Data Collection

Question 1

D: Experimental Designs

Answer 1

• manipulated IV; recorded DV

- clear causal relationships (bear in mind validity/reliability/design)

Question 2

M: Correlational Designs

Answer 2

• all variables measured; strength of association assessed

- possible causation via theoretical considerations

Question 3

ED: Lab Experiments

Answer 3

• done in lab; greatest environmental control
• POSITIVES: highly controlled; variables easily excluded; easier to replicate standard procedure
• NEGATIVES: artificial; unnatural pp beh; ecological validity questioned; demand characteristics affect beh

Question 4

ED: Field Experiments

Answer 4

• everyday environment; variables still manipulated
• POSITIVES: natural; more likely IRL responses (high eco validity); less affective demand characteristics (particularly when covert)
• NEGATIVES: less control; difficult replication; poor reliability

Question 5

ED: Natural Experiments

Answer 5

• everyday environment; variables NOT manipulated
• POSITIVES: natural; high eco val; unlikely demand chars (particularly when covert); tool around ethics (ie. stress research)
• NEGATIVES: costly (time/finance/etc.); no control; randomisation impossible so self-selection/reliability may be an issue

Question 6

CD: Natural Observations

Answer 6

• often used in when looking for strength of associations
• POSITIVES: allow study of “unethical” phenomena w/o experiments; establish how well experiments generalise to natural contexts (confirmatory evidence); prediction of direction/strength of variable relationships based on theories.
• NEGATIVES: can’t establish causation w/o logical relationship sequence

Question 7

Data Collection Methods

Answer 7

• the optimal method/combo must always be chosen

- include: OBSERVATIONAL METHODS, CASE STUDIES, SURVEYS, INTERVIEWS, EXPERIMENTS, NEW TECHNOLOGIES

Question 8

M: Observational Studies

Answer 8

• beh observed in natural setting; pps how about observation (overt) or not (covert)
• CONTROLLED/NATURALISTIC/PARTICIPANT

Question 9

OS: Controlled Observations

Answer 9

• lab; control over context; systematically classified beh w/categories and timed schedule; coded by +1 researcher for inter-rater reliability
• CODING: numbers/scale
• EG: BANDURA (1961); bobo doll aggression; AINSWORTH (1970); attachment styles
• POSITIVES: easily replicable; easy quantitative stat method/software analysis of data; quick conduct, so large samples
• NEGATIVES: Hawthorne effect (demand chars limit validity); is overt beh dif?

Question 10

OS: Naturalistic Observations

Answer 10

• natural beh; data recorded variously
• CODING: numbers/scales
• EG: CROFT (2017); killer whale menopause; LEVINE (2011); group violence
• POSITIVES: informs further studies; high eco validity
• NEGATIVES: small samples are unrepresentative; difficult to replicate; substantial training required; cause/effect relationships may be impossible

Question 11

OS: Participant Observations

Answer 11

• alternate naturalistic; researcher = pp; false role/identity “undercover”
• EG: FESTINGER (1957); cults and cognitive dissonance
• POSITIVES: same as naturalistic
• NEGATIVES: challenges w/data recording; lack of objectivity; researcher bias

Question 12

OS: Sampling Methods

Answer 12

• EVENT; events/coding identified in advance; event frequency/characteristics recorded; all other beh ignored
• TIME; events/coding identified in advance; obs taken in specific time period (ie. 10min p/h) w/set schedule (ie. each hour for 12h); beh at other times ignored
• INSTANTANEOUS/TARGET TIME; observations at specific time point; all others ignored

Question 13

M: Case Studies

Answer 13

• individual/group/event analysed w/detail
• multiple techniques (ie. observational coding/interviews/psychometric tests)
• involves IDIOGRAPHIC APPROACH (ie. what happens to pp; reconstructing history of pp/group)
• often part of CLPSYCH/psychiatry; rich info; further research prompt
• POSITIVES: rich description; indicated possible new hypotheses; study rare phenomena; opportunity for “unethical” variable investigation
• NEGATIVES: unable to give cause-effect/causal inference; atypical/unrepresentative focus; ungeneralisable; relies on heavy subjectivity; difficult replication

Question 14

M: Surveys

Answer 14

• questions given to sample from pop
• POSITIVES: carefully selected representative sample gives accurate info for pop; large sample = high external reliability
• NEGATIVES: unrepresentative sample may give misleading info; researcher bias/social desirability risks distortion
• IN-PERSON; TELEPHONE; MAIL-OUT; WEB-BASED

Question 15

S: In-Person Surveys

Answer 15

• participants complete survey in presence of researcher
• POSITIVES: control; reduced biases; explicit instructions/queries; highest quality data
• NEGATIVES: time-consuming/expensive; small samples

Question 16

S: Telephone Surveys

Answer 16

• researcher telephones pps
• POSITIVES: cheap; large samples; anonymous
• NEGATIVES: less control; less credibility; unavailable/less sophisticated visual materials

Question 17

S: Mail-Out Surveys

Answer 17

• researcher mails survey to pps (snail/email)
• POSITIVES: cheap; convenient; time for completion; no interviewer bias; visual aids; rapid data collection; anonymous
• NEGATIVES: full instructions required; self-selection bias

Question 18

S: Web-Based Surveys

Answer 18

• survey made available online w/respondents
• POSITIVES: convenient; cheapest; completion time; no interviewer bias; visual aids; rapid data collection; anonymous
• NEGATIVES: full instructions required; self-selection bias

Question 19

M: Interviews

Answer 19

• relatively small respondent number give rich data in “live” interaction (ie. in-person/telephone)
• POSITIVES: well selected representative sample gives rich info about pop
• NEGATIVES: unrepresentative sample may give misleading info; researcher biases/social desirability bias risks distortion

Question 20

M: Open VS Closed Questions

Answer 20

• open questions give rich data source but are harder to empirically analyse; qualitative analysis techniques required
• closed questions give more specific answers but a bias is likely
• issue w/all surveys or methods involving questions

Question 21

M: Experiments

Answer 21

• IV manipulated; DV measured; lab/field
• POSITIVES: best method for cause-effect relationships; physically controlling for variables; alternatives ruled out
• NEGATIVES: various issues w/reliability may threaten validity of conclusions

Question 22

DCM: New Technologies

Answer 22

• technological solutions rapidly expanding; allow data collection previously impossible
• includes: INTERNET/DIGITAL THERAPY/TELEPSYCHOLOGY; SMARTPHONE APPS; AMBULATORY DATA MONITORING; VR; SOCIAL MEDIA

Question 23

NT: Internet/Digital Therapy

Answer 23

• FAIRBURN & PATEL (2017)
• POSITIVES: popular; access to secluded groups; clinically relevant changes on large scale; supported interventions more effective than unsupported; supported digital treatments as effective as face to face
• NEGATIVES: missing direct comparisons of existing treatments for same problem; effects of the digital (ie. age; psychopathologies w/o completion); how are they different to in-face treatments?

Question 24

NT: Smartphone Apps/Ambulatory Monitoring

Answer 24

• RESEARCH: for studying beh/mood/physiological responses in IRL settings
• INTERVENTIONS: for supporting beh change w/IRL feedback and application of new skills IRL
• GOAL PROCESSES IN MOOD DISORDERS: goals = life meaning/direction; central to psychotherapeutic work; disrupted goal content implicates mood disorders; IRL measurement (ie. MoodFood, ADEPT, DClinPsy, ERSC work at Exeter Uni)
• INHIBITION TRAINING: “impulse control”; personalised brain-training leading to new cue-response relationships

Question 25

NT: VR (EG)

Answer 25

- AUSTAKALNIS & BLATNER (1992); "... a way for humans to visualise, manipulate and interact w/computers and extremely complex data" - RIZZO et al (1997); advanced human-computer interference; user interacts in more natural/sophisticated way

Question 26

NT: VR

Answer 26

- IMMERSIVE: visual display/body tracking in simulated environment in natural way allowing embodiment (ie. head-mounts; 360 videos) - SEMI/NON-IMMERSIVE: modern computers/consoles to show graphics on monitors/projections allowing navigation/interaction (ie. driving simulator; treadmills) - SOC APPLICATION: increases pp engagement; simulating situations give new skills in safe environment for therapeutic use; practice for training clinicians w/ simulating VR clients

Question 27

NT: VR (EVA)

Answer 27

- NEGATIVES: coding skills required; "messy data" as it easily gets lost; machine learning/mathematical modelling for advanced VR requires interdisciplinary collaborations; less evidence for complex disorders; few studies to date; assessment requires determination of psychometric properties - KEY ISSUES: how immersive must it be to allow IRL transfer; can theory be successful; can therapists be replaced and affordable?

Question 28

NT: Social Media

Answer 28

- access to large pool of hard to reach pps/content; established platforms w/specific blogs/forums which are mines for qualitative data analyses/specific research purposes - KEY ISSUES: informed consent; anonymity/confidentiality (BPS guidelines)