Full topic

Abstract

Summary of the entire investigation

Should be written last

Includes: aim

Hypothesis

Type of design

Variables

No of participants and sampling method

Results

Conclusion

Introduction

Sets the scene

Puts the aim and hypothesis of the investigation into context

Method

Chronological order of how u conducted your study

Results

A summarised account of the data collecting using descriptive statistics and graphs

Discussion

Outline a conclusion by explaining your results

Evaluating your study

Referencing

Last name , first initial . (Year) Title/ Name Of Book . Publisher , (issue number) , page number

Peer review

Sent of to other psychologist experts who either accept reject or suggest it should be made better

Institution bias research from prestigious university’s are looked upon more favourably

Experiment vs correlation

How the IV affects the DV (how salt vs sugar affects memory) vs if one factor affects another (the older we are the slower our reactions)

Strengths of correlations (2)

-easy to identify relationship between co variables (scatter graph)

-can study varaibles that would be unethical to test experimentally

Weaknesses of correlations (3)

-cannot determine cause and effect

-could be misinterpreted

-could be a third variable

No correlation

No relationship between the variables

Correlation coefficient

A number between -1 and +1 that tells us how strong the relationship is

+1.0 perfect positive

0 no correlation

-1.0 perfect negative

Historical/ temporal validity

Whether findings will still be valid over time

Face validity

Does something look like it will measure what it is supposed to measure

Ecological validity

Whether the study reflects real life situations

Population validity

Whether the sample is representative of the wider target population

Concurrent validity

The amount of agreement between two different tests

One test is new and the other is well established

If the participants scored similarly in both tests this meant it had high concurrent validity

External validity

Will the findings generalise to other populations locations or times and still hold true

Internal reliability

Whether a measure has consistency with itself

External reliability

The consistency of two or more sets of results with the same measuring device

Inter-rater reliability

Two or more researchers have a high agreement on a measure

Reasearchers would compare results and check they matched by using correlation

Test-retest reliability

Testing participants more than once

One person should get the same or similar scores on the same test but at separate occasions

Confidentiality

Keeping data private

Keep files in a safe place

Deception

Tell all information do not leave anything out

Thorough debrief, counselling sessions

Competence

Having the knowledge and skills to perform the work of a psychologist

Studying pyschology to have these skills

Debrief

Full explanation of aims and consequences

Writing a report

Withdrawal

The right to leave the study

Protection from psychological and physical harm

Participants must leave in the same state they joined

Counselling

Informed consent

Tell the participants what’s included in the study

Privacy

Make sure the client is in control and participants do not have to answer if they do not want to

Can Do Can’t Do With Participants In Pyschology

Confidentiality

Deception

Competence

Debrief

Withdrawal

Protection from psychological and physical harm

Informed consent

Privacy

Pilot study

Initial run through of the procedures to be used in an investigation

Selecting a few people and trying the study on them

Purpose of a pilot study

-saves time and money by identifying flaws in the procedure

Extraneous variables

Other variables that are not the IV that could affect the DV

Could affect validity

Counterbalancing

One group does condition A then B and the other group does condition B then A

Target population

The set of people researchers want to find out about

Sample

A small set of people taken from the target population

Random sampling

Names in a hat, everyone has an equal chance of getting picked

Systematic sampling

Every fourth person from a list

Opportunity sampling strengths

anyone available at the time

-easy and less time consuming

-collects participants with similar characterisitics

Opportunity sampling weaknesses (2)

-higher chance of researcher bias

-could not be representitive

Self selected sampling strengths (3)

-reaches a large variety

-easy

-participants will remain commited

Self selected sampling weaknesses (3)

-might not get relevant people

-volunteer bias

-may not be enough interest

Systematic sampling strengths (3)

-more generalisable

-unbiased -increases validity

-likely to gain a varied sample -representative

Systematic sample weaknesses (2)

-difficult to carry out -time consuming

-could accidentally create a biased sample

Random sampling strengths (2)

-reduces researcher bias

-representative

Random sampling weaknesses (2)

-time Consuming

-lacks generalisation

Stratified sampling

Sampler groups target group into sections based on a key characteristic that should be shown in the final sample (different classes)

Stratified sampling strengths (1)

-if list order is randomised -unbiased

Stratified sampling weaknesses (2)

-time consuming

-difficult as sub groups must be known

Representative

How well a sample reflects the target population

Population validity

Being able to generalise results from our sample to the target population and still hold true

Aim

What you aim to find out for example: if chewing gum affects memory

Non-directional hypothesis

Predicting that there will be an effect but not the direction of the effect (positive/negative)

Directional hypothesis

Predicting the direction of the effect (positive/negative)

Null hypothesis

Predicts no effect

Things to include in a hypothesis

-IV and how it is manipulated

-DV and how it is measured

-directional or non-directional prediction of result

Strengths of questionnaires (3)

-no Immediate judgement

-easy to administer (email)

-quantitive can be easy to analyse

Weaknesses of questionnaires (3)

-response bias could say same thing for each question

-people could leave open questions blank or provide little detail

-cannot follow up

Closed questions

Only provide quantitative data

Response could lack detail

Likert scale

How much u agree with the question

Rating scale

Rating in a numerical scale

Double barrelled question

Includes more than one topic but only allows a single answer

Structured interview

Only asks predetermined questions

Semi structured

Some are pre planned and others are created in the interview

Unstructured interview

Topic is planned but no questions for discussion

Behavioural categories

Clearly defined behaviours are identified which can be observed and recorded

Placed on a checklist and talied every time the behaviour occurs (eating, talking, laughing)

Event sampling

Behaviours are tallied as they occur for a set amount of time (for 30 minutes)

Event sampling strengths (2)

-seeing more behaviour over a longer period of time

-more accurate reflection of events

Event sampling weaknesses (2)

-time consuming

-behaviours could be missed -reduces validity

Time sampling

Observing and recording behaviour at specific time intervals (every 5 minutes for 30 seconds)

Time sampling strengths (2)

-less likely to miss behaviours

-understanding how long a behaviour occurs for or how behaviours change over a period of time

Time sampling weaknesses (2)

-could miss important behaviours

-reduces detail

Covert

Do not know they are being observed

Covert strengths (2)

-natural behaviour so access to sensitive behaviours

-no demand characteristics

Covert weaknesses (3)

-ethical issues -no consent

-cannot follow up

-could lead to distrust if they discover they are being watched

Overt

Participant knows they are being watched

Overt strengths (2)

-ethical transparency

-can interact more easily so ease of data collection

Overt weaknesses (3)

-could show demand characteristics

-lack of natural behaviour

-limited access to sensitive behaviour

Naturalistic

In natural environment

Naturalistic strengths (2)

-high ecological validity

-unbiased behaviour

Naturalistic weaknesses (2)

-low reliability (harder to replicate)

-lack of control over extraneous variables

Controlled

controlled by the researcher but with no IV

Controlled strengths (3)

-higher reliability (easier to replicate)

-controlled extraneous variables

-researchers can focus on behaviours of interest without distraction

Controlled weaknesses (3)

-demand characteristics

-not their natural behaviour

-low ecological value so behaviour cannot be applied to everyday experience

Participant

Researcher is involved

Participant strengths (2)

-builds trust and creates a relationship

-gains a deeper understanding of behaviours and interactions

Participant weaknesses (3)

-ethical issues

-hard balancing roles of participant and observer

-could feel behaviour on a personal level

Non-participant

Researcher remains separate

Non-participant strengths (3)

-no distractions so easier data recording

-remains a degree of detachment so reduces bias

-access to larger groups to generalise findings

Non-participant weaknesses (1)

-limited depth of understanding so potential for misinterpretation

Repeated measures design

The same participants participate in both conditions

Repeated measures strengths (2)

-individual differences do not distort effects of the IV on the DV

-counterbalancing reduces order effects

Repeated measures weaknesses (2)

-order effects (practice, fatigue)

-seeing the experimental task more than once means more likely to guess aim

Independent measures

One group of participants participate in 1 condition and the other group participates in the other condition

Independent measures strengths (2)

-no practice effects

-less likely to guess aim and change behaviour

Independent measures weaknesses (2)

-individual differences -extraneous variable

-more participants needed

Matched pairs

One group of people take part in one condition and another group of people who are matched with a certain characteristic of someone in the first group take part in the second condition

Matched pairs strengths (3)

-no order effects

-cannot guess aims as only seen once

-effects of individual characteristics are highly controlled