Methodologies Flashcards
Participant observation
The researcher takes part in the research, joining in with those
being observed. The researcher becomes part of the group and does not reveal who they are.
Participant observation: Strength
- Less chance of demand characteristics.
- Enables research of people who would otherwise be very difficult to observe.
Participant observation: Weaknesses
- Observer bias may occur.
- Unreliable findings because it is difficult to take notes during the observation; data relies on memory.
Non-participant observation
- The observer doesn’t take part in the action, but instead watches and makes notes from a distance.
- The participants are not aware that they are being observed.
Non-participant observation: Strengths
- Less chance of observer bias.
- Researchers can see how participants behave rather than relying on self-reports; may produce more valid and reliable findings.
Non-participant observation: Weaknesses
- Observer bias: it is difficult to make judgments on thoughts and feelings of participants when they are being watched.
- Unethical because participants do not always know they are being observed.
Questionnaire
A set of written questions where answers are analysed by the researcher. Questionnaires can produce quantitative or qualitative data or a mixture of both.
Questionnaire: Strengths
- Can be used to assess psychological
variables that may not be obvious by just observing someone. - Data can be collected from a large group of participants more quickly than interviewing them.
Questionnaire: Weaknesses
- There is no guarantee that the participant is telling the truth.
- Different participants may interpret the same question in different ways.
Structured interview
The interviewer has a pre-prepared set of questions that are asked in a fixed order. Pre-determined questions are used to elicit a verbal response. There is no deviation from the original questions.
Structured interview: Strengths
- The same questions are used every time which makes results easy to analyse.
- Replicable, so more reliable because the same questions can be asked in the same way.
Structured interview: Weaknesses
- Can be restrictive because there is no chance to ask further questions.
- Doesn’t allow for ‘spontaneous questions’, which may mean the interviewer is less
responsive to the participant.
Semi-structured interview
Begins with a general aim and a few
pre-determined questions but subsequent questions develop based on the answers given by the participant.
Semi-structured interview: Strengths
- More qualitative information can be gathered by the interviewer because they tailor the questions to the respondent’s responses.
- High validity because participants have the opportunity to fully express their true feelings/views.
Semi-structured interview: Weaknesses
- The same questions are not used every time; results are difficult to analyse, and it is difficult to identify patterns and trends.
- Not replicable due to different questions asked each time and therefore unreliable
Unstructured interview
A free-flowing conversation around a particular topic with a respondent.
Unstructured interview: Strengths
- More qualitative information
- High validity
Unstructured interview: Weaknesses
- Not replicable due to different questions.
- Same questions are not used every time.
Case study
In-depth study of a unique individual, small group or event. Uses many different research methods, such as interviews, questionnaires, or observations in order to get the required depth. Most data collected is qualitative, but it can sometimes be
quantitative. It is a holistic study and is usually longitudinal.
Case study: Strengths
- Produces rich qualitative data which is of high ecological validity because it is a study of real-life situation.
- Allows researchers to study cases they couldn’t practically or ethically manipulate in an experiment.
Case study: Weaknesses
Researcher bias; researchers can become too involved and lose their objectivity.
It is difficult to generalise findings beyond the individual/group studied; the sample is too small (low population validity)
