Discussion: Sampling and Collecting Quantitative and Qualitative Data

week 10 dq post

If you take both a qualitative and quantitative example of dozens and dozens of articles about neuropsychology you will find the same paraphrased sentence in each one. “Our study has limitations, but the other studies and other disciplines are such intense limitations and errors their data cannot be trusted”

To answer this weeks question, the first and foremost question which much be established is the question of HUP.

HUP is Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle. The history of the origin of this sequence of concepts is a long and to me entirely fascinating story. Heisenberg was a young physicist at the same conference where the great Einstein was present. Heisenberg kept coming to Al and asking questions, which Al shot most of those ideas down for the first days. But Heisenberg kept refining the ideas, refining and refining. Close to the end of the conference; Heisenberg finally came to Al with the foundation for HUP.

Among other rules and concepts is this one; which could not have more of a foundational affect on the entire field of psychology than in this week’s question.

“An object under observation can and will alter based on being observed”. The next aspect which is totally and completely applies “We can know where an object is, or we can know how fast that object is traveling but we cannot know both of those things at the same time.” which is a slight take off from Schrodinger’s Cat “where the cat is both alive and dead at the same time in the box. Being two states of matter at the same exact time”.

No matter what type of research is done qualitative, quantitative, mix method, etc. the objects can and absolutely will alter based on being observed.

How do we know this as a matter of absolute fact. Physics has proven that atoms communicate with each other. Your atoms are talking with the object under observation and the object of observation atoms are talking with yours at the same time. Everything which produces Electro-Magnetic waves is sending out “communications”. From Sub Quarks up, all things send out Electro-Magnetic waves. It is part of being at least in part physical.

In my opinion the entire clinical and testing structure needs to be immediately reevaluated from zero up. There are obvious gaping holes in most aspects of the process. Learning about something which itself admits has structural and strategic flaws is inherently not a solid application of resources. Learning it in order to fix what is wrong with it, is the only real solution.

Plus, in the last few months I have collected enough data to point to a serious theory and or difficult to prove wrong humans have a 3-act behavior pattern. Which the Romans used from day one well minute one to present, e.g. the descendant cultures of the Romans name changed and still utilize the 3 acts in almost every single thing they do. An AMA panel needs to be convened to begin the rebuild from zero standpoint of how psychological tests are performed. What mathematical models are used, not with an emphasis on how well x tool works. But with emphasis on how x tool does not work and how to fix it.

Measurement reliability; mathematics rule one, measure to and from fixed points. Any and all things in science must start with the predictability factor of the next fixed point will occur at this time and space. Minus that being able to rely on 2 is the same distance from 1 as 1000 is the same distance from 999. To predict where and when x will occur is measurement reliability.

Measurement validity; to have validity many people need to perform the same test with the same parameters and finding the same =x. All the people involved need to be able to add 1 to 999 to produce 1000. The validity of a measurement is if no matter who performs the actions, as long as they follow the same exact parameters they will achieve the same =x mark.

I predict in 99% of movies, tv shows, and most human interactions the following pattern will happen in sequence, sometimes layered and complex where many to dozens and dozens of 3 acts are happening at the same time from qualitatively up to and through quantitatively. Those 3 acts are part 1a some type of violence, 1b some type of pair bonding (from the most innocent platonic e.g. Bambi meets Thumper, to fill in the blank), part 2 some type of community involvement. The events of the Crucifixion have dozens and dozens of the 3 acts sequenced in small ways and in huge ways. Cutting off the ear 1a, Judas kiss 1b, taken out in chains 2. 3 times the sequence repeats in the 12 stages of the cross. 1a violence, 1b interacting with kindly, 2 onto the next step. 1a the trail, 1b Pilot washing his hands as the Philistines rejoice at the verdict, 2 the journey to the Hill. Makes less than no account if the stories are true or fiction, there is more than enough people who believe in the story to in their minds makes it true. Last count several billion. You can hardly find a fictional plot play, tv show, movie, etc. which does not rely on these 3 acts as a foundation for the story. Every James Bond movie starts with an act of violence, the intro title sequence the images on the screen are more than obvious 1b, then the action sequence to start the movie 2 a parade or some type of community involvement. That sequence of events being a foundation 3 acts for at least western culture to be based on/from is not part of any study for the last 2 centuries. The entire field for 2 centuries missing those 3 acts which the Romans used from previous cultures; the Mem in Memento Mori the name derives directly from Pharaoh Mem and his 3^rd and smallest Pyramid on the Giza Plateau. Those 3 acts need to be studied intensely, extremely, and retested and retested, and retested to find any type of way those 3 acts are not part of human nature. If they are proven to be part of human nature, then every single test done every participant is affected by and their actions controlled by those 3 acts. From people like me who do not have much of a autoexec.bat forced behavior to work within the 3 acts. To people who have almost no control over, they repeat those 3 acts every second of their lives. Start the rebuild process with those facts. In addition, a database of data collection is a requirement. A way to use all the ways the testing parameters work well balanced by the ways the tests fail entirely. If x test does not perform a measurement well, then x needs to be paired with y test because y test does perform a measurement well, whereas x test performs b extremely well which y is entirely lost performing that test. This is what Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle talked about. Socrates was executed for pointing out these 3 acts, which lead to his own 1a trail and sentence, 1b appeal, 2 his appeal was dismissed with prejudice and the community rejoiced.

The days where a researcher can create a list of questions to ask in x format and have that information be published needs to end. The results are guesses at best (many of the articles read from vaguely to openly admit the results are guesses. Consistent guesses but still guesses., and misleading at worst. Until the weaknesses are pointed out and fixed the results are invalid. That is how the scientific method works, any answer unless it passes a thorough testing phase is only an idea now matter how much the mathematics can predict the mathematics cannot answer the all-important question, why is that happening. Only that it does. Only that it does, is insufficient of an answer to quality as scientifically valid. Gravity is also on that list, so is the concept of time.

References

Drost, E. A. 1. edrost@calstatela. ed. (2011). Validity and reliability in social science research. Education Research & Perspectives, 38(1), 105–123. Retrieved from https://search-ebscohost-com.ezp.waldenulibrary.org/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=79555639&site=ehost-live&scope=site

Teddlie, C., & Yu, F. (2007). Mixed methods sampling: A Typology with examples. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1). Sage Publications Inc. Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications Inc. via the Copyright Clearance Center.

Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Collins, K. M. (2007). A typology of mixed methods sampling: Designs in social science research . The Qualitative Report, 12(2), 281-316. Retrieved from https://nsuworks.nova.edu/tqr/vol12/iss2/9