1a. Identify the method used and outline two characteristics of the method.

This is a naturalistic, overt, non-participant observation. Naturalistic observations have high

ecological validity; the participants are observed carrying out normal behaviour without any
manipulation of variables by the researcher. In an overt observation, there is no use of deception
and because it is a non-participant observation, the researcher does not interfere with the behaviour
of the participants.

1b. Describe the sampling method used in the study.

The researcher uses a sample of opportunity. Hockey teams that exist at the university are asked to
participate in the study. An opportunity sample is a non-random sample in which the researcher
uses a sample that already exists. In this case, the sample is easily obtained and the researchers
would have had good familiarity with the characteristics of the sample.

1c. Suggest an alternative or additional research method giving one reason for your choice.
A questionnaire could be given to hockey players to see what they believe sparks aggressive
behaviour. This would allow easy collection of data and would look more holistically at a hockey
player's performance, rather than just three games.

2. Describe the ethical considerations that were applied in the study and explain if further ethical
considerations could be applied.
Informed consent was obtained, not just from the players but from their coach as well. They would
have had their rights explained to them, including their right to withdraw from the study. As the
games were recorded, it is important that the players are aware of this as well as how the
recording will be used. It is important that the anonymity of the players is maintained; they should
not be identified by name or by number. There was no deception in the study, but a debriefing must
still be done. This will allow the researchers to share their findings as well as give the participants
one more chance to withdraw their data. Although aggression is shown in this study, it is a
naturalistic observation. So, there is no "undue" stress or harm as the stress that they experience is
not more than they would in any competitive match.

3. Discuss the possibility of generalizing/transferring the findings of the study.

The sample is fairly large for a university, so it most likely that the results may be generalized to the
population from which the sample was drawn. However, with only three games observed, the
findings may be premature. Although there were several teams observed, the limited number of
matches means that it is difficult to generalize the findings. It is not clear to what extent the study
could be transferred to other findings; the characteristics of the team would have to be well
described and then the results of the study could be transferred to other hockey teams.
Characteristics that might affect the results are the reputation of the teams, the opposition (was it a
long-term rivalry?) or the competition required to qualify for the team. In addition, these were male
varsity teams. We cannot generalize to female hockey teams. We cannot generalize to professional
hockey teams. It would also be difficult to generalize the aggression to other sports as the
operationalization of the aggression is very specific to the sport.