September 2011 Archives

Ghost Hunters are Victims of Confirmation Bias

| 1 Comment

In the last couple years there have been a series of new ghost and paranormal TV shows. I find the shows interesting, but I am also a skeptic. Lilienfeld pointed out in our book the concept of Confirmation Bias and I believe the hosts/viewers of these shows have fallen victim to it.


Confirmation bias as defined by Lilienfeld is "The tendency to seek out evidence that supports our beliefs and deny, dismiss, or distort evidence that contradicts them."

In the case of Ghost Hunters the hosts of the shows tend to point out the smallest anomalies on audio and videotapes. Most of these video anomalies can be explained by lens defects, dust, and digital malfunctions. The hosts however, take what can be explained by normal incidents and present the "evidence" as proof that ghosts exist because it supports their beliefs.

The hosts are also showing signs of overconfidence by thinking that their video and audio evidence is perfect proof that paranormal events exist. In reality many more tests especially in controlled situations would need to be conducted.

Although it is obvious to me that the hosts have become victims of confirmation bias I am not sure how they could test their beliefs in paranormal activities. Part of their belief is that paranormal activities can only happen in specific locations. By conducting an experiment in a location that is rumored to be haunted brings in bias to the experiment.

Nature versus nurture: what a depressing debate!

| 1 Comment

The debate about nature and nurture excite my curiosity. Is our behavior more influenced by our genes than by the environment in which we grow up? Or is it the opposite? In both cases it is depressing to know that our free will does not really exist! To illustrate this debate, we can focus on only one domain of study: intelligence; and try to answer the two previous questions in the domain of intelligence. What would be your answer?

If you answer yes at the first question, you think that intelligence is mostly influenced by our genes. And you can make a good case for this assumption. You can use the IQ test studies made by Thomas Bouchard from the University of Minnesota and computed by Ridley in his book Genome: The autobiography of a species in 23 chapters. We know from these studies that twins reared together or apart have almost the same scores, whereas adopted children living together have totally different scores. Some studies also show that our spatial and reasoning abilities are mostly due to our genes. So if we take logic to extremes we could say that we cannot do anything to improve our school scores. Bad luck if the nature has not been nice with our brain capacities.

But if you answer yes to the second question, you also have good arguments to support your idea. And you can show us the work of Bouchard and Segal (Handbook of Intelligence: Theories, Measurements, and Applications, 1985) and Liungman (What is IQ? Intelligence, Heredity and Environment, 1975). They both found that intelligence varies with at least 21 factors. Among these 21 factors, there are the social group of the parental home, the average of books read, the degree of parental rigidity, or the number of siblings. So it is not all over at the birth. Everybody can improve his brain capacities; intelligence seems to have a large reaction range. But which are your chances to get high scores at the IQ test if you live in a poor family, socially disadvantaged, with no books at home and parents who are lax with you? They are low. Therefore kids living in socially disadvantaged families have fewer chances to get good results at school than other kids from families with a higher social status.

So the tabula rasa theorem of John Locke is finally maybe not better for the human being than the behavior geneticists' point of view.

That video that I found on Youtube shifts the nature/nurture debate in the domain of criminal behavior:

Bouchard, T. J., & Segal, N. L. (1985). Environment and IQ. In B.B. Wolman (Ed.). Handbook of Intelligence: Theories, Measurements, and Applications (pp. 391-464). New York: John Wiley.
Liungman, C.G. (1975). What is IQ? Intelligence, Heredity and Environment. London: Gordon Cremonesi.
Ridley, M. (1999). Genome: The autobiography of a species in 23 chapters. London: Fourth Estate Ltd.

Twitter Says

| 1 Comment

An article was posted today on Yahoo news by blogger Adriana Diaz claiming that "Study Says Twitter Can Gauge Moods." The evidence for this claim came from researchers at Cornell University who examined 500 million tweets from more than 2 million people in 84 countries. The article indicated that between the hours of 6 am and 9 am people are very positive, that moods decline throughout the day and at around 4 pm moods pick up, weekends included. They determined this claim through the words people used in their tweets such as "awesome," "agree," "annoyed," and "afraid," swear words as well.
This claim however cannot be proven fact because it does not follow all principles of scientific thinking that are crucial when determining how reliable a claim is. The first principle it defies is ruling out rival hypothesis. Researchers do not know whether or not another variable could have caused these emotions; whether it is that they drank caffeine in the morning that boosted their mood, or whether the morning and nighttime is the only time of day they were presented with an opportunity to tweet. For that, we are not able to reject other probable explanations. Secondly, this claim goes against the principle of correlation isn't causation. The argument that the words people use in their tweets determine the mood they are in is not necessary true for many reasons. First, Tweeter is a social media network that connects individuals over the Internet, which means anything can be said behind closed doors whether or not it is truthful. Secondly, because certain words are used at certain times of the day does not accurately display one's mood. There is no operational definition or factually for what words represent what moods; words can have many different meanings and the tone of these words are unknown. Thus, the connection between moods and words over an Internet site cannot be truly demonstrated.
One alternate explanation for the findings could be that individuals tweet what they think their followers would like to hear. Harvard psychologist, Dan Gildbert, states that "Tweets may tell us more about what the tweeter thinks the follower wants to hear than about what the tweeter is actually feeling" (The New York Times). The principle that is most useful for evaluating this claim is falsiability. This claim does not try and explain every tweet but instead can be used as a testable hypothesis.

Rhythms of Life :-)

| No Comments

In next week's reading assignment, you will come across the term "circadian rhythm." In the news today is a study that analyzed Tweets from across the world. The researchers found that emotional tone (or mood) followed similar patterns across the day, weeks, and seasons -- in other words circadian rhythms apply to mood. This finding regarding circadian rhythms and moods is not novel, but the method of data collection and the wide range of nationalities, large sample size, etc. make this study stand out. However, as with all studies, there are limitations; for example, only Tweets in English were included and the text analysis program is not sophisticated enough to distinguish the context in which the words are used (e.g., swear words might not always mean a person is angry). As I read this article, I found myself disturbed by the method of data collection. While analyzing social media content could provide valuable research insights and large sample sizes, is doing so a violation of privacy of those who post? Or is it acceptable that if you feel comfortable enough Tweeting or posting on Facebook for the general public to view, you have given up your right to privacy? I'm not a Twitter user, but for those of you are, did you have to agree to have your Tweets used for research purposes when you signed up for an account? Or is there some way to "opt out" of having your data used in this way, similar to being able to decide not to participate in a research study during any time?

Hair and Fingernails continuing to grow after death

| 1 Comment

I'm sure most people have heard this myth at least once or twice, "Your hair and fingernails continue to grow, even after you are dead." This creepy myth, fortunately, is not true. I found a description of the myth on Hair and nails both require living cells to grow, and so it is not possible for them to grow after a person has died. The reason they appear to be growing is because the body dehydrates after death. During dehydration, the skin around the nails and on the head shrivels and pulls back, making the nails and hair appear longer. However, they have remained the same length, it is the skin that has shrunk. This video explains all of that:

Using the scientific thinking principle Falsifiability, this theory can be proven wrong, as both of these things require living cells to grow. We can also look at this theory with Scientific Thinking Principle 1, Ruling out rival hypotheses. When looking at other possible explanations we can see that there is a better explanation for what's going on: the process of dehydration. Since this explanation can be proved and is a much simpler explanation(Occam's Razor) we can conclude that the theory that hair and nails continue to grow after death is not true.


Thinking Sick, Be Sick?

| 1 Comment

After reading the materials on placebo phenomenon, I was impressed by the fact that some people's believe of taking the "real medicine" can actually result improvement to their condition. And patients' reactions after taking the "dummy pill" can be greatly influence by the suggestions and cautions on its effectiveness given by the experimenters, just as a sugar pill may cure your headache simply because someone told you it's going to work, it may makes your symptoms worse if you were told otherwise, in other words, "thinking sick, be sick."side effect.jpgOpposite to the placebo effect, a nocebo effect is an ill-effect caused by the suggestion or belief that something is harmful. An experiment showed that more than two-thirds of 34 college students developed headaches when told that a non-existent electrical current passing through their heads could produce a headache. In another experiment, about 20% of patients report uncomfortable side effects after taking a sugar pill in controlled clinical trials of a drug -- "and even higher percentage if they are asked."

But I fail to see whether there is enough indications in these two examples show that the ill-reactions are actually cause by the non-existent electrical current and the sugar pill. Participants' discomfort may due to other factors such as the different experiment environment, warning from experimenters, insufficient lighting, etc. Anything perceive by the participants of a study "may be imbued with rich meaning for them and have profound effects for good or for ill on their response to treatment." As an important scientific thinking principle reminds us: "Correlation Isn't Causation." In my opinion, "thinking sick, be sick" is not that simple as it may appear.

My question remained after the reading is: what measures can we take to prevent the placebo/nocebo effect from happening or minimize its influence?

"nocebo and nocebo effect", unknown author,, Last updated on 01-Mar-2011
"The Flip Side of Placebos: The Nocebo Effect", By John Cloud
"The nocebo response" (This article was first printed in the March 2005 issue of the Harvard Mental Health Letter.)

Shaving Hair Makes It Grow Thicker

| 1 Comment

shaving-legs.jpgI have had this told to me since I can remember - that shaving your hair makes it grow back thicker. It's a myth that has caused many women to turn to alternative hair removal methods for fear of growing thicker hair. I have also found it on Snopes. After doing some research, I have found that this is,indeed, a myth. However, the hairs do grow back more noticeable than before. It is true that after shaving your body hair, it may feel slightly rougher or coarser than you remember. This is due to the fact that hair that grows naturally have a wispy, tapered tip whereas hair that grows after being shaved have a rectangular, blunt tip. This makes the hair seem thicker and darker than before you shaved even though in truth, the width of the hair is the same. According to scientific thinking principle 3, a claim is only meaningful if it is falsifiable. In this case, the claim is falsifiable because it can be tested. In fact, it has been tested and proven otherwise. Apart from that, the study is replicable as all findings based on the matter have been the same.

Other than that, in my opinion, having hair grow after a few days of not having hair at all will definitely make the hair seem more noticeable. An analogy for that is coming out into a bright area from a dark room. Everything will seem extremely bright because your eyes aren't accustomed to the light yet. In the same way, you are used to having no hair so that when hair grows, it seems extremely coarse and dark relative to what it was before. This could be another explanation as to why hair SEEMS to grow back thicker after it's shaved.

Naturalistic Observation

| 1 Comment

Naturalistic observation is a research method that has the researchers watch and take notes of the subject in a natural, "real world" setting. This method helps to determine how the subject would react in a particular situation and it would give the researcher an insight into their behaviors in the "real world" or their daily life. I believe that naturalistic observation is important because it is a great way to eliminate bias in a study. It offers a clear image of the results of a study without any manipulation.
In this study of naturalistic observation, you would be able to watch how the other pedestrians react to the man being pushed over from the bike rider. The researcher would be able to watch the type of behaviors that the other people are exhibiting because it was in public. This study would be very high in external validity because the study would be taking place in a real-world setting and the results would be reflected on the true behaviors of the subjects.
I am curious how the researcher would know if the subjects were acting with bias or not. What if the subject was aware that they were part of a naturalistic observation study? It would seem that the entire study would contain false information. How do you keep the subject from knowing that they're part of a study? How could you become part of the scene as a researcher without interrupting the situation for naturalistic observation?

Can Drinking Coffee Decrease Risk of Depression?

| No Comments

smiling-coffee.jpg A recent study showed that drinking 2 - 3 cups of caffeinated coffee per day might lower women's risk of depression. Unlike most articles in the media, this article does a good job of pointing out limitations to the research. For instance, it clearly states that this study only looked at the association between coffee consumption and depression, but cannot prove that coffee consumption is the cause of lower depression risk. Sound familiar? Also, replication is mentioned (somewhat) because these results fall in line with previous research. Rival causes also are examined for why this relationship might exist. For example, the study was done using nurses as participants and that might affect the generalizability of the results.

One thing that was unclear to me from reading this article was whether coffee is one possible cause of the lower risk of depression or if caffeine consumption is the possible cause. The article mentions that other caffeinated beverages were studied, but only reports on the effects of coffee... Notice the care that is taken in the discussion of coffee as a cause -- there is mention that perhaps those with depression are less likely to drink more coffee. Still despite all the evidence that coffee has great health benefits, this non-coffee drinker has not been convinced to start drinking it -- I dislike the taste too much!

Right or Left Brained?

| 1 Comment

One article I found interesting in the text is whether or not a person can be right or left brained. If a person was right brained, they were thought to be more creative, artistic, and emotional. If a person was considered to be left brained, they were more logical, scholarly, and analytical. The book even notes that people have tried to make political comparisons to this theory. According to the text, much more research needs to be done before this claim can be supported. I personally believe that there is a correlation between how your brain works and what kind of personality you have. For me, I am extremely creative and artistic, and I don't like to over analyze things. My friend however, loves math and science and she thinks critically about everything. I believe that there has to be some sort of connection between your brain and the way you think and act. Whether or not its right vs left I am not sure, but there has to be something!

I found this fun little quiz that can tell you if you are right and left brained. Were the results what you thought they would be? (Mine were - I always knew I was "right brained")

Bryan Tabery, Placebo Effect and its use in the Medical Field

| 1 Comment

The placebo effect has been researched extensively within the medical field and many breakthroughs have been made. First, the placebo effect is improvement just from the expectation of improvement. In 1957, a patient known as Mr. Wright by the doctors had cancer the size of oranges in his lymph nodes, and every treatment had previously been unsuccessful. As a last resort they gave him Krebiozen, an anti-cancer cure shot. Three days late his cancer in his lymph nodes' size had been cut in half. They tried Krebiozen to many other cancer patients, but to no avail (Niemi par. 2).ff_placebo_effect_f.jpg The placebo effects can be just as successful, if not more, than of actual drugs. While reading an article from NaturalNews, "Placebo effect should be embraced as real medicine." I was introduced to some the astounding breakthroughs with the placebo effect being used at medicine. "In the last 10 years we've made tremendous strides in demonstrating the biological veracity of the placebo effect," said Ted Kaptchuk of Harvard Medical School. "The frontier is, how do we utilize what is clearly an important phenomenon in a way that's consistent with patient-practitioner trust, and informed consent (Gutierrez par. 2)? In most aspects, it can be very unethical and dangerous for doctors to prescribe placebo instead of actual medicine. Obviously, you can't tell them you're giving the patient fake pills and have the patient sign consent. My main question after reading this article is; what is the solution to being able to give patients placebo pills, which can cure faster than regular prescriptions, instead of regular medicine while being legal?

Gutierrez, David. "Placebo Effect Should Be Embraced as Real Medicine." Natural Health News. 16 Oct. 2010. Web. 26 Sept. 2011. .
Niemi, Maj-Britt. "Placebo Effect: A Cure in the Mind: Scientific American." Science News, Articles and Information | Scientific American. 25 Feb. 2009. Web. 26 Sept. 2011. .

Blog 1 Example 2

| No Comments

How I would respond to the prompt today (as promised in Example 1 that I posted last week):

chickenmultiple.jpgThe area of psychology that interests me most is psychometrics (testing and measurement), followed by personality and clinical psychology. Individual differences underlie all three of these areas. If there was no variation in behavior, there would be no reason to study psychology! I am most interested in applied testing and measurement. I have worked on studies assessing the psychometric properties of alcohol abuse and dependence scales for men and women (and men vs. women), psychopathy scales,and ability tests. My most recent work has been on determining the dimensionality of items and tests. In testing, it would be more efficient (and more realistic) to measure more than one ability at a time with an item or test, but many popular psychometric techniques assume primarily single dimension (or unidimensional) items and/or tests.

My interest in psychometrics began at an early age. I was a very good math student and wondering why classmates struggled with math or experienced great anxiety over math tests. This lead me to wonder why differences in ability exist and how one could best measure these differences. I am still fascinated by the constructs of math and test anxiety. Although my siblings and I all are good at math, our mother experiences great anxiety over the simplest of math problems! From having students discuss math anxiety in previous classes, it sounds like the causes are primarily situational (e.g., having a bad teacher or bad experience with math). This video seems to agree:
I would love to do research on math and test anxiety and am filing that away for a later time!

One thing that has surprised me most about this class is that even though it has been a long time since I've taken intro psych, the core concepts and definitions are the same. I'm looking forward to reacquainting myself with the overall field of psychology and getting out of my specialized psychometric bubble!

Attention International Students!

| No Comments

Longitudinal study of international students' adjustment trajectories

Dear international student,

We are associated with the Counseling Psychology program in the Department of Psychology, at the University of Minnesota. We are writing to invite you to participate in a study examining the cross-cultural adaptation of international students.

You qualify for this study if:

*You identify as an international student whose first language is NOT English.

*You have just started your first semester at the University of Minnesota.

If you choose to participate, you will complete five online surveys - three this semester and two next semester. The first survey will take about 20 minutes to complete and the other three will each take about 10-15 minutes to complete. You will receive a $5 Target gift card each time for the first 3 surveys you complete. You will receive a $10 Target gift card for 4th and 5th survey completion. If you complete all 5 surveys, you will receive a total of $35 in gift card. If you are in a participating psychology class, for this semester only, you have an option to receive 1 REP point each time instead of a $5 gift card (maximum of 3 REP points).

You can withdraw your participation at any time without any negative consequences. Participation is completely voluntary and confidential.The survey questions ask about your background information, your experience of using English as a non-native language, what it is like to live in the US, and your feelings about yourself and your life.

Anticipated results could inform programs for building multicultural sensitivity on campus and raising coping skills of international students during the cross-cultural adaptation process.

The link for the survey is:

** You MUST sign in to your U of M Gmail account in order to access the survey. Only your U of M Gmail account will work for this survey. Please take the survey right away.

This link will direct you to a full informed consent document that outlines the study in more detail.

Please feel free to contact the principal investigator, Reiko Hirai, at should you have any questions or concerns.

Thank you in advance for your time and participation.

Reiko Hirai, Patricia Frazier, and Moin Syed

Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota

Is Stress Contagious within Families?

| No Comments

stressed-out-child.jpgIllnesses, such as colds and the flu, are easily transferable between parents and kids, but is stress? Today's article claims that kids can "catch" stress from parents. While I'm sure parental stress has some impact on children's well-being, is it the only factor that might contribute to children feeling stressed? This article seems to place emphasis on the environmental components of stress (e.g., parental verbal cues, "vibes") instead of assessing potential biological causes -- the old nature vs. nurture debate. In addition to environmental cues, could children of stressed parents be stressed out because these kids share biological tendencies toward stress? Yes, parents face a lot of stress in today's world, but don't kids face pressures, too? As a parents, I've heard and read a great deal about over-scheduled children (sports, school, other activities) and know that there is increased pressure for children to perform well in school. So, could parental stress be the only contributing factor to childhood stress? If not, why doesn't the article discuss alternative reasons for why children are stressed out? Perhaps this is an article that makes parents feel guilty about not being "perfect," which, oddly enough, would increase parental stress levels...

Blog #1 - Social Psychology

| 1 Comment


Personally, I'm most interested in the aspect of Social Psychology. I've always been truly perplexed by how people communicate with each other, and why I naturally fit with certain personalities but clash with others, or why certain people act differently when put into different situations. A method that I've come across that is used often in social psychology is a process called "reflected appraisal process", in which someone imagines how others view them. It occurs to me that this happens much more than anyone realizes, and I personally never knew it had a legitimate title and process of thinking. I think it's defining of someone's self-image whether they are truly concerned with how people view them, or are determined to prove that they "don't care what others think". It's an interesting notion and one that I'd like to research further, because it first appears simpler than it actually is. I wonder whether there is any biological evidence that would cause a person to be more naturally curious or aware of their social environment, or whether it's more of a nature vs. nurture argument.

Science Fiction --> Science Reality?

| 1 Comment

inception-uc-berkeley-scientists-turn-brain-waves-into-real-images.jpgLook at these pictures -- do they look similar? Can you believe that a computer recreated the image on the right using a brain scan from a person watching a clip of the image to the left? Previously, such reconstruction existed only in science fiction, but using fMRI, which has been discussed in your text, and a computer fed a lot of YouTube clips, researchers have been able to reconstruct movie scenes shown to participants. The downside is that the participants had to sit in the fMRI machines for hours on end... However, as this technique becomes better developed over time, amazing -- and perhaps, frightening -- implementations of this technology could materialize. Next week in class and discussion, we will be learning more about vision and processing of stimuli, which might put into greater context how remarkable this research is. What could be beneficial about this breakthrough? What could be harmful? Could there be ethical issues with using such techniques?

Blog 1 example 1

| No Comments

This is how I would have written blog 1 as my 18-year-old, second semester freshman self taking PSY101 (I'll also write an example as to how my current self would reply to the prompt):

baby girl.jpgThe area of psychology that interests me most is developmental psychology. I have a baby cousin that I babysit occasionally when I go home. It has been enjoyable to watch her change in between visits home. I found this video about object permanence; while my cousin is not quite old enough to exhibit object permanence, I look forward to testing out the concept the next time I visit her! It might be fun to hide objects on her and watch her reaction. At her age (approximately 8 months old), if I replicated an object permanence "experiment" over and over, I should get the same result. She simply is not old enough to realize that out of sight does not mean the object disappears! It amazes me that babies can be "fooled" by the world and watching them learn and change over time is fascinating!

I am looking forward to learning more about development, intelligence, and personality in this course. Differences among people in areas such as intelligence and personality intrigue me. I wonder what causes the differences and how such differences contribute to decision-making. Are these differences due to biological causes, environmental causes, or both? How do intelligence and personality change over the lifespan? Can they change much or is there a fixed-point value for people? How do psychologist measure intelligence and personality, especially because these concepts seem to have multiple components?

*Of course, now my interest in developmental psychology mainly is due to this guy: rsd4.jpg

Does intuition = belief in God?

| No Comments

gut.jpgHow would you answer this question -- "A bat and ball cost $1.10 total. The bat costs $1 more than the ball. How much does the ball cost?" Your answer could be related to whether you believe in God. This article discusses a recently published psychological study that look at the relationship between intuitive decision making (vs. rumination or "reflective" reasoning) and belief in God. The article implies that thinking style can influence religious belief. However, the study conducted was based on a survey and was NOT an experiment. Therefore, is it correct to jump to conclusions of causality? Note also that the article mentions that the researchers would like to look at how genes and education influence thinking style, which should sound familiar... this relates to the nature/nurture debate we discussed last night!

Buyer beware?

| No Comments

bananas in store.jpg Today's article of interest is about the psychology of marketing. Note that these tactics do not just apply to Whole Foods, but to almost all grocery stores. Though psychology is not explicitly mentioned, companies such as Dole and Whole Foods do lots of market testing (probably with at least one trained psychologist on staff) to see what consumers prefer and what will make someone buy, buy, buy! So, next time you are at the grocery store, take a moment to wonder -- are these bananas vibrant yellow or buttercup?

Writing Assignment 1

| No Comments

blog_assignments-button_off.jpg From's Kate's 1001 blog:

Pick one of the following topics and write ~250 words about it. Feel free to add images, videos or links. Actually, let me make that stronger. We prefer images, videos and links are almost a necessity.

1) Identify one important concept, research finding, theory or idea from Psy 1001 lectures or the Lilienfeld text from the past two weeks. Summarize the concept in your own words and explain why you believe this concept research finding, theory or idea is important. Apply this to some aspect of your life (real life example are an excellent way to learn. Photos, You-tube videos, etc. are encouraged.) As you reflect on this concept, research finding, theory or other idea, what other questions occur to you? What are you still wondering about?

2) Provide a link to an article, hoax or claim that has been made in the media and evaluate the claim using one or more of the six principles of critical thinking. (You can find a rich source of urban legends at

Apply a concept, research finding, theory or idea that you have learned about in Psychology to provide an alternative explanation. Which principle is most useful for evaluating this particular claim? Remember to cite your sources.

3) If you can think of a different explanation or want to support something one of your classmates has posted, you can respond to a classmates post with a post of your own. Be sure to provide evidence to support your response.

For this first writing assignment, our primary goal is to get you online and writing.

I'd like to add a 4th option (you can pick and choose from the questions listed under #4):

4) What area of psychology interests you most and why? What are you looking forward to learning from this class? Is there anything that you've learned so far that has surprised you? Any pressing psychological questions that you'd like addressed in class? Be sure to link your answers to your life experiences, but try not to be too personal because this blog is public!

The due date for post 1 has been extended -- you now have until 11:59 pm on October 2nd to post, but try not to procrastinate and get this done! Please apply the tag "blog 1" to your post so I can easily sort through the entries to grade them. Good luck!

Comments on DS-RES

| No Comments

Greetings, class! The grades have been entered for last week's discussion section homework. Overall, most of you did a good job! Specific comments can be view within your group's Google Doc. To see my comments, click on the "Comments" box on the upper right and choose "Show comment stream." Your grade on the document is listed there as well. (Remember 1 point of your participation from last week was for completing the cartoon study, so the maximum possible score on the document was 4.) If you have any questions, please let me know. I'll discuss common errors in class tonight. feedback2.jpg

Police lineups

| No Comments

the-usual-suspects.jpgOn pages 36 and 37 of your text, the authors mention how psychological research shows that sequential lineups are better than simultaneous lineups. During my morning web surfing, I came across this article about that very topic!


| No Comments

psychology22.jpg Welcome to the blog for PSY 1001 Section 23 for Fall 2011! On this blog, I will post articles, video, and other information that might be of interest to you as we cover the various areas of psychology. Soon I will post more information regarding your first writing/blog assignment. If you wish to get started before then, you can use the information in the syllabus as a guide.

About this Archive

This page is an archive of entries from September 2011 listed from newest to oldest.

October 2011 is the next archive.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.