Unit 1 Research Methods: Strengths and Weaknesses

case studies

strengths:

-collects in-depth/detailed data (adds validity to findings)

-studies every day life (increases ecological validity)

weaknesses:

-unique/makes generalizations difficult

-attachment btw participant and researcher can form (reduces objectivity and validity of data and analysis)

questionnaires

strengths:

-more truthful answers as human interaction is not involved

-can be answered in a short time span (increases representativeness and generalizability)

weaknesses:

-social desirability bias (lowers validity)

-closed questions can force participants into choosing an inaccurate answer

interviews

strengths:

-open questions reveal participants' reasoning for their behavior and opinions

weaknesses:

-social desirability bias (due to interviewer)

observations (in general)

strengths:

-participants will act naturally if unaware they're being observed (increases ecological validity)

-data can be analyzed statistically with minimal bias as behaviors are "counted" (quantitative)

weaknesses:

-participants can act unnaturally if aware they're being observed (lowers validity)

-several uncontrollable variables since it's naturalistic (lowers reliability)

participant observations

strengths:

-participants are usually observed in real-life setting (increases ecological validity)

-observers can understand motives and reasons for behaviors better (increases validity)

weaknesses:

-participants being observed cannot give informed consent (ethical problem)

-presence of an outsider (the observer) can change participants' behaviors (lowers validity)

non-participant observations

strengths:

-participants' behavior will remain unaffected as observer is out of sight

-more likely to be objective as researcher is detached from participants

weaknesses:

-difficulty making detailed observations and qualitative that explains why behaviors are occurring

structured observations

strengths:

-can be analyzed statistically as behavioral checklist allows objective quantitative data

weaknesses:

-restrictive behavior sampling which doesn't explain why behaviors are occuring

unstructured observations

strengths:

-collects in-depth, qualitative data that explains why behaviors are occurring

weaknesses:

-observers may focus on overly noticeable behaviors and miss important/representative behaviors occurring

naturalistic observations

strengths:

-no chance of demand characteristics as participants are unaware they're being watched and should behave naturally

-observation takes place in natural settings for participants (increases ecological validity)

weaknesses:

-uncontrolled variables can cause difficulty to make cause-and-effect conclusions about observed behaviors

controlled observations

strengths:

-observers have confidence over what causes participant behaviors as set-up is controlled

-less risk of uncontrollable variables

weaknesses:

-participant behaviors may be influenced as they're in unusual environments

-lacks ecological validity

correlations

strengths:

-shows relationship btw two variables which helps researchers establish a cause-and-effect

-manipulation is not required meaning they can be used in both ethical and unethical experiments

weaknesses:

-issues of causality as researchers are unaware which variable is affecting the other or if a third variable is present

-doesn't provide qualitative data meaning it doesn't explain why a behavior is occurring

independent measures design

strengths:

-no order effects as different participants are used in each level of IV

-participants can only see one level of the IV (reduces effects of demand characteristics)

-effects of individual differences are reduced as random allocation is used

weaknesses:

-individual differences btw participants in different levels of IV may distort participant variables

-may be less ethical as more participants are needed in comparison to a repeated measures (participants can be harmed and less effective)

repeated measures design

strengths:

-participant variables are unlikely to distort effect of the IV as each participant does all of the levels

-counterbalancing reduces order effects

-uses less participants than independent measures or matched pairs which is good when participants are hard to find or at risk

weaknesses:

-order effects can distort results

-greater chance of demand characteristics as participants are repeatedly doing the same task

matched pairs design

strengths:

-reduced effect of demand characteristics as participants can only see one level of IV

-individual differences are matched which means participant variables are less likely to distort effect of the IV

-no order effects are different participants are used in each level of IV

weaknesses:

-can only be effective if correct matching criteria is chosen in advice as similarity btw pairs is limited by the matching process

-availability of pairs may be limited lowering the size of the sample

laboratory experiment

strengths:

-good control of variables (increases validity)

-easy to determine causal relationships as only the IV should be affecting the DV

-standardized procedures increases reliability/replication

weaknesses:

-lowers ecological validity as participants' behaviors can be unrepresentative

-higher chance of demand characteristics that change participants' behaviors

field experiment

strengths:

-participants are more likely to behave naturally as they are in their usual environment (increases representativeness)

-less chance of demand characteristics in comparison to lab. experiment as participants are unaware they're in a study

weaknesses:

-controlled variables are harder in comparison to lab. experiments (lowers reliability/complicates replication)

-researchers are less confident that changes in DV were caused by changes in IV

-ethical issues as participants are unaware they're in a study

opportunity sampling

strengths:

-quick and easy as participants are available and a larger sample can be obtained

weaknesses:

-likely to be non-representative as available people are limited/similar and the sample can be biased

volunteer (self-selected) sampling

strengths:

-easy since participants come to the researcher and are likely to show commitment

weaknesses:

-likely to be non-representative as volunteers may be similar

random sampling

strengths:

-likely to be representative as all people in the population have an equal chance of being chosen

weaknesses:

-realistically, not everyone may have an equal chance of being chosen as mainly one type of participant is selected or (ex.) some people can't be accessed

quantitative

strengths:

-usually uses objective measures

-scales/questions are reliable

-measures of central tendency and spread make it easy for data to be analyzed and compared

weaknesses:

-less validity as responses can be limited due to the method used to collect data

qualitative

strengths:

-increased validity of data as participants can give open responses instead of limited/fixed ones

-less likely to ignore important but unusual response due to averaging

weaknesses:

-lowered validity as data is often subjective and can be biased by the researcher

-lowered generalizability as detailed data are gathered from only one or few individuals