Mind and behavior: psychological perspectives and theories

Mind and Behaviour

Investigators in the discipline of psychology strive to determine factors that affect the mind and behaviour and how these interactions occur. In order to form hypotheses and answer questions, these scientists adhere to the scientific method. However, often psychological studies provide weak reliability and validity due to issues such as small sample sizes, inappropriate control groups or a complete lack there-of, as well as an inability to determine causation by effectively manipulating an independent variable. Also, the methods used to collect data in psychological studies affect the generalizability of the results as well as how likely the results can be replicated. Although many studies in psychology are quantitative, relying on numerical data in order to devise results the field of psychology often deals with information regarding emotions and personal accounts. This kind of information is more subjective and is sometimes more effectively evaluated through qualitative investigations. How effective are these qualitative studies? How convincing are the findings from studies that rely more on subjective reporting of personal experiences?

Essentially, the scientific thought process is grounded in comparison, control, and manipulation (Stanovich, 2009). These elements are necessary in order confirm certain conclusions while ruling out alternative explanations. This is achieved through either controlling an experimental situation or through observation of naturally occurring situations (Stanovich, 2009). Qualitative studies usually fall under the latter category, and information is collected through qualitative interviews. There are several problematic issues that arise in open-ended, conversational interviews used in qualitative psychological research (Potter & Hepburn, 2005). These problems involve the design of the studies, the manner in which they are conducted, analysis of the collected interview data, as well as how findings from these studies are reported (Potter & Hepburn, 2005).

Potter & Hepburn (2005) suggested that qualitative interviews present two categories of problems: contingent problems and necessary problems. Contingent problems of qualitative interviews are those which may or may not be issues depending on whether attention is given to certain aspects of the study. These types of problems include the interviewer being deleted from the interpretation of findings, flaws in how the interactions are represented, how specific observations are, not knowing how interviews are set up, and sometimes failure to see the interview situation as an interaction (Potter & Hepburn, 2005). These are widespread problems that are found commonly throughout research based on qualitative interviews, and psychological research in general could be drastically improved by correcting these problems (Potter & Hepburn, 2005). Potter & Hepburn (2005) suggest that a starting point toward correcting these problems would be for researchers to acknowledge the presence of these issues and in turn justify why certain components of the qualitative interviews are used and how they contribute to improved execution of the study.