Investigation 2

• Variables

  1) stroop test performance, operationalised as the time taken, in seconds, to complete the test.

  2) reading speed, operationalised as time taken, in seconds to read a 250-word article.
• Hypothesis

  Alternative- significant relationship between reading speed and stroop performance.

  Null- no relationship between reading speed and stroop performance

  Non-directional- more appropriate as previous research has operationalised stroop performance as the number of errors made
• Research Locations

  It will take place in a field environment(the college)

  Advantage- behaviour is more natural, increasing internal validity

  Disadvantage- extraneous variables are hard to control
• Methodology

  We used a correlational study

  Advantage- shows strengths of a relationship between two variables

  Disadvantage- doesn't show a cause and effect relationship
• Sampling Method

  We used 14 ppts aged 16-19. We used opportunity sampling

  Advantage-Its quicker/cheaper than other methods like stratified sampling.

  Disadvantage- its unlikely to be representative
• Ethical Issues

  Lack of valid consent- during the briefing ppts aren't made fully aware of the aims. Dealing- we gained presumptive consent from other students

  Psychological harm- ppts may find it embarrassing if they struggle to read aloud. Dealing- debriefing took place afterwards.
• Procedures

  Explain the instructions, let them know when they can start and time them. Then the students completes the reading speed task. Once data is recorded you must read the debrief.
• Descriptive Statistics

  Mean- considers all 14 students scores on the stroop test

  SD- shows the spread of data and whether there are large variations in results.
• Graphical Representation

  We used a scatter diagram which shows a weak-positive correlation. Its appropriate as it gives a visual representation of the relationship between two co-variables.
• Inferential Statistics

  We used Spearmans rank correlation test which looks at correlation, repeathed measure group and ratio.
• Findings and Conclusion

  Findings- our observed was 0.55 which was more than our critical value of 0.46, our results were significant at the p<0.05 level.

  Conclusion- there was a significant association between reading speed and stroop test performance.
• Reliability

  Internal- there's a lack of standardisation, there would have been inconsistencies in measuring performance. Dealing- we used standardised instructions and procedures.

  External- a standardised location wasn't used or recorded. Dealing- a location can be put in place to provide full detail.
• Checking Reliability

  Test-retest : study could be repeated on another occasion. This would allow us to check for consistency in results over time.
• Validity

  Ecological- its a lab experiment so there's a risk of artificial behaviour. Dealing- w used a field environment instead (college).

  Internal- lack of control over confounding variables like noise. Dealing- we conducted test in classroom environments where noise is better controlled.
• Checking Validity

  Content analysis- an expert is asked to look at the stroop test, if they agree that the study is measuring what it intends to then the study is valid.
• Improving Research

  External validity- a stratified sample could be used to make it more representative.

  External reliability- it could be repeated using test-retest

  Internal validity- a double-blind design could be used.