3.5 - practical investigation Flashcards
what is the aim?
to find out whether there a correlation between personality (neuroticism) and attitude towards recreational drugs (caffeine)?
which research methods will be used in this investigation?
a correlational study
how was each variable operationalised (measured)?
attitude towards caffeine - Using 5 statements (3 positive, 2 negative) about caffeine with a 6-point Likert scale for responses. We then added up responses to each question to give each pp a score for attitude towards caffeine out of 25 (higher score=more positive attitude)
neuroticism - Using 3 questions from the Big 5 model of personality with a 7-point Likert scale for responses. We then added up responses to each question to give each pp a score for neuroticism out of 18 (higher score=more neurotic)
what is a Likert scale?
a way of quantifying people’s attitudes
how does a Likert scale work?
it includes statements and a response scale eg. strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree
each item is scored eg. SA (3), A (2), D (1), SD (0)
item scores are added to produce an overall score
what is the alternative hypothesis (H1) for this practical?
there will be a positive correlation between score for attitude towards caffeine out of 25 and score for neuroticism out of 18
what is the null hypothesis (H0) for this practical?
there will be no correlation between score for attitude towards caffeine out of 25 and score for neuroticism out of 18
what is the target population for this practical?
females aged 16-18
what was the sample and sampling method?
sample was 20 females aged 16-18 from our school
sampling method was opportunity
what was the procedure for obtaining the data?
- approach someone in the sixth form common room and brief them on our investigation
- if they agreed to participate, give them a printed copy of the questionnaire, instruct them on how to complete it and leave them for a few minutes to fill it in
- collect the questionnaire, debrief them and thank them for their time
what was the procedure for analysing the data?
- for each questionnaire, calculate attitude towards caffeine score out of 25 and neuroticism score out of 18
- plot a scatter graph for attitude score and personality score
- calculate the Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient for the data
- check the significance of the correlation coefficient
what were the results of the investigation - correlation coefficient and significance?
Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient was 0.0748 - very weak positive correlation between variables
critical value (one-tailed test, n=20, p<0.05) was 0.380 - the calculated value was less than the critical value so the null hypothesis was accepted, meaning the correlation was not significant
strengths - replicability and reliability?
used a questionnaire and standardised script for recruiting, instructing and debriefing pps and therefore standardised procedure, so others could replicate research and compare results to see if they are reliable
strengths - objectivity?
allocated numerical score to each possible response to each question so we could calculate two overall scores
collected quantitative data so couldn’t be interpreted in different ways
calculated correlation coefficient to provide objective answer to whether there was correlation between variables
strengths - validity/internal validity?
control variables like standardised procedure and script
collected quantitative data so less open to researcher bias
participants knew what we were investigating (informed consent) but didn’t know exactly what we expected to find which reduced demand characteristics
strengths - ethics?
pps told what we were investigating in briefing - informed consent
pps knew what study was about and how data would be used - deception
anonymous questionnaires - confidentiality
pps told in briefing and debrief that they could withdraw data at any time - right to withdraw
pps given debrief - debrief
weaknesses - generalisability?
sample only consisted of females aged 16-17 so not representative of target population (females 16-18)
can’t generalise findings to see whether there is correlation between neuroticism and attitude towards caffeine in 18 year olds
weaknesses - validity?
most pps completed questionnaire in sixth form common room which is busy environment with many extraneous variables eg. noise and other people
reduces validity of results
improvements - generalisability?
approach wider range of pps so sample also includes 18 year olds
this would mean sample is fully representative of target population so findings can be generalised to everyone
improvements - validity?
adjust procedure so pps complete questionnaire in empty room
would be fewer extraneous variables (no noise/other people) so the validity would be improved
