developed, it may aid in generating future hypotheses. In other
words, researchers may have additional questions regarding the theory that
help them to generate new hypotheses to test. If the results from these addi-
tional studies further support the theory, we are likely to have greater confi-
dence in the theory. However, further research can also expose weaknesses
in a theory that may lead to future revisions of the theory.

一 m IN REVIEW
SOURCE DESCRIPTION ADVANTAGES/DISADVANTAGES
Superstition Gaining knowledge through subjective feelings, interpreting Not empirical or logical
random events as nonrandom events, or believing in magical
events
Intuition Gaining knowledge without being consciously aware of where Not empirical or logical
the knowledge came from
Authority Gaining knowledge from those viewed as authority figures Not empirical or logical; authority
figure may not be an expert in the area
Tenacity Gaining knowledge by clinging stubbornly to repeated ideas, Not empirical or logical
despite evidence to the contrary
Rationalism Gaming knowledge through logical reasoning Logical but not empirical
Empiricism Gaining knowledge through observations of organisms and Empirical but not necessarily logical or
events m the real world systematic
Science Gaining knowledge through empirical methods and logical The only acceptable way for
reasoning researchers/scientists to gain
knowledge

7
 Thinking Like a Scientist • • 11

The Scientific (Critical Thinking) Approach

and Psychology
Now that we have briefly described what science is, let's discuss how this
applies to the discipline of psychology. As mentioned earlier, many students
believe that they are attracted to psychology because they think it is not a
science. The error in their thinking is that they believe that subject matter
alone defines what is and what is not science. Instead, what defines science
is the manner in which something is studied. Science is a way of thinking
about and observing events to achieve a deeper understanding of these
events. Psychologists apply the scientific method to their study of human
beings and other animals.
The scientific method involves invoking an attitude of skepticism.
skeptic A person who A skeptic is a person who questions the validity, authenticity, or truth of
questions the validity, something purporting to be factual. In our society, being described as a
authenticity, o「 truth of
skeptic is not typically thought of as a compliment. However, for a scientist,
something purporting to be
factual it is a compliment. It means that you do not blindly accept any new idea that
comes along. Instead, the skeptic needs data to support an idea and insists
on proper testing procedures when the data were collected. Being a skep-
tic and using the scientific method involve applying three important criteria
that help define science: systematic empiricism, publicly verifiable knowl-
edge, and empirically solvable problems (Stanovich, 2007).

...
systemabc Empir1c1sm
As you have seen, empiricism is the practice of relying on observation to
draw conclusions. Most people today probably agree that the best way to
learn about something is to observe it. This reliance on empiricism was
not always a common practice. Before the 17th century, most people relied
systematic empi 『icism
more on intuition, religious doctrine provided by authorities, and reason
Making observations in a
systematic manne 「 to test than they did on empiricism. Notice, however, that empiricism alone is not
hypotheses and develop o「 enough; it must be systematic empiricism. In other words, simply observ-
refute atheory ing a series of events does not lead to scientific knowledge. The observations

8
12• • CHAPTER 1
publicly verifiable
knowledge Presenting
「esea「ch to the public so that
it can be observed, 「epl icated,
c「iticized, and tested.
empi『ically
p『oblems
solvable
Questions that
a「e potentially answerable by
means of cu 「「ently available
「esea「ch techn iques.
p『 inciple of falsifiability
The idea that ascientific theory
must be stated in such away
that it is possible to 「elute o「
d isconfi rm 几
must be made in a systematic manner to test a hypothesis and develop or
refute a theory (in other words, empiricism and rationalism). For example,
if a researcher is interested in the relationship between vitamin C and the
incidence of colds, she will not simply ask people haphazardly whether they
take vitamin C and how many colds they have had. This approach involves
empiricism but not systematic empiricism. Instead, the researcher might
design a study to assess the effects of vitamin C on colds. Her study will
probably involve using a representative group of individuals, with each
individual then randomly assigned to either take or not take vitamin C sup-
plements. She will then observe whether the groups differ in the number
of colds they report. We will go into more detail on designing such a study
later in this chapter. By using systematic empiricism, researchers can draw
more reliable and valid conclusions than they can from observation alone.
Publicly Verifiable Knowledge
Scientific research should be publicly verifiable knowledge. This means
that the research is presented to the public in such a way that it can be
observed, replicated, criticized, and tested for veracity by others. Most com-
monly, this involves submitting the research to a scientific journal for pos-
—
sible publication. Most journals are peer-reviewed other scientists critique
the research to decide whether it meets the standards for publication. If a
study is published, other researchers can read about the findings, attempt
to replicate them, and through this process demonstrate that the results are
reliable. You should be suspicious of any claims made without the support of
public verification. For example, many people have claimed that they were
abducted by aliens. These claims do not meet the criteria of publicly verifi-
able knowledge; they are simply the claims of individuals with no evidence
to support them. Other people claim that they have lived past lives. Once
again, there is no evidence to support such claims. These types of claims are
unverifiable—there is no way that they are open to public verification.
Empirically Solvable Problems
—
Science always investigates empirically solvable problems questions that
are potentially answerable by means of currently available research tech-
niques. If a theory cannot be tested using empirical techniques, then sci-
entists are not interested in it. For example, the question "Is there life after
death?" is not an empirical question and thus cannot be tested scientifically.
However, the question "Does an intervention program minimize rearrests
in juvenile delinquents?" can be empirically studied and thus is within the
realm of science.
When empirically solvable problems are studied, they are always open
—
to the principle of falsifiability the idea that a scientific theory must be
stated in such a way that it is possible to refute or disconfirm it. In other
words, the theory must predict not only what will happen but also what
9
14• • CHAPTER 1
CRITERIA
Systematic empiricism
Publicly verifiable
knowledge
Empirically solvable
problems
basic research The study
of psychological issues toseek
knowledge fo「 its own sake
You may feel that your intelligence has been insulted with this foolish expla-
nation of brain functioning. However, you should see the analogy between
this explanation and the one offered by proponents of ESP, despite any evi-
dence to support it and much evidence to refute it.
IN REVIEW
DESCRIPTION WHY NECESSARY
Making observations in a systematic manner Aids in refuting or developing a theory
in order to test hypotheses
Presenting research to the public so that it can Aids in determining the veracity of a
be observed, replicated, criticized, and tested theory
Stating questions in such a way that they are Aids in determining whether a theory
answerable by means of currently available can potentially be tested using empirical
research techniques techniques and whether it is falsifiable
Basic and Applied Research
Some psychologists conduct research because they enjoy seeking knowledge
and answering questions. This is referred to as basic research the study of—
psychological issues to seek knowledge for its own sake. Most basic research
is conducted in university or laboratory settings. The intent of basic research
is not immediate application but the gaining of knowledge. However, many
treatments and procedures that have been developed to help humans and
animals began with researchers asking basic research questions that later led
to applications. Examples of basic research in psychology include identify-
ing differences in capacity and duration in short-term memory and long-
term memory, identifying whether cogniti:e maps can be mentally rotated,
determining how various schedules of remforcement affect learning, and
determining how lesioning a certain area in the brains of rats affects their
behavior. In October of 2013, after winning the Nobel Prize for physics for
their work in helping explain how matter formed after the Big Bang, based
on the Higgs boson, or "God particle," Peter Higgs and Francois Englert
both commented on the importance of basic research. Higgs was quoted as
saying he hoped that the prize would help people recognize "the value of
blue-sky research." Englert said the award pointed to the importance of sci-
entific freedom and the need for scientists to be allowed to do fundamental
(basic) research that doesn't have immediate practical applications.
11

applied 『esearch The study
of psychological issues that
have p 「actical significance and
potential solutions
description Ca「efu l ly
obse「vi ng behavio「 in orde 「 to
describe it
p『ediction Identifying the
factors that indicatewhen an
event o「 events wi II occur
Thinking Like a Scientist • • 15
A second type of research is applied research, which involves the study of
psychological issues that have practical signi_ficance and potential solutions.
Scientists who conduct applied research are mterested in finding an answer
to a question because the answer can be immediately applied to some situ.a-
tion. Much applied research is conducted by private businesses and the gov-
emment. Examples of applied research include identifying~ow stress affects
the immune system, determining the accuracy of eyewitness testimony,
determining the relationship between watching violent TV and aggression in
children, and determining whether cell phone use while driving negatively
affects driving performance. Some people think that most research should
be directly relevant to a social problem or issue. In other words, some people
favor only applied research. The problem with this approach is that much of
what started out as basic research eventually led to some sort of application.
If researchers stopped asking questions simply because they wanted to know
the answer (stopped engaging in basic research), then many great ideas and
eventual applications would undoubtedly be lost.
Goals of Science
Scientific research has three basic goals: (1) to describe behavior, (2) to pre-
diet behavior, and (3) to explain behavior. All of these goals lead to a better
understanding of behavior and mental processes.
Description
Description begins with careful observation. Psychologists might describe
patterns of behavior, thought, or emotions in humans. They might also
describe the behavior(s) of animals. For example, researchers might observe
and describe the type of play behavior exhibited by children or the mating
behavior of chimpanzees. Description allows us to learn about behavior
and when it occurs. Let's say, for example, that you were interested in the
channel-changing behavior of men and women. Careful observation and
description would be needed to determine whether or not there were any
gender differences in channel changing. Description allows us to observe
that two events are systematically related to one another. Without descrip-
tion as a first step, predictions cannot be made.
Prediction
Prediction allows us to identify the factors that indicate when an event or
events will occur. In other words, knowing the level of one variable allows
us to predict the approximate level of the other variable. We know that if
one variable is present at a certain level, then it is likely that the other vari-
able will be present at a certain level. For example, if we observed that men
change channels with greater frequency than women, we could then make
predictions about how often men and women might change channels when
given the chance.
12
16• • CHAPTER 1
explanation Identifying the
causes that determine when and
why a behavior occurs.
Explanation
Finally, explanation allows us to identify the causes that determine when
and why a behavior occurs. To explain a behavior, we need to demonstrate
that we can manipulate the factors needed to produce or eliminate the
behavior. For example, in our channel-changing example, if gender predicts
channel changing, what might cause it? It could be genetic or environmental.
Maybe men have less tolerance for commercials and thus change channels at
a greater rate. Maybe women are more interested in the content of com.mer-
cials and are thus less likely to change channels. Maybe the attention span
of women is longer. Maybe something associated with having a Y chromo-
some increases channel changing, or something associated with having two
X chromosomes leads to less channel changing. Obviously there are a wide
variety of possible explanations. As scientists, we test these possibilities to
identify the best explanation of why a behavior occurs. When we try to iden-
tify the best explanation for a behavior, we must systematically eliminate
any alternative explanations. To eliminate alternative explanations, we must
impose control over the research situation. We will discuss the concepts of
control and alternative explanations shortly.
13
26 CHAPTER ONE I Introduction, Acquiring Knowledge, and the Scientific Method

The Steps in the Research Process

The process of planning and conducting a research study involves using the
scientific method to address a specific question. During this process, the re-
searcher moves from a general idea to actual data collection and interpreta-
tion of the results. Along the way, the researcher is faced with a series of deci-
sions about how to proceed. In this section, we outline the basic steps, or
decision points, in the research process. The complete set of steps is also
shown in Figure 1.5. Reading this section should give you a better under-
standing of the scientific method and how it is used, as well as an overview of
the topics covered in the rest of the book. As a final note, remember that, al-
though research requires a decision about what to do at each stage in the pro-
cess, there are no absolutely right or wrong decisions. Each choice you make
along the way has disadvantages as well as advantages. Much of the material
in the remainder of the book focuses on the kinds of decisions that need to be
made during the research process and examines the strengths and weaknesses
of various choices.

14
 1.4 Th e Res earch Proc ess 27

1. Find a Research Idea:

Select a Topic and Search the Literature
to Find an Unanswered Question
Identify a general topic that you would like
to explore and review the background
literature to find a specific research
idea or question.

10. Refine or Reformulate Your

Research Idea 2. Form a Hypothesis
Use the results to modify, refine, or expand Form a hypothesis, or tentative answer,
your original research idea, or to to your research question.
generate new ideas.

9. Report the Results 3. Determine HowYouWill Define &

Use the established guidelines for format
and style to prepare an accurate and
honest report that also protects the
anonymity and confidentiality of
the participants.
Measure Your Variables
Identify the specific procedures that will be
used to define and measure all variables.
Plan to evaluate the validity and reliability
of your measurement procedure.

8. Evaluate the Data 4. Identify the Participants or Subjects

for the Study, Decide How They Will be
Use the appropriate descriptive and
Selected, and Plan for Their Ethical
inferential statistics to summarize and
Treatment
interpret the results.
Decide how many participants or subjects
you will need, what characteristics they
should have.and how they will be selected.
Also plan for their ethical treatment.

5. Select a Research Strategy

7. Conduct the Study Consider internal and external
Collect the data. validity and decide between an
experimental (cause-effect) and a
descriptive, correlational, or
quasi-experimental strategy.

6. Select a Research
Design
Decide among between-subjects,
within-subject, factorial or
single-subject designs.

FIG u RE 1.5 The Steps in the Research Process

15
28 CHAPTER ONE I Introduction, Acquiring Knowledge, and the Scientific Method

Step 1: Find a Research Idea: Select a Topic and Search the Literature
to Find an Unanswered Question
The first step in the research process is to find a research idea. This task, dis-
cussed in detail in Chapter 2, typically involves two parts:

1. Selecting a general topic area (such as human development, perception,

social interaction, and so on).
2. Reviewing the literature in that area to identify the relevant variables and
find an unanswered question.

You may decide, for example, that you are interested in the topic of obesity
and want to examine the variables that contribute to overeating. Ideas for top-
ics can come from a variety of sources including everyday experience, books,
journal articles, or class work. It is important that a researcher be honestly in-
terested in the chosen topic. The research process can be a long-term, demand-
ing enterprise. Without intrinsic interest to sustain motivation, it is very easy for
a researcher to get tired or bored and give up before the research is completed.
Bear in mind that your general topic area is simply a starting point that
eventually will evolve into a very specific idea for a research study. Your final
research idea will develop as you read through the research literature and dis-
cover what other researchers have already learned. Your original topic area
will guide you through the literature and help you to decide which research
studies are important to you and which are not relevant to your interests. Even-
tually, ~ou will become familiar with the current state of knowledge and can
determme which questions are still unanswered. At this stage, you will be
ready to identify your own research question. In Chapter 2, we discuss the task
of searching through the research literature to find an idea for a research study.
As you become familiar with an area of research, you will learn the differ-
ent variables that are being investigated and get some ideas about how those
variables are related to each other. At this point, you should be looking for an
unanswered research question.
Occasionally, finding an unanswered question is very easy. Published re-
search reports often include suggestions for future research, or identify limita-
tions of the studies they are reporting. You are welcome to follow the sugges-
tions or try to correct the limitations in your own research. More often,
however, the unanswered question is the result of critical reading. As you read
a research report, ask yourself why the study was done a certain way. If the
study only used participants from middle-class families, perhaps the research-
ers suspected that family income might influence the results. Ask what might
happen if some characteristics of the study were changed. For example, if the
study examined eating behavior in restaurants, would the same results apply to
eating at home?
In some situations, the research question may simply ask for a description
of an individual variable or variables. For example, a researcher might be inter-
ested in the sleeping habits of college students. How much sleep do college stu-
dents typically get? What time do they get up each day? More often, however,
the research question concerns a relationship between two or more variables.
For example, a researcher may want to know whether there is a relationship

16
 1.4 The Resea rch Process 29

between portion size and the amount of food that people eat. Does serving
larger portions cause an increase in food consumption?

Step 2: Form a Hypothesis

If your unanswered question simply asks for a description of a variable or vari-
ables, you can skip this step and go directly to Step 3 of the research process.
However, if your question concerns the relationship between variables, the
next task is to form a hypothesis, or a tentative answer to the question. For ex-
ample, if your question is whether serving larger portions leads to overeating,
a hypothesis could be stated as follows: Increasing portion size will cause an
increase in the amount of food eaten.
When you are selecting an answer to serve as your hypothesis, you should
pick the answer that seems most likely to be correct. Remember, the goal of the
research study is to demonstrate that your answer (your hypothesis) is correct.
The likelihood of a hypothesis being correct is often based on previous re-
search results. If similar research has demonstrated the importance of one spe-
cific variable, it is likely that the same variable will be important in your own
study. It is also possible that you can develop a logical argument supporting
your hypothesis. If you can make a reasonable argument for your hypothesis,
then it is likely that the hypothesis is correct.

Step 3: Determine How You Will Define and Measure Your Variables
Later in the research process, the hypothesis will be evaluated in an empirical
research study. First, however, you must determine how you will define and
measure your variables. Suppose, for example, that your hypothesis says that
watching violence on television leads to more aggressive behavior. Also sup-
pose that you have decided to evaluate this hypothesis using a group of pre-
school children as your participants. Thus, your hypothesis predicts that if we
observe a group of preschool children, we should see that those who watch
more television violence are more aggressive than those who watch less televi-
sion violence. Before we can evaluate this prediction, however, we need to de-
termine how we will distinguish between more and less television violence, and
distinguish between more and less aggression. Specifically, we must decide ex-
actly how we will define and measure television violence, and exactly how we
will define and measure aggressive behavior. The variables identified in the re-
search hypothesis must be defined in a manner that makes it possible to mea-
sure them by some form of empirical observation. These decisions are usually
made after reviewing previous research and determining how other researchers
have defined and measured their variables.
By defining our variables so that they can be observed and measured, we
are continuing to transform the hypothesis (from Step 2 of the research pro-
cess) into a specific, well-defined research study based on empirical observa-
tions. Notice that this step is necessary before we can evaluate the hypothesis
by actually observing the variables. The key idea is to transform the hypothesis
into an empirically testable form.
You should also realize that the task of determining exactly how the variables
will be defined and measured often depends on the individuals to be measured.
For example, you would certainly measure the aggressive behavior of a group of

17
30 CHAPTER ONE I Introduction, Acquiring Knowledge, and the Scient巾 c Method

preschool children very differently from the aggressive behavior of a group of

adults. The task of defining and measuring variables is discussed in Chapter 3.

Step 4: Identify the Participants or Subjects for the Study, Decide

How They Will be Selected, and Plan for Their Ethical Treatment
To evaluate a hypothesis scientifically, we first use the hypothesis to produce a
specific prediction that can be observed and evaluated in a research study. One
part of designing the research study is to decide exactly what kind of individu-
als will participate, determine how many individuals you will need for your re-
search, and plan where and how to recruit them. If the individuals are human,
they are called participants. Nonhumans are called subjects.

D EF I N I T I ON The individuals who take part in research studies are called participants if
they are human, and subjects if they are nonhuman.

At this point, it is the responsibility of the researcher to plan for the safety
and well-being of the research participants and to inform them of all relevant
aspects of the research, especially any risk or danger that may be involved. Eth-
ical considerations also include determining the procedure that you will use to
recruit participants. For example, you may decide to offer some payment or
other compensation for participation but you must be careful that you do not
entice or coerce individuals who normally would not participate. Finally, we
should note that ethical considerations often interact with your choice of par-
ticipants. Specifically, ethics may influence your decision about which individu-
als to select. For example, the swearing study described in the Chapter Preview
was ethically obliged to use adult participants. Most people would consider it
unethical to use young children in a study that involved shouting obscenities.
On the other hand, the individuals you select may affect your ethical decisions.
For example, a research study using young children or other vulnerable groups
places a stronger obligation on the researcher than would exist with adult par-
ticipants who are more cap~ble of caring for their own well-being. The issue of
ethical treatment for part1c1pants and subjects is discussed in Chapter 4.
In addition, you must decide whether you will place any restrictions on the
characteristics of the participants. For example, you may decide to use pre-
school children. Or you may be more restrictive and use only 4-year-old boys
from two-parent, middle-income households who have been diagnosed with a
specific learning disability. Be aware, however, that you are also defining limi-
tations for generalizing the results of the study. For example, if you choose to
use a sample of 50 college students, then you are justified in generalizing the
results to other college students but not to different populations. Different
ways to select individuals to participate in research are discussed in Chapter 5.
Notice that when you have completed Steps 3 and 4 you have created a spe-
cific research study that will test the original hypothesis from Step 2 of the re-
search process. Specifically, you have specified exactly how the variables will
be defined and measured, and described exactly who will be observed and
measured. Ultimately, the research study will test the original hypothesis by ac-
tually making the observations.

18
 1.4 The Research Process 31

Step 5: Select a Research Strategy

Choosing a research strategy mvolves deciding on the general approach you
will take to evaluate your research hypothesis. General research strategies are
introduced in Chapter 6 and discussed in Chapters 7, 10, 12, and 13. The
choice of a research strategy is usually determined by one of two factors:
1. The type of question asked: Consider, for example, the following two
research questions:
Is there a relationship between sugar consumption and activity level for preschool
children?
Will increasing the level of sugar consumption for preschool children cause an
increase in their activity level?
At first glance, it may appear that the two questions are actually the same.
In terms of research, however, they are quite different. They will require differ-
ent research studies and may produce different answers. Consider the follow-
ing two questions:
Is there a relationship between intelligence and income for 40-year-old men?
Will increasing the salary for 40-year-old men cause an increase in their IQ scores?
In this case, it should be clear that the two questions are not the same and
may lead to different conclusions. The type of question that you are asking can
dictate the specific research strategy that you must use.
—
2. Ethics and other constraints: Often, ethical considerations discussed in
—
Chapter 4 or other factors, such as equipment availability, limit what
you can or cannot do in the laboratory. These factors often can force you
to choose one research strategy over another.

Step 6: Select a Research Design

Selecting a research design involves making decisions about the specific meth-
ods and procedures you will use to conduct the research study. Does your re-
search question call for the detailed examination of one individual, or would
you find a better answer by looking at the average behavior of a large group?
Should you observe one group of individuals as they experience a series of dif-
ferent treatment conditions, or should you observe a different group of individ-
uals for each of the different treatments? Should you make a series of observa-
tions of the same individuals over a period of time, or should you compare the
behaviors of different individuals at the same time? Answering these questions
will help you determine a specific design for the study. Different designs and
their individual strengths and weaknesses are discussed in Chapters 8, 9, 10,
11, and 14.

Step 7: Conduct the Study

Finally, you are ready to collect the data. But now you must decide whether the
study will be conducted in a laboratory or in the field (in the real world). Will
you observe the participants individually or in groups? In addition, you must
now implement all your earlier decisions about manipulating, observing, mea-
suring, controlling, and recording the different aspects of your study.

19
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
they stood talking for a quarter of an hour, when Charles concluded
by saying aloud, “I will never grant the Poles peace till they have
elected another king.” The Cardinal, who had expected this,
immediately reported it to all the counts, saying that he was most
sorry about it, but pointing out the necessity for complying with the
conqueror’s wishes.
At this news the King of Poland saw that he must either lose his
crown or defend it in battle, and he put forth his best resources for
this last contest. All his Saxon forces had arrived from the frontiers of
Saxony. The nobility of the Palatinate of Cracow, where he still was,
came in a body to offer him their services. He personally exhorted
every one of these to remember the oaths they had taken, and they
promised him that they would fight to the last drop of their blood in
his defence. Fortified by this help, and by the troops called the crown
corps, he went for the first time to attack the King of Sweden, and
soon found him advancing towards Cracow.
The two Kings met on the 19th of July, 1702, in a large plain near
Clissau, between Warsaw and Cracow. Augustus had nearly 20,000
men, and Charles not more than 12,000; the battle began by a
discharge of artillery. At the first volley, discharged by the Saxons,
the Duke of Holstein, who commanded the Swedish cavalry, a young
prince of great courage and valour, received a cannon-shot in his
loins. The King asked if he were dead, and when they answered in
the affirmative he said nothing, the tears fell from his eyes, and then
covering his face with his hands for a moment, he spurred his horse
furiously, and rushed into the thick of the fight at the head of his
guards.
The King of Poland did all that could be expected of a prince
fighting for his crown; he thrice personally led his men in a charge,
but the good fortune of Charles carried the day, and he gained a
complete victory. The enemy’s camp, artillery and flags, and
Augustus’s war-chest were left in his hands.
He did not delay on the field of battle, but marched straight to
Cracow, pursuing the King of Poland, who fled before him. The
citizens of Cracow were brave enough to shut the gates upon the
conqueror. He had them broken open, the garrison did not dare to
fire a single shot; they were chased with whips and sticks to the
castle, where the King entered with them. One gunner ventured to
prepare to fire a cannon; Charles rushed up to him and snatched the
match away; he then threw himself at the King’s feet. Three Swedish
regiments were lodged at free quarters in the town, and the citizens
were taxed by a tribute of 100,000 rixdollars. Count Steinbock,
having heard that some treasure had been hidden in the tomb of the
Polish kings, in the Church of Saint Nicholas at Cracow, had them
opened; they only found gold and silver ornaments belonging to the
church; they took some of them and Charles sent a golden chalice to
a Swedish church; this would have raised the Polish Catholics
against him, if anything could have withstood the terror inspired by
his arms. He left Cracow fully resolved to pursue Augustus without
intermission, but within a few miles of the city his horse fell and
broke his thigh-bone, so that he had to be carried back to Cracow,
where he lay in bed in the hands of the surgeons six weeks. This
accident gave Augustus breathing space. He had the report
immediately spread throughout Poland and Germany that Charles
had been killed by his fall. This false report, which was believed for
some time, filled all men’s minds with astonishment and uncertainty.
During this slight interval he assembled all the orders of the
kingdom to Mariemburg. The meeting was a large one, and few of
the Counts refused to send their deputies.
He regained popularity by presents, promises, and the affability
which is so necessary to absolute kings to make them popular, and
to elective kings as an added support to their power. The Diet was
soon undeceived concerning the false report, but the impulse had
already been given to that great body, and they allowed themselves
to be carried along by the impulse, and all the members swore
fidelity to the King.
The Cardinal himself, pretending to be still attached to King
Augustus, came to the Diet. He kissed the King’s hand, and did not
scruple to take the oath with the rest. The oath implied that they had
never attempted, and never would attempt anything against
Augustus. The King excused the Cardinal from the first part of the
oath, and he blushed as he swore to the rest.
This Diet resolved that the republic of Poland should maintain an
army of 50,000 men at their own expense for the service of the
State, that they should give the Swedes six weeks to declare for
peace or war, and the same time to the Princess Sapieha, the
authors of the troubles in Lithuania, to come and beg pardon of the
King of Poland.
In the meantime the King of Sweden was cured of his wound,
and carried everything before him. Still pursuing his plan of making
the Poles dethrone their King themselves, he had, by means of the
intrigues of the Cardinal, a new assembly called at Warsaw, to
oppose that of Lubin. His generals pointed out to him that the affair
might still be protracted and might at last prove abortive, that during
this time the Russians were daily attacking the troops he had left
behind in Livonia and Ingria, that the Swedes were not invariably
successful, and that his presence there would in all probability
shortly be necessary. Charles, who was as dogged in the carrying
out of his plans as he was brisk in his action, answered, “Should I
stay here fifty years, I would not leave the place till I have dethroned
the King of Poland.”
He left the Assembly of Warsaw to dispute with that of Lubin in
debates and writings, and to seek precedents to justify their
proceedings in the laws of kingdoms, laws which are always
equivocable, and interpreted by each party at will.
For himself, having increased his victorious troops by 6,000
cavalry and 8,000 infantry, he marched against the rest of the Saxon
army he had beaten at Clissau, and which had time to rally and
recruit while he had been kept in bed by his fall.
This army avoided him and withdrew towards Brussels on the
north-west of Warsaw. The river Bug lay between him and the
enemy. Charles swam across at the head of his horse, while the
infantry sought a ford higher up.
 On May 1, 1703, he came upon the Saxons at a place called
Pultask. They were commanded by General Stenau and were about
10,000 in number. The King of Sweden in his precipitate march had
not brought more with him, being sure that fewer would have
sufficed. The fear of his arms was so great that one half of the army
ran away at his approach.
General Stenau held his ground for a few minutes with two
regiments; but the moment after he was drawn into the general
retreat of his army, which was dispersed before it was beaten. The
Swedes did not make 1,000 prisoners, nor were there 600 killed;
they had more difficulty in pursuing than in defeating them.
Augustus, who had nothing left but the scattered remnants of the
Saxons who had been beaten on all sides, hastily withdrew to Thorn,
a town in the kingdom of Prussia, on the Vistula, and under Polish
protection. Charles at once prepared to besiege it. The King of
Poland, realizing his danger, withdrew to Saxony, but Charles, in
spite of brisk marches, swimming across rivers, hurrying along with
his infantry, and riding behind his cavalry, was not able to bring his
cannon up to Thorn; he was obliged to wait till it was sent him from
Sweden by sea.
In the meantime, he took up a position within some miles of the
town, and would often advance too near the ramparts to reconnoitre;
the plain coat that he always wore was of greater service to him than
he had ever expected on these dangerous walks; it protected him
from being marked out by the enemy for a shot. One day, when he
had gone very near with one of his generals, called Lieven, who was
dressed in blue trimmed with gold, he feared that he would be seen.
With the magnanimity which was natural to him, which prevented
him from remembering that he was exposing his own life for a
subject, he told Lieven to walk behind him. Lieven, realizing too late
the mistake he had made in putting on a noticeable uniform which
brought those near him also into risk, and being equally afraid for the
King’s safety in whatever place he was, hesitated as to whether he
ought to obey him. While he was debating with himself for a second,
the King took him by the arm, and screened him: at that very instant
a discharge of cannon took them in the flank, and struck the general
dead on the very spot which the King had just left. The death of this
man, killed directly in his stead, and because he was trying to save
him, confirmed him in the opinion he had always had about
predestination, and made him believe that his fate which had saved
him under such extraordinary circumstances was reserving him for
the execution of great designs.
All his schemes succeeded, and he was equally fortunate in
negotiations and in war; his influence was felt throughout the whole
of Poland, for his Grand Marshal Renschild was in the heart of those
dominions with a large section of the army. Nearly 30,000 generals,
scattered through the north and east on the Russian frontier,
withstood the efforts of the whole Russian Empire; and Charles was
in the west, at the other end of Poland, at the head of picked troops.
The King of Denmark, tied down by the treaty of Travendal, which
he was too weak to break, remained quiet. He was prudently afraid
of showing his vexation at seeing the King of Sweden so near his
estates. Further, towards the south-west, between the Elbe and
Weser, lay the Duchy of Bremen, the last territory formerly acquired
by the Swedes, filled with strong garrisons, and opening the way for
the conqueror to Saxony and the Empire. Thus from the German
Ocean almost to the Gulf of Borysthenes, that is, across the whole
breadth of Europe, and up to the gates of Moscow, all was in
consternation, and a general revolution was imminent. His vessels
were masters of the Baltic, and employed in transporting prisoners
from Poland into his own country. Sweden alone, at peace during
these great doings, was rejoicing in deep peace, and in the glory of
her King, for which she did not have to pay the price, for his
victorious troops were maintained at the expense of the conquered.
During this general peace of the North before the arms of Charles
XII, the town of Dantzig ventured to offend him. Fourteen frigates
and forty transports were bringing the King reinforcements of 6,000
men, with cannon and ammunition to finish the siege of Thorn.
These had to pass up the Vistula; at the mouth of that river lies the
rich town of Dantzig, a free town, enjoying the same privileges in
Poland as the Imperial towns have in Germany. Its liberty had been
alternately attacked by the Danes, Swedes, and some German
princes, and was only saved by the mutual jealousy of these Powers.
Count Steinbock, one of the Swedish generals, assembled the
magistrates in the name of the King, and demanded a passage and
ammunition for his troops. The magistrates, showing an unusual
rashness in those treating with their superior, dare neither absolutely
refuse nor yet exactly grant what he demanded. The general
compelled them to give him more than he had asked; and even
exacted from the town a contribution of 100,000 crowns to make up
for their rash denial.
At last the recruits, the cannon and the ammunition having
arrived before Thorn, the siege was begun on the 22nd of
September. Robel, governor of the place, defended it for a month
with a garrison of 5,000 men, and then it was forced to surrender at
discretion. Robel was presented unarmed to the King. His Majesty
never missed a chance of honouring merit in a foe, and gave him a
sword with his own hand, together with a considerable present of
money, and sent him away on parole. But the town, which was small
and poor, was condemned to pay 40,000 crowns, an excessive sum
for it.
Elbing, standing on an arm of the Vistula, was founded by the
Teutonic Knights, and had been annexed to Poland. It did not take
advantage of the mistake of the Dantzig townsfolk, hesitated too long
about giving passage to the Swedes, and was more severely
punished than Dantzig.
Charles entered it in person on the 13th of December, at the
head of 4,000 men armed with bayonets. The inhabitants, in terror,
threw themselves upon their knees in the streets, and begged for
mercy. He disarmed them, quartered his troops in their houses, and
then summoning the chief magistrate he demanded a sum of
260,000 crowns, to be handed over that very day. He seized the 200
pieces of cannon, and the 400,000 charges of powder, which were in
the town; a victory gained would not have brought him so many
advantages. All these successes were the precursors to the
dethroning of King Augustus.
 The Cardinal had scarcely taken the oath of fealty to his King
when he repaired to the assembly at Warsaw, still under pretence of
making peace. He talked of nothing but peace and obedience, but
was attended by 3,000 soldiers raised on his own estate. At last he
threw off the mask, and declared in the name of the Assembly that
“Augustus, Elector of Saxony, was incapable of wearing the crown of
Poland.” They then unanimously pronounced the throne vacant.
The intention of the King of Sweden, and so necessarily of this
Diet, was to give the throne to the Prince Jacques Sobieski, whose
father Jean had possessed it.
Jacques Sobieski was then at Breslau, in Silesia, impatiently
waiting for the crown which his father had worn.
One day he was hunting some miles from Breslau, with Prince
Constantine, one of his brothers, when thirty Saxon cavaliers, sent
secretly by King Augustus, suddenly rushed from a neighbouring
wood, surrounded the two princes, and carried them off without
resistance. Relays of horses were ready a little distance off, on
which they were at once taken to Leipzig, and closely guarded.
This step upset the plans of Charles, the Cardinal and the
Assembly of Warsaw.
Fortune, which sports with crowned heads, almost brought the
King of Poland to the point of being taken himself. He was at table,
three miles from Cracow, relying on an advanced guard, posted at a
distance, when General Renschild appeared suddenly, after having
surprised this guard. The King of Poland had only time to mount with
eleven others. The general pursued him for eight days, expecting to
seize him at any moment. The King had almost reached Sendomir;
the Swedish general was still in pursuit, and it was only through
extraordinary good luck that the Prince escaped.
In the meantime the King’s party and that of the Cardinal were
calling each other traitors to their country.
The army of the Crown was divided into two factions. Augustus,
forced at last to accept help from the Russians, regretted that he had
not applied to them sooner; he hurried alternately into Saxony, where
his resources were at an end, and into Poland where they dare not
help him. On the other hand, the King of Sweden was ruling calmly
and successfully in Poland. Count Piper, who was as great a
politician as his master was a hero, seized the opportunity to advise
Charles to take the crown of Poland for himself; he pointed out to
him how easily he could carry out the scheme with a victorious army
and a powerful party in the heart of a kingdom which he had already
subdued; he tempted him by the title of Defender of the Reformed
Faith, a name which flattered Charles’s ambition. He could, he said,
easily play (in Poland) the part which Gustavus Vasa had played in
Sweden, and introduce Lutheranism, and break the tyranny of the
nobility and the clergy over the people. Charles was tempted for a
moment; but glory was his idol; he sacrificed to it both his interests
and the pleasure he would have had in taking Poland from the Pope.
He told Count Piper that he would rather give away kingdoms than
gain them, and added smiling, “You were born to be the minister of
an Italian prince.”
Charles was still near Thorn, in that part of the kingdom of
Prussia which belongs to Poland; from there he had an eye on what
was going on at Warsaw, and kept his powerful neighbours in awe.
Prince Alexander, brother of the two Sobieskis, who had been
carried off to Silesia, came to ask vengeance of him. The King was
all the more ready to grant it, because he thought it easy, and that he
would gain his own vengeance too. But as he was eager to give
Poland a king, he proposed that Prince Alexander should take the
crown, which fortune seemed bent on denying to his brother. He did
not in the least expect a refusal, but Prince Alexander told him that
nothing would ever persuade him to take advantage of his elder
brother’s misfortune. The King of Sweden, Count Piper, all his
friends, and especially the young Palatine of Posnania, Stanislas
Leczinski, pressed him to accept. But he was decided. The
neighbouring princes were astonished at the news, and did not know
which to admire most—a king who at the age of twenty-two gave
away the crown of Poland, or Prince Alexander who refused it.
BOOK III
 BOOK III
Stanislas Leczinski chosen King of Poland—Death of the Cardinal-
Primate—Great retreat of General Schullemburg—Exploits of
the Czar—Foundation of Petersburg—Charles’s entry into
Saxony—The peace of Altranstadt—Augustus abdicates in
favour of Stanislas—General Patkul, the Czar’s plenipotentiary,
is broken on the wheel, and quartered—Charles receives the
ambassadors of foreign princes in Saxony—He also goes to
Dresden to see Augustus before his departure.

YOUNG Stanislas Leczinski was therefore deputed by the

Assembly at Warsaw to give the King of Sweden an account of
several differences that had arisen among them since Jacques had
been carried off. Stanislas’ personal appearance was pleasing, full of
courage and sweetness, with that frank open air which is the
greatest of outward advantages, and a better seconder of a man’s
words than eloquence itself. Charles was impressed by his discreet
allusions to King Augustus, the Assembly, the Cardinal and the
different interests which rent Poland. King Stanislas did the writer the
honour of relating his conversation with the King, which took place in
Latin. “How can we hold an election if the two Princes and
Constantine are absent?” he inquired. “How can you get the State
out of the difficulty without an election?” answered the King.
This conversation was the only intrigue which placed Stanislas on
his throne. Charles prolonged the conversation purposely, that he
might the better sound the young deputy’s genius. After the
conference he said aloud that he had never met a man so fit to
reconcile all parties. He immediately made inquiries about the
character of Leczinski, and found that he was brave and inured to
fatigue, that he always slept on a kind of straw mattress, and that he
required no personal service from his attendants; that he was more
temperate than is usual in that climate, economical, adored by his
servants, and perhaps the only popular prince in Poland, at a time
when all ties were broken but those of interest and faction. This
character, which corresponded in many respects with his own, made
him make up his mind finally. He remarked aloud after the meeting,
“There is a man who will always be my friend,” and people knew that
that meant, “There is a man who shall be king.”
When the Primate of Poland heard that the King had nominated
the Palatine Leczinski, he hastened to Charles to try to make him
change his mind, for he wished to put the crown on the head of a
certain Lubomirski. “But what objection have you to Stanislas?”
asked the conqueror. “Sire,” said the Primate, “he is too young.” “He
is much about my own age,” answered the King dryly, turning his
back on the Prelate. Then he sent Count Horn to Warsaw at once to
notify the Assembly that they must elect a king in three days, and
that they must choose Stanislas Leczinski. Count Horn arrived on
the 7th July, and fixed the election for the 12th, just as if he were
arranging the decampment of a battalion. The Cardinal-Primate,
disappointed of the fruit of so many intrigues, returned to the
Assembly, where he left no stone unturned to ruin the election in
which he had had no share; but the King of Sweden arrived incognito
at Warsaw, so that he had to be silent. All that the Primate could do
was to absent himself from the election: he took up the position of a
neutral, being unable to oppose the conqueror and unwilling to assist
him.
On Saturday, 12th July, the day appointed for the election, the
Assembly met at Colo, at about three in the afternoon. They met
there by arrangement, and the Bishop of Posnania presided instead
of the Cardinal. Count Horn and two other officers were present at
the ceremony, as ambassadors extraordinary from Charles to the
Republic. The session lasted till nine in the evening, and the Bishop
brought it to an end by declaring in the name of the Diet that
Stanislas was elected King of Poland. They all threw their caps into
the air, and the acclamations stifled the cries of the opposers.
It was no use for the Cardinal and his party to stay away from the
elections; they were all obliged the next day to come and pay
homage to the new King, who received them as if he were quite
satisfied with their conduct; their greatest mortification was that they
had to attend him to the King of Sweden’s quarters. His Majesty
gave all honours to the King he had just made, and, to add weight to
his new dignity, assigned money and troops for his use.
Charles XII left Warsaw at once to proceed to the completion of
the conquest of Poland. He had ordered his army to meet before
Leopold, the capital of the great Palatinate of Russia, a place
important in itself, but still more so for the riches it held. It was
thought that by means of the fortifications, which King Augustus had
made there, it would hold out fifteen days. The conqueror invested it
on the 5th, and took it the following day by assault. All who resisted
were put to the sword. The victors, who were now masters of the
town, did not disperse for pillage, in spite of the reports concerning
treasure in Leopold: they ranged themselves in battle array in the
great square. The King then proclaimed, by sounding a trumpet, that
all who had anything belonging to King Augustus or his adherents
should bring them themselves before sunset on pain of death. The
arrangements were so well made that few dare disobey him, and
they brought him 400 chests, filled with gold and silver coin, plate
and other things of value.
The beginning of Stanislas’ reign was contemporaneous with a
very different event. Some business for which he must be present
had forced him to remain in Warsaw: he had with him his mother, his
wife and two daughters; the Cardinal, the Bishop of Posnania and
some prominent Poles made up his new court. His guards were
6,000 Poles of the royal army, who had lately entered his service, but
whose fidelity had not yet been tried. General Horn, governor of the
town, had only about 1,500 Swedes with him. They were at Warsaw
in peace, and Stanislas was reckoning on starting in a few days for
the conquest of Leopold, when suddenly they heard that an
immense army was approaching the town. It was King Augustus,
who was making a fresh effort; by one of the finest marches ever
made he was coming up with 20,000 men to fall on Warsaw, after
having eluded the King of Sweden; his purpose was to kidnap his
rival.
 Warsaw was not fortified, and the Polish troops who were
defending it were not reliable. There were those in the town from
whom Augustus got information, and if Stanislas delayed he would
be ruined. He sent his family to Posnania, under the guard of Polish
troops upon which he could absolutely rely. It was in this disorder
that he feared he had lost his second daughter, aged one; she was
lost by a nurse, and they discovered her in a manger, in a
neighbouring village, where she had been left. That is the story that I
have often heard him tell. It was this child who, after many
vicissitudes, became Queen of France. Several gentlemen took
different roads. The new King went to join Charles XII, learning early
to suffer disgrace, and forced to leave his capital six weeks after he
had been made King.
Augustus entered the capital as a victorious and enraged
sovereign. The inhabitants, already fleeced by the King of Sweden,
were more heavily taxed still by Augustus. The Cardinal’s palace and
all the houses of the confederate lords were given over to plunder.
The most extraordinary thing about this transient revolution was that
the Papal Legate, who had come with King Augustus, demanded in
the name of his master that the Bishop of Posnania should be
handed over to him as responsible to the Court of Rome for having
abetted a Prince who had been put on the throne by the arms of a
Lutheran.
The Court of Rome, which had always endeavoured to increase
its temporal power by means of the spiritual, had long established a
kind of jurisdiction in Poland, with the Papal Legate at the head of it.
These ministers never missed a chance of extending their power,
which was revered by the majority, but always resisted by those of
greater discernment. They had claimed the right of judging all
ecclesiastical cases, and had, especially during periods of
disturbance, usurped many other privileges which they maintained
until about 1728, when they were deprived of them: for such abuses
are seldom reformed till they have become intolerable.
King Augustus, very glad to be able to punish the Bishop with
decency, and at the same time to do something acceptable to the
Roman Court, though he would have opposed it on any other
occasion, delivered up the Polish Prelate into the hands of the
Legate. The Bishop, having seen his palace plundered, was taken by
the soldiers into Saxony, where he died.
Count Horn endured the continual fire of the enemy in the castle
where he was enclosed for some time, but at last the place could
hold out no longer, and he sounded a parley and gave himself up
with his 15,000 Swedes. This was the first advantage which King
Augustus gained in the torrent of his misfortune against the
victorious Swedes.
Charles, accompanied by King Stanislas, went to meet his enemy
at the head of the best part of his troops. The Saxon army fled
before him; the towns for thirty miles round sent him their keys, and
every day brought word of some advantage gained. Success
became too familiar to Charles: he said it was hunting rather than
fighting, and complained of never having to contest a victory.
For some time Augustus entrusted the command of his army to
Count Schullemburg, a very able general: he certainly needed all his
experience at the head of a discouraged army. He seemed more
anxious to safeguard his master’s troops than to conquer: he made
war by means of stratagem, while the two kings acted with vigour.
He stole marches on them, seized advantageous posts, and
sacrificed some of his cavalry to give time to his foot to withdraw in
safety. He saved his troops by splendid retreats before an enemy
with whom one could only gain this sort of glory.
Scarcely had he arrived in the Palatinate of Posnania than he
heard that the two Kings, whom he had believed to be fifty leagues
off, had covered the fifty leagues in nine days. He had not more than
8,000 foot and 1,000 horse; he had to hold his own against a
superior force, the King of Sweden’s reputation and the fear which
so many defeats had naturally inspired in the Saxons. He was
always of opinion, in spite of the German generals, that the foot
might hold their own against the horse in an open field, even without
the benefit of chevaux de frise: and he ventured to try the experiment
on that day against a victorious horse commanded by the two Kings
and the most experienced of the Swedish generals. He took up such
an advantageous position that he could not be surrounded; his first
line knelt on the ground, and were armed with pikes and muskets;
the soldiers were in close formation, and presented to the enemy’s
horse a kind of rampart bristling with pikes and muskets; the second
line bending a little over the shoulders of the first, shot over their
heads, and the third, standing upright, fired simultaneously from
behind the other two. The Swedes fell upon the Saxons with their
usual impetuosity, but they awaited them without flinching. By this
means the Swedes advanced in disorder, and the Saxons warded off
the attack by keeping their ranks.
Schullemburg drew up his men in an oblong battalion, and,
though wounded in five places, he retired in good order at midnight
to the little town of Gurau, three leagues from the battle-field. He had
scarcely time to breathe here before the two Kings appeared close
behind him.
Beyond Gurau, towards the river Oder, lay a thick wood through
which the Saxon general led his exhausted troops; the Swedes,
without being nonplussed, pursued him through the thickets of the
woods, finding their way without difficulty through places scarcely
passable by foot-passengers. Yet the Saxons had not crossed the
wood more than five hours before the Swedish cavalry appeared.
On the other side of the wood runs the river Parts, at the foot of a
village named Rutsen. Schullemburg had sent forward in haste to
get the boats ready, and had got his troops across the river: they
were already lessened by half. Charles arrived just as Schullemburg
had reached the other side; never had a conqueror pursued his
enemy so rapidly.
The reputation of Schullemburg depended on his escaping from
the King of Sweden, while the King thought his glory concerned in
taking him and the rest of his army. He lost no time in making his
cavalry swim the river. Thus the Saxons found themselves enclosed
between the river Parts and the great river Oder, which rises in
Silesia, and is very deep and rapid at this spot.
The ruin of Schullemburg seemed inevitable: but after having lost
few soldiers he crossed the Oder during the night. Thus he saved his
army, and Charles could not help saying, “To-day Schullemburg has
conquered us.”
It was this same Schullemburg who was afterwards general of
the Venetians, and he in whose honour the Republic erected a
statue in Corfu, because he defended this rampart of Italy against
the Turks. None but republics confer such honours; kings do not give
rewards.
But what thus brought glory to Schullemburg was of little use to
King Augustus. He once more abandoned Poland to his enemies,
withdrew into Saxony and hastily prepared the fortifications of
Dresden, for he already feared, not without reason, the loss of the
capital of his hereditary dominions.
Charles XII found Poland submissive; his generals, following his
example, had engaged in Courland with several small bodies of
Russians, who, since the great battle of Narva, had only shown
themselves in small companies, and who in this part only made war
like the Tartar vagabonds, who plunder and flee and reappear only to
flee again. Wherever the Swedes were they thought they were
certain to win, though they numbered only twenty against a hundred.
Under these fortunate circumstances Stanislas prepared for his
coronation; fortune, which had had him elected king at Warsaw and
then had driven him thence, recalled him thither to the acclamation
of a crowd of nobles which the fortune of war attached to him; a Diet
was convoked there; all other obstacles were removed, only the
Court of Rome was disposed to thwart it.
It was naturally expected that this Court would declare in favour
of King Augustus, who from a Protestant had become a Catholic to
gain the crown in opposition to Stanislas, who was placed upon the
throne by the great enemy of the Catholic faith. The then Pope,
Clement XI, sent dispatches to all the prelates of Poland, and
especially to the Cardinal-Primate, threatening them with
excommunication if they presumed to assist at the consecration of
Stanislas or take part in any plot against King Augustus.
 If these dispatches were delivered to the bishops who were at
Warsaw, it was to be feared that, while some would obey them
through weakness, the majority would seize the opportunity to
become more exacting in proportion as they were necessary. All
possible precautions were therefore taken to prevent the letters of
the Pope from being received at Warsaw. A Franciscan got
possession of them secretly, undertaking to deliver them into the
bishops’ own hands: he first gave one to the suffragan of Chelm.
This prelate, who was a great partisan of King Stanislas, gave it to
his Majesty unopened. The King sent for the monk, and asked how
he dare take charge of such a document. The Franciscan answered
that he did it by order of his general. Stanislas told him to in future
take his orders from his King rather than from his Superior, and
banished him immediately from the town.
The same day a placard was published by the King of Sweden,
by which all ecclesiastics, secular and regular, were forbidden to
take part in politics under the severest penalties.
For greater security he had guards posted at the doors of all the
prelates’ houses, and forbad the entry of any stranger into the town.
He exercised these small severities so that Stanislas should not fall
out with the clergy on his accession; he said that he refreshed
himself from the fatigue of campaigns by checking the intrigues of
the Roman Curia, and that he must fight it on paper, just as he
attacked other sovereigns with actual weapons.
The Cardinal was asked by Charles and Stanislas to perform the
ceremony of coronation. But it did not seem to him seemly that he
should quit Dantzig to consecrate a king who had been elected
against his wish; but, as it was always his policy to act a part in all
that he did, he wanted to get a legitimate excuse for his refusal: he
therefore caused the Pope’s dispatch to be fixed, in the night, to the
gate of his own house. The magistrate of Dantzig in great indignation
had search made for the culprits, which were not found; the Primate
feigned irritation and was really very pleased: he had an excuse for
not consecrating the new King, and at the same time remained on
good terms with Charles, Augustus, Stanislas and the Pope.
 He died a few days after, leaving his country in turmoil. The only
result of all his intrigues was that he had offended simultaneously
three Kings, Charles, Augustus, Stanislas, the Polish State and the
Pope, who had commanded him to come to Rome to account for his
conduct. But, as even politicians sometimes experience remorse in
their last moments, he wrote to King Augustus on his death-bed
asking his pardon.
The coronation was solemnized quietly and magnificently in
Warsaw in spite of the Polish custom of crowning kings in Cracow.
Stanislas Leczinski and his wife Charlotte were consecrated King
and Queen of Poland at the hands of the Archbishop of Leopold
assisted by several other bishops. The only reward Charles reaped
from his conquest was to be present at the ceremony incognito.
While he was thus providing Poland with a king, and the King of
Denmark dare not harrass him, while the King of Prussia was
courting his friendship and Augustus was withdrawing to his
hereditary dominions, the Czar became daily more formidable. His
assistance of Augustus in Poland had been feeble, but he had made
powerful diversions in Ingria.
As for him, he not only began to be a great soldier himself, but
also to teach his soldiers the art of war: discipline was established
among his forces; he had good engineers, experienced artillery and
many good officers; he had also learned the great art of supporting
his armies. Some of his generals had learned both to fight well and,
if necessary, to abstain from fighting; more than all, he had built up a
fleet capable of making head against the Swedes in the Baltic.
Confident in all these advantages, due both to his genius and to
the absence of the King of Sweden, he took Narva by assault after a
regular siege and a blockade by land and sea. When the soldiers
had taken the town they plundered it, and gave themselves to
horrible barbarities: the Czar hastened from one place to another to
stop the disorder and massacre. He rescued by force from the hands
of the soldiers women whose throats they were going to cut after
having outraged them; he was obliged to kill with his own hands
some Russians who would not listen to his commands. In the town
hall at Narva they still show the table where he laid his sword, as he
said to the citizens who flocked after him, “This sword is not wet with
the blood of the citizens I have slain, but with that of the Russians
whom I have killed to save your lives.”
Had the Czar always shown such humanity he would have been
the greatest of heroes. His ambition went beyond the destruction of
towns. In the midst of his new conquests he was laying the
foundations of a city not far from Narva. This was the city of
Petersburg, which was henceforth his seat and the centre of his
trade. It is between Finland and Ingria, in a marshy island, around
which the Neva flows in several branches before it falls into the Gulf
of Finland. He himself made the plan of the town, of the fortress, the
port, the quays, which adorn it, and the fortifications defending its
entry. This desert, uncultivated island, which is nothing but a mud
heap during the short summer of that climate, and a pool of ice in
winter, unapproachable by land except across wild forests and deep
morasses, and till then the habitation of bears and wolves, was, in
1703, filled with more than 300,000 men whom the Czar had called
together from the farthest limits of his dominions. The peasants of
the kingdom of Astrakan and those who live on the frontiers of China
were transported to Petersburg. Before he could lay the foundations
of a town he was obliged to pierce forests, make roads, drain
marshes and raise banks. Nature was subjugated in every direction.
But the Czar was bent on peopling a country which did not seem
meant for man’s habitation; he was not to be diverted from his
resolve either by the floods, which ruined his works, or by the
barrenness of the soil, or by the ignorance of the workmen, or by the
mortality which swept away 200,000 men at the very beginning. The
town was founded in spite of the obstacles which existed in nature
herself, in the genius of the people, and an unfortunate war. Already
in 1705 Petersburg was a considerable town, and its port was full of
vessels. The Emperor attracted strangers in large numbers by the
rewards which he gave them, giving some lands, others houses, and
encouraging all the arts which might civilize life in that cruel climate.
Above all, he made it inaccessible to the enemy. The Swedish
generals, who frequently beat his troops in every other district, were