Studied by 105 people
Falsifiability
The possibility that a statement or hypothesis can be proved wrong - found to be false by testing - can’t be something that can’t be tested
Objectivity
Measurement of data is not affected by the expectations of the researcher - opposite of subjectivity
Replicability
Recording procedures carefully in order for another researcher to repeat them and verify the original results - do it until you get repetition in the results
Empirical Methods
Methods of gaining knowledge which rely on direct observation or testing (not hearsay or rational argument) - actually been tested and has seen results
Paradigm
A shared set of assumptions about a subject matter of a discipline and the methods appropriate to its study - an approach
Paradigm Shift
Process within an established science occurs when there is a scientific revolution - a handful of researchers begin to question the accepted paradigm, and this opposition gathers pace and popularity, and eventually a paradigm shift occurs when there’s too much contradictory evidence to ignore
Induction Theory Construction
Create a study to find out something that interests you - form theory by testing
Observations
Testable hypothesis
Conduct a study to test the hypothesis
Draw conclusions
Propose theory
Deduction Theory Construction
Think you know the answer before you test it
Observations
Propose theory
Testable hypothesis
Conduct a study to test the hypothesis
Draw conclusions
Hypothesis Testing
In order to make clear and precise predictions on the basis of a theory, a hypothesis should be tested using systematic and objective methods to determine whether it should be supported or rejected
Laboratory Experiments
Artificial experiment
Carried out in a controlled environment where variables can be carefully manipulated
Participants are aware they are taking part but may not know the true aims of the study
Advantages of Laboratory Experiments
High internal validity - the experimenter has high control over research variables so we can be more certain that any observed change in the DV is due to the IV
Easy to replicate - due to high levels of control and standardised procedures it is easy to replicate, allowing for results to be tested and compared
Disadvantages of Laboratory Experiments
Low ecological validity - the results can’t be generalised beyond the research setting, participants may not behave naturally due to artificial setting
Demand characteristics - when participants become aware of the aims of the experiment, and may lead to participants behaving differently, therefore reducing validity
Field Experiments
Conducted in a more natural (or ‘ordinary’) environment
IV is still deliberately manipulated by the researcher who measures the DV
Participants are usually not aware that they are participating in an experiment
Advantages of Field Experiments
High ecological validity - results can be generalised beyond research setting, due to the real-life setting participants will behave more naturally - higher mundane realism
Lack of demand characteristics - participants are usually not aware they’re being studied so won’t behave differently
Disadvantages of Field Experiments
Low internal validity - researcher has less control over extraneous variables so can’t be sure the change in DV is due to the IV
Harder to replicate - lower levels of control means it’s not so easy to replicate, so harder for results to be tested and compared
Natural Experiments
Conducted when it is not possible for ethical or practical reasons to deliberately manipulate an IV
The IV occurs ‘naturally’
Advantages of Natural Experiments
Allows research where the IV can’t be manipulated - this may be for ethical or practical reasons
High ecological validity - allows psychologists to study the affects of ‘real’ problems e.g. effects of natural disaster on mental health
Disadvantages of Natural Experiments
Lack of casual relationship - cannot be demonstrated because the IV is not directly manipulated
Lack of random allocation - IV is naturally occurring so participants can’t be randomly allocated, so there may be confounding variable affecting results
Quasi Experiments
The IV is simply a difference between people that already exists e.g. gender/age, disorder/control, a DV is still measured
E.g. Do females drive faster that males? Do blondes have more fun? Do people with OCD have more anxiety than those without?
Advantages of Quasi Experiments
Allows comparisons between different types of people - no manipulation is carried out but results show differences
Can be carried out in a lab - DV can be tested in a lab, therefore high control/can be replicated
Disadvantages of Quasi Experiments
May be carried out in a lab - DV may be tested in a lab, therefore low ecological validity
Lack of random allocation - because IV is naturally occurring participants can’t be randomly allocated, so there may be confounding variables
Independent Variable
Variable that is manipulated (controlled)
Dependent Variable
Variable that is measures (to see if it has been affected)
Extraneous Variable
Anything (other than the IV) which might have an effect on the DV - can be controlled by the experimenter e.g. age of participants, time limit for tasks
Confounding Variable
Variable that isn’t controlled in an experiment which affects the results (ruin them) e.g. weather, mood of participants
Aim
Stated intentions of what question(s) are planned to be answered
Hypothesis
A formal, unambiguous statement of what is predicted - must contain both conditions of the IV and the expected outcome of the DV, be operationalised and measurable
Directional Hypothesis (H1)
States whether the DV outcome is expected to be greater or lesser, positive or negative - it is used when there has been previous research which suggests the direction
(IV Group 1) will (score higher/lower, do better/worse, be quicker/slower) on (DV) than (IV Group 2)
Non-Directional Hypothesis (H1)
Doesn’t state the direction of the DV, just that they’ll be a difference - it is used when there is no theory/previous research or it is contradictory
There will be a significant difference between (DV) from (IV Group 1) and (IV Group 2)
Null Hypothesis
A prediction of no difference between the two IV conditions on the outcome of the DV - all studies have a null hypothesis
There will be no significant difference between (DV) from (IV Group 1) and (IV Group 2)
Directional Alternative Hypothesis
States the direction of the correlation
There will be a positive/negative relationship between (A) and (B)
Non-Directional Alternative Hypothesis
Doesn’t state the direction of the correlation, only that there will be a relationship
There will be a relationship between (A) and (B)
Reliability
Consistency
Internal Reliability
Each participant in a study is treated the same way with the same experience - more EVs controlled, the more internally reliable
External Reliability
Same results found after repeated test
Assessment of Reliability
Test-retest reliability (external) - test the same person twice: same sample, same test - ensure time gap
Inter-observer reliability (external) - compares observations from 2 or more different observers
Spearman/Pearson’s correlation coefficient (exceeding 0.80) to measure correlation for reliability
Improving Reliability
Repetition of experiment
Validity
Accuracy (representativeness)
Internal Validity
IV effect only? Measures what it’s meant to measure
External Validity
Generalisable beyond experimental setting
Ecological Validity
Is the setting realistic?
Population Validity
Does the sample used make the results applicable to everyone?
Temporal Validity
Does it stand the ‘test of time’?
Assessment of Validity
Face validity - whether it looks like it measures what it’s meant to (at surface level)
Concurrent validity - whether findings are similar to those on a well-established test - 2 tests correlated similarly as a check of truth
Improving Validity
Larger sample size, more realistic setting etc.
Independent Groups
Recruit a group of participants and divide them in two
One group does the experimental task with IV condition 1 and the second group does IV condition 2
Measure the DV for each group and compare results
Advantages of Independent Groups
Order effects are not an issue as participants only do one condition
Participants are less likely to guess the aims of the study
Disadvantages of Independent Groups
Twice as many participants needed - increases time and money spent
Differences in results may be due to participant variables
Repeated Measures
Recruit a group of participants
The group does the experimental task with IV condition 1 and then repeats the task for IV condition 2
Compare the results for the two conditions
Advantages of Repeated Measures
Participant variables are controlled - high validity
Fewer participants are needed
Disadvantages of Repeated Measures
Order effects could create boredom and fatigue
Participants’ performance may improve through practice
Participants are more likely to guess the aims
Matched Pairs
Recruit a group of participants and find out what sorts of people you have in the group
Recruit another group that matches relevant characteristics (e.g. intelligence)
Treat the experiment as independent measures
Compare the results for matched pairs
Advantages of Matched Pairs
Participants only take part in one condition so order effects and demand characteristics are less of a problem
Reduces participant variables
Disadvantages of Matched Pairs
Matching may be time-consuming and expensive
Participants can never be matched exactly
What is Counterbalancing?
Used in repeated measures to reduce order effects
Half the group does condition A followed by condition B
Other half of the group does condition B followed by condition A
Opportunity Sampling
Anyone in the vicinity who is willing and available
Advantages of Opportunity Sampling
One of the fastest and easiest ways to gather participants
Must less costly than other types of sampling
Disadvantages of Opportunity Sampling
Possible the researcher can influence those selected
Unrepresentative as it is drawn from a specific area, e.g. one town or street
Random Sampling
All members of the target population have an equal chance of being selected
Advantages of Random Sampling
Potentially unbiased
Less chance that researchers can influence results
Disadvantages of Random Sampling
Difficult and time-consuming
You may still end up with an unrepresentative sample
Selected participants may refuse to take part
Stratified Sampling
Reflects the proportions of people in subgroups of the target population
Advantages of Stratified Sampling
Representative sample as it is designed to accurately reflect the composition of the population
Disadvantages of Stratified Sampling
Very time-consuming
Extremely difficult to execute and impractical
Systematic Sampling
Every nth member of the target population
Advantages of Systematic Sampling
Simple way to gather participants without bias
Sample should, in theory, be representative
Disadvantages of Systematic Sampling
Time-consuming
Would need a bigger sample size
Participants may refuse to take part
Volunteer Sampling
A self-selected sample, often replying to an advert
Advantages of Volunteer Sampling
Requires minimal input from the researcher, so less time-consuming
Participants should be willing to give their informed consent to take part
Disadvantages of Volunteer Sampling
Volunteer bias - asking may attract a certain ‘profile’ of a person that is curious and more likely to try and please the researcher
What are Demand Characteristics?
Participants may change their behaviour as a result of them trying to interpret a cue from the researcher that may be revealing the purpose of the research
What are Investigator Effects?
Any effect of the investigator’s behaviour on the research outcome e.g. encouraging a behaviour - asking leading questions
Single Blind Design
Participants are not told the aims of the study beforehand - used to control for confounding variables such as demand characteristics
Double Blind Design
Participants and researcher conducting the study are not aware of its aims - control investigator effects and demand characteristics - useful in drug trials and use of placebo
What is a Control Group?
A group of participants who do not undergo a change in the IV condition - used as a baseline behaviour measure
What is a Confederate?
An individual in a study who is not a real participant but has been instructed how to behave by the researcher
What is Random Allocation?
A technique used to reduce participant variables, so each participant has the same chance of being in any condition
What is Randomisation?
The use of chance methods to control for the effects of bias when designing materials and deciding the order of conditions
What is Standardisation?
Using exactly the same formalised procedures and instructions for all participants in the research study
What is a Pilot Study?
A small scale trial run to check procedures, instructions, materials, etc. work in order to make any necessary changes before the real study
Why are Pilot Studies carried out?
So researchers can see what needs to be adjusted without having invested a large amount of time and money in a full-scale study - tests the reliably and validity of the study
Ethical Guideline
How you should treat the human participants - to safeguard participants in research
Informed Consent
Permission from the participants to use them and their data in your study - signature
Be told prior to the study
Parental consent needed for children in study
Dealing with Informed Consent
Retrospective - get permission and inform them afterwards
Presumptive - assume on behalf of other people e.g. friends, parents, etc.
Prior General - consent without knowing what’s going to happen
Right to withdraw - participants can leave the study at any time
Deception
No lies - However, there may be cases where some deception is unavoidable
Dealing with Deception
Debrief - participants told immediately afterwards and given the chance to withdraw their data
Right to withdraw/withhold data - participants can leave the study at any time
Protection from harm (Psychological and Physical)
Participants should be protected from extreme damaging/lasting physical or psychological harm
Dealing with Protection from Harm
Debrief - Participants told immediately afterwards, participants should leave feeling the same way (about themselves) as when they arrived
Right to with-draw/withhold data - participants should always be aware they can leave the study at any time (even if payments been offered)
Counselling - not done by the researcher, offers money for it
Privacy/Confidentiality
Observations/field experiments/natural experiments should be only carried out in public places where people might expect to be seen by strangers
Dealing with Privacy/Confidentiality
Anonymity - all information is kept confidential - told from the beginning, e.g. use numbers instead of names, never broadcast footage, no photos in published work
Giving Advice
The decision whether or not to tell someone if you find something out about them, e.g. a health condition
Colleagues
‘Whistle-blowing’ - telling on someone if you see someone going against the ethical guidelines and mistreating participants
Consent Form
Information about the study giving a basic aim and informing participants of the procedures
Information about the participant’s right to withdraw
An assurance of confidentiality
An opportunity to ask any questions about the research
A statement for them to sign which says they have read and understood the information sheet and agree to take part in the research
Naturalistic Observation
Studied in a natural setting
Everything is left as it would be normally
Researcher does not interfere
Evaluation of Naturalistic Observation
High ecological validity
Quicker and easier to do
Controlled Observation
Some variables are controlled by the researcher
Participants know they are being studied
Usually conducted in lab conditions
Evaluation of Controlled Observation
Allows you to see something that wouldn’t happen in real life
Low ecological validity
Overt Observation
The participants are aware of the observation
Evaluation of Overt Observation
More moral and ethical
Demand characteristics
Covert Observation
Participants are not aware of the observation
Note 
Flashcard (64)