Paper 2

• Aim 


  A broad statement of the purpose of the research
• experimental / alternative hypothesis


  testable statement that a piece of research attempts to support or reject
• directional hypothesis


  predicts that IV will affect DV in 1 specific direction, only 1 outcome
• non directional hypothesis


  predicts IV will affect DV but no specific direction for results. Allows multiple outcomes
• Null hypothesis


  no causal relationship between variables, any relationship is due to chance
• Independant variable

  manipulated and controlled to see how it affects behaviour
• Dependant


  measured, affected by IV
• Operationalisation


  give a precise definition of behaviour being manipulated/observed . Both IV and DV operationalised, allowing repetition and reliability as it is an agreed value attributed to measurement
• co-variables


  2 variables that may or may not change with each other
• extraneous variables


  variables that aren’t measured but affect results of ALL pps equally, reduces internal validity and external reliability
• confounding variables

  variables in a study that aren’t measured that affect SOME pps results,creating inconsistency

  need to be controlled to make it a fair test and maximise reliability.
• reliability


  whether findings of a study produce consistent results
• internal reliability


  the extent to which a test or measure is consistent within itself ie standardised procedures
• external reliability


  consistent results over several occasions
• ways of assessing reliability

  • split half method
  • test- retest method
  • Inter-rater reliability
• The split half method 


  split pps test results in half and see if they got the same/ similar scores in both halves. Yes = high internal reliability. No = low and questions need to be redesigned
• test retest method


  Testing and retesting same pps over time on same test and comparing scores, if thy are the same, the test has external reliability
• inter-rater reliability


  2 o more psychologists produce consistent results by using a standardised procedure, agreed coding system or correlation of their data
• validity


  whether findings paint a true picture amd whether study is measuring what it claims to measure
• internal validity


  findings accurate and effective on DV caused by IV , study measures what it intends to measure- confounding variables controlled
• external validity 


  whether study paints true picture of real life ( mundane realism)
• researcher bias


  researcher directly or indirectly influences results of study, through designing it or how it is conducted
• demand characteristics


  confounding variable where pps unconsciously work out aims and act differently
• social desirability bias


  Pps give response they think shows them in the best possible light: not a true reflection of their real thoughts/ feelings
• ways of assessing validity

  • face validity
  • content validity
  • predictive validity
  • concurrent validity
  • construct validity
• face validity


  least sophisticated measure . The test appears at face value to measure what it claims to be and is subjective. If purpose is clear, it has high face validity.
• content validity


  checks method of measuring behaviour is accurate, deciding whether it is a fair test. Ask an expert in that field to check if test is valid.
• predictive validity


  degree to which test accurately predicts future outcome on more broadly related topic. Do findings apply in more different and varied situations?
• concurrent validity


  Validate measurement by comparing with an established measurement with known validity Similar results on both tests=new test has concurrent validity, if not test has to be redesigned and retested
• construct validity


  extent to which test measure intended definitions of overall behaviour. Most sophisticated, looking at whether overall result reflects the behaviour as a whole
• lab environment


  lab is equipped for scientific research/ measurement. Conditions and variable controlled and procedures standardised
• advantages of lab environment

  greater control over confounding and extraneous variables, so easier to replicate increasing reliability

  Can use large equipment that’s not available in the field
• disadvantages of lab environments

  artificial environment lowers ecological validity

  some behaviours not studied in a lab, limits use
• in the field


  research outside of lab, in a natural setting. Could be interviews, observations, field experiments
• advantages of in the field research


  Minimises artificial nature, pps behave more naturally- increase ecological validity

  More behaviours studied in the field, and less chance of demand characteristics / social desirability bias affecting results
• Disadvantages of in the field research


  lower control over confounding and extraneous variables = lower reliability

  can be unethical if pps unaware ( lack consent)
• online research


  pps accesssed via internet , often involving questionnaires but can be experimental
• advantages of online research


  large number of pps can be accessed from many cultures

  cost effective and data analysis is quick as responses already in electronic format
• disadvantages of online research


  ethics: valid consent, most people wont read term and conditions. Debriefing more difficult

  Limited methods, mostly surveys and self report, research may be subject to socia;l desirability bias
• laboratory experiment


  Research involving manipulation of IV in artificial lab conditions, pps randomly allocated each condition