paper 1-research methods 2 Flashcards
experimental method
concerns the manipulation of an independent variable to have effect on dependant variable
experiments can be lab, field, natural and quasi
aim
general statement made by researcher
tells us what the purpose of the study is
hypothesis
statement clearly stating the relationship between the variables being investigated
used when research has been carried out before which relates
directional hypothesis
states direction of relationship that will be shown between the variables
straight to point
used when research has already been carried out
non directional hypothesis
does not state the direction
used when there has been no research carried out which relates
states it will have an effect
independant variables
something that is maniupualted/changes to bring about change in dv
dependant variable
variable which is measured
has been caused from the change in IV
operationalisation
act of a researcher clearly defining the variables in terms of how they are being measured
variables should be measurable
always better to include in a hypothesis
can be even more operationalised e.g numbers given on test
what are the two types of control variables
extraneous variables
confounding variables
in experiment, only aspect affecting DV should be IV
any other variables that may interfere, should be removed or controlled
extraneous variables
any other variable that may have effect on DV
are identified before experiment is conducted
confounding variable
any extraneous variable which is not controlled can become confounding variable as can confound and be confusing
demand characteristics
any cue the researcher or research situation may give which makes participant feel like they can guess the aim of the investigation
can cause participant to act differently
what is participant reactivity
participant reacts differently to how they normally would in normal situation due to clocking on what the aim of the study is about
what is the please u effect and the screw you effect
please u effect-where participant reacts way they think researcher wants them
screw u effect-where participant intentionally underperforms to sabotage study’s results
investigators effects
any unwanted infleunce from researchers, behaviour on dv measured
randomisation
minimise effects of confounding variables or extraneous variables
randomly allocating participants to different conditions of the iv
e.g. flipping a coin
-reduces effects of bias
standardisation
using exact same procedures and instructions for every single participant involved in research participant
every participant has exact same experience
effects all participants in conditions equally
lab experiments
takes place in special environment e.g lab
variables are controlled
strengths of lab experiments
high control of variables-leads to greater accuracy
replication-researchers can easily repeat experiments and check results
limitations of lab study
low ecological validity-high control of variables makes situation artificial, unlike real life
experimenters bias-participants may be influenced by expectations
(two e)
field experiment
more natural environment
not in lab
still control of variables
strengths of field experiments
high ecological validity-like real life, more natural behaviours
controlled iv
limitations of field experiments
ethical considerations-invasion of privacy and likely no conformed consent
loss of control over extraneous variables , precise replication may not be possible
quasi experiment
Iv is naturally occurring
DV may also be naturally occurring
can be measured in field or lab
strength of quasi experiments
high ecological validity-natural behaviour to take place
high internal validity
limitations of quasi experiment
so confounding variables may be present
harder to conclude that IV caused the DV
natural experiment
iv is not brought about by researcher
would have happened even if the researcher was not present
strengths of natural experiments
high external validity-dealing with real life issues
limitations of natural experiment
natural occurring events meaning rare meaning not replicable meaning hard to generalise findings
opportunity sampling
anyone who is willing to take part/ wanting to take part
adv of opportunity sampiling
easy to obtain
cheap
easy to carry out
dis of opportunity sampling
tend to get similar people in similar places
not representative of whole population
researcher bias-they can control who they want to select
random sampling
each member of population has equal chance of being selected
e.g name pulled out of hat
adv of random sampling
no researcher bias-researcher has no influence on who is picked
dis of random sampling
time consuming-need to have list of members and ones chosen need to be contacted
systematic sampiling
where you have list of target population
pick every nth term
3rd or 4th member
adv of systamatic sampling
no researcher bias-resarchers has no infleunce on who is picked
dis of systamtic smapiling
not truly unbiased
may not be representative to wider population
stratified sampling
researcher makes sub groups from target population
then work out percentage of each variable in population
adv of stratified sampling
no rsearcher bias-done randomly
represntative to wider population
dis of stratified sampiling
time consuming
volunteer sampiling
involves self selection
participant offers to take part either in response to advert or when asked to
adv of volunteer sampiling
easy to do
easy to obtain
dis of volunteer sampling
lacks population validity-only focuses on same types of people
advert most likely to interest the same types of people
independent groups design
partipants only peform in 1 codition of IV
pilot study
small scale version of investigation which is carried out before real investigation
carried out to allow potential problems of study to be identified
allows money and time to be saved in long run
single blind procedure
where participants do not know which condition they are being tested
double bind procedure
where neither researcher or participants know conditions of which they are being tested
naturalistic
measure naturally occurring behaviour
strengths of naturalistic
high ecological validity
high external validity-done in natural environment
limitations of naturalistic
low ecological validity-if participants become aware that they are being watched
replication can be difficult
controlled observations
watching and recording behaviour in structureed enviorment e,g lab setting
strengths of controlled observations
high control over variables
easily replicable
dis of controlled observations
more liekly to be observing unnatural behaviour as takes place in unnatural environment
demand charcterisrics pesnt
loww mudane realism
low ecological validity
overt
know they are being watched
adv of overt observations
ethically acceptable-informed consent is given
dis of overt observation
more liekly to be recoding unnatural behaviour
demand characteristics more liekly to be present
covert observation
participnats are unaware that their behaviour is being watched and recorded
adv of covert observation
natural behaviour-high internal validity
dis of covert observation
ethical issues may be presnt-dont have informed consent
participant observations
researcher plays a part
directly involved in the observation
adv of partipant observations
can be more insightful
increases validity of findings
dis of participant observations
behaviour may chnage is partipants figure out they are being watched
non-participant observation
researcher is purely an observer
dis of non-participant observations
rsearcher may lose valuable insight
what are the 3 experimental designs
repeated measures
independent groups
matched pairs
repeated measures
ALL participants take part in ALL conditions of the experiment
adv of repeated measures
dont need as many participant, eliminates participant variables
not as time consuming
dis of repeated measures
order effects-boredom may mean second condition done participant does not do as well on task
independent groups
participants are allocated to different groups
where each group represents one condition
adv of independent groups
no order of effects
participants are less likely to guess aims of study
dis of indepednent groups
no control over participant variables
less economical
matched pairs
pairs of participants matched on some variable that has been found to affect DV
one member of each pair does one condition
and the other does another
adv of matched pairs
no order of effects
no demand characteristics
dis of matched pairs
time consuming
expensive to match participants
unstructured design
continious recording where researcher writes everything they can see during observation
adv of unstructured design
depth of detail
dis of unstructured design
qualitative data
harder to analyse
structured design
researcher quantifies what they are observing using predetermined list of behaviorus and sampiling methods
adv of structured design
quantitive data analysed so easily collected
easier to analyse
less risk of observer bias
dis of structured design
not much depth of detail
time sampling
event sampling
what are the 4 ethical guidelines
DIPP
deception
infromed consent
protection of ps from harm
privacy confedentiality
deception
deliberately misleading infroamtion from partipants at any stage of investigation
informed consent
making partipants aware of the aims of the study, the procedures, their rights, what their data will be used for
dealing with informed consent
particpants should be given consent letter
with relevent info and if happy will continue
protection from PS from harm
partipants should not be put at any more risk then they would in their daily lives
dealing with protection from ps from harm
participants should be given a full debrief at end of study
privacy confidentiality
partipants have right to contol info about themselves
right for privacy
dealing with privacy confidentiality
if personal details are held, they must be protected
control
where all extraneous variables are held constant so the only variable manpulating dv is iv
all are controlled, any changes must be from iv
experimental hypothesis
statement of predicted outcome when using experimental method
null hypothesis
states that IV will have no effect on DV
reliability
measurement of consistency
how do you test internal relaiability
split half method
test items divided into half
scores om both halves compared
scores should be similt if test is relaible
how do you test external vaildity
test-re-test method
compare results of test at one time
with results of test at another time
results should be simialr if external validity
what is the target population
group of people who are the focus of the researchers interest
what is a sample
small gorup of poeple, represing the traget popualtion of the study
event sampling
counting the number of times a particular event occurs
time sampiling
recording behaviour in pre-estabilished timeframe
e.g making note of what a footballer is doing every 30 seconds
what is a correlation
method of data analysis
