Similarities and Differences Flashcards
Loftus & Palmer and Grant
Similarities
- Method – both are lab experiments
- Design - both are independent measures designs
- Methods – both are potentially low in ecological validity
- the situations were hypothetical
- Both collected both quantitative data
- Ethical – both were ethical
- Sample – both are ethnocentric – based in one culture
Differences
- Reliability – L&P are more standardized than Grant (equipment used)
- Validity – Grant’s study is more ecologically valid – students do learn in similar ways to this, L&P was very artificial
- Sample – Grant had a larger age sample
Moray and Simons & Chabris
Similarities
Differences
*
Bandura and Chaney
Similarities
Differences
*
Kohlberg and Lee
Similarities
- Methods – both are potentially low in ecological validity – the situations were hypothetical
- Both collected both quantitative and qualitative data
- Ethical – both were ethical
- Sample – both are cross cultural (remember that Kohlberg compared his American boys to Tawain, Turkey etc. Both have biased samples – Kohlberg was American boys and Lee was middle class
Differences
- Method – Kohlberg was longitudinal and Lee was a snapshot
- Kohlberg’s data was more subjective as he had to transfer the data from quantitative to qualitative whereas Lee collected both during the experiment
- Lee is more holistic than Kohlberg
- Sample in Kohlberg just used boys whereas Lee used boys and girls
Milgram and Bocchario
Both studies employed a volunteer- sampling method involving respsonses to an advert. However, Milgrams advert was placed in a newspaper, whereas Bocchiaro et al was placed in a student cafeteria.
- Milgram used an all-male sample, where Bocchiaro et al used a mixed- sex sample.
- Target population was different. Milgram used adults aged 20-50 and from a variety of occupations but Bocchiaro et al studied just undergraduate students with a much younger mean age and a smaller age range.
- Both were carried out in a laboratory and both involved a situation where pp’s were aware that they were taking part in research but were. it aware of the nature of the study.
- in both the procedure involved the experimenter giving the participant an instruction. However, a difference was that milgrams order were to directly inflict pain on another person and put them in danger. In contrast in Bocchiaro et al study pp’s were ordered merely to write a message.
Piliavin and Levine
One difference is how the independent variable occurs. Piliavin et al. manipulated the IV themselves whereas it was naturally occurring in Levine et al.’s study. Piliavin had direct control over how the victim presented themselves whereas Levine et al.’s IV could not be set up because it was based on the country a person already inhabited.
One similarity is the sampling method. Both studies used opportunistic sampling, collecting the sample based on who was available at the time. In the case of Piliavin et al it was members of public how happened to be travelling on the subway when the fall was staged. In one of Levine et al’s scenarios, the participants were pedestrians who happened to be using a crossing at the same time as a confederate posing as a blind person
Sperry and Casey
Similarities
Differences
*
Freud and Baron Cohen
Similarities
Differences
*
Maguire and Blakemore & Cooper
Similarities
Method
◦both high in internal validity◦Both easily replicated◦Standardised◦High controls
Ethics
Both ethical - follow the BPS guidelines (be careful for informed consent etc as it was on kittens so they won;
Debates
◦Both are reductionist◦Both are biologically deterministic◦Both use the nature and nurture debate
Sample
◦Both have limited samples
Differences
Method
◦Lab vs quasi◦Data – Qualitative and Quant for Blakemore and only Quantitative for Maguire◦Longitudinal vs snapshot
Ethics
◦Not relevant here – they are both ethical
Debates
◦Not really relevant – they are more similar than different
Sample
◦Kittens vs humans (taxi drivers) – make sure that you refer to them as kittens NOT cats as they were raised from 0 in this environment
Gould and Hancock
