Name: Iqra Ramzan
Student ID: RAM19127405
Introduction to Psychology
Psychology is known to be the study of the mind. A scientific study of behaviour and knowledge on
people that psychologists research. It is seen as an experimental test of common sense. By the end of
this essay, scientific methodology will be explained, two commonly used scientific research methods will
be discussed. The application of two approaches in psychology to an aspect of human behaviour will be
evaluated. To end off, ethical issues raised by psychological research will be discussed.
Science is a way of thinking, it involves testable explanations, acquiring knowledge followed up by
scientific methodology. Scientific methodology in other words is conducting research. It is a way of
making observations, collecting data, developing hypotheses, testing predictions and analysing results.
Scientific methodology starts off with unbiased observations. It is backed with sensory evidence, which
allows us to build a picture of how the world operates. There are two main theories to explain scientific
methodology, they are empirical method and hypothetico deductive method. Empirical method was
discovered by Sir Francis Bacon (1561-1621). There are two stages to empirical method, them being one,
gathering data through experience and second: inductions of patterns and data. On the other hand,
hypothethico deductive method was discovered by Karl Pepper (1935), this method includes theories
and laws about how the world should come. It is used to generate and test hypothesis.
Psychologists use a variety of scientific methods. Hypotheses are tested using these scientific research
methods, laboratory experiments and participant observations.
To sum up participant observation, it is known as the process by which a researcher joins a group of
people who share the same identity in order to gain insight into the environment by gathering data on
real behaviours and vocabulary (Walker, 2010). Coolican (2009) states, this reduces the likelihood of
gross misrepresentations, which may occur when participants do not join the group. According to
Coolican, there are various degrees of involvement, such as being an observer who is not concealed but
not expressly stated. For instance, a researcher can perform research by being a member of a school's
teaching staff, and the other members of the staff are aware of this (Coolican, 2009). Festinger et al.
used this form of research approach in 1956 to investigate how members of a religious cult act and hold
beliefs. Festinger (1956) used undercover observation to study the Seekers' cult, in which researchers
pretended to believe in the cult's ideals in order to gain access to the group. Not only did the
researchers secretly observe, but some even lead group meetings. One benefit of participant
observation is that it improves data collection and analysis while also encouraging the development of
new hypotheses (de Munk, Sobo, 1998, p.8). This is due to the fact that participant observation allows
the researcher to analyse a situation with an open mind, and new scenarios may be analysed when they
occur (Revise Sociology, 2016). The downside of participant observation is that the researcher might be
uninterested in what happens behind closed doors, so key informants must be counted on. The Mead-
Freeman dispute, for example, describes how bias can arise when choosing key informants that are
close to the researcher's personality and hypothesis because different researchers obtain different
understandings of what was observed (de Munk, Sobo, 1998).
Laboratory experiments, on the other hand, are monitored settings in which the researcher decides
where the experiment will take place, when it will take place, what methods will be used, and who will
participate (Simply Psychology, 2012). Milgram's experiment, for example, demonstrated how far
, Name: Iqra Ramzan
Student ID: RAM19127405
people would go to follow a command if it meant hurting another human. Once participants were
assigned to their positions – learner or instructor – the teacher would administer an electric shock to the
learner any time he or she made a mistake, gradually raising the intensity of the shock (Milgram, 1974).
The ability to monitor variables that can be used to decide what is best for the population is a strength
in laboratory experiments, because the experiment can be replicated so the methods of instructions
would be available (Writing at Colorado State University, n.d.). This control helps researchers to
determine a cause-and-effect relationship between the independent and dependent variables, which is
made possible because variables can be accurately measured and modified with instruments available in
a laboratory environment, which is difficult to do in other settings such as field testing (Tutor2u, n.d.).
The immoral treatment of the participants was one of the experiment's drawbacks. For example, many
of the participants may have been traumatised because they thought their behaviour had caused
distress to a stranger (Kleinman, 2012, p.46). Also, demand characteristics may occur, in which
participants alter their behaviour in response to what the researcher desires, causing results to be
inaccurate. Finally, the researcher can influence the participants' behaviour by manipulating their
perceptions, which can influence the interactions between the pair and affect the final results (Tutor2u,
n.d.).
Aggression is described by psychologists as "behaviour intended to harm another person who does not
wish to be harmed" (Baron and Richardson, 1994, p.28). Theorists of social learning emphasise the
importance of social meaning and claim that people will learn from watching others. This is particularly
true when aggressive behaviours are shown in the workplace and the effect that this has (Carey et al.,
2009). Bandura, for example, proposed in 1961 that people learn by watching and imitating the
behaviours of others (Association for Psychological Science, 2012). Children were exposed to an adult
punching an inflatable clown called Bobo as part of the experiment. Children who observed an adult
beating up a doll were likely to mimic the same degree of violence until the adult had left the room.
Children who saw a non-threatening adult or no adult at all, on the other hand, were less aggressive
toward Bobo (Association for Psychological Science, 2012). Because of its versatility, this theory has the
ability to explain variations in a child's behaviour. Since children learn in a social setting, this suggests
that if the child's environment changes, so will the child's behaviour. In a relaxed home environment, a
child will struggle to obey the rules, but in a stricter school setting, he or she would have no problems
(Classroom, 2018).
Furthermore, the social learning theory ignores the biological perspective, since there are hereditary
factors, such as psychological disorders, that can lead to violent behaviour in children (DiLalla and
Gottesman, 1991). Beardslee et al. (1996), for example, performed a study on depression in the family
and discovered that it was a major indicator of emotional and behavioural issues in children. The
biological approach, on the other hand, indicates that the amygdala, a large part of the brain, regulates
aggression (BCcampus Open Publishing, n.d.). The biological approach to understanding violence has the
benefit of being very scientific because researchers use systematic observational methods, and the
findings are generally accurate and realistic. Consequently, the study is valuable in the quest for
therapies for a variety of psychiatric disorders (Verywell Mind, 2021). However, this approach has the
downside of being nomothetic and reductionist because it ignores the fact that individuals are special
and assumes that the ideas it creates apply to all. The General Adaptation Syndrome, for example,
assumes that everyone reacts to stress in the same way, but it ignores the fact that some people might
have more support than others (George State University, n.d.). Furthermore, the biological approach
