Pick your own value. Choose the best 5 values that describe yourself.

Efficiency 

Committed
Passion
Ability

Family

Empowerment

Trust

Creative

Adventurous

Flexibility
Success

Truth

Integrity
Telus 
Amanah
Akauntibiliti
Berdisiplin
Semangat Berpasukan

 

Value                      Reason

1. ______     _________

2. ______     _________
3. _______   __________
4. _______   ___________
5. ________  ___________

2.     Characteristic of Entrepreneurs

3.     Types of Entrepreneurial Business

4.     Aptitude 

5.     Advantages and Disadvantages of Entrepreneurship

Step 2: I will give 4-5 contents (Section of textbook, Online)

Step 3: Each person learn and be expert on one content (study 10 min independently)

Step 4: For 20 min have student meet in expert groups (compare ideas and work together – prepare a presentation in a mind map A4 paper and 

prepare 3 questions

Step 5: Student return to Home Group to teach others, students take notes and ask lots of questions. Each expert spend 8 min to teach.

Step 6: Assessment based on questions ask from Expert 1 to other to check, i don't want you to tell me of what you write, I want you to tell me about what you learned from other expert friends

 

The scientific method is more than just hypotheses and experiments. In this lesson, we'll explore the themes and variations that make up the world of science.

 

Is There Only One Scientific Method?

When you first took science class in school, you probably learned the basic steps of a scientific investigation. You've likely heard of words like 'hypothesis,' 'experiment,' and 'observation.' You may have even memorized a prescribed set of steps. The scientific method is a set of procedures that scientists follow in order to gain knowledge about the world.

However, the steps involved in the scientific method vary widely among the different scientific disciplines. Chemists follow the method a bit differently than psychologists. Geologists and botanists have their own unique methods. So, is there really one scientific method that encompasses all of science? To find out, we'll need to learn more about the scientific process.

Key Elements of the Scientific Method

There are six key steps that tend to characterize the scientific method. The first step is the question. This is the part where a scientist proposes the problem that he or she wants to solve. A well-conceived question usually leads to a hypothesis, a potential answer to the question at hand. Sometimes, hypotheses look more like predictions. The scientist predicts what the outcome will be when he or she tests the hypothesis. The scientist's test is also called the experiment. Experiments are ordered investigations that are intended to prove or disprove a hypothesis. Important data comes from performing an experiment.

The scientist has to make observations of the results that he or she gets from the experiment. An observation is a statement of knowledge gained through the senses or through the use of scientific equipment. Observations are crucial for collecting data. Once the results are in, the scientist must begin the analysis. Data analysis involves comparing the results of the experiment to the prediction posed by the hypothesis. Based on the observations he or she made, the scientist has to determine whether the hypothesis was correct. He or she then sums up his or her findings with a conclusion. The conclusion of a scientific process is a statement of whether the original hypothesis was supported or refuted by the observations gathered.

 | 1 . Questions
 2. Hypothesis
3. Experiment
4. Observation
5. Analysis
6. Conclusion

 | The six steps of the scientific method do not always occur in the same order.

 

The scientific method usually employs all six of the steps I mentioned, but the steps don't always occur in the same order. Real scientists may go back and repeat steps many times before they come to any conclusions. It's actually better to use the word 'elements' to describe the steps, since the first step, question, does not always come first. Sometimes, for example, it's an observation that came first and spawned the initial question. Likewise, observations that are made during an experiment can inspire more questions that scientists have to answer. The scientific method is much more fluid than you might think. Let me show you how the steps can feed back and branch out from one another with an example from my own experience.

 

Feedback Loops in the Scientific Method

Last weekend, I had a minor ordeal with my Internet connection at home. I had started up my laptop, and I was frustrated to find that I couldn't get on the Internet. I made the observation that my laptop wasn't receiving an Internet connection. I asked myself a question: Is something wrong with the Internet itself, or was it just my laptop? One way to begin answering this question was to check the connection on the desktop computer. Quickly, I formed a hypothesis: If the Internet isn't working on the desktop either, then the problem is beyond my laptop computer. The experiment I performed was to check the desktop's connection, and my resulting observation was that the Internet didn't work there. So, by analyzing the evidence, I was able to form my first conclusion: Nothing is wrong with my laptop, and something is wrong with the Internet connection.

Now, this conclusion answered my first question. But it still didn't get my Internet to work. So I had to pose another question: Where exactly was the problem occurring in the chain of Internet devices? Was it the cord between the modem and the router? The cord between the router and my computer? Or was the problem in the router itself? I had to form another hypothesis: If both my Internet cords are properly plugged in, then there must be a problem with the router. My experiment was to check both cords and the router. My observation was that both cords were plugged in and that the router was off. I analyzed the evidence, and my conclusion was that I couldn't connect to the Internet because my router was off.

Are you seeing a pattern here? Once I came up with one conclusion, it left me with another question that I needed to answer. From every question I got a hypothesis, from every hypothesis I got an experiment, and from every experiment I got observations that led me to more conclusions. I don't need to tell you the rest of the story. Eventually, I figured out that my router was unplugged and solved my Internet problem by plugging it back in. The important thing to see here is that the scientific method doesn't follow a straight line. It loops back on itself in countless ways. It branches out into new investigations. There's never just one way to answer a question.

 

Fluidity and Community in Science

Keep in mind that the key elements of the scientific method are not the only things that keep science moving forward. It's not nearly as rigid as many textbooks describe. In addition to hypotheses, experiments, and analyses, science requires more subjective processes like creativity, experience, and intuition. In my problem with the Internet, I needed to reference my basic knowledge of computerized technology. I knew from experience that unplugged cords were most likely the cause of the problem, but I also brainstormed for a minute or two about other possible causes. I have two curious cats and a husband who often changes the arrangement of our cords on the power strip. It's dusty under our desk, and the router is getting old. Any of these factors could have affected the connection. I didn't end up pursuing those other possibilities, but I did use plenty of creativity while trying to solve my problem. If it had turned out that my problem was more complicated than an unplugged cord, then I would have had a handful of other ideas to try.

Many scientists have used a combination of skills to develop their ideas. Take Charles Darwin, for example. He is credited with devising the theory of evolution by natural selection. It's a biological theory, but Darwin wasn't a biologist. He was a naturalist who studied not only plants and animals but anything to do with the natural world. Darwin read up on geological principles written by Charles Lyell. He studied theories of economics and population by Thomas Malthus. He bred fancy pigeons and collected natural artifacts on his farm. And yes, he took an amazing voyage to study exotic creatures around the world. Darwin wouldn't have come up with his ideas about evolution without combining all of these influences. It took some creativity and twenty years of research to put all his ideas together. Darwin's work shows that the scientific method is really a fluid, integrated process.

It's worth mentioning that scientific studies are kept in check by communities around the world. Most scientific journals employ a process of peer review, whereby scientists critique each other's work and decide whether it meets the standards of the scientific community. Scientists have to pool their resources and check in with one another before they can perform any significant work. But scientists also compete with one another to discover new things. They know that the prize goes to the scientist who gets things right and publishes first. Even Darwin had to compete with other naturalists like Alfred Wallace and Jean-Baptiste Lamarck. But he also worked closely with his friends, Joseph Hooker and Thomas Huxley, who also studied biology and helped him develop his theories. As you can see, the scientific method does not work in isolation. It functions within a community, both inside and outside the realm of science.

 

Lesson Summary

So, it turns out there really is no one way to follow the scientific method. There are key elements that should appear in any investigation, but science is done differently in every profession, and no one follows the exact same process.

The scientific method describes the processes by which scientists gain knowledge about the world. It's characterized by six key elements: questions, hypotheses, experiments, observations, analyses, and conclusions. These elements are interrelated steps, so they don't always function in the same order. Other, more subjective skills like creativity, experience, and intuition also have a place in the scientific method. Science is characterized by professional competition and develops through the collaboration of scientists in the worldwide community.

Lesson Transcript

 

This lesson will discuss important components of scientific research, including the scientific method, peer review, statistical significance, and more!

 

The Nature of Scientific Research

Did you ever discover you could do a cool new trick? Or, have you ever asked a friend to double-check your essay for mistakes?

Well, scientists love to discover cool new things, write about them, and then have their peers double-check their work for mistakes, too.

That's the nature of scientific research!

Scientific research is the systematic investigation of scientific theories and hypotheses.

 

Who Does It? Why Do It?

By the way, just in case you didn't already know, a hypothesis is a single assertion, a proposed explanation of something based on available knowledge, for something yet to be explained. One that is subject to further experimentation.

In science, the people who create such hypotheses are researchers. Most researchers work for companies or academic institutions. Many of them, but not all, have a PhD in an appropriate field related to their research. For example, a person conducting research on a new drug may have a PhD in chemistry - a PhD in history probably wouldn't do much good.

Anyways, scientific researchers try to answer the many questions we have about how the world works. But a lot of their work doesn't really have to do with the questions at the forefront of our minds.

I mean, yes, we're all fascinated with knowing whether or not there may be life on other planets, but for many reasons such research isn't as common as finding out whether or not a drug you never heard of has a potentially dangerous side effect.

We may not think about this kind of research very often, but it impacts us or people we know far more so than the search for life on other planets. Until, of course, we find out we're not alone in this universe and are potentially going to be invaded by little green men.

 

The Scientific Method

Furthermore, scientists don't just come up with explanations about the world around us willy-nilly. Not even close. Scientists use the scientific method, a process that helps construct an accurate depiction of our universe and its processes, in order to answer whatever question they may have!

What this means is, researchers observe the world around them, formulate potential explanations for the phenomena they observe, test their hypotheses out with experiments, and analyze their results to see if they were right or wrong.

The key thing about the scientific method is that it carries no prejudice, meaning you don't even have to believe whatever it is the researcher wrote or said! Using the scientific method, you can repeat the experiment to find out for yourself whether or not the other researcher's assertions are true. This is a key factor that separates science from dogma!

The other important part of scientific research is that a hypothesis must be falsifiable. A falsifiable hypothesis or theory is one where an experiment or another discovery can prove it to be wrong, untrue, and false. This is another critical factor that separates science from the world of religion, astrology, and pseudoscience.

If I were to say that Bigfoot exists but always hides when humans are around and leaves no evidence behind, that, in the words of Penn and Teller, is bologna! There is no way to disprove such a statement and it is therefore unscientific.

Overall, scientific research helps people come up with rational, objective, testable, and disprovable questions and methods that help us explain the world and its ever-changing nature.

In science, you don't have to believe anything. You are free to test it out for yourself and prove or disprove anything you want in an objective and unbiased manner.

 

Peer Review & Statistical Significance

Even though scientific experiments are constructed and conducted in an objective and unbiased manner, science provides for two more fail-safes to ward off potential mistakes in the evidence collected and conclusions reached after an experiment.

One of these is the peer review process. Peer review is a process where scientific experts not connected to the study and experiment in question check it for scientific accuracy, proper methodology, and relevancy, before the study is published in a scientific journal.

What this is saying is that the final paper written about a hypothesis, the experiment, and analysis thereof is checked by scientific peers. It's like having your essay checked by a friend. Peer review helps scientists catch mistakes and ward off questionable data.

Another tool in the arsenal of scientific research is math. Researchers use math to figure out if their findings are statistically significant. If a finding is statistically significant, then it was unlikely to have occurred due to chance alone.

For example, you may have heard that certain areas or even towns in this country have a lot of people who get cancer, more so than the rest of the nation. But did you know that such clusters of high numbers of cancer cases can actually occur completely due to chance and not as a result of something like bad water, chemicals in the soil, and whatnot? It's completely true!

The only way to find out if it is actually due to random chance or not is to conduct an experiment and analyze it scientifically.

 

Lesson Summary

Scientific research is the systematic investigation of scientific theories and hypotheses.

A hypothesis is a single assertion, a proposed explanation of something based on available knowledge, for something yet to be explained. One that is subject to further experimentation.

Scientists use the scientific method, a process that helps construct an accurate depiction of our universe and its processes, in order to answer whatever questions they may have.

Such a method allows scientists to construct questions about observed phenomena, construct experiments, and analyze results.

In addition to the scientific method, researchers depend on the peer review process. Peer review is a process where scientific experts not connected to the study and experiment in question check it for scientific accuracy, proper methodology, and relevancy, before the study is published in a scientific journal.

Researchers also use mathematics to determine if their findings are statistically significant. If a finding is statistically significant, then it was unlikely to have occurred due to chance alone.

 

 

There is a parallel between how people come to understand something and the process of researching an idea. This lesson explores the purposes of research as well as three approaches to research in psychology: exploratory, descriptive, and explanatory.

 

Purpose of Research

As you probably already know, there are many reasons why research is done. But, what are its purposes? Why bother with all the different styles, techniques, experiments and measurements?

Why did the first sailors, the ones before Columbus and Magellan, hop on their little canoes and paddle out? Humans naturally explore the world around them, wanting to learn about the planet we have labeled Earth.

Why did Hippocrates and Galen examine and write about the maladies of man? The need to describe and understand our world is found in even the youngest children.

Why did we develop an entire group of sciences to understand humans? Because what good is being human if you cannot explain why we do something. Maybe I am being a little to 'meta' about all this. The purpose of psychology is to explore, to describe and to explain how and why a person thinks, feels and acts.

 

Exploratory Research

Exploratory research is defined as the initial research into a hypothetical or theoretical idea. This is where a researcher has an idea or has observed something and seeks to understand more about it. An exploratory research project is an attempt to lay the groundwork that will lead to future studies or to determine if what is being observed might be explained by a currently existing theory. Most often, exploratory research lays the initial groundwork for future research.

To make this a little more understandable, imagine you are blindfolded or placed into a room without light. You are not told if something is in the room, but you have a suspicion there is something in there. You shuffle out slowly into the room, exploring with the tips of your fingers until you find something.

Exploratory research can come in two big forms: either a new topic or a new angle. A new topic is often unexpected and startling in its findings. For example, American psychologist John Watson really began his behaviorism research with a new topic on the study of human behaviors and learning: rats! Because humans have brains and rats have brains, it makes a certain kind of sense. There was an attempt to find the universal laws of learning in all brains.

New angles can come from new ways of looking at things, either from a theoretical perspective or a new way of measuring something. For instance, computers have allowed large populations to be looked at. Old experiments can now involve thousands of people from around the globe instead of a few people from the local train station.

 

 

 

Descriptive Research

Once the groundwork is established, the newly explored field needs more information. The next step is descriptive research, defined as attempts to explore and explain while providing additional information about a topic. This is where research is trying to describe what is happening in more detail, filling in the missing parts and expanding our understanding. This is also where as much information is collected as possible instead of making guesses or elaborate models to predict the future - the 'what' and 'how,' rather than the 'why.'

Remember that room you're blind in? Descriptive research is the act of exploring the thing in the dark, creating a fuller picture of what you are looking at. It is not quite as tentative as exploratory, but you still are not 100% sure what you've found, although you're starting to get an idea. You begin to fill in what you know with what you find.

A psychological example is the use of CT scans, MRI, fMRI, PET, and SPECT imaging to describe the living brain. We now have the clearest picture in all of history of the thinking, living brain. Just a few decades ago, a person who wanted to look at a living brain had two options: a really blurry CT scan without any detail or to crack open the skull and peel back the protective layers around the brain.

Both options are better than a century ago, where you kind of had to wait for someone to die to examine their brain. Research over the last few decades has been expanding our understanding, providing descriptions of the active processes in the brain.

One field that is quickly growing is the field of forensic psychology. Over the last few decades, studies exploring the decision making process of police officers, the techniques used to question witnesses and the jury processes are all being examined. There has been an active interest in many researchers to explore the field that the judicial system needs.

For instance, looking into eyewitness memory studies reveals research explaining and describing the factors that influence what people see. For example, did you know that a person with different lights shining at different angles on a person's face can alter a person's entire look, including their ethnicity? How about that, even in broad daylight, people still get gender of perpetrators and victims mixed up?

 

Explanatory Research

We began exploring something new with exploratory research. Then, we conducted descriptive research to increase our knowledge of it. Lastly, we need to explain it.

Explanatory research is defined as an attempt to connect ideas to understand cause and effect, meaning researchers want to explain what is going on. Explanatory research looks at how things come together and interact. This research does not occur until there is enough understanding to begin to predict what will come next with some accuracy.

The person in the dark has fully explored the elephant and understands what it looks like. Now, the process of 'how did it get here' and 'where is it going next' comes into play. This often requires imaginative studies, more so than just touching an elephant in the dark.

Explanatory research never really ends because new ideas, techniques and information are constantly increasing. This is sort of like, 'the more you know, the more you realize you need to learn.' Explanatory research can even split apart and turn back into exploratory research with a new or unique finding.

For instance, there was a time in psychology that everyone who was anyone was a behaviorist. As time went on, the field kept running into the 'black box' (a term given to the ephemeral mind). Over time, the field of behaviorism went into a sidetrack and developed into the study of cognition and neural processes.

Exploratory research can also end when something has been sufficiently explained to be incorrect. For instance, the study of phrenology, or the measuring of bumps on the head to determine your personality and characteristics, was discovered to be a garbage theory.

Explanatory research is typically concerned with understanding the relationship between things and how they are in the past and the future. This often takes the form of a quantitative approach so that statistical tests can be conducted. Due to the large number of experiments occurring, pinpointing a single researcher or study is difficult.

However, examples of explanatory research include examining the neural development and degradation of drug addicts, as well as the effects of lifestyle on IQ tests in adults and children. (Hint: watching YouTube isn't good for your brain.) Each of these has a great deal of studies behind it, and the current researchers are attempting to pinpoint the exact cause-and-effect relationships between the variables involved.

 

Lesson Summary

What are the purposes of research?

Exploratory research is the initial research into a hypothetical or theoretical idea. It is the first step in learning about something. Somebody gets a new idea in their head, and it leads research in a new direction.

Next, is descriptive research, which provides more elaborate descriptions and information. Descriptive research helps fill in the research community's understanding of the initial exploratory studies.

Last is explanatory research, which attempts to connect ideas to understand cause and effect. This occurs when researchers are beginning to understand what they are looking at and trying to create models of cause and effect.

 

This lesson will go over some important research methods, including observation, correlation, and experimentation, as well as examples of each type of methodology.

 

Research Methods

Have you ever wondered how scientists prove or disprove all sorts of stuff, ranging from correlations between a certain drug and cancer risk to the way animals behave? Well, depending on what is being studied, researchers can use more than one research method to find out more about their questions. You may have even employed some research methodology as you observed your little brother and tried to figure out why in the world he's sucking on his thumb.

 

Observational Research

Your observations fell into the category of observational research, which is a type of research method that records observations of phenomena. So, as a more appropriate example, perhaps you are studying for possible behavioral changes in primates after they give birth. Maybe you travel to the rainforests of Africa or to a zoo to watch how a mother-to-be changes her behavior before and after birth, how long she performs each behavior, and so on.

Observational research may be split into naturalistic observation and participant observation. In naturalistic observation, the observer sits back and watches behavior without manipulating different variables that may influence the results. It would be like watching a bunch of people sitting in an ice cream shop from afar.

This is in contrast to participant observation, where the researchers insert themselves into the group being observed. Meaning, the researcher goes to the ice cream shop, buys some ice cream, and sits and even interacts amongst the people he or she is observing.

 

Correlational Research

Observational research is a type of correlational research, a research method that examines statistical relationships between variables. A famous example of correlational research is smoking and lung disease. Lots of data on these variables is collected, and it is then analyzed to figure out if there is any covariation between the two. However, you shouldn't immediately think of this as a cause-and-effect type of research just because of what I said.

A simple explanation from one of my favorite books, The Art of Happiness, will point out what I mean. This book, written by the Dalai Lama and psychiatrist Howard Cutler, had a little interesting section. In short, very intelligent researchers were positing that mood changes occurred as a result of chemical imbalances in the brain (a type of cause-and-effect belief). But the Dalai Lama asked them, why couldn't it be that the mood changes caused those imbalances?

And despite not being a man of science, he is a man of wisdom, for he is completely correct. Emotional changes themselves, triggered for any number of reasons, can cause new chemical imbalances in our body and vice versa.

 

Experimental Research

Unlike correlational research, experimental research is a type of research that provides strong evidence for cause-and-effect relationships. A real experiment is where we try to control all variables except for the one we are studying. Experimental research need not always be a laboratory study, but it's often easiest to do so there since so much can be placed under our direct control.

Experimental research allows the researcher to manipulate a variable they are studying. Such a variable is known as the independent variable and is like our cause. The variable reacting to the manipulation of the independent variable, one we believe may be being affected by it, is known as the dependent variable, for it supposedly depends on the independent one.

A possible such study design may manipulate the noise level people are exposed to while they sleep in identical rooms and conditions to see how varying noise levels affect the amount of time a person spends in the deepest stages of sleep.

 

Lesson Summary

This lesson went over three types of research methodologies. Observational research is a type of research method that records observations of phenomena. Observational research may be split into naturalistic observation and participant observation.

Observational research is a type of correlational research, a research method that examines statistical relationships between variables. And we finally went over experimental research, which is a type of research that provides strong evidence for cause-and-effect relationships.

While there are many ways to conduct an experiment in psychology, there are only so many ways you can describe it. In this lesson, we will discuss the differences, strengths, and weaknesses of the qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods.

 

Quantitative, Qualitative, and Mixed Methods

Researchers have many ways of examining and relating their study. Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed measures are all differentiated by the question, 'How is the researcher explaining his or her findings?' If the researcher uses numbers, they are using a quantitative measure; if they use a descriptive style, it is qualitative measure; and if they are somewhere in between, it is a mixed method.

 

Quantitative Research

Quantitative research uses numbers to test hypotheses and make predictions by using measured amounts, and ultimately describe an event by using figures. By using numbers, the researcher has the opportunity to use advanced and powerful statistical tests to ensure that the results have a statistical relationship and are not just a fluke observation.

When using quantitative research, the researcher must define what they are measuring. The idea here is to look at a specific attribute or variable. This is referred to as an operational definition. By operationalizing what you are looking for, you are only measuring a particular and relevant thing, which restricts your view to what is relevant. For example, if you are only looking at acts of aggression by physically touching someone, you don't count when someone yells at another person.

A strength of quantitative methods is that, by examining numbers, a certain level of bias is removed. It is hard to argue that one kicking a ball, for instance, is not kicking a ball. When a researcher studies a specific variable that is operationally defined, then the results can be applied to larger populations, making the findings generalizable.

Here's an example: You have been called upon to conduct research on elementary school violence. You go through the process of selecting the school and decide that you will observe the youngsters while at recess. Prior to your observations, you decide you will operationally define violence as one child pushing, shoving, or striking another child during recess. You monitor them for a week and find 50 acts of violence, with an average of 10 a day and a standard deviation of two.

By using quantitative research, you have been able to determine how frequent violent acts occur on a school ground. This can then be generalized to other schools in the area under similar conditions or act as a comparison to other schools in different areas.

 

Qualitative Research

Qualitative research describes the kind and quality of a subject, while interpreting and attempting to understand an event. By using narrative descriptions, the purpose of qualitative research is to give someone a mental picture of what the researcher is seeing. Due to the nature of qualitative research, it is difficult to use statistical procedures to measure kinds and qualities, and this research typically focuses on a few individuals or just a single person.

Qualitative research is dependent on a researcher's personal view and description of a situation. This leads to a certain level of bias and subjectivity in the description. For example, in the schoolyard situation before, what you may see as aggressive, I may see as playful. It's all in the eye of the beholder. The descriptions, however, take on a dynamic and personal account of what is occurring. They are not just tallies of something that occurred, but a story of the individual or group. Going along with this story idea, though, is the issue of a lack of generalizability. The story is a unique description that reveals the dynamic interaction of an individual or group; it limits its ability to be about other people.

Qualitative research is often used when researching a new field or area, a unique interaction between people, or rare or unique conditions. A new field, like studying the interaction between genetics and psychology, would first need to be described so other researchers can follow. Unique interactions between people are studied, for example, when a group of soldiers returning from war are part of a support group. And lastly, rare or unique conditions, like a new diagnosis, must be described so that others can see what you see. In all of these instances, the researcher is looking for patterns, features, and themes.

 

Mixed Methods

Mixed methods represents the middle group, the application of qualitative and quantitative methodologies to fully describe an event. Why doesn't everyone do this? Well, in a way they do. It is extremely difficult to have a purely qualitative or quantitative study. So, there is some overlap between the two, and in the center of it are the true mixed methodologies.

Mixed methods can be used to describe something qualitatively, as in the form of a description of something new or a unique set of circumstances. They also use quantitative mechanics to provide statistically useful information that can be generalized to other situations. An example is a unique blend of medicine and psychology when a study looked into the effects of pesticides on the cognitive development of children. The children's actions and responses to memory and psychological tests were both described and quantified, providing both kinds of useful information.

 

Lesson Summary

Quantitative research looks to test predictions and find statistical relations by using figures. It excels at generalizability, but falls short when it comes to unique or varied responses. Qualitative research attempts to describe a unique and dynamic interaction to the reader. It excels in the area of description, but is subject to researcher bias and flaws. Between the two, there is a mixed method, which attempts to combine the two and take the best of both worlds.

A.  Experiment

B.  Question

C.  Conclusion

D.  Peer Review

A.  Observation

B.  Analysis

C.  Conclusion

D.  Experiment

A.  Experiment

B.  Analysis

C.  Question

D.  Hypothesis

A.  Theory

B.  Observation

C.  Hypothesis

D.  Experiment

A.  Scientists never compete with one another.

B.  Science journals usually require peer review.

C.  Scientists often use creativity.

D.  Scientists often rely on their experience.

A.  Untestable

B.  Falsifiable

C.  Always true

D.  Unverifiable

E.  Always untrue

A.  Peer review

B.  Scientific method

C.  A theory

D.  Scientific research

E.  A hypothesis

A.  Hypothesis

B.  Statistical significance

C.  Scientific Research

D.  Peer review

E.  None of these answers are correct

A.  A hypothesis

B.  Scientific research

C.  Peer review

D.  A theory

E.  Statistical significance

A.  It didn't occur at all

B.  It occurred due to chance

C.  None of these answers are correct

D.  It's likely to have occurred due to chance alone

E.  It is unlikely to have occurred due to chance alone

A.  Exploratory-Explanatory-Descriptive

B.  Descriptive-Exploratory-Explanatory

C.  Descriptive-Explanatory-Exploratory

D.  Exploratory-Descriptive-Explanatory

A.  Explanatory research

B.  Descriptive research

C.  Exploratory research

D.  Extrapolation research

A.  Descriptive research explains what has been learned by using research appropriate language.

B.  Descriptive research attempts to explore and explain the situation while providing additional information about a topic.

C.  Descriptive research provides a statement of how the research was done.

D.  Descriptive research explains what is yet to be learned by stating what needs to be done.

A.  Research which tells us in great detail how the African elephants are killed by ivory poaching activity

B.  Research which tells us how many African elephants have been killed by ivory poaching activity

C.  Research which tells us what will happen to the current habitats of African elephants as a result of ivory poaching activity

D.  Research which tells us the psychological profiles of the ivory poachers who kill African elephants

A.  Exploratory

B.  Explanatory

C.  Descriptive

D.  Neurosurgical

A.  Experimental

B.  Cohort

C.  Observational

D.  None of these answers are correct

E.  Research paper

 

A.  All of these answers are correct

B.  Quazi-research

C.  Experimental research

D.  Correlational research

E.  Negative research

 

A.  The one that is being manipulated by the researcher

B.  The one not being manipulated by the researcher

C.  None of these answers are correct

D.  Is equivalent to the dependent variable

E.  Is not used in experimental studies

A.  Supposedly depends on the independent variable

B.  Is independent of anything else

C.  Is being manipulated directly by the researcher

D.  Is like the 'cause' in a potential cause and effect relationship

E.  None of these answers are correct

A.  Observational research

B.  All of these answers are correct

C.  Spying

D.  Laboratory research

E.  Participant research

1. What type of research is the following: 

The juveniles primarily avoided each other during their interactions. However, when contact did occur, there was some aggression noted ('squaring off'=5; verbal threats=3). However, after each interaction the juveniles would then separate and continue to avoid each other. 

A.  Mixed Methods 

B.  Qualitative 

C.  Generalizable 

D.  Quantitative 

 

2. A researcher is studying the behavior of animals in difficult desert conditions in Africa. He is measuring how many times they eat per day, analyzing how much they are active during extremely hot temperatures, and how much water they drink per day. He hopes to understand what they need to survive in such a harsh climate. Based on the concept of generalization, which of the following can the results of this study be applied on? 

A.  The results can be applied to the behavior of all animals, regardless of the climate they live in. 

B.  They can't be applied to another area, as generalization can only be used in qualitative studies. 

C.  The results can only be applied to the environment that the researcher has personally studied. 

D.  They can be applied to a similar environment, such as a desert climate in South America. 

3. Why is using an operational definition sometimes problematic in research? 

A.  Because it depends upon what you perceive as the relevant attribute or variable, thus restricting your view 

B.  Because it allows researchers to use non-relevant arguments when conducting qualitative analysis, thus generalizing the issue 

C.  Because it allows the researcher to use both quantitative and qualitative forms of analysis 

D.  Because it causes problems in overgeneralizing what you are trying to measure when using quantitative analysis

 4. Identify in which of the following examples would the use of qualitative research be most likely useful: 

A.  When we are trying to predict the future value of stock indexes using various variables such as inflation, economic growth and the exchange rate 

B.  When we are trying to detect problems in the world economy by understanding the relationship between the relevant variables 

C.  After detecting a rise of greenhouse gas emission, prompting the need to identify which factors caused it and how influential they were 

D.  After a discovery of ancient remains that provides sociology and archaeology with a unique new opportunity