Study and Sheet Notes Werkgroepen ARMS (2019/2020 - UU)
- 1883 keer gelezen
Firk, C., Konrad, K, Herpertz-Dahlmann, B., Scharke, W., & Dahmen, B. (2018). Cognitive development in children of adolescent mothers: The impact of socioeconomic risk and maternal sensitivity. Infant Behavior and Development, 50, 238-246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2018.02.002
In dit onderzoek beantwoorden ze de vraag of cognitieve ontwikkeling verschilt tussen kinderen van adolescente of volwassen moeders en of deze verschillen gemedieerd worden door moederlijke gevoeligheid en socio-economische risico. Veel studies wijzen uit dat kinderen van adolescente moeders minder intelligent zijn, minder sociale en emotionele vaardigheden hebben en meer externaliserende en agressieve gedragingen vertonen dan kinderen van volwassen moeders. Eerdere onderzoeken hebben aangetoond dat socio-economische problemen geassocieerd zijn met negatieve ontwikkelingsuitkomsten van nakomelingen. Ook dat adolescente moeders minder gevoeligheid tonen en meer vijandig zijn tegenover hun kinderen, wat een oorzaak kan zijn voor de verschillen in ontwikkeling. De huidige studie repliceert deze bevindingen van eerder onderzoek door de eerste twee jaar van kinderen van adolescente (< 21 jaar) en volwassen moeders (> 25 jaar) te onderzoeken op drie momenten.
In de analyse werden verschillende statistische analyses gebruikt, waaronder ANOVA, ANCOVA, correlatie en verschillende mediation modellen werden getest. Uit de resultaten kan geconcludeerd worden dat kinderen van adolescente moeders lagere cognitieve vaardigheden hebben dan kinderen van volwassen moeders. Adolescente moeders zijn minder gevoelig dan volwassen moeders tijdens moeder-kind interacties. Het effect van leeftijd van de moeder of cognitieve ontwikkeling kan door een groot deel verklaard worden door de mediator moederlijke gevoeligheid. Dit geldt niet voor socio-economische risico, dit is geen mediator in deze relatie.
JoHo can really use your help! Check out the various student jobs here that match your studies, improve your competencies, strengthen your CV and contribute to a more tolerant world
In this bundle Lecture Notes are shared for the course Advanced Research Methods and Statistics for Psychology of Psychology Bachelor 2/3 at the University of Utrecht.
For a complete overview of the summaries & study service offered by JoHo and the available printed summaries for this course, visit the Summary Shop University of Utrecht - Bachelor 2/3 on JoHo.org.
Study materials from the preceding course MTS3 are also included in Dutch.
De opdracht voor de werkgroep bevatte de volgende vragen.
1. Describe the terms of reliabilty and validity.
2. What are the conditions for being able to speak of a causal relationship?
3. How can a sample be used to to make inferences about a population?
Inferential statistics use probability theory to formulate general statements based on samples about the populations from which these samples were taken.
4. What are the assumptions of multiple regression?
In de rest van de werkgroep is het volgende artikel besproken:
Kanazawa, S. (2012). Intelligence, birth order, and family size. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(9), 1157-1164. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212445911
6. Describe the three different explanation sgiven in the introduction for the relationship found between intelligence and birth order. Note. Do not discuss the revised confluence model.
7. What are the population and sample in the article? Describe the participants that are participating. In your description also explain exactly what the different sweeps mean conceptually.
A ‘population’ of British respondents is used. Participants were all babies born in Great Britain on March 3-9, 1958. These participants were measured over a longer period of time, during which data were collected at various moments (sweeps). This study uses data collected on sweep 0 (age 0), sweep 1 (age 7), sweep
.....read moreKanazawa, S. (2012). Intelligence, birth order, and family size. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(9), 1157-1164. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167212445911
Er is veel onderzoek gedaan naar het effect van geboortevolgorde op intelligentie, dit houdt dit dat de geboortevolgorde een causale invloed heeft op intelligentie. The confluence model en de resource dilution model stellen dat de gemiddelde intelligentie daalt bij toenemende geboortevolgorde, dus eerstgeborene zijn intelligenter dan later geborene. Er is veel debat over wat een betrouwbare verklaring is voor dit effect. Onderzoeken die between-family data gebruiken hebben voornamelijk significante resultaten (verschillende families vergelijken), hoewel onderzoeken die within-family data gebruiken dit niet vinden (binnen een familie). Meest recente onderzoek stelt dat geboortevolgorde onafhankelijke effecten heeft op intelligentie. In dit huidige onderzoek repliceert deze vroegere bevindingen om te laten zien wat het effect is van geboortevolgorde op intelligentie.
The National Child Development Study (NCDS) bestaat uit een groot longitudinaal onderzoek met baby’s geboren in Groot-Brittannië tussen 3 en 9 maart 1958. Deze participanten worden over langere tijd gevolgd en gemeten op verschillende momenten: 0 jaar, 7 jaar, 11 jaar en 16 jaar. Intelligentie wordt gemeten door totaal elf verschillende cognitieve testen af te nemen (verschillend per leeftijd welke testen). De data wordt geanalyseerd met behulp van een multiple regressieanalyse. Uit de resultaten kan geconcludeerd worden dat het effect van geboortevolgorde op intelligentie niet bestaat, maar dat familiegrootte een invloed heeft op intelligentie. Intelligentie ouders hebben gemiddeld minder kinderen dan minder intelligente ouders. Mogelijke verklaringen hiervoor zijn dat intelligente individuen sneller de nieuwe evolutionaire voorkeuren aannemen en zij beter gebruik maken van anticonceptie. Belangrijk om te weten is dat de effectgrootte van familiegrootte op intelligentie echter wel erg klein is.
De eerste vragen gaan over het artikel:
Brunell, A.B., Fisher, T.D. (2014). Using the bogus pipeline to investigate grandiose narcissism.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 55, 37-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.05.015
1. What is the research question of Brunell and Fisher (2014)?
To what extent are grandiose narcissism and other narcissism-related constructs sensitive to bias in reporting?
2. In the article, an experimental manipulation is used.
a. Please explain, in your own words,what a bogus pipeline is.
The bogus pipeline is a technique used by social psychologists to reduce socially desirable answers. Participants are linked to a device that the researchers tell them is a lie detector. As a result, participants have the feeling that they are being checked to see whether they are responding truthfully. It is assumed that this will actually motivate participants to answer truthfully.
b. Describe, in your own words, what the differences are between the experimental conditions in this study.
The idea behind this is that by using the bogus pipeline technique, amongst other things, the measurement of social constructs becomes more valid. Giving socially desirable answers is a systematic error that affects validity.
Bogus pipeline condition: Participants were told that they would be linked to a lie detector during the experiment. Participants completed the questionnaires while they were linked to the bogus pipeline.
Anonymous condition: Participants in this condition were not linked to a lie detector. Participants filled in the questionnaires in a private setting.
Exposure threat condition: Participants in this condition were not linked to a lie detector. Participants completed the questionnaires, with a survey assistant in the room. This research assistant informed the participants that he/she would pick up the questionnaire afterwards. In all conditions, the participants submitted the questionnaires in a closed box.
De volgende vragen van de voorbereidende opdracht gaan over replicatie, assumpties en type I fouten.
Replication Explanation
Direct replication | In direct replication researchers repeat an original study as closely as they can to see whether the effect is the same in the newly collected data. |
Conceptual replication | In a conceptual replication researchers explore the same research question but use different procedures. The conceptual variables in the study are the same, but the procedures for operationalizing the variables are different. |
Replication-plus- extension | In a replication-plus-extension study, researchers replicate their original experiment and add variables to test additional questions. For example, adding an additional experimental condition or adding an additional (in)dependent variable. |
Assumptions ANOVA
Assumptions ANCOVA
Type I error
Brunell, A.B., Fisher, T.D. (2014). Using the bogus pipeline to investigate grandiose narcissism.Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 55, 37-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2014.05.015
In dit onderzoek beantwoorden ze de onderzoeksvraag in welke mate grandioos narcisme en andere narcisme gerelateerde constructen gevoelig zijn voor bias in rapporteren. Narcisten worden beschreven als grandioos en zelf-gecentreerd, hierbij hebben ze het geloof dat ze boven anderen staan wat leidt tot aandacht en bewondering zoeken bij anderen. Grandioze narcisten zien zichzelf als meer intelligent en meer aantrekkelijk dan anderen, ze overdrijven hun vaardigheden en prestaties. Dit zou kunnen functioneren als een masker voor hun verborgen kwetsbaarheden. Door impliciete metingen, zoals de impliciete associatie test (IAT), kunnen deze diepe gevoelens onthuld worden. Resultaat toont aan dat grandioze narcisten geen lage zelfwaardering hebben, waardoor het kwetsbaarheden argument ontkracht wordt. Echter, expliciete metingen over het zelfconcept zijn meer valide dan impliciete metingen, waarbij de mogelijkheid er is dat rapporteer bias een rol speelt in het onderzoek naar de relatie tussen narcisme en zelfwaardering met expliciete metingen.
In dit onderzoek werd de rol van rapportage bias onderzocht door participanten te verbinden aan een leugendetector (bogus pipeline conditie). Mensen kunnen verschillend reageren dan wanneer ze anoniem antwoord moeten geven of wanneer iemand anders aanwezig is. Dit zijn de drie condities van dit experiment: de bogus pipeline conditie, de anonieme conditie en de exposure threatconditie. In elke conditie moeten de participanten vragenlijsten invullen. Er zijn in dit onderzoek enorm veel analyses uitgevoerd met als gevolg een verhoogde kans op type I fout van bijna 100%. Concluderend, grandioze narcisten veranderen niet in hun rapportages over hun zelfbeeld zelfs wanneer ze de druk voelden om eerlijk te zijn. De expliciete metingen worden dus niet beïnvloed door rapportage bias, wat de validiteit verhoogd voor deze testen.
Kritiek op dit artikel is dat er gebruik wordt gemaakt van ANCOVA’s, terwijl er niet naar het verschil tussen groepen wordt gekeken. Daarnaast is de data niet compleet, waardoor er systematische verschillen ontstaan tussen de steekproef en de populatie en het leidt tot verschillende relaties tussen de variabelen. Er wordt niet verteld wat er wordt gedaan met de participanten die argwanend waren over het onderzoek.
Het eerste deel van de vragen gaat over het artikel van Firk et al. (2018) met als referentie:
Firk, C., Konrad, K, Herpertz-Dahlmann, B., Scharke, W., & Dahmen, B. (2018). Cognitive development in children of adolescent mothers: The impact of socioeconomic risk and maternal sensitivity. Infant Behavior and Development, 50, 238-246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2018.02.002
1. What is the research question of Firk et al. (2018)?
What are the differences in children’s cognitive development between children of adolescent and adult mothers in their first two years of life? Are these differences between children of adolescent and adult mothers mediated by maternal parenting qualities?
2. What is the hypothes is of the researchers with regard to this research question?
No clear hypothesis is mentioned, but Firk et al. do repeat what they want to investigate: They want to test the hypothesis whether maternal socioeconomic problems have a direct effect on child outcome or whether this effect is mediated by maternal sensitivity.
3. Describe in your own words which groups the researchers want to compare. How did the researchers select these samples?
Mother-child dyads were recruited within a project on adolescent parenting in cooperation with the local youth welfare system, obstetric clinics, midwife practices and pediatrician practices. Adolescent mothers were all < 21 years, adult mothers were all > 25 years. It is unclear how the samples were actually selected, but it appears that all dyads that wanted to participate and met the inclusion criteria, were included in the study.
4. In the results section, study the first mediation model that the researchers analyze. What is in this model the independent variable (X), the dependent variable (Y) and the mediator (M)?
X = Maternal age
Y = Cognitive development
M = Maternal sensitivity
5. For model 1, use the values included in the text and in the notes of Figure 2, to fill in the table below. For each effect, note (a) the lower and upper boundaries of the confidence interval, (b) whether the value 0 falls between these boundaries, and (c) whether this effect is significant.
95% confidence interval | |||
---|---|---|---|
Effect | Lower and upper boundaries | 0 between boundaries? | Significant |
Total | 0.49 – 1.94 | No | Yes |
Direct | 0.16 – 1.59 | No | Yes |
Indirect | 0.06 – 0.80 | No | Yes |
6. What is the conclusion of Firk et al. (2018)? Is this in line with their hypothesis?
When controlling for maternal IQ, children of adolescent mothers showed lower cognitive skills than children of adult mothers. In the current study, this difference emerged when children were between 18 and 24 months of age. In contrast to children of adult mothers, whose age-standardized scores were comparable at all time-points, age-standardized scores for children of adolescent mothers decreased from T2 to T3.
When controlling for maternal IQ, Firk et al.
.....read moreFirk, C., Konrad, K, Herpertz-Dahlmann, B., Scharke, W., & Dahmen, B. (2018). Cognitive development in children of adolescent mothers: The impact of socioeconomic risk and maternal sensitivity. Infant Behavior and Development, 50, 238-246. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2018.02.002
In dit onderzoek beantwoorden ze de vraag of cognitieve ontwikkeling verschilt tussen kinderen van adolescente of volwassen moeders en of deze verschillen gemedieerd worden door moederlijke gevoeligheid en socio-economische risico. Veel studies wijzen uit dat kinderen van adolescente moeders minder intelligent zijn, minder sociale en emotionele vaardigheden hebben en meer externaliserende en agressieve gedragingen vertonen dan kinderen van volwassen moeders. Eerdere onderzoeken hebben aangetoond dat socio-economische problemen geassocieerd zijn met negatieve ontwikkelingsuitkomsten van nakomelingen. Ook dat adolescente moeders minder gevoeligheid tonen en meer vijandig zijn tegenover hun kinderen, wat een oorzaak kan zijn voor de verschillen in ontwikkeling. De huidige studie repliceert deze bevindingen van eerder onderzoek door de eerste twee jaar van kinderen van adolescente (< 21 jaar) en volwassen moeders (> 25 jaar) te onderzoeken op drie momenten.
In de analyse werden verschillende statistische analyses gebruikt, waaronder ANOVA, ANCOVA, correlatie en verschillende mediation modellen werden getest. Uit de resultaten kan geconcludeerd worden dat kinderen van adolescente moeders lagere cognitieve vaardigheden hebben dan kinderen van volwassen moeders. Adolescente moeders zijn minder gevoelig dan volwassen moeders tijdens moeder-kind interacties. Het effect van leeftijd van de moeder of cognitieve ontwikkeling kan door een groot deel verklaard worden door de mediator moederlijke gevoeligheid. Dit geldt niet voor socio-economische risico, dit is geen mediator in deze relatie.
In this work group we discussed the article of Escartin et al (2011). The article can be found by Escartín, J., Salin, D., & Rodríguez-Carbaillera, Á. (2011). Conceptualizations of workplace bullying. Gendered rather than gender neutral? Journal of Personnel Psychology, 10, 157-165. https://doi.org/10.1027/1866-5888/a000048.
The researchers investigate what the significance of gender is for how employees define bullying and how severe they rate different forms of bullying to be. They form four hypotheses:
Hypothesis 1 and 2 are tested in study 1 and hypothesis 3 and 4 are tested in study 2.
The researchers do not specifically mention the population to which they want to generalize the results of the research. However, they do state that 'One should always be cautious when generalizing findings from one specific country or region'. It therefore seems likely that they want to generalize to the general working population, but that they do realize that they are dealing with a specific research group.
The sample of study 1 is a convenience sample of 246 employees (154 women, 92 men). Participants were recruited in two different ways: (1) one set of participants (109 employees) were recruited at workshops on the prevention of workplace bullying held by one of the authors and (2) a second set of participants (137 employees) were recruited via administrative services. The sample of study 2 is also a convenience sample of employees. Participants were recruited via email from four different organizations, 39.9% of the questionnaires were actually filled in (300 employees; 191 women, 109 men).
The research procedure of study 1 is not completely described. All we know is that as part of the study participants were asked to think about their own definition of bullying. How participants were asked to do this was not mentioned (questionnaire on paper, digital, interview?). It is also unclear when the data was collected (this is particularly interesting for the participants who were recruited at the workshops on the prevention of workplace bullying, did they answer the questions during the workshops? At which moment?). We do know that the data has been collected (partly) qualitatively, but was processed quantitatively. In study 2, employees from various branches of four organizations were sent a questionnaire by e-mail. In this questionnaire, all participants were asked questions about background information and they had to assess the severity of different types of bullying.
They performed two statistical analyses: logistic regression and hierarchical regression analyses. The researchers report nothing about the assumptions of the analyses. However, in both studies they did not include age as a predictor in the analyses because this variable
.....read more1. What does an odds ratio of 1 mean?
A. The odds can't be calculated.
B. The odds of one group are 1x bigger than the odds for the other group.
C. The odds are the same for both groups.
D. None of the above.
2. A researcher wants to check whether female students are more intelligent during their first study year than male students. Which part of the teacher's question reflects the O of a PICO question?
A. Intelligent
B. Female students
C. Male students
D. First study year
3. A researcher is interested in the relationship between gender and creativity. Among other things, the researcher receives the following output.
Creativity | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
No | Yes | Total | ||
Gender | Male | 30 | 10 | 40 |
Female | 15 | 45 | 60 | |
Total | 45 | 55 | 100 |
What are the odds that females are creative?
A. 1.50
B. 1.33
C. 3
D. 0.33
4. Which of the following statements is/are true?
I. “Performing a manipulation check increases the power of the study.”
II. “Performing a manipulation check increases the reliability of the research.”
A. Statement I is true
B. Statement II is true
C. Both statements are true
D. Both statements are false
5. In a article they compare the definitions of indoor tanning by men and women. The following is said in the artical about the sample they used: "One set of respondents (N = 97) were recruited at workshops on the prevention of indoor tanning in Wales and Scotland held by one of the authors".
What could be affected by the use of this sample?
A. Internal validity
B. External validity
C. A and B are both true.
D. A and B are both false.
6. Which validity is checked with the following statement: "Is the sample representative for the population?"
A. Internal validity
B. Construct validity
C. External validity
D. Statistical validity
7. A researcher performs a logistic regression analysis, predicting whether or not people vote using gender and age.
Based on the output, what is the correct interpretation of the effect of gender? (Male = 1, Female = 0)
Sig. | Exp (B) | |
Gender | .000 | .401 |
Age | .000 | 1.502 |
Constant | .000 | .542 |
A. The probability of males voting is 0.401.
B. The probability of males voting is 0.401x smaller than the probability of females recycling.
C. The odds of males voting are 0.401x smaller than the odds of females recycling.
D. The odds of males voting are 2.49x smaller than the odds of females recycling.
8. A researcher conducts an experiment with children to see whether experimentally manipulated depression influences intelligence. After the depression manipulation the researcher asks all participants to complete the Children's Depression Inventory (CDI). He
.....read moreThere are several ways to navigate the large amount of summaries, study notes en practice exams on JoHo WorldSupporter.
Do you want to share your summaries with JoHo WorldSupporter and its visitors?
Field of study
Add new contribution