experimental methods Flashcards
Experimental methods
- the tool being used
Types of experimental methods
- lab
- field
- natural
- quasi
Lab
- experiment conducted in lab
- highly controlled environment
- where researcher manipulates IV
- and measures effect on DV
Strength of lab - AO3 - high control over EV
- high level of control over extraneous variables (CONTEXT)
- cause and effect can be established between IV and DV
- increases internal validity of research
Strength of lab - AO3 - hight reliability
- high reliability
- experiment (CONTEXT) can be easily repeated
- in same conditions
- to check for consistent results
Limitation of lab - AO3 - lacks ecological validity
- lacks ecological validity
- carried out in artificial environment (CONTEXT)
- so difficult to generalise findings (CONTEXT)
- beyond setting of study
- lowering external validity
Limitation of lab - AO3 - prone demand characteristics
- prone to demand characteristics
- ppts change natural behaviour
- based on clues by researcher (CONTEXT)
- lead to ppt choosing to help or hinder research
- lowering internal validity
Field
- experiement in natural environment
- such as office or school
- researcher manipulates IV
- and measures effect on DV
Strength of field - AO3 - no demand characteristics
- less prone demand characteristics
- ppt not know being watched
- less likely to guess clues given by researcher
- less likely change natural behaviour (CONTEXT)
- increases internal validity
Strength of field - AO3 - high ecological validity
- high ecological validity
- based in real life setting
- so easier to generalise findings
- beyond setting of study to other similar (CONTEXT)
- increases internal validity
Limitation of field - AO3 - low reliability
- low reliability
- environment is natural (CONTEXT)
- difficult to repeat
- with exactly same conditions
- to check for consistent results
Limitation of field - AO3 - ethical issue
- could create ethical issue
- lack of informed consent
- ppl not aware being studied (CONTEXT)
- would not have given consent
- if ppt become aware may become upset
- wish to withdraw data from research
Natural
- researcher takes advantage of naturally occurring IV
- variable would have changed even if experimenter not interested
IV natural not setting could be in a lab
Strength of natural - AO3 - opportunity
- provide opportunity for research
- may not otherwise occur
- for ethical or practical reasons
- e.g. Rutter’s study on romanian orphans - unethical to manipulate unless institutionalisation (IV) not occurred naturally
- (CONTEXT)
- so contributes to greater psychological understanding of behaviour
Strength of natural - AO3 - high ecological validity
- high ecological validity
- often based in real life settings
- so easier to generalise findings
- beyond setting of the study
- to other similar settings (CONTEXT)
- increases external validity
Limitation of natural - AO3 - rare
- happen very rarely
- limits opportunities for research (CONTEXT)
- means is unlikely research can be repeated
- to check for consistent results
- so lacks reliability
Limitation of natural - AO3 - low control EV
- low control over extraneous variables
- take place in natural environment (CONTEXT)
- so difficult to establish cause and effect
- between IV and DV
- lowers internal validity
Quasi
- IV based on existing individual differences
- between people
- researcher has not manipulated
- e.g. age or gender
- measures affect on DV
AO3 for quasi
- can be conducted in natural or controlled environment
- field or lab
- so select appropriate strength and limitation
- based on scenario
Limitation for quasi - AO3 - sample bias
- sample bias
- sample being studied may have unique characteristics
- (CONTEXT)
- so difficult to generalise to target population (CONTEXT)
- decreases external validity
Define demand characteristics (2m)
- any clues given off within research
- could lead to ppt’s changing natural behaviour
- to either help or hinder research (CONTEXT)
- reducing internal validity
How can demand characteristics be controlled?
- getting another researcher
- who does not know aims of research (CONTEXT)
- to carry out experiment
- so cannot give off clues to influence ppts
- increase internal validity
(controls help increase internal validity)