Research methods Flashcards
State the 4 types of experiments
laboratory
field
natural
quasi
Outline and evaluate laboratory experiments
-researcher manipulates IV to measure its effect on DV
-conditions are heavily controlled to minimise the effects of extraneous variables
-prevents them from interfering with the DV
-participants are aware that they are taking part in the experiment, due to the contrived nature of the situation which feels unlike real-life
Evaluations:
Strength - high degree of control over extraneous variables can be achieved
-hence researcher can prevent extraneous variables from becoming confounding variable that negatively affects DV
-provides high degree of internal validity
-allows for conclusions about cause and effect be drawn between IV and DV
Limitation - lacks ecological validity
-due to artificial nature of environment of the experiment, results may not be representative of everyday life
-tasks lack mundane realism
-hence cannot be generalised beyond the setting of the research
-furthermore, unnatural nature of environment may cause change in behavior, as participant display demand characteristics
-reduces internal validity
Outline and evaluate field experiments
-carried out in natural conditions
-researcher manipulates Iv to to measure effect on DV
-any location that is not a lab
Evaluations:
strength - high ecological validity
-more natural setting
-results are more likely to be representative of everyday behavior
-however, natural setting means less control over extraneous variables
-can distort findings, which reduces validity, as a firm cause and effect relationship cannot be established
-uncertain if any other factors apart from the IV had an effect on DV
Limitation - ethical issues associated with it
-often participants do not know they are in a psychological investigations
-cannot give informed consent
-hence, research may involve a breach of their privacy rights
-however, a cost-benefit analysis can be conducted prior to investigation
-ensures perceived outcomes of investigation outweigh any personal costs to those involved
Outline and evaluate natural experiments
-experimenter cannot manipulate the IV
-so the DV is simply measured and judged as the effect of an IV
-due to this, participants cannot be randomly allocated to experimental groups as they are already pre-set, making them quasi-experiments. For instance, an experiment might investigate the relative levels of aggression observed in boys and girls in a primary school (the experimenter cannot manipulate who belongs to the ‘boy’ and ‘girl’ groups).
Evaluations:
strength - high ecological validity
-more natural setting
-results are more likely to be representative of everyday behavior
-however, natural setting means less control over extraneous variables
-can distort findings, which reduces validity, as a firm cause and effect relationship cannot be established
-uncertain if any other factors apart from the IV had an effect on DV
strength - demand characteristics are often not a problem, unlike laboratory experiments
-participants are less likely to adjust their natural behaviour according to their interpretation of the study’s purpose, as they might not know they are taking part in a study
-increases internal validity
limitation - possible for sample bias
-unable to randomly allocate participants to conditions
-(e.g. other extraneous variables that change with the pre-set IV group differences may confound the results
-meaning a causal IV-DV effect is unlikely).
limitation - ethical issues
-such as lack of informed consent commonly arises,
-as deception is often required;
-however, debriefing, once the observation/experiment has ended, is necessary.
Outline and evaluate quasi experiments
-like natural experiments, it contains a naturally occurring IV, but is one that already exists
-e.g. gender, age
-examines the effect of IV on DV
-can be conducted in a natural setting or laboratory
Evaluations:
strength -High ecological validity
-due to the lack of involvement of the researcher; variables are naturally occurring
-so findings can be easily generalised to other (real life) settings
-resulting in high external validity.
limitation -cannot prevent bias
-as the IV is a naturally occurring difference between the participants, the level of IV they belong to is pre-decided,
-hence psychologist is less certain that the IV alone has caused the effect
-other dispositional or environmental factors may have played a role
-however, quasi experiments allow researchers to compare different types of people easily
-provides insight into similarities and differences between these groups, which would not be ethically generated otherwise
-limitation - methodological issues
-often takes place under natural conditions
-no control over environment and extraneous variables
-makes it difficult to be sure that only the IV has affected DV
-however, when they take place in laboratory setting, extraneous variables are controlled
-strict conditions causes lower ecological validity
-findings cannot always be generalised to real life, as behaviour may not translate outside of the research environment
Outline and evaluate covert observations as an observational technique
-observing people without their knowledge
-may be informed of this post-observation
Evaluations:
strength - investigator effects are less likely
-investigator is hidden, so there is less chance of their direct/indirect behaviour having an impact on the performance of the participant
-hence less chance of demand characteristics, as they will not try to guess the aim of the observation if they are unaware of the observer’s presence
-participant behaviour will be more natural so increases internal validity
-furthermore, high ecological validity as natural behaviour is more representative of everyday life
-hence findings of observation can be generalised beyond the sample
limitation - ethical issues may arise
-participants are unaware of being observed
-cannot give fully informed consent or exercise their right to withdraw
-hence can be criticised for breaking ethical guidelines
-however, it s perfectly acceptable to observe behaviour in a public place (e.g. mall)
-hence, prior to the observation, investigator must assess whether privacy laws are being violated
Outline and evaluate overt observations as an observational technique
participants are aware of being observed
-e.g. publicly filming
Evaluations:
strength - more ethical than covert
-as participants are aware of observation, they can give fully informed consent and exercise their right to withdraw
-therefore, the reputation of the psychological research being ethical is protected
limitation - possibility of investigator effects
-bias can occur where unintentional behaviour of observer (e.g. body language, facial expressions) influences that of participant
-hence participants may change their behaviour by displaying demand characteristics
-may act in accordance with their perception of the research aims
-authentic behaviour not observed
-reduces internal validity of the observation
Outline and evaluate participant observations as an observational technique
-investigator conducting observation also takes part in the activity
Evaluations:
strength - researcher can obtain in-depth data
-as observer is in close proximity to participants, they can gain a unique insight into the phenomenon in question
-furthermore, observer is less likely to overlook any behaviour that an external observer might, due to nuances that can only be seen by becoming a participant in that activity
-therefore, this method observation allows a more comprehensive understanding of human behaviour
limitation - possibility of investigator effects
-bias can occur where unintentional behaviour of observer (e.g. body language, facial expressions) or their mere presence influences that of participant
-hence participants may change their behaviour by displaying demand characteristics
-may act in accordance with their perception of the research aims
-authentic behaviour not observed
-reduces internal validity of the observation
Outline and evaluate non-participant observations as an observational technique
-observer does not participate in the activity being observed
Evaluations:
strength - investigator effects are less likely
-observer is at distance or may not be visible
-unlikely that their behaviour will negatively impact that of the participants being observed
-hence behaviour is more likely to be natural
-furthermore, high ecological validity as natural behaviour is more representative of everyday life
-hence findings of observation can be generalised beyond the sample
limitation - data obtained may not be in-depth
-due to lack of proximity, observer may miss some details of interest
-hence unique insights which contribute to the understanding of human behaviour will be overlooked
Outline and evaluate naturalistic observations as an observational technique
-carried out in an unaltered setting
-observer does not interfere
Evaluations:
strength - high ecological validity
-naturally occurring behaviour is observed in the natural environment
-hence behaviour recorded is more likely to represent everyday life
-furthermore, it reflects spontaneous actions that occur incidentally
limitation -issues with ascertaining reliability
-naturally occurring behaviors are recorded as they unfold
-difficult for the exact same conditions to be replicated
-hence, test-retest method cannot be used with naturalistic observations, as researcher is not in control of variables
-often lacks applicability when this observational techno
Outline and evaluate controlled observations as an observational technique
-strict conditions
-extraneous variables controlled to avoid interference with IV
Evaluations:
strength -can be replicated to check for reliability
-high level of control
-standardized procedures, manipulation of IV and control over extraneous variables can be repeated by the same, or different researchers to assess reliability
limitation - low level of external validity
-behaviour is recorded in artificial environment where variables are subject to strict manipulation
-setting feels unnatural
-hence participant behaviour may be altered
-would not represent everyday behaviour
-causes ecological validity of findings to be questionable
Outline and evaluate structured observations as an observational technique
-researcher uses coded ‘schedules’ according to previously agreed formula to document behaviour and organised data into behavioural categories (when psychologists decide which specific behaviours must be examined)
-hence target behaviour is broken down into components that can be measured/observed
Evaluations:
strength - researcher can compare behaviour between participants and across groups
-use of operationalised behavioral categories makes the coding of data more systematic
-when there is more than 1 observer, the standardised behaviour schedule results in greater inter-observer reliability
-important for research methodologies to be consistent, so that accurate comparisons can be made
limitation -problems with ascertaining high internal validity
-researcher may miss critical behaviours duuring observation, which is pertinent to the aim of the investigation
-hence findings may not provide the full picture about the behaviours in question, as they could lack the finer details
-issue because what was intended to be measured was not achieved in its entirety
Outline and evaluate unstructured observations as an observational technique
-every instance of observed behaviour is recorded and described in as much detail as possible
-useful if the behaviour that the researchers are interested in does not occur very often
-more usual with naturalistic observation
Evaluations:
strength - richness of data obtained
-as behaviour is recorded in great detail, researhers can obtain a comprehensive view of human behaviour
-adds to internal validity of unstructured observations
limitation -
-prone to observer bias
-lack of objective behavioural categories
-hence observer may only record behaviour which is of subjective value to them
-not a valid representation of what is being displayed
-as a result, there could be a problem with inter-observer reliability, due to lack of consistency in the observation recorded
Outline and evaluate time sampling in observations
Outline and evaluate event sampling in observations
Outline and evaluate the use of behavioural categories in observations
What is a case study and why is it used?
-detailed analysis of an individual, event or a small group of people
-often used when rare behaviour is being investigated, which does not arise enough to warrant a larger study being conducted
-allows data to be collected and analysed on something that psychologists have very little understanding of
-hence acts as a starting-point for further research to take place
Evaluate the use of case studies in psychology
Limitation - only one individual or small group is studied
-difficult to generalise findings to wider population, as results are likely to be unique
-psychologists are unable to conclude with confidence that someone beyond the ‘case’ will behave the same way under similar circumstances
-therefore, lowers population validity
Limitation - research may be subjective
-especially when qualitative methods are used
-e.g. case study of Little Hans
-Freud developed an entire theory around what he observed
-no scientific or experimental evidence to support suggestions from his case study
-means that psychologists cannot be sure whether he objectively reported his findings
-hence, validity of conclusions are lowered, as research bias can interfere with the results of the study
Strength - variety of methods can be used
-helps to reduce sources of bias
-also offers alternative interpretations
-helps to gather more data to deepen our understanding of complex human behaviour
Strength - offers rich, detailed information about a situation
-unique insights can often overlooked in situations where there is only the manipulation of one variable to measure its effect on another
-furthermore, case studies can be used where it is not ethical to experimentally examine
-e.g. case study of Genie (Rymer, 1993) allowed researchers to understand long-term effects of failure to form an attachment
-could not do this with a human participant unless it naturally occurred
Difference between aim and hypothesis
Aim - summary of the goal or purpose of the research
Hypothesis - a clear and precise prediction about the difference/relationship between the variables in the study
Difference between dependent and independent variables
DV - variable that research measures, and is affected when the IV changes
IV - variable that the researcher manipulates, and which is assumed to have a direct effect on the DV
What is operationalisation?
State the two types of experimental hypothesis
operationalisation - how a variable is clearly defined bythe researcher (can be applied to IV, DV and co-variables)
directional/non-directional hypothesis
Outline the difference between directional and non-directional hypotheses and give an example of each
directional:
-predicts the specific nature of the difference between two or more variables
-key words: increase, decrease, higher, lower, positive, negative, more less
-e.g. There will be significant decrease in recall of names when age increases
non-directional:
-predicts that a difference will exist between two or more variables, but does not state the nature of it
-key word: difference
-e.g. There will be a significant difference in recall of names when age increases
What is a null hypothesis
states that there is no difference between groups or no relationship between variables
What are the two types of questionnaires?
open question
closed question
Outline and evaluate the use of open question questionnaires
-allows participants to answer how they want
-generates qualitative data, as there is no fixed number of responses to choose from
Evaluations:
strength - less researcher bias
-especially true if participants are anonymous
-participant can answer questions in their own words
-as researcher does not provide fixed responses, there is less chance of the response being influenced by the researcher’s expectations
limitation - may suffer from social desirability bias
-participants may try to behave in socially acceptable way
-portrays themselves in an unnatural way
-hence open response may lack internal validity as it is not their natural response
-furthermore, they may display demand characteristics by attempting to guess the aim of the questionnaire
-further reduces internal validity
Outline and evaluate the use of closed question questionnaires
-restrict participant to a predetermined set of responses
-generates quantitative data
Type 1: Checklist
-participants tick the response that applies to them
Type 2: Likert response scale
-participants rate on a scale their views/opinions on a question
Type 3: ranking scale
-participants order a list off items in their preferred order
Evaluations:
strength - collects quantitative data
-makes it easy to analyse results statistically or in a graphical format
-useful in making direct comparisons between groups or individuals
-hence, researcher can find patterns and trends in the data that can lead to further research being conducted
limitation - limited insight provided
-by predetermining the set of responses, researchers are unable to pursue and explore responses that are of particular interest
-furthermore produces a response bias
-because participant does not take time to read all of the questions properly
-hence, data generated may lack internal validity
factors that should be considered when designing questionnaires
-keep the terminology simple and clear
-keep it as short as possible
-be sensitive ; do not ask personal question. if you must, collect personal information at the end
-do not use leading questions
-do not use questions that make assumptions or sweeping statements
pilot and modify the questionnaire
What are the two types of self-report techniques?
interviews
questionnaires
What are the three types of interviews?
structured ,unstructured and semi-structured
Outline and evaluate structured interviews
-questions are predetermined and asked in the same sequence every time
-interviewer uses an interview schedule
-often records answers to each question by taking notes on their schedule
Evaluations:
strength - generates quantitative data
-easy to analyse statistically
-useful as direct comparisons can be made between groups
-researchers can look for patterns and trends in data
-furthermore, questions are standardized and asked in the same sequence for all participants
-hence interview is easily explicable to test for reliability
limitation - possible investigator effects
-interviewer may run several interviews following the same schedule for different participants
-hence they may unconsciously influence the responses given by interviewee (e.g. by tone and body language)
-furthermore, investigator effects can also occur between researchers where there is more than one researcher conducting interviews
-hence reduces internal validity of the research
Outline and evaluate unstructured interviews
-interviewer facilitates discussion rather than asking set questions
-very little is set in advance
-(e.g. only questions to identify interviewee)
-hence produces large amount of rich, qualitative data
Evaluations:
strength - significantly reduces possibility of investigator effects
-unstructured interviews used an open question schedule
-investigator does not control direction of the topic to meet their own preconceived agenda
-hence participants can justify their answers in their own words with opinions
-furthermore, useful as participants are less likely to display demand characteristics in their interview responses
-less likely to guess the aim of study through any clues given
-increases validity of findings
strength - generates large amount of rich, qualitative data
-allows interviewer to clarify meaning and gain further information from participant if required
-allows them to fully understand complex human behavior
-however, can be more time-consuming and costly
-due to requiring trained psychologist to administer this type of interview
-furthermore, statistical analysis is more challenging
-due to data collection being qualitative
-makes it difficult to identify patterns and trends without undergoing a content analysis
Outline and evaluate semi-structured interviews
-comprises of mostly prepared questions
-can be supplemented with additional questions as seen fit by the interviewer at the time
-hence produces rich, qualitative data, as interviewer can deviate from original questions
Evaluations:
strength - reduces social desirability bias
-open questions encourage interviewees to be more honest
-more likely to justify their answers in their own words with opinions
-increases validity of findings
-however, interviewer still retains control over semi-structured interview
-hence investigator effects are still possible
-can affect behaviour of participants negatively
strength - generates rich qualitative data
-allows interviewer to clarify meaning and gain further information from participant if required
-allows them to gain unique insight complex human behavior
-however, can be more time-consuming and costly
-due to requiring trained psychologist to administer this type of interview
-furthermore, statistical analysis is more challenging
-due to data collection being qualitative
-makes it difficult to identify patterns and trends without undergoing a content analysis
What is the difference between correlations and experiments?
-in an experiment, the effect of the IV on the DV is measured
-in correlational studies, the movement and direction of co-variables in response to each other is measured
What are the different types of correlations?
Positive correlation: as one variable increases, the other also increases
Negative correlation: as one variable increases, the other decreases
Zero correlation: occurs when a correlational study finds there is no relationship between either variable
Evaluate correlational techniques
strength - ideal place to begin preliminary research investigations:
-can measure strength of relationship between two or more variables
-provides valuable insight for future research
-this type of analysis can be used when a lab experiment would be unethical (i.e. variables cannot be manipulated, merely correlated)
-furthermore, secondary data can also be used in correlational studies
-alleviates concerns over informed consent, as information is already in the public domain, e.g. government reports
limitation - not possible to establish a cause and effect relationship by correlating co-variables
-means a researcher cannot conclude whether one variable has caused other variable to increase/decrease
-other factors may have influenced relationship
-furthermore, correlations only identify linear relationships
-e.g. relationship between temperature and aggression is rectilinear
-hence relationship is linear to a point, i.e. when temperatures is very high, aggression declines
What is a correlation co-efficient and how do you interpret it
-used to measure strength and nature of correlation
-ranges between -1.0 and +1.0
-the closer the number is to -1.0 or +1.0, the stronger the correlation is
-1 = perfect negative correlation
+1 = perfect positive correlation
-zero = no correlation
What is sampling?
What is a target population?
Why is sampling needed?
-sampling involves selecting participants from the target population
-target population = particular subgroup to be studied, and to which findings will be generalised to
-target population is generally too large to study in its entirety, so sampling techniques are used to choose a representative sample
Outline and evaluate random sampling as a sampling technique
-every member of the target population has an equal chance of being selected
-involves identify everyone in the target population and using a method that would give an equal chance of someone being selected
-e.g. pulling names out of a hat
Evaluations:
strength - free from researcher bias
-as sample is obtained using a random generator method, researcher has no input into who is selected
-significantly reduces possibility of them choosing a biased sample of participants
-may possibly serve to support their aims
-means that sample is likely to be representative
-hence can be generalised to the wider population
limitation - difficult and time-consuming to ensure everyone has equal chance of selection
-also possible that individuals who are picked may be unwilling to take part
-results in sample being more of a volunteer sample
Outline and evaluate systematic sampling as a sampling technique
-predetermined system is used to select participant
-e.g. every fifth person is chosen
-same interviewer is consistently applied to the whole of the target population
Evaluations:
strength - free from researcher bias
-researcher follows pre-determined system
-does not pick them by choice
-reduces any potential influence that investigator may have over obtaining the sample
limitation - may not be truly unbiased
-e.g. every Nth person may share the same characteristic
-although it will be fairly unlikely, it is still possible when using this technique
-hence sample generated in this way may not be truly representative
-hence findings may lack external validity
-generalisation to the wider population may be more difficult
Outline and evaluate stratified sampling as a sampling technique
-subgroups within a target population are identified
-participants are obtained from each strata in proportion to their occurrence in the population
strength - largely free from researcher bias
-sample is generated randomly once strata have been identified
-significantly reduces possibility of researcher choosing a biased sample of participants, who would serve to support their aims
-means that sample is likely to be representative, because each particular subgroup, if identified correctly will be represented within the sample
-hence any findings generated from research with a stratified sample can be generalised to the target population with greater confidence
limitation - difficult and time-consuming task
-e.g. different subgroups must be identified
-then participants within each strata must be selected
-furthermore, stratification is not a perfect process, as the subgroups identified cannot possibly reflect the individual differences between those in the target population
-hence a truly representative sample would be extremely difficult to obtain using this technique
Outline and evaluate opportunity sampling as a sampling technique
Evaluations:
strength -convenient nature
-obtaining sample is quick and easy
-requires less effort on behalf of the researcher
-furthermore, it is likely to save money andis therefore favored s the most economical technique
-often used due to its ease of application
limitation - contains issue of bias
-as sample is likely to be obtained from one particular location/area,, e.g. university, likely that only students will be available to take part
-not representative of the target population
-furthermore, increased risk of investigator bias, as researcher has complete control over who they can approach
-hence may select particular individuals or avoid others according to their own subjective preferences
Outline and evaluate volunteer sampling as a sampling technique
-participants self-select to take part in the study
-either volunteer when asked or respond to an advert
Evaluations:
strength - convenient nature
-participants generally approach researcher, rather than the other way round
-requires minimal effort and input on behalf of the researcher
-quicker and easier to obtain sample
limitation - issues of bias
-likely that only a particular type of person will come forward
-or only people who have teens eh advert will come forward
-furthermore, those quo are naturally more inquisitive or curious may volunteer more readily
-hence sample is likely to be biased
-not representative of target population
-makes generalisation of findings vert difficult
what are pilot studies and their purpose
-small-scale prototypes of a study that are carried out in advance of the full research
-find out if there are any issues with:
-experimental design
-instructions for participants
-measuring instruments
Outline and evaluate repeated measures as an experimental design
-same participants take part in each condition
-data obtained from each condition is then compared for each participant to see if there was a difference
Evaluations
strength - fewer participants are needed
-less costly and time-consuming
-furthermore, use of same participants across conditions minimizes effects of participant variables
-e.g. individual differences playing a part on the different results obtained
-hence effect on DV can be attributed to the IV with more confidence
limitation - order effects can occur
-participants can experience practice effects
-causing them to perform better in the second condition as they know what is excerpted of then
-participants who experience fatigue may perform worse in the second condition, as they give up
-however, this can be resolved by counterbalancing
-half of the participants complete Condition A and then Condition B
-other half take part in Condition B and then Condition A
-hence any order effects will cancel out
limitation - participants may display demand characteristics
-may attempt to guess the aim of the research
-reduces internal validity, as participates do not behave as they normally would
Outline and evaluate independent groups as an experimental design
different groups of participants for different conditions
-each participant only takes part in one condition
-participants should be allocated to groups by random allocation
-ensures that each person has an equal chance of being assigned to a particular group
-reduces investigator effects
Evaluations:
strength - avoids order effects
-participants only take part in one condition
-less likely to become bored and give up
-furthermore, risk of demand characteristics is reduced
-less likely to guess the aim of experiment if they are only part of one condition
-increases internal validity of results
limitation - more participants are required
-different participants are needed for different conditions
-more costly and time-consuming compared to other experimental designs
-furthermore, participant variables may affect the results
-e.g. differences in age, sex, social background may act as an extraneous hairball pm the DV
-hence psychologists cannot be sure that the IV caused the changes that have been measured
Outline and evaluate matched pairs as an experimental design
-pairs of participants are matched from the sample in terms of key variables (e.g. age/IQ)
-one member is placed in the experimental group
-other is placed in control group
Evaluations:
strength - reduces participant variables
-researchers pair up participant so that each condition has people with similar abilities and characteristics
-furthermore, order effects are less of an issue
-as each participant only takes place in one condition
-hence less likely to experience fatigue
limitation - more participants are required
-different participants are needed for different conditions
-more costly and time-consuming compared to other experimental designs
-furthermore, it is very difficult to find close or exactly matched pairs
-hence individual differences may still play a role in the measurement of the DV
-reduces certainty that IV affected the change
State 2 types of extraneous variables
participant variables (e.g. age)
situational variables (e.g. time of day)
Outline the process of control in psychological investigations, referring g to random allocation, counterbalancing, randomisation and standardisation
Random allocation:
-participants are allocated to groups randomly
-decreases possibility that participant variables will affect results in the form of individual differences
Counterbalancing:
-combats issue of order effects in repeated measures design
-half of the participants complete Condition A and then Condition B
-other half take part in Condition B and then Condition A
-hence any order effects will cancel out
-any order effects should be balanced out by the opposing half of participants
Randomisation:
-trials are presented in a random order
-prevents any bias caused by the order of the trials
Standardisation:
-all situational variables in a procedure used in research are kept identical
-so methods are sensitive to any change in performance
-under these circumstances, changes in data can be attributed to the IV
-furthermore, it is more likely that results will be replicated on subsequent occasions when research is standardised
Outline the idea of demand characteristics and identify how to control them
-participants attempt to make sense of research
-change their behaviour accordingly to support what they believe is the aim of the investigation
-hence they are not displaying natural behaviour
-results lack internal validity
-they may also deliberately try to disrupt the results
-however, this can be controlled by not allowing participants to guess aim of research
-can be achieved by a single-blind experimental technique
-only researcher knows true aim of experiment
-measure of deception has been used so participant cannot easily guess the aim
-hence they are unable to try and either support or undermine research on purpose
Outline the idea of investigator effects and identify how to control them
-researcher (consciously or unconsciously) acts in a way thsat supports their prediction
-can be a problem when observing events that can be interpreted in more than one way by different people
e.g. one teacher may interpret aggression as violence, whereas another as play-fighting
-can be controlled by not allowing participants or researcher to know aim of research
-achieved using double-blind technique
-only the person who originally designed the experiment knows the aim of research
-measure of deception has been used on participants and researcher, so they are unaware of true aim
-therefore, investigator cannot influence participants
British Psychological Society (BPS) code of ethics
Acronym: DRIPP
series of guidelines that researchers need to consider when undertaking psychological research
the main ones are:
Deception
Right to withdraw
Informed consent
Privacy and confidentiality
Protection from harm
Outline issues associated with deception
Overview:
-information is withheld from participants
-or they are knowingly misled
Why is it unethical if broken:
-prevents participants from giving fully informed consent
-they might be taking part in research that goes against their views/beliefs
How to deal with issue:
-at the end of the study, participants should be fully debriefed
-made aware of the true aim and nature of research
-at this point the participant should be given right to withdraw the publication of their results
-contact details of experimenter should be given if tear are any further questions or queries
Outline issues associated with right to withdraw
Overview:
-can remove themselves or their data from the research at any stage, including after research has been conducted
Why is it unethical if broken:
-participants who are not given right to withdraw may feel unnecessary stress
-hence not protected from harm
How to deal with issue:
-at the end of the study, participants should be fully debriefed and told the aim of the study
-at this point, participants should be given the right to withdraw the publication of results
-contact details of experimenter should be given if tear are any further questions or queries
Outline issues associated with informed consent
Overview:
-aims of research must be made clear before they agree to participate
Why is it unethical if broken:
-lack of informed consent may mean participant may be taking part in experiments that are against their views and beliefs
-possible that participants may have felt obliged to take part or are coerced into it, especially if they are not fully informed
How to deal with issue:
Presumptive consent:
-involves taking a random sample of the population and introducing them to the research, including any deception which may occur
-if they agree to take part in the research, it can be presumed that other future participants would do the same
-hence the consent is generalised
Prior general consent:
-involves participants agreeing to take part beforehand in numerous psychological investigations
-told it may or may not involve deception
-hence they will have given consent to being deceived
Retrospective consent:
-participants give consent for participation after already taking part
-e.g. if they were not aware that they were the subject of an investigation
Children as participants:
-parent of children under 16 give consent for them to participate in any research
-
Outline issues associated with privacy and confidentiality
Privacy:
Overview:
-right of individuals to decide how information about them is communicated with others
Why is it unethical if broken:
-a skilled researcher may obtain more information from a participant than they wish to give
-could be an invasion of privacy
-participant may later feel ashamed or embarrassed
How to deal with issue:
-participant should be provided with fully informed consent and the right to withdraw at any stage
-researcher should explain to participants the way(s) in which their information will be protected and kept confidential
-e.g. no names will be published in the final report and -any written/video information will be destroyed
Confidentiality:
Overview:
-participant’s personal information is protected both during and after experiment by law under the Data Protection Act
Why is it unethical if broken:
-a person’s data may be used by other parties against the participant’s wishes
How to deal with issue:
-participants are provided with fake name, number, or initials to protect identity
-assures anonymity
-they should not be identifiable by any person, institution or organisation
Outline issues associated with protection from harm
Overview:
-psychologists are responsible for protecting participants from physical/psychological harm, including stress
-risk of harm must be no greater than what they are already exposed to in everyday life
Why is it unethical if broken:
-participants should leave research in the same state they entered it
-if they are harmed, they may suffer from long-term effects that could impact their lives in the future
How to deal with issue:
-researcher should remind participants of their right to withdraw throughout and after research
-researcher should terminate experiment if level of harm is higher than expected
-participants should be debriefed at the end of experiment
-in some instances they may be referred to counselling
Aims of peer review in the scientific process
-to provide recommendations about whether the research should be published in the public domain, or whether it needs revision
-to check the validity of the research to ensure it is of a high quality
-to assess the appropriateness of the procedure and methodology
-to judge the significance of the research in the wider context of human behaviour
-to assess the work for originality and ensure that other relevant research is sufficiently detailed
-to inform allocation of future research funding to worthy investigative processes
Evaluate peer reviews
limitation - peer reviewers are often anonymous
-may use this fact to criticise rivals in their filed of psychology
-hence inaccurate/unfair criticism may be received following the peer review process
-not a valid reflection of the quality of the work
-furthermore, perpetuated by the fact that there is limited funding for new research
-hence elements of competition could breed jealousy amongst researchers
limitation - often difficult to find suitable peer
-especially true when conducting psychological research on a new or ground-breaking topic
-possible consequence is that research which is not of high quality may be passed as suitable for publication
-as researcher did not fully comprehend aims or content
-conversely, results may be published which preserves the status quo by supporting existing theories more readily than unconventional research might
-results in positive publication bias
strength - prevents any substandard research from entering the mainstream
-serves to protect reputation of the discipline
-furthermore, experts of the field act as peers
-reduces opportunity for plagiarised work to be published-
-hence journals who publish work will be trusted for the articles they disseminate
Outline the implication of psychological research for this economy
can have an effect on:
-employment rates of workers
-tax revenues
-spending of income on public services
-attachment theory: upcoming view that mother and father should equally raise child
-affects parental leave and taking time of work for childcare duties
Outline and evaluate the use of qualitative data
-non-numerical, language based data
-expressed in words
Evaluations:
strength - rich detail obtained by researcher
-participants can freely develop answers
-provides researcher with meaningful insights into human experiences, opinions and feelings
-external validity is higher, as more likely to represent an accurate real-word view
limitation - can be subjective
-due to rich detail of responses, interpretations can rely on researcher’s opinions and judgement
-hence any preconceptions that the researcher holds may act to bias any conclusions drawn
Outline and evaluate the use of quantitative data
-numerical data
Evaluations:
strength - easy to analyse statistically or convert into a graphical format
-when large amounts of numerical data are generated, it is relatively easy to conduct descriptive statistics or inferential tests
-allows for comparisons and trends to be identified between groups
furthermore, as mathematical procedures are already established for this type of analysis, it makes quantitative data more objective
limitation - lack of representation
-often generated from closed questions
-narrow responses are gained, so do not fully explain complex human behaviour
-hence quantitative data often lacks meaning and context
-does not represent everyday life and lacks external validity
Outline and evaluate the use of primary data
-participant directly reports to researcher
-collected for a specific reason
Evaluations:
strength - authenticity
-data collection is designed to suit aims of investigation
-researcher can exert high level of control
-hence greater probability that data generated will fit the aims of the investigation
-reduces any wasted time on behalf of the researcher
-ensures that information prepared for analysis is relevant
limitation - time-consuming
-takes considerable effort
-expenses can accrue due to the time investment needed on behalf of researchers, as well as any equipment that needs to be purchased
-however, secondary data already exists, so can save researcher time, effort and money
Outline and evaluate the use of secondary data
-data that already exists
-collected by other researchers for investigations with different aims
Evaluations:
strength - information already exists in the public domain
-less time consuming and cheaper to collect
-researcher can find the information they need with less effort
-hence, overall collection of secondary data is easier
limitation - concerns over accuracy
-information was not gathered to meet the specific aim of the investigation
-there may be significant variability in the quality of the data
-hence data may be of little or no value to researchers
Outline and evaluate the use of meta-analysis
combining different studies on a single phenomenon
Evaluations:
strength - based on a larger sample
-results are combined from multiple studies, not just one
-provides greater confidence for generalisation
-hence increases validity of the patterns and trends identified
limitation - issues of bias
-researcher is selecting data from research that has already taken place
-may choose certain findings to omit from their investigation
-especially true if previous findings were inconclusive
-hence findings from meta-analysis may be biased as they do not accurately represent all of the relevant data on the topic
What are measures of central tendency?
-tells us about central, most typical value in a data set
-such as mode, mean, median
How is the mode calculated?
Give strengths and limitations
-identify most frequent value in data set
Strength:
-not distorted by extreme scores
-only method that can be used with nominal data (categories)
Limitation:
-can be more than one mode
-hence not always the most useful central measure of tendency
How is the median calculated?
Give strengths and limitations
-rank all scores from lowest to highest and select middle number
Strength:
-not distorted by extreme scores
Limitation:
-does not reflect all scores in the data set
How is the mean calculated?
Give strengths and limitations
-calculated by adding up all the values and dividing by total number of values
Strength:
-most representative of all central measures of tendency
-as comprised of the whole data set
Limitation:
-most sensitive measure
-as outliers (extreme scores) can distort the mean
-furthermore, cannot be used for nominal data
Outline and evaluate the two measures of dispersion
Range: difference between highest and lowest values in data set
Strength: easy to calculate mathematically without using calculator
Limitation: does not indicate the distribution pattern across the whole data set
Standard deviation: looks at spread of scores around the mean
Large SD = lot of variation around the mean
Small SD = dats is closely clustered around the mean
Zero SD = all data is the same
Strength: all values of data set are included in the calculation
Limitation: extreme values can distort the measurement + more complicated to calculate than range, so may take longer
How do you identify normal and skewed distributions on a graph
Normal distribution = bell-shaped graph
Positive skew: large proportion of scores fall below the mean
Negative skew: large proportion of scores fall after the mean
Outline the process of content analysis, and the use of coding
-studying people indirectly using qualitative data (e.g. video recordings, written responses or transcripts) and turning it into quantitative data
-coding = creating categories for data to be classified, so that clear, concise conclusions can be reached
Process:
1) select piece of text
2) read through it, highlight and annotate in the margins
3) using annotations, categorise data according to what it contains
4) this process is repeated for each piece of text/audio/video that is of interest to researcher
5) categories which emerged during content analysis are reviewed to decide changes, e.g. merging or subdividing
6) with the operationalised behavioural categories, researcher tallies occurrence of each behaviour
7) this quantitative data can now be used for further statistical tests
Outline the process of thematic analysis
-helps identify themes in qualitative dats
Process:
1) select piece of text
2) read through it, highlight and annotate in the margins
3) using annotations, categorise data according to what it contains
4) researcher decides if any categories can be linked together
5) categories are critically reviewed to decide their relevance
6) qualitative comparisons are drawn between major and minor themes
Evaluate the use of content analysis and thematic analysis in psychological research
Limitation - can produce subjective findings
-e.g. researcher may interpret what was said in an interview differently to how it was meant
-as a result of their own preconceptions and biases
-furthermore, cultural differences may contribute to inconsistent interpretations
-e.g. if language is translated, it may be interpreted differently by different nationalities
-hence questionable validity of findings from content analysis
-as it may not have been measuring what it intended to with accuracy
Strength - high ecological validity
-analysis is usually on observations of real-life behaviour and written/visual communciations
-e.g. analysis can take place of books or documentaries
-hence can be applied to wider range of situations
-furthermore, records of these qualitative sources remain
-allows content/thematic analysis to be a replicable process
-hence if results are found to be consistent, reliability can be proved
What is standardisation
-refers to the process in which procedures used in research are kept the same
-=all elements of a procedure are kept identical.
-under these circumstances, changes in data can be attributed to the
-also it is far more likely that results will be successfully replicated on subsequent occasions
Define extraneous variable
-unwanted factors in a study that, if not accounted for, could negatively affect (i.e. confound) the data subsequently collected
-these can otentially prevent researchers from finding a direct causal effect between the manipulated IVs and measured DVs set out in an investigation.
Outline the following features of a science:
Objectivity and empirical method
Replicability and falsifiability
Theory construction and hypothesis testing
Paradigms and paradigm shifts
Theory construction
-theory = set of principles that intend to explain certain behaviours or events
-however, evidence to support this notion needs to be collected first, since the empirical method does not allow knowledge to be based solely on beliefs
-researcher must devise experiment to examine their ideas
-if they start to discover patterns or trends in their research then a theory can be constructed (inductive process)
Hypothesis testing
-must be objective and measurable so that at the end of the investigation a clear decision can be made as to whether results have supported or refuted the hypothesis
-theory strengthened by findings that support it
-if it is refuted, then it is likely that alterations will be made to the theory accordingly
-researcher may begin with theory and narrow down topics of interest to specific hypothesis that can be tested empirically (deductive process)
-data gathered from testing the hypothesis in this way will then be used to adjust the prediction
Empirical Method
-idea that knowledge is gained from direct experiences in an objective, systematic and controlled manner to produce quantitative data
-suggests that we cannot create knowledge based on belief alone
-hence any theory will need to be empirically tested and verified in order to be considered scientific
-adopting an empirical approach reduces opportunity for researchers to make claims based on subjective opinion
Paradigm & paradigm shifts
-paradigm = set of shared assumptions and methods within a particular discipline
-psychology has too much disagreement at its core between the various approaches (e.g. behaviourist versus cognitive psychologists)
-unable to agree on one unifying approach to consider itself a science
-way in which a field of study moves forward is through a scientific revolution
-can start with a handful of scientists challenging an existing, accepted paradigm
-over time, this challenge becomes popular with other scientists also beginning to challenge it, adding more research to contradict the existing assumptions
-when this happens, it is called a paradigm shift.
Replicability
-ability to conduct research again and achieve consistent results
-if findings are truly generalisable and valid, psychologists would expect that replicating a study using the same standardised procedures would produce similar findings and reach the same conclusions
Objectivity
-researchers must not let their personal opinions, judgements or biases interfere with the data
-laboratory experiments are the most objective method within the psychology discipline
-due to high level of control that is exerted over the variables
-on the other hand, a natural experiment cannot exert control over the manipulation of independent variables
-hence natural experiment is often viewed as less objective
-similarly, the observational and content analysis methods can fall victim to objectivity issues
-as the behavioural categories assigned are at the personal discretion of the investigator
Falsifiability
-idea that hypothesis can be proven wrong
-scientific research can never be ‘proven’ true, only subjected to research attempts to prove them as false
-hence all investigations have a null hypothesis which suggests that any difference or relationship found is due to chance
Outline how to report psychological investigations
Abstract:
-short summary of the key points of the research
-general overview of the study
-allows reader to make informed decision about whether to read the rest of the article or not
Introduction:
-justifies need for conducting research
-researchers try to identify if there a gap in existing research or if previous research created new questions that need to be answered
-in order to better understand the subject, a literature review needs to be carried out (overview of research which already exists within the proposed field of study)
Method:
-typically split into several sections
-ensures that each aspect of the procedure is written in sufficient detail
-allows reader would be able to replicate the study
• Design: experimental design and variables
• Sample/participants: number of participants, sampling technique, mean age, etc
• Apparatus/materials: equipment, stimuli for participants, but questionnaires should be in appendix
• Procedure: the standardised instructions for replication, informed consent and debriefing forms
• Ethics: issues and how they were addressed
Results:
-in chronological order
-can include descriptive statistics
-raw data should be in appendix section instead
Discussion:
-allows for findings to be interpreted
-links everything, including information discussed in the literature review from the introduction to the final statistics from the analyses
-discussion should progress as follows:
1. How the findings compare with the initial research questions and hypotheses
2. How the research compares with other relevant research that has been published within the field
3. The implications for future research
References:
-gives credit to the original authors of any work that has been referred to or cited within the research report.
How to conduct content analysis
-devise important categories from interview
-work through transcribed conversations
-count number of occurrences of each category
