Recording participants' natural behaviour in their usual environment
Controlled Observation
Researches control conditions such as where and when the observation occurs, who participates, and the circumstances with standardised procedures.
Covert Observation
Where participants are unaware they are being observed. Their behaviour is observed in a public place and recorded secretly by the researcher
Overt Observation
Where the participant knows they are the focus of an observation and informedconsent has been given.
Participant Observation
Where the observer becomes a participativepart of the group being studied, so they can provide a first-handaccount of behaviour
Non-participant Observation
Where the researcher remains seperate from the group they are studying
Structured Observation
Used to gather quantitative data by focusing on behaviours important to the investigation. Conducted using a pre-determined list of behaviours as a checklist
Unstructured Observation
Researcher collects rich, detailed, qualitative data wherein they note everything they see - appropriate for smaller scale investigations
Event Sampling
The sampling of the frequency of a particular event or behaviour eg through tallying. Valuable for behaviours that transpire infrequently
Time Sampling
Recording behaviour within predetermined time frames: for a set duration or at specific time intervals eg every 3 minutes. Efficiently reduces required amount of observations but may be unrepresentative
Evaluation: Natural Observation
Reduces interference
High ecological validity
High generalisability
Extraneous variables
Difficult to replicate - can't test for reliability
Evaluation: Controlled Observation
Easy to replicate + test for reliability
Extraneous variables less problematic
Reduced ecological validity
Demand characteristics may be an issue
Evaluation: Covert Observation
Removes risk of demand characteristics
Lack of informed consent creates ethical issues
Evaluation: Overt Observation
Ethical as informed consent is given
Demand characteristics are an extraneous variable
Reduced ecological validity
Evaluation: Participant Observation
Valuable insight increases the validity of results
Risk of identification with group leading to blurred lines and "going native"
Cannot immediately record data - could lose objectivity
Evaluation: Non-participant Observation
Data can be recorded at time of event
Allows for objective psychological distance from study - less risk of 'going native' or identification
Valuable insight may be lost, reducing validity
Evaluation: Structured Observation
Quantitative data is easy to analyse and compare
Recording of data is easier and more systematic
Reduces observer bias
Lacks detail and depth of qualitative data
Evaluation: Unstructured Observation
Qualitative data is more detailed
Data is harder to record, analyse, and compare
Potential for observer bias (only recording what they notice in the moment)
Longtitudinal
Takes place over long period of time
Strengths of Case Studies
Rich and detailed
Often longitudinal - allowing for observation of changes
Use several methods increasing validity
May highlight a need for further research
Natural studies allow for investigations with would otherwise be unethical
Weaknesses of Case Studies
Generalisation often problematic
Researchers may be biased
Difficult to replicate and therefore test for reliability
Very time consuming
Directional Hypothesis
Clearly states difference anticipated
Non-directional hypothesis
Only states that there will be a difference, but doesn't specify how so, as there is no previous research
Operationalisation
Stating how we will measure something and the units
How to start a hypothesis
Therewillbe a _____
(increase, correlation, change etc)
Repeated Measures
Same participants take part in each condition of the IV
Independent Groups
Different participants allocated to two or more experimental groups representing different levels of the IV
Repeated Measures Eval
Strengths:
Good control of participant variables
Fewer participants needed
Weaknesses:
Demand characteristics may occur if participants guess aim of experiment
Order of conditions may cause order effects (bias)
Independent Groups Eval
Strengths:
Avoids order effects as each participant only partakes in one test
Less time consuming
Weaknesses:
Need more participants
No control of participants variables
Matched Pairs
Participants are matched for similar traits such as age and IQ, then one does condition A and the other condition B
Matched Pairs Eval
Strengths:
Some control of participant variables
Avoids demand characteristics and order effects
Weaknesses:
Very time consuming - less economical
Cannot control all participant variables
Counter balancing in repeated measures
Half participants to condition A then B, others do B then A - controls for order effects
Types of extraneous variable
Participant - individual participant differences eg age
Situational - aspects of environment affecting DV eg noise
Confounding Variables
Extraneous variables which also vary with IV
eg one group coincidentally older - becomes another IV
Types of demand characteristics
Please-u-effect
Screw-u-effect
Investigator Effects
Investigator's behaviour affects DV
eg leading questions
How could we minimise extraneous/confounding variables?
Randomisation - eg of participant groups or order of conditions
Standardisation - Using the same formalised procedures for all ppts
Lab Experiment
Conducted in highly controlled environment
Natural Experiment
Researcher takes advantage of previously existing variable
Field Experiment
Independent variable is controlled but manipulated in an everyday setting (ppt's natural environment)