Study guide
Complete LIFESCI 2A03 Notes
- Vak
- Instelling
Complete LIFESCI 2A03 notes including all relevant lecture annotations, in-depth figure analysis, and step-by-step explanation of difficult concepts. Received an A in the course.
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 3 van de 28 pagina's
Voorbeeld 3 van de 28 pagina's
In winkelwagen
In winkelwagen
gesponsord bericht van onze partner
Verkoper
Volgen
dhanotas
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Scientific Method: Lecture 1Characteristics of Science
• Based on empirical knowledge
◦ knowledge derived from observation or experimentation
‣ data collection (quantitative or qualitative)
◦ observations - often the starting point of a scientific investigation
• Provides rational/natural explanations
◦ seeking explanations in terms of rational/natural causes
◦ very few questions are off-limits in science - but the answers science can provide are limited to
the natural world
• Repeatable and reproducible (and reliable)
◦ scientific results are always subject to confirmation by the same or other investigators
‣ makes the study more reliable/powerful
◦ if experiments can be repeated/reproduced via a reliable method/procedure -> confirmation ->
reliable findings
◦ sometimes due to impracticality, temporal difficulties, or expense, it's not possible to repeat/
reproduce experiments
• Testable
◦ a good theory isn't enough - must be testable via experiments
◦ for an idea to be testable, it must generate specific expectations
‣ a set of observations/results are expected if idea true
‣ same expected if false
◦ sometimes to test ideas, the development of new tools may be required
• Involves experimentation
◦ an organized and detailed series of steps to validate or reject a hypothesis
• Generality of principles
◦ science seeks generality of principles
‣ generality is the establishment of universal principles that express how the natural world
works under certain conditions
The Scientific Method
1. define/identify a problem/question (usually arises from observation)
2. formulate a hypothesis (a potential explanation)
3. test the hypothesis - make observations or perform experiments and collect data
4. analyze data/results
5. does the data support the hypothesis? - if no, make new hypothesis/experiments
6. draw conclusions
7. communicate results
Case Study: Human Chromosome Count
• in 1923, Theophilus Painter reported that there were 48 chromosomes in a human cell
◦ had serial sections of testicular cells in metaphase and chromosomes were clumped together
and curled in
• this number was believed and accepted for 33 years - scientists used the same technique he used to
experiment
,• in 1950's new techniques were used such as hypotonic treatment, treatment with colchicine and
ideograms to count chromosomes
◦ 1952 - Tijo and Levan reported 46 chromosomes
• so what was wrong with Painter's approach? - he was only working with samples from a single patient
◦ we don't know if he had any chromosome aberrations
◦ single chromosome could have been counted as 2
• people often see what they expect/want to see - this is bias
Scientific Method: Lecture 2
Reasoning
Inductive Deductive
• inductive: summarizes a set of observations and
serves to provide predictions about unseen
events
◦ Ex. this ice is cold, therefore ALL ice is cold
• deductive: going beyond formulation of
hypotheses formed by induction & test if correct
◦ Ex. if all green apples are sour, then this
green apple will be sour
The Hypothesis
• statement or idea proposed as tentative explanation to a research question and the account for
observations
◦ question -> hypothesis -> prediction -> experiment
• should be:
◦ simple
◦ specific
◦ stated in advance
• it leads to predictions about the result of intervention
Testing the Hypothesis
• the formulation and testing of hypothesis is the basis of any scientific or rational inquiry
• deductive syllogism: hypothesis followed by a prediction
◦ i.e. "If (hypothesis) ..., then (prediction)
• Ex. hypothesis: all swans are white
◦ prediction: swans that live in America should be white
◦ If all swans are white, American swans should also be white
Prediction and Hypothesis Testing
• predictions can be verified or refuted by analyzing the data
◦ accumulation of supporting experimental evidence (i.e. consistent with your prediction) will
strengthen a hypothesis but will never let us know for certain that the hypothesis is true
‣ therefore, you fail to reject the hypothesis
◦ a contradictory observation to your prediction (i.e. if the results you obtain are inconsistent
, with your prediction) allow us to know for (almost) certain that a hypothesis is incorrect
‣ therefore you reject the hypothesis
Null vs Alternative Hypothesis
• Null hypothesis (H0): usually a statement of 'no effect' or 'no difference'
◦ a hypothesis that there is no significant different between two sets of results, e.g.:
‣ between observations from a control group and experimental group
‣ between observations of two groups in two different conditions
‣ between a set of predicted results and the observed results
• Alternative hypothesis (Ha): hypothesis that is contrary to the null hypothesis
◦ usually the research hypothesis
◦ this is the hypothesis that you are trying to
'prove'
• as seen in the table, a type I error is one in which the BoB
null hypothesis is rejected, but in reality we should
have failed to reject
• a type II error is one in which we fail to reject the null
when we should have rejected it
Case Study: Brain Freeze
• Ha: the rate at which you eat ice cream affects whether you will experience an ice cream headache
• Ho: there is no effect of the rate of eating ice cream on the incidence of ice cream headaches
◦ i.e. there is no statistical difference in either observed effects (they both either cause headaches
or they don't)
• The experiment: 145 middle school students were randomly placed into 2 groups:
◦ Eat slowly group: eat ice cream in over 30 seconds (100mL)
◦ Eat fast group: eat it in 5 seconds (100mL)
• Results: found that in slow group, 9% had headaches whereas fast group 27% has headaches
◦ a chi-square test can be done to see if these values are statistically significant
• Drawing conclusions:
◦ if researchers rejected the Ho: data supports Ha or is consistent with the Ha
◦ if failed to rejected the Ho: they didn't detect a difference between groups and there is no
evidence to support Ha
‣ this basically means they accepted the null hypothesis
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper dhanotas. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €14,30. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 78291 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen