CPSY102 3J0
Dr. N. GhazbanMarch 22, 2019
Writing Assignment 2: Analyzing Scientific Principles
Scientific Principle #1: Extraordinary Claims
After analyzing the research, it is noted that the scientific principle which states thatextraordinary claims
require extraordinary evidence, is not being satisfied. According toLilienfeld et. al (2016), thinking
critically requires readers to ask themselves whether this claimresembles information already known,
and if it does, whether the evidence is as extraordinary asthe claim that the research provides. The
research expresses extraordinary claims regarding thepossible outcomes after undergoing
psychoacoustic desensitization and reprocessing (PDR). Dr.Chime claims that in just one session PDR can
cure phobias and anxiety in just one session.Onesession is an extremely fast recovery time to be cured
of phobias and anxiety disorders that aredeeply rooted psychological disorders.
Scientific Principle #2: ReplicabilityAnother guiding principle of scientific thinking replicability.
Replicability is when a thefindings of a study are able to be duplicated, ideally by other researchers using
similar methods(Lilienfeld et. al, 2016). The research provided explains that the same investigator has
replicatedthese findings in two other studies at their clinic. According to the definition, it is ideal for
thefindings to be replicated by other independent researchers. The replicability of the study can
beenhanced if the study is successfully replicated by other researcher clinics using the samemethods,
and similar samples. The sample size can be altered to include other ethnicities asidefrom just Caucasian
adults. The replicated studies should also include children and the elderly,since children and the elderly
also experience phobias and anxieties disorders.
Research Method #1: Lack of Control GroupWhen conducting an experiment, the researcher must have
a control group which doesnot encounter the manipulated independent variable, and an experimental
group whichencounters the manipulated independent variable (Lilienfeld et al, 2016). This study lacks
acontrol group since there is no description of a second group of research participants that do
notreceive the psychoacoustic desensitization and reprocessing treatment which is needed in orderto
infer causation. Without both the experimental and control groups, researchers are unable toaccurately
determine the effect of the independent variable. In order to improve this study, theresearchers must
do the experiment again, but instead with two groups of research participants.The researchers must
separate the participants in the control group and the experimental group.Research participants may be
randomly assigned to either the control group or to theexperimental group. By having the two groups of
research participants, the researchers will beable to infer the results of the study and determine
whether or not the PDR therapy works as wellas it claims to.
Research Method #2: ReactivityReactivity refers to the way in which the data is collected in regard to
the social nature ofobservational studies (Lilienfeld, 2016). It is often the case that research participants
alter theirbehaviour because they know that they are being studied and observed. The research
informationprovided suggests that participants may have altered their responses due to the length of
thetherapy session. According to the research information the therapy can be exhausting for
theresearch participants who know that they must finish all of the therapy sessions. For this
reason,research participants may alter their behaviour in order to decrease the amount of time
theyspend in the therapy sessions. This may explain why participants reported to begin smiling and
changing their responses during therapy. In order to enhance the study, it would be wise for theresearch
to attempt to decrease the amount of time necessary for the therapy sessions. Bydecreasing the
amount of time required for a single session, research participants may be moreinclined to give more
truthful responses