Research Methods - key terms

aim

general statement of what the researcher intends to investigate

procedure

what happened in the study, who, where

findings

how did participants behave

conclusions

what do the findings show

criticisms

strengths/weaknesses

GRAVE

generalisability

reliability

application

validity

ethics

generalisability

the extent to which results can be generalised beyond the sample to a wider population

reliability

the extent to which a study is controlled and standardized to get reproducible results in an objective way

application

what do the results suggest that is useful in helping society?

validity

the extent to which the study is accurate and controls for extraneous variables

ethics

was the study ethical and did this affect results/behaviour?

internal reliability

if a measure is consistent within itself

external reliability

if the same participants show the same behaviour on a separate occasion

inter-rater reliability

if multiple researchers are consistent when measuring and interpreting behaviour

intra-rater reliability

if the same researcher is consistent in their interpretation of behaviour over time

split-half method

checks internal reliability, compare scores from one half of the data from each participant to the other half

test-retest method

checks external reliability, compare score of same participants over time, test them on another occasion

internal validity

whether effects are due to the IV and not some other factor

external validity

refers to factors outside the investigation

ecological validity

can results be generalised from one setting to another

population validity

can results be generalised to the wider population

temporal validity

can results hold true over time

face validity

whether a test appears to measure what it is supposed to measure.

content validity

experts in the field ensure the test measures what it intends to measure

construct validity

experts in the field scrutinise the test to ensure the test measures the entire variable

concurrent validity

comparing a new test with an existing test to see if they produce similar results.correlation coefficient must be +0.8 or higher

interpretive validity

accurately portraying the participants' subjective viewpoints and meanings

criterion validity

the extent to which two different assessment systems arrive at the same diagnosis for the same patient

triangulation

the use of multiple methods to study one research question

paradigm

shared set of assumptions and agreed methods within a scientific discipline

paradigm shift

change in the dominant theory in a scientific discipline, due to new knowledge

theory construction

developing an explanation of behaviour by gathering evidence

hypothesis testing

testing predictions systematically to determine if they are supported or rejected by evidence

falsifiability

principle that a theory cannot be scientific unless it admits the possibility of being proved untrue

replicability

extent to which scientific procedures and findings can be repeated by other researchers

objectivity

all sources of personal bias are minimised so as to not distort or influence the research process

empiricism

gathering evidence through direct observation and experience

abstract of an article

summary of aims, hypothesis, procedure, results, conclusions

introduction of an article

literature review of the general area of investigation

method of an article

SPADE (sample, procedure, apparatus, design, ethics)

results of an article

descriptive/inferential statistics, analysis of themes

discussion of an article

verbal summary, mindful of limitations, wider implications

appendices of an article

contains raw data

experiment

researcher measures the change in DV caused by the change in IV

hypothesis

clear, precise, testable statement that states a relationship between variables

experimental hypotheses (alternative)

directional and non-directional

directional

one-tailed, states the direction of the difference

non-directional

two-tailed, states expected difference but not the direction of the relationship, used in new or conflicting areas of study

null hypothesis

no relationship expected to be found between variables

independent variable (IV)

variable that changes or is manipulated

dependent variable (DV)

variable that is measured by the researcher

operationalisation

making variables testable and measurable

laboratory experiment

researcher changes IV in a controlled environment and measures effect on DV

field experiment

researcher changes IV in a natural setting and measures effect on DV

natural experiment

researcher does not change IV, uses a pre-existing change based on an experience (i.e. orphans)

quasi-experiment

researcher does not change IV, uses a pre-existing biological difference (e.g. age, sex)

ethical issues

conflicts between the rights of the participants and the goals of a study

DDRIPP

deception, debrief, right to withdraw, informed consent, protection from harm, privacy/confidentiality

informed consent

making participants aware of the aims of a study and their rights, with a consent form

right to withdraw

participant's right to leave a study at any time and withdraw their data, without any consequences to themselves

protection from harm

the right of research participants to be protected from physical or psychological harm

deception

when information is withheld or participants are misled, cannot give informed consent

debrief

participants are made aware of the aims and details after the study has ended

presumptive consent

asking a group of people from the same target population as the sample whether they would agree to take part in such a study, if yes then presume the sample would

prior general consent

before participants are recruited they are asked whether they are prepared to take part in research where they might be deceived about the true purpose

retrospective consent

during debriefing, having already taken part in the study

privacy

the right of people not to reveal information about themselves

confidentiality

respecting data protection laws in the UK

acquiescence bias

the tendency to agree to all statements given

experimental design

how conditions are organised

order effects

when the order in which the participants experience conditions in an experiment affects the results of the study

independent groups

separate groups experience different conditions, averages are compared

repeated measures

all participants take part in all conditions of the experiment

matched pairs

pairs of ppts are matched on variables that may affect DV, one assigned to each condition

counterbalancing

method for controlling for order effects in a repeated measure design by varying order of conditions (ABBA technique)

random allocation

allocating participants to experimental groups or conditions using random techniques

observation

watching and recording behaviour

natural observation

watching and recording behaviour in the natural environment where it usually occurs

controlled observation

watching and recording behaviour within a structured environment

covert observation

observation in which the observer's presence or purpose is kept secret from those being observed

overt observation

ppt behaviour is watched and recorded with their knowledge and consent

participant observation

researcher systematically observes people while joining them in their routine activities

non-participant observation

when the researcher remains separate from the group they are studying

self-report technique

measurement methods that rely on research participants' reports of their own behaviours or attitudes

closed questions

require fixed answers, giving quantitative data

open questions

participants are free to give any response, giving qualitative data

psychometric test

scientific measurement of a person's skills, attitudes, personality etc.

scores conform to a normal distribution of the population

structured interview

list of pre-determined questions asked in the same order

unstructured interview

like a conversation, no set questions, general discussion with elaborations

semi-structured

follows a general list of questions but allows for some elaboration

population

group of people, focus of the researcher's interest

sample

research participants, presumed to be representative of the population

biased sample

not representative, certain groups over/under represented

random sampling

when all members of the target population have an equal chance of being selected; lottery method

systematic sampling

every nth member of the target population is chosen from a sampling frame

stratified sampling

sample composition reflects proportions of subgroups (strata) in the population; each stratum selected with random sampling

opportunity sampling

select anyone who happens to be willing and available

volunteer sampling

self-selection, ppts. seeking themselves to be in sample

volunteer bias

certain profile more likely

e.g. keen, helpful

unstructured observation

researchers record everything they see happen