Topic Describe Evaluate / Strengths & Application to Study

Weaknesses

1. Experiments
• an investigation looking for a causal relationship in which an independent variable is manipulated and is expected to be responsible for changes in the
dependent variable.

Lab Experiment A research method in Strengths - Canli et al.

which there is an IV, a DV - Extraneous variables - Dement and
and strict controls. It controlled Kleitman
looks for a causal - Procedures - Schacter and Singer
relationship and is standardised - Andrade
conducted in a setting Weaknesses - Baron-Cohen et al.
that is not in the usual - Lacks mundane realism - Laney et al.
environment for the - Findings not - Bandura et al.
participants with regard to generalisable - Saavedra and
the behaviour they are - More demand Silverman
performing characteristics displayed - Pepperberg
- Yamamoto et al.
- Milgram

Field Experiment An investigation looking Strengths - Piliavin et al.

for a causal relationship - True behaviours shown
in which an IV is - Better ecological validity
manipulated and is - Fewer demand
expected to be characteristics
responsible for changes - Findings more
in the DV. It is conducted generalisable
in the normal Weaknesses
environment for the - Extraneous variables
participants for the harder to control
behaviour being - Procedures harder to
investigated standardise
- Researcher less sured
that changes in DV have
been caused by
changes in the IV
- Participants not aware of
the study

Natural Experiment An investigation looking Strengths - Dement and

for a causal relationship
in which the independent
variable cannot be
directly manipulated by
the experimenter.
Instead, they study the
effect of an existing
difference or change.
Since the researcher
cannot manipuate the
levels of the IV it is not a
true experiment.
- Able to study real-world Kleitman
issues - Baron-Cohen et al.
- Participants in their
normal situation,
findings generalisable
- Fewer demand
characteristics
Weaknesses
- Only possible when
differences arise
naturally
- Extraneous variables
hard to control
- Researcher less sure if
the DV is changed by
the IV since it is not
manipulated, so a
causal relationship
cannot necessarily be
established
 2. Self-Reports
• a research method, such as a questionnaire or interview, which obtains data by asking participants to provide information about themselves.

Questionnaires A research method using Strengths Examples:

(including open/closed questions) written questions
Closed questions
questionnaire, interview
or test items that produce
quantitative data. They
have only a few, stated
alternative responses and
no opportunity to expand
answers. Ex. Do you
have a son?
Open questions
questionnaire, interview
or test items that produce
qualitative data.
Participants give full and
detailed answers in their
own words, i.e. no
categories or choices are
given.
Ex. Tell me about the time
you had your last birthday
party.
- Closed questions easier - Schacter and Singer
to analyse - Laney et al.
- Easy to work out
averages with
quantitative data
- Qualitative data
gathered is rich in detail
Weaknesses
- Qualitative data
interpreted by the
researcher lacks in
reliability as researcher
inconsistent with their
interpretation
- Participants can easily
ignore them
- Responses may be
similar to each other

Filler questions
items put into a
questionnaire, interview
or test to disguise the aim
of the study by hiding the
important questions
among irrelevant ones so
that participants are less
likely to alter their
behaviour by working out
the aims.

Interviews A research method using Strengths Examples:

structured/unstructured/semi-stru verbal questions asked
ctured directly, e.g. face-to-face
or on the telephone.
Structured interview
an interview with
questions in a fixed
order which may be
scripted. The interviewer
may need to be
consistent in their tone of
voice, posture, etc. to
standardise the
procedure.
Unstructured interview
an interview in which
most questions are
dependent on the
respondent’s answer. A
list of topics may be given
to the interviewer.
- Better response rate Structured: Canli et al.
- Detailed qualitative Semi-structured: Dement
responses can be and Kleitman
obtained
Weaknesses
- Interviewees may lie to
appear more acceptable
(social desirability) or to
disrupt the research by
providing the desired
responses (demand
characteristics)
- Time-consuming to
conduct interviews
 Semi-structured
interview
an interview with a fixed
list of open and closed
questions. The
interviewer can add more
questions if necessary.
3. Case Studies
Case Studies In-depth investigations
conducted on a single
person, group or
community.
4. Observation
• a research method used when watching human or animal participants directly, to gather data about their behaviour.
Overt/covert observer Overt
The role of the observer
is obvious to the
participants.
Covert
The role of the observer
is not obvious to the
participants.
Participant/non-participant Participant
observer An observer who takes
part in a social setting.
Non-participant
An observer who does
not take part in a social
setting and observes
through a one-way mirror
or from a distance.
Strengths - Saavedra and
- Rich and detailed Silverman
information gathered - Pepperberg
- Use of triangulation
improves validity
- Conducted over a long
period of time
Weaknesses
- Possibility of researcher
and participant
developing a close
relationship (researcher
bias)
- May be unethical due to
asking intrusive
questions and harder to
maintain anonymity
- Findings not
generalisable
Strengths (Overt) Examples:
- Allows participants and Overt: Milgram
observers to build Covert: Schachter and
rapport, so they are less Singer
distressed
- Able to obtain informed
consent
Weaknesses (Overt)
- Possible display of
demand characteristics
and social desirability
Strengths (Covert)
- Validity increases
because less demand
characteristics and
social desirability
Weaknesses (Covert)
- Data collection is more
difficult
- Participants did not give
informed consent
Strengths (Participant) Examples:
- Researcher can Non-participant: Piliavin et
accurately the al.
participants’ behaviour
Weaknesses (Participant)
- Possible bias in the
results
- Sample is usually quite
small
 Strengths (Non-participant)
- Increased validity
because behaviour
recorded is realistic
Weaknesses (Non-participant)
- Difficult to record
participants’ behaviours
accurately

Structured/unstructured Structured Strengths (Structured) -

observation A study that is conducted - Produces reliable data
where a small, limited Weaknesses (Structured)
range of behaviours is - May miss some
recorded. behaviours as what is
needed to be recorded
is limited

Unstructured Strengths (Unstructured)

A study that is conducted - Ensures that all types of
where a wide and important behaviour are
possible range of recorded
behaviours is recorded. Weaknesses (Unstructured)
- May be difficult to record
behaviours accurately
- Some behaviours
recorded may be
irrelevant

Naturalistic/controlled Naturalistic Strengths (Naturalistic) All studies are controlled

observation A study that is conducted - Realistic behaviours observations
by observing the observed
participants’ behaviour in Weaknesses (Naturalistic)
their natural environment - Behaviour may not be
without the inference of observed all the time
researchers in either the
social or physical Strengths (Controlled)
environment - Desired behaviours are
always observed
Controlled Weaknesses (Controlled)
A study that is conducted - Realistic behaviours
by observing the may not be observed all
participants’ behaviour in the time
their natural or in an
artificial environment
where the social either
the social or physical
environment has been
manipulated by the
researchers.

5. Correlations

Correlation A research method which Strengths Examples:

looks for a causal
relationship between two
measured variables. A
change in
one variable is related to
a change in the other. Weaknesses
Positive correlation
A relationship between
two variables in which an
increase in one
accompanies an increase
in the other.
- Provide useful - Canli et al.
information about the - Baron-Cohen et al.
specific strength of the
relationship between two
variables
- Having a correlation
does not mean that
there is a causal
relationship
 Negative correlation
A relationship between
two variables in which an
increase in one
accompanies a decrease
in the other.

6. Hypothesis and aims

• recognise and write aims and directional (one-tailed) and non-directional (two-tailed) hypotheses and null hypotheses

Hypothesis Direction (One-tailed) Hypothesis

a testable statement
predicting a difference between levels of
the independent variable or a
relationship between variables.
A statement predicting the direction of a relationship between variables.
Non-directional (Two-tailed) Hypothesis
A statement predicting only that one variable will be related to another.
Null Hypothesis
A testable statement saying that any difference or correlation in the results is due to chance.

Aims A general statement that describes the purpose of the study

7. Variables
• describe what is meant by an independent Independent variable: Why do researchers Example:
variable and a dependent variable
The variable that is being operationalise variables? Schacter and Singer
• identify independent variables and
dependent variables in studies manipulated IV: Description of injection
• understand what is meant by Researchers operationalise and Physiological effects
‘operationalisation’ Dependent variable: variables in order to turn abstract DV: Measures of pulse rate,
• operationalise: – an independent variable – a
The variable that is being conceptual ideas into self-ratings of side effects
dependent variable
• apply knowledge of variables to a novel affected by the measurable observations. and behaviours seen during
research situation manipulation of the IV observation

Operationalisation:
the definition of variables
so that they can be
manipulated, measured
or quantified and
replicated

8. Experimental Design
• the way in which participants are allocated to levels of the IV.

Independent measures An experimental design in Strengths Schacter and Singer

which a different group of - No order effects Andrade
participants is used for - Reduces demand Baron-Cohen
each level of the IV. characteristics
- Reduces individual
differences
Weaknesses
- Participant variables
distort results
- More participants
required so less ethical
and effective

Repeated measures An experimental design in Strengths Canli et al.

which each participant
performs in every level of
the
- Participant variables
won't distort results
- Use of counterbalancing
reduces order effects
- Uses less participants

Weaknesses
- Order effects distort
results
- More demand
characteristics displayed
Matched pairs An experimental design in
which participants are
arranged into pairs. Each
pair is similar in ways that
are important to the study
and one member of each
pair performs in a
different level of the IV.
9. Controlling Variables
• describe how psychologists can control variables in a study • understand the difference between controlling variables and standardisation of a
procedure, including extraneous, uncontrolled, participant and situational variables • apply knowledge of controls to a novel research situation
Control A way to keep a potential
extraneous variable
constant
Standardisation Keeping the procedure
for each participant in an
experiment (or interview)
exactly the same to
ensure that any
differences between
participants or conditions
are due to the variables
under investigation rather
than differences in the
way they were treated.
Confounding Variables A type of extraneous
variable that not only
affects the dependent
variable, but is also
related to the
independent variable.
Situational variable
A confounding variable
caused by an aspect of
the environment.
Experimenter variable
The presence of the
researchers themselves
may affect the outcome of
the experiment.
Uncontrolled variable
A confounding variable
that may not have been
identified and eliminated
in an experiment, which
may confuse the results.
Strengths Bandura et al.
- Reduces demand Baron-Cohen et al.
characteristics
- Participants variables
are less likely distort
results
- No order effects
Weaknesses
- Similarity between pairs
is limited by the
matching process
- Availability of matching
pairs may be limited, so
small sample size
Strengths Example:
- More control over the Baron-Cohen et al.
extraneous variables Control: Non-doodling
means that the DV is Experimental: Doodling
more likely due to the IV;
cause and effect are Example:
much more likely to be Milgram
shown The researcher had four
- Participants are more fixed prods to say to the
likely to behave in the participants everytime they
way that the researchers wanted to end the
want experiment.
- Controls act as a means
of comparison between
the experimental groups.
Weaknesses:
- More controls means the -
situation becomes less
realistic
- Controlling too many
variables may make the
participants to suspect
the aim of the study
Extraneous Variables Any variable that you’re -
not investigating that can
potentially affect the
dependent variable

Participant Variables Individual differences -

between participants

Stooge A person who acts in a Strengths Example:

way that has been
predetermined by the
researcher. They follow
the script: performing,
saying and doing things
at certain
times and is consistent
for all the participants
- A measure of Schachter and Singer
standardisation There was a stooge in each
- Participants may behave of the conditions (anger and
more naturally as the euphoria)
stooge may be
perceived as another
participant
- Can be used a model to
suggest participants on
how to behave

Weaknesses
- Unethical because
participants are
deceived as they
thought the stooge was
another participant
- May lead to participants
to behave in ways that
they would not normally
behave.

10. Types of Data

Quantitative Numerical results about Strengths

the quantity of the - Measures objective measures
psychological measure - Scales and/or questions used are reliable
- Data easy to analyse using measures of central
Qualitative Descriptive, in-depth tendency
results, indicating the - Data easy to compare
quality of a psychological
characteristic Weaknesses
- Data collection limited to a few fixed responses
- Data is less valid
Strengths
- Data is valid as participants have the freedom to
express themselves

Weaknesses
- Data collection often subjective
- Data collected may be invalid due to interpretation bias
by the researcher
- Detailed data collected may not be generalisable

11. Sampling of Participants

• Describe what is meant by sample/population.

Opportunity Participants chosen as Strengths Andrade: She asked

they are available - Quicker and easier than
Ex. Office workers other methods
chosen for a study as
they are at their Weaknesses
workplace. - Not representative as
participants may be
similar in characteristics
participants who just left a
different study 5 minutes of
their time
Bandura et al.: Participants
were readily available at the
Stanford University nursery
Random Participants inclusive of
all parts of the population
allocated by with a fixed
number
Strengths -
- Mostly representative as
all types of people in the
population are equally
likely to be chosen

Weaknesses
- Everyone may not
chosen equally
- Some participants may
not be accessed

Volunteer Participants invited to the Strengths Baron-Cohen et al.: Autism

study through means of
advertisements and/or
notices
- Quick and easy as group recruited through
participants come to the adverts in the National
researcher society of autism and
- Willing to stay through support groups
the study
- Willing to return to the
study when asked

Weaknesses
- Not representative as
participants may be
similar in characteristics

Sample The people who are taking part of the study

Population The people who could be part of the study

12. Ethics

Ethics in relation to human Informed consent

participants Participants should be informed about the details of the study to give their informed consent.

Right to withdraw
Participants should be informed at the beginning of the study that they can leave whenever
they wish.

Protection from physical and/or psychological harm

Participants should not be exposed to greater risk and harm that they would normally
experience in their day-to-day life.

Deception
Participants should not be deliberately misled in the study about the aims and/or procedures.
If it is not possible, then participants should be debriefed at the end of the study.

Confidentiality
Participant’s personal details should not be shared with anyone outside this study.

Privacy
Participants should have the right to deny/ignore any questions that they do not feel like
answering/sharing.

Debriefing
Participants should be informed at the end of the study about the aims and the
consequences so that they leave in at least as positive a condition as they arrived in.

Ethics in relation to animals Replacement

Wherever possible, alternatives to using animals should be considered like computer
simulations or watching videos of previous studies.

Species and strain

An appropriate species should always be used and some strains are more suitable than
others.
Numbers
The smallest number of animals to meet the goals of the research must be used.
 Procedures
No procedure should cause physical or psychological harm or distress. A special licence is
required if there will be harm or distress.

Housing
Distress caused in animals who are caged in isolation or are caged in overcrowded
conditions should be avoided.

Reward, deprivation and aversive stimulation

Regular feeding patterns should be adhered to and deprivation and aversive stimulation
should be avoided or kept to a minimum.

Anaesthesia, analgesia and euthanasia

Post-operative care should minimise stress, and when needed the animal must be killed
humanely using an approved technique

13. Reliability
• describe different types of reliability, including inter-rater and inter-observer reliability, test-retest reliability • evaluate studies based on their
reliability • apply knowledge of reliability to a novel research situation

Reliability The extent to which a If a study has high reliability then the study is more easily
procedure, task or replicable to test the findings.
measure is consistent.

Inter-rater Reliability The extent to which two researchers interpreting qualitative Example:
responses in a questionnaire or interview Bandura et al.
will produce the same records from the same raw data. The study used two
observers to rate the
Inter-observer Reliability The consistency between two researchers watching the aggressions of children
same event, i.e. whether they will produce the same records. before the start of the
experiment in order to check
the reliability of the
observations.

Test/Retest Reliability A way to measure the consistency of a test or

task. The test is used twice and if the participants’ two sets of
scores are similar, it has good reliability

14. Validity
• describe different types of validity, including ecological validity • evaluate studies based on their validity, subjectivity/objectivity, demand
characteristics, generalisability • apply knowledge of validity to a novel research situation

Validity The extent to which the researcher is testing what they claim to be testing.

Mundane Realism The extent to which the
tasks in the study are
given to the participants
are true to real life.
Strengths of high mundane
realism/ecological validity
- Participants are likely to
behave more normally in
a natural setting
- Less display of demand
characteristics
Example:
Canli et al.
This study lacks mundane
realism because it is not
normal for participants to
look at images inside an
fMRI machine.

Ecological Validity The extent to which the
location of the study is
conducted is true to real
life.
Problems when trying to Example:
achieve high mundane Canli et al.
realism/ecological validity This study has low
- May be impossible to do ecological validity because it
so is conducted in a laboratory
- Some tasks are setting.
impossible to make an
equivalent in a real-life
setting
- Lack of control over
confounding variables

Face Validity A simple measure of validity indicating whether a measure appears to test what it claims
Internal Validity A measure of how well the experiment controls for confounding variables. If a study has
internal validity then the researcher is sure that only the IV is affecting the DV and that no
confounding variables are affecting the DV.

Generalisability How widely findings Strengths of making Example:

apply. generalisations Pepperberg
Ex. Other settings and - Can predict how people The parrot used was a
populations. are likely to behave in a captive and laboratory-grown
situation animal, meaning that it may
- Simplify complex not be generalisable for
behaviour parrots in the wild.
- Helps people to
successfully interact in
society
Weaknesses of making
generalisations
- Sample size may be
small, so not
representative
- Ethnocentric or
gender-bias sample size
may not not
generalisable
- Laboratory-based
studies may not apply to
real-life situations

Data Subjectivity Example for subjectivity:

a personal viewpoint, which may be biased by Saavedra and Silverman
one’s feelings, beliefs or experiences, so may differ between The ‘feelings thermometer’
individual researchers. was used which was
personalised to the boy and
Objectivity so the following responses
an unbiased external viewpoint that is not from interviews were
affected by an individual’s feelings, beliefs or experiences, so subjective.
should be consistent between different researchers.
Example for objectivity:
Canli et al.
Brain scans of participants
were collected when the
amygdala was activated.

Social Desirability Bias trying to present oneself in the best light by determining what a test is asking.

Demand Characteristic features of the experimental situation which give away the aims which can cause
participants to try to change their behaviour.

Order Effects Practice effect

A situation where participants’ performance
improves because they experience the experimental task
more than once.

Fatigue effect
A situation where participants’ performance
declines because they have experienced an experimental task more than once.
Ex. boredom or tiredness
 15. Data Analysis
• understand the meaning of ‘measure of central tendency’ and ‘measure of spread’ • understand when it is most appropriate to use different
measures • name, recognise and know how to find a: – mean – median – mode – range • name, recognise, know how to draw and interpret data from
a: – bar chart – histogram – scatter graph • recognise, interpret and understand: – standard deviation – normal distribution

Measures of central tendency Mean

a mathematical way to find The average value of a data set.
the typical or average score from a data
set, using the mode, median or mean. Median
The middle value of a data set.

Mode
The most frequent value of a data set.

Measure of spread Range

a mathematical way to describe the the difference between the top value and the bottom value
variation or dispersion within a data set.
Standard Deviation
a measure of spread of data around the mean

Normal distribution curve for

continuous data

Histogram for continuous data

Bar graph for discrete data

Scatter graph for correlations for

discrete data

:)