Strengths and weaknesses

• What is one strength of Grant et al (1998) evaluation regarding extraneous variables?

  Control of extraneous variables increases validity
• How does controlling extraneous variables affect the results in Grant et al (1998)?

  It leads to more accurate results about memory
• What is the age range of participants in Grant et al (1998)?

  Ages 17-52
• Why is a wide age range in the sample beneficial for Grant et al (1998)?

  It makes results more generalizable to wider population
• What aspect of the procedures in Grant et al (1998) contributes to reliability?

  Standardised procedures and equipment
• What ethical consideration is mentioned in Grant et al (1998)?

  Good ethics, including consent
• What makes the study ecologically valid according to Grant et al (1998)?

  Students doing student activities
• What is a weakness of the independent measures design in Grant et al (1998)?

  Individual differences affect results
• How do age differences in the sample affect validity in Grant et al (1998)?

  Different people may have varying memory abilities
• What is the final sample size in Grant et al (1998)?

  39 participants
• Why is a small sample size a weakness in Grant et al (1998)?

  It makes generalization to target population harder
• What are confounding variables mentioned in Grant et al (1998)?


  Fatigue from the second test
• What is a potential issue with extraneous variables in Grant et al (1998)?

  Study done in participants' bedrooms lacks consistency