Assess whether Cassibba et al.’s (2013) research is a scientific study of development. (8)

Question 1

Scientific status in psychology is often a result of controlled conditions where cause and effect can be established

Answer 1

A meta- analysis does not measure cause and effect, so it could be considered unscientific as it is a qualitative review of other research.

Question 2

What is scientific status in phsychology often a result of?

Answer 2

controlled conditions where cause and effect can be established

Question 3

what does meta-analysis not meausre?

Answer 3

cause and effect, so it could be considered unscientific as it is a qualitaitve review of other research

Question 4

Cassiba et al (2013) conducted a meta-analysis which was a review of research into attachment, some using the strange situation procedure.

Answer 4

By reviewing studies that used the strange situation procedure Cassibba et al. (2013) increased the scientific status of their research as they draw on structured observations with fully operationalised behaviours.

Question 5

what type of analysis did Cassiba et al (2013) conduct?

Answer 5

meta-analysis which was a review of research into attachment, some using the strange situation procedure

Question 6

how did Cassiba et al (2013) increase scientific status of their research?

Answer 6

by reviewing studies that used the strange situation procedure as they drew on structured observations with fully operationalised behaviours

Question 7

The process of collecting information used by Cassiba et al (2013) was controlled with clear criteria for study selection ,for example only using studies with Italian samples.

Answer 7

Despite consistency in the meta-analysis methodology it is not an empirical method so does not give the research by Cassiba et al (2013) scientific status

Question 8

The process of collecting information used by Cassiba et al (2013) was controlled with…

Answer 8

clear criteria for study selection ,for example only using studies with Italian samples

Question 9

Despite consistency in the meta-analysis methodology, why does it not give the research by Cassiba et al (2013) scientific status ?

Answer 9

it is not an empirical method

Question 10

Meta-analysis is a subjective process, whereas methods such as laboratory experiments or PET scans are considered more objective.

Answer 10

Scientific methods such as PET scans are not appropriate for the study of attachment, so the limitations on the scientific status of Cassiba et al (2013) are unavoidable due to ethical considerations of research with young children.

Question 11

what type of process is a meta-analysis?

Answer 11

subjective process, whereas methods such as laboratory experiments or PET scans are considered more objective.

Question 12

Scientific methods such as PET scans are not appropriate for the study of attachment, so the limitations on the scientific status of Cassiba et al (2013) are…

Answer 12

unavoidable due to ethical considerations of research with young children.