The dangers of generalizing from comparative studies of how
different groups of people learn, remember, conceptualize (think,
that is), much less the dangers of making educational or social
policy based on such data, are documented in detail by Professors
Cole (Communications, Univ. of California, San Diego) and Means
(Educational Psychology, Univ. of Maryland). They first review the
assumptions underlying traditional experimental research in
psychology, then show how comparative studies typically violate the
logic of such experimental designs. Most importantly, they point
out that "all other things cannot be equal" when groups are
compared, no matter how carefully the researcher thinks he has
matched them. Educational variables, cultural differences,
physiological variation, even historical events may contribute to
variation in subjects' responses to instructions, or to the task
itself, and certainly can influence their ultimate performance. The
authors therefore suggest alternate research strategies - among
them scrupulous analysis of the processes involved in the tasks
being studied, with comparisons of patterns of performance (not the
usual search for "better" scores); or comparisons of groups and
tasks, with systematic variation to eliminate a possible
explanation of varying performance levels. In addition, they
describe four approaches in which subjects' performances are
compared with a theoretical model which has predicted particular
outcomes. The final chapter will be of particular interest to the
lay reader concerned about the leap from laboratory to life -
notably, for its discussion of the dubious uses of research
findings to explain (or attempt to change) spontaneous and varied
real-world behaviors. A valuable study for educational researchers
and users of educational research - which one need not have a
statistical background to comprehend. (Kirkus Reviews)
The psychology of thinking has traditionally been in the business
of making comparisons between different groups of people. On the
whole, these comparisons have rendered a substantial body of
knowledge; but all too often, they have suffered the pitfalls of
faulty organizational logic and unfounded or invidious conclusions.
In this extraordinarily clear and critical introduction, Michael
Cole and Barbara Means Jay out the problems involved in comparing
how people think. They show, for example, how variables confounded
with the constitution of two groups can lead to the wrong
interpretation of group differences. More subtly, they demonstrate
how cognitive differences between groups can destroy the
equivalence of the tests used to make comparisons. They also
discuss the unfortunate way that observed differences between
groups have led to prejudicial interpretations in which mental
differences are transformed into mental deficits.
Cole and Means illustrate all these problems with a rich variety
of examples drawn from the research literature in comparative
cognition. Because they use real examples. Cole and Means offer
much more than the usual banal remedies for improving research
design. Instead of merely telling the student to run the right
control groups, for example, they show how theory enters into the
selection of appropriate controls and how atheoretic comparative
work can easily run amok.
It is a rare event when seasoned researchers take time to tell
the novice how to avoid the problems of previous research.
"Comparative Studies of How People Think" provides just such an
event.
General
Is the information for this product incomplete, wrong or inappropriate?
Let us know about it.
Does this product have an incorrect or missing image?
Send us a new image.
Is this product missing categories?
Add more categories.
Review This Product
No reviews yet - be the first to create one!
Welcome to Loot.co.za!
Sign in / Register |Wishlists & Gift Vouchers |Help | Advanced search
