Psychology Research methods 1b:

Opportunity sampling

anyone who is in the nearby area who is willing to take part

Random sampling

a sample that fairly represents a population because each member has an equal chance of inclusion. done by using the lottery method (computer based randomiser).

stratified sampling

reflects the proportions of people in subgroups (designed to be representative). Researcher identifies subgroups (stratas). proportions are then calculated for pps to be selected

Systematic sampling

Every nth member in the target population is selected

Volunteer sampling

self-selected sample often responding to an advert

Advantages of opportunity sampling

quick, convenient, and economical

Advantages of random sampling

less bias, enhances validity, CV/EV distribution

Advantages of stratified sampling

representative sample, higher ecological validity

Advantages of systematic sampling

objective (less researcher bias)

Advantages of volunteer sampling

easy, low input, pps more engaged

Disadvantages of opportunity sampling

potential for researcher bias, unrepresentative

Disadvantages of random sampling

time consuming, difficult, unrepresentative sample

Disadvantages of stratified sampling

time consuming, true representative sample not always possible

Disadvantages of systematic sampling

time consuming

Disadvantages of volunteer sampling

attracts a certain 'type' of pps, potential volunteer bias, ecological validity and demand characteristics could affect the experiment

informed consent

fully informed consent to participate in the research. Can cause issues with validity as pps may change their behaviour

deception

hiding the true aims of the study

Protection from harm

should be protected from psychological + physical harm

privacy/confidentiality

make it all anonymous

4 ethical guidelines

1. informed consent

2. deception

3. protection from harm

4. privacy/confidentiality

how to deal with informed consent

retrospective (ask for consent after the study), presumptive (obtain consent from another group similar to the pps and the pps are told after), prior general (consent before with limited info), right to withdraw data

how to deal with deception

debriefing (at the earliest opportunity without ruining data), right to withdraw/withhold data

Dealing with protection from harm

debrief (pps told all the aims and details after), right to withdraw/withhold data, counselling (options of counselling given afterwards)

dealing with privacy/confidentiality

Maintain anonymity, private data should not be published

ethical issues

results from the rights of pps and the need for valid research clashing

colleagues

must check their ethical practices

BPS code of conduct

quasi-legal document to protect pps based on: respect, competence, responsibility and integrity

ethics committee

weigh up costs (harm to pps) and benefits (value of research) before deciding wether a study should go ahead

social desirability bias

when respondents give answers to things/questions that they believe will make them look good to others. This conceals their true opinions or experiences and can affect researchers results

How to write a consent form

1. information about the study providing basic aim and informing pps of the procedures. Anything that could influence a pps willingness to participate should be included

2. info about the pps right to withdraw

3. assurance of confidentiality

4. opportunity to ask questions about the research

5. statement to sign, saying they have read and understood the info sheet and agree to take part in the research

writing a debrief form

1. thank the pps, then briefly explain purpose of study, what you predict and possible implications of the work

2. remind them their results are confidential to the experimenters and all results are published anonymously (group data)

3. if deception has been used, it’s important that the nature of deception has been fully explained, with reason for using it

4. Suggest options of counselling, if they feel this is necessary. If they feel uncomfortable having been deceived they are free to withdraw their data

5. If the study involves any kind of possible stress, however mild it may seem the pps must be told they can speak to a counsellor

6. if they would like any info about the results of the study, once it is completed they should feel free to contact you. Provide a name (your own or a supervisors), along with contact info that they can take with them

7. If you need to ask pps to refrain from speaking about the experiment while you are still running it, you should explain why

8. provide appropriate names, and contact info in case a pps wants to express concern about the experiment

9. thank them for taking part

naturalistic observation

occurs in a real world setting

advantages of naturalistic observation

• high external validity

• generalise to real life

disadvantages of naturalistic observation

• hard to replicate

• uncontrolled extraneous variables

controlled observation

setting has been set up by the researcher

overt observation

participants are aware they are being observed

advantages of controlled observation

• control over extraneous variables

• easier to replicate

disadvantages of controlled observation

• low external validity

• harder to generalise in real life

advantages of overt observation

• more ethical

disadvantages of overt observation

• participant reactivity/social desirability

• lower validity (demand characteristics)

covert observation

people being observed and not being aware that they are being observed

how can covert observations take place

two way mirror, observing from afar, from a video

advantages of covert observation

• high validity

• removes participant reactivity and social desirability

disadvantages of covert observation

• unethical (deception)

Participant observation

one of the participants record the observations and records what they see

advantages of participant observation

• increased validity

• maybe only method to observe

Disadvantages of participant observation

• going native then loses objectivity

• may influence behaviour

Non-participant observation

the observer is not part of the activity of observation

advantages of non-participant observation

• remain objective

• less likely to influence behaviour

disadvantages of non-participant observation

• lose validity

• may not access certain behaviours

structured observation

you go in with a preset list of behavioural categories

advantages of structured observation

• remain objective

• easy to replicate

disadvantages of structured observation

• miss certain behaviours

unstructured observation

no list of behaviours, researcher writes all the behaviours they see

disadvantages of unstructured observation

• lose objectivity

• difficult to replicate

behavioural categories

target behaviour broken into observable and measurable components (no grey area, must be distinct for the observer)

event sampling

target behaviour is first established when researcher records this event and every time the behaviour occurs

example of event sampling

every time someone kicks, hits, or swears

time sampling

target group established when researcher records behaviour in a fixed frame

example of time sampling

every 60 seconds

questionnaire

pre-set list of written questions (or items) to which a participant responds

advantages of a questionnaire

• large amount of data

• quick and easy

• highly replicable and easy to score

• efficient as researcher doesn’t need to be present while the pps completes it

• reduced investigator effects, and interpersonal effects as pps can do it solo

• cost effective

disadvantages of a questionnaire

• lack of flexibility

• self report data, issues with validity due to social desirability

• biased by motivation levels

• distortion of sampling frame, only people who can read or write

• ambiguous phrasing may make qs hard to understand

• response bias, pps answer in the same way for all qs

open questions

questions where people can choose their own answer and give more detail about their answer they have chosen from multiple choice

closed questions

questions which can only have a fixed answer and the person doing the questionnaire has to pick which one best fits for them (multiple choice/rate on a numerical scale)

4 techniques to employ in order to write good questions

1. avoid jargon

2. avoid leading questions

3. use appropriate language

4. use of filler questions

jargon and why to avoid

using specialised terms utilised in a certain field which aren’t usually understood by most people, means questions are accessible and easy to understand

leading questions

questions that are worded to suggest a particular answer

filler questions

questions put into the questionnaire to disguise the aim of the study by hiding the important questions among irrelevant ones in order to make pps less likely to change their behaviour by working out the aims

advantages of interviews

• unstructured interviews provide potential to cater detail, rich info from each pps (more so than questionnaires)

• conversational nature of interviews is better suited to discussing sensitive, complex issues as pps are more likely to relax

• Can be used as part of pilot study to gather info prior to conducting proposed research

Disadvantages of interviews

• time consuming

• expensive (training required for interviewers)

• interview data can be time-consuming to analyse and interpret (when so detailed, qualitative)

• social desirability (pps giving responses they believe the most socially acceptable, rather than truthful)

• require basic competences from pps to be successful, limiting sample size and representativeness of population

structured interview

where the interviewer has a set list of questions to lead the conversation, a framework to rigidly be stuck to

unstructured interview

where the interviewer may have a list of topics but no questions and has extra flexibility to lead the conversationfuther. Should the pps responses lead to deeper, more detailed discussions

semi-structured interviews

Where the interviewer has some questions they want to ask but will be happy to ask others based on the person’s responses, if one of them is particularly interesting or pertinent to what is being explored

Things to consider when interviewing

1. quiet room

2. rapport

3. ethics

quiet room in an interview

help the interviewee focus providing more detailed and useful data

rapport in interviews

researcher may get better data due to trust and understanding built as a result of a good relationship between the interviewer and interviewee

ethics in interviews

consider the correct rules of conduct when carrying out an interview

interviewer effect

emerges when characteristics of an interviewer (race, age, gender, identity etc) influences the responses given by the interviewee

correlation

method of data analysis used to find an association (or relationship) between 2 co-variables. showing simply how to variables are related

what graph shows a correlation

scattergraph

correlation coefficient

assess how closely two variables tend to vary together, the strength and direction of a linear relationship between two variables

meta-analysis

where you bring together multiple studies (in a similar topic) to collate the results. Secondary data, to give a big body of info on a big topic/area of research, mostly quantitative

Case study

an in-depth investigation, description and analysis of a single individual, or single group, institution, or event. Usually idiographic and normally produces qualitative data. Use of interviews and observations

advantages of meta-analysis

• more data

• larger sample sizes mean increased validity

• bigger picture and more information

• quicker and more economical

disadvantages of meta-analysis

• cherry picking studies supports researchers theory

• GIGO - garbage in, garbage out

• might include studies with flawed methodology (can’t check methods)

• lack validity

advantages of case studies

• in depth, detailed insights

• study of atypical/unusual behaviours or concepts

• may open up areas for further study, more detail from existing research

disadvantages of case studies

• generalisation difficult and/not possible

• subjective element - researcher bias

• methodological issues (social desirability) validity issues

content analysis

studying people indirectly through communications they have produced

content analysis sampling methods

speech, text, books/magazine

coding the data

producing quantitative data by categorising into meaningful units and counting up how many times they occur

advantages of content analysis

• detailed in depth analysis

• can compare results with other data sets more easily (as it is now represented by quantitative data)

• can present results graphically

disadvantages of content analysis

• time consuming

• subjective nature of creating themes and coding units

thematic analysis

any emerging themes that are recurrent in the communication are then studied in more depth (further qualitative analysis is carried out)

peer review

before research becomes part of a journal it must undergo the process of peer review. This involves all of the written investigation being scrutinised by a small group/2-3 experts (‘peers’) in that particular field. The experts conduct an objective review and are unknown to the researcher/author.

3 main purposes for peer review

1. allocation of research funding

2. publication of research into academic journals and books

3. assessing the research rating of university departments

allocation of research funding

can be used to decide whether or not to award funding for a proposed research project, may be run by government-run funding organisations who have vested interest in establishing which research projects are the most worthwhile

publication of research into academic journals and books

for it to be published in academic journals and books, it needs to be checked for quality and relevance and they must assess the validity of the research. In extreme circumstances they may decide the work can’t be published

assessing the research rating of university departments

in order to validate the quality and relevance of the work, reviewers must suggest minor revisions of the research to improve the report

anonymity of peer review

the ‘peer’ doing the review stays anonymous throughout, in order to gain a more honest appraisal. However due to the reviewers knowing who the researchers are they may use their anonymity to criticise rival researchers, partly due to there being a competition for funding. Therefore some researchers may favour a system of open reviewing in which the reviewers are named and made public.