Research methods: principles and applications

Psychological Research Methodology

Nothing is more important to the advancement of psychology than objective research that leads to new ideas and discoveries about the human psyche and the workings of the mind. Developing a research methodology that delivers these objective and verifiable results can be difficult in any science, however, and especially in the field of psychology due to the subjective nature of the material studied -- humans themselves. Psychology as a science is complex, with many conflicting theories that often delve into rather nebulous territory. Keeping in mind the basic guiding principles of all sciences can help to simplify the problems encountered in conducting psychological research. This means temporarily setting aside the practical applications of psychology, which though of great importance must be built on a solid theoretical foundation. That is, before turning to the practice of psychology, we must understand the science.

According to Dr. Robert Kaleta of the University of Wisconsin, psychology can be most simply defined as "the science that studies behavior and the psychological cognitive processes that underlie it" (Kaleta). There are many different ways that different researchers and psychologists attempt to study and analyze behavior and its underlying causes, but the modern science of psychology began with the system of psychoanalysis developed by Sigmund Freud at the turn of the twentieth century. Freud took years of observation to develop his explanation for human behavior, which basically consisted of the variations and abnormalities concerning the pleasure drive at various stages of growth, especially during childhood (Boeree, 2000). The Freudian explanation of behavior and personality is still adhered to by many today, and his description of the id, ego, and superego are even more widely used than other more controversial elements of his theory. His is not the only explanation, however.

One of the problems with Freudian theory is its supreme subjectivity; both the mind examined and the mind doing the examining have their own individual prejudices and motives, many of them (according to Freud himself) unknown to the mind itself and therefore unaccountable -- they cannot be tempered by altering conscious though and action. For this reason, according to Boeree, "behaviorism is the philosophical position that says that psychology, to be a science, must focus its attentions on what is observable -- the environment and behavior -- rather than what is only available to the individual -- perceptions, thoughts, images, feelings" (Boeree, 2000). This is another major branch of the science of psychology, and is arguably more scientific due to its apparently increased objectivity. Other major theories of psychology take similar approaches, while still others not only acknowledge but even embrace the subjectivity of the science, at least insofar as the patient is concerned, in order to solve problems.

None of these sciences of psychology would be possible, however, without the foundation of science itself: the scientific method. The scientific method is a way -- perhaps the way -- to gather information and use it to come to rational, objective, and verifiable conclusions. Without such a method in place for gathering evidence and testing hypotheses, there would be no reason to trust science. In fact, a careful application of the scientific method often ends up disproving former conclusion.

That is one of the great beauties of the scientific method -- it allows and even requires constant adjustment based on new evidence, and no problem is ever considered totally solved; instead, issues must be continually examined and re-examined, and knowledge constantly adjusted. But before this, it all starts with a question.

Before any scientific endeavor can be undertaken, a scientific question must be posed. Questioning is the first step of the scientific method. Not all questions can be asked scientifically, however. In order to apply the scientific method to a questions, there have to be observable factors related to the phenomenon in question. Thus, questions like "what is the meaning of life?" cannot be answered with the scientific method; there are no physically observable details related to this question, and each individual might -- and usually does -- come up with their own answer.

Observation is the second step of the scientific method. In order to answer a scientific question, observations must be made that suggest possible answers to the question, or relationships with other phenomenon that might cause the questioned phenomenon. After enough observation is made, a hypothesis can be formed. This is the third and one of the most central steps in the scientific method. A hypothesis proposes a possible answer or solution to the question posed in the first step; it is an educated guess based on the observations made in the second step.

The fourth and most vital step in the scientific method is testing the hypothesis through experimentation. An experiment must be designed to control variables other than the one questioned, so that the results can be interpreted correctly. It is especially important that the experiment is not conducted from the point-of-view of trying to prove the hypothesis right, because this can lead to subjective results. In fact, some suggest that the best way to approach an experiment is with an attitude of skepticism, trying to prove the hypothesis false. Failing to do this can be interpreted not as proving the hypothesis, but leaving it a viable solution. Analyzing the results of the experiment in this way is the last step of the scientific method. A careful analysis of the observations made in the experiment can be compared to the observations made after questioning, and the hypothesis can be tested as to whether or not it matches the new information.

There are also two types of data that can be collected and analyzed via the scientific method. These are qualitative and quantitative data. Quantitative data might be thought to be more traditionally "scientific"; it involves concrete and measurable facts like frequencies and ratios. Qualitative data, on the other hand, is more about drawing meaning from more abstract facts, and is gathered by means of interviews and other less directly measurable tools (Trochim, 2006). Both types of data are very important in psychological research; quantitative data can support biological and neurological conclusions as well as provide information about populations at large. Qualitative data can also be useful in describing populations as a whole, and is especially useful in determining individual preference and personality (Trochim, 2006).