Psychology griggs 5th edition pdf download

My deepest thanks go to Kevin Feyen, my current Editor, and Marge Byers and Renee Altier, my two previous Editors, for their insightful and invaluable guidance of this project throughout the first three editions. Finally, my thanks extend to my wife, Sherri. Her love, encouragement, and unflagging support kept me going through all three editions of this text.

If you are like most people, when you think of a psychologist, you think of a therapist counseling people who have problems. If I asked you to name a psychologist, you would probably name Sigmund Freud. However, Freud and psychologists who work as therapists are not the focus of this book. Psychology is a science, not just a mental health profession. The subjects of this scientific study are you, me, all humans.

Some psychologists may use other animals in their research, but their main goal is usually still to understand humans.

Psychology is the science of behavior and mental processes. Psychologists may be found in any number of roles, including teaching, researching, consulting, and yes, counseling troubled people. Psychological researchers study everything about us from how our brain works and how we see and hear to how we reason and make decisions. The American Psychological Association lists 54 different divisions of psychology, and psychologists specialize in studying each of these different aspects of our behavior and mental processing.

To learn more about these various subfields and careers in psychology, visit www. Although there are many diverse areas within psychology, there are only four major research perspectives for studying these topics. We will begin with a general overview of these four perspectives and then provide descriptions of the major research methods that psychologists use regardless of their perspective.

Understanding these perspectives and the research methods used by psychologists will allow you to start thinking like a psychologist like a scientist. Note that there are other perspectives in psychology that are primarily clinical in nature related to psychological therapy. We will discuss the psychoanalytic perspective which emphasizes the interaction of unconscious forces and childhood experiences in personality development and the humanistic perspective which emphasizes the personal growth motive in Chapter 8, Personality Theories and Assessment.

The research findings from the major perspectives fit together like the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle to give us a more complete picture. No particular perspective is better than the others, and psychologists using the various perspectives work together to provide a more complete explanation of our behavior and mental processing.

To explain means to know the causes of our behavior and mental processes. To facilitate your understanding of these perspectives, I discuss them in two different pairs based on the type of causal factors that they emphasize—internal factors or external factors. The biological perspective and the cognitive perspective focus on causes that stem from within us internal factors ; the behavioral perspective and the sociocultural perspective focus on causes that stem from outside us external factors.

Perspectives Emphasizing Internal Factors The biological perspective and the cognitive perspective focus on internal factors. In the case of the biological perspective, our physiological hardware especially the brain and nervous system is viewed as the major determiner of behavior and mental processing. The genetic and evolutionary bases of our physiology are also important. In contrast, for the cognitive perspective, the major explanatory focus is on how our mental processes, such as perception, memory, and problem solving, work and impact our behavior.

To contrast this perspective with the biological perspective, you can think of these mental processes as the software, or programs, of the brain the hardware. The biological perspective. We are biological creatures; therefore, looking for explanations in terms of our biology makes sense.

Biological psychologists look for causes within our physiology, our genetics, and human evolution. They argue that our actions and thoughts are functions of our underlying biology. Why do we get depressed? A biological psychologist might focus on a deficiency in the activity of certain chemicals in the nervous system as a cause of this problem.

Therefore, to treat depression using this perspective, the problem with the chemical deficiency would have to be rectified. Antidepressant drugs such as Prozac or Zoloft might be prescribed. These drugs increase the activity of the neural chemicals involved, and this increased activity might lead to changes in our mood.

Thus, our mood is at least partly a function tory focus is how the brain, nervous of our brain chemistry. Of course, many nonbiological facsystem, and other physiological tors can contribute to depression, including unhealthy mechanisms produce behavior and mental processes. Biological psychologists have found that it is the back part of our brain that allows us to see the world.

In Chapter 2, you will learn how the brain manages this incredibly difficult task as well as about the roles of other parts of our nervous system and the many different chemicals that transmit information within it. The cognitive perspective. Cognitive psychologists study all aspects of cog- nitive processing from perception to the higher-level processes, such as problem solving and reasoning. I will name a category, and you say aloud as fast as you can the first instance of that category that comes to mind.

Are you ready? If you are like most people, you said apple or orange. Again, if you are like most people, you said chair or sofa. How do we have categories of information organized so that certain examples come to mind first for most of us? In brief, cognitive research has shown that we organize categorical information around what we consider the most typical or representative examples of a category Rosch, These examples such as apple and orange for FRUIT are called prototypes for the category and are retrieved first when we think of the category.

A broader cognitive processing question concerns how memory retrieval in general works. This can be especially frustrating in exam situations. Or think about the opposite—an event or person comes to mind seemingly out of the blue. Even more complex questions arise when we consider how we attempt to solve problems, reason, and make decisions. The progress that cognitive psychologists have made in answering such questions about cognitive processing will be discussed in Chapter 5, on memory, and Chapter 6, on thinking and intelligence where you can find the answer to the series problem.

Perspectives Emphasizing External Factors Both the behavioral perspective and the sociocultural perspective focus on external factors in explaining human behavior and mental processing. The sociocultural perspective also emphasizes the influence of the external environment, but it more specifically focuses on the impact of other people and our culture as the major determiners of our behavior and mental processing. In addition to conditioning, the sociocultural perspective equally stresses cognitive types of learning, such as learning by observation or modeling, and thus focuses just as much on mental processing as observable behavior.

The behavioral perspective. According to the behavioral perspective, we behave as we do because of our past history of conditioning by our environment. There are two major types of conditioning, classical or Pavlovian and operant.

The pairing of these two environmental events led the dog to salivate to the tone in anticipation of the arrival of the food. The dog learned that the sound of the tone meant food was on its way.

According to behaviorists, such classical conditioning can explain how we learn fear and other emotional responses, taste aversions, and many other behaviors. Classical conditioning is important in determining our behavior, but behaviorists believe operant conditioning is even more important.

Operant conditioning involves the relationship between our behavior and its environmental consequences whether they are reinforcing or punishing. Simply put, if we are reinforced for a behavior, its probability will increase; if we are punished, the probability will decrease. For example, if you ask your teacher a question and he praises you for asking such a good question and then answers it very carefully, you will tend to ask more questions. Both types of conditioning, classical and operant, will be discussed in Chapter 4.

The point to remember here is that environmental events condition our behavior and are the causes of it. The sociocultural perspective. This perspective focuses on the impact of other people individuals and groups and our cultural surroundings on our behavior and mental processing.

We are social animals, therefore other people are important to us and thus greatly affect what we do and how we think. Our coverage of sociocultural research will emphasize the impact of these social forces on our behavior and mental processing. Kitty Genovese was brutally attacked, stabbed, and murdered while trying to enter her apartment building late at night. The attack was a prolonged one in which the attacker left and came back at least three times over a half-hour period.

Kitty screamed and pleaded for help, but none was forthcoming. Some people living in the building heard her screams for help, but no one helped. Someone finally called the police, but it was too late. The attacker had fled, and Kitty was dead. Exactly how many people witnessed the attack and failed to help is not clear. Regardless, no one acted until it was too late. Their general finding is called the bystander effect—the probability of a victim receiving help in an emergency is higher when there is only one bystander than when there are many.

In brief, other bystanders may lead us not to help. How do we apply this effect to the Kitty Genovese murder? The bystanders to the murder led each other not to help. Each felt that someone else would do something and that surely someone else had already called the police.

This research, along with studies of other intriguing topics that involve social forces such as why we conform and obey even when it may lead to destructive behavior, will be detailed in Chapter 9, on social psychology. Now you have at least a general understanding of the four major research perspectives, summarized in Table 1.

Remember, these perspectives are complementary, and, when used together, help us to gain a more Table 1. Research Perspective Major Explanatory Focus Developmental psychology the scientific study of human Biological How our physiology especially the brain and nervous system produces development across the our behavior and mental processes lifespan is a research area that and how genetics and evolution have nicely illustrates the benefits of impacted our physiology using multiple research perCognitive How our mental processes, such as spectives to address experimenperception, memory, and problem tal questions.

A good example solving, work and how they impact is the study of how children acour behavior quire language. Initially, behavBehavioral How external environmental events ioral learning principles of condition our observable behavior reinforcement and imitation Sociocultural How other people and the cultural were believed to be sufficient to context impact our behavior and account for language acquisimental processes tion.

Studies of the brain, for example, indicate that specific brain areas are involved in language acquisition. Research has also revealed that cognitive processes are important as well. For example, as children acquire new concepts, they learn the names that go with them and thus expand their vocabulary.

In addition, it has been shown that the sociocultural context of language helps children to learn about the social pragmatic functions of language. Thus, by using all four research perspectives, developmental researchers have gained a much better understanding of how children acquire language. We will learn in Chapter 7 Developmental Psychology that our understanding of many developmental questions has been broadened by the use of multiple research perspectives.

Subsequent chapters will detail the main concepts, theories, and research findings in the major fields of psychology. Almost any conceivable psychological research finding may seem like common sense after you learn about it. Hindsight bias works to make even a pair of opposite research conclusions both seem obvious Teigen, Be mindful of hindsight bias as you learn about what psychologists have learned about us.

It may lead you to think that this information is more obvious and easier than it actually is. You may falsely think that you already know much of the material and then not study sufficiently, leading to disappointment at exam time. The hindsight bias even works on itself. What is important phenomenon The tendency, after is understanding how psychologists conduct this scientific learning about an outcome, to be research in order to get the best answers to their questions.

Two of them, the biological perspective and the cognitive perspective, focus on internal causes of our behavior and mental processing. The biological perspective focuses on causal explanations in terms of our physiology, especially the brain and nervous system. The cognitive perspective focuses on understanding how our mental processes work and how they impact our behavior.

The biological perspective focuses on the physiological hardware, while the cognitive perspective focuses more on the mental processes or software of the brain. The behavioral perspective and the sociocultural perspective emphasize external causes.

The behavioral perspective focuses on how our observable behavior is conditioned by external environmental events. The sociocultural perspective emphasizes the impact that other people social forces and our culture have on our behavior and mental processing.

Psychologists use all four perspectives to get a more complete explanation of our behavior and mental processing. None of these perspectives is better than the others; they are complementary. Developmental psychology is a research field that nicely illustrates their complementary nature. We also briefly discussed the hindsight bias, the I-knew-it-all-along phenomenon. This bias leads us to find outcomes as more obvious and predictable than they truly are.

You need to beware of this bias when learning the basic research findings and theories discussed in the remainder of this text. It is important that you realize that psychologists have used scientific research methods to conduct their studies, thereby obtaining the best answers possible to their questions about human behavior and mental processing.

These methods fall into three categories—descriptive, correlational, and experimental. The experimental method is used most often because it allows the researcher to explore cause—effect relationships. Remember, the main goal of psychology is to explain through cause—effect relationships human behavior and mental processes.

Who would knowingly subject a group of children to cigarette smoke? In such situations, psychologists can learn a lot by employing the other methods—descriptive and correlational. Researchers can carefully observe and describe the health effects on one child in a family of smokers, or they can study many families in search of relationships correlations between parental smoking and childhood infections.

These other research methods also provide data for developing hypotheses testable predictions about cause—effect relationships to examine in experimental research. Descriptive Methods There are three types of descriptive methods: observational techniques, case studies, and survey research. The main purpose of all three methods is to provide objective and detailed descriptions of behavior and mental processes.

However, these descriptive data only allow the researcher to speculate about cause—effect relationships—to develop hypotheses about causal relationships. Such hypotheses must then be tested in experiments.

Observational techniques. Observational techniques exactly reflect their name. The researcher directly observes the behavior of interest.

Such observation can be done in the laboratory. However, behavior in the laboratory setting may not be natural. This is why researchers often use naturalistic observation, a descriptive research method in which behavior is observed in its natural setting, without the researcher intervening in the behavior being observed.

Researchers use naturalistic observation when they are interested in how humans or other animals behave in their natural environments. The researcher attempts to describe both objectively and thoroughly the behaviors that are present and the relationships among these behaviors. There have been many well-known observational studies of other species of animals in their natural habitats. This method is not used only for the observamethods whose main purpose is tion of other species of animals.

Observational studies of human to provide objective and detailed descriptions of behavior and mental behavior are conducted in many natural settings such as the processes. The observer may influence or change the behavior of interest is observed in its natural setting, and the researcher behavior of those being observed.

However, in most participant observation studies, the observer begins the study as a participant, whether in a laboratory or natural setting. You can think of this type of study as comparable to doing undercover work.

A famous example of such a study involved a group of people posing as patients with symptoms of a major mental disorder to see if doctors at psychiatric hospitals could distinguish them from real patients Rosenhan, We will find out what happened to them in Chapter Case studies.

Detailed observation is also involved in a case study. In a case study, the researcher studies an individual in depth over an extended period of time. In brief, the researcher attempts to learn as much as possible about the individual being studied.

A life history for the individual is developed, and data for a variety of tests are collected. The most common use of case studies is in clinical settings with patients suffering specific deficits or problems. The main goal of a case study is to gather information that will help in the treatment of the patient. The results of a case study cannot be generalized to the entire population.

They are specific to the individual that has been studied. A famous example method in which the researcher of such a case study is that of the late Henry Molaison, an studies an individual in depth over an extended period of time. For confidentiality purposes while he was alive he died in at the age of 82 , only his initials, H. Thus, we will refer to him as H.

For medical reasons, H. His case study included testing his memory capabilities in depth after the operation. He could read a magazine over and over again without ever realizing that he had read it before. We will learn exactly what role the hippocampus plays in memory in Chapter 5.

Remember, researchers cannot make cause—effect statements based on the findings of a case study, but they can formulate hypotheses that can be tested in experiments. All Rights Reserved.

Agree or disagree? The last descriptive method is one that you are most likely already familiar with, survey research. You have probably completed surveys either over the phone, via the mail, or in person during an interview. Survey research uses questionnaires and interviews to collect information about the behavior, beliefs, and attitudes of particular groups of people. It is assumed in survey research that people are willing and able to answer the survey questions accurately. However, the wording, order, and structure of the survey questions may lead the participants to give biased answers Schwartz, For example, survey researchers need to be aware of the social desirability bias, our tendency to respond in socially approved ways that may not reflect what we actually think or do.

This means that questions need to be constructed carefully to minimize such biases. Developing a well-structured, unbiased set of survey questions is a difficult, time-consuming task, but one that is essential to doing good survey research. For many reasons such as time and money , it is impossible to survey every person in the population. This is why the researcher only surveys a sample, the subset of people in a population participating in a study. For these sample data to be meaningful, the sample has to be representative of the larger relevant population.

One ill-fated survey study of women and love Hite, tried to generalize from a nonrepresentative sample Jackson, Because such a sample is not representative of American women in general, the results were not either. For example, the estimates of the numbers of women having affairs and disenchanted in their relationships with men were greatly overestimated. To obtain a representative sample, survey researchers usually use random sampling. In random sampling, each individual in the population has an equal opportunity of being in the sample.

In actuality, statisticians have developed procedures for obtaining a random sample that parallel selecting names randomly from a hat.

Think about how you would obtain a random sample of first-year students at your college. You would have to get a complete list of all first-year students from the registrar and then sample randomly from it. A variable is any factor that can take on more than one value. For example, age, height, grade point average, and intelligence test scores are all variables. In conducting a correlational study, the researcher first gets a representative sample of the relevant population.

Next, the researcher takes the two measurements on the sample. To see if the variables are related, the researcher calculates a statistic called the correlation coefficient, a statistic that tells us the type and the strength of the relationship between two variables.

Correlation coefficients range in value from —1. A positive correlation indicates a direct relationship between two variables—low scores on one variable tend to be paired with low scores on the other variable, and high scores on one variable tend to be paired with high scores on the other variable.

Think about the relationship between height and weight. These two variables are positively related. Taller people tend to be heavier. SAT scores and first-year college grades are also positively correlated Linn, Students who have higher SAT scores tend to get higher grades during their first year of college.

A negative correlation is an inverse relationship between two variables—low scores on one variable tend to be paired with high scores on the other variable, and high scores on one variable tend to be paired with low scores on the other variable. As you know if you have ever climbed a mountain, elevation and temperature are negatively correlated—as elevation increases, temperature decreases.

The second part of the correlation coefficient is its absolute value, from 0 to 1. The strength of the correlation is indicated by its absolute value. Zero and absolute values near 0 indicate no relationship. As the absolute value increases to 1. Please note that the sign of the coefficient does not tell us anything about the strength of the relationship. Coefficients do not function like numbers on the number line, where positive numbers are greater than negative numbers.

For example, —. The sign of the coefficient perfect predictability. Thus, we usually do not have perfect predictability so respectively. The absolute value of the coefficient 0. These exceptions do not, however, invalidate 1. In a scatterplot, each data point two variables for each participant. Several sample scatterplots are presented in Figure 1.

Correlational studies usually involve a large number of participants, therefore there are usually a large number of data points in a scatterplot. Because those in Figure 1. This means there were 15 participants in each of the hypothetical correlational studies leading to these scatterplots. The scatterplots in Figure 1. All of the points fall on the same line in each scatterplot, which allows us to predict one variable from the other perfectly by using the equation for the line.

This means that you have maximal predictability. Please note that the difference between a and b is the direction of the data points line. If the data points show an increasing trend go from the bottom left to the top right of the scatterplot as in a , it is a positive relationship. Low scores on one variable tend to be paired with low scores on the other variable, and high scores with high scores. This is a direct relationship. However, if the data points show a decreasing trend go from the top left to the bottom right as in b , there is a negative relationship.

Low scores tend to be paired with high scores, and high scores with low scores. This is an inverse relationship. The scatterplot in Figure 1. There is no direction to the data points in this scatterplot. They are scattered all over in a random fashion. This means that we have a correlation near 0 and minimal predictability. Now consider d and e. First, you should realize that d indicates a positive correlation because of the direction of the data points from the bottom left to the top right and that e indicates a negative correlation because of the direction of the scatter from the top left to the bottom right.

But what else does the scatter of the data points tell us? Note that the data points in d and e neither fall on the same line as in a and b nor are they scattered all about the graph with no directional component as in c.

Thus, scatterplots d and e indicate correlations with strengths somewhere between 0 and 1. As the amount of scatter of the data points increases, the strength of the correlation decreases. So, how strong would the correlations represented in d and e be?

They would be fairly strong because there is not much scatter. Remember, as the amount of scatter increases, the strength decreases and so does predictability. When the scatter is maximal as in c , the strength is near 0, and we have little predictability. The third-variable problem. Strong correlations give us excellent predictabil- ity, but they do not allow us to draw cause-effect conclusions about the relationships between the variables.

I cannot stress this point enough. Correlation is necessary but not sufficient for causation to exist. The correlation in a is positive because the data points show an increasing trend go from bottom left to top right and is negative in b because the data points show a decreasing trend go from top left to bottom right.

Only data collected in well-controlled experiments allow us to draw such conclusions. This does not mean that two correlated variables cannot be causally related, but rather that we cannot determine this from correlational data. Maybe they are; maybe they are not. Correlational data do not allow you to decide if they are or are not. As self-esteem decreases, depression increases.

But we cannot conclude that low self-esteem causes depression. First, it could be the reverse causal relationship. Both self-esteem and depression could also stem from some current very stressful events. Such alternative possibilities are examples of the third-variable problem—another variable may be responsible for the relationship observed between two variables.

To make sure you understand the third-variable problem, here is a very memorable example Li, , described in Stanovich, Because of overpopulation problems, a correlational study was conducted in Taiwan to identify variables that best predicted the use of contraceptive devices. What third variable might be responsible ship between the two variables. Think about it. A likely one is level of education. People with a higher education tend to be both better informed about birth control and to have a higher socioeconomic status.

The former leads them to use contraceptive devices, and the latter allows them to buy more electrical appliances. To control for the effects of such third variables, researchers conduct an experiment in which they manipulate one variable and measure its effect upon another variable while controlling other potentially relevant variables.

Researchers must control for possible third variables so that they can make cause-effect statements. Such control, manipulation, and measurement are the main elements of experimental research, which is described next. Experimental Research The key aspect of experimental research is that the researcher controls the experimental setting. The only factor that varies is what the researcher manipulates. It is this control that allows the researcher to make cause—effect statements about the experimental results.

This control is derived primarily from two actions. First, the experimenter controls for the possible influence of third variables by making sure that they are held constant across all of the groups or conditions in the experiment. Second, the experimenter controls for any possible influences due to the individual characteristics of the participants, such as intelligence, motivation, and memory, by using random assignment—randomly assigning the participants to groups in an experiment in order to equalize participant characteristics across the various groups in the experiment.

If the participant characteristics of the groups are on average equivalent at the beginning of the experiment, then any differences between the groups at the end of the experiment cannot be attributed to such characteristics.

Please note the differences between random assignment and random sampling. Random sampling is a technique in which a sample of participants that is representative of a population is obtained. Hence it is used not only in experiments but also in other research methods such as correlational studies and surveys. Random assignment is only used in experiments. It is a control measure in which the researcher randomly assigns the participants in the sample to the various groups or conditions in an experiment.

Random sampling allows you to generalize your results to the relevant population; random assignment controls for possible influences of individual characteristics of the participants on the behavior s of interest in an experiment. Designing an experiment. When a researcher designs an experiment, the researcher begins with a hypothesis the prediction to be tested about the cause-effect relationship between two variables.

One of the two variables is assumed to be the cause, and the other variable is the one to be affected. The dependent variable is the variable that is hypothesized to be affected by the independent variable and thus is measured by the experimenter.

Thus, in an experiment the researcher manipulates the independent variable and measures its effect on the dependent variable while controlling other potentially relevant variables.

If there is a causal relationship between the independent and dependent variables, then the measurements of the dependent variable are dependent on the values of the independent variable, hence the name dependent variable. Sometimes the researcher hypothesizes more than one cause or more than one effect so he manipulates more than one independent variable or measures more than one dependent variable. For control purposes, participants are randomly assigned to these two groups.

The group exposed to the independent variable is ment, a variable that is hypothesized called the experimental group, and the group not exposed to be affected by the independent to the independent variable is called the control group.

The experimental and measures their effect on one group will participate in some aerobic exercise program, and or more dependent variables while controlling other potentially relevant the control group will not. To measure any possible effects of variables. If the aerobic exercise does reduce anxiety, then we should see this difference in the second measurement of anxiety at the end of the experiment.

The independent and dependent variables in an experiment must be operationally defined. An operational definition is a description of the operations or procedures the researcher uses to manipulate or measure a variable. We always recommend students and instructors to download the samples before placing orders.

October 02, Griggs People Also Search: psychology a concise introduction 5th edition test bank test bank for psychology a concise introduction 5th edition pdf test bank for psychology a concise introduction 5th edition chapter 1 psychology a concise introduction 5th edition chapter 2 test bank test bank for psychology a concise introduction 5th edition pdf download Psychology A Concise Introduction 5th Edition by Griggs college test bank , Griggs.

No more waiting. You download your files once you complete your order. All Test Bank Files are complete with current and updated Chapters. Post a Comment. Some features of WorldCat will not be available. Create lists, bibliographies and reviews: or. Search WorldCat Find items in libraries near you. Advanced Search Find a Library.

Refine Your Search Year. Your list has reached the maximum number of items. Please create a new list with a new name; move some items to a new or existing list; or delete some items. Psychology: A Concise Introduction. Psychology : a concise introduction.