Upload
sophia-banks
View
220
Download
1
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Research MethodsOutline Meta-analysis Correlation Quasi-Experiments Discuss Questionnaire Data Observational Research Activity: Observational Research
Meta-analysis A set of statistical procedures for combining the
results of a number of studies in order to provide a general assessment of the relationship between the variables
Tells us if there is a difference between groups
Tells us how strong the finding is, the effect size
Meta-Analysis Examples Example: Participation
rate & leader emergence (Mullen, Salas, & Driskell, 1989)
One of the strongest determinants of who emerges leader in a group is the member with the highest participation
Example: Social loafing (Karau & Williams, 1989)
Social loafing is greater for males than females and more pronounced as the size of the group increases
SOCIAL
Correlational Research Method Researchers gather a set
of observations about a group of people and test for associations between different variables
Tells you whether 2 variables are associated with each other systematically
Cannot prove cause-effect X could cause Y Y could cause X Z could cause X
and Y (third variable problem)
Correlation Measures the degree and
direction of linear relationship between 2 variables
Two parts to a correlation
Strength
Direction Positive or negative
The Pearson Correlation Coefficient (r)
Closer to 1 or –1 means stronger relationship
Positive value indicates positive relationship, negative value is negative relationship
Positive Correlations As one variable goes up the other one goes up as well
(or as one goes down the other goes down)
STRONG (r = 1.0) WEAKER ( r= .60)
Negative Correlations As one variable goes up the other one goes DOWN (or as one goes down the other goes up)
STRONG (r = -1.0) WEAKER ( r= -.60)
Quasi-Experiments Sometimes known as queasy-experiments
Can give experimental purists a queasy feeling
Researcher has only partial control over her/his independent variables Participants assigned to 1 or more conditions by means other
than random assignment
A correlational method in which real-world groups are compared on a DV.
Quasi-ExperimentResearch Example
Out-group homogeneity effect Perceive out-group as more
homogeneous (less diverse) than the in-group
In-group bias Tendency to more favorably
evaluate members of In-group
EXAMPLE: Park and Rothbart (1982)
3 sororities Rate own and other 2
Results: Clear evidence of out-group
homogeneity effect Clear evidence of in-group bias
Yet another example… Stereotype Threat (Steele)
Stereotyped group is aware of the stereotype
Creates apprehension and impaired performance
EXAMPLE: Steele & Aronson, 1994
Difficult verbal test: Black & White Stanford students
Two conditions: Testing intellectual ability Testing the test
Results: When testing the test: B & W
performed equally well When testing IQ= B poorer
than W
Class Questionnaire Data Develop Hypotheses with these variables:
Comfort with working in groups and cooperation in last student project
Years playing team sports and preference to work in a group Gender and teamwork attitude Gender and leadership in student project Gender and number of years in team sports
Class Questionnaire Data Correlation
Group Comfort and cooperation in group tasks
r= -.27 Years and preference for
groups r = + .33
Quasi-experiment Gender & teamwork attitude
No difference Women and men: 5.15
Gender & leadership in student project
Men report more leadership experience
Men: 5.85, Women: 4.88 Gender & number of year of
team experience Men report more years of
team experience Women: 10.15, men:12.77
Final Questionnaire Issues Social desirability bias
A bias resulting from participants giving responses that make them look good rather than giving honest responses
You completed 2 different scales: LIKERT scale: Items typically asking whether participants
strongly agree, agree, disagree, strongly disagree
SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL scale: Participants rate a given concept on a series of 7-point bipolar attitude scales
Summarizing open-ended question responses
Observational Research Observational methods
Nonexperimental methods in which observers watch groups to gather information
Methods vary with respect to Degree to which observer is part of a group Degree to which observations are structured
Observational Research
Gender, group size, and amount of beer consumed (Geller, Russ, & Altomari)
Observed 56 females 187 males at local bars (students 18-25 years)
Results Drank more in a group Males drank more than females
Function of container type
Unstructured Observational Methods
Unstructured: Observers offer impressionistic, descriptive
accounts of the group
Participant observation Researcher becomes a member of the group
being studied
Unstructured Observational Methods Participant observation examples:
Whyte (1943) Joined Italian American gang in Boston
Festinger, Reiken, & Schachter (1956) Joined ‘doomsday’ cult, pretended to believe in world
ending Ezekiel (1995)
Attended neo-Nazi and KKK groups to get an insider’s look Martel (2001)
Joined Jewish Harley Davidson riders Bock (2000)
Was member of ‘single moms by choice’ support group
Criticisms of Participant Observation By joining the group, they change it in some way Groups are unaware they are being observed
May be unethical People don’t liked to be spied on, feel betrayed,
foolish Observer bias Hard to quantify unstructured data
Structured Observational Methods Structured
Quantitative methods in which group behaviors are observed and recorded with objective system
Researcher must meticulously develop coding system Code things relevant to research Coding system is lens of research
Interrater reliability Extent to which the ratings of different observers are in
agreement
Interaction Process Analysis
Observational coding system developed by Bales to measure 6 task and 6 socioemotional activities in a group
Interaction Process Analysis
Example (Hutson-Comeaux & Kelly, 1996)
Investigated whether female and male groups of college students differed in their interaction style
Found that females engaged in more positive socioemotional behavior and males engaged in more task-oriented behavior
Observational Research Discussion Use your data to draw conclusions about the
groups structure and process Use the information from the communication analysis to
identify the group’s leader as well as other members who were more or less active in the activity.
Use the information from the content analysis to identify the overall content of the groups discussion. (Items 1-3 and 10-12 are socioemotional activities, 4-9 are task activites, see Forsyth, p.32)
Report your findings to the class