Learning practical investigation

Question 1

Aim & Hypothesis

Answer 1

• To investigate whether there are differences in the learned helping behaviour of younger and older people
• There will be significantly more helpful behaviour shown on public transport by older people (above teenage years) compared to younger people (teenagers and younger).

Question 2

Procedure

Answer 2

• opportunity sample of 15 indiviuals, H17, about 25 minutes, around 2pm

1) P observed on public transport in London, during morning + afternoon commute
2) Devised list of behavioural categories including helpful + unhelpful behaviours e.g. helpful (give up seat for others), unhelpful (stand in the way of others)
3) observed members of the public during their morning and afternoon commute within a 25-minute period, noting down any instances of helpful + unhelpful behaviour observed using the behavioural categories.
4) collected qualitative data by observing 5 individuals, noting down interactions and behaviours, although P not aware taking part in study they in public space, therefore private behaviour not likely to be oberved

• observation type: naturalistic, non-participant, covert

Question 3

Finding

Answer 3

• Young people more helpful then older people
• quantiative data analysis = chi-squared test used as study looking for difference between older + younger, P using independent groups + gathering nominal data
• Statetment of signficance: as Chi-squared value (0.027) is less then the critical value for a one tailed test at 5% (2.72) shows there is no significance therefore no difference between young and old people when displaying helpful behaviour

Thematic analysis
Theme 1 - hesitancy in helpful behaviour
- young = ‘hesitant to move out of the way for stroller’
- old = ‘hesitant to give up to her seat’
Theme 2 - lack of communication
- young = ‘focused on phone for time observed’
- old = ‘looked out window, didn’t pay attention or talk to anyone on bus’

Question 4

Conclusion

Answer 4

Both quantitaive (chi-squared) + qualitiative (thematic analysis) data suggests that there is no significance difference between young people’s helpful and unhelpful behaviour compared to that of older people

Question 5

Strength

Answer 5

I - The study is also high in ecological validity as it was a naturalistic observation
J - Whereby participants did not initially know they were taking part in a study and that their helpful and unhelpful behaviours were being monitored.
E - Therefore their behaviour is more likely to be natural and not influenced, meaning that the results are representative of the helping behaviour of older / younger people whilst using public transport.

Question 6

Weakness

Answer 6

I - However, only one observer was used to gain the data for each observation on public transport.
J - This may have introduced an element of bias into the observation as it would be easy for the researcher to unconsciously categorise behaviour in a way that suits the experimental hypothesis. For example, if older individual performs unhelpful behaviour in order to fit into hypothesis research may add to helpful
E - therefore, decreases validity of study as not accurately representing how old + young people behave bus

Question 7

Improvements

Answer 7

1) reliability, having more than 1 oberver, 2 or more oberservers carefully trained on implementation of helpful/unhelpful behaviour. Spearmans test used to assess level of agreement in two sets of reults. prevents subjective bias on what helpful/unhelpful behaviour is, so findings on helpful + unhelpful behaviour increase validity + accuracy as to how old/young people behave on the bus
2) since opportunity sampling used, may introduced bias into sample, likely reseacher only used individuals from local area, therefore different sampling technique used e.g. startified sampling, ensure sample, diverse range of people, allowing findings increased generalisability to wider population