Strengths and weaknesses of studies

1. Milgram
Strengths:
(1) The method used in this study was a controlled environment, so it was
very easy to control all the extraneous variables such as the age and
appearance of the actor playing the stooge
(2) The procedure was standardised throughout; the verbal prods used were
all the same each time. It made the research more reliable because all the
participants had the same experience.
(3) The realistic design of the study and sample shocks given to everyone
improved the validity of the experiment as it made the participants believe
the study was real.
(4) Use of quantitative data as the voltages of shock delivered were the main
measurement of obedience, it offered an objective record for obedience
for each participants.

Weaknesses:
(1) All the participants were men who came from the local area, this
mean the sample size was small and the genreliasabilities made
were low in validity.
(2) Use of deception; the participants were lied to and manipulated into
thinking they were giving the shocks and harming others when in
reality the student was just a stooge.
(3) No protection from psychological harm was given to the participants
as they genuinely thought they were harming the other person that
could have affected their brain.
(4) Participants werent given the right to withdraw from the experiment
as when they refused to follow the commands the experimenter
gave standardised verbal prods to the participants building social
pressure and hence continuing the experiment.
(5) No informed consent from the participants as they were told the
study was on memory and learning.

2. Subway samaritans
Strengths:
(1) It was a field experiment so it had good ecological validity as the participants
would have behaved naturally towards the emergency.
(2) 4450 people took part in the study. It had all kinds of gender, ethnicity and culture
which makes it a large and diverse sample that is representing of the survey
population and hence generelisalitions made have higher validity.
 (3) Recorded both quantitative data, measuring bystanders helping, no. of helpers
and how long they took to help, and qualitative data including the remarks and
the movements made by participants in each trial, allowed researchers to get an
in depth understanding of the the thoughts and behaviours associated with
helping.

Weaknesses:
(1) No informed consent
(2) Use of deception
(3) No protection from psychological harm as the participants actually thought it was
an emergency when in reality it was not.
(4) More demand characteristics; as people who have used the same route twice
might be more or less likely to help.

3. Button phobia
Strengths:
(1) Case study so one person is studied in detailed using different methods, validity
is high.
(2) Highly standardised measures used such as the ‘fear thermometer’.
(3) Use of quantitative data so results can be analysed from start to finish and
qualitative data to help us understand the reasons for underlying psychological
disorders.

Weaknesses:
(1) Building a rapport with the the participant, less room for anonymity or objectivity,
higher risk of bias which may compromise validity of the study.
(2) Demand characteristics as the boy was aware of being studied and undergoing
therapy with intention of improving his phobia.
(3) No protection from psycholofgical harm as during beavioural therapy his fear
went up from a 6 to 8 that could potentially distress the child even more.

4. Doodling

Strengths:
(1) Lab experiment, could control extraneous variables.
(2) Standardised procedure, all participants were equally bored. Perationalisation of
doodle was also standardised as they all had the same doodle sheets, high
validity.
(3) Participants varied from ages 18-55 years so representative of adults.
Weaknesses:
(1) Risk of demand characteristics
(2) Invasion of privacy
(3) No fully informed consent as they were given a surprise test of recall.
(4) This surprise recall task distressed the participants so no protection given from
psychological harm.

5. MITE Test
Strengths:
(1) Lab exp,could control extraneous variables
(2) Standardised as everyone had to take the mite test, high validity
(3) Gave informed consent
(4) Confidentiality was kept
(5) Gives us greater understanding of people with autism and HFA’s and their
experiences.

Weaknesses:
(1) Quasi exp, not able to randomly allocate participants, can become an extraneous
variable.
(2) Although the test was vastly improved it still lacked ecological validity.
(3) Only 15 participants with a diagnosis of autism and HFA so it may not be
representative for all them

6.. Bashing bobo

Strengths:
(1) Lab experiment, control all extraneous variables.
(2) Behaviour of the model was standardised for all children, high validity
(3) Matched pairs on pre existing levels of aggression, age and gender of both
children and model.
(4) Less demand characteristics as the chilren were unaware of being studied,
behaving naturally.
(5) Both qualitative and qualitative data collected

Weaknesses:
(1) No protection from physical and psychological harm
(2) Usage of children, might not apply to adults
(3) Children from different backgrounds that could be and extraneous variable.
(4) Children might not be taking the experiment seriously and lead to low ecological
validity as violence in reality is far different from violence shown in this study.
7. Monkey toy preference
Strengths:
(1) Use of animals to prevent effects os socialisation.
(2) Highly standardised procedure with clear operational definitions of behaviour to
improve reliability.
(3) Proper housing
(4) Food given as reward no deprivation.
(5) No physical or psychological harm

Weaknesses:
(1) No genuine choice given as toys were given one at a time rather than at the
same time to see which one would the monkey of any gender would pick.
(2) No replacement of data as this study had been previously done with vervet
monkeys

8. Line ups
Strengths:
(1) Control of variables
(2) The position of the targets were randomized, and order of photos was varied.
This counterbalancing reduced potential biases and order effects, internal
validity.
(3) Safeguarded childrens comfort and well being so they dont get tired and fatigued.
(4) Got consent from parents and informed consent of children in a friendly way.

Weaknesses:
(1) Limited age range and demographics.
(2) Use of familiar vs unfimiliar target, introduced a bias, might get overestimation of
their identification abilitiesin more realistic scenarios,where target is actually
unfamiliar( bcz children are more familiar with c cartoons can easily identify
them).
(3) Low ecological validity as the photos and videos shown might not resemble real
life lineups which could cause distress for children.

9. Elephant learning
Strengths:
(1) Standardised training process for all the subjects, same behavioural tasks,
internal validity high.
(2) The methods used in the study are replicable, so more studies can use this and
verify the results,increased validity and reliability.
 (3) High ecological validity as the study was conducted in the natural environment of
the elephants.

Weaknesses:
(1) Limited sample size and diversity.
(2) Subjectively assessed as the criteria for judging was set by the trainer himself,
affect validity.
(3) Distractions in the natural enviorment that could hinder the training process and
affect the learning ability of the elephants, affects validity.

10. Mindfulness
Strengths:
(1) Use of control group( people who did not take part in the study) so that the
researchers have something to compare the results with in growth of grey matter
in the brain, high internal validity.
(2) Use of standardised mindfulness program for all the participants so all of them
achieve the same results.

Weaknesses:
(1) Small sample size- only 16 people in MBSR group and 17 people in the
control group.
(2) Lack of randomization- participants were not randomly allocated but self
selected, risk of selection bias.
(3) Risk of experimenters bias as they didnt use double blind method.

11. Personal space

Strengths:
(1) Usage of double blind method that increase the internal validity of the study, as
both participants and the experimenter didnt know whether OT was given or
placebo
(2) By standardising the exp conditions and ensuring that all participants were
exposed to same stimuli in a controlled environment reduced the extraneous
variables.

Weaknesses:
(1) Small sample (9males)- not representative, not generelisable.
(2) Lab exp, use of computerised experiments, reduced ecological validity.

12. REM sleep

Strengths and weaknesses on the notes.