| Laboratory experiments description | Conducted in a controlled setting where the IV is manipulated. |
| Laboratory experiments advantages | High control of variables → Increases internal validity.
Replication is easier → Increases reliability.
Precise measurement → Reduces extraneous variables. |
| Laboratory experiments disadvantages | Low ecological validity → Artificial setting may not reflect real-life behaviour.
Demand characteristics → Participants may guess the aim and change behaviour.
Ethical concerns → Some studies involve deception or stress. |
| field experiments descriptions | Conducted in a natural environment with IV manipulation. |
| field experiments advantages | Higher ecological validity → Behaviour is more natural.
Less demand characteristics → Participants may be unaware they’re in an experiment.
Applicable to real life → Findings are more generalisable. |
| field experiments disadvantages | Lower control over variables → Increases risk of confounding variables.
Replication is difficult → Reduces reliability.
Ethical issues → Participants may not have given informed consent
Participants may not have given informed consent. |
| Independent measures designs description | Different participants take part in each condition. |
| Independent measures designs advantages | No order effects → Participants only do one condition.
Less demand characteristics → Less likely to guess the aim.
Time-efficient → No need for breaks between conditions. |
| Independent measures designs disadvantages | Participant variables → Individual differences may affect results.
More participants needed → Increases cost and time.
Less control over confounding variables → Differences between groups could affect results. |
| repeated measures designs description | Same participants take part in all conditions. |
| repeated measures design advantages | Controls participant variables → Increases validity.
Requires fewer participants → More time and cost-effective.
More statistical power → Differences between conditions are clearer. |
| repeated measures design disadvantages | Order effects (practice/fatigue) → Participants may improve or tire out.
Demand characteristics → Participants may guess the aim.
Time-consuming → Participants must wait between conditions. |
| matched pairs design description | Participants are paired based on characteristics and assigned to different conditions. |
| matched pairs design advantages | Controls participant variables → Improves internal validity.
No order effects → Each participant does one condition.
Reduces demand characteristics → Participants don’t compare conditions. |
| matched pairs design disadvantages | Difficult to match participants perfectly → Small differences may still exist.
Time-consuming → Matching requires pre-testing.
More participants needed → Increases cost. |
| counter balancing | A method to control order effects in repeated measures designs by varying the order of conditions. |
| random allocation | Description: Assigning participants to different conditions randomly to minimise biases.
Example: Using random number generators to assign participants to control or experimental groups. |
| order effects description | Description: Changes in participants' performance due to the sequence of conditions experienced. |
| order effects types | Practice Effect: Improvement due to familiarity with the task.
Fatigue Effect: Decline in performance due to tiredness or boredom. |
| control methods for order effects | Counterbalancing or ensuring sufficient rest between tasks. |
| use of experimental groups | Purpose: To compare outcomes and determine the effect of the IV.
Example: In drug trials, the experimental group receives the medication, while the control group receives a placebo. |
| use of control methods | Purpose: To provide a baseline for comparison.
Example: Measuring participants' reaction times with and without caffeine intake. |
| case study method description | An in-depth investigation of a single individual, group, or event to explore causation and find underlying principles. |
| case study method features | Focus on a single unit of study.
Utilises multiple data sources (e.g., interviews, observations).
Provides detailed qualitative data. |
| questionnaire techniques | Paper and Pencil: Traditional method where participants fill out physical forms.
Online: Digital forms completed via the internet. |
| questionnaire question formats | Open Questions: Allow free-form responses, providing rich qualitative data.
Closed Questions: Provide fixed choices, yielding quantitative data. |
| questionnaire advantages | Quick and easy to distribute → Efficient for large samples.
Standardised format → Increases reliability.
Participants may be more honest → Especially for sensitive topics. |
| questionnaire disadvantages | Response bias → Participants may answer in socially desirable ways.
Limited depth of answers → Closed questions restrict detail.
Misinterpretation → Participants may not understand the questions. |
| interviews format | Structured: Pre-determined questions in a fixed order.
Unstructured: Flexible, open-ended questions guided by the interviewee's responses.
Semi-Structured: Combines fixed questions with opportunities for exploration. |
| interviews techniques | Telephone: Conducted over the phone, offering convenience.
Face-to-Face: In-person interactions, allowing for observation of non-verbal cues. |
| interviews advantages | Rich, detailed data → Especially with open-ended questions.
Clarification possible → Interviewer can explain questions.
Higher response rate → Participants are more engaged |
| interviews disadvantages | Interviewer bias → Their tone or wording may influence responses.
Time-consuming → Requires scheduling and transcription.
Lack of anonymity → Participants may not be completely honest. |
| observational methods | overt, covert, participant, non-participant, structured, unstructured, naturalistic, controlled |
| overt | Participants are aware they are being observed. |
| covert | Observation without participants' knowledge. |
| participant | Observer becomes part of the group being studied. |
| non-participant | Observer remains detached and does not interact. |
| structured | Use of predefined categories for recording behaviour. |
| unstructured | Recording all relevant behaviour without predefined categories. |
| naturalistic | Observing behaviour in its natural environment. |
| controlled | Observation in a setting manipulated by the researcher. |
| observation advantages | High ecological validity - naturalistic observations provide realistic data as they occur in real life settings
useful when other method are unethical - allows studying behaviours that cannot be manipulated like aggression
rich detailed data - can provide in depth qualitative insights |
| observation disadvantages | observer bias - researcher may interpret behaviour subjectively
lack of control - in naturalistic settings, extraneous variables may affect results
ethical issues - covert observations raise privacy concerns |
| application of observation | Consider the type of observation that suits the scenario (e.g., naturalistic vs. controlled).
Identify whether participant/non-participant methods are appropriate.
Determine if structured or unstructured recording methods should be used. |
| aims | Description: The general purpose or intent of the research.
Example: Investigating the effect of sleep deprivation on cognitive performance. |
| null hypothesis | States there is no effect or difference.
Example: Sleep deprivation has no effect on cognitive performance |
| alternative hypothesis | States there is an effect or difference. |
| types of alternative hypothesis | Directional (One-Tailed): Specifies the direction of the effect.
Example: Sleep deprivation decreases cognitive performance.
Non-Directional (Two-Tailed): Does not specify the direction.
Example: Sleep deprivation affects cognitive performance. |
| Independent Variable (IV) | Description: The variable manipulated by the researcher.
Example: Amount of sleep (e.g., 4 hours vs. 8 hours). |
| Dependent Variable (DV) | Description: The variable measured to assess the effect of the IV.
Example: Scores on a cognitive performance test. |
| operationalising | Description: Clearly defining variables in measurable terms.
Operationalising IV: Specifying how the IV is manipulated.
Example: Participants receive either 4 hours or 8 hours of sleep. |
| types of variables | uncontrolled variables - factors not accounted for which may affect results
participant variables - individual differences e.g. intelligence, mood
situational variables - environmental factors e.g. noise, time of day |
| how to control variables | standardisation - keeping procedure identical for all participants
use of controls - ensuring external factors do not affect the results |
| applying control methods in research | random allocation - reduces participant-related confounding variables
counter balancing - controls for order effects in repeated measures designs
using a control group - helps isolate the effect of the IV |
| types of data | quantitative data - numerical
qualitative data - descriptive
objective - measurable and not influenced by personal opinions
subjective - influenced by personal perspective like feelings or options |
| advantages of quantitative data | easier to analyse - statistical comparisons can be made
more reliable - consistency across different studies
less researcher bias - less interpretation is needed |
| disadvantages of quantitative data | lack of depth - does not provide insight into emotions or experiences
over-simplifies behaviour - human thoughts and feelings are complex
can miss context - ignores the meaning behind responses |
| advantages of qualitative data | rich in detail - provides deep insights
high validity - captures genuine experiences
useful for complex topics - ideal for studying human emotions and social behaviour |
| disadvantages of qualitative data | difficult to analyse - harder to compare responses
subjectivity - researcher bias may influence conclusions
less replicable - findings may not generalise well |
| applying data to a research scenario | identify whether numerical or descriptive data is needed, consider how data collection impacts reliability and validity, determine if mixed-method approaches are beneficial |
| opportunity sampling advantages | quick and easy - uses readily available participants
convenient - no need for recruitment
useful for pilot studies - can test methods before larger studies |
| opportunity sampling disadvantages | not representative - may be biased towards certain groups
higher risk of researcher bias - selection may be influenced
findings are harder to generalise - limited sample diversity |
| random sampling advantages | unbiased - every participant has an equal chance of selection
more representative - reduces selection bias
can be generalised - findings are more applicable to a larger population |
| random sampling disadvantages | time consuming - need to identify all potential participants
not always practical - some people may refuse to participate
still had an element of chance - may not fully eliminate bias |
| volunteer sampling advantages | ethically sound - participants choose to take part
quick and easy - less researcher effort required
higher commitment - participants are usually more engaged |
| volunteer sampling disadvantages | volunteer bias - sample may not be representative
may attract a certain personality type - more confident or more motivated individuals
generalisation is limited - findings may not apply to a wider population |
| human ethical concerns | minimising harm, informed consent, right to withdraw, lack of deception, confidentiality, privacy, debriefing |
| minimising harm | researchers must ensure that participants are not exposed to physical or psychological plan beyond what they would encounter daily in life |
| informed consent | participant must be fully informed about the nature of the study, including what they will be asked to do in the study, any risks involved and their rights they must give their voluntary agreement before participating |
| right to withdraw | participant can leave the study at any time even after giving consent without facing any consequences. They can also request that their data is removed. |
| lack of deception | Researchers should avoid misleading participants about the true aim of the study unless deception is necessary for valid results. If deception is used, it must be minimal and justified, and participants should be fully debriefed afterward. |
| confidentiality | Personal data, identities, and responses must be kept private and anonymous. This protects participants from potential negative consequences (e.g., embarrassment, discrimination). |
| privacy | Researchers must not invade participants' personal space or private lives without permission. This applies especially in observational studies—if the behavior occurs in a private setting, consent must be obtained. |
| Debriefing | After the study, researchers must explain the true purpose, answer any questions, and check participants' well-being. If deception was used, it must be clarified. |
| animal ethical concerns | minimising harm, replacement, species, numbers, procedures, pain suffering and distress, housing, reward deprivation and aversive stimuli |
| minimising harm | Researchers must ensure animals do not experience unnecessary pain or distress. |
| replacement | Using alternative methods or species instead of animals when possible. |
| species | Choosing the appropriate species for the research, considering their capacity to suffer and the relevance to the study. |
| numbers | Using the minimum number of animals necessary to achieve valid results. |
| procedures | Ensuring that procedures are designed to minimise harm and distress to animals. |
| pain suffering and distress | Minimizing any pain, suffering, or distress experienced by animals during the study. |
| housing | Providing appropriate living conditions for animals, including space, social interaction, and environmental enrichment. |
| reward deprivation and aversive stimuli | Ensuring that any rewards, deprivations, or aversive stimuli used are justified and do not cause unnecessary harm. |
| advantages of ethical guidelines | Ensures Humane Treatment – Reduces unnecessary suffering.
Encourages Alternative Methods – Promotes ethical advancements in research.
Improves Scientific Standards – Well-treated animals yield more reliable results. |
| disadvantages of ethical guidelines | Still Causes Harm – Some level of suffering may be unavoidable.
Difficult to Generalise to Humans – Animal models do not always apply to human psychology.
Can Be Costly – Ethical treatment requires significant resources. |
| applying ethics to a research situation | Consider whether animal use is justified.
Ensure minimal suffering and appropriate living conditions.
Follow ethical regulations (e.g., using the 3Rs: Replacement, Reduction, Refinement). |
