methodologies

• Laboratory experiment


  Conducted under controlled, artificial conditions. Researcher manipulates the independent variable (IV) whilst measuring the dependent variable (DV). Conducted under both experimental and a control conditions. Researcher randomly allocates participants to experimental or control conditions.
• Laboratory experiment


  • High level of control; can infer that the IV caused the DV. Easy to replicate so that reliability can be checked.
• Laboratory experiment


  • Problems of demand characteristics. Low ecological validity.
• Field experiment


  Conducted in a natural environment. IV is still manipulated by the researcher and the DV is still measured. Participants are unaware that they are being researched.
• Field experiment


  • High in ecological validity. Fewer demand characteristics.
• Field experiment


  • Unethical: participants are unaware of the research. Extraneous variables affect results.
• Quasi-experiment


  Not a 'true' experiment because the researcher has not deliberately manipulated an IV, and participants are not randomly allocated to an experimental or a control condition.
• Natural experiment


  When a research does not deliberately manipulate an IV, they take advantage of a 'naturally occurring' IV. The DV of a natural experiment may be tested in a laboratory, in the field or online.
• Quasi-experiments and natural experiments

  • Allows research where the IV can't be manipulated for practical or ethical reasons; a range of behaviours can be investigated. Allows researchers to investigate 'real' problems, such as the effects of a disaster on health, which can help more people in more situations.
• Quasi-experiments and natural experiments

  • Cannot demonstrate causal relationships because the IV isn't manipulated directly so we cannot be sure that the IV caused the DV. Threat to internal validity due to there being less control of extraneous variables that could be the reason for the DV rather than the IV.
• Participant observation


  The researcher takes part in the research, joining in with those being observed. The researcher becomes part of the group and does not reveal who they are.
• Participant observation


  • Less chance of demand characteristics. Enables research of people who would otherwise be very difficult to observe.
• Participant observation


  • Observer bias may occur. Unreliable findings because it is difficult to take notes during the observation; data relies on memory.
• Non-participant observation


  The observer doesn't take part in the action, but instead watches and makes notes from a distance. The participants are not aware that they are being observed.
• Non-participant observation


  • Less chance of observer bias. Researchers can see how participants behave rather than relying on self-reports; may produce more valid and reliable findings.
• Non-participant observation


  • Observer bias: it is difficult to make judgments on thoughts and feelings of participants when they are being watched. Unethical because participants do not always know they are being observed.
• Content analysis


  A type of observational study. Written or verbal material such as magazines, television programmes, websites, advertisements etc. are analysed. The sample is the artefact(s) being analysed. The researcher has to create a coding system, which breaks down the information into categories and a tally is taken each time the material fits a theme.
• Content analysis


  • The artefacts being analysed already exist, so less chance of demand characteristics. Can be replicated by others as long as the artefacts are available to other people.
• Content analysis


  • Observer bias can affect validity of findings; different observers might interpret the meanings of the categories in the coding system differently. Cannot draw cause and effect relationships because the origin of the artefacts is usually unknown.
• Structured interview


  The interviewer has a pre-prepared set of questions that are asked in a fixed order. Pre-determined questions are used to elicit a verbal response. Similar to a questionnaire that is answered by participants either face-to-face or over the telephone with the interviewer, there is no deviation from the original questions.
• Structured interview


  • The same questions are used every time which makes results easy to analyse. Replicable, so more reliable because the same questions can be asked in the same way.
• Structured interview


  • Can be restrictive because there is no chance to ask further questions. Doesn't allow for 'spontaneous questions', which may mean the interviewer is less responsive to the participant.
• Questionnaire


  A set of written questions where answers are analysed by the researcher. Questionnaires can produce quantitative or qualitative data or a mixture of both. Traditionally they have been paper/pen based, but more recently psychologists are using on-line options.
• Questionnaire


  • Can be used to assess psychological variables that may not be obvious by just observing someone. Data can be collected from a large group of participants more quickly than interviewing them.
• Questionnaire


  • There is no guarantee that the participant is telling the truth. Different participants may interpret the same question in different ways.
• Semi-structured interview


  Begins with a general aim and a few pre-determined questions but subsequent questions develop based on the answers given by the participant. Sometimes called a clinical interview because it is a bit like the kind of interview you might have with a doctor.
• Semi-structured interview


  • More qualitative information can be gathered by the interviewer because they tailor the questions to the respondent's responses. High validity because participants have the opportunity to fully express their true feelings/views.
• Semi-structured interview


  • The same questions are not used every time; results are difficult to analyse, and it is difficult to identify patterns and trends. Not replicable due to different questions asked each time and therefore unreliable.
• Correlation


  Used to analyse the relationship or association between two continuous variables (co-variables)
• Correlation


  • A scatter diagram/scatter graph can be used to illustrate correlations
  • The closer the coefficient is to 0, the weaker the coefficient. The closer the coefficient is to 1 (be that +1 or -1) the stronger it is
• Strengths of Correlation


  • Shows both the direction and strength of a relationship which can then be used to make predictions about behaviour
  • Can be used when experiments are inappropriate
• Weaknesses of Correlation


  • Only shows whether there is a relationship; not how or why co variables are related
  • Difficult to establish cause and effect using a correlation
• Case Study


  • In-depth study of a unique individual, small group or event
  • Uses many different research methods, such as interviews, questionnaires, or observations in order to get the required depth
  • Most data collected is qualitative, but it can sometimes be quantitative
  • It is a holistic study and is usually longitudinal
• Strengths of Case Study

  • Produces rich qualitative data which is of high ecological validity because it is a study of real-life situation
  • Allows researchers to study cases they couldn't practically or ethically manipulate in an experiment
• Weaknesses of Case Study

  • Researcher bias; researchers can become too involved and lose their objectivity
  • It is difficult to generalise findings beyond the individual/group studied; the sample is too small (low population validity)
• Self-Reports


  Methods that involve the participant reporting information about themselves. They can include interviews, questionnaires, inventories, diaries
• Strengths of Self-Reports


  • Offer an insight into why people behave as they do, so there is less need for researchers to guess reasons for behaviours
  • Qualitative information can be gathered
• Weaknesses of Self-Reports


  • Possible risk of social desirability bias
  • People may not be able to recall accurately, especially if self-report method asks for details over an extended period
• Quantitative Data


  Data that can be measured numerically by the psychologist, so that statistical analysis can be completed e.g. scores on an IQ test
• Strengths of Quantitative Data

  • Data is easy to analyse
  • Easier to collect data from a large group of participants