research methods

• strength of lab experiments

  lab experiments allow a cause and effect relationship to be established. this is due to the use of controls and the objective nature of the research. therefore lab experiments are high in internal validity. furthermore, the use of standardised procedure means that the research is replicable which increases the reliability
• limitations of lab experiments

  the use of artificial tasks results in a lack of ecological validity. for example, if participants are performing tasks in an unfamiliar setting this does not reflect how they might behave in real conditions. this makes the findings difficult to generalise beyond the lab setting.

  demand characteristics may limit the generalisability of the findings because as participants know they are in a study they may alter their behaviour. this means that the external validity of the study is lowered.
• strengths of field experiments

  the degree of artificiality if reduced because the research is conducted in real settings. for example, if participants fell more comfortable in the setting this means that their behaviour is likely to reflect their behaviour outside of the research parameters. therefore this makes field experiments high in external validity. furthermore, participants are less likely to experience demand characteristics due to the more relaxed and natural environment which hightens the validity of the findings.
• limitations of field experiments

  extraneous variables are more likely to interfere because the researcher cannot control all extraneous variables due to the lessening of control possible with field experiments. this means that reliability is reduced. furthermore it is difficult to replicate field experiments due to the nature of the method.
• strengths of natural experiments

  they allow the researcher to investigate topics which would otherwise be unethical. this means that natural experiments are high in ethical validity.

  natural experiments are high in ecological validity. for example the participants report on events and experiences that they have personal knowledge of, the researcher does not attempt to control of procedure. this elevates mundane realism.
• limitations of natural experiments

  causal relationships are difficult to determine due to the array of variables at play. this is a key limitation of research which imposes no controls on the procedure. this means that the researcher cannot be sure as to what effeect the phenomena have had on the participants. they have to rely on accounts of participants themselves. therefore this reduces the reliability of natural experiments.
• strengths of quasi experiments

  due to the lack of manipulation of the IV the results could be said to be higher in external validity. for example, comparing the performance of young versus older people on a memory test gives insight into the effect of age on recall. this is important because comparing the ability to identify emotion based on empathy training gives insight as to how this training might benefit other groups or professions.
• limitations of quasi experiments

  lacks internal validity because there may be other factors which could explain the results. for example, teachers who have been trained in empathy my work in a school in which emotional intelligence is valued. this means that they would already be at an advantage in an emotion-recognition task. furthermore as participants cannot be randomly allocated to condition this can lead to participant variables, making it difficult to determine casusality.
• Strength of independent groups design and random allocation

  The use of independent groups means that demand characteristics are less likely to act as a confounding variable. For example as participants only take part in one condition of the IV they are less likely to guess the aim of the study and act accordingly. This is important as it increases the internal validity of the study.
• strength of independent groups design and random allocation

  order effects are eliminated as participants only take part in one condition. for example participants will not become tired, bored or overly practiced at the task. this means that the results have an increased validity.
• limitation of independent groups design and random allocation

  participant variables may affect the validity of the findings. for example, it more participants with a particular characteristic are all randomly allocated to one condition then this presents an unfair playing field. this is important are the results are therefore not a true measure of the IVs effect on the DV.
• limitation of independent groups design and random allocation

  more participants are needed. this may cause logistical issues if there are enough people available to take part in the research. this is important as each condition of the IV may have a lower number than if a repeated measures design was used which in turn affects the reliability of the findings due to the small sample size.
• strength of repeated measures design and counterbalancing

  participant variables are not an issue with a repeated measures design. this is because each participants performance in one condition is measured against their performance in another condition so they act as their own control group. this is important as it increases the internal validity of the study.
• strength of repeated measures design and counterbalancing

  fewer participants are needed. this is because each participant generates two scores it cuts down the need for a larger sample. this is important as it is less problematic for the researcher to find sufficient participants willing to take part in the research
• limitation of repeated measures design and counterbalencing

  demand characteristics may become a confounding variable. for example as participants take part in both conditions of the IV they may guess the aim of the study and act accordingly. this is important as it decreases the internal validity of the study.
• limitation of repeated measures design and counterbalancing

  if not controlled, order effects may lower the validity of the study. for example participants may become tired, bored or overly practiced at the task. this is a limitation as the research cannot be confident that the IV has affected the DV or that the results were due to other factors.
• strength of matched pairs design

  the matched pairs factors out individual differences as a confounding variable. this is because the researcher has found a match per participant. this is important as each participants performance is compared to someone similar. therefore participant variables are controlled to some extent, thus increasing reliability.
• strength of matched pairs design

  as participant take only in one condition of the IV the chance of demand characteristics is reduced. this is because each participant is only tested once. this is important as they are less likely to guess the aim of the research. therefore the validity of the study is increased.
• limitation of matched pairs design

  matching is difficult and time-consuming. for example it is often impossible to match the participants across all of the criteria, epecially when the unmatched characteristic could be important to the results of the research. this is important as even well-matched participants could have different levels of motivation, skills or ability. therefore the lack of consistency such as this lowers the reliability of the study.
• limitation of matched pairs design

  if one participant drops out of the research then the researcher ha to find someone very similar to replace them. this is problematic and could slow down the research process. therefore funding could be removed if there is a timeline
• strength of random sampling

  random sampling eliminates researcher bias because the research has n control over who is selected to be in the sample. this is important as it raises the validity of the findings. furthermore, using a random sample means that the study results should be fairly represented. therefore the findings can be generalised to the target population.
• limitation of random sampling

  can be time-consuming and impractical. for example it is not always possible to get access to all the information on a target population. this is important as not everyone selected for the sample at want to take part in the study. furthermore, random sampling can result in a non-representative sample. this is because of the nature of the technique therefore the sample will be unbalanced.
• Strength of opportunity sampling

  A quick and easy way of obtaining participants for a study. For example as people as have been approached and agreed to take part this is more likely to mean that the research process runs smoothly. this is important as having an unwilling or resistant participant could damage the validity of the findings.
• Limitation of opportunity sampling

  it is not possible to generalise from an opportunity sample as the sample only represents those who were available and willing to participate at the time. furthermore, the researcher may be prone to unconscious bias when they approach people to take part in the study. for example they may only approach the people they feel comfortable with.
• strength of volunteer sampling

  this technique is quick, easy and cost effective. this is important as it is one of the most used techniques used by psychologists. furthermore, participants are likely to be willing and enthusiastic about the research because they have made a conscious decision to take part in the research. therefore they are less likely to jeopardise the study and its results.
• limitation of volunteer sampling

  the technique is prone to volunteer bias. this is because the results are not easy to generalise a volunteer participants often have personality traits in common. furthermore volunteers are often eager to please. this tendency may give demand characteristics, therefore affecting the validity of the study.
• strength of naturalistic observation

  participants are unaware they are being observed. for example they are observed going about their daily activities. this is important as it means that their behaviour is natural and unforced. therefore the technique is high in ecological validity.
• limitation of naturalistic observation

  there are ethical concerns because participants are unaware they are being observed. for example, participants cannot give informed consent or the right to withdraw and it may not be possible to debrief them. this means that naturalistic observations may lack ethical validity.
• limitation of naturalist observation

  cannot be replicated due to the nature of the method. this makes it difficult to apply scientific rigour to them as no variables are controlled. this is important as the method may be overly subjective.
• strengths of controlled observation

  replicable procedures can be set up with adherence to more to a scientific method. for example the researcher may manipulate and IV. this is important as participants are tested using the same standards and materials. therefore the method has good reliability. furthermore, if more than one researcher is used throughout the study there is a high level of inter-observer reliability.
• strength of controlled observation

  the researcher can be more confident of a cause and effect relationship with a controlled observation. for example, in the Bobo Doll experiment only the children who had observed the aggressive model performed imitative acts on the Bobo Doll. this is important as it supports the validity of the researcher’s hypothesis.
• limitation of controlled observation

  the use of artificial tasks in a controlled observation means the observations are low in ecological validity. for example, Ainswoth’s strange situation placed a mother and baby in an unfamiliar environment including a stranger. this is important as both mother and baby may have been responding in ways which did not truly represent their attachment style.
• limitation of controlled observation

  demand characteristics may impair a controlled observation. for example the children in Bandura’s study may simply have been aggressive because that’s what they thought was expected of them. this is important as it would lower the validity of the findings. therefore it would not be a true effect of the IV on the DV.
• strength of covert observation

  as the researcher is hidden from the participants this means the behaviour being observed is more likely to be real and uncontrolled. this is important as this type of observation is high in ecological validity.
• strength of covert observation

  as participants are unaware of the researcher they may behave in ways which would not necessarily emerge if they knew they were on display. this is important as the covert nature of observation means that people are unguarded and open in their responses. therefore the validity of the findings is increased.
• limitation of covert observation

  it is problematic if a researcher wants to replicate a covert observational study. for example, Rosenhan’s observation of metal hospital patients could not be relicated due to intrusive and unethical nature of the study
• Strength of overt observation

  Ethics can be preserved as the researcher makes themselves known to the participants, who are aware they are being observed. For example zimbardo’s study was an overt observation and the participants knew they were being observed. This is important as knowledge of the overt nature of the observation meant that the participants could more easily exercise their right to withdraw as there was no pretence that this was real life.
• Limitations of overt observation

  participants are aware they are being observed and that their behaviour is being measured which could risk demand characteristics. this is important as participants could be trying too hard in the research. therefore this damages the validity of the findings.
• limitation of overt observation

  overt observations may suffer from researcher bias. for example, the researcher may set up the observation schedule and tasks to align too closely with their hypothesis. this is important as the researcher has succumbed to confirmation bias. therefore they are striving to look for behaviours which support their hypothesis rather than keeping an open mind.
• strength of participant observation

  participant observations mean that the researcher can get fully involved with the group that they are observing. this is important as it increases the validity of the study as access to real thoughts, feelings and conversation is possible.