Research Methods

laboratory experiment

• Controlled environment

• Behaviour is not natural

• Conditions are staged beforehand

• Aim is to find cause and effect and the connection between

• Extraneous variables are all controlled

Strengths of laboratory experiments

• Most scientific as it has high levels of control

• Cause and effect can be established, which can help with internal validity

Weaknesses of laboratory experiments

• Conducted in unnatural environment

• Participants are invited to the study and may show demand characteristics

• Reductionist as it isolate only the variables under consideration, ignoring other variables that could be involved

field experiment

• Natural environment

• Less control on extraneous variables

• Unpredictable environments

• Participants are likely unaware of taking part

• Examples: Conformity, Obedience

Strengths of Field experiment

• Behaviour is natural in natural environment

• There is cause and effect between IV and DV

• Some extraneous variables can be controlled

Weaknesses of field experiment

• Not all extraneous variables can be controlled

• Participants may not have given informed consent to take part if it is conducted covertly

natural experiment

• Real-life environment

• Researchers don't manipulate the IV

• Situations appear naturally and uniquely

Strengths of natural experiment

• IV is naturally occurring and not manipulated

• Environment is real and naturalistic

Weaknesses of natural experiment

• Not possible to randomly allocate participants to conditions of IV, so there may be issues with participant variables

• Extraneous variables are difficult to control

case study

An in-depth study on a single person, group or event

Strengths of a case study

• Used for situations that would normally be unethical to set up

• Provides in-depth information about a particular individual

• Can stimulate research to new areas of psychology that would not have been found unless rare individuals have been studied

• Researcher bias can be prevented if triangulation is used

Weaknesses of a case study

• Cannot be replicated to check reliability as every individual studied is unique

• Findings may not be applicable to others, and may lack generalizability

• Researchers may lose objectivity as they may be involved with gathering data and interacting with the participant 

  • Researcher bias

IV

the variable that is directly manipulated by the researcher to find its effect, basically the variable you change

DV

The variable that is measured by the researcher

extraneous variable

Variables that may interfere with the IV or DV, and may affect the findings of the study.

confounding variable

A type of extraneous variable, if an extraneous variable is not controlled and it damages the outcome, it is known as this.

Situational variables

A type of extraneous variable that are present in the environment where the study is held

• Examples: noise, distractions, light levels and temperature

Participant variables

A type of extraneous variable associated with the participants as they each have different attributes and abilities that could influence the results, especially when a certain type of participant is found in one condition and not in the other

• Examples: Memory, substance tolerance, memory ability, life experiences, mood, upbringing, sex

Operationalistation

Making the variables in a study more specific and detailed

Order effects

Occurs when participants improve or worsen in the second condition because they have adapted or feel fatigued (results worsen)

demand characteristics

cues in an experiment that tell the participant what behavior is expected

Investigator effects

When researchers unintentionally gives clues to participants on how they should behave

Ecological Validity

The extent to which a study is realistic or representative of real life.

Counterbalancing

Technique used to deal with order effects during a repeated measures design, the participant sample is divided in half, one half completing the two conditions in one order and the other half completing the conditions in reverse

Repeated measures design

Using the same participants in all conditions of a study

Independent measures design

Splitting participants into groups and testing each group in only one condition of the study, sometimes this is the only design possible if a factor of the participant is unchangeable (e.g gender or age) as they cannot be in both conditions

Matched pairs design

Uses different people in each condition of the study, but matching people together based on their characteristics and abilities, a pair would be split up into either conditions so the results would be more fair

Internal validity

Whether the measures used in a test actually test what they were designed to test

External validity

If the findings are generalisable to the target population

Ethical guidelines

Researchers much follow rules of conduct to avoid causing harm to participants

Informed consent

Participant’s agreement to take part after they are aware of the aims, nature and intended outcomes of a study

Deception

Misleading or lying to participants, this interferes with the ability to give informed consent or it would beat the purpose of the experiment. Is ethical if it prevents unnecessary harm

Debriefing

After the investigation, participants are given a full report on what had happened during the study

Condifentiality

Not disclosing the identity of participants, keeping them anonymous

Right to withdraw

Ensures that the participant is able to withdraw when they are uncomfortable with the investigation, participants should never be bribed to stay in an investigation against their will.

Protection of participants

The guideline that participants must be protected from both physical and psychological harm, however psychological harm is subjective as people react differently to situations and embarrassment or stress may not occur to every participant.

Researcher/experimenter bias

When researchers modify the outcome of a study according to a specific consequence

Hypothesis

A precise and testable prediction of what will the outcome be

Null hypothesis

A prediction that the results will not show any difference (or relationship) that is consistent

• e.g there will be no difference in the number of digits recalled whether participants listened to kpop or classical music, any difference or relationship will be due to chance

Alternative (experimental) hypothesis

Your own prediction of the outcome based on what is expected to happen, usually based on a theory

Directional hypothesis

Predicts the direction the results will go in

• e.g Adults will recall more fruits than children

Non-directional hypothesis

Predicts that a difference or relationship will be found, but does not specify what the difference is

• e.g There will be a difference in the number of fruits recalled by adults and children

Experimental hypothesis

The hypothesis that is used in field and laboratory experiments

Target population

Group of people that the investigation is studying about and will apply the findings to

Sample

A smaller selection of the target population that is directly studied

Generalisability

The extent to which the results represent the whole population and not the sample being studied

Random sampling

Everyone in a target population have an equal chance of being selected into the sample

• e.g assigning all members of the target population a number and drawing numbers from a hat

Stratified sampling

Ensures subgroups of a target population will be proportionately represented, a random sample will be taken from each subgroup and will be equally shown based on the ratio of the subgroup to the target population

Volunteer sampling

Participants willingly volunteer themselves to take part, often involves advertising the study in an advert

Opportunity sampling

Participants are people who happen to be around at the time of the research, can be done by asking passer-by’s to take part or simply studying people who are there without their agreement

Covert observation

Researchers are “undercover", participants are unaware that they are being observed

Overt observation

Participants are aware that they are being observed

Sample error

The sample is not representative of the entire population it was supposed to represent

Biased sample

The sample mainly consists of a particular type of person or person of a group, which may not reflect the target population

Structured interview

Pre-set questions asked to a respondent

Interview schedule

A list of pre-set questions that are asked exactly the same way and order to every respondent

Semi-structured interview

A mix of pre-set questions and unprepared questions asked to a respondent

Unstructured interview

A free-flowing conversation around a particular topic with a participant

Strengths of interviews

• Information on participant’s beliefs, feelings, attitudes and opinions are gathered which is hard to achieve in an experiment

• Structured interviews gathers lots of information quickly for a large number of people

• Unstructured interviews allow for in-depth interview and can explore beliefs and attitudes of respondents fully

Weaknesses of interviews

• For free flowing conversation, interviewers need to be well trained to build up rapport with respondents

• Impossible to replicate as not all participants will receive the same unstructured and unset questions 

• Time consuming for free flowing conversations

Correlation

Accessing whether there is a relationship between 2 or more variables

Strengths of correlations

• Useful for examining relationships between many variables

• Cheaper and less time consuming than experimental research

• Useful for studying a topic that would be difficult to study experimentally for ethical reasons

• Comparing variables rather than manipulate behaviour is less interventionist and more likely to be ethical

Weaknesses of correlations

• Cause and effect cannot be established as there could be other variables in play or if one variable causes another to occur, it could always be the other way around

Positive correlation

As one variable increases, the other variable increases (direct proportion)

Negative correlation

As one variable increases, the other variable decreases (indirect proportion)

Social desirability bias

Respondents answer questions in a way that is deemed socially acceptable

Randomisation

When participants are randomly assigned to conditions as their first or second test condition, controls order effects

Single-blind technique

When information is withheld from participants and they are unaware of the aims and expectations of a study, controls demand characteristics

Double-blind technique

When aims of the study are withheld from both participants and researchers, controls demand characteristics as none of the people involved in the study have participated in building the study beforehand and will not know the purpose of the study

Random allocation

Participants are randomly assigned to one of the conditions of a study

Interviewer effect

Characteristics of an interviewer affects the way a respondent answers questions

Participatory

Research that involves children and young people from the start and for the whole process of the research, data gathering and analysis

Participation rights

The rights of people, including children to participate in decisions about them

Protection rights

 The rights of a child to be protected at all times

Risk benefit

Comparing a study’s risks and benefits to ensure the benefits outweigh the risks

Primary Data

Data gathered for a specific piece of research and follows the purpose of a study, can be expensive and time-consuming to obtain

Secondary data

Data that was gathered for a different purpose or by other people, typically used in a meta-analysis. It can be cheaper to use as researchers don’t need to research about it themselves, however since it has a different purpose, it may not suit the study that is reusing this data

Meta-analysis

Procedure used to merge and analyse findings from studies focusing on a similar issue in order to draw overall conclusions

Quantitative research

Follows the normal scientific procedure, using a hypothesis to test a theory, usually in the form of numbers e.g % and statistics, it is more objective and less open to researcher bias

Qualitative research

Research is gathered through detailed information where ideas and theories emerge from, done more exploratory, usually in the form of words, pictures or a format where a story is being told and the data gives detail

Reliability

Consistency of an outcome/result, this makes findings trustable and ensures that they are not a one-off result

Validity

The extent to which a study measures what it intended to measure

External validity

Whether findings are generalizable to the target population

Internal validity

Whether measures used in a test genuinely test what they were designed to test

Triangulation

Applying several different theoretical frameworks in research instead of approaching a research question from just one theoretical perspective

Questionnaires

Self-report technique that investigates people’s beliefs, options and attitudes first hand, more flexible than interview as there is no need for an interviewer as they are posted online or by mail

Strengths of questionnaires

• Inexpensive way of gathering information 

• Ethical as people can freely choose to not complete it

• Reduces social desirability effect as they are not affected by presence of an interviewer

• Close ended questions provide quantitative data which is easy to analyse and is objective

• Open ended is more free for respondents

Weaknesses of questionnaires

• Response rate for questionnaires are low as people may not have the time or inclination to finish it

• Close ended questions may not provide the right options for participants to express and explain their choices

• Open ended are more difficult to analyse as they provide qualitative data which is open to interpretation

Non-participant observation

When a researcher is simply just watching and records without actively being involved

Participant observation

When a researcher that is observing becomes involved with the group they are observing

Naturalistic observation

Conducted in everyday environment where behaviour being studied is normally seen, can be done covertly or overtly

Controlled/structured observation

Conducted in a laboratory or controlled environment, where researchers may stage a situation to encourage behaviour

Strengths of observations

• Less chances for observer bias, especially in non-participant observation

• Applicable to some behaviours like gangs

• Reliability of observations must be checked with inter-rater reliability

Weaknesses of observation

• Can be unreliable if some measures are not in place

• Behaviour can be undetected or interpreted in different ways, making findings unreliable

• It may be time consuming to operationalise behaviours that need to be studied and to train researchers to correctly record behaviours 

• Lack internal validity if behaviours are not a good measure of the concept being tested

• Lacks validity if observer bias get associated with the group (participant observation)

• Possible ethical issues, covert has a lack of consent and participant covert observation can be deceiving if they are acting as a group member

inter-rater reliability

When more than one observer codes behaviour and their results are compared to check for agreement