clinical: research methods

• Cross-sectional methods


  Useful when researchers want to take a quick 'snapshot of behaviour in a given population in a set period of time
• Cross-sectional studies


  • Usually a large group of people are used in the sample to enable a good 'cross-section' to be studied from the whole target population
  • Conclusions can then be drawn from the data gathered
• Example of a cross-sectional study


  • Crawford et al (2018) - examined the quality and assessment of treatment of physical health problems in people with schizophrenia
• Crawford et al (2018) found that only 53% of people with high blood sugar received an appropriate intervention, and only 20% of people with abnormal cholesterol levels were recorded as receiving appropriate treatment
• Cohort effect


  Different age groups would have been exposed to different social and environmental factors, which could change a study into the development of a mental disorder
• Cross-sectional designs are not good for finding out the cause of something like a mental disorder because they are descriptive research
• Cross-sectional studies are a snapshot at one moment in time, so they are unlikely to include any historical information about a patient, or information about the future
• Cross-sectional studies are useful when researchers want to take a quick snapshot of behaviour in a given population
• An advantage of the cross-sectional method is that a conclusion can be drawn and acted on more rapidly
• Cross-sectional studies are not useful to track development in mental illnesses like schizophrenia over a long period of time
• Cross-cultural research


  Carried out by researchers who want to compare some behaviour or attitude in different cultures
• Cross-cultural research can identify elements of abnormal behaviour that can be attributed to purely biological factors
• Cross-cultural research can reduce the level of ethnocentrism in psychological studies and conclusions and can improve generalisability of psychological research
• Cross-cultural methods aid clinicians' understanding of the cultural factors that they should consider when diagnosing and treating patients from differing cultural groups, especially when the culture of the patient is different from their own
• Participants will be different in different cultures, which can bias the findings
• When conducting research across cultures there is likely to be a conflict between the cultures: values of some or all of the participants and those of the researchers, which can impact the validity of the conclusions
• Luhrmann's study found that participants in the U.S.A were more likely to use diagnostic labels and to report violent commands than those in India and Ghana, who were more likely than the Americans to report rich relationships with their voices and less likely to describe the voices as the sign of a violated mind
• Meta-analysis


  Involves using the findings of different studies, conducted by different researchers, and pooling and reanalysing the data
• Meta-analysis gives an overview of results in one area of study, with a larger sample and more findings, hopefully showing reliability and generalisability
• In clinical psychology, researchers have used meta-analyses to find out about the effectiveness of therapies and treatments across different patient groups
• Example of a study using meta-analysis in clinical psychology

  • Carlsson's study (2000) - combined the results of various neurotransmitter studies to investigate the role of neurotransmitters including dopamine, serotonin and glutamate in schizophrenia
• Strengths of meta-analysis


  • Conclusions can be drawn from a huge sample and from different areas
  • Results can be generalised to a larger population because of the larger and wider sample
  • There is likely to be more accuracy in the analysis because more data are used
  • Quick and cost effective compared with researchers having to undertake all the studies themselves
  • The research generally focuses on using peer-reviewed publications so data has been scrutinised
• Limitations of meta-analysis


  • The researchers are not involved in gathering the data directly, so there may be unidentified issues of reliability and/or validity in the methods of data gathering
  • There is also the possibility of publication bias (only studies which come up in a search will be published) which can impact on the validity of meta-analyses
• Primary data


  Gathered first-hand from source, directly by the researcher
• Example of primary data in clinical psychology

  • Rosenhan (1973) - gathered data from first-hand observations
• Secondary data


  Data that has already been gathered by researchers and is used by others for further research
• Examples of secondary data in clinical psychology

  • Gottesman and Shields (1966) used hospital notes for their twin studies
  • Carlsson et al (2000) gathered data using a literature review
• Strengths of primary data

  • Operationalisation is done with the research in mind, so there is likely to be validity with regard to the aim
  • More credible than secondary data, because they are gathered for the purpose with chosen research method, design etc.
• Weaknesses of primary data

  • Expensive compared with secondary data because data gathered from the start
  • Limited to time, place and number of participants, whereas secondary data can come from different sources to give more range and detail
• Strengths of secondary data

  • Relatively cheap compared with primary data, as they are already collected
  • Can be large quantities of data, so there might be detail
  • Can be from different sources, so there is a possibility of comparing data to check for reliability and validity
• Weaknesses of secondary data

  • Likely to be gathered to suit another aim, so may not be valid for the study
  • When analysed originally to be presented as results, there may have been subjectivity
  • May have been gathered some time before, so not in a relevant time period e.g., cultural change
• Case studies


  Involve studying individuals or small groups with a unique characteristic or experience
• Case studies


  • Researchers will use a variety of different methods to gather information on the group, and then triangulate the data to draw conclusions
  • Often, the evidence gathered will be qualitative, allowing an in-depth analysis of the group being studied
  • The conclusions will be highly valid for the sample being studied as the focus is on 'real life'
• Case studies


  • Researchers will use a variety of different methods to gather information on the group, and then triangulate the data to draw conclusions
  • This will show validity, reliability
• Case studies


  • In clinical psychology, these case studies may be of people with rare symptoms or individual taking part in a specific therapy
• Qualitative data


  Often the evidence gathered will be qualitative, allowing an in-depth analysis of the group being studied
• Conclusions from case studies

  Will be highly valid for the sample being studied as the focus is on 'real life'
• Triangulation


  Using multiple sources of data to enhance the credibility of a research story
• Case study procedure


  Prospective case study: Carol's progress over 3 years of CBT and follows up her progress 6 months after the therapy and again a year after theory
• Measures used in the case study

  • Psychosocial functioning (Role Functioning Scale)
  • Goal Attainment Scale (GAS)
  • Hospitalisation
  • Global Pathology Index (GPI)