non directinal hypothesis~states there is a diffrence in the measurment of dv as a result manipulation of iv but not direction it will go on.
~2 tailed test~
diffrent , affect , effect,change
directional hypothesis~ states that there is a difference in the measurement of DV as a result of manipulation of IV and predicts which way the relationship between them will be.
~one tailed~
increase, higher, faster,slower,decrease,increase
null hypothesis :hypothesis that there is no diffrence
independent variable~the thing you control and can be manipulated by researcher.
depndentvariable~ the thing in the experimnet that is measured
random sampling ~each memeber of the target population has an equal chance of being in the experiment
s-avoids researcher bias
w-unintentionally may not be respresentative
opputnitiessample~ the researcher directly ask available members of the target population eg on a high street. Usually, due to accessibility
s-quickest way to get sample
w-researcher bias ,unlikley to be unrepresentative,excludes extranous factors
volunteer samplepts offer to take part in the experiment eg..through advertisement
s-practical easy sample easy advertisement
w-volunter bias, targetting only one certian target population eg eg..extroverts
strafied sample~ characteristics of pts within the sample are in the same porportion found in target population
s-sample is represanttive of larger target pop results are generalisable
w-time consuming, bias
mundane realism~ focuses on the real life and canbe cpmpared to real life
extranousvariables~ factors that your not investigation howver can potentially affect your out comes
confounding variables~influence that interfere with and accurate measuremnet btween iv an dv
!confuses results !
operationalise ~ making the ivdv measurable
super specfic
s-makes replicable and reliable if its standarisded applicable
ecological validity~ if it reflects real life
demand charactertics~ pts may act a ceratin way if they know the true reasons for experiment and also may behave certain way messing the results up
Field Experiment
A research method where the researcher manipulates and measures variables in a natural setting, allowing for observation of behavior in a real-world context.
:)field exp
Increased Ecological Validity
Observes behavior in a natural setting, making it more representative of real-life situations.
:)field exp
More Generalizable Results
Findings can be applied to a broader population, as the setting is more representative of everyday life.
:)field exp
More Natural Behavior
Participants are more likely to behave naturally, as they are not in a controlled laboratory setting.
:)field exp
Lower Demand Characteristics
Participants are less likely to respond based on expectations or demands of the researcher, as they are in a natural setting.
:) field experiment
More Opportunities for Data Collection
Allows for collection of data from multiple sources, such as observational data, self-report measures, and physiological measures.
:(field experiment
Difficulty in Controlling Variables
Many variables cannot be controlled in a natural setting, which can affect the outcome of the experiment.
:(field experiment
Ethical Considerations
Participants may be exposed to unintended risks or harm, and obtaining informed consent can be challenging.
:(field experiment
External Invalidity
The results may be influenced by external factors unrelated to the independent variable, such as confounding variables.
:(field experiment
Low Internal Validity
The results may not be due to the independent variable, but to other unknown factors.
:(field experiment
Limited Generalizability
The results may only be applicable to a specific population or culture.