Practical Flashcards
What was the aim?
To see whether there was a correlation between 2D:4D ratio and aggression in comparison to males and females
What was the sample?
21 students (3 males, 18 females) from NSFC aged 16-18
What was the procedure?
- All participants were given a questionnaire on aggression
- Scores were added up
- Measured the lengths of index fingers and ring fingers then divided the length of the index finger by the length of the ring finger
- Inserted into a chart the gender, aggression score and 2D:4D ratio
How was the significance of the scores calculated?
By Spearman’s Rho
What was the significance result?
0.13>0.791 therefore insignificant
What is the conclusion of the study?
There is no correlation between 2D:4D ratio and aggression
What was the hypothesis for the study?
There will be a correlation between 2D:4D ratio and aggression levels with males having ssmaller 2D:4D ratios and higher levels of aggression
Was the study generalisable?
Yes because males and females were used
No because all from NSFC so ethnocentric
Was the study reliable?
Yes because it was standardised and controlled
No because were all teenagers and still growing and going through puberty so may lack validity
Was the study applicable?
Yes because revealse how males and females have similar aggression levels
No because it doesn’t explain why on average men are more aggressive
Was the study valid?
Yes because it was in a classroom so high ecological validity
No because participants were aware of the purpose so may have suffered from social desirability
Was the study ethical?
Yes because participants were kept confidential
No because couldn’t remain fully confidential as other participants could see the results being typed up
