I'm working on my report and was wondering if you guys can clarify/confirm I'm doing this right. For the full experiment please see:
http://www.springerlink.com/content/v2175688r1w4862x/
The point my research is to think critically about a research topic that is frequently viewed to be true, but in reality is false.
I had to apply the 6 flags of critical thinking for those of you who are not familiar with them they are:
1. ruling out rival hypotheses, 2. correlation vs. causation, 3. falsifiability (a falsifiable claim can be disproven), 4. replicability, 5. extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and 6. Occam’s Razor
The flags I found relevant on this experiment were Replicability, Rival Hypothesis and correlation vs causation.
Replicability: Study mimics the Good Friday Experiment(some questionnaires are the same),similar purpose , although there are distinct differences noted in experiment design, including stronger blinding procedures, both male and female participants(not just male in Friday Exp), different settings and environments and some other variations I might of missed. The study results indicate a higher percentage of participants in this recent study had a more complete mystical experience, but these findings are not duplicated anywhere else and since the researchers didn't follow the same recipe the findings should be viewed as skeptical.
Rival Hypothesis: Participants who strongly believed in having a mystical experience, may have induced a more powerful mystical or life changing event, since expectantancy plays a large role in the effects of psilocybin and other hallucinogens.
Correlation vs causation: 61% of participants experienced a profound mystical or life-changing event, that still effected them to this day. Would that mean that the the correlation strength r=0.61 represent a moderately strong correlation associated with high dose psilcybin creating a mystical experience? The third variable problem may be present here as we would be unaware of participants impulses that may of lead to such an experience thereby affecting the primary correlation which is high dose psilcybin creates mystical experiences that are imprinted in participants short and long-term memories.
Hopefully I'm on the right track here guys, let me know what you think and if you want to add something else please do! I also discussed the research methods like Hawthorne effect,validity, random selection, biases, double blind strengths .ect. but don't have time to discuss those right at this moment.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/v2175688r1w4862x/
The point my research is to think critically about a research topic that is frequently viewed to be true, but in reality is false.
I had to apply the 6 flags of critical thinking for those of you who are not familiar with them they are:
1. ruling out rival hypotheses, 2. correlation vs. causation, 3. falsifiability (a falsifiable claim can be disproven), 4. replicability, 5. extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, and 6. Occam’s Razor
The flags I found relevant on this experiment were Replicability, Rival Hypothesis and correlation vs causation.
Replicability: Study mimics the Good Friday Experiment(some questionnaires are the same),similar purpose , although there are distinct differences noted in experiment design, including stronger blinding procedures, both male and female participants(not just male in Friday Exp), different settings and environments and some other variations I might of missed. The study results indicate a higher percentage of participants in this recent study had a more complete mystical experience, but these findings are not duplicated anywhere else and since the researchers didn't follow the same recipe the findings should be viewed as skeptical.
Rival Hypothesis: Participants who strongly believed in having a mystical experience, may have induced a more powerful mystical or life changing event, since expectantancy plays a large role in the effects of psilocybin and other hallucinogens.
Correlation vs causation: 61% of participants experienced a profound mystical or life-changing event, that still effected them to this day. Would that mean that the the correlation strength r=0.61 represent a moderately strong correlation associated with high dose psilcybin creating a mystical experience? The third variable problem may be present here as we would be unaware of participants impulses that may of lead to such an experience thereby affecting the primary correlation which is high dose psilcybin creates mystical experiences that are imprinted in participants short and long-term memories.
Hopefully I'm on the right track here guys, let me know what you think and if you want to add something else please do! I also discussed the research methods like Hawthorne effect,validity, random selection, biases, double blind strengths .ect. but don't have time to discuss those right at this moment.
