Researchy Flashcards
Aim
A statement of what the researcher intend to find out in a research study
Hypothesis
A precise and testable statement about the assured relationship between variables. Operationalisation is a key part of making the statement testable
Directional hypothesis
States the direction of the predicted difference between two conditions or two groups of participants
Non-directional hypothesis
Predicts simply that there is a difference between two groups or conditions of participants, without stating the direction of the difference
ETHICS - informed consent
FOR RESEARCHER - means revealing true aims of study/what is going to happen- however could lead to participants trying to guess aims of study —> demand characteristics (so may not want to reveal aim of study
FOR PARTICIPANT- told what they are required to do in study so can make an informed decision as to whether they want to take part. Despite this, however, does not guarantee participants know what they are accepting.
Should be told all the benefits/risks of a situation, however researcher may not know this yet so cannot tell them
ETHICS - DECEPTION
RESEARCHER - necessary to deceive participants about aim , otherwise participant may change their behaviour. Should not however provide deliberately false info, just withhold some info
PARTICIPANT - prevents participants from being able to give informed consent- agree not knowing what they agreed to and may be distressed by experience
Can lead to seeing psychologists as untrustworthy and not want to take part in further research
DIANA BAUMRIND(1985) deception is wrong on basis of 3 rules: 1. Right of informed consent, 2. Obligation to protect welfare of participant 3.responsibility of researchers to be trustworthy. —> however is pointed out that sometimes deception can be harmless
ETHICS - right to withdraw
RESEARCHER - is participants leave, will bias the study as the remaining participants are likely to be more obedient/more hardy leading to a bias sample
PARTICIPANT- if they feel uncomfortable/distressed they should be allowed to withdraw. Ethically important if participant has been deceived. Participant may feel as if they didn’t fully understand what they agreed to do still allowed to withdraw.
Sometimes compromised by payment of participants or some other reward, making participants feel less able to withdraw
ETHICS - protection from physical and psychological harm
RESEARCHER - studying some aspects of psychology may cause a degree of distress. Also difficult to predict outcome of studies, so can’t always guarantee protection from harm
PARTICIPANT - many ways harm is caused, some physical (making them smoke/drink) and some psychological (embarrassing them). Considered acceptable if harm is no greater that participant would experience in normal life, and if participants are in the same state after the study as before
ETHICS - confidentiality
RESEARCHER - researcher will want to publish findings. Participants can be kept anonymous however, if their is a specific reference to their specific group (I.e. children’s hospital in isle of white) then their identity may be easy to guess
PARTICIPANT- data protection act makes confidentiality a legal right. Only acceptable for personal data to be recorded if data not made available in a form that identifies participants
ETHICS-
Privacy
RESEARCHER- may be difficult to avoid invasion of privacy when studying participant without their awareness( field experiment)
PARTICIPANT- people do not expect to be observed in certain situations
DEALING WITH ETHICS- ethical guideline
BPS regularly updates its ethical guidelines - tells psychologists what behaviour is/isn’t acceptable and give guidance in ethical dilemmas
DEALING EITH ETHICS- cost-benefit analysis
Just the cost of doing research against the benefits, which may be judged from the participants point of view
Alternatively, may be judged in terms of society at large - value of improving ppls lives v possibilities ppls lives harmed in the process
Judge in terms of terms of which a group an individual belongs too- finding may not harm individual however may lead to biased treatment of that individuals group
DEALING WITH ETHICS- ethics committees
Must approve any study before it begins
Will look at all the possible ethical issues and how the researcher suggests the issues be dealt with
DEALING WITH ETHICS - punishment
If a psychologist behaves in an unethical manner, then the BOS review the researcher and may decide to bar the person from practicing psychology again
Cost benefit analysis
Strengths as weaknesses
Limitations- difficult, almost impossible, to predict both costs and benefits prior to conducting a study. Also difficult to even quantify costs and benefits
- DIANA BAUMRIND (1959) thins approach legitimises unethical practice - suggests deception and harm are acceptable provided the benefit is high enough
ethical guidelines
Strengths and weaknesses
STRENGTHS- the rules and sanctions of BPS and APA ethical guidelines has strengths in terms of the clarity it offers
WEAKNESSES- BPS/APA guidelines inevitably rather general because of impossibility of covering every conceivable situation
- tends to close of discussions about what is right/wrong because answers are provided
- guidelines absolve the researcher of any responsibility because the researcher can simply argue they followed the guidelines
INFORMED CONSENT HOW TO DEAL WITH + LIMITATION
How to deal with- participants asked to formally indicate their agreement to participate i.e signing a document with all info on
- to gain presumptive consent
- must offer right to withdraw
ISSUES- if participant given full info, may invalidate purpose of study
- even if researchers gained consent, cannot guarantee participants Understand what is happening
- presumptive consent- what people expect they will or will not mind is different from actually experiencing it
DECEPTION how to deal with and issues
HOW TO DEAL WITH- should be approved by ethics committee, weighing up benefits against costs
- participants should be debriefed after study- informing them of true nature of study and providing opportunity to discuss any concerns or withhold data (retrospective informed consent)
ISSUES-cost- benefit are flawed as they involve subjective judgments and costs/benefits not always clear
-debriefing can’t turn clock back - may still feel embarrassed or have low self esteem
The right to withdraw
How to deal with and issues
HOW TO DEAL WITH- participants informed from beginning of their right to withdraw
ISSUES- participants may feel they shouldn’t withdraw as will ruin study
- participants are usually paid or rewarded in some way and may not feel able to withdraw
Protection from harm
How to deal with and issues
HOW TO DEAL WITH- avoid any risks greater than experienced in everyday life
- stop study of harm suspected
ISSUES-harm may not be apparent at time of study only judged later with hindsight
Confidentiality
How to deal with and issues
HOW TO DEAL WITH- should not record names of participants
-should use numbers or false names to represent individuals
ISSUES- sometimes possible to work out how the participants were using info that has been provided
Privacy
How to deal with and issues
HOW TO DEAL WITH- do not study anyone without informed consent unless in public place and is public behaviour
ISSUES- no universal agreement as to what is a public place
QUESTIONNAIRES
- set of written questions designed to collect info on topic
- can discover what ppl think and feel - observations rely on guessing by how they behave
- can ask ppl directly how they think and feel
- can be objective and scientific
- are always pre determined
QUESTIONNAIRES STRENGTHS LIMITAITONS
STRENGTHS- can be distributed to large numbers of ppl relatively cheaply and quickly - can collect data from a large sample of ppl
-may be more willing to give personal info than in interview
WEAKNESSES- only filled by ppl who can read and write and have time to fill them in. Biased sample
Questionnaires construction
- CLARITY- no ambiguity
- BIAS- question may lead to participants giving a particular answers - social desirability bias (participant wants to seem nice)
- ANALYSIS- closed questions easier to analyse, but may not represent real thoughts
Writing good questionnaires
- filler questions- distract from purpose - reduce demand characteristics
- sequence for questions - start with easy ones
- sampling technique- how to select participants (usually stratified sampling)
- pilot study- questions can be refined
Open questions strengths weaknesses
STRENGTHS - can expand on answers, increasing amount of detail and info collected
-can provide unexpected answers, allowing better insight for researchers
LIMITATIONS- respondents may avoid lengthy questions so in practice provide less info
- produce qualitative data which is more difficult to summarise -harder to detect clear patterns
Closed questions strengths weaknesses
STRENGTHS- limited range of answers and provide quantitative data making data easy to analyse using graphs and averages
LIMITATIONS- may be forced to select answers that don’t represent their real thoughts/behaviour - lack validity
-may select ‘don’t know’ or have a preference to select yes and so data not informative
