Social Practical Investigation Flashcards
What was the aim of the Social Practical Investigation?
To investigate whether there are gender differences in obedience.
What was the independent variable of the investigation?
Gender- Male, female, other (not specified)
What was the dependent variable of the investigation?
Obedience level to authority figures
What are the extraneous variables of the investigation?
Personality, age, upbringing, social class, ethnicity, experience, profession
What are the confounding variables of the investigation?
Personality, upbringing, social class, experiences
Describe the procedure of your social practical investigation.
The aim of the social practical investigation was to investigate whether there was a difference in obedience as a result of gender. A sample of 8 participants was used consisting of 2 male and 6 females. A questionnaire was created using both open and closed questions, for example ‘How likely would you be to run a red light in an emergency?’. The questions were created to ensure that they were not socially desirable. The responses were then collected and scored using quantitive analysis, the open questions were also analysed using thematic analysis.
Explain the results of your Social practical investigation
Overall, the results suggest that on average females were more obedient than male. This can be seen by comparing the mean, females scored an average of 3.5 out of 14, compared to males who scored an average of -2 out of 14.
However, upon further investigation, the variance between the scores suggest that male obedience was more variant compared to female obedience. This is evident through the standard deviation of scores, for males, the standard deviation was 2.83 compared to 1.64 for females.
Evaluate the Social Practical Investigation (8 marks)
Generalisability- Weakness
Small sample size of 8 participants, therefore results are not representative of obedience in the wider population due to gender differences.
Reliability- Strength
High test- retest reliability because a standardised procedure was used.
Questions and scoring system was kept the same,
Therefore, no differences in the procedure could have impacted the findings.
This means that the procedure could be replicated to see whether results are consistent
Application- Strength
Questions used could be applied to everyday life, therefore they can be used to identify individuals who are more or less likely to be obedient through gender differences.
Strategies could be implemented in order to increase obedience.
Validity- Strength and Weakness
High internal validity as the investigation deceived participants and explicit questions which could have socially desirable answers were avoided in order to prevent bias. Participants could have been affected by demand characteristics otherwise- Screw you and Hawthorne theory.
However, the investigation does not take into account personality, upbringing, experiences. Therefore, the results found could have been impacted by these confounding variables. Results are unlikely to be valid.
Ethics- Strength and Weakness
Participants were told about their right to withdraw twice at the beginning and end of the investigation.
They were debriefed at the end and all participants remained anonymous and results kept confidential.
They also provided Fully informed consent
This means that the investigation could be replicated.
Weakness - participants were deceived, however this can be argued as necessary, otherwise participants would have been impacted by demand characteristics.
