Hi Annette, I explore such misconceptions in a number of ways. I teach a
class for majors on "scientific foundations" for psych and cover a number of
misconceptions from K. Stanovich's text. I use a set of control questions that
I do NOT cover such as those pertaining to the ten percent myth, violence of
the mentally ill, the power of hypnosis to regress to childhood, two
personalities for schizophrenia, and right and left-brained personalities. Tho
my students have had Intro and often other psych classes, 30-40% continue to
accept these misconceptions with the acceptance rates often going to 50% or
more for the ten percent myth and right and left-brained personalities idea.
I continue to shake my head at how sloppy psychologists are getting when
writing about correlational studies and employing causal language. I know
textbook and journal authors are finding it acceptable to call correlational
variables independent and dependent to supposedly refer to predictor and
criterion variables, but I still teach my students to be more cautious about
such language and watchful of language usage.
Also, with reference to effect size yes, I introduce it still by talking about
r squared and developing that conceptually. Students often can tell that the
word effect here is another area where psychologists will imply something that
they may not mean or cannot defend. Just one (probably)fading view.... Cheers,
Gary
Gerald L. (Gary) Peterson, Ph.D.
Professor, Psychology
Saginaw Valley State University
University Center, MI 48710
989-964-4491
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
