research methods

• Lab experiment


  A type of research method in which the researcher is able to exert high levels of control over what happens as part of the experimental process
• Lab experiments


  • The researcher controls the environmental factors, such as noise and temperature (possible extraneous variables) so that the effects of the independent variable (IV) upon the dependent variable (DV) can be clearly observed and measured
  • Use a standardised procedure to ensure replicability and reliability
  • The same number of participants take part in each condition of the IV
  • Each participant is given the same instructions (apart from instructions regarding the task as this will differ per condition as per the IV)
  • The same task/materials are used as far as is possible given the IV
  • Participants are given the same amount of time to complete the task per condition and across conditions if the IV allows it
  • All variables are kept the same/constant: only the independent variable changes between conditions
  • Keeping all variables constant means the DV can be measured exactly using quantitative data
• Strengths of lab experiments

  • Cause and effect conclusions are more possible than other methods due to the control the researcher is able to exert
  • The use of a standardised procedure means that the research is replicable which increases reliability
  • High internal validity is achieved as the independent variable may be seen to affect the dependent variable without interference from extraneous variables
• Limitations of lab experiments

  • Demand characteristics may be an issue as participants know they are in a study and so may alter their behaviour which impairs the validity of the study
  • This method often lacks ecological validity due to the artificial nature of the procedure
  • This method often lacks mundane realism meaning the results cannot be generalised to real-world behaviour
• Field experiment


  A research method which takes place in a natural setting, away from the lab
• Field experiments


  • The researcher has less control over what happens as part of the experimental process
  • The researcher controls the environment to some extent but they have to allow the fact that many extraneous variables are included in field experiments
  • Still involve the implementation of an IV and DV
  • Can collect quantitative data but there is also more scope for researchers to obtain qualitative data as part of the research process
• Strengths of field experiments

  • Likely to have higher ecological validity as it is a real life setting
  • Participants are less likely to show demand characteristics as they are less likely to know what is expected from them and are often in their 'natural' environment
  • High levels of mundane realism, which means the results are more likely to be able to be generalised to real-world behaviours
• Limitations of field experiments

  • Harder to randomly assign participants and so means it is more likely a change could happen due to participant variables, rather than what the researcher is measuring
  • Harder to control extraneous variables within the experiment, which could change the measurement of the dependent variable
• Natural experiment


  A research method which does not manipulate the IV, it uses naturally-occurring phenomena
• Natural experiments


  • The researcher has less control over what happens as part of the experimental process as they cannot randomly allocate participants to condition (the participants are the conditions e.g. either young/old, trained/untrained)
  • Collect quantitative data
• Strengths of natural experiments

  • Allow research in areas that controlled experiments could not conduct research, this could be due to ethical or cost reasons
  • High external validity as they are conducted in a natural setting with natural behaviours being exhibited
• Limitations of natural experiments

  • Difficult to say there is a cause and effect relationship as too many variables are unable to be controlled so could effect the outcome
  • Lack of reliability as incredibly unlikely to be able to replicate the same situation again to test
• Observation


  A non-experimental technique where observers can only investigate observable behaviours, not infer motive, intention, feeling or thought
• Covert observation


  Participants are observed without their knowledge
• Strengths of covert observation

  • Higher levels of validity as participants are unaware they are being observed which rules out demand characteristics (the observer effect)
• Limitations of covert observation

  • Unethical as does not have participants informed consent
• Overt observation


  Participants are aware that they are being observed
• Limitations of overt observation

  • Social desirability is likely, where participants present their 'best selves' to the researcher
  • Demand characteristics, known as the observer effect, are more likely which impacts the validity of the results
• Participant observation


  The researcher joins the group being observed and becomes involved with them
• Strengths of participant observation

  • The researcher is able to build a rapport with the participants, meaning the participants are more likely to have open conversations and act in a natural way
• Limitations of participant observation

  • The researcher can become too involved with the participants and the interpretation of their behaviour becomes biased as they only see it from the participants' point of view
  • There are ethical considerations with this type of observation such as deception and right to withdraw because the participants may not know that they are being observed, despite the researcher's participation
• Non-participant observation


  The researcher remains separate from the participants and observes and records the participants without taking part in activities or conversations
• Strengths of non-participant observation

  • The researcher is more likely to remain objective whilst observing and recording the participants' behaviour
• Limitations of non-participant observation

  • The researcher is not able to build rapport with the participants and so they are less likely to open up completely or enough to show the full natural behaviours
• Self-reporting techniques


  When the participant reveals personal information about themselves when answering a series of questions, usually collected by questionnaire or interview
• Questionnaire


  • Can have both open and closed questions
  • Open questions allow the participant to write down their own answer and are often seen as having more validity, providing qualitative data
  • Closed questions provide the participant with a selection of answers to choose from, providing quantitative data
• Structured interview


  The interviewer reads out a list of prepared questions for the participant to answer, and does not deviate from the prepared questions
• Strengths of structured interviews


  • The interview does not need to have intensive training to ask the questions
  • The answers are easy to compare as the same questions were asked
• Limitations of structured interviews

  • Response by the participants cannot be followed up with additional questions to add more detail as there is a prescribed list of questions
  • The pre-determined questions may not provide the relevant data required for the investigation
• Unstructured interview


  The interviewer has a topic of interest they want to discuss with the interviewee, with no set list of questions, instead it is an open conversation about the topic
• Strengths of unstructured interviews

  • The interviewer is able to build a rapport with the interviewee, which is more likely to allow for honest answers thus increasing validity
  • Interesting answers can be followed up for more information as there is not a prescribed list of questions
• Limitations of unstructured interviews

  • The interviewer has to be responsive to the participant and ready to come up with suitable questions on the spot
  • Every interview will be different, making comparisons difficult
  • The interviewer will need specific training to ensure that questions, whilst responsive, aren't leading or show bias
• Semi-structured interview


  The interviewer uses a combination of set questions, with the ability to ask extra questions to gather more information
• Strengths of semi-structured interviews

  • Comparison is easier than for an unstructured interview as the same questions are asked for part of the interview
  • The interviewer can gather more information by asking further questions or asking the participant to expand on the answers they have given
  • Rapport can be built as the interviewer can ask more questions and follow up on responses
• Limitations of semi-structured interviews

  • The interviewer has to be responsive to the participant and ready to come up with suitable questions on the spot if they feel that this is necessary
  • The interviewer, as with unstructured interviews, would need specific training to avoid asking leading questions or loaded questions (with bias)
• Sting answers


  • Can be followed up for more information
  • There is not a prescribed list of questions
  • Every interview will be different, making comparisons difficult
• Interviewer


  • Needs specific training to ensure that questions, whilst responsive, aren't leading or show bias
• Semi-Structured Interviews


  The interviewer uses a combination of set questions, with the ability to ask extra questions to gather more information
• Semi-Structured Interviews


  • Allows the interviewer to ask for more information if they feel it would be of benefit
• Strengths of Semi-Structured Interviews

  • Comparison is easier than for an unstructured interview as the same questions are asked for part of the interview
  • The interviewer can gather more information by asking further questions or asking the participant to expand on the answers they have given
  • Rapport can be built as the interviewer can ask more questions and relax the interviewee