Studied by 3 people5 Sampling techniques
VORSP
volunteer
opportunity
random
snowball
purposive
very often rats steal pizza
volunteer strengths
More target population control (compared to opportunity) because the researcher has the opportunity to change their advertisement’s location
Ethically sensitive: control in the audience & no forcing. Good for autonomy
volunteer weaknesses
participants can ignore advertisement
Not as efficient because it depends on the individual to take initiative
Necessary to consider what type of audiences will view your advertisement → may take more work from the researcher to categorize volunteers into target populations and not
Aggressive and extremely persuasive advertising needed
opportunity strengths
Very convenient and efficient
Doesn’t have biased information
Quick
Cheap
Not a lot of materials/preparation needed
opportunity weaknesses
No control over selection
people might not care and have poor quality or even unreliable information/answers
cannot be generalized
may be biased
could be said that it's not effective when studying a specific group
random strengths
Relatively simple to get sample as there was a name list given
Wide sample, getting people who are different from one another
Not much thinking involved when selecting people (computer generated)
random weaknesses
contact details needed and may ignore contact
less control over traits of participants
research becomes dependent
must represent the target population proportionately
purposive strength
control the type of people involved in your study
Time and cost-efficient
Small margin of error (the people chosen fit a specific criteria
Beneficial for the understanding of a specific narrow group inside the target populations.
Good for examination of rare topic/group
purposive limitation
certain types of studies (eg. a rare or unique condition)
Might not be a good vary representation of the target population
Bias heavy
Data invalidation / ethical
Not effective on a large scale
Difficult to collect participants as it depends on whether your target population aligns with the people you know
quanitative data
predicting & testing
Numerical data
Non-probing (closed) questions
Large sample sizes
Narrow focus (deliberately isolates variables)
qualitative data
understanding and describing how/why
Non-numerical data
Rich, in depth and detailed
Uses probing (open) questions
Small sample size often
Lab and Field experiments
IV manipulated
determines C+E between two variables
often quantitative
“true” experiements
four elements:Â manipulation, control. random assignment, and random selection
Lab vs Field experiments
both IVs manipulated
Field “natural setting”
Laboratory: controlled to minimize extraneous
In field experiments, why do researchers have to balance realism with control?
Realism is necessary to ensure it is actually applicable and generalizable to real-world applications. However, it needs control to be certain about C+E relationship without extraneous variables
Field experiment issues
observation/experimentation without knowledge
cannot dismiss or leave the experiment at any point
lack of informed consent on goals, about, risks & longevity
CT of Field experiment
lack of consent, deception, lack of debrief
control of variables -- replicability
relative generalizability and no participant bias
CT lab experiment
replicability due to controlled variables
lack of generalizability if too controlled
consent may be obtained
bias may occur
correlation
relationship between two studies
co-variables
IV cannot be manipulated
positive, negative and zero correlation
Why do correlations not showcase causation between two variables?
cannot manipulate one variable to showcase C+E
Strengths of correlation
understands complex relationships without unethical practices
What does it mean for two variables to correlate with each other?
the degree to which two variables move in coordination with each other.
correlational CT
avoids ethical practices
cannot establish C+E
bi-directionality -- which affects?
third variable: Another variable altogether that is not being measured affects the other variable(s)
Naturalistic observations
no IV
Observation that occurs in a natural setting, with limited control of variables to observe behaviors in natural and realistic settings
4 types of naturalistic observation
Participant observation: The researcher is part of the group being observed
non-participant observation: Researcher is not part of the group being observed
covert: participants are unaware they are being observed
overt: participants are aware they are being observed
How are observations different to experiments?
no IV manipulated
Which types of observation may naturally create ethical issues? Why?
covert because participants are unaware they are being recorded -- cannot consent or withdraw
Why is this research method’s approach to studying behaviour generally considered qualitative (even if you gather some quantitative data as part of the process)?
depends on the interpretations of the researcher.
Quantitative data is often calculated through standardized formulas and algorithms however, observations require researchers to decide which information is worth noting and how that is interpreted and generalized into data.
CT naturalistic observations
ethical: lack of consent and withdrawal
bias and subjectivity
validity: cannot stop extraneous variables
Hawthorne effect: participants change to appear socially desirable
Interviews key features
interview includes at least 1 interviewer and another interviewee
semi structured questions
qualitative
interviewer must be able to establish a good rapport, have people skills & understand biases that may occur
survey key features
collects self-reported data
may be on a large scale
can do both quantitative and qualitative
structured questions
interview vs survey
self-reported vs with interviewer
semi vs fully structured questions
interviews may be a focus group
interviewers may lead with another action (look at pic)
How/why do surveys offer a more ethical approach to studying sensitive topics?
no pressure to answer questions participant does not want to
does not have to come face to face admitting something
lowers social desirability bias
Why would a survey be used after an interview to help generalize?
it would all be the same question which can yield similar answers like all numbers which can be easily quantifiable
The biggest issue with self-reported data is the possibility that it isn't accurate. In what ways can answers be biased/ altered by:
participant can lie or not tell full truth
the researcher can misinterpret
CT interviews and surveys
ability to generalize may be good if a large enough sample population
interviews difficult to generalize if different questions
validity affected by researcher and participant bias
surveys can lessen participant pressure
Wording of questions may not sound objective or may hint at a desired answer that causes the participant to answer in a way influenced by the question
quasi experiment
has an IV and DV, in which the IV is not manipulated by the researcher, but rather, the IV itself had already pre-existed."
natural experiment
has an IV and DV, in which the IV is produced by environmental or external factors that had occurred over time, and consists of a before and after period of observation."
CT natural & quasi
Extraneous variables: (aka confounding variables) are undesirable variables that influence relationship of IV and DV
Demand characteristics: participants act differently because they know they are in a study, may try to guess aims
time
expense
Access to prospective target populations
4 points when discussing ethics
what is the ethical issue?
which study?
where and how does the ethical issue arise?
cost-benefit analysis
Note
Flashcard