Research Methods

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

1. Information about the study giving a basic aim and informing participants of the procedures

2. Information about the participant’s right to withdraw

3. An assurance of confidentiality

4. An opportunity to ask any questions about the research

5. 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