Research Methods

• Natural Observation


  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 informed consent has been given.
• Participant Observation


  Where the observer becomes a participative part of the group being studied, so they can provide a first-hand account 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

  There will be 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

  1. Participant - individual participant differences eg age
  2. 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

  1. Please-u-effect
  2. 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)