Research Methods

1. Research Methods 10 Practical Uses For Psychological Research in Everyday Life

2. People love to give each other advice. • The web is full to bursting with all types of pseudo-psychological advice about life. • The problem is, how much of this is based on real scientific evidence? • Well, here we actually have the scientific evidence. • So here's a top 10 list of what you can learn practically from the psychological research discussed in the news, etc.

3. 1. How to detect lies • Lies are extremely difficult to detect. • Research shows the average person barely does any better than chance. • Part of the reason may be there's so much misinformation about how to detect lies floating around.

4. Lies are extremely difficult to detect. • Research shows the average person barely does any better than chance. • Part of the reason may be there's so much misinformation about how to detect lies floating around. • Years of work in psychology, including research from real police interviews conducted by Aldert Vrij and colleagues, provides guidance on which nonverbal signals do and which don't signal lying (Vrij, 2006). • So, first we've got to dump the misconceptions: • People don't actually fidget and look away when they're lying. Even some police forces still have this in the manual even though it's just plain wrong. • Even classic highly researched signs of lying are not that good. Less blinking, more pauses in talking, vocal tension, pupil dilation, chin raise and nervousness don't consistently (across different people) mean someone is lying. • It may be particularly difficult to detect lies in close friends or partners as we have come to trust them and don't expect them to lie to us. • How do these misconceptions come about? First we are badly informed by popular culture and second we think we're displaying these signs when lying ourselves - when actually we're not.

5. Vrij, A. (2006). Nonverbal communication and deception. In: V. L. Manusov & M. L. Patterson (Eds.). The SAGE Handbook of Nonverbal Communication. SAGE. • So, with those misconceptions dealt with, what can psychology research tell us about how to detect lies? • Individual differences are key. Some people's natural behavior looks honest while others' natural behavior doesn't. This won't tell you whether each is lying. E.g. introverts or socially nervous people tend to look as though they're lying when they're not. The way to do it is using comparisons. It's possible to spot falsehoods when they are compared with truthful statements. • Micro-expressions. Good lie detectors can pick up on tiny facial movements that give away lies. The problem is that they're 'micro' so they're difficult to detect. • Vocal inflection can be vital. There's evidence it's easier to detect lies just from the voice. The eyes are relatively easy to control and it can be better if we can't see them. • Rely on intuition. People may be better at detecting lies with their intuition. Implicit or broadly unconscious processes can be more effective than conscious directed thought. • Lying is hard work. Lying can place high cognitive demands on an individual - putting more pressure on a suspected liar can help with detection.

6. 2. How to make your smile more attractive, more trustworthy and less dominant. • This psychology study found that a long-onset smile (0.5s onset) is seen as more authentic and flirtatious than a short-onset smile (0.1s). • On top of this, the researchers found long-onset smiles were perceived as more attractive, more trustworthy and less dominant. • Head tilting also increased attractiveness and trustworthiness but only if the head was tilted in the right direction.

7. Psychology research is not generally very good at capturing change. • Measurements tend to be fairly static, either looking at one slice of time or asking participants to average over a period. • This is why this research on smiling is so unusual. • Some of the best known research on smiling is about how people judge an authentic smile - the so-called 'Duchenne smile' or the 'crinkly-eyed smile'. • What this research asks, though, is how does a smile's speed in combination with head-tilt and gender affect its perception?

8. In this experiment, one hundred participants, half men half women, were sat in front of a monitor to judge the smiles of synthetic faces (Krumhuber, Manstead & Kappas, 2007). • They watched the faces smiling - some whose smile appeared in just over 0.1 of a second, and some whose smile appeared in just over 0.5 of a second. • At the same time, some of the heads were tilted to the left and some to the right. • Participants then had to judge the smiles on how trustworthy, attractive, dominant, fake and flirtatious they made the faces seem.

9. Results • The study replicated a previous finding that a long-onset smile (0.5s onset) is seen as more authentic and flirtatious. • On top of this, the researchers found long-onset smiles were perceived as more attractive, more trustworthy and less dominant. • Head tilting also increased attractiveness and trustworthiness but only if the head was tilted in the right direction. • In this case, the right direction was the same way as eye orientation or towards a partner.

10. Gender • There was also evidence that smiles are perceived in different ways depending on the gender of both the target and the observer. • Previous research has found that smiling is associated with attractiveness in women, but dominance in men. • These are probably a result of gender stereotypes. • One finding in the present study was that women's smiles were judged less authentic than men's. • Krumhuber et al. (2007) speculate that this is because women tend to smile more than men, so their behavior is seen as more usual and therefore less informative. • The reverse may be true for men.

11. Now .. while women's smile were more likely to be discounted, it seemed women were generally better at detecting the difference between short- and long-onset smiles. • The differences found in this study, therefore, were mostly due to female participants rather than the men. • Krumhuber et al. (2007) suggest this ties in with findings men are more likely to interpret ambiguous or inauthentic signals (short-onset smiles) as flirtatious behavior. • They can't (or won't) tell the difference.

12. Krumhuber, E., Manstead, A., & Kappas, A. (2007). Temporal Aspects of Facial Displays in Person and Expression Perception: The Effects of Smile Dynamics, Head-tilt, and Gender. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 31(1), 39-56. • And finally... • I've discovered that psychologists studying nonverbal behavior have a lot of over the top terminology. • This study is about the 'Temporal Dynamics of Smiling' and I also came across one titled 'Spontaneous vs. posed facial behavior: automatic analysis of brow actions' (think Groucho Marx). • This one is particularly intriguing: 'Head Canting in Paintings: A Historical Study' Gotta read that one!. • Perhaps I'm weird, but those titles really tickle me.

13. 3. How to persuade others your opinion represents the whole group • If you want to convince others that your opinion is representative of the majority, then just repeat yourself. • This surprising psychology study finds that if one person in a group repeats the same opinion three times, it has 90% of the effect of three different people in that group expressing the same opinion.

14. OK, … a group of us are sat around shooting the breeze, talking about this that and everything else besides. • Like all folks, we always end up with a bit of weather-related chat when the conversation flags. And sure enough, before long, James is complaining about the unseasonably cool and wet weather that we're having at the moment. • "It just flies in the face of all that 'global warming' crapola, right?" says James. • Now, like the others I know a little bad weather in the short-term doesn't disprove a long-term trend. But, for whatever reason, I don't say anything and neither does anyone else. • He goes on: "Doesn't it just make you wonder what's really going on with all these environmental groups telling us we're ruining the planet and all the rest?"

15. The power of repetition • Now, I actually think humans are ruining the environment and causing global warming. • Again, though, I'm lazy and only mumble a few words in disagreement. • I half think James is just trying to wind us up to get the conversation going. Still, I let it go. • There's no more talk on the subject until much later when I'm with one of the group on his own. • We start on about global warming and the environment again. • It soon becomes clear that he's been swayed by what James said earlier. • "Well no one really said anything against James and I just thought everyone agreed," he explains. • "I thought you guys were all up to date with this sort of thing being scientific types?" • I explained to him that James' opinions probably bore no relation to what the rest of us thought - it's just we hadn't expressed our own opinions. • I don't think he believed me, which was annoying. • It seemed the simple act of one person expressing their opinion loudly and clearly in a group setting had convinced him we all felt the same way. • Unfortunately, knowing that group, I saw nothing could be further from the truth.

16. Where does this effect come from? • The authors argue it comes down to memory. • Because repetition increases the accessibility of an opinion, we assume it has a high prevalence. • In everyday life we are likely to hear the same opinion many times in different places. • We then put all these together to judge the general mood of a group. • When one person repeats their opinion, we simply over apply the rule.

17. Weaver, K., Garcia, S.M., Schwarz, N., & Miller, D.T. (2007) Inferring the popularity of an opinion from its familiarity: A repetitive voice can sound like a chorus. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(5), 821-833. • Familiarity doesn't breed contempt. • The theme of this research is something that has been known and used by advertisers and influencers for decades. • Familiarity doesn't breed contempt at all, it breeds attraction. • Making your voice heard is the only way to let others know what you think. • Otherwise they will think you agree with the loudest person. • Similarly, and more worryingly, when an opinion is repeatedly broadcast at us by the same organization - think of a particular media conglomerate or an advertiser - we're likely to come to believe it represents the general opinion. • That's despite the fact it is analogous to the same person repeating themselves over and over again.

18. Our strange brains • And … in a study published recently in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology examined exactly this situation to test how people judge the distribution of opinion. • The study, carried out by Kimberlee Weaver and colleagues, found we can tell that three different people expressing the same opinion better represents the group than one person expressing the same opinion three times - but not by much. • In fact, if one person in a group repeats the same opinion three times, it has 90% of the effect of three different people in that group expressing the same opinion. • When you think about it, that is strange. • Heck, I'm not sure I'd even believe it if I hadn't already read many other psychology studies that point to the illogical and unreasonable ways our minds sometimes work.

19. 4. How to have a refreshing holiday • This environmental psychology study suggests that being stuck indoors on vacation can limit mental recuperation. • On the other hand, when able to roam outdoors, we can exert ourselves at a favorite sport or simply linger in the park.

20. Everyone gets down sometimes - it's only natural. • It would be more unusual never to be depressed. • The idea that depression is an on-off condition with a purely chemical foundation is a myth no psychologist would endorse. • The causes of depression can be many and widespread. • But one cause many of us have to cope with is work. • One of the main weapons against stress building up from work is going on vacation. • Holidays are a firmly established way of allowing the mind and body to recuperate. • In new research, however, published in the Journal of Environmental Psychology, Hartig, Catalano and Ong (2007) find that all holidays are not created equal.

21. Getting out in the open • The lead author of this paper, Terry Hartig, lives and works in Sweden, a country well known for its long, dark winters. • As such, the Swedes know the importance of getting out in the sunshine, when it finally arrives. • There is even a law requiring employers to provide four consecutive weeks of holiday in the summer. • And it's actually this law that is crucial to Hartig et al's findings. • Hartig and colleagues suggest that being stuck indoors on vacation can limit mental recuperation. • On the other hand, when able to roam outdoors, we can exert ourselves at a favorite sport or simply linger in the park. • Psychologically, beautiful scenery can distract us from our troubles, help us forget our normal stressful environments and reconnect us to nature.

22. Anti-depressant prescriptions and the weather • Hartig et al. decided to use the number of SSRI anti-depressants prescribed between 1991 and 1998 as a proxy for the general level of depression in the population of Sweden. • They then looked for correlations between the weather and the amount of anti-depressants prescribed, which they duly found. • Wait, though, there's a problem with this. • Perhaps people are simply happier when the weather is warmer? • It would then follow there would be an association between anti-depressant prescriptions and temperature.

23. Hartig et al. anticipated this problem. • They remove the variation in anti-depressant prescriptions associated with the general change in monthly mean temperature from the equation. • Then they get a really interesting finding. • Now there's only a correlation between temperature and anti-depressant medications in one month: July. • There's no similar effect even for the adjacent months of June or August. • How can that be explained? Why would the relationship only occur in July?

24. Why July is unusual • Here is the authors' reasoning. • In Sweden people take most of their holiday in July at the centre of the period stipulated by law (from 1 June to 31 August). • A survey found it is over 90%. • This means that during July they have the highest likelihood of being free to enjoy outdoor pursuits. • On average, the rest of the year they will be working, so even if the weather is unseasonably warm in May, for example, they won't be able to take advantage of it. • The reasoning goes, then, that if the weather is bad in July people are stuck indoors. • This means they are unable to fully recuperate mentally before returning to work. • Alternately, if the weather is good in July people are, on average, mentally rested and have less need for medication.

25. Hartig, T., Catalano, R., & Ong, M. (2007). Cold summer weather, constrained restoration, and the use of antidepressants in Sweden. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 27(2), 107-116. • Remember that this explanation relies on averaging out many people's behavior across nine years. • Obviously not everyone requires anti-depressants to get through a spell of bad weather. • Similarly some people require them whatever the weather. • But think about it in terms of the people who are slipping across the boundary of requiring/asking for medication. • Then the authors' explanation makes sense.

26. I know this study falls into the category of telling us something we already know. • But it does so in rather an ingenious way that takes advantage of Swedish vacation patterns. • Also, we can't be reminded often enough that we should take every opportunity to get out in the open air. • Really, happiness is looking out across fresh fields, gazing at a distant tree, feeling the sun on your back and the wind brushing your skin.

27. 5. How to avoid getting scammed • If I had to explain only one thing to someone who knew nothing about psychology, it would be 'crowd psychology'. • Being aware and watching out for this one fact can improve our lives no end.

28. Perhaps you've lost some loose change on the street hunting the lady while trying to beat the 'three-card trick'? • This is the one where three cards are moved one over the other and you have to find a particular card. • It appears easy when you watch someone else winning but, when you step up to have a go at the makeshift table, you keep losing. • The card should be where you think it is, but it's not. • So you lose a bit of cash.

29. Many people like card tricks, although the mechanical explanations of their workings are usually disappointing. • It always turns out to be some low-level cheating which almost anyone could get the hang of with a little practice. • Same with the three-card trick. When you know how the card trick itself is done, you feel like a fool for falling for it. • That's because the trick isn't really in the cards, it's in the mind. • The interest for me in card tricks, and in magic generally, is the psychology. • The best part is understanding how the magician, or huckster, plays on our human nature to get us to behave in a certain way.

30. Sheep theory • The three-card trick relies on what is variously known in psychology as 'emergent norm theory' or 'crowd psychology' or what some like to call 'sheep theory'. • I like sheep better (although less scientific sounding) because it clearly emphasizes how much people like to follow each other. Like sheep. … Baaaaaaaaaa! • If I had to explain only one thing to someone who knew nothing about psychology, it would be 'sheep theory'. • Being aware and watching out for this one fact would improve our imaginary naive person's life no end. • One classic example of sheep theory is Stanley Milgram's famous electro-shock obedience experiment. Social psychology is filled with endless studies of us copying each other or, in the lingo, 'conforming to group norms'. • It's not just humans, there's evidence that chimps conform as well.

31. NatureThe Guardian Milgram, S. (1963). Behavioral study of obedience. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(4), 371-378. • Three-card trick • This is why along with telling our imaginary fool about sheep theory I would also show them an experienced mob running the three-card trick. • Keeping a safe distance from them I would point out the all-too-simple components. • There are the shills pretending to play the game - sometimes winning sometimes losing. • Here's a fool walking up and watching the shills, not realizing they are in on the game. • There's another shill explaining how easy the game looks. • And there they go, approaching the table. • They say a fool and his money are soon parted but I wouldn't really call our fool a fool. • They are merely acting just like the rest of us, the way that is often good for us, by fitting in with others and following their lead. • In life the real trick is knowing when to conform and when to buck the trend.

32. 6. Using email to persuade • Before sending an email remember that women may not generally be easily persuaded over email because there is less opportunity to form relationships from which attitude changes can be built. • Men, however, tend to be less competitive over email and are better able to concentrate on arguments presented, rather than being distracted by seeing the other man as a threat.

33. Our intuitive understanding is that face-to-face communication is the most persuasive. • In reality, of course, it's not always possible to meet in person, so email wins out. • How, then, do people react to persuasion attempts over email? • Persuasion research has uncovered fascinating effects: that men seem more responsive to email because it bypasses their competitive tendencies (Guadagno & Cialdini, 2002). • Women, however, may respond better in face-to-face encounters because they are more 'relationship-minded'. • But is this finding just a gender stereotype?

34. Gender stereotypes • Guadagno and Cialdini explain their results in terms of expectations about social roles. • Cultural stereotypes have it that men are task-oriented whereas women are relationship-oriented. • So, when put in a situation where relationships were important i.e. face-to-face, women tend to follow the cultural stereotype. • Similarly, as men are often viewed as more competitive, when they face each other they tend to be more competitive and so less open to persuasion. • Practically, what this research is suggesting is that email could provide a way of side-stepping men's competitive tendencies. • But, this research doesn't consider the effects of pre-existing relationships. • After all, we react differently to friends than strangers.

35. In an article published in the journal Computers and Human Behaviour’, Guadagno and Cialdini (2007) examine the effect of relationships. • The problem for researchers is how to manipulate people's relationships experimentally to effectively test the differences. • Guadagno and Cialdini use the concept of 'oneness'. • Oneness • Oneness refers to the idea of an interconnected identity. • The closer two people feel, the more helping the other person is like helping themselves. • So oneness can promote altruistic behavior. • Oneness can also be seen in terms of the classic in-group out-group dichotomy in social psychology. • People show a positive bias towards other people who are in the same notional group as themselves: e.g. work colleagues.

36. Results • The researchers found that when there were low levels of oneness between men, email was a more effective way to communicate. • Conversely, for women, higher levels of oneness made face-to-face encounters significantly more persuasive. • How can these results be explained? • Women may not generally be easily persuaded over email because there is less opportunity to form relationships from which attitude changes can be built. • Men, however, tend to be less competitive over email and are better able to concentrate on arguments presented, rather than being distracted by seeing the other man as a threat.

37. Male-female interaction • Bear in mind that this study is ironing out the spectrum of differences amongst both men and women. • In other words, clearly not all women are always relationship-focused and not all men are always task-focused. • It seems an obvious point but it's a mistake often made in mainstream media presentation of psychology research. • Additionally, one of the drawbacks of the study was that it only concentrated on same-sex communication. • Although, I would suggest it's better not to think of this study in terms of men and women but in terms of individual relationships.

38. Guadagno, R. E., & Cialdini, R. B. (2002). Online persuasion: an examination of gender differences in computer mediated interpersonal influence. Group Dynamics: Theory Research and Practice, 6, 38-51. Guadagno, R., & Cialdini, R. (2007). Persuade him by email, but see her in person: Online persuasion revisited. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 999-1015. • So, if you want to persuade someone with whom you have a competitive relationship - whatever your and their gender - email might be a better choice. • On the other hand, if your persuasion attempt is aimed at someone with whom you have a more cooperative relationship, face-to-face could be a better choice. • Unfortunately, it isn't always possible to see someone face-to-face, so it's very useful to be aware of the processes operating in both face-to-face and online interactions.

39. 7. Find out if you're satisfied with your relationship • Once a relationship has become long-term, although we still talk about love and commitment, in some ways it's satisfaction that comes to the forefront. • Indeed, low satisfaction is an important predictor of relationship breakdown.

40. Unlike 'love' and 'commitment', the words 'relationship satisfaction' are unlikely to strike fear into the heart of the unreconstructed man (or reconstructed woman). • But once a relationship has become long-term, although we still talk about love and commitment, in some ways it's satisfaction that comes to the forefront. • Indeed, low satisfaction is an important predictor of relationship breakdown. • So, what factors have psychologists found are important in how satisfied we are with our relationships? • Relationship satisfaction has been measured at both cognitive and behavioral levels (Fincham & Beach, 2006). Here are the main behaviors important in satisfaction:

41. 1. Support behavior. The giving and receiving of supportive behavior has not only been found to affect relationship satisfaction but also general health levels. • 2. The negative loop. One of the signatures of a dissatisfied couple is the negative loop. • This is where you start off commenting on the lack of milk in the fridge and end up trading full-scale character assassinations. • 3. Demand-withdrawal pattern. Another signature of the dissatisfied couple is the demand-withdrawal pattern: you wonder out-loud about a visit to the in-laws, they turn the TV up. • The stereotype is that women demand and men withdraw, but who wants to be stereotyped?

42. And here are some of the main cognitions (thoughts) that are important: • 4. Unrealistic beliefs. She's not stubborn. • She's determined and principled. • He's not lazy. He's laidback, chilled out. • It may seem strange to say that 'cognitive distortions' and 'unrealistic beliefs' are associated with relationship satisfaction. • But, as long as your reinterpretations of what others might consider flaws are positive, then unrealistic beliefs can be very good for your relationship. • 5. Attribution patterns. Was she late from work 'just this once' for reasons beyond her control? • Or, is this sort of thing always happening and she could just as easily make it home if she tried? • Attributions are the reasons we attach to our own and other's behavior, what we see as its cause. • Patterns of attributions which paint partners in a good light are associated with relationship satisfaction.

43. For Fun: Love Online: A Report on Digital Dating in Canada • 6. Partner and ideal standards discrepancies. Guaranteed dissatisfaction: I want Angelina Jolie. • I will accept no substitute. • 7. Memory. Satisfaction is associated with feeling your relationship has improved in recent times. • Satisfied: yes or no?Intuitively it seems obvious that relationship satisfaction should be a sliding scale, say, from 1 to 10. But, what some of the evidence suggests is that it might be just yes or no. Many of the processes important for relationship satisfaction tend to operate in self-reinforcing loops. So that if you start to become dissatisfied, for example, by a change in attributional patterns, things rapidly go from bad to worse. • Whether or not relationships can really be put into two categories, it certainly makes for an entertaining game while you're out people watching: them? No, not satisfied. Those two? Yes, satisfied.

44. 8. Reduce your cholesterol levels • The results from two separate studies demonstrated that after only 25 days, the experimental group who had written affectionate notes, showed a significant reduction in cholesterol. • These reductions were seen independently from the effects of general health factors like age, drinking, smoking and so on. • According to this early data, affectionate writing can reduce cholesterol levels.

45. According to new research, writing down affectionate thoughts about close friends and family can reduce your cholesterol levels. • Floyd et al. (2007) randomly assigned participants to one of two groups: one experimental and one control. • The experimental group wrote with affection about one person in their lives for 20 minutes on three occasions over a five-week period. • The control group wrote mundane descriptions of their activities over the week, jobs they had done and places they had lived.

46. The results from two separate studies demonstrated that after only 25 days, the experimental group who had written affectionate notes, showed a significant reduction in cholesterol. • These reductions were seen independently from the effects of general health factors like age, drinking, smoking and so on. • Mean cholesterol levels reduced from 170 mg/dL to 159 mg/dL (figures are from the second study which was methodologically more secure). • The researchers also examined whether linguistic features of the experimental group's writing affected cholesterol reduction. • They found that those who wrote directly to someone showed greater reductions in cholesterol than those who wrote in the third person about someone.

47. CautionThese are preliminary results. The research was carried out in a small sample (Study 1, N=34; Study 2, N=30) of healthy US college students all in the normal range for cholesterol. More research will be required to see if this generalizes across cultures, overall health status and so on. On the other hand, the possible side-effects of writing affectionate letters are not that worrying, unless you count paper cuts. • One of the strengths of this study was that it specifically examined the benefits of expressing affection. • Other studies have found evidence for the benefits of expressing affection but have had difficulties separating the expressing from the receiving. • This is because when you express affection towards someone else, they are likely to reciprocate. • Expressing is, therefore, tightly bound up with receiving. • In an age where human nature is often considered profoundly selfish, here's a selfish reason to be nice to people. • Of course compared with all the money-spinning methods of reducing cholesterol levels around nowadays, you'll never see this one advertised because it's essentially free. So, pass it on...

48. 9. How to make friends with self-disclosure • Turning an acquaintance into a good friend can be hard. • Whether it's romantic or platonic, there are endless reasons why people fail to connect and maintain their relationships with each other. • So let’s find out how to make that connection with self-disclosure.

49. Turning an acquaintance into a good friend can be hard. • Whether it's romantic or platonic, there are endless reasons why people fail to connect and maintain their relationships with each other. • This disconnect isn't always a result of some huge mistake by one person or the other, more often it's just that people drift apart. • Social bonds can be hard to maintain, especially when they aren't based on firm routine footings like work, marriage or other institutions. • In explaining how people form strong relationships, psychologists - along with other social scientists - have long been interested in what personal information people reveal to each other. • This research has culminated in recent studies of how internet daters reveal (or fail to reveal) information about themselves.

50. Not just deep and meaningful • Research on self-disclosure is enormous, addressing issues such as when people choose to self-disclose, for what reasons and whether it is effective. • Within this research though, Greene, Derlega and Mathews (2006) point out some highlights. • Self-disclosure brings to mind earnest conversations about our deepest hopes and fears. • But self-disclosure is also about simply sharing our preferences for music, food or books. • These can play an equally important role in forming relationships as those deep and meaningful conversations.