Biological Approach

Dement & Kleitman vs Holzel et al.

Both Dement & Kleitman and Holzel et al. use repeated measures design, which means that all
participants went through all levels of the independent variable. In Dement & Kleitman,
participants were woken in both REM and NREM sleep after both 5 or 15 minutes, meaning
every participant performed in all levels of the levels of the independent variable. Similarly in
Holzel et al. participants went through the FMRI (Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging) scan
and completed the FFMQ (Five Facet Mindfulness Questionnaire) before and after eight weeks
of mindfulness training. Furthermore, both the studies have strong validity as they were
controlled for participant variables which could have caused an impact on the dependent
variables that the researchers used in the repeated measures design.
A difference is that, although both studies used scientific equipment to study the brain, they
used different types of technology. Dement & Kleitman used an EEG (Electroenchephalogram)
to measure brain wave activity in different stages of sleep, while in Holzel et al, MRI (Magnetic
Resonance Imaging) and VBM (Voxel Based Morphometry) was used to measure brain gray
matter density in different parts of the brain (eg: Hippocampus and Insula). In conclusion,
although data collected from both studies is quantitative and used scientific equipment, they
measured two completely different things in the brain.

Hasset et al. vs Dement & Kleitman

Hassett et al. and Dement & Kleitman both used observations in their research. In Hassett et al.
the researchers watched and observed how long each monkey played with either types of toys
to determine the magnitude of preference which referred to how much males preferred
‘masculine’ toys and how much females preferred ‘feminine’ toys. In Dement & Kleitman the
researchers had the EEG machine running all night to observe and determine what stage of
sleep the participants experienced eye movements in as well as the direction of the eye
movement to investigate whether the eye movement corresponded to their dream content.
However, Hassett et al. used independent measures design which was different from Dement &
Kleitman as it used repeated measures design. In Hassett et al. different groups of monkeys
went through each level of the independent variable. Here the independent variable was a
naturally occurring one. While in Dement & Kleitman repeated measures design was
implemented where participants performed at every level of the independent variable. Here the
independent variables were whether the participants woke up from REM or NREM sleep,
whether the participant was awoken at 5 or 15 minutes into REM sleep and their eye movement
patterns.
 Cognitive Approach

Andrade vs Pozzulo et al.

A similarity between Andrade and Pozzulo is that both the studies are lab experiments, this
means that both the studies had a higher validity and standardisation as well as controls
over extraneous variables. In Andrade all participants heard the same mock telephone call
which played at a comfortable speed and volume for 2.5 minutes, they were all provided the
same sheets and sat in the same dull and quiet room. The interval between recall tasks was
always one minute. While in Pozzulo et al. participants were shown the same videos and photo
arrays with the same faces for the same duration and were all asked the same set of questions
and given the same forms to complete. (The demographic and the cartoon watching form).
A difference would be the experimental design of the studies. In the study by Andrade, an
independent measures design was used which meant that there were different participants for
each level of the independent variable, which was whether the participant doodled or not. 20
participants were allocated to the doodling group and 20 to the non-doodling group. However in
Pozzulo et al., repeated measures design was used, which meant that all participants went
through all levels of the independent variable which was the age (naturally occurring iv), the
lineup type and the level of cognitive demand.

Andrade vs Baron Cohen et al.

A similarity between the study by Andrade and Baron Cohen et al. is that they both lack
ecological validity because they are lab experiments with high levels of control. In Andrade the
task of listening to a mock telephone call and having to recall information is not something
people may experience in their daily lives and likewise, in Baron Cohen et al. people were
supposed to judge emotions through static images on a questionnaire, which is something
unnatural and unlikely to happen, hence reducing the ecological validity of both the studies.
A difference would be the ethics followed in both the studies, in the Andrade study participants
were told that they were not required to anything, as a result they were deceived about the
surprise memory task, which meant that the participants were not able to give their fully
informed consent. While in Baron Cohen et al. participants volunteered and gained fully
informed consent from their participants, this means that the participants were not deceived in
any way about the purpose of the study.

A similarity between Milgram and Perry et al would be that they were both conducted in an
artificially and highly controlled setting of a lab. In the study by Perry the task of selecting
preferred interpersonal distance was done through a computer animation, rather than through
actual physical interaction with people while in the study by Milgram the participants went
through the task of shocking an innocent individual, as a result this is not something people
would experience in their everyday lives and therefore it can be said that both the studies lack
mundane realism.