self report methods

• self report 


  Asking a participant about their thoughts and behaviour and recording their answers.

  Self-reports can be used in a variety of different ways:

  • Questionnaires
  • Diary entries
  • Interviews
  • Psychometric tests
• improving validity 


  • Removing leading/unclear/poorly operationalised/socially desirable/recall questions (can find which ones these are using a pilot study)
  • Adding open questions with qualitative data.Adding closed questions to allow for easy quantitative data collection
  • Add filler questions unrelated to the study so that participants don’t figure out the aim and display demand characteristics
  • Ensuring answers will be anonymous and confident.
• improving reliability 


  • Training interviewers so they are standardised.
  • Providing standardised questions.
  • Adding closed questions with quantifiable data.
  • Using split test/test-retest methods.
• structured interview


  Interview where the questions are fixed and the interviewer reads them out and records the responses
• evaluation: structured interview 


  • The structured nature means that the interview can easily be repeated to increase internal reliability
  • Structured interviews can be easily assessed for reliability and improved by removing or changing inconsistent items
  • Interviewer doesn’t require as much training as for semi-structured or unstructured interviews
  • Structured interviews are limited by fixed questions, lack validity.
  • Harder to build rapport with participant, so may not get as much or as high quality information
• semi-structured interview 


  Interview that has some predetermined questions, but the interviewer can develop others in response to answers given by the participant
• evaluation: semi structured interview 


  • Enables the researcher respond more flexibly and so gain more detailed information than from a structured interviews
  • Answers to the set questions allow for analysis
  • Difficult to assess for reliability as questions asked can alter, difficult to repeat exactly as questions alter, so may lack internal validity
• unstructured interview 


  Also known as a clinical interview, there are no fixed questions just general aims and it is more like a conversation
• evaluation: unstructured interview 


  • Requires highly trained interviewer to stay on track
  • Only some people willing to participate, so not representative of the population
  • Participants may be affected by biases such as social desirability or leading questions
  • Greater risk of low internal validity and demand characteristics having more of an effect as difficult to replicate the interview exactly due to differing questions each time
• general evaluation of interviews 


  • Can generate quantitative data if questions are closed and qualitative if they are open
  • Researcher bias can occur. The expectations of the interviewer may alter the way the respondent answers questions.
  • Subjectivity (questions responses can be open to interpretation depending on intonation and body language used and who witnesses them).

  Social desirability bias- Participants’ behaviour is distorted as they modify this in order to be seen in a positive ligh
• questionnaire 


  set of written questions that participants fill in themselves
• qualitative data 


  Descriptive information that is expressed in words
• quantitative data 


   Information that can be measured and written down with numbers.
• closed questions 


   Questions where there are fixed choices of responses e.g. yes/no. They generate quantitative data
• types of closed question


  • checklist questions
  • ranking questions
  • likert/verbal rating scale (indication of how much you agree with statement)
  • rating scale
  • psychometric questionnaires -  A series of standardised closed questions, to measure a mental characteristic
• evaluation of closed questions 


  • quick and easy for participants to answer.
  • more likely to be structured in a certain order, high in internal reliability.
  • time efficiency, large samples can be collected increasing generalisability.
  • Quantitative data easy to analyse e.g. find median, modes and draw graphs.
  • Lacks detail, participants can’t express opinions fully, lacks validity.
  • Risk of response bias e.g. saying yes to everything.
  • The score for all participants on each question is only nominal data so only the mode can be calculated. Limited analysis.
• open questions 


  Questions where there is no fixed response and participants can give any answer they like. They generate qualitative data.
• evaluation of open questions 


  • They produce qualitative data, giving participants an opportunity to fully express their opinions, thus increasing validity.
  • All info is analysed so information is not lost by averaging answers – increasing validity.
  • Qualitative data is time consuming to analyse as themes need to be identified.
  • Interpretation of data is subjective, leading to bias. This can lead to issues of validity. In addition, the inconsistency of interpreting data can lead to low inter-rater reliability.
  • Findings are based on individuals so may lack generalisability.
• general evaluation of questionnaires 


  • relatively cheap and quick way to gather a large amount of data.
  • can be completed privately, responses may be more likely to be honest.
  • Social desirability , where participants give incorrect responses to try to put themselves in a socially acceptable light. Can be solved by adding in easy filler questions.
  • may be flawed if some questions are leading
  • If questions are misunderstood, participants completing questionnaires privately can't get clarification on the meaning, so may complete them incorrectly.
• case studies 


  In-depth investigation of a single person, group or event, where data is gathered from a variety of sources and by using several different methods (e.g. observations & interviews).
• evaluation: case studies 


  • Provides detailed (rich qualitative) information.
  • Provides insight for further research.
  • Permitting investigation of otherwise impractical (or unethical) situations.
  • Can’t generalize the results to the wider population.
  • Researchers' own subjective feeling may influence the case study (researcher bias).
  • Difficult to replicate.
  • Time consuming.