Methods in Behavioral Research 12th Edition Cozby Solutions Manual
Methods in Behavioral Research 12th Edition Cozby Solutions Manual
Methods in Behavioral Research 12th Edition Cozby Solutions Manual
Chapter 2
Where to Start
Learning Objectives
Please note that much of this information is quoted from the text.
Researchers use research questions to identify and describe the broad topic that they are
investigating, and then conduct research in order to answer their research questions. A
hypothesis is a tentative idea or question that is waiting for evidence to support or refute it. Once
the hypothesis is proposed, data must be gathered and evaluated in terms of whether the evidence
is consistent or inconsistent with the hypothesis.
Where a research question is broad, and a hypothesis is more specific, a prediction is a guess at
the outcome of a hypothesis. If a prediction is confirmed by the results of the study, the
hypothesis is supported. If the prediction is not confirmed, the researcher will either reject the
hypothesis or conduct further research using different methods to study the hypothesis. It is
important to note that when the results of a study confirm a prediction, the hypothesis is only
supported, not proven.
The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (APA, 2010) allows the use
of either participants or subjects when describing humans who take part in psychological
research.
A. Common Sense
One source of ideas that can be tested is the body of knowledge called common sense—the
things we all believe to be true. Do “opposites attract” or do “birds of a feather flock
together”? Asking questions such as these can lead to research programs studying attraction.
Observations of personal and social events can provide many ideas for research. The
curiosity sparked by one’s observations and experiences can lead one to ask questions about
all sorts of phenomena.
C. Theories
D. Past Research
Becoming familiar with a body of research on a topic is perhaps the best way to generate
ideas for new research. Because the results of research are published, researchers can use the
body of past literature on a topic to continually refine and expand people’s knowledge.
E. Practical Problems
Research is also stimulated by practical problems that can have immediate applications.
Before conducting any research project, an investigator must have a thorough knowledge of previous
research findings. Even if the researcher formulates the basic idea, a review of past studies will help
the researcher clarify the idea and design the study.
In journals, researchers publish the results of their investigations. After a research project
has been completed, the study is written as a report, which then may be submitted to the
editor of an appropriate journal. The editor solicits reviews from other scientists in the same
field and then decides whether the report is to be accepted for publication.
Language: English
A
HISTORY OF TITHES
BY THE
REV. HENRY WILLIAM CLARKE, B.A.
T .C ., D .
Author of “The Past and Present Revenues of the Church of England in Wales,” and
“The Public Landed Endowments of the Church in Anglo-Saxon Times.”
SECOND EDITION
London
SWAN SONNENSCHEIN & CO
NEW YORK: CHARLES SCRIBNER’S SONS
1894
PREFACE.
In my former[1] as also in my present work, I have taken Selden’s
“History of Tithes,” ed. 1618, as my chief authority. I adopted his views
on the interpretation of King Ethelwulf’s charter as having been the first
legal title deeds of granting tithes to the clergy.
After carefully consulting the best authorities, especially Mr. Kemble,
Mr. Haddan, and Bishop Stubbs, I have in my present work adopted their
views, that Ethelwulf granted a tenth part of his lands and not the tithes
of the lands of his kingdom.
I have also considered Archbishop Egbert’s alleged canon for the
tripartite division of tithes as an anachronism.
In preparing my former work, I laboured under the great disadvantage
of residing too far away from a good public library, where I could
consult the best and most recent authorities on the subject.
Just as the sheets of my former work passed through the press, a third
edition of Lord Selborne’s work, “A Defence of the Church of England
against Disestablishment,” was published. And in the following year,
1888, appeared his “Ancient Facts and Fictions concerning Churches and
Tithes.”
I could only then refer in the briefest manner in my former book to his
first work. But his two works contain so many erroneous and fallacious
statements, that I thought it a public duty to expose and refute them.
With this view and in order to prepare materials, I had taken steps to
have access to the Library and to the manuscripts in the Manuscript
Department of the British Museum.
I had not gone far with my work when I found it absolutely necessary
to rewrite the whole of my “History of Tithes,” and to make the present
work, as it really is, quite a new one.
I had not only to deal with Lord Selborne’s works, but also with
historians, who wrote private letters to parsons against the threefold
division of tithes, which letters contradicted statements made in their
own histories which favoured the tripartite division of tithes, and the
Church Grith law of . . 1014.
The tithe disputes in Wales brought forward crude, erroneous,
misleading and ill-digested statements about the origin and history of
tithes in this country. “Our Title Deeds,” by the Rev. M. Fuller, is a most
remarkable specimen of that class.
Directly and indirectly, I have dealt with all these matters in my
present work. I mention these facts in order to indicate the absolute
necessity I was under of rewriting the whole of my history.
And now in reference to Lord Selborne’s works, which, owing to his
high position, have influenced the opinions of many, one unsound mode
of reasoning runs through many parts of them, especially his “Ancient
Facts and Fictions.” I mean his inferences from negative evidence. And
these inferences are so cleverly and shrewdly expressed, in the special
pleading style, that although I knew they were wrong, yet I found it
extremely difficult to prove how they were wrong, because they were
based on negative evidence. This mode of reasoning in the hands of a
shrewd, clever lawyer is most powerful, misleading and embarrassing;
and is at the same time most difficult to answer from the nature of the
evidence. In order to elucidate my meaning, I shall give one out of many
examples. He wants, in support of a certain cause, to sweep away the
Church Grith law ( . . 1014) which enacts the tripartite division of
tithes, and this is his mode of reasoning:—“Selden and Spelman were
well acquainted with the Worcester (Cottonian) manuscript [he calls it
“The Worcester Volume” on the same page]; and, as neither of them
made mention of this Church Grith document, it may be inferred that
they did not regard it as having the character or the authority of a
law.”[2] The reader of the book would naturally suppose that Selden and
Spelman had seen the “document,” although it is an unquestionable fact
that they had never seen it, simply because it was never in Sir Robert
Cotton’s library during his lifetime for them to see. I could not have
proved this point if I were not aided by the official catalogue of 1632.
I have often thought that Lord Selborne’s error arose in his assuming
that all the manuscripts which are now in the Worcester volume, Nero,
A. 1, were in the same volume when Selden and Spelman consulted it
during the life of Sir Robert. If I am right, it is a clear proof how unsound
it is to draw inferences from negative evidence, and how careless he
must have been in not having made himself quite certain that the
“document” was in the volume for them to see. As this is a vital point in
the discussion, I have devoted the whole of chapter x. in defence of this
Church Grith law. But the most unfair part adopted by the opponents of
this law is, that whilst they parade, with a great flourish of trumpets, the
opinions of Price and Wilkins against the law, they carefully omit
material evidence furnished by Archdeacon Hale, which is dead against
their opinions (see pp. 107, 108).
Since my former work was published, there appeared in July, 1887,
the Parliamentary Return of the Tithes Commutation of 1836. I have
dealt with this important information in Chapter XIX., and also in the
Appendices.
In Chapter XVII., I have given a very full account of the enormous
revenues received from tithes and house rentals by the incumbents of
parishes in the City and Liberties of London for the spiritual work of
small populations, and which revenues have become a public scandal
because valuable endowments are thus wasted.
The “Redemption” of tithes is dealt with in Chapter XVIII.
I have inserted in Chapter XX. the Tithe Act of 1891.
Appendix F contains a summary by counties of the rent charges of
England and Wales, taken from the return of 1887.
Appendix G is an analysis of the Tithe Commutation Return as regards
(1) the number of old parishes; (2) parishes appropriated and their vicars;
(3) parishes which had not been appropriated. Nearly one-half (or 3,864)
in England were appropriated. It was worse in Wales, for of 834 old
parishes, 468 were appropriated. When we add the sinecure rectories,
pluralities and non-residence of incumbents, we can form a correct
conclusion as regards the cause of the present position of the Church of
England in Wales.
In addition to the above, I have also given the number of parishes in
receipt of lands and money payments in lieu of tithes by numerous
Inclosure Acts.
But the most important statistics are given at page 257 as regards the
gross aggregate amount of the “Revenues of the Church of England.”
Hitherto, very small and misleading amounts of these revenues have
been given. But the Parliamentary Return, made up in the office of the
Ecclesiastical Commissioners and just published, has now given the
public, for the first time, a generally correct idea of the gross annual
amount, from permanent sources, of these revenues, and also the number
of benefices and parsonage houses with their rateable value, which is
much less than their actual value.
The Return is defective; (1) because it is framed on values in 1886,
and (2) it omits the large fluctuating income—about a million a year—
from fees, pew-rents, and Easter offerings. Correctly, the gross income in
1890, was £6,825,730. But the permanent income capitalized equals
£140,000,000.
My best thanks are due to Walter de Gray Birch, Esq., of the MSS.
Department of the British Museum, for his kind assistance and courtesy;
also to the officials connected with the Library.
H W C .
CONTENTS.