Quantitative Research
in the form of numbers (experiment)
aim: numerically expression characterizes behaviour of large groups of individuals
pros: speed, scientific, generalize
cons: no context, no flexiblity
Qualitative Research
in form of text (interview, observation)
aim: an in-depth study
pros: flexible, context
cons: subjective, small sample
Meta Analysis
Variety of data sources → high external validity
research bias/confirmation bias (can choose their own study to fit the thesis) → low internal validity
Experimental Studies
manipulate variables: IV and DV
control all other variables
aim: cause and effect relationship
Correlational Studies
no manipulation on variables
aim: locate a pattern
Descriptive Studies
no mapulation on variables
approach variable seperately
Sample
Partipants in a research
Sampling
Process finding a sample
Credibility
The extent the study do what it say (qualitative)
By sharing the result with the participants, they can confirm the result → increasefa credibility
Reliability
can the study be replicated
eg. case study is not replicable → no reliability
Bias
error which affect how the result reflects reality
Random Sampling
random selection
pros: no bias
cons: can be not a representive for the target population (quantitative)
Stratified Sampling
groups are made based on shared charateristic
pros: more focus on the research
cons: harder analyse?, bias (quantitative)
Self-selected sampling
participant volunteers to be in a study
pro: reduce time looking for participant
cons: can be unrepresentive -> lower population validity (quantitative)
Opportunity sampling
anyone who is convenience
pro: reduce time looking for participant
cons: can be unrepresentive -> lower population validity (quantitative)
Purposive Sampling
particpants are recuited based on certain charateristic
cons: low external validity (qualitative)
snowball sampling
particpant invites other participants
occurs when limited participants (qualitative)
Observation
observe people with no, little contact or control
pros: high accuracy (closed to 1st hand experience)
cons: time and money
Covert observation
the observees are not informed
pros: avoid demanding charateristic or participant bias
cons: ethics (consent)
Overt observation
observees give consent
pros: ethics
cons: social desirability effect, expectancy effect
Independent Measures Design
each participant can be only in one group/condition of the experiment
Strength: no order effect
Limitation: participant variability
Matched Pairs Design
put in group based on certain charateristics
Repeated Measures Design
the conditions of the groups are compared rather than the participants
Order Effects
How the order of things can affect the result
Participant Variability
the prior difference between the participants
Construct Validity
concern about how the experiment is constructed (setting, participation, etc)
Internal Validity
the extent which the study do what it says (quantitative)
External Validity
the extend which the study can be generalized
include population and ecological validity
Population Validity
the extend which the study can be generalized to its target population
ecological validity
the extent which the result can be applied to other setting
History
Past events which can impacts the DV
Only for longitudinal study
Maturation
the amount the participant grow during the experiment
Experimental Mortality
participant's drop out
Demand Characteristics
how particpants change their behaviour to fit the what they think is demanded or acceptable
Experimenter Bias
researcher's bias (quantitative)
Double-blind designs
Both the people conduct the experiment and participants are decepted
Quasi-experiments
used of pre-existing group
some manipulation
pros: high external validity
cons: no cause and effect relationship
Natural experiments
real life setting
pre-existing group
no control
pros: high ecological validity
cons: low internal validity
Field experiments
real life setting
pre-existing group
some manipulation
pros: high ecological validity
cons: low internal validity
confounding variable
variables which have potential to affect IV and DV
Representativeness
representation of the target audience
Target population
population the study is targeted
Generalizability
The extent the result can be applied outside the sample
Triangulation
different techniques are used to collect data → confirmation
Type: data and method triangulation
Establishing a rapport
Researchers ensure that participants are honest
Reflexivity
research acknowledge or take their bias into account
Epistemological Reflexivity
acknowledge of the strength and limitation of a method
Personal Reflexivity
acknowledge of the prior belief or expectation of research has
Thick Description
The explanation, description which an outsiders can find meaning from
Acquiescence Bias
Being positive no matter the situation (participant bias)
social desirability bias
The desire to be acceptance influences the patient's behaviours (participant bias)
Confirmation Bias
researcher unintentionally tries to prove his/her prior belief (researcher bias)
Sampling Bias
when the sample does not satisfy the research's purpose
Biased Reporting
when the finding of study is more lean on one event rather talk about all the finding equally
Participant Observation
observers is the people in the observed group
Structured Observation
information is recorded systematically and in a standardized way (ex: table, chart)
Instructed Observation
no structure, observers simply register whatever behaviours they find noteworthy
Interview
researchers asked question and participant answers
Interview Transcript
the transcript of the interview
Structured Interviews
there is an order which question must be asked
Semi-structured Interviews
There are required question but no order
Unstructured Interviews
there are no structured and required question, it is solely based on the participant's performance
Focus Group
An interview with a group of people at the same time. The questions would be discussed in the group
Pros: more observation (body language, interaction)
Cons: time consuming, dominant response, social desirablitiy effect
sampling bias: exculding people who does not have a specific characteristics
Inductive Content Analysis
The method to analyze text from the participants to find a pattern. recurring themes.
Case Study
Use to invest a certain case or event
Pro: rare, condition which can not be created without ethical concerns
Cons: difficult to replicate, time consuming, researcher bias, cannot be generalized
Representational generalization
apply to other populations
Sample size
affect internal validity because higher participant variability
eg. a psychopath in a sample of 10 people → result 10% of the population is psychopath which is not necessary true :DD