practical Flashcards
what is the aim of the pratical
The aim of our practical investigation was to investigate if there is a correlation between the height of participants and aggression scores out of 40
what were the co-variables being investigated
The height of each participant in feet and inches
The aggression score of each participant out of 40 from a questionnaire
what was the research hypothesis
There will be a significant correlation between the height of participants and the aggression scores out of 40 on a questionnaire to test aggression.
is the hypothesis one or two tailed
Two tailed because we don’t say whether there will be a positive or negative correlation in height and aggression only say that there will a correlation
what was the research method
The research method that we used was a questionnaire as we wanted to find a correlation between height and aggression so therefore wanted to ask them open and closed questions about their thoughts and feelings on aggression and what their height eas which was best suited to a questionnaire and we can sent it to many people in a short time to collect the data
what was the sampling method
We used opportunity sampling as we wanted to send out height vs aggression questionnaire to as many people via social media so they could fill it out. This sampling method enabled is to gather many participants more quickly and conveniently than other methods
what was the method
All researchers in the team met to create a questionnaire which included a mix of open and closed questions so that we could collect qualitative and quantitative data. The first question asked for participants height with the remainder asking about the participants aggression levels. One question we used in our questionnaire was ‘ my friends think that i am short tempered’ on a scale 1 to 5, 1 being never get angry and 5 beginning i snap at everything’. Once we had designed our height vs aggression questionnaire we carried out a small pilot study where we asked a small group of people in our class to complete the questionnaire and let us know if there were any errors or questions that didn’t make sense so we could make some changes. Once we had corrected any errors, we sent the questionnaire to as many people via social media who were willing to complete it.
give an example of the questions used
One question we used in our questionnaire was ‘ my friends think that i am short tempered’ on a scale 1 to 5, 1 being never get angry and 5 beginning i snap at everything’
what ethical considerations were made
We needed to make sure that all the participants’ answers on the height vs aggression questionnaire were kept confidential. Therefore we made sure we did not ask the participants to write their name or any other personal details other than their height. No emails were recorded so the participants’ data was confidential and could be removed at any time.
how was the analysis conducted
We added up each participant’s score out of 40 from the questionnaire by grading the responses. For example in the question ‘ my friends think that i am short tempered’ on a scale 1 to 5, 1 being never get angry and 5 beginning i snap at everything’ answers of 1 scored 1 point and answers of 5 scored 5 points. We placed the heights and aggression scores into a table. We ranked the heights from 1-15 with the smallest being ranked 1 and tallest being ranked 15. We then ranked the aggression scores from 1-15 with the lowest being 1 and highest being 15. We then found the difference between the height ranks and the aggression score ranks and used the spearman’s rho equation to find the calculated value to see if there is a significant correlation between height and aggression. We also plotted a scatter graph to see if a positive or negative correlation between height and aggression could be seen.
what were the results
We added up each participant’s aggression score out of 40 and put it into a table to carry out a spearman’s rho stats test. We chose this test because ordinal data of height and aggression scores out of 40 were used, correlation data was collected looking at height vs aggression, and we were looking for a relationship between height and aggression scores. At the 0.05 level of significance the critical value when N=15 is 0.521. Since the calculated value of 0.26 is less than the critical value the null hypothesis can be accepted and the experimental hypothesis rejected. There is therefore more than a 5% probability that the results are due to chance. Therefore there is no significant correlation between height and aggression. Any correlation is due to chance.
what conclusions were made
After carrying out the spearman’s rho we found our results not to be significant therefore we can conclude that there is no correlation between height and aggression scores out of 40 of our participants. This would suggest that height has no effect on the amount of aggression a person would show. However from the scatter graph you can see a slight positive correlation suggesting height may play a small role in aggression.
what were the strengths of the pratical
One strength of our biological practical was that standardised procedures were used. Every participant was given the same aggression questionnaire with the same questions and instructions. This means that competitions can be made between results. This increases the reliability and validity. Another strength of our biological practical is that it was ethical. Each participant had to give consent at the start of the questionnaire with a brief at the beginning before they completed it telling them that we were investigating height vs aggression and gave a debrief at the end of the questionnaire that their results would be used in analysis in a psychology class.
what improvements could be made
One improvement we could have made to our practical investigation is to gain more data for more heights including multiple sets of data on the same heights. This would add validity into the researcher because conclusions would be easier to draw and the results would be more reliable. Therefore we would be able to generalise the results easier to the target population. Another improvement we could have made to our investigation is to include more questions asking about the participants aggression so that the score of aggression increases from 40 so that the results are more reliable as we would be provided with a wider range of scores.
