參考說明實(shí)驗(yàn)心理學(xué)12individual difference and development

ExperimentalPsychology

SchoolofPsychology

ZhaoFanAPsychologyCourse

inCentralChinaNormalUniversityQQ:1024-2410-81IndividualDifferenceandDevelopmentIndividualDifference:PracticalOrientation:

IDstudiesbeganbecauseofimportantpracticaldecisionsthathadtobemadeaboutpeople(howpeoplediffer,howtheirfuturebehaviourcanbepredicted);SoIDhaslongbeenatopicforpsychologistswithmorepracticalandappliedinterests.(ratherthantofindgenerallawsandexplanationsforbehaviourformostExperimentalPsychologists).

IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:AlfredBinet(1857-1911)TheodoreSimon(1873-1961)IndividualDifference:Empirical/AnalyticalApproaches

EquivalenttoInductive(歸納)/Deductive(演繹);

EmpiricalApproaches:

Aimstoachievethegreatestdegreeofpredictiveprecisionpossiblebyanymeansavailable;Forexample,theoriginalpurposeofTraditionalIQistopredictschoolperformance;AlfredBinet&TheodoreSimon;Whichchildrencouldnotprofitfromaneducation;Logic-youngerChildrenwhodowellonquestionsdevisedforolderonesarethoughttobeintelligent,andviseversa;Testsofmemory,comprehension,attention…;

IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:Empirical/AnalyticalApproaches

EquivalenttoInductive/Deductive;

EmpiricalApproaches:

Ifa7-year-oldchildcanpassthesamenumberofitems(basedonalargesample)astheaverage9-year-oldchild;MentalAge=9,ChronologicalAge=7;IQ=(MA/CA)*100=129;ConfoundingvariablesinIQtests:Learningtothetestingitems;Cultureknowledge;Languageusage;motivation;testingexperience;IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:Empirical/AnalyticalApproaches

EquivalenttoInductive/Deductive;EmpiricalApproaches:

Theyoperationallydefinedintelligenceastheabilitytosucceedinschool,andonepredictorofthissuccesswasthechild’sscoreonthetests.IQ-Academicsuccess,around+0.60correlation;

PredictiveValidity(CriterionValidity):whenatestpredictsacriterionbehaviorwell;FaceValidityofaconstruct:meansthetestsseemtomeasuresomethingmostpeoplewouldbewillingtocallintelligence(alsotrueforotherconstructs).IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:Empirical/AnalyticalApproaches

EquivalenttoInductive/Deductive;

AnalyticalApproach:Involvesatheoreticalanalysis(intheleveloftheunderlyingpsychologicalprocesses)ofwhatproducestheeffectsweattributetointelligence.Oncewehaveanalyzedthecomponentsoftheconcept,wecanmeasurethem.

Forexample,19thcentury,SirFrancisGalton,hadasetofhypothesis(MentalImageAbility;RT->Intelligence),butwhenhesystematicallycomparedscientists/statesmenwithcommonworkers,hefoundnodifference,thusconcludedtheseabilitiesnotheavilycontributetointelligence;IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:SirFrancisGaltonF.R.S.1822-1911

IndividualDifference:TheoriesontheOriginofIndividualDifference:

Nature:GeneticsunderliesID;SomepsychologistsclaimedthatBlack-WhiteIQdifferenceshaveageneticbasis;Nurture:Focusesontheexperientialfactorsthatinfluencehowanorganismdevelops.

Ericssonet.al.(1993)arguedthatextensivepracticeforatleast10yearsisthemajorcontributortomusicalability.Identicaltwins;FraternalTwins(異卵雙生);Othersiblings;andunrelatedchildrenwhoarerearedinthesameordifferenthouseholds;foster(養(yǎng)育)childrenvs.biologicalchildren;Prenatalexperience;Earlypostnatalexperience;IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:TheoriesontheOriginofIndividualDifference:

Amorecomprehensiveview:byHebb;sixinteractingfactorstoexplaindevelopment;

3physicalorconstitutional(體質(zhì)的)variablesrelatedtothebraindevelopment:1-Genetics;2-PrenatalNutritionEnvironment(alcoholusage);3-PostnatalNutrition;Associatedwithexperience;4-Culturelearning

(grouplevel);5-Individuallearning

(uniqueexperiencetoindividual);6-Physicaltrauma(suchasbraintumor)

IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:

IfsomepracticaldecisionsaremadebasedonthemeasurementofID,thismeasurementneed:Repeatable(Reliability);Canbecommunicatedtoothers(OperationalDefinitions);Unconfoundedbyotherfactors(suchasRegressionArtifacts);Notover-explained(theissueofSVs);

IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:ReliabilityofIDmeasurement:

TechniquestoassessReliability:Test-RetestReliability:sametestgiventwice;expressedasacorrelationbetweentwoscores;Parallelformsofthetesttoavoidpracticeeffects;

Split-HalfReliability:Dividingthetestitemsintotwoarbitrarygroups;IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:ReliabilityofIDmeasurement(anExample):

Example:StabilityofIntelligenceovermanyyears:

Test-RetestRisabout0.95,thenhowstableIntelligenceremainsoveranindividual’slifetime?Kangas&Bradway,1971study;Table12.1:[Intelligence:A38-yearFollow-Up]

S-B:Simon-Binet(givenatallages;twoalternateformsofthetest:L,M);WAIS:

WechslerAdultIntelligenceScale(givenin1956and1969);Sample:SanFranciscoBayAreachildren;

IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:ReliabilityofIDmeasurement(anExample):

Example:StabilityofIntelligenceovermanyyears:

IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:ReliabilityofIDmeasurement(anExample):

Example:StabilityofIntelligenceovermanyyears:

Severalfindings:fromlefttoright,correlationsdecreasewiththeincreaseoftheamountoftimebetweentestings;(especiallythetoprowofthetable,1931S-B:preschoolintelligencewithmeanageof4.1);

b.Thecorrelationsaremuchhigherwhenadultscoresarecorrelated;

c.However,allcorrelationsherearesignificant,soatleastsomeextentofpredictability.d.Correlationbetweenthe1969measuresandpreviousonesincreaseasSs’agesincrease!

e.SincetheS-Btestisverbal,itdoesnotcorrelatetoohighlywiththeperformancepartoftheWAIS;Conclusion:Intelligenceisfairlystableacross38yearsforthissample;

IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:ReliabilityofIDmeasurement(anExample):

Example:StabilityofIntelligenceovermanyyears:

AnotherfindingfromK&B(1971)study:

Figure12.1:thetestscoresincreaseateachtestingagefrom4.1to41.6.

Takentogether,measureintelligencedoesremainRelativelyStableoveralargeportionofone’slife,fromearlychildhoodtomiddleage.IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:ExperimentalDesignsinwhichageisvaried:

Cross-SectionalDesign(橫斷設(shè)計(jì)):

Peopleofdifferentages(acrosssectionofthepopulation)aretested.Potentialconfounding:anydifferencesfoundmaybeowingtofactorsconfoundedwithage,suchasdifferencesineducationorotherparticularlifeexperience.

CohortEffects:refertoeffectsofthedifferentsortsofpeople(thecohorts,Agenerationalgroup;代·九零后·)whogrowupwithpeopleofdifferingages.Itisdifficulttoexplainthedifferenceonlybyage,oldpeoplemighthavelesschanceofhigheducationcomparedwithyoungerpeople;IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:ExperimentalDesignsinwhichageisvaried:

LongitudinalDesign(縱向設(shè)計(jì)):

Samegroupofpeopleistestedrepeatedlyastheyage,thuseliminatingmuchoftheconfoundingthatoccursintheC-SD.

Potentialconfounding:insomecasestheLDcanbemisleading,whentheobservedchangesarenotowingtoagepersebuttolifeexperiencesthatjusthappentobecorrelatedwithage.

HistoryEffects:theconfoundingoftestdatewithage(socialeventslikeWWII,9-11);

Otherpotentialconfounding:Repeatedtesting;Subjectdrop-out(movingaway/deathinanotrandomway!;over50%)IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:ExperimentalDesignsinwhichageisvaried:

Cross-SequentialDesign(交叉序列設(shè)計(jì)):

IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:ExperimentalDesignsinwhichageisvaried:

Cross-SequentialDesign:

Schaie(1977);Figure12.2;time-lagdesign:Peopleofthesameageareexaminedoverdifferenteras,thusrevealingtheeffectoferaratherthanage.

EmbedsmultipleC-SDsandLDswithinitandpermitsevaluationofvariationcausedbychangingtimesoreras(ratherthanage)throughexaminationofthetime-lagdesignbuiltinit.

IfTLD=0,thenLDandC-SDarethetrueeffectsofage.C-SDallowsstrongerinferencestobemadeabouttheeffectsofage,unconfoundedwithotherfactors,butisdifficulttoimplementinpractice.

IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:OperationalDefinitionsofpsychologicalConstructs:

SpecifytheConstructintermsoftheexperimentaloperationsusedtostudyit.Example,Turingtest:todefineArtificial/MachineIntelligence.

ImitationGame-TuringTest;A,BandanInterrogator(C);Controlcondition:CneedtodecidethegenderofAandB(whohelpsC);IfamachinereplacesA(EXPcondition).Ifcontrol/experimentconditionshavenodifference,e.g.amachinewhoseoutputiscapableofimitatingahuman,wewillcallthismachine‘Intelligence’.StrongAI:machinecanhaveintelligence(possessacognitivestateunderlyingIntelligence,asinhuman);WeakAI:computercanonlyuseprogramstomodelhumanintelligence;IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:OperationalDefinitionsofpsychologicalConstructs:

Example,Turingtest:todefineArtificial/MachineIntelligence.

TuringTestisanexperiment;Opposedopinion:Theproblemofthevalidityofoperationaldefinition.Orsay,althoughTuringtestisconsistent(reliable),therearedisagreementsaboutthevalidity(referstothetruthorsoundnessofthedefinition)oftheTuringtestasadefinitionofIntelligence.

ThetermConstructValidityreferstotheextenttowhichthetestmeasurestheconstructthatitissupposedtomeasure.IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:OperationalDefinitionsofpsychologicalConstructs:

Example,Turingtest:

Forexample,theoperationaldefinitionofhunger(withholdfoodforatimeandobservetheamounteaten)mighthassomeproblem(variousreasonsforfood;wanttoloseweight;complexrelationshipbetweenfullnessofstomach;anupsetstomach);Thus,ConvergingOperations(multipleoperationaldefinitions)needtobeused;IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:OperationalDefinitionsofpsychologicalConstructs:

Example:AcriticismofthevalidityoftheTuringtest:

TheChineseRoom,thephilosopherSearle(1980,1990);AnotherThoughtExperiment;AcompleteinstructionbookwritteninEnglishinsidetheroom;MatchCharacterswithcertaincards-putcardsinaslotthatdropsthemoutsidetheroom;YouareactuallyansweringquestionsinCthatwereaskedinC;

Youareadequatelymanipulatingasetofformalsymbols,butthesesymbolshavenomeaningforyou;Doesnotattachmeaningorunderstandingtothesymbols(whichrequiresabrainthathascausalpowersinthesituationunderexamination);

IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:OperationalDefinitionsofpsychologicalConstructs:

ProblemofcurrentIQtests(S-B):

Focusedonmathandverbalability;Nomusical,social…Limitedscope:nopredictionofsuccessinothercontextbeyondschool(desert).CulturallyBiased:datafromalargesampleofwhitepopulation;Contemporarytheory:

MultipleIntelligence-Gardner(1983,2000),sevenfacetsofintelligence:bodily-kinesthetic,linguistic,logical-mathematical,musical,self-understanding(intrapersonal),socialsuccess(interpersonal),andspatial.Eachhasseparateneuralbasis;Evidence:doubledissociationofmusicalability(RH,tonalagnosia;stillpossesslanguageability)andlinguisticability(LH,aphasic;stillcansing);IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:OperationalDefinitionsofpsychologicalConstructs:

Sternberg’sIntelligencetheory:Emphasizestheabilitytoprocessinformation,synthesizeinformationinnovelways,andadapttonewsituations;AccordingtoSternberg,Gardnerhasidentifiedtalentsratherthanintelligences.(Lackingmusicaltalentisnotadisasterbutlackingplanningandreasoningwillbefundamentallyunsurvival).

;Althoughoperationaldefinitionscanfacilitatescientificcommunication(agreetodisagree)and,hence,thereliabilityofscientificresearch,theycanbecontroversialdefinitionsoftheconceptsinquestion.Theycanbevalidbuttheirmeaningisoftensubjecttodebate(disagreetoagree).IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:SubjectVariables:

SuchasIntelligence,Weight,orAge;Bytheirnature,SVspreluderandomassignmentofsubjectstoconditions;cannotbeexperimentallymanipulated;ArenottrueIVs;

Cautioninresultexplanation:SomeeffectsmaynotbeduetoSVs,becausesomeconfoundedfactormayhaveproducedtheeffects.EXPswithSVsarequasi-experiments;theresultsobtainedarealwayscorrelationalinnatureandpossiblycontaminatedbyconfounding.IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:RegressionArtifacts:

Implementsometreatmenttoimproveindividualperformance;Needevaluatetheeffectsofthetreatments;

Iftwogroupsarematchedonsomecriterionratherthanbeingrandomlyassignedtothetwogroups,thereisagreatlikelihoodthattheRegressionArtifacts(statisticalregressiontothemean)willoccur;WhenextremegroupsofSswereselected,theirscoresuponretestingwilltendtowardthemeanofthegroup.Thisoccursdespitematchingonothercriteria.Thusthescoresofthegroupswillchangeinretestingevenwithoutanyinterveningtreatment.Thismakesitimpossibletoevaluatetheeffectofthetreatment.IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:RegressionArtifacts:

Example:Table12.2;RAiscausedbythefactthatyouandyourfriendwerenottrulyequivalentstudents(bothwereerroneously“matched”asBstudents).Solution:randomlyassignBstudentsintotwogroups;RAoccursbecauseallpsychologicalmeasuresaresubjecttoacertainamountofvariability;Anyextreme-performancegroupcontainsnotonlytruescoresbutalsosomescoreswithvariance(thedirectionofthevariancemightchangeinthenextretest);OnlySolution:toassignsubjectsrandomlytoconditionsinthefirstplace.

IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:RegressionArtifacts:

Oneexample:HeadStartprogramhasnoeffectcannotbedrawnfromtheWestinghouse-Ohiostudy(Cicirelli&Granger,1969).

HS-group:fromapopulationthatwaspoorerinabilitythanthe“control”children;No-HS-group(Control);

Thematching(B)willinevitablypickupabovethepopulationmean(C)studentsforHS-groupandbelowthepopulationmean(A)studentsforcontrolgroup;Inretest,HS-group=>B-orB,Control-group=>B+orB;SoeventhereisnoHSprogram,weexpecttohaveabetterperformanceofControl-group.Sincetheauthorsgotnodifferencesbetweenthetwogroups,theirconclusionthatHeadStartprogramhasnoeffectisunwarrantedhere!

IndividualDifferenceandDevelopment:IndividualDifference:MethodologicalIssues:RegressionArtifacts:

Oneexample:HeadStartprogramhasnoeffectcannotbedrawnfromtheWestinghouse-Ohiostudy(Cicirelli&Granger,1969).

ThebestwaytodesignW-OstudywouldhavebeentorandomlyassignparticipantstoeitherHS-grouporcontrolgroupinthebeginning.(Though,itseemsunfairtogivehalfthechildrenwhoseekthehelp[ofaremedialprogram]notrainingwhatsoever.)

AsuccessfulexampleofrandomlyassigningSsintodifferentgroups:

Figure12.3;Breitmayer&Ramey(1986);InteractionsofTreatment(HeadStart-typeprogramtopreventmentalretardation)