research methods Flashcards
define aim
description of what you are researching and why
define hypothesis
states the relationship between the variables and predicts the results
define directional hypothesis
states the direction and correlation the experiment is expected to go in based on previous research
define non directional hypothesis
predicts there will be a difference in results but the direction is unknown as there is no previous research
define null hypothesis
predicts there will be no difference
define IV
variable we change
define DV
variable we measure
define operationalisation of variables and how to do it
clearly defining the variables and stating how they will be measured by adding values and units
define extraneous variables
variables other than IV that may have an effect on DV if not controlled and doesn’t relate to IV
define demand characteristics
clues that allow participant to guess the aim and changes their behaviour to help or sabotage the experiment
define social desirability
when the participant tries to please the researcher or try to make themselves look better
define the hawthorne effect
when people are interested so they show a more positive response which leads to artificially high results
define investigator/experimenter effects
experimenter unconsciously conveys to participant how they should behave
examples of investigator effects
tone, accent, body language, leading questions
define situational variables
aspects of environment that may affect the participants behaviour
examples of situational variables
temperature, noise, authenticity of experiment
define participant variables
the ways each participant varies and how this affects their results
examples of participant variables
trauma, mood, intelligence, anxiety, gender, culture
how can you control extraneous variables
single blind design
double blind design
experimental realism
randomisation
standardisation
controls
define single blind design
participant is not aware of the research aims
define double blind design
participant and experimenter are unaware of aim and hypothesis
define experimental realism
researcher makes the task engaging that the participant doesn’t know they are being observed
define randomisation
randomly allocating tasks and roles to avoid bias
define standardisation
experience of experiment is kept almost identical
define confounding variable
variable other than IV that had a direct effect on the DV and is related to IV
define pilot studies
small scale practice investigations to help identify potential problems before doing the real experiment, so money and time is saved and stops floor and ceiling effect
define validity
the extent to which a study measures what it intends to measure
define internal validity
whether the effects observed are due to the IV and not another factor
define mundane realism
how realistic the task is
define external validity
how well you can even compare your findings to other people, places and times
define ecological validity
the extent to which the results reflect real life
define population validity
how well the sample can be used to generalise to represent the population as a whole
define temporal validity
the extent to which the findings are valid when we consider differences in time progressions
define face validity
the test/questionnaire looks like it measures what it intends to
define concurrent validity
whether the results can be compared to another existing, well established test which measures the same thing and follows the same correlation
how to improve validity
- control group- compare results with the experimental group to see if IV changes
- covert observations- participant doesn’t know they are being watched so they are natural
- questionnaires- keeping them anonymous so they are more truthful
- qualitative methods- interviews have high ecological validity as they represent humans more accurately
- standardise procedures and instructions
- single blind or double blind
- assure results are anonymous so participants are truthful
- incorporate a lie scale to assess the consistency of responses
- triangulation- use of different sources of evidence
define experimental design
researcher has to decide how they will use their participants
define a repeated measures experiment
same group if participants in all conditions
advantages of repeated measures experiment
- no participant variables
- fewer participants so more economical
disadvantages of repeated measures experiment
- order effects
- demand characteristics
define order effects and what are the different types
doing the same task twice
boredom, fatigue, practise
solutions to repeated measures experiment
counterbalancing and randomisation
define counterbalancing
when two groups do the tasks in different order to cancel our order effects
define independent group design
different groups perform only one condition
advantages of independent group design
- no practice effects
- reduces demand characteristics
disadvantages of independent group design
- needs more participants
- participant variables between groups
solutions to independent group design
random allocation as each participant had an equal chance to being in either group and tried to avoid imbalance of participant variables in either group
define matched pairs design
pair up participants on a certain quality that is believed to affect the performance on the DV and their results are compared
advantages of matched pairs design
- participant variables reduced
- no order effects
disadvantages of matched pairs design
- larger number of participants needed
- difficult to match on characteristics like personality
- difficult to know which variables are relevant
solutions to matched pair design
pilot study to help choose which variables are most important to match on
define ceiling effect
task is too easy so all the scores are high
define floor effect
task is too difficult so all scores are low
define construct validity
extent to which a test captures a specific construct or trait and it overlaps with some other aspects of validity
define experiment
IV that is changed so that the effect on DV can be observed and aims to establish cause and effect relationship
define laboratory experiment
takes place in a carefully controlled lab where the IV is manipulated by the experimenter so the DV can be measured
pros of laboratory experiment
- extraneous variables are closely controlled so increases internal validity
- easily repeated as it is controlled so increases reliability
- shows cause and effect relationship
cons of laboratory experiment
- artificial nature so lacks ecological validity
- know they are tested so may lead to demand characteristics
- lacks mundane realism
define field experiment
conducted in natural setting where the IV is still manipulated so the DV can be measured
pros of field experiment
- higher mundane realism
- naturalistic so high ecological validity
- demand characteristics are less likely
cons of field experiment
- harder to control extraneous variables
- ethical issues as the participant don’t know they are being studied
- harder to replicate
- IV may be operationalised in a way that lacks mundane realism
define natural experiment
IV naturally occurs, and would take place even without the research taking place, and DV is then measured
pros of natural experiment
- high external validity
- provides opportunities for research that would otherwise be impossible to replicate
- reduced demand characteristics
cons of natural experiment
- less control over extraneous variables
- very unlikely to be able to replicate
- random allocation of participant not possible so there may be bias and lead to participant variables
define quasi experiment
participants are automatically assigned to a condition depending on their characteristics or features that don’t change
pros of quasi experiment
- controlled experiments so can be replicated
- high ecological validity as you can compare to real life
cons of quasi experiment
- cannot randomly allocate so more chance of extraneous variables
- demand characteristics as they may become more aware
- DV may be articulate and reduced ecological validity
define sampling
choosing a group of people to represent the target population
define target population
population to which the researcher would like to generalise their results to
define opportunity sample
using people who are available at the time of testing
define random sample
each member of the population has an equal chance of being selected like names in a hat or random generator
define stratified sample
subgroups are identified and participants are chosen at random from each group in proportion to target population
define volunteer sample
participants out themselves forward to take part
define systematic sample
using a system to pick a pattern of participants e.g every nth time
pros of opportunity sampling
- quick and cheap
- can have face to face ethical debriefings
cons of opportunity sampling
- researcher bias as they bc hoods who they want
- depends on who’s available, different factors eliminate who is free
pros of random sampling
- avoids bias
- aims to be fair and representative
cons of random sampling
- impossible to have all names of target populayion
- doesn’t guarantee full representation
- time consuming
pros of stratified sampling
- highly representative so has population validity
cons of stratified sampling
- time consuming and difficult to gather
pros of volunteer sampling
- give their informed consent
- will be interested and less likely to withdraw
- large number may apply so it gives more accurate results and in depth analysis
- helpful to find people who can be seen as atypical
cons of volunteer sampling
- biased as it is not representative of the whole population
- hawthorne effect
- demand characteristics
pros of systematic sampling
- normally representative
cons systematic sampling
- may not be able to identify all members of the population
- unexpected bias that has a pattern
- starting point and deciding on list type may be biased
what are the ethical issues
- informed consent
- deception
- right to withdraw
- protection from harm
- privacy and confidentiality
features of informed consent
- making participants aware of the aims of the research, procedures, risks, rights and what their data will be used for
- use consent forms
- under 16s need parental consent
- consent cannot be given by those under the influence
define presumptive consent
similar group of people are told the details of the study and asked if it is acceptable, and their answer will presume the answer of the actual participants
define prior general consent
participants give their permission to be deceived but not knowing how
define retrospective consent
asking them after they have taken part of their data can be used
limitations of informed consent
- invalidate purpose of study
- participants do not know fully what they are getting in to
- demand characteristics
features of deception
- BPS only allows when there is scientific justification and no alternative procedure
- full debrief after to discuss concerns
- cost-benefit analysis
limitations of deception
- cost- benefit decisions are flawed
- debriefing cant turn back time
- distrust in psychologists
features of right to withdraw
- enticed by financial incentives
- fully informed consent so they know what they are doing and less likely to withdraw
- volunteer samples as people are more eager and won’t withdraw
limitations of right to withdraw
- time consuming
- guilty to withdraw
- economic pressure because they are getting paid
features of protection from harm
- physical or psychological
- should be in same state after the experiment as they were before
- no greater harm than what they would experience in every day life
- offer therapy and counselling at the end
- stop the study immediately if the participant is harmed too much
limitations of protection from harm
- harm may not be apparent or obvious yet
- don’t always know what will be harmful beforehand