TOPIC - The take-home assignment has been chosen as a form of examination where you can gain experience in relating different pieces of information and in writing skills that you will require in the scientific field. The assignment should take the form of a study protocol - you are asked to outline a hypothesis relating to a specific scientific theory, and describe how you would go about creating an experimental design that allows you to investigate the stated hypothesis.
Based on what we learned in chapter 2, make sure to mention all critical elements that are part of your study, e.g. theoretical assumptions, hypothesis or hypotheses, variables, study type, research approach, predictions etc. When it comes to the analysis and the interpretations of your study, since you won't have any real data, describe the type of test you would need to apply (depending on your type of study), and what type of results would lead you to support or reject your hypothesis.
The area from which you derive your study protocol can be any of the areas that we are covering in class, from any of the different research areas in psychology (biological, social, personal, cultural).
ASSIGNMENT:
THEORY:
Teenagers are purported to be moody, maddening and impulsive: their actions causing disruptions in their family, raising parental concern even if they are physically old enough to take care of themselves. Their constant desire to take the more reckless, dysfunctional decision puzzles psychologists everywhere - Why do teenagers find the need to do what they do? (Appendix II)
HYPOTHESIS:
Teenage brains, viewed through the eyes of evolution are the most important phase in growth of human intelligence. The wild, riotous phase every human goes through plays a vital role in us becoming successful citizens and making constructive decisions. Putting it simply 'if we smartened up sooner, we'd end up duller'. This highly adaptive period causes the necessary improvement that creates the richer networks and faster connections in the executive region of the brain. The simple reason is because teenagers value rewards more heavily than adults do.
The adolescent mind brain condones impulsivity. The more impulsive a teenager was during his adolescent years the more stable s/he is for the rest of his/her life. Impulsivity peaks at adolescence and teaches teens to not take the same risks in the later stages of life. The higher the reward in store for a situation no matter how risky the situation attracts teen brains far more than the adult brain.
Type of study - Experimental Research
RESEARCH:
Experiment 1 - This deals with teenagers' love of thrill. Behavioral scientists test whether age affects the risk taking tendencies when seven different age groups are presented with similar risk situations. The two different risk situations are smoking and skydiving. A graph is plotted based on how many subjects actually give in and perform the risk versus the age group, when all groups are briefed about the risks and consequences.
Dependent Variable - How many people take the risk from each age group.
Independent Variable - The different age groups considered.
Control/Comparison - A specific age group in which the number of risk-takers has been previously determined and this acts as our comparison factor.
Procedural analysis - A group of people selected randomly placed in the seven age groups go through a briefing about the two risk situations, smoking and skydiving. An immediate consensus is taken on how many people would choose to complete these tasks. Number of risk-takers and their ages are recorded.
Confound - Possible confounds are if the subject has already been smoking or has experienced skydiving previously in their life which would then present the activity as a far lesser risk. Another possible confound would be acrophobic subjects who would consider skydiving a far greater risk than smoking. These factors many decrease the randomness of the subjects chosen but will not effect the experiment's overall conclusions.
Data collection method -Interactive experience sampling with close ended questions. (Active approach) Conclusions based on statistical analysis.
Data and conclusions - A graph is plotted peaking at an age of 17 years. (2) A surprising plateau is observed from 12-15 years. (Appendix I) Impulsivity generally drops through out life staring at about the age of ten years and peaking at 17. This proves we never value things more highly than we do during adolescence. Here we hit a high in what behavioral scientists call sensation seeking: the hunt for the neural buzz, the jolt of unexpected. Even though sensation seeking can lead to dangerous behaviors, it can lead to positive ones too like the urge to meet people or the 'get out of the house' approach which complements a successful career, as observed by pioneering researcher Jay Giedd, at NIH. (2)
Experiment 2- The following experiment focuses on how teenagers take more risks because they weigh risk versus reward differently. In situations where risk can get them what the want, they value reward more heavily than adults do. This is illustrated by testing a group of subjects playing a videogame - To try and drive across a town in as little time as possible. Along the way the subject encounters several traffic lights and as in real life the traffic lights sometimes turn from green to yellow as the virtual car approaches, forcing a quick go-or-stop decision. Another variable was added further into the experiment such that the subject was playing/competing with another subject who the former subject values a relationship with.
Part 1: Dependent Variable - The number of times a traffic signal was driven through, the speed of the virtual car.
Independent Variable - The different age groups considered.
Control/Comparison - Compare the results obtained with a group of individuals who have played the video game but without a time limit.
Procedural analysis - A group of people selected randomly and assigned in different rooms playing the video game described above. The number of times a subject ignores a signal is noted, the speed of the virtual car is noted.
Confound - Possible variations in data could occur if the subject has had previous practice at the game; increasing the familiarity and decreasing the randomness factor of that subject towards the experiment.
Data collection method - Response performance based on stimulus judgments and response accuracy.
Part 2 - Dependent Variable - The number of times a traffic signal was driven through, the speed of the virtual car.
Independent Variable - The different age groups considered.
Control/Comparison - For this part the control is Part 1; to cross check effects of increase in stress with risk-taking.
Procedural analysis - A group of people selected randomly, assigned in pairs playing the video game described above against each other within a fixed time limit. The number of times a subject ignores a signal is recorded, the speed of the virtual car is noted.
Confound - Possible variations data could occur if the subject has been playing with the 2nd subject before, and thus would have accumulated knowledge of possible behavioral patterns observed by one while playing with the other during the game.
Data collection method - Response performance based on stimulus judgments and response accuracy.
Data and conclusions - A rough idea of experimental statistics could be obtained from graph 2 Appendix 3 (3). The video game rewards the subject for taking a certain amount of risk and punishes the subject for taking too much. A clear in peak for teenagers in the graph shows that they do indeed take more risks than adults do but the difference in the number of risks taken isn't dramatically different. The speed of the cars is nearly constant for all the age groups. (2) But for part 2 when an external factor was added and the stakes about which teenagers care about raised, the situation changes. According to Laurence Steinberg's research, the teenagers took twice as many risks and the speed of the car also increased rapidly. The adults, meanwhile, drove no differently with a friend playing. (2) This study shows the subject didn't necessarily take more chances because s/he downgraded the risk but because s/he gave more weight to the payoff.
RESULTS: The most obvious result is that our hypothesis has been proved to be correct. The higher the reward in store for a situation no matter how risky the teenager will be more likely to take it than the adult.
CONCLUSIONS: Researchers such as Steinberg and Casey believe that this risk-friendly weighing, cost versus reward has been selected for over the course of human evolution as the willingness to take risks during this period of life has granted an adaptive edge. (2) The two experiments also show teenagers have a high regard for reward. Even though teenagers use basically the same cognitive strategies that adults do, process information through the same reasoning; their actions to a similar stimuli follow different patterns. Succeeding often requires moving out of the box and into less secure situations as the more you seek novelty the better results turn out. The responsiveness to reward thus put teenagers in a strange position: to choose a less likely task but achieve results leading to success less predicted but more accountable in the long run.
Based on what we learned in chapter 2, make sure to mention all critical elements that are part of your study, e.g. theoretical assumptions, hypothesis or hypotheses, variables, study type, research approach, predictions etc. When it comes to the analysis and the interpretations of your study, since you won't have any real data, describe the type of test you would need to apply (depending on your type of study), and what type of results would lead you to support or reject your hypothesis.
The area from which you derive your study protocol can be any of the areas that we are covering in class, from any of the different research areas in psychology (biological, social, personal, cultural).
ASSIGNMENT:
THEORY:
Teenagers are purported to be moody, maddening and impulsive: their actions causing disruptions in their family, raising parental concern even if they are physically old enough to take care of themselves. Their constant desire to take the more reckless, dysfunctional decision puzzles psychologists everywhere - Why do teenagers find the need to do what they do? (Appendix II)
HYPOTHESIS:
Teenage brains, viewed through the eyes of evolution are the most important phase in growth of human intelligence. The wild, riotous phase every human goes through plays a vital role in us becoming successful citizens and making constructive decisions. Putting it simply 'if we smartened up sooner, we'd end up duller'. This highly adaptive period causes the necessary improvement that creates the richer networks and faster connections in the executive region of the brain. The simple reason is because teenagers value rewards more heavily than adults do.
The adolescent mind brain condones impulsivity. The more impulsive a teenager was during his adolescent years the more stable s/he is for the rest of his/her life. Impulsivity peaks at adolescence and teaches teens to not take the same risks in the later stages of life. The higher the reward in store for a situation no matter how risky the situation attracts teen brains far more than the adult brain.
Type of study - Experimental Research
RESEARCH:
Experiment 1 - This deals with teenagers' love of thrill. Behavioral scientists test whether age affects the risk taking tendencies when seven different age groups are presented with similar risk situations. The two different risk situations are smoking and skydiving. A graph is plotted based on how many subjects actually give in and perform the risk versus the age group, when all groups are briefed about the risks and consequences.
Dependent Variable - How many people take the risk from each age group.
Independent Variable - The different age groups considered.
Control/Comparison - A specific age group in which the number of risk-takers has been previously determined and this acts as our comparison factor.
Procedural analysis - A group of people selected randomly placed in the seven age groups go through a briefing about the two risk situations, smoking and skydiving. An immediate consensus is taken on how many people would choose to complete these tasks. Number of risk-takers and their ages are recorded.
Confound - Possible confounds are if the subject has already been smoking or has experienced skydiving previously in their life which would then present the activity as a far lesser risk. Another possible confound would be acrophobic subjects who would consider skydiving a far greater risk than smoking. These factors many decrease the randomness of the subjects chosen but will not effect the experiment's overall conclusions.
Data collection method -Interactive experience sampling with close ended questions. (Active approach) Conclusions based on statistical analysis.
Data and conclusions - A graph is plotted peaking at an age of 17 years. (2) A surprising plateau is observed from 12-15 years. (Appendix I) Impulsivity generally drops through out life staring at about the age of ten years and peaking at 17. This proves we never value things more highly than we do during adolescence. Here we hit a high in what behavioral scientists call sensation seeking: the hunt for the neural buzz, the jolt of unexpected. Even though sensation seeking can lead to dangerous behaviors, it can lead to positive ones too like the urge to meet people or the 'get out of the house' approach which complements a successful career, as observed by pioneering researcher Jay Giedd, at NIH. (2)
Experiment 2- The following experiment focuses on how teenagers take more risks because they weigh risk versus reward differently. In situations where risk can get them what the want, they value reward more heavily than adults do. This is illustrated by testing a group of subjects playing a videogame - To try and drive across a town in as little time as possible. Along the way the subject encounters several traffic lights and as in real life the traffic lights sometimes turn from green to yellow as the virtual car approaches, forcing a quick go-or-stop decision. Another variable was added further into the experiment such that the subject was playing/competing with another subject who the former subject values a relationship with.
Part 1: Dependent Variable - The number of times a traffic signal was driven through, the speed of the virtual car.
Independent Variable - The different age groups considered.
Control/Comparison - Compare the results obtained with a group of individuals who have played the video game but without a time limit.
Procedural analysis - A group of people selected randomly and assigned in different rooms playing the video game described above. The number of times a subject ignores a signal is noted, the speed of the virtual car is noted.
Confound - Possible variations in data could occur if the subject has had previous practice at the game; increasing the familiarity and decreasing the randomness factor of that subject towards the experiment.
Data collection method - Response performance based on stimulus judgments and response accuracy.
Part 2 - Dependent Variable - The number of times a traffic signal was driven through, the speed of the virtual car.
Independent Variable - The different age groups considered.
Control/Comparison - For this part the control is Part 1; to cross check effects of increase in stress with risk-taking.
Procedural analysis - A group of people selected randomly, assigned in pairs playing the video game described above against each other within a fixed time limit. The number of times a subject ignores a signal is recorded, the speed of the virtual car is noted.
Confound - Possible variations data could occur if the subject has been playing with the 2nd subject before, and thus would have accumulated knowledge of possible behavioral patterns observed by one while playing with the other during the game.
Data collection method - Response performance based on stimulus judgments and response accuracy.
Data and conclusions - A rough idea of experimental statistics could be obtained from graph 2 Appendix 3 (3). The video game rewards the subject for taking a certain amount of risk and punishes the subject for taking too much. A clear in peak for teenagers in the graph shows that they do indeed take more risks than adults do but the difference in the number of risks taken isn't dramatically different. The speed of the cars is nearly constant for all the age groups. (2) But for part 2 when an external factor was added and the stakes about which teenagers care about raised, the situation changes. According to Laurence Steinberg's research, the teenagers took twice as many risks and the speed of the car also increased rapidly. The adults, meanwhile, drove no differently with a friend playing. (2) This study shows the subject didn't necessarily take more chances because s/he downgraded the risk but because s/he gave more weight to the payoff.
RESULTS: The most obvious result is that our hypothesis has been proved to be correct. The higher the reward in store for a situation no matter how risky the teenager will be more likely to take it than the adult.
CONCLUSIONS: Researchers such as Steinberg and Casey believe that this risk-friendly weighing, cost versus reward has been selected for over the course of human evolution as the willingness to take risks during this period of life has granted an adaptive edge. (2) The two experiments also show teenagers have a high regard for reward. Even though teenagers use basically the same cognitive strategies that adults do, process information through the same reasoning; their actions to a similar stimuli follow different patterns. Succeeding often requires moving out of the box and into less secure situations as the more you seek novelty the better results turn out. The responsiveness to reward thus put teenagers in a strange position: to choose a less likely task but achieve results leading to success less predicted but more accountable in the long run.
