Biological Practical Flashcards
Aim
To investigate whether those with a higher testosterone rate were more aggressive than those with lower
How we measure DV / operationalisation
Using digit ratio to measure testosterone levels and a questionnaire to measure aggression
One problem with our practical
Measuring finger length and digit ratio could vary with the person depending where you draw the line at the bottom of the finger
Statistical test used
Spearmans rho
Why did you choose this statistical test
Test of relationship between pre-natal exposure to testosterone and aggression
One tailed hypothesis
Ordinal data
Ethical issues - digit ratio
How to measure testosterone levels, many different ways such as taking blood test
However, this would have caused harm to participants and made them feel more uncomfortable
Decided to measure using digit ratio, which would cause no harm
This mean that we kept our practical’s ethic level high as no one felt discomfort or harm
Ethical issue - deception
Deception
Lied to participants about why we traced around hand or what we were comparing in practical
BUT we used standardised instructions to debrief participants and allowed them to ask any questions
Results
For a sphearmans rho test a one tailed hypothesis, our n=10 and p<0.05 the critical value is -0.564.
Our observed value was -0.409. As the critical value is higher than the observed, we reject the research hypothesis and accept the null, meaning there is no relationship between pre-natal exposure to testosterone and aggression except by chance
Conclusions
no relationship between digit ratio (as a measure of pre-natal exposure to testosterone) and aggression, except by chance
Meaning that exposure to testosterone when young does not permanently alter your brain, that makes you more aggressive in later life
Construct validity
P = CV is seeing whether our practical will measure what it intends to measure. Our CV is low due to the technique we used of digit ratio and self-report questionnaire.
E = Questionnaire is prone to social desirability bias, although making them anonymous 16-18 yr olds were our sample who tend to be more aggressive and may exaggerate because socially those who are more aggressive are seen as tough and better. Digit ratio is a crude measure of pre-natal testosterone as it is a blunt instrument. We cannot necessarily use digit ratio to measure testosterone, as it is inaccurate. Drawing around fingers can also be slightly different when done each time depending on the researcher. Blood tests and other methods are much more accurate techniques.
T = This shows that the techniques used to gather data are rather inaccurate so results may vary and would indefinitely be more accurate if alternatives methods were used i.e. blood tests.
Population Validity
P = Low because our sample does not generalise to our target population of being all adult males, when our sample was 16-18 year olds.
E = 16-18 yr olds tend to have higher testosterone and equate social status with toughness. So are prone to exaggerating the questionnaire results although their aggression is already high. We also used sixth form students who have gone past required education so would be a less aggressive group of people.
T = this measn that our sample did not generalise well to target population due to age, they may have exaggerated answers due to social status so if we had more of an age range in our sample our results would be more accurate
Ecological validity
P= Low as questionnaire does not predict whether participants would follow through with what they write.
E= How people actually behave and acting on it is a big difference. Aggression also tends to show up in situations where people are uncomfortable/unsafe/intoxicated or in a bad mood. None of which were present in our participants. This means that our self report questionnaire had some faults as people taking it were under conditions aiming to keep participants in this specific calm and content state to avoid psychological harm.
T = Making results harder to generalise as this is not how someones state would be when they should have been taking the questionnaire
Reliability
P= Was high as 16-18 year olds are almost fully grown, so the age we used as good as digit ratio won’t to change because fingers wont grow between tests.
E = We also funneled closed ended questions, to ensure that if the question was repeated again at a different time but with opinion having slightly changed their answers would only change by one box. Although if mood changed entirely, answers can be heavily affected (if considerably angry), but our funnelled questions would.
T= This shows that our study was very reliable as digit ratio is unlikely to change in a few years, and questions funneled boxes also result in little change meaning this study can be repeated and results would change slightly.
Objectivity
P= High as no opinion required from research at all during there study when drawing around hands and counting digit ratio, no opinion was necessary to do so.
E= The only downside is that different people may measure digit ratio from different lengths at different areas of the finger. Additionally to this we used a self reported questionnaire with tick boxes, so analysing data collected was quantitative using spearmans rho.
T = This shows that no opinion needed when analysing and comparing data, making it very objective as both digit ratio and the questionnaire is not analysed or collected subjectively.
T = This shows that our objectivity is high as no opinion was required throughout the whole practical and each practical was done at the same time with the same standardised instructions showing lack of opinion makes our study very generalisable.
