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