A-Level Psychology - PAPER 2 - Research Methods Part 2

decided BEFORE content analysis using pre-existing coding units

decided AFTER you have viewed the material

LARGE AMOUNTS OF QUALITATIVE DATA QUICKLY - more representative results

EASY TO TEST FOR RELIABILITY - inter-rater tests - more objective

BIAS - researcher chooses coding units - reduces internal validity

MAY NOT BE ACCURATELY ANALYSED - behaviour that does not fit coding unit will be ignored - reduces internal validity

in-depth study over time of a 'case' which is usually an individual or small group

CLIVE WEARING

contracted Herpes Simplex virus

attacked the brain

unable to process new memories

unable to control emotions

RICH DATA - provide valuable new data

ETHICS - privation

RELIABILITY - unlikely to be replicated - relies on pps memory being accurate

SUBJECTIVE - relationships may be established - biased - not be a true reflection

small scale study - make sure materials / procedures are suitable

materials

timings

instructions

behavioural checklist

covert position

cctv

inter-observer ratings

questions

| - recording method

makes sure observations are reliable

| - saves time and money

group of people who share a set of characteristics

| - large

subset of the target population

representative of target population

| - larger the sample the more accurate (not always)

selecting those who are readily available

going to the common room to look for students

researcher bias - researcher chooses sample

unlikely - everyone who doesn't have science will be in the common room

all the members of the target population have an equal chance of being selected

pulling names from a hat

free from researcher bias

should be generaliseable but there is a chance you get a majority of males / females

putting pps in an order and selecting every nth from the list

selecting every 5th name from the register

free from researcher bias

should be representative but some small groups e.g. language students may be missed

same proportion of people in the target population will be represented in the sample

Target population = 50% male / 50% female

| Sample = 50% male / 50% female

free from researcher bias

most generalisable because all groups will be represented

place an advert asking for volunteers

puting an advert in a food magazine to attract chefs

volunteer bias - they are choosing to take part so it is likely they are all interested in the topic being researched

unlikely - not be representative of all types of people

general statement

what is being investigated

developed from previous theories

an investigation into whether the level of processing involved affects whether the information is remembered

formulated after the aim

| - prediction about the outcome

states there will no difference / correlation

when an experimental method has been carried out and there is an IV and a DV

when there is no IV or DV e.g. correlation / observation

predicts the direction

more / less / greater

lots of previous research

does not predict the direction

| - little existing research

the investigator should inform all pps of the objectives

inform pps of all aspects of the research

safeguarding for those with special needs

unacceptable to withhold information

| - intentional deception should be avoided where possible

pps must not be harmed (physiological or psychological)

pps can withdraw at any time

results can be withdrawn

should not be told they cannot withdraw

pps should leave as entered

researcher should discuss their experience

re-explain aims / objectives

any information gained must remain confidential

| - pps have the right to know their data will remain confidential

topic

expected to do

anything that might affect willingness to participate

confidential

withdraw

place to sign

place for questions

thank you

specific hypothesis

what you expect to find

withdraw

how to contact you

source of support

questions

give full debriefing

pps told what their results will be used for

pps have right to withdraw data

pps should be given a consent letter

similar group of people are asked if the experiment is acceptable

pps give consent to a number of studies

pps are asked for consent (during debriefing) having already taken part

pps should be reassured their behaviour is normal

| - may require counselling

personal data must be protected

| - pps real names must not be used e.g. numbers

researcher ways pros against cons

| - may be looked at from pp point of view

approve any study before it begins

| - consider possible ethical issues and how the researcher could deal with them

psychology papers under INDEPENDENT SCRUTINY

| - consider validity, significance and originality

both the researcher and the reviewer are known to each other

the reviewer known the researcher

neither the researcher nor the reviewer knows who the other is

HIGH QUALITY - highest quality of research

CONTRIBUTION - important contribution to the scientific field

GENUINE - refers to relevant research by other psychologists

INTEGRITY - allow the reviewer to research the issue OR the work has already been plagiarised

BIAS TOWARDS POSITIVE FINDINGS - 'file-drawer problem'

TIME CONSUMING - months to review and send back with suggestions, can take years if adjustments need to be made

consistency

test - retest method / inter - observer reliability

person is given same test / interview etc but a few weeks later (long enough so pp doesn't remember answer)

outcome should be similar every time

correlation can be carried out between the scores

checks to see each observer is interpreting the behavioural categories in the same way

measure the extent to which DIFFERENT OBSERVERS get SIMILAR RESULTS for the SAME PPS

sets of results are correlated

extent to which a measure varies from one use to another

extent to which a measure is consistent with itself

test-retest method

variables are operasionalised

tight control of extraneous variables

clearly described materials

in-depth method section

standardised instructions

inter-observer reliability

multiple observers (good training)

coding system

clear behavioural checklist

filming behaviour

split-half method

pilot study

check questions are non-ambiguous

trained interviewers

measure the extent to which all part of the test contribute equally to what is being measured

accuracy

what goes on inside the study

| - sees if the researcher tested what they intended to test

face validity

| - concurrent validity

tests internal validity

| - whether at face value the study appears to measure what it should have done

tests internal validity

| - compares new measures against previously validated measures

concerned with factors outside the study

| - the extent to which the findings can be generalised

ecological validity

| temporal validity

extent to which we can generalise to other time periods

| e. g. is a 1950s study applicable to behaviour today ?

operationalise variables

control extraneous variables

adapt IV or DV

change sampling technique

replication with different sample will improve population validity

making IV and DV true to real life

multiple observers

well trained observers

validated coding system

check behavioural checklist

observe as many people as possible

covert observation

adjust behavioural checklist

questions should be a valid representation of the behaviour being studied

accessible e.g. complete online

| - updated to suit contemporary society

objectivity

theory construction

hypothesis testing

replication

falsifiability

expectation should not affect what they record

stop any personal prejudice

standardised instructions / operationalised variables / double blind technique

using research evidence to help develop and find support for theories

using facts to construct theories

collection of general principles

must be testable and falsifiable

testing to see if a researcher hypothesis is true or not

formed from previous research

researcher gathers evidence which helps to develop and inform the theory

theory - devise hypothesis - test theory using appropriate method - analyse results and compare to hypothesis and theory