Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM

Browse over 1 million classes created by top students, professors, publishers, and experts.


See full index

Psychology Paper 2 > Research methods > Flashcards

Research methods Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
Psychology 101 flashcards GRE® Psychology flashcards AP® Psychology flashcards
1
Q

Define aim

A

A general statement of what the researcher intends to investigate

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Define hypothesis

A

Statement of what researcher believes to be true, must be operationalised - defined + measurable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Define extraneous variable

A

Nuisance variables that don’t vary systematically w/ IV. Any variable, other than IV that may have an effect on DV if not controlled

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Define confounding variable

A

Change systematically w/ IV so can’t be sure if change to DV is due to CV or IV

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Define single blind

A

PP don’t know aims so demand characteristics are reduced

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Define double blind

A

PP + researcher don’t know aims so demand characteristics + investigator effect are reduced

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Define independent groups

A

PP randomly allocated to diff groups where each group represents 1 experimental condition

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Evaluate independent groups

A

(+) No order effects bc tested once

(+) Less likely to guess aim therefore behaviour more natural

(-) Pps are diff, act as CV - reduces validity

(-) Pp variable, more time + money wasted - need twice as much pp

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Repeated measures

A

Same pp take part in all conditions of experiment. Order is counter balanced to avoid order effect

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Evaluate repeated measures

A

(+) Pp variable is controlled as same person is used

(+) Fewer participants needed bc take part in all conditions - more economical

(-) Order effects acts as CV - reduces validity

(-) Pp may guess aim, change behaviour - reducing validity

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Matched pairs

A

2 Groups of pp used but related by being paired on pp variable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Evaluate matched pair

A

(+) Reduces pp variable, controls CV - inc validity

(+) No order effect bc tested once

(-) Matching is not perf, time consuming + can’t be matched exactly

(-) More time + money spent bc need more pp

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Describe a lab experiment

A
  • Controlled env
  • EV + CV are controlled
  • IV is manipulated + effect on DV is recorded
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Evaluate lab experiment

A

(+) EV + CV controlled so effects on DV is minimised

(+) Easily replicated due to standardised procedure

(-) Lack generalisability, controlled lab env is artificial

(-) Pp know they’re being studied so gives rise to demand characteristics

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Describe a field experiment

A
  • Natural setting
  • IV manipulated + effect on DV is recorded
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Evaluate field experiment

A

(+) More generalisability bc env is more realistic than lab

(+) High ext val bc pp don’t know they’re being studied

(-) More difficult to control CV so harder to establish cause + effect due to effects on DV

(-) Ethical issues if pps don’t give informed consent

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Describe a natural experiment

A

Change in IV isn’t brought about by researcher but would’ve happened even if researcher hadn’t been there

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Evaluate natural experiment

A

(+) Provide opportunities for research that may be impractical or unethical

(+) High ext val bc study real life issues

(-) Naturally occurring events happen rarely, reducing opportunities for research - limits generalisability

(-) Pp not randomly allocated to conditions, less sure whether IV affects DV

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Describe a quasi experiment

A
  • IV based on pre-existing diff btw people
  • Variable not manipulated, already exists
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Evaluate quasi experiment

A

(+) Carried out in controlled conditions so high internal validity

(+) Replication possible due to high control

(-) Pp not randomly allocated to conditions, less sure whether IV affects DV

(-) Causal relationship not demonstrated bc researcher doesn’t manipulate IV

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Opportunity sample

A

Ask people most available + w/in area

(+) Quick - most convenient

(-) Bias - unrepresentative of target population as it draws from specific area

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Volunteer sample

A

Advertise, pp select themselves

(+) Requires minimal input by researcher - saves time

(-) Bias sample - pp share similar traits, keen + curious

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Random sample

A

Given no. then picked out

(+) unbiased - researcher has no influence over who is selected

(-) Time consuming

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Systematic sample

A

Every nth person is selected from target popullation

(+) Unbiased - researcher has no influence over who is selected

(-) Takes time + effort to get complete list of population

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Q

Stratified sample

A

Subgroups are identified, relative percentages of subgroup in population are refelected in sample

(+) Highly representative of target population, generalisability is more likely

(-) Selected pp may still refuse so more like volunteer sample

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
26
Q

What are the alternative forms of consent?

A
  • Presumptive - ask similar group
  • Prior general - agree to be deceived
  • Retrospective - get consent after study
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
27
Q

What are the diff btw correlations + experiments?

A
  • Experiments, researchers manipulate IV + record effects on DV, correlation, no manipulation of variables so cause + effect can’t be demonstrated
  • Correlation, influence of EV isn’t controlled, maybe 3rd variable
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
28
Q

Evaluate correlation

A

(+) Useful starting point for research - measures how 2 variables are related + suggests hypotheses in future research

(+) Economical - no need for controlled env, less time consuming

(-) No cause + effect - maybe 3rd variable

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
29
Q

When are observations usually used?

A

W/in experiments as a way of assessing DV

30
Q

Evaluate observations

A

(+) Captures unexpected behaviour - insight into unplanned behaviour

(-) Risk of researcher bias - situation affected by expectations

31
Q

Naturalistic observation

A

Takes place where target population usually occurs

(+) High ext val

(-) Low control

32
Q

Controlled observation

A

Some control/manipulation of variables

(+) Can be replicated - standardised procedures

(-) Low ext val

33
Q

Covert observation

A

Pp unaware they’re beig studied

(+) Demand characteristics are reduced - inc validity

(-) Unethical

34
Q

Overt observations

A

Pp aware they’re being studied

(+) Ethical - pp given consent

(-) Demand characteristics - reduces validity

35
Q

Participant observation

A

Researcher becomes part of group

(+) Leads to greater insight - inc validty

(-) Loss of objectivity - researcher identifies too strongly w/ pp, threatens validity

36
Q

Non-participant observation

A

Researcher remains seperate from group

(+) More objective - less bias, inc validity

(-) Loss of insight - reduces validity

37
Q

Behavioural categories - behavioural design

A

Target behaviour to be observed should be broken up into set of observable categories

(-) Difficult to make clear + unambiguous - shouldn’t overlap

(-) Dustbin categories - all behaviours should be in list + not 1 dustbin

38
Q

Time sampling - observational design

A

Observation made at regular intervals

(+) Reduces no. observations - more structured + systematic

(-) May be unrepresentative - may miss important details outside time scale

39
Q

Event sampling - observational design

A

Target behaviour is recorded everytime it occurs

(+) Records infrequent behaviour

(-) Complex behaviour is oversimplified + unrecorded - dec validity

40
Q

Questionnaires

A

Pre-set list of written questions to which pp respond

(+) Cost effective - can gather large amounts of data quickly bc distributed to large no. of people

(+) Pp more truthful compared to interview bc less self-conscious

(-) May not always be truthful + respond to present themselves in +ve light - social desirability bias

(-) Often produce response bias - respondents reply in a similar way eg. always ticking yes.

41
Q

What are the qualities of a good questionnaire?

A
  • Avoid jargons
  • Avoid double barelled Q
  • Avoid leading Q
42
Q

Closed questions

A

Respondent has limited choices

(+) Easier to analyse - produces graphs, easy to draw conclusions from

(-) Respondents are restricted - reduces validity

43
Q

Open questions

A

Respondents provide own ans expressed in words

(+) Respondents not restricted - inc val

(-) Difficult to analyse

44
Q

Structured interview

A

List of pre-determined Q asked in fixed order

(+) Easy to replicate due to standardised format

(-) Interviewees can’t elaborate

45
Q

Unstructured interview

A

No set Q

(+) More insight - able to elaborate

(-) Difficult to replicate bc lacks structure + not standardised

46
Q

Outline what a pilot study is and the aims of a pilot study

A
  • Small scale trial run of research design before doing the real thing
  • Find out certain things don’t work to correct them before spending time + money on real thing
47
Q

Quantitative data

A

Numerical data

(+) Easier to analyse - can draw graphs + calculate averages

(-) Oversimplifies behaviour - eg. using rating scales to express feelings, individual meaning are lost

48
Q

Qualitative data

A

Non-numerical data

(+) Greater external validity than quantitative data - provides researcher w/ more meaningful insight

(-) Harder to analyse - large amount of detailed info is harder to summarise

49
Q

Primary data

A

First hand data collected for purpose of investigation

(+) Fits job - study designed to extract only data needed, info directly relevant to aim

(-) Requires time + effort - 2º can be accessed w/in minutes

50
Q

Secondary data

A

Collected by someone other than person conducting research

(+) Inexpensive - requires minimal effort

(-) Qual may be poor - research my be outdated/incomplete, challenges validity of conclusion

51
Q

Meta-analysis

A

Type of 2º data that combines data from large no. studies. Calculation of effect size

(+) Inc val of conclusions - eventual sample size is much larger than individual sample, inc generalisability

(-) Publication bias - may not select relevant studies, leaving out -ve/non-sig results

52
Q

What are the measures of central tendency?

A
  • Mean
  • Mode
  • Median
53
Q

Mean

A

Arithmetic average

(+) Sensitive - includes all scores w/in calculation

(-) May be unrepresentative - large/small no. distorts no.

54
Q

Median

A

Middle value

(+) Unaffected by extreme scores - representative of data set as whole

(-) Less sensitive than mean - not all scores included

55
Q

Mode

A

Most frequent no.

(+) Relevant to categorical data

(-) Overly simple measure - may be many modes in data

56
Q

What are the measures of dispersion?

A
  • Range
  • SD
57
Q

Range

A

Diff. btw highest + lowest +1

(+) Easy to calculate

(-) Doesn’t account for distribution of scores

58
Q

Standard deviation

A

Measure of average spread around the mean

(+) More precise than range - includes all values w/in calculation

(-) May be misleading - extreme values aren’t revealed

59
Q

What is peer review + what are the aims of it?

A
  • Before publication, all aspects of investigation are scrutinised by experts in the field, should be objective + unknown to researcher
  • Funding: allocate research funding
  • Validation of qual + relevance of research
  • Improvements + amendments suggested
60
Q

Evaluate peer reviews

A

(+) Protects qual of published research - minimises fraud + means research is highest qual

(-) Publication Bias - research not seen as +ve or headline grabbing may be ignored, creates false impression of current state of psy

61
Q

Outline a case study

A
  • Detailed + in-depth analysis of individual/group
  • Tend to be longitudinal
  • Qualitative data
62
Q

Evaluate case studies

A

(+) Rich detailed insight - inc validity

(+) Enable study of unusual behaviour - eg. HM, help understanding of normal functioning

(-) Research bias - conclusion based on subjective interpretation of researcher, reduce validity

(-) Pp accounts are biased - prone to inaccuracy, low val

63
Q

Outline content analysis

A
  • Observational research
  • People studied indirectly via communications eg. media
  • Coding (counting no. times word is mentioned) may produce quantitative data
  • Thematic analysis produces qualitative data
64
Q

Evaluate content analysis

A

(+) Fewer ethical issues - data is 2º that already exists - no issues obtaining permission

(+) Flexible - produces qualitative + quantitative data

(-) Communication studied out of context - researcher may attribute motivations to speaker, reduces validity

(-) Lacks objectivity

65
Q

How do you assess reliability?

A
  1. Test-retest - test same person twice on 2/more diff. occasions, results should be same
  2. Inter-observer
  • Correlation coefficient: +0.8
66
Q

Outline ways to improve reliability

A
  • Questionnaire - replace open Q
  • Interview - same interviewer
  • Experiments - standardised procedure
  • Observations - operationalise behavioural categories
67
Q

Give 2 types of validity

A
  • Ecological validity - findings generalise to everyday setting
  • Temporal validity - findings should be consistent over time
68
Q

How do you assess validity?

A
  • Face validity - whether test looks like it measures what it should
  • Concurrent validity - whether findings are similar to those on well established test
69
Q

Outline ways to improve validity

A
  • Experiment - control group + standardised procedure
  • Questionnaire - lie scale (test for social desirability bias) + told that data is confidential
  • Observations - operationalised categories
  • Qualitative research - use no. diff sources
70
Q

Outline type 1 error

A
  • Null rejected
  • Optimistic error
  • Sig diff found even when it doesn’t exist
  • Too linient
71
Q

Outline type 2 error

A
  • Null accepted
  • pessimistic error
  • Too stringent

Psychology Paper 2 (2 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2024 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions