Research methods Flashcards
What does HMC SQUID FORCE stand for?
H - Hypothesis testing
M - Manipulation of variables
C - Control of variables
S - Standardisation
QU - Quantifiable measurement
I - Induction
D - Deduction
F - Falsification
O - Objectivity
R - Replicability
C E - Cause + Effect
What is Hypothesis testing?
procedure that uses sample data to evaluate the credibility of a hypothesis about a population
What is the Manipulation of variables?
we manip./change IV ∴ can infer cause + effect
What is the Control of variables?
- Making sure EV don’t affect outcome of study
- controls = anything we do to try + stop these affecting outcome (DV)- ⬆se our confidence in cause + effect
What is Standardisation?
Ensures RS’s carried out in consistent way:
- experience of ps = same every time - standardising procedure, materials + instruct.
- Helps control Vs + make RS replicable
What is Quantifiable measurement?
- Ensuring numerical data’s gathered - allows to statistical analysis + compare results
- Stat. tests used to decide if res = sig. (cos of IV)
What is Induction?
- General conclusion, principle/explanation derived by reasoning from particular instances/obs
What is Deduction?
- process of reaching specific conclusion, b4 studies carried out, make generalised Hp ➡ then test
What is Falsification?
- Being able to prove something wrong (can Ffy. something if 1 E.G that goes against belief found)
- Must ensure results we collect have pt. to prove theory wrong.
- Unscientific rs. may not have pt. to be ffied
What is Objectivity?
- all sources of bias = minimised + personal/subjective ideas = eliminated
What is Replicability?
What is Cause + Effect?
- Cause states why something happens.
- An effect states a result/outcome.
- At times, a single cause ➡ several effects.
What’s peer review?
- Process that occurs b4 a study’s published = check quality + validity of RS, + ensure RS contributes to its field
Research cycle?
Theory ➡Hp(predictions) ➡ experiement ➡analyse results(draw conclusion)➡
Sections of journal/report: Abstract
- 1st section in report but wrtiten @ end
- Includes summary of: aims, Hyp, method, results + concl, + ∴ provides overview of entire report
Sections of journal/article: intro
- Justifies reasons for writing ab ur topic.
- Intros topic to reader, overview of previous RS on topic provided, key terms defined + own hyp identified
Sections of journal/article: method
4 subsections: - exact procedure
1 - design: IV + DV, EV, exp. design
2 - particip.: who, how many, how u got them
3 - materials - specifically what u used
4 - exact procedure- what u did
Sections of journal/article: Results
- calc mean, mode, range + median(measures of central tendency) and SD
- graphs + tables
- stat. analysis - Will Coxon - Chi-squared
- verbal explanation of findings
Sections of journal/article: Discussion
- ref. bk. to rationale(aims) of study + expl what progress RS made in its field
- compare what’s found in results sect. to what other ppl found in intro + pt. offer expl - Y u found what u did
- limits in method(criticism):strengths + weaknesses of study + ways to overcome in future
Sections of journal/article: References
- ref every psch. talked ab
- end of report
- alphabetical order
- Author name / initials, date of publication,title of article/ journal volume
Sections of journal/article: Appendix
- Raw data, mathem. calc., standardised instruct, lists of words, questionnaire used in RS, detailed description of an apparatus used in RS, stat test workings out
IV
V we manipulate (cause)
DV
we meas. - see if IV has effect on DV/effect
Conditions
group of particip. exposed to IVs
EVs:
- could pt. have effect on DV other than IV
Participant Vs:
- any individual diff. between ps that may affect DV
Situational Vs:
- could pt. lower internal validity = Rser = less confid
- IVs affected Dv + means what they wanted
Control of EV + CV: Randomisation -
- use of chance in order to control for effects of bias when designing materials deciding order of conditions - way to control investigator effects
Operationalising variables
- putting abstract concepts ➡ into concrete measurable concept (vs into a form they can be tested)
= being more specific
CV(confunding)
- found after study + these can be found to have affected DV - change systematically w IV ∴ can’t be sure if any obs changed
- lower internal validity of study = Rser knows DV isn’t direct result of IV
Control of EV + CV: Standardisation
- Using some formalised procedures + instructions for all ps in Rs study - w/in a study as far as possible all ps should be subject to same environ., info + experi.
Control of EV + CV: Reduce demand characteristics
- hide aim (using deception/distractor Qs)
Describe exactly Harvard referencing of: Books
- Surname, Initial (of 1st name).(date).
- Title of book in Italics,
- Where it was published: Publisher who published it.
Describe exactly Harvard referencing of: Journal articles
- Surname, Initial (of 1st name).(date).
- Title of book in NOT in Italics .
- Title of journal in Italics. volume number. pg numbers.
Similarities of Harvard ref. in books and journal articles:
- comma after surname
- brackets for date
- start with surname
Differences of Harvard ref. in books and journal articles:
- title of JA bot in italics but B is
- punctuation is diff.
- books have place but articles don’t
- JAs always have pg #, Bs don’t
Control of EV + CV: having control group
don’t take part in IV - acts as a baseline
what’s the RS aim?
Statement of which RSer intends to find out in RS study, always starts w/ ‘to investigate…’
what’s the RS Q?
Q Rser is trying to answer
Hypothesis:
- Precise + testable statement/ prediction ab assumed relationship betw Vs
what do we use when we use experimental methods?
use experimental Hp
what do we use when we use non-experimental methods?
non exp. methods (obs, self report + correlation) - alternate Hp
Null Hyp:
- says there’ll be no diff betw. conditions
- Rsers should aim to support null Hyp. = avoid Rs bias
Alternate Hyp:
states that there’s relationship betw the 2Vs being studied (IV has effect on other)
One-tailed (directional) Hyp:
- when u say what direction o effect will acc be
- includes words like more/less, higher/lower, faster/slower
- Rsers tend to use directional Hyp. when findings of prev studies sugg particular outcome
two-tailed (non - directional) Hyp:
- when u say there’ll be a difference/relationship but don’t say what that diff. will be
- Rsers use when no prev Rs/prev. Rs that’s been conducted in Area = contradictory
Alternate Hyp - One-tailed (directional) : writing frame
Ps who [IV condition 1] will…sig.ly more/less [DV] that Ps who [IV condition 2]
Alternate Hyp - two-tailed (non - directional) : writing frame
there will be a sig diff in the [DV] of the Ps [IV condition 1] compared to Ps [IV condition 2]
Null Hyp : writing frame
there will be NO sig diff in the [DV] of the Ps [IV condition 1] compared to Ps [IV condition 2]. Any diff will be due to chance
Laboratory experiment:
- RSer has strict control over Vs + uses standardised procedures in controlled environm.
- Cause + effect can be established as EVs are minimised
- Laboratory exper. tend to take place in artificial environments
- RSer manipulates IV
Laboratory experiment: Strengths
- ⬆internal validity – ⬆ controls so only IV should affect DV
- ⬆ scientific – easy to repeat (standardised procedures)
- ⬆able to assume cause and effect
Laboratory experiment: examples -
- Loftus + Palmer
- Bandura
- Moray
- Simon + Chabris
- Blakemore
- Cooper
Laboratory experiment: weaknesses
- ⬇ ecological validity – hard to generalise findings of lab experiments to everyday life
- ⬆ed demand characteristics – pps alter natural behaviour to ‘impress’ experimenter