Psychology paper

Introductory Psychology II (CPSY202) – Spring 2022

Written Assignment, Part 1

Instructions

Psychology is an evidence-based discipline wherein we propose and test theories of using scientific studies. When a study is finished, it is normally published in the form of a research article in a scientific journal. Once published, the article is available for widespread consumption and – importantly – constructive criticism. Discussion of research articles is pivotal; it helps improve science and helps science improve society. This being the case, understanding research articles is vital to Psychology and is the goal of this assignment.

To complete this assignment, please use the guide below:

• First, read the research article (Li et al. 2020, Psychological Science) provided in the Assignment folder on D2L Brightspace. Please note that the article is also likely available via your library resources.
• Take detailed notes of the article’s central theory, method, results and implications. Your understanding of this material will be tested.
• Reading articles will be a little daunting and time-consuming at first. You might find yourself re-reading sentences (sometimes paragraphs!) a few times before you understand them. You might encounter strange terminology that you have not heard before and now need to learn. This is a normal, healthy and necessary part of the learning process. It is recommended that you budget approximately 3 hours for a thorough reading of the article.
• After finishing the article, proceed to read the fake press release (page 3) that is attached below. This press release is an attempt to communicate the nature and significance of the article, but it makes many errors in doing so.
• The goal of your assignment is to identify all the correct statements and mistakes in the press release.
• Prepare a word document (*.docx, *.rtf or *.pdf) which includes your name, student number, course code and the title of the assignment. Please ensure that the document is in the right format or the D2L system will not be able to process it.
• This document must have two clearly labeled sections: 1) correct statements and 2) mistakes.
  • In the correct statement section, include all correct statements (you can paraphrase or use partial quotes) in a numbered list (e.g. Correct Statement 1, Correct Statement 2…). You do not need to explain them.
  • A mistake is a statement in the press release which directly contradicts the information in the article. Do not include errors of omission. In the mistake section, include all mistakes (you can paraphrase or use partial quotes) in a numbered list (e.g. Mistake 1, Mistake 2…). Explain the nature of each error by providing the correct information in 1 or 2 sentences.
  • List the statements in the order that they appear.
• Spelling and grammar are vital to communicating a clear message and will be monitored. Please proofread each answer before submitting your assignment.
• Your assignment must not exceed 1000 words (~4 pages).
• Submit your document via the portal available on D2L (see Assessments > Assignments > Written Assignment Part 1).
• Your assignment is due on Monday, July 11 by 11:59 pm (slight extension from syllabus). For students with accessibility accommodations or exceptional circumstances, appropriate extensions will be provided. If the assignment is late without an exceptional reason, there will unfortunately be a late penalty (see Syllabus > Course Policies > Late submissions).
• To assist you with the assignment, help will be offered in office hour discussions. The assignment is designed to be completed through a combination of independent work and group conversation. Don’t try to do it completely alone!
• The assignment will be marked out of 20 and will contribute 15% to your final grade. Please note that the mark value may not reflect the volume of correct statements or errors.
• Please save any notes you have on the article. We will be revisiting this article later in Assignment 1, Part 2.

Take care, stay safe and good luck with everything!

Best,

Dr. Whissell

Press Release

This release is based on Li et al. 2020, Psychological Science.

Trust is the foundation of successful relationships and societies. We want to trust others and feel good when we do. However, trust is not without risk. Unfortunately for us, there are sometimes “bad actors” who take advantage of our trusting nature and do us harm. Choosing who to trust is therefore critical. A new Psychology study provides important insight into how selective trust works in children. The study, which represents an international collaboration between the United States and Canada, is poised to overturn many long-held notions about selective trust.

The study examined how schoolchildren of two different age groups (3 – 4 years and 5 – 6 years) placed trust in a stranger (termed a confederate) based upon the accuracy of the information that stranger provided (correct or incorrect). Importantly, the researchers used a sampling method that drew subjects from multiple schools, thereby ensuring that schoolchildren of all levels of socioeconomic status, cognitive ability and cultural background were equally represented. On this basis, the researchers have argued strongly that the study’s findings apply well to children of all types.

The study was remarkable in that it utilized an entirely new method of assessing trust: the selective trust paradigm. Many researchers have commented that this paradigm is unique and incomparable to all existing tests in the literature. In this novel paradigm, children are first lead to a ‘safe spot’ by their parents. The parent then announces they are leaving briefly and tells the child to remain. When the parent is gone, a confederate arrives. The confederate then has a discussion with the child wherein they give the child three pieces of information that are relevant to them: 1) their mother’s name, 2) their class number and 3) their teacher’s family name. These forms of information are either all correct (in the correct condition) or all incorrect (in the incorrect condition). After having a brief dialogue with the child, the confederate invited the child to leave with them. The child’s agreement to leave, or disagreement, was recorded (response to suggestion, considered the primary outcome measure). In the event the child agreed to go, the time taken to make the decision was recorded (hesitation time, considered a secondary measure). Importantly, a valuable aspect of the study was that it used a mixed design with a within-subject feature: all children were tested in every condition for which they were eligible (e.g. children in the 3 – 4 year age group completed both the accurate and inaccurate condition). This design method was favored as it reduced confounding variables and sample size. All group sizes were approximately equal in the study.

The study contained some shocking findings. Overall, when averaging out all conditions, the vast majority (90%) of children in the study agreed to go with the confederate. Younger children (3 – 4 years) agreed more often than older children (5 – 6 years). In both age groups, the accuracy of the information (either correct or incorrect) was an important factor. When the confederate provided correct information, the child was more likely to agree to leave. Surprisingly, hesitation time was not related to the accuracy of the information given.

The gender of the confederate was also a factor in trustworthiness. Children more often agreed to go with female confederates than male confederates. This effect was strong and, in certain cases, overwhelmed the effect of information accuracy. In fact, children more often left with female confederates providing incorrect information than male confederates providing correct information. This particular finding is perhaps less surprising, as it is consistent with prior research that indicates children are less trusting and more wary of adult males. This tendency to mistrust males may be adaptive, as the data suggests that most crimes of child kidnapping are committed by male adults. Interestingly, though the study exhaustively examined for potential effects of the child’s gender on trusting, it did not find any significant effect.

Response to the study has been extraordinary. While the vast majority of comments have been positive, some are critical. Some scientists are concerned that the study is purely correlational in nature and cannot be used to infer cause. The experimenters themselves acknowledge this. Others have remarked that the study poorly captures behavior in the real world as it only measures behavior in the lab. Finally, some have even commented that the study’s sample is way too small to provide any meaningful insight into behavior. Critics have argued the sample size was determined arbitrarily and goes against typical conventions.

These complainants, however, are the minority. Most people approve of the study and its methodology. Parents are looking to act swiftly based upon the study’s results. Some have speculated that the study could even inspire a ‘safety movement’. Programs designed to increase suspicion of others, and reduce trust, may be advantageous, preventing crimes and protecting children. However, such programs must be implemented carefully, as they could have some negative consequences. Ultimately, it may take years – perhaps even decades – before a suitable program is developed.