Research Methods Flashcards
Variable
A factor that is able to take on at least 2 different values.
Independent variable
The variable that affects the dependent variable (the variable that is manipulated)
Ex). Amount of water given to plants
Dependent variable
Depends on the independent variable (is the outcome)
Ex). Plant growth
Confirmatory Research
When a testable hypothesis can be formed
Exploratory Research
No hypothesis; venturing into a topic
Correlational Study
Observed associations between variables without manipulation; correlations do not imply causation.
Positive correlation
Relationships going in the same direction. Perfect positive correlation = +1.00. X increases and Y increases.
Negative Correlation
Relationships going in opposite directions. Perfect negative correlation = -1.00. X increases and Y decreases.
0 Correlation
No relationship
Reverse Causality
When though that X causes Y, it might be the case that Y causes X
3rd Variable
Other factors that may explain why X is correlated with Y.
Random Assignment
When participants have an equal chance of being assigned to the different conditions of an experiment
Experiment
Requires both manipulation of a variable and random assignment to conditions.
Field studies
Conducted in people’s natural environment. High mundane realism (realistic), high external validity (external validity = generalizability)
Lab studies
Particiant comes to researcher; usually an artificial environment. Allows for more controlled conditions, high experimental realism (engages & absorbs participants), high internal validity (confidence that independent variable caused dependent variable)
Internal Validity
Confidence that the IV caused the DV
External Validity
Generalizability to other situations, people, etc. (can generalize what you observe towards ordinary people outside your study, can apply your findings)
Experimental Realism
Extent to which a study is engaging to the participants.
Mundane Realism
Similarity to actions/events in the real world.
Social Desirability
Wanting to look good in front of an experimenter so either lying or saying what they think the experimenter wants to hear, also want to feel like a good person so may not admit to having done bad things.
Observational data
Data that researchers see directly; pros: high authenticity; cons: potentially more time-consuming, may be hard to interpret
Self-report data
Collected through surveys, face-to-face interviews, telephone screenings; pros: can measure internal states (eg. loneliness); cons: potentially biased responses, social desirability is a concern.
Archival research
Previously collected research; cons: one is unable to control what is asked, who the participants were, and the origin of data.
Subject (or Participant) Bias
You can never study every member of the larger group that we are interested in understanding. Most of the time we want to have a representative sample of people but we can’t randomly select from all of the people. (would have to be from all over the world, every country, every background…impossible!!!)
Experimenter Bias
Since the experimenter knows what results they want to see they might give unintentional cues or hints to participants (blinding counters this)
Participant Bias
Participants respond in a way that corresponds to what they believe the researcher is hoping to observe
Demand Characteristics
Cues/features of a study that inadvertently tip off the participant.
» Proposed Solution: keep participants and experimenters blind to study purpose and hypotheses, conducting studies where participants are unaware they are being observed
Convenience Sample
Rely on whatever people are convenient to participate in studies (often college students). Can also be people from the community (but usually not representative, usually white, financially comfortable, etc.)
