AQA A Level Psychology Topic Companion...(e.g. unemployment and an earthquake) Measures the DV QUASI Controlled conditions /Natural conditions IV is a difference between

Joseph Sparks & Helen Lakin

AQA A Level Psychology

Topic CompanionResearch Methods

SAMPLE

Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permittedwww.tutor2u.net/psychology

Contents

Page 2 AQA A LEVEL Psychology topic companion: RESEARCH METHODS

TopicExperimental Methods 3

Observational Techniques 8

Self-Report Techniques 15

Correlations 20

Case Studies [A-Level Only] 23

Aims, Hypotheses, IVs And DVs 25

Sampling 28

Pilot Studies and Experimental Design 34

Control, Demand Characteristics, and Investigator Effects 38

Ethical Guidelines, Peer Review and The Economy 41

Types of Data 47

Descriptive Statistics 50

Presentation and Display of Quantitative Data 57

Distributions: Normal and Skewed Distributions 59

Content Analysis [A-Level Only] 60

Features of Science [A-Level Only] 63

Reliability [A-Level Only] 66

Validity [A-Level Only] 69

Reporting Psychological Investigations [A-Level Only] 72

The Sign Test [As And A-Level] 77

Levels of Measurement [A-Level Only] 80

Probability and Significance [A-Level Only] 83

Statistical Tests [A-Level Only] 85

Appendices 90

SAMPLE

Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted www.tutor2u.net/psychology

AQA A LEVEL Psychology topic companion: RESEARCH METHODS Page 3

EXPERIMENTAL METHODS Specification: Experimental method. Types of experiment: laboratory and field experiments; natural and quasi experiments. WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW Outline and evaluate laboratory experiments. Outline and evaluate field experiments. Outline and evaluate natural experiments. Outline and evaluate quasi experiments. Introduction Experimental methods all have one thing in common: they are attempting to find a cause and effect relationship between an independent variable (IV) and dependent variable (DV), and to measure the extent of this effect. There are four different types of experiment:

1. Laboratory experiment 2. Field experiment 3. Natural experiment 4. Quasi experiment

Summary of Experimental Methods SETTING IV DV

LABORATORY Controlled conditions Manipulates the IV Measures the DV

FIELD Natural conditions Manipulates the IV Measures the DV

NATURAL Natural conditions IV is naturally occurring (e.g. unemployment and an earthquake)

Measures the DV

QUASI Controlled conditions /Natural conditions

IV is a difference between people (e.g. gender and age)

Measures the DV

Laboratory Experiments Laboratory experiments are conducted under specified controlled conditions in which the researcher manipulates the independent variable (IV) to measure the effect on the dependent variable (DV). The conditions are heavily controlled in order to minimise the effect of any extraneous variables, to prevent them from becoming a confounding variable which might adversely affect the DV. Participants will be aware that they are taking part in an investigation due to the contrived nature of the situation which may feel unlike real‐life.

SAMPLE



Evaluating Laboratory Experiments A strength of laboratory experiments is the high degree of control over extraneous variables which can

be achieved. A researcher is therefore able, in most cases, to prevent extraneous variables from becoming confounding variables which negatively affect the DV. This provides a high degree of internal validity allowing for conclusions about cause and effect to be drawn between the IV and DV.

A limitation of laboratory experiments is that they can lack external validity. The artificial nature of the

environment in which the investigation is taking place means that the study can lack ecological validity. This means that the findings of the study cannot always be generalised to settings beyond the laboratory as the tasks often lack mundane realism and would not be everyday life occurrences. Since participants know they are being investigated their behaviour can also change in an unnatural manner resulting in demand characteristics being seen.

Field Experiments Field experiments are carried out in natural conditions, in which the researcher manipulates the independent variable (IV) to measure the effect on the dependent variable (DV). The ‘field’ is considered any location which is not a laboratory. Participants in a field experiment typically do not know that they are taking part in an investigation with a view to observing more natural behaviour. Evaluating Field Experiments The natural setting means that field experiments often have a higher level of ecological validity, in

comparison to laboratory studies. This means that the results are more likely to be representative of behaviour witnessed in everyday life. However, because the setting is more natural, there is less control over extraneous variables. These can then become confounding variables and distort the findings meaning a firm cause and effect relationship cannot be drawn since other factors could have had an impact on the DV, other than the IV.

There are important ethical issues associated with field experiments. Since participants are often

unaware that they are in fact participants in a psychological investigation, they cannot give informed consent to take part. As such, the research may involve a breach of their privacy rights and a cost‐benefit analysis will need to be conducted before proceeding with any study to ensure the perceived outcomes from the research will outweigh any personal costs to those involved.

Natural Experiments In a natural experiment, the researcher does not manipulate the IV and instead examines the effect of an existing IV on the dependent variable (DV). This IV is naturally occurring, such as a flood or earthquake, and the behaviour of people affected is either compared to their own behaviour beforehand, when possible, or with a control group who have not encountered the IV. It is important to note that it is the IV which is natural in this type of experiment, and not necessarily the context in which the investigation is taking place since participants could be tested in a laboratory as part of the study. Evaluating Natural Experiments The naturally occurring IV means that natural experiments often have a higher level of external validity

compared to laboratory and field experiments. These types of investigations are considered high in ecological validity given the real‐life issues that are being studied rather than manipulated artificially. However, natural experiments have no control over the environment and subsequent extraneous variables, which means that it is difficult for the research to accurately assess the effects of the IV on the DV. It may be that a confounding variable has affected the results so a cause and effect relationship must be drawn with extreme caution, if at all.

SAMPLE



A strength of using natural experiments is the unique insights gained into real‐life situations from using this methodology. Investigating a naturally occurring IV allows for research to be conducted into areas of psychology that could not be generated for ethical reasons or because of logistical and practical constraints. However, a naturally occurring event that interests researchers may only occur very rarely. This limits the opportunity to generalise the results to other similar events or circumstances.

Quasi Experiments Quasi experiments also contain a naturally occurring independent variable (IV), but one which already exists. However, in this instance the IV is a difference between people such as gender, age or a personality trait. The researcher examines the effect of this IV on the dependent variable (DV). Quasi experiments do not have to be conducted in a natural setting, although they often are. They may also be conducted in a laboratory setting, under controlled conditions. Evaluating Quasi Experiments A limitation of quasi experiments is that participants cannot be randomly allocated to research

conditions to remove the issue of bias in the procedure. Since the IV is a naturally occurring difference between the participants, the level of IV to which they belong is predecided. This means the psychologist will be less certain that the IV alone will have caused the effect which is measured through the DV as other dispositional or environmental factors may have played a role in the outcome. That being said, quasi experiments allow researchers to compare different types of people easily to provide insight into similarities or differences between these groups which could not be ethically generated otherwise.

There are methodological issues associated with conducting quasi experiments. When quasi

experiments take place under natural conditions, there is no control over the environment and subsequent extraneous variables, making it difficult to be sure that factors such as age, gender or ethnicity have affected the DV. On the other hand, when quasi experiments take place under laboratory conditions the high level of control means that the research often lacks ecological validity, and the findings cannot always be generalised to a real‐life setting since behaviour may not translate outside of the research environment.

Comparison of Experimental Methods ECOLOGICAL VALIDITY EXTRANEOUS VARIABLES REPLICABILITY LABORATORY Low Controlled High

FIELD High Not controlled Low

NATURAL High Not controlled Low

QUASI *Low/High *Controlled/Not controlled *High/Low *The level of each factor depends on whether the quasi experiments are carried out in a laboratory setting or under natural conditions. Possible Exam Questions 1. Dr Helpful was interested in studying expectations when meeting a new work colleague for the first

time. Each participant who volunteered to take part was taken to the same room where they listened to a description of their new potential work mate called ‘Ms B’. The participants were randomly allocated to one of two groups in the experiment. Dr Helpful gave each participant exactly the same background information about ‘Ms B’, but the order of the information varied depending the experimental condition as follows:

SAMPLE



Group 1 Three strengths of Ms B’s CV were followed by three negative comments. Group 2 Three negative comments about Ms B’s CV were followed by three strengths. After listening to the excerpt from Ms B’s CV, each participant was asked to state whether they thought Ms B would be a competent colleague to have on their work team or not. Dr Helpful recorded how many participants in each group stated that Ms B was ‘competent’. Identify which type of experiment that was conducted by Dr Helpful. (1 mark)

2. What is meant by the term ‘quasi experiment’? (2 marks) Exam Hint: It is important for students to remember that quasi experiments can be conducted in either a laboratory or a natural setting. 3. Identify two features of an experiment. (2 marks)

4. Outline what is meant by a laboratory experiment. (2 marks)

5. Identify and explain one difference between a laboratory and a field experiment. (2 marks) 6. A psychologist was interested in investigating whether people with phobias were more aware of their

own heartbeat than people who do not suffer with a specific phobia. A matched pairs design was adopted. The sample included eight individuals with a phobia and eight people without a phobia. The investigator asked each participant to make an estimation about how fast their heart was beating (in beats per minute). This figure was compared to their actual heartbeat measurement. Results showed that people with a phobia were more accurate at estimating their own heartbeat than people who did not suffer with a phobia at all.

Explain why this study is considered a quasi experiment. (2 marks)

Exam Hint: Many students often recognise that quasi experiments do not involve manipulation of the IV, but in questions like this can struggle to apply this understanding to the context of the question; that phobias could be pre‐existing (evolutionary/biological origin) or naturally occurring (learned from the environment). 7. Describe one difference between a natural experiment and a field experiment. (2 marks) 8. Donald, a middle‐aged male politician, approached an adult in a busy street and asked for directions to

the nearest bus stop. He repeated this with 14 other adults in the same city.

Each of the 15 adults asked were then approached by a second researcher, called Melania, who showed each of them six photographs of different middle‐aged politicians, including a photograph of Donald. Melania asked the 15 adults to choose the image of the individual who had asked them for directions to the bus stop. Melania estimated the age of each of the 15 adults and noted whether each participant had chosen the correct photograph of Donald. Suggest one reason why the researchers decided to use a field experiment rather than a laboratory experiment. (2 marks)

Exam Hint: Students can gain marks here for responses referring to the benefits in terms of validity or fewer demand characteristics but must elaborate their point fully to achieve the second mark.

SAMPLE



9. What is meant by an extraneous variable? (2 marks) Exam Hint: Students need to avoid vague definitions of extraneous variables such as, ‘something that cannot be controlled’ or ‘something that must be controlled’. Answers must be specific by referring to the fact that an EV is a variable that is not manipulated by the experimenter but may have an effect on the dependent variable making it difficult to establish a cause and effect relationship.

10. Explain why it is important to control extraneous variables in experimental research. (2 marks) Exam Hint: Stronger answers to this question will refer to ‘confounding variables’ in their answer. 11. Eleanor was interested in investigating the impact of caffeine on memory.

Discuss advantages of carrying out an experiment like this in a laboratory. (4 marks)

Exam Hint: If students write about disadvantages here no marks will be awarded as the question clearly asks for ‘advantages’. Answers which refer to specific advantages (e.g. higher control of extraneous variables) and link it appropriately to the scenario (e.g. strength of caffeinated drink assured) will be able to access the full range of marks available. 12. Outline and evaluate the use of laboratory experiments in psychological research. Refer to specific

examples in your answer. (8 marks)

SAMPLE


OBSERVATIONAL TECHNIQUES Specification: Observational techniques. Types of observation: naturalistic and controlled observation; covert and overt observation; participant and non‐participant observation. Observational design: behavioural categories; event sampling; time sampling. WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW Outline and evaluate observational techniques, including:

o Covert and overt o Participant and non‐participant o Naturalistic and controlled o Structured and unstructured

Outline and evaluate the factors involved in the design of observational research, including: o Behavioural categories o Event sampling and time sampling

Introduction to Observational Techniques When conducting an observation, the researcher has the choice between: Covert and overt Participant and non‐participant Naturalistic and controlled Structured and unstructured

It is important to note that these techniques are not mutually exclusive: it is quite possible for an observation to be naturalistic, unstructured, participant and covert all at the same time, as these terms refer to different aspects of the methods. Covert Observations A covert observation is also known as ‘undisclosed’ observation and consists of observing people without their knowledge; for example, using a one‐way mirror (covert non‐participant) or joining a group as a member (covert participant). Participants may be informed of their involvement in the study after the observation has taken place. Evaluating Covert Observations A strength of covert observation compared to overt

observation is that investigator effects are less likely. Since the investigator is hidden in this type of observation there is less chance that their direct or indirect behaviour will have an impact on the performance of the participants. As a result, there is less chance of demand characteristics occurring whereby the participant tries to guess the aim of the investigation and act accordingly, since they are unaware that they are being observed. This means that the participants’ behaviour seen will be more natural and representative of their everyday behaviour.

There are ethical issues associated with the covert method of observation inherent within its design. As participants are not aware they are taking part in an investigation, they

www.tutor2u.net/psychology Copyright tutor2u Limited / School Network License / Photocopying Permitted

SAMPLE



cannot give fully informed consent nor exercise their right to withdraw. That being said, it is perfectly acceptable to observe human behaviour in a public place such as a shopping centre. This means that an assessment is made by the investigator before the observation begins to ensure that no privacy laws are being violated.

Overt Observations An overt observation is an observational technique where the observations are ‘open’ and the participants know/are aware that they are being observed. For example, filming publicly (overt non‐participant) or joining a class and informing the other students that you are carrying out an observation (overt participant). Evaluating Overt Observations A strength of the overt method is that it is often more ethical than the covert method. Since the

participants are aware that their behaviour is being observed for the purposes of a psychological investigation, it is possible to inform them in advance of the aims and thus obtain informed consent. This awareness of participation also allows participants to exercise their right to withdraw themselves or their data from the investigation, before, during or after the observation is conducted. As a result, the reputation of psychological research as being ethical is protected.

A drawback of using an overt style of observation is the possibility of investigator effects. It is possible for a bias to occur whereby what the investigator does influences the behaviour of the participants in a way which was not intended (e.g. body language or facial expressions). As a result, the participants may change their behaviour through demand characteristics and act in accordance with their perception of the research aims. Therefore, authentic and natural behaviour is not being observed, thus reducing the internal validity of the observation because it is overt.

Participant Observations In a participant observation, the person who is conducting the observation also takes part in the activity being observed. It can be either covert (a group member quietly observing others without their knowledge) or overt (a group member using a camera to record the behaviour of other members with their full knowledge). Evaluating Participant Observations A strength of using participant observations in psychological research is that the researcher can obtain

in‐depth data. Since the observer is in close proximity to the participants, they are able to gain a unique insight into the phenomenon in question. In addition, through participating they are unlikely to overlook any behaviour that, as an external observer, would be missed due to nuances only seen by becoming a participant of the activity itself. This means that a comprehensive understanding of human behaviour can be achieved using this method of observation.

A disadvantage of using the participant observation method is the possibility of investigator effects and the impact of the researcher on the other participants’ behaviour. The mere presence of the investigator as a member within the group might influence the participants’ behaviour in a way which was not intended. Consequently, the participants may change their behaviour through demand characteristics and act in accordance with their perception of the research aims. Consequently, natural behaviour is not being observed, thus reducing the internal validity of the observation because the investigator is a participant.

SAMPLE



Non‐Participant Observations In a non‐participant observation, the person who is conducting the observation does not participate in the activity being observed. This type of observation is quite common in educational settings, as in teacher evaluations, for example, when an observer sits in the corner of the room and watches the lesson. The aim is for the observer to be as unobtrusive as possible and not engage with any of the activities happening. Evaluating Non‐Participant Observations An advantage of using a non‐participant observation method is that investigator effects are less likely

compared to a participant observation. The researcher is often observing at a distance from the participant(s) and in some situations, not visible to them at all. As a result, the behaviour of the investigator is unlikely to have a negative impact on the behaviour of the participants. This means that behaviour observed is more likely to be representative of natural and unaltered human conduct.

There are disadvantages associated with the non‐participant method of observation. Due to a lack of proximity to the participant behaviour being studied, the researcher might miss behaviours of interest. This means that unique insights which contribute to the understanding of the human behaviour being observed will be overlooked because of not being involved personally.

Naturalistic Observations A naturalistic observation is an observation carried out in an unaltered setting in which the observer does not interfere in any way and merely observes the behaviour in question as it happens normally. An example of this would be an observation carried out in a shopping centre as people go about their daily business. Evaluating Naturalistic Observations A strength of using naturalistic observations is that a higher level of ecological validity can be achieved.

In an observation of this design, the researcher records naturally occurring behaviour in the original environment in which it ordinarily occurs. This means that the behaviour being recorded is likely to be more representative of everyday activities and reflect spontaneous actions that sometimes occur incidentally.

There are issues of ascertaining reliability with naturalistic observations. Since observations of this kind record behaviours which are occurring naturally as they unfold it is difficult, if not impossible, for the exact same conditions to be replicated. Consequently, the test‐retest method of checking reliability cannot be used with this type of observational design, as the researcher is not in control of variables. This means that research attempting to understand human behaviour using naturalistic observations often lacks replicability.

Controlled Observations A controlled observation is conducted under strict conditions, such as in an observation room or laboratory setting where extraneous variables (such as time of day, noise, temperature and visual distractions) can be controlled to avoid interference with the behaviour being observed. Sometimes one‐way mirrors can be used for these types of observations. If the participants know they are being observed, this is an overt method which is most commonly the case for controlled observations. Evaluating Controlled Observations A strength of controlled observations is that they can be replicated to check for reliability. By their very

nature, the variables are highly controlled in this type of observational design. This means that standardised procedures, the manipulation of the independent variable and control over extraneous

SAMPLE



variables can be repeated by the same, or different, researchers to assess the reliability.

A criticism of controlled observation is that they have a lower level of external validity. The researcher records behaviour in an artificial environment with variables subject to strict manipulation. This high level of control comes at a cost with the setting of the observation feeling quite unnatural as a result. Therefore, the participants’ behaviour may alter in response meaning that the observation no longer represents real‐life occurrences causing the ecological validity of the findings to be questionable.

Structured Observations In structured observations, the researcher uses coded ‘schedules’ according to a previously agreed formula to document the behaviour and organise data into behavioural categories. A behavioural category is when psychologists must decide which specific behaviours should be examined. This involves breaking the target behaviour (e.g. aggression) into components that can be observed and measured (e.g. hitting or kicking). Evaluating Structured Observations A strength of structured observations is that the researcher can compare behaviour between

participants and across groups. The use of operationalised behavioural categories makes the coding of the data more systematic. When there is more than one observer, the standardised behaviour schedule results in greater inter‐observer reliability. It is important for research methodologies to be consistent so that accurate comparisons can be made.

However, there may be problems with ascertaining high internal validity in a structured observation. This is because the researcher may miss some crucial behaviours during the observation which is pertinent to the aim of the investigation. As a result, the findings portrayed may not provide the full picture about the behaviour in question, as they could lack the finer details. This is a problem because what was intended to be measured was not achieved in its entirety.

Unstructured Observations An unstructured observation involves every instance of the observed behaviour being recorded and described in as much detail as possible. This is useful if the behaviour that researchers are interested in does not occur very often and is more usual with naturalistic observation. Evaluating Unstructured Observations A strength of unstructured observation is the richness of data obtained. Since behaviour is recorded in

great detail, researchers are able to obtain a comprehensive view of human behaviour. This adds to the internal validity of the observational technique.

Additionally, this type of observation is also prone to observer bias due to the lack of objective behaviour categories. This is a problem because the observer may then only record behaviour which is of subjective value to them, and not a valid representation of what is being displayed. As a result, there may be a problem with inter‐observer reliability as there will be a lack of consistency in the observations recorded.

SAMPLE



Comparison of Observational Techniques OVERVIEW STRENGTHS LIMITATIONS

COVERT OBSERVATION

Undisclosed: Participant is not aware

Investigator effects and demand characteristics are less likely

Less ethical: lack of informed consent

OVERT OBSERVATION Participant is aware More ethical: informed

consent obtained

Investigator effects and demand characteristics are more likely

PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION

Researcher takes part (close proximity)

In‐depth data is gathered due to close proximity

Investigator effects and demand characteristics are more likely

NON‐PARTICIPANT OBSERVATION

Researcher does not take part (not close proximity)

Investigator effects and demand characteristics are less likely

Researcher might miss behaviours of interest due to lack of proximity

NATURALISTIC OBSERVATION

Takes place in naturalistic (unaltered) setting

Higher level of ecological validity

Issues with replication and ascertaining reliability

CONTROLLED OBSERVATION

Takes place in artificial (controlled) environment

Can be replicated to check reliability

Lower levels of ecological validity

STRUCTURED OBSERVATION

Behaviour is coded using behavioural categories

Higher levels of inter‐observer reliability

Less rich data can lack internal validity as researchers miss important behaviours

UNSTRUCTURED OBSERVATION

Every instance of behaviour is recorded and described

Rich data leads to greater internal validity

Lower levels of inter‐observer reliability

Exam Hint: Although there are many strengths/limitations of observations, you will notice that for each pair of observations (i.e. covert and overt) the strength of one type (i.e. covert observations have a lower chance of investigator effects) is the limitation of the opposite type (i.e. overt observations have a higher chance of investigator effects). In observations, the observer generally has the choice of two methods: time sampling or event sampling. TIME SAMPLING EVENT SAMPLING This is where an observer records

behaviour at prescribed intervals, e.g. every 10 seconds.

This is where an observer records the number of times that the target behaviour occurs, e.g. using a tally.

STRENGTH Time sampling methods allow for a better use of time since fewer observations are made.

Every behaviour of interest to the researcher, in theory, will be counted from the beginning through to the end of the observation.

LIMITATION Not every behaviour of relevance to the investigation will be counted if it occurs in between the time frames allocated.

There is the possibility that some behaviours could be missed if there is too much happening at the same time, resulting in some not being coded.

SAMPLE



Possible Exam Questions 1. Explain how observational research can be enhanced through the use of operationalised behavioural

categories. (2 marks) 2. Explain what is meant by ‘overt observation’. (2 marks)

3. Describe what is meant by ‘participant observation’. (2 marks) 4. Explain what is meant by ‘event sampling’ in relation to observational research in psychology. (2 marks)

5. Controlled observation techniques have been used in the Strange Situation to investigate cultural

variations in attachment. Suggest one advantage of using controlled observation in psychological research. (2 marks)

Exam Hint: It is important for students to only express one advantage of using a controlled observational method for this question using the ‘name and explain’ method of elaboration. 6. Briefly explain how a psychologist could improve her research by conducting observations in a

controlled environment. (4 marks) 7. Explain the difference between a participant observation and a non‐participant observation. You may

use an example to support your point. (4 marks) Exam Hint: Note that this question is asking for a difference and not a definition of each observational method, so the response must be tailored accordingly.

8. Identify and explain one strength and one limitation of conducting naturalistic observations. (4 marks)

9. A developmental psychologist was interested in investigating the effects of early and late adoption on

future aggressive behaviour in children. She compared the behaviour of children who had been adopted before the age of two with children who had been adopted after the age of two. The children were observed in their primary school playground when they were seven years old. Suggest two operationalised behavioural categories that the developmental psychologist could use in her observation of aggressive behaviour in children and explain how the psychologist could have carried out this observation. (4 marks)

Exam Hint: This is a context based question so explicit reference to the scenario is required to gain full credit. Note that behavioural categories such as ‘verbal aggression’ and ‘physical aggression’ would not be awarded any marks as they are not operationalised. Suggestions such as ‘kicking’ or ‘swearing’ would be creditworthy as they are specific and measurable. To answer the second component of this question, most students will refer to the use of a tally chart for recording behaviours observed on an event sampling basis.

SAMPLE



10. Read the item below and then answer the question that follows. Dr Fox was interested in the differences between male and female communication skills. Past research has investigated gender differences in this field of psychology through focusing on fluency in spoken word communication and non‐verbal communication such as body language and facial expressions.

Design an observational study for Dr Fox to be able investigate differences between males and females in non‐verbal communication when they are giving a presentation to a large audience. (12 marks) In your answer, you must refer to:

a. the task used for the participants to complete b. the behavioural categories to be implemented and how the data will be recorded c. how reliability of the data collection might be established d. ethical issues to be considered.

SAMPLE

More Psychology revision and support at:

www.tutor2u.net/psychology

@tutor2uPsych ALevelPsychStudentGroup tutor2uPsych

SAMPLE

Documents

AQA A Level Psychology Topic Companion...(e.g. unemployment and an earthquake) Measures the DV QUASI Controlled conditions /Natural conditions IV is a difference between