Comments on: Human Experimental Psychology: Science With One Hand Behind Your Back http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2007/07/25/human-experimental-psychology-science-with-one-hand-behind-your-back/ Self-Experimentation, Scientific Method, the Shangri-La Diet, etc. Fri, 09 Jan 2009 13:08:48 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7 by: seth http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2007/07/25/human-experimental-psychology-science-with-one-hand-behind-your-back/#comment-30498 Fri, 27 Jul 2007 17:06:13 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2007/07/25/human-experimental-psychology-science-with-one-hand-behind-your-back/#comment-30498 I didn't know that about Festinger and cognitive dissonance. A revealing story. Self-experimentation seems to me such a powerful tool that I find it hard to imagine it will lie unused forever. And with research funding becoming harder to get, the fact that it costs nothing looks better and better. I didn’t know that about Festinger and cognitive dissonance. A revealing story.

Self-experimentation seems to me such a powerful tool that I find it hard to imagine it will lie unused forever. And with research funding becoming harder to get, the fact that it costs nothing looks better and better.

]]> by: Timothy Beneke http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2007/07/25/human-experimental-psychology-science-with-one-hand-behind-your-back/#comment-30494 Fri, 27 Jul 2007 16:34:18 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2007/07/25/human-experimental-psychology-science-with-one-hand-behind-your-back/#comment-30494 Thanks for the clarification. What's clear to me is that if you had a team of 100 self experimenters actively generating and testing hypotheses about major human problems, like say, mood disorders or sleep, they should be able to make major progress fast. I would like to see such a program funded by the powers that be some day. It's clear in the history of psychology that major advances often start from self observation. Festinger noticed how the more his car, I think a nash rambler, broke down, the more attached he got to it and defended its value -- that and other observations led to cognitive dissonance research that totally contradicted and refuted Skinnerian ideas about operant conditioning. The step from self observation as generating hypothesis to self experimentation -- in those domains where it is viable -- is not that big. I suppose getting the powers that be to see that one person's self experimentation has made huge strides in solving the obesity problem is the first step. Thanks for the clarification. What’s clear to me is that if you had a team of 100 self experimenters actively generating and testing hypotheses about major human problems, like say, mood disorders or sleep, they should be able to make major progress fast. I would like to see such a program funded by the powers that be some day. It’s clear in the history of psychology that major advances often start from self observation. Festinger noticed how the more his car, I think a nash rambler, broke down, the more attached he got to it and defended its value — that and other observations led to cognitive dissonance research that totally contradicted and refuted Skinnerian ideas about operant conditioning. The step from self observation as generating hypothesis to self experimentation — in those domains where it is viable — is not that big.

I suppose getting the powers that be to see that one person’s self experimentation has made huge strides in solving the obesity problem is the first step.

]]> by: seth http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2007/07/25/human-experimental-psychology-science-with-one-hand-behind-your-back/#comment-30385 Fri, 27 Jul 2007 04:22:58 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2007/07/25/human-experimental-psychology-science-with-one-hand-behind-your-back/#comment-30385 I should have made clearer that I was talking about human experimental psychology. Self-experimentation is not available for most other areas of psychology -- e.g., developmental, clinical, social. At least in human experimental psychology -- sometimes called cognitive psychology -- you will have to look long and hard to find any experiments in which the subjects or the experimenter were prevented from knowing the condition. I should have made clearer that I was talking about human experimental psychology. Self-experimentation is not available for most other areas of psychology — e.g., developmental, clinical, social. At least in human experimental psychology — sometimes called cognitive psychology — you will have to look long and hard to find any experiments in which the subjects or the experimenter were prevented from knowing the condition.

]]> by: Timothy Beneke http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2007/07/25/human-experimental-psychology-science-with-one-hand-behind-your-back/#comment-30379 Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:42:37 +0000 http://www.blog.sethroberts.net/2007/07/25/human-experimental-psychology-science-with-one-hand-behind-your-back/#comment-30379 Regarding: "Very few psychology experiments are run blinded." I may well be missing something, but my impression is that in most psychology experiments, those who measure the dependent variable are usually "blinded"; i.e., they don't know whether they are observing the control group or those who have been influenced by the independent variable. I thought that was just standard practice. I am most familiar with social psychology experiments. Wouldn't most intro psych texts argue for blinding in measuring effects as basic to psychology? I'm a bit confused. Certainly in medicine in measuring the effects of agents or activities on illness, double blinding is considered the gold standard. Regarding: “Very few psychology experiments are run blinded.”

I may well be missing something, but my impression is that in most psychology experiments, those who measure the dependent variable are usually “blinded”; i.e., they don’t know whether they are observing the control group or those who have been influenced by the independent variable. I thought that was just standard practice. I am most familiar with social psychology experiments. Wouldn’t most intro psych texts argue for blinding in measuring effects as basic to psychology? I’m a bit confused.

Certainly in medicine in measuring the effects of agents or activities on illness, double blinding is considered the gold standard.

]]>