Why Do We Do Research?
If we examine psychology as a discipline, one of the things that becomes clear fairly quickly is that we need a way of recognizing what we know and how we know what we know. It might seem that certain things are "common sense" findings or that they are obvious - yet in any rigorous discipline, psychology included, we take nothing for granted. Sometimes common sense is wrong.
An example of the need to test even the most basic assumptions (which also includes building on established research - we don't have to reinvent the wheel) comes from the problem popularly known as the Monty Hall problem. The two videos from Brady Haran and Numberphile below illustrate the not quite common-sense solution to this problem:
Let's imagine I present you with three envelopes, labeled A, B, and C. In one of the envelopes is a hundred dollar bill. In the other two are nothing. You are offered the chance to select one of the envelopes - and if the envelope you select contains the $100, you may keep it. You select envelope A.
I then open envelope B, revealing it is empty inside. I then offer you the chance to switch to envelope C or keep envelope A. Is it to your advantage to switch or should you stay with your original choice?
When I ask students to hypothesize, the vast majority hypothesize that there will be no difference in the odds of getting the hundred dollars if the person choosing switches or stays. That is in line with common sense. Among the already small minority who hypothesize it would be better to switch, most of those students are already familiar with this conundrum. Needless to say by this point, I wouldn't be making a big deal of this if common sense won out. The odds are twice as good for someone who switches as they are for someone who stays. I suggest you watch the explanation video on the left first, and the "for dummies" video second. (For any Tims who may be reading, the videos link directly back to You Tube so no freebooting happening here.) For anyone who wants to become a Tim, go here. You're welcome.
An example of the need to test even the most basic assumptions (which also includes building on established research - we don't have to reinvent the wheel) comes from the problem popularly known as the Monty Hall problem. The two videos from Brady Haran and Numberphile below illustrate the not quite common-sense solution to this problem:
Let's imagine I present you with three envelopes, labeled A, B, and C. In one of the envelopes is a hundred dollar bill. In the other two are nothing. You are offered the chance to select one of the envelopes - and if the envelope you select contains the $100, you may keep it. You select envelope A.
I then open envelope B, revealing it is empty inside. I then offer you the chance to switch to envelope C or keep envelope A. Is it to your advantage to switch or should you stay with your original choice?
When I ask students to hypothesize, the vast majority hypothesize that there will be no difference in the odds of getting the hundred dollars if the person choosing switches or stays. That is in line with common sense. Among the already small minority who hypothesize it would be better to switch, most of those students are already familiar with this conundrum. Needless to say by this point, I wouldn't be making a big deal of this if common sense won out. The odds are twice as good for someone who switches as they are for someone who stays. I suggest you watch the explanation video on the left first, and the "for dummies" video second. (For any Tims who may be reading, the videos link directly back to You Tube so no freebooting happening here.) For anyone who wants to become a Tim, go here. You're welcome.
|
|
|
