RESUMEN
Phenomenon: This qualitative inquiry used conceptual change theory as a theoretical lens to illuminate experiences in medical school that trigger professional identity formation. According to conceptual change theory, changes in personal conceptualizations are initiated when cognitive disequilibrium is introduced. We sought to identify the experiences that trigger cognitive disequilibrium and to subsequently describe students' perceptions of self-in-profession prior to the experience; the nature of the experience; and, when applicable, the outcomes of the experience. Approach: This article summarizes findings from portions of data collected in a larger qualitative study conducted at a new medical school in the United States that utilizes diverse pedagogies and experiences to develop student knowledge, clinical skills, attitudes, and dispositions. Primary data sources included focus groups and individual interviews with students across the 4 years of the curriculum (audio data). Secondary data included students' comments from course and end-of-year evaluations for the 2013-2017 classes (text data). Data treatment tools available in robust qualitative software, NVivo 10, were utilized to expedite coding of both audio and text data. Content analysis was adopted as the analysis method for both audio and text data. Findings: We identified four experiences that triggered cognitive disequilibrium in relationship to students' perceptions of self-in-profession: (a) transition from undergraduate student to medical student, (b) clinical experiences in the preclinical years, (c) exposure to the business of medicine, and (d) exposure to physicians in clinical practice. Insights: We believe these experiences represent vulnerable periods of professional identity formation during medical school. Educators interested in purposefully shaping curriculum to encourage adaptive professional identity development during medical school may find it useful to integrate educational interventions that assist students with navigating the disequilibrium that is introduced during these periods.
Asunto(s)
Facultades de Medicina , Identificación Social , Estudiantes de Medicina/psicología , Femenino , Grupos Focales , Humanos , Entrevistas como Asunto , Masculino , Preceptoría , Investigación Cualitativa , Estados UnidosRESUMEN
The debate about whether replication studies should become mainstream is essentially driven by disagreements about their costs and benefits and the best ways to allocate limited resources. Determining when replications are worthwhile requires quantifying their expected utility. We argue that a formalized framework for such evaluations can be useful for both individual decision-making and collective discussions about replication.
Asunto(s)
Toma de Decisiones , Análisis Costo-BeneficioRESUMEN
The facial feedback hypothesis suggests that an individual's facial expressions can influence their emotional experience (e.g., that smiling can make one feel happier). However, a reoccurring concern is that supposed facial feedback effects are merely methodological artifacts. Six experiments conducted across 29 countries (N = 995) examined the extent to which the effects of posed facial expressions on emotion reports were moderated by (a) the hypothesis communicated to participants (i.e., demand characteristics) and (b) participants' beliefs about facial feedback effects. Results indicated that these methodological artifacts moderated, but did not fully account for, the effects of posed facial expressions on emotion reports. Even when participants were explicitly told or personally believed that facial poses do not influence emotions, they still exhibited facial feedback effects. These results indicate that facial feedback effects are not solely driven by demand or placebo effects. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).
Asunto(s)
Artefactos , Emociones , Humanos , Retroalimentación , Expresión Facial , SonrisaRESUMEN
Progress in psychology has been frustrated by challenges concerning replicability, generalizability, strategy selection, inferential reproducibility, and computational reproducibility. Although often discussed separately, these five challenges may share a common cause: insufficient investment of intellectual and nonintellectual resources into the typical psychology study. We suggest that the emerging emphasis on big-team science can help address these challenges by allowing researchers to pool their resources together to increase the amount available for a single study. However, the current incentives, infrastructure, and institutions in academic science have all developed under the assumption that science is conducted by solo principal investigators and their dependent trainees, an assumption that creates barriers to sustainable big-team science. We also anticipate that big-team science carries unique risks, such as the potential for big-team-science organizations to be co-opted by unaccountable leaders, become overly conservative, and make mistakes at a grand scale. Big-team-science organizations must also acquire personnel who are properly compensated and have clear roles. Not doing so raises risks related to mismanagement and a lack of financial sustainability. If researchers can manage its unique barriers and risks, big-team science has the potential to spur great progress in psychology and beyond.
Asunto(s)
Investigación Interdisciplinaria , Humanos , Reproducibilidad de los ResultadosRESUMEN
The past decade has witnessed a proliferation of big team science (BTS), endeavours where a comparatively large number of researchers pool their intellectual and/or material resources in pursuit of a common goal. Despite this burgeoning interest, there exists little guidance on how to create, manage and participate in these collaborations. In this paper, we integrate insights from a multi-disciplinary set of BTS initiatives to provide a how-to guide for BTS. We first discuss initial considerations for launching a BTS project, such as building the team, identifying leadership, governance, tools and open science approaches. We then turn to issues related to running and completing a BTS project, such as study design, ethical approvals and issues related to data collection, management and analysis. Finally, we address topics that present special challenges for BTS, including authorship decisions, collaborative writing and team decision-making.
RESUMEN
This paper presents a generalized registration form for systematic reviews that can be used when currently available forms are not adequate. The form is designed to be applicable across disciplines (i.e., psychology, economics, law, physics, or any other field) and across review types (i.e., scoping review, review of qualitative studies, meta-analysis, or any other type of review). That means that the reviewed records may include research reports as well as archive documents, case law, books, poems, etc. Items were selected and formulated to optimize broad applicability instead of specificity, forgoing some benefits afforded by a tighter focus. This PRISMA 2020 compliant form is a fallback for more specialized forms and can be used if no specialized form or registration platform is available. When accessing this form on the Open Science Framework website, users will therefore first be guided to specialized forms when they exist. In addition to this use case, the form can also serve as a starting point for creating registration forms that cater to specific fields or review types.
Asunto(s)
Formularios como Asunto , Revisiones Sistemáticas como AsuntoRESUMEN
In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Psychological Science Accelerator coordinated three large-scale psychological studies to examine the effects of loss-gain framing, cognitive reappraisals, and autonomy framing manipulations on behavioral intentions and affective measures. The data collected (April to October 2020) included specific measures for each experimental study, a general questionnaire examining health prevention behaviors and COVID-19 experience, geographical and cultural context characterization, and demographic information for each participant. Each participant started the study with the same general questions and then was randomized to complete either one longer experiment or two shorter experiments. Data were provided by 73,223 participants with varying completion rates. Participants completed the survey from 111 geopolitical regions in 44 unique languages/dialects. The anonymized dataset described here is provided in both raw and processed formats to facilitate re-use and further analyses. The dataset offers secondary analytic opportunities to explore coping, framing, and self-determination across a diverse, global sample obtained at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which can be merged with other time-sampled or geographic data.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Humanos , Adaptación Psicológica , Conductas Relacionadas con la Salud , Pandemias , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
Following theories of emotional embodiment, the facial feedback hypothesis suggests that individuals' subjective experiences of emotion are influenced by their facial expressions. However, evidence for this hypothesis has been mixed. We thus formed a global adversarial collaboration and carried out a preregistered, multicentre study designed to specify and test the conditions that should most reliably produce facial feedback effects. Data from n = 3,878 participants spanning 19 countries indicated that a facial mimicry and voluntary facial action task could both amplify and initiate feelings of happiness. However, evidence of facial feedback effects was less conclusive when facial feedback was manipulated unobtrusively via a pen-in-mouth task.
Asunto(s)
Emociones , Expresión Facial , Humanos , Retroalimentación , Felicidad , CaraRESUMEN
The facial feedback hypothesis suggests that an individual's experience of emotion is influenced by feedback from their facial movements. To evaluate the cumulative evidence for this hypothesis, we conducted a meta-analysis on 286 effect sizes derived from 138 studies that manipulated facial feedback and collected emotion self-reports. Using random effects meta-regression with robust variance estimates, we found that the overall effect of facial feedback was significant but small. Results also indicated that feedback effects are stronger in some circumstances than others. We examined 12 potential moderators, and 3 were associated with differences in effect sizes: (a) Type of emotional outcome: Facial feedback influenced emotional experience (e.g., reported amusement) and, to a greater degree, affective judgments of a stimulus (e.g., the objective funniness of a cartoon). Three publication bias detection methods did not reveal evidence of publication bias in studies examining the effects of facial feedback on emotional experience, but all 3 methods revealed evidence of publication bias in studies examining affective judgments. (b) Presence of emotional stimuli: Facial feedback effects on emotional experience were larger in the absence of emotionally evocative stimuli (e.g., cartoons). (c) Type of stimuli: When participants were presented with emotionally evocative stimuli, facial feedback effects were larger in the presence of some types of stimuli (e.g., emotional sentences) than others (e.g., pictures). The available evidence supports the facial feedback hypothesis' central claim that facial feedback influences emotional experience, although these effects tend to be small and heterogeneous. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
Asunto(s)
Emociones/fisiología , Cara/fisiología , Expresión Facial , Retroalimentación Sensorial/fisiología , Autoinforme , HumanosRESUMEN
Concerns have been growing about the veracity of psychological research. Many findings in psychological science are based on studies with insufficient statistical power and nonrepresentative samples, or may otherwise be limited to specific, ungeneralizable settings or populations. Crowdsourced research, a type of large-scale collaboration in which one or more research projects are conducted across multiple lab sites, offers a pragmatic solution to these and other current methodological challenges. The Psychological Science Accelerator (PSA) is a distributed network of laboratories designed to enable and support crowdsourced research projects. These projects can focus on novel research questions, or attempt to replicate prior research, in large, diverse samples. The PSA's mission is to accelerate the accumulation of reliable and generalizable evidence in psychological science. Here, we describe the background, structure, principles, procedures, benefits, and challenges of the PSA. In contrast to other crowdsourced research networks, the PSA is ongoing (as opposed to time-limited), efficient (in terms of re-using structures and principles for different projects), decentralized, diverse (in terms of participants and researchers), and inclusive (of proposals, contributions, and other relevant input from anyone inside or outside of the network). The PSA and other approaches to crowdsourced psychological science will advance our understanding of mental processes and behaviors by enabling rigorous research and systematically examining its generalizability.