I don't want to talk about this generally, rather I want to talk about this in the context of people who don't believe in Psychology, who think that Psychology is just a common sense. They claim that most of what Psychologists study involve things that we can predict on our own. They will say that they knew it all along when Psychologists said that studies show that people are less likely to help when there are more people in the place where the emergency happens. They will say they knew it all along when Psychologists reported that symmetry is one of the major factors of attractiveness. If these people knew it all along, then why is there a need for psychology and psychological studies?
The reasons I outlined below:
1) Bell curve in statistic (or the normal distribution)
When Psychologists conduct a study, they would like to know how the curve in the graph looks like. The most usual curve that they are more likely to find out is the normal distribution along the graph - or as they call it the bell curve. The bell curve is when a distribution of individuals' scores is even, creating a curve that resembles a bell.
What does this mean? This means that Psychologists do not claim on extremity, they acknowledge the fact that there will always be: 1) events that are likely to occur, and 2) events that are less likely to occur, but could occur nonetheless. Take a look at the picture of a bell curve above, the one in the middle is event that is more likely to occur, and the extreme ends are the proportion of events that are less likely to occur. So, the aim of psychological studies is to inform you which event/outcome that would most likely to occur when a behavior is performed. So, the phenomenon that help is more likely to be offered when there are fewer people in an emergency place is the event that is reported from psychological studies that is located in the middle of the bell curve. The end extreme might tell you that even when there are fewer people in the emergency place, but someone decides to help anyway. So, it's an exception. But it's less likely to occur depending on various factors.
2) Our "knowing it all along" is a 50-50 chance of being correct
When you have an assumption in your mind of how things would be, you have a 50-50 chance of your assumption being correct. And when you find out that your assumption is actually correct, this is where you profess so gloriously, "I knew it all along, I don't know why there is a need to study this..." But when you are wrong, you either lie and say that you knew it all along too, or you just keep silent, trying not to put your wrongness into spotlight.
Rather than making a random assumption and waiting for your 50% chance of being correct, Psychological studies make an informed decision by looking at the bell curve and see what event that is more likely to occur. When the outcome is what is predicted to occur, then it is not them knowing it all along, it is informed. But when the outcome is not as predicted to occur, then there must have been other factors that chip in. For example, event when you found out that someone actually decides to help even when there are fewer people in the emergency case, there might have been a personality factor, personal factor, or environmental factors that lead to the decision of that person to help. So, this leads to another study that can help in future decision making. The point is, it is always informed and does not come from "gut".
So, these are the reasons to convince you skeptics out there that psychology is a legitimate science because it uses legitimate and rigorous research method to study about something. It might be about the everyday life, but psychology is the distinction between assuming and predicting.
No comments:
Post a Comment