Paper 3

Question 1

Research Methods

Case study

Answer 1

Qualitative that can have quantitative data.

Characteristics
Detailed analysis that generates rich, in-depth data
Often uses method triangulation.
Often longitudinal.

Strengths
High ecological validity.

Enables to study theories/things that have not been studied

Limitations
Time consuming.

Often cannot be replicated.

Question 2

Research Methods

Naturalistic Observation

Answer 2

Qualitative.

Characteristics
Natural situations without researcher interference.

Strengths
Highest ecological validity.

Allows data to be collected that may be unethical otherwise.

Limitations
Lack of reliability - observer bias.

Difficulty getting access.

Question 3

Research Methods

Semi-structured interviews

Answer 3

Qualitative.

Characteristics
Open-ended and closed questions to give insight into people’s personal experience.

Interview guide before the interview.
Interview follows a script, but some flexibility.

Gives the subjective experience.

Strengths
Questions can be prepared.
Allows researchers to stay focused on research aim.

Useful in sensitive issues because themes can be fully explored.

Limitations
Data-analysis is time-consuming.

Need to consider reflexivity (process in researcher recognises their own assumptions/biases that are being brought into the study) and member checks (Verifies the interviewer correctly interpreted the interviewee).

Question 4

Research Methods

Unstructured interviews

Answer 4

Qualitative.

Characteristics
Natural, authentic conversation - Completely expressing their authentic selves, in their language.

Gives the subjective experience.

Strengths
People can use colloquial language and talk freely.

Useful for gaining knowledge on sensitive issues.

Limitations
Time consuming for data analysis.

Limited in replicability because the researcher plays such a key role in creating that rapport.

Question 5

Research Methods

Focus group interviews

Answer 5

Qualitative.

Characteristics
Semi-structured interview with 6-10 people.

The researcher plays the role of facilitator that can monitor discussion and guide it.

Gives the subjective experience.

Strengths
Less time consuming than unstructured/one-to-one interviews.

Creates more natural/comfortable environment than 1 on 1 interviews.

Limitations
More difficult to preserve anonymity and confidentiality.

Question 6

Research Methods

True experiments

Answer 6

Quantitative.

Characteristics
Participants are randomly allocated to condition (IV)

Aims to test a hypothesis.

Highly controlled environment (isolation of IV).

Strengths
Random allocation helps to reduce equally distribute individual differences across conditions.

High internal validity - causal relationship.

Highly standardised procedures make it easier to replicate/repeat/reproduce.

Limitations
Low ecological validity - Artificial setting.

Question 7

Research Methods

Field experiments

Answer 7

Quantitative.

Characteristics
Done in a more everyday environment.

Still manipulation of IV by researcher but in real-life setting.
Aims to test hypothesis.

Strengths
Higher ecological validity - Conducted in real-life setting.

Limitations
Less control over extraneous variables that might bias results.

Question 8

Research Methods

Natural experiments

Answer 8

Quantitative.

Characteristics
No control over IV - naturally occurring.

Conducted in participants’ natural environment.

Strengths
Higher ecological validity for experiments.

Can be used in potentially unethical scenarios.
E.g. studying the effects of trauma or war in different populations.

Limitations
No control over extraneous variables that may bias results.

Very hard to replicate.

No random allocation.
No IV manipulation - No causal relationship.

Question 9

Research Methods

Quasi experiments

Answer 9

Quantitative.

Characteristics
Participants not randomly allocated to IV - Grouped based on pre-existing trait/characteristic.
E.g. gender, ethnicity.

Hypothesis generated.

Not causal - Shows correlation.

Strengths
Clearly measured DV.

Still controlled.

Allows for variables to be studied experimentally that cannot be manipulated.

Limitations
No random allocation - Hard to establish causality.

Question 10

Research Methods

Correlational studies

Answer 10

Quantitative.

Characteristics
Offers statistic evidence for relationships - Descriptions and predictions about human behaviour.

Unmanipulated co-variables (no IV/DV)
Determines whether or not co-variables relate to each other.

Strengths
Useful for investigating variables that are impossible, unethical, or impractical.

Predictive capabilities.

Limitations
Does not establish causation.

Bidirectional ambiguity.

Question 11

Research Methods

Surveys

Answer 11

Quantitative with some qualitative data.

Characteristics
Gathers quantitative and qualitative data (categorised as quantitative by IB).

Open/closed questions.
Rating/Like scales.

Time efficient, cost effective (online accessibility).

Gives the subjective experience.

Strengths
Large amount of data - Larger the data set, more reliable.

High generalisability.

Limitations
No variable manipulation - No causal relationship.

Social desirability.

Question 12

Research Methods

(Observational) Covert

Answer 12

Participants don’t know they are being observed

Question 13

(Observational) Overt

Answer 13

Participants know they are being observed.

Question 14

Sampling Techniques

Probability Sampling

Answer 14

Everyone has equal chance of getting sampled

Question 15

Sampling Techniques

Non-probability sampling

Answer 15

Participants are not chosen randomly from a target population.

Question 16

Sampling Techniques

Random sampling

Answer 16

Probability sampling.

The process where every member in the target population has an equal chance of being selected.

Strengths
Easier to generalise (depends on sample size), assumed representativeness.

Aims to reduce selection bias.

Limitations
Can be time consuming or not possible for some samples.

Question 17

Sampling Techniques

Convenience sampling

Answer 17

Non-probability sampling.

The process of selecting people who are able to participate in the study at a given time.

Strengths
It is easy, quick, cost-effective when accessing people who are readily available.

Limitations
Not statistically generalisable to the target population because the sampling technique is biased in several ways.

Selection bias may mean that certain people are selected (or agree to selection).

Question 18

Sampling Techniques

Self-selected/Volunteer sampling

Answer 18

Non-probability sampling.

Individuals choose to participate in the study.

Strengths
Relatively easy to obtain and almost a guarantee the sample will be highly motivated.

Limitations
Self-selection bias - rarely reflect the general population (Difficult to make generalisations).

Question 19

Sampling Techniques

Purposive sampling

Answer 19

Non-probability sampling.

Selected based on a specific selection criteria - Participants have salient characteristics.

Strengths
Participants represent the target population.

Relatively easy way to sample.

Limitations
Sampling may be biased, if criteria is objective, documented and explained the bias is limited.

Question 20

Sampling Techniques

Snowball sampling

Answer 20

Non-probability sampling.

Participants who are already in the study help the researcher to recruit more participants through their social network.

Strengths
Cost effective way to recruit participants.

Limitations
Likely to be biased because participants know each other and may have same/similar attitudes or experiences.

Ethical issues with anonymity and confidentiality because they know each other.

Question 21

Ethical Considerations

Ethics/Ethical Guidelines

Answer 21

Correct rules of conduct necessary when carrying out research, where researchers have a moral responsibility protect research participants from harm.

Ethical guidelines for research are published by ethical commitees (US is APA) to protect research participants, the reputation of psychology, and psychologists themselves.

Goal to promote scientific integrity and social responsibility in psychology research.

Question 22

Ethical Considerations - Applied in the Study

Informed consent

Answer 22

The guideline that participants need to be informed of the aims and objectives of the research and what its potential risks.

Give consent to participate.

Question 23

Ethical Considerations - Applied in the Study

Consent

Answer 23

Participants were given consent but not informed (maybe due to deception)

Question 24

Ethical Considerations - Applied in the Study

Protection from Undue Stress and Harm

Answer 24

Researchers need to consider how the research causes anxiety, stress, discomfort, pain, etc.

Provide suggestion on how researcher can provide protection.

Question 25

Ethical Considerations - Applied in the Study, In Reporting Results

Right to Withdrawal

Answer 25

Ultimately its participant’s choice whether they want to continue participating in the research.

No matter the reason, participants always have the right to withdraw from a study and researchers cannot prevent them.
- Ensures respect for individuals.

Results: Participants have right to withdraw data before results are reported.

Question 26

Ethical Considerations - Applied in the Study, In Reporting Results

Confidentiality

Answer 26

Use this over anonymity.

Participants have complete right to confidentiality.

More on the privacy of data.
- How is the data stored.
- Disconnection to participants.
- How data is destroyed?

Question 27

Ethical Considerations - Applied in the Study

Anonymity

Answer 27

No participants should be identifiable by name or any other distinguishing detail.

Anonymity - Impossible for anyone, even researcher, to connect a participant with their data.

Question 28

Ethical Considerations - Applied in the Study

Deception

Answer 28

The misleading participants which present slight ethical problems but also allows for more valid measurement of naturally occurring behaviour in some circumstances.

Needs to be approved by an ethics committee.

If there is deception, will always be treated as a further consideration due to its unethical reasonings.
If there is no deception, this an ethical consideration applied.

Question 29

Ethical Considerations - Applied in the Study, In Reporting Results

Debriefing

Answer 29

The effort to return participants to their original state at the conclusion of the experiment.

Involves an explanation of the research and participant’s role.

Results: Participants should be informed of their results will be reported (and their applications), and how they are to be reported.

Question 30

Ethical Considerations - In Reporting Results

Validity/Reliability or Credibility

Answer 30

Could be considered unethical to use findings from a single study without first verifying their validity in replications.

Study needs to be replicated before being valid.

Question 31

Ethical Considerations - In Reporting Results

Beneficence/Cost-benefit analysis

Answer 31

Need to weigh up to pros and cons before proceeding (possible harms).

Includes possible stigma - One ethical consequence of research is that socially marginalised or vulnerable populations may be stigmatised.
e.g. inferior minority groups, stigma against people with depression, etc.

Question 32

Ethical Considerations - In Reporting Results

Approval from an ethics review board

Answer 32

Potential applications of the findings should be told to the ethics review board before the study is conducted.

Question 33

Question 3 - Generalisability/Transferability

Generalisability

Answer 33

Quantitative Studies.

The idea of applying findings beyond the context of the given study.

Specifically statistical generalisability
- How the results from a sample are representative of the target population from a statistical viewpoint.
- Based on probabilities.
- Generalisation specifically involves statistics.

Argument - External validity
External validity
Whether psychological processes measured in the artificial lab setting have any application to other people or other situations beyond the lab.

Population validity
Extent to which the characteristics of the sample will enable the conclusions to be applied beyond the context of the study.
- Needs to be considered before generalising findings.
- Look at sampling method to determine how representative they are.

Ecological validity
Extent to which the environment of the study reflects other situations.

Mundane reality - Extent to which the task that participants are asked to perform is representative of a real-life situation (VERY similar to ecological validity).
- Ecological validity = environment
- Mundane reality = Task

Replication
How would replication affect generalisability of study?

Question 34

Question 3 - Generalisability/Transferability

Statistical generalisability

Answer 34

How the results from a sample are representative of the target population from a statistical viewpoint.

Based on probabilities.

Generalisation specifically involves statistics.

Question 35

Question 3 - Generalisability/Transferability

External Validity

Answer 35

Whether psychological processes measured in the artificial lab setting have any application to other people or other situations beyond the lab.

Question 36

Question 3 - Generalisability/Transferability

Population Validity

Answer 36

Extent to which the characteristics of the sample will enable the conclusions to be applied beyond the context of the study.

Question 37

Question 3 - Generalisability/Transferability

Ecological Validity

Answer 37

Extent to which the environment of the study reflects other situations.

Question 38

Question 3 - Generalisability/Transferability

Mundane Reality

Answer 38

Mundane reality - Extent to which the task that participants are asked to perform is representative of a real-life situation.
- Ecological validity = environment
- Mundane reality = Task

Question 39

Question 3 - Generalisability/Transferability

Transferability

Answer 39

Qualitative Studies.

Refers to the transfer of findings from a study to contexts or groups of people outside of the original study.
May be increased if findings of study have been corroborated by similar findings in other studies.

Specifically Inferential generalisability
- Extent to which findings from a study can be applied to situations outside of the study context.
- Is there enough detail of subjective experiences to assess if findings can be transferred?

Argument 1 - Quality of research
Characterised by the ‘thick description’ of subjective experiences.
- Higher the quality of study, more likely it is transferable.
- Use sample size.
- Depth of description provides a solid ground for conclusions to be transferred.

Spiral: With enough detail, becomes possible to assess congruence with other situations and populations.

Main Argument 2 - Triangulation
May also be achieved through corroboration with other findings from similar studies.
- Data triangulation.
- Researcher triangulation.
- Methodological triangulation.

Corroboration
Study can become more credible by collecting data with different people in different settings.

Question 40

Question 3 - Validity/Credibility

Validity/Reliability

Answer 40

Quantitative Studies.

All about extraneous and confounding variables.

Measurement of Internal Validity.
- Assesses whether observed changes in the dependent variable can be confidently attributed to the manipulation of the independent variable, rather than other factors.
- High internal validity indicates a well-designed study
- Minimises confounding variables
- Greater confidence in causal inferences.

Confounding variables - Will have an impact on the variables.
- Controlling them is essential to establishing true causal relationships.

Argument 1 - Internal Validity
Find 2-3 confounding variables in study.
- Control allows for to make more likely that dependent variable is affected by the independent variable.

Potentials and ways to deal with them:
Participant bias/expectancy.
- Single blind study (placebo)
- Deception (withhold info)

Researcher bias/expectancy.
- Ensured by a double blind study.
- Including a researcher assistant

Individual participant differences.
- Random allocation (however does not ensure validity).
- Need to undergo matched participants design for guaranteed validity (Separate into groups and ensure equal distribution of all participants).

Non-standardised constructions/procedures.
- To ensure validity, use standardised procedures.
- Standardised instructions.
- Same time of day.

Order-effects (repeated-measures/within groups design: where all participants act in all variables)
- Increased in results due to past experience of study.

Argument 2 - External Validity
Assesses degree to which the results obtained in a study accurately represent the behaviours, relationships, and outcomes in a broader population or different contexts.

High external validity implies that findings are more likely to hold true in diverse situations.

Question 41

Confounding Variables

Answer 41

Will have an impact on the operationlised variables

Question 42

Question 3 - Validity/Credibility

Credibility

Answer 42

Qualitative studies.

Conclusions of study must give true picture of phenomenon under investigation and congruent with the subjective experience of participants.

Looking at the trustworthiness and believability of the study.

Argument 1 - Methods to ensure credibility
Well-established methods
Sticking to specific procedures that have been successful in comparable research projects.

Researcher-participant prior relationship
Allowing for prolonged engagement between researchers and participants long before research begins.
- Establishes cultural familiarity, trusting relationship.

Reflexivity
Researcher should use critical self-awareness as to how her personal beliefs and expectations could influence research process and conclusions.

Member checks
To validate the findings/clarify subjective viewpoints.

Peer Debriefing
Peer debriefing and scrutiny by fellow psychologists not involved in research itself, to disclose blind spots/biases of researcher.

Triangulation
Researcher triangulation, data triangulation, methodological triangulation
- Ensure results are accurate reflection of participants’ experiences (consistent results).
- Compensate for respective strengths/limitations in each method.

Question 43

Question 3 - Bias

Bias

Answer 43

Psychology aims to be as objective and scientific as possible in its approaches to research, however every method is prone to bias in some way.

Argument 1 - Sampling Bias
Bias where sample chosen is not properly representative of the target group.
- Applies to all sampling techniques.
- Leads to statistical errors.

Lack of representativeness lead to larger problems with internal validity.
- Not enough participants with relevant characteristics can limit accuracy of measurements and results.
- Makes it more difficult to determine causality.

Solutions:
- Use a larger sample.
- Limit use of self-selection samples.

Argument 2 - Participant bias
Tendency of participants to consciously or unconsciously act according to how they think the researcher wants them to act.
- Referred to as participant reactivity.

Further affected by social desirability effect.
Participants respond positively so researcher has good impression of them on social level.

Causes problems with determination of causality in an experimental setting.

Solutions:
- Use covert study.
- Use deception.
- Use single blind studies (Participant does not know whether they are in experimental condition or not).
- Can be controlled using placebo (fake treatment).

Argument 3 - Researcher bias
Researcher interact differently towards participants in a study.

Specific to the researchers themselves, not their use of methodology (researchers-participants interaction).

Expectancies and interactions take many forms:
- More encouragement offered to participants in the experimental condition.
- Clearer instructions for participants in the experimental condition.
- Allowing more time for participants in the experimental condition.

Solutions:
Quantative - Remove researcher from research as much as possible, standardisation and double-blind controls.
Qualitative - Researcher/methodological triangulation, reflexivity.

Question 44

Question 3 - Bias

Bias definition

Answer 44

Bias - Any factor that distorts the results of the study, presumably because the factor was not controlled for.