Jeannine:
        I have been using "40 Studies that Changed Psychology:..., 3rd
ed." by R.R. Hock for several years now.  It is a paperback by Prentice
Hall, and is relatively inexpensive for students to buy.  I like it
because it contains "classic" articles (e.g., Milgram's first obedience
study, Watson & Raynor's Little Albert study, 2 Asch conformity
experiments, Darley & Latane's bystander intervention study, Festinger and
Carlsmith's cognitive dissonance study, Loftus' eyewitness testimony
study, Rosenhan's pseudopsychpatient study, etc.).  The "downside" is that
the articles are not the complete unedited originals.  Rather, they are
pretty good summaries of the originals.  I use selelcted studies to help
my students understand variables (remember, Milgram's original study had
_no_ IV's! -- that really gets my students thinking!), and to decide what
makes a study "good" or "bad" via learning about and understanding the
methodology used (such as looking for gaps (i.e., uncontrolled confounds)
in the methods).  Specific "problems" are not discussed - it is left to
the students and instructor to tease out those details.  (As an aside,
before I heard about this book, my students had to go to the library, into
the microfilm, and literally copy the articles -- this is so much easier!)
        I hope this helps, even if this isn't the book you were
originally thinking about.  Also, and I tell my students this, it can be
gotten through the bookstore, Amazon.com, Barnes and Noble or Crown Books
(and I'm sure many other places), so it is definitely plentiful and easy
to acquire.  (A major bonus!)
        Best of luck, and let me know if there is any other book out
there like this -- I'm always on the lookout myself!

--Cheryl

************************************************************
                  Cheryl Schwartz, Ph.D.

                  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
                            OR
                   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
      --------------------------------------------------
          If logic is in the eye of the logician,
          then is wit in the eye of the wittician?
************************************************************

Reply via email to