
Health Psychology Research Methods
As an empirical science, health psychology utilizes the scientific method – a process by which scientists compose, direct, and distribute findings as representations of their subjects that are both accurate and capable of validation. In order to analyze the quality of the research performed, we must first understand the limitations of the research methods and then scope their implications. In brief, researchers specify an issue, problem, or hypothesis; develop an operational definition; collect data from various methods; analyze data often using statistical methods; and formulate or redefine/comment on an existing theory.
Health psychologist employ several lines of empirical research to uncover or define a potential association between two phenomena, determine the etiology of co-occurring conditions, or establish the efficacy of nonpharmacological (e.g. behavioral) interventions. The researcher may select observational methods, surveys, or experiments, or a combination thereof, to reach a scientific finding.
The following outlines common research methods in health psychology and their advantages (+) and drawbacks (-):
Observations (i.e. case reports/studies): observations of behavior and recording a systematic variable or aspect of such behavior.
(+) Often uncover associations between behavior and disease.
(+) Could characterize low-incident phenomena.
(-) Cannot describe causality or the degree of association in the larger population.
(-) The observer may influence the observations or the way they perceived such behaviors.
Surveys: questioning a population on their feelings, beliefs, and practices and recording their responses.
(+) Inexpensive and wide reaching method of data collection.
(+) Could access a broad range of topics beyond simple observation.
(-) The question composition, arrangement, and pose (e.g. leading questions) may bias the responses.
(-) Individuals may inaccurately report because of failure to recall information, confabulation, and possibly deception.
(-) Cannot determine causality.
Experiments: random group assignments to measure the effect of an independent variable (e.g. how it influences behavior). Clinical studies are a special kind of experiment when the subjects are humans. They require substantial ethical and practical considerations.
(+) Can determine causality and the degree of effect (intended or adverse).
(-) Artificial environments (i.e. a lab) may influence behavior.
Popular Posts
- The Love Drug
- Women After Sex
- Fatty Acids and Suicide Risk
- Mind Games - Science's Attempts at Thought Control
- Risks of Personalized Medicine
- Mental Health Disorders Prevalent Among Youth Worldwide
- Is Giftedness Nothing More than Good Genes?
- Behind the Masks - The Mysteries of Dissociative Identity Disorder
- The NeuroSocial Network
- Inside Your Brain on Holiday
Future Posts
- The Brain’s Buying Power
- Aging Intelligently
Latest Posts
- A Nicotine Patch a Day Keeps the Cognitive Impairment Away
- The Many Emerging Roles of Astrocytes
- Diabetes Impairs Cognition
- Media Violence Leads to Real Violence
- Intelligence – Are You Holding Back Your Brain?
- Childhood Aggression Predicts Health Care Use Later in Life
- The Brain’s Border Patrol – Blood Brain Barrier
- Risks of Personalized Medicine
- BED-head and Obesity – Food for Thought
- Salvia Divinorum – DEA Control over Magic in the Mint
Comments
- Scapadas Amorosas: Lets patent it, package, marke
- sumeshmavungal: Advice on buying a car?
- Emily Haines, MSc, PhD student: Thanks for your comments, Matt
- Emily Haines, MSc, PhD student: Thanks for your comments and s
- Alex: While we have our eyes glued t
- Richard Kensinger, MSW: Carla,You are absolutely c
- Soraya L. Valles: I'm interested in astrocytes.
- Raymond Tallis: Dear Kitty, I have come to you
- Steven: After smoking for 17 years dai
- Matt: I'm just interested in hearing
- Carla Easley: If everyone adopted the "Growt
- Isabel (retired RN): I second that query for resear









No Responses