4.1b: Phone usage
Experimental: There will be a difference in the number of times males and females hold their phone, text on their phone and scroll on their phone.
Null: There will not be a difference in the number of times males and females hold their phone, text on their phone and scroll on their phone.
We decided to do an observation, which is a non-experimental method, meaning there are no IVs and DVs.
A field experiment, done by observing children around the school and marking down phone usage. This increases ecological validity.
This was done during lunch time.
A covert observation, meaning participants were not aware they were being observed
We used independent groups, as there every person was only marked down once.
Opportunity sampling, by using what children were walking around at the time.
We used presumptive consent.
We made three behavioural categories; holding phones, scrolling and texting.
Event | Female | Male |
|---|---|---|
Holding phone | 20 | 9 |
Scrolling | 10 | 6 |
Texting | 14 | 6 |
Total | 44 | 21 |
We used the mode as this was nominal data, meaning:
Females and males were most likely to hold their phone
Inter-rater reliability - The researchers conferred before each tick to ensure that they were correctly measuring the behaviour.
There were fixed categories, decreasing confusion and allowing quantitative results to be drawn.
N/A
Inter-rater reliability - The researchers conferred before each tick to ensure that they were correctly measuring the behaviour.
There were fixed categories, decreasing confusion and allowing quantitative results to be drawn.
It was a field experiment, allowing for higher ecological validity.
Only measured comprehensive school age children, meaning it cannot be generalised across all populations.
Face validity - We looked at the categories and they appeared to measure a range of different phone usages.
We need to consider:
Privacy: No identifiable information was marked down, only gender.
Risk of stress: Sixth formers walking around areas where phones are banned could cause the children to be scared. This was alleviated by being covert.
Valid consent: We asked children around the school whether they consented and they said yes, giving us presumptive consent.
Working with vulnerable individuals: We are working with children. They gave presumptive consent.
Experimental: There will be a difference in the number of times males and females hold their phone, text on their phone and scroll on their phone.
Null: There will not be a difference in the number of times males and females hold their phone, text on their phone and scroll on their phone.
We decided to do an observation, which is a non-experimental method, meaning there are no IVs and DVs.
A field experiment, done by observing children around the school and marking down phone usage. This increases ecological validity.
This was done during lunch time.
A covert observation, meaning participants were not aware they were being observed
We used independent groups, as there every person was only marked down once.
Opportunity sampling, by using what children were walking around at the time.
We used presumptive consent.
We made three behavioural categories; holding phones, scrolling and texting.
Event | Female | Male |
|---|---|---|
Holding phone | 20 | 9 |
Scrolling | 10 | 6 |
Texting | 14 | 6 |
Total | 44 | 21 |
We used the mode as this was nominal data, meaning:
Females and males were most likely to hold their phone
Inter-rater reliability - The researchers conferred before each tick to ensure that they were correctly measuring the behaviour.
There were fixed categories, decreasing confusion and allowing quantitative results to be drawn.
N/A
Inter-rater reliability - The researchers conferred before each tick to ensure that they were correctly measuring the behaviour.
There were fixed categories, decreasing confusion and allowing quantitative results to be drawn.
It was a field experiment, allowing for higher ecological validity.
Only measured comprehensive school age children, meaning it cannot be generalised across all populations.
Face validity - We looked at the categories and they appeared to measure a range of different phone usages.
We need to consider:
Privacy: No identifiable information was marked down, only gender.
Risk of stress: Sixth formers walking around areas where phones are banned could cause the children to be scared. This was alleviated by being covert.
Valid consent: We asked children around the school whether they consented and they said yes, giving us presumptive consent.
Working with vulnerable individuals: We are working with children. They gave presumptive consent.
