Scientific Thinking and Scientific Skepticism It isn't easy to define psychology. Nonetheless, the general understanding of psychology is that it a scientific study of behavior, the mind and the brain. As a discipline, it spans several levels of analysis. A thorough understanding of psychology cannot be achieved by looking at just a single level of analysis since every level has a different set of knowledge and view point (Lillienfied, Lynn, Namy & Woolf, 2011).

Lilienfield, Lynn, Namy and Woolf (2011) are of the opinion that scientific thinking gives us skills to overcome our prejudices and biases which can distort our perception and make us ignore evidence that go against our line of thinking. Six scientific principles of thinking are particularly vital when one wants to study psychology. The first one is "Extraordinary Claims" which was proposed by David Hume, a Scottish Philosopher who lived in the 18th century. David Hume believed that as claims become more contradicting to what we already hold to be true, the more the evidence needs to be more persuasive for the claim to be accepted. An example is the claim that there are aliens and that of alien abduction. While the claim could be right, those who push the claim have failed to give any evidence to support claims of alien abduction. The push to provide evidence is vital because it forces psychology researchers and practitioners to dig in deeper when assessing theories or claims. On evaluating a psychological claim, we ought to ask if the claim is in line with what we already know to be true and whether or not the evidence given for the extraordinary is equally extraordinary.

Examples of Pseudoscience

Mark Shead states that memorizing text isn't as hard as people think in an article he did titled "How to Memorize Verbatim Text." Most people's problem with memorization is that the only tactic they know is reading a text several times. Memorization is an art that can be learned. It is important to master any tactic that can speed up or make the memorization process better. One can easily recall a text after reading it several times since different connections are made with every reading session. The formation of connections is really how one memorizes something. You don't repeat, you recall. The argument is that reading something again and again is a less efficient approach. All one needs to do is learn to recall and someone can only recall something that has been stored in their memory for some time (Shead, 2015).

This technique of trying to recall is one of the most productive, says Mark Shead. He has utilized it a lot when he had to memorize scriptures fast. In giving you something to practice with, it can help improve memory. This is just but one technique, though. One should understand the ways they recall information. The goal is to always have the information stored in the short-term memory so that it can later be recalled (Shead, 2015).

These kinds of theories can be called pseudoscientific theories. They are claims that appear scientific but really aren't. Particularly, pseudoscience doesn't have any safeguards to prevent belief perseverance and confirmation bias which are a common characteristic of science.

One would therefore ask if there is evidence supporting Mark Shead's theories on memorization and learning. While there are some pieces of evidence, experts argue that the available evidence isn't strong enough. For the methods to be convincing there should be data showing that a group applying these methods got better results than another group applying different methods or a control group that didn't use any particular style or method. But there aren't many convincing studies in support of Mark Shead. It has been found that there is better performance among groups that stick to one specific style. The reason for this is that humans are unique and we have differing learning styles and the best way to approach the subject is not to push for similar learning styles, but to make the substance of the material similar for the whole group.

Another issue is that even on accepting a particular style of learning, not all styles are reliable and people's preferred modes of learning don't necessarily mean that they perform better on using those methods. They can get...

Results are therefore the best predictor of what will work or what works.
There are lots of warning signs that can assist in separating pseudoscience from science. The most important three are: overusing ad hoc immunizing hypothesis, not self-correcting one's self and overreliance on anecdotes (Lillienfield, Lynn, Namy & Woolf, 2011). Often, "Ruling out Rival Hypothesis" is the scientific principle that I use. On evaluating a claim, I exclude other probable explanations which makes my point-of-view on the subject in question small or perspective narrow-minded.

Studies show that suicidal teenagers either have issues at home or in school. Home and school problems are some of the biggest factors that lead to teenagers committing suicide. Another key concept in evaluating claims that I consistently use is replicability. While evaluating a claim, I don't usually ask if other researchers have replicated findings supporting the claim. In the abductions cases, for instance, many researchers have replicated the claim of hallucinations. Discussion 2: Choice 2

Research and Psychology

Article Title: "More Than Just Skin Deep? Personality Information Influences Men's Ratings of the Attractiveness of Women's Body Sizes"

The study examines how personality information influences men's perception of how attractive various female body sizes are. The article's focus is a dynamic attractiveness aspect called the influence of personality information on perceptions of physical attractiveness. Personality components have traditionally not fallen within experimental scientists' purview as they studied physical attractiveness, mainly because static and dynamic attractiveness components are not easy to measure and evaluate concurrently. Also, various works have shown the existence of a phenomenon termed as "beauty is good" which explains that people who are physically attractive are often perceived to have a number of positive qualities. Thus the hypothesis being studied here is if there is a link between physical appearance and personality as far as perceived attributions is concerned (Swami et al., 2010).

The applied research methods include correlation studies and natural observations. The sample was made up of male students at university level. 2,157 of them were assigned randomly to one of ten groups where they got personality information on the women they were to rate, or to control groups where no such personality information was given. Participants were directed to one of eleven groups where they took a test, the Photographic Figure Rating Scale (PFRS). 5 groups did PFRS that was paired with positive personality information while 5 groups had negative personality information. A control group did not receive any personality information (Swami et al., 2010).

The study's results show that there are few differences in the figures the participants viewed as attractive physically as a function of availed personality information. This is to say, participants had almost the same views on women's most attractive figures regardless of personality information availed. In contrast, personality information did have an effect when it comes to body size ranges participants found attractive. Generally, results gotten reveal that personality influence how physically attractive one is viewed to be. In all, the results are of significance since they begin the journey of reshaping oversights had by contemporary research on interpersonal attraction which have always focused more on physical attraction and less on non-physical characteristics. These non-physical traits seem to have as much a place in interpersonal interactions and attractiveness as physical appearance. Further, while the study examines the place of personality information in influencing how people judge attractiveness, some other non-physical characteristics exist that can also shape how one's attractiveness is viewed. They include emotional and social role-playing ability and skills, fashion sense, non-verbal cues and reputation (Swami et al., 2010)