Rsm Flashcards
Lab experiment
An experiment carried out in an environment where variables can be carefully controlled.
P aware they are taking part, may not be aware of the true aims of the study.
Strengths of using lab experiments (1)
High internal validity because extraneous variables can be controlled. Allows us to be confident that any observed change on the DV is due to the IV.
Limitations of using lab experiments (2)
Participants are aware they are being studied, may show demand characteristics reducing its ecological validity.
The IV and DV may be operationalised in such a way that doesn’t represent everyday experience, low ecological validity.
Field experiment
Carried out in natural conditions
Where researcher manipulates IV to measure effect on DV
Field experiment advantage (2)
- more natural environment, where Ps are more comfortable, results more generalisable to everyday
- Ps unaware they are being studied, behaviours normal, findings easier to generalise, greater external validity
Field experiment disadvantage (2)
- ethical issues (can’t give informed consent) invasion of privacy
- Cofounding variables, changes in DV may not be due to IV by CV instead. Makes it Difficult to establish cause + effect
Natural experiment
Carried out in natural conditions.
Researcher unable to manipulate IV.
Therefore examines effect of naturally occurring IV on the DV
Natural experiment advantage
- allows research where the IV can’t be manipulated for ethical or practical reasons (e.g. Romanian orphans)
- high external validity, as they involve real life issues such as effects of natural disasters on stress levels
Natural experiment disadvantage
- Natural event occurs rarely, reduces opportunity for research, limiting scope for generalising findings to other situations.
- Ps not randomly allocated as the
Iv is pre-existing, the experimenter has no control over which Ps are placed in which condition. May result in CV that aren’t controlled.
Quasi experiment
- IV based on pre existing difference between people e.g. age or gender
- No manipulation of IV, simply exists
- DV may be naturally occurring or may be measured by experimenter
Quasi-experiment advantages
Often high control as takes place in high control conditions
Comparisons can be made about people as IV is a difference between people
Quasi-experiment limitation (2)
No random allocation, as IV is pre existing. Cofounding variables may have caused change in DV.
No manipulation over DV, casual relationship not demonstrated.
 naturalistic observation
Takes place where target behaviour would normally occur
Naturalistic observation advantage
High external validity
Natural context, behaviours more likely to be spontaneous
More generalisable findings to everyday life
Naturalistic observation limitation
little control
May be uncontrolled extraneous variables
Makes it difficult to detect patterns
Controlled observation
Some control/manipulation of variables including control of Extraneous variables
Controlled observation advantage
Can be replicated due to standardised procedures.
Findings can be checked to see if they occur again
Controlled observation disadvantage
Low external validity
Behaviour may be contrived as a result of the setting
Findings cannot be applied to everyday experience
Covert observation
Observing people without their knowledge
Covert observation advantage
Participants are unaware they are being observed and therefore the behaviour is more natural. Less demand characteristics. increased validity of findings.
Covert observation disadvantage
Ethical issues, cannot give consent
Overt observation
Observational study where participants are aware their behaviours being studied
Overt observation disadvantage
Participants are aware they are being studied which may affect the naturalness of their behaviour – they may respond to demand characteristics
Participant Observation
Observations made by someone who is also participating in the activity being observed
Participant observation advantage
Can lead to greater insight.
Researcher experiences the same situation as the P do
Enhances validity of findings
Participant observation disadvantage
Possible loss of objectivity
Participant may identify too strongly with those they are studying
Threatens objectivity and validity
Non participant observation
Observer is separate from the people being observed
Nonparticipant observation advantage
Observers are likely to be more objective because they are not part of the group being observed
Non participant observation disadvantage
Loss of insight. Researcher to far removed from study. May reduce validity
Structured Interview
List of pre determined questions
Asked in a fixed order
Structured Interview advantages
- easy to replicate because the questions are standardised, meaning answers form different people can be compared
- Easier data to analyse over an unstructured interview as the difference between interviewees is reduced
Structured interview disadvantages
- investigator effects (Interviewer bias)
- Interviewee cannot elaborate or deviate from their topics/points
May be a source of frustration
Unstructured interview
- no set questions
- general topic to be discussed but the interaction is free flowing
- interviewee encouraged to elaborate
Unstructured interview Advantage
Greater flexibility
Unlike a structured interview, points can be followed up, greater insight
Unstructured interview disadvantage
Difficult to replicate
Not standardised
Greater risk of interviewer bias
Questionnaire
Pre set list of written questions to which a participant responds
Can be used as part of an experiment to assess the DV
Questionnaire stengths
- Once designed, they can be distributed to large numbers relatively cheaply and efficiently, enabling the researcher to gather a large sample
- Anonymity, Ps may be more likely to give personal information than in an interview where they feel more self-conscious.
- less chance of socially desirable responses compared to an interveiw
Questionnaire weakness
- untruthful responses, respondents tend to present themselves in a positive light, thus socially desirability is still possible
- Response Bias - Respondents may favour a particular type of response, e.g. always agree
Content analysis
- A research tool used to quantify and analyse the presence of certain words, themes or concepts within some given qualitative data.
- analyse it in order to draw conclusions
Content analysis strengths
- Based on observations of what people actually do, real communications that are current and relevant, this gives it high ecological validity.
- When sources can be retained/accessed by other researchers, findings can be replicated
Content analysis weakness
Observer bias reduces objectivity and validity of the findings
because different observers may interpret the meaning of the behavioural categories differently
Case studies
Detailed study of an individual or event
Usually yielding a large amount of information
Case study strengths (2)
- useful as a means of investigating instances of human behaviour and experience that are rare, e.g rare cases of brain damage (Clive wearing)
- this method offers rich in-depth data so information that may be overlooked using other methods is likely to be identified
Case study limitations
– Difficult to generalise from individual cases as each one has unique characteristics
- Retrospective studies (such as damage to the brain) may rely on memory and we cannot be sure that the apparent changes observed were not present originally
Correlational study
Show strength and direction of a relationship
Do not show cause and affect
Expressed has a coefficient between -1 and +1
Shown on a scatter graph
Correlational study advantages
Relatively economical, unlike controlled environment of a lab.
Less time consuming
Useful starting point for research, strong correlation may suggest hypotheses for future research
Correlational studies limitations
No cause and effect
Correlations often presented as casual when they only show how 2 variables are related
May be intervening variables that explain the relationship
Overt observation advantage
More ethically acceptable, given consent, right to withdraw
Difference between correlation and experiment
Ex : Researcher manipulates IV and records effect on DV
Cor: No manipulation of variables, no cause and effect
Also influence of EV not controlled, may be a third variable causing relationship
How to conduct a Content analysis
- Decide sampling method (what material to use)
- Decide coding units
- Frequency - the number of times a word/theme comes up
