Lab Exp: when IV can be controlled or manipulated directly by researcher using standardized procedures and settings. Field Exp: conducted in the natural environment of p's involving some degreee of control/manipulation. Natural/Quasi Exp: May take place in labs or in genuine settings but IV is naturally occuring.LAB EXP: + Controlled and standardised procedures are easier to replicate which means that results can be assessed for reliability. + Setting allows for control of potentially confounding variables.+setting allows for standardization of procedure so that variables can be kept constant. - results gained in lab may not be replicated in real situations so often results lack generalisability beyond research setting. - P's may behave differently in labs than in natural environments so demand characteristics and researcher effects affect the results. - practically difficult to create in a lab a scenario that reflects real life, so results may lack eco-validity. Field Exp: + if p's are unaware that their behaviour is being observed there will be no demand characteristics displayed. +P's are less likely yo be affected by researcher effects than in a lab exp. + behaviour is taking place in a real not artificial environment therefore results are more ecologically valid. - LAck of control and standardization over research setting makes replication difficult. - It may be practically difficult or/and unethical for researchers to gather data unobtrusively.-it may be practically difficult to gain access to the kind of research environment required for the research. Natural exp: + method can be combined with either a lab-based method/field depending upon what is being investigated.+as the IV is naturally occuring results are often more ecologically valid.+method can point to cause and effect relationship in rare or atypical behaviours that are otherwise difficult to study. -Participant variables may confound results e.g. personal experiences,- it maybe practically difficut to find the naturally occuring IV due to its rarity. - If IV is rarely occuring or untypical, samples maybe small and unrepresentative and results then lack generalisability.
To establish the direction and strength of relationships between variables.
+Avoids some of the practical ðical problems raised by other methods as there is no direct involvement with or manipulation of p's.
+can reveal the direction and strength of a relationship between variables.
+Can be used on data from ecologically valid sources e.g. actual health stats.
-Cannot reveal cause + effect relationshiops.
-uses only quantitative data which may be reductionist and not holistic
-can only be performed on quan data which is ordinal or interval.
Usually doesn't involve any direct manipulationof the IV.
Refers to the way in which the iv is measured, e.g. how data is gathered
disclosed observation-Sometimes p's know they are being observed
undisclosed observation-Sometimes they do not.
Participant observation-sometimes researchers are part of the setup.
Observer bias may be more likely in participant observation as researchers may become personally involved.
Controlled observations-involve researcher controlling certain variables-most labs. +allows for control and good access to p's, - often leads to p's feeling dehumanised and reacting to the artificial situation in which they find themselves. P's might behave in a very dif. way when in a lab and this tends not to reflect real life.
Field observations-involves researcher observing naturally occuring behaviour-has + of yielding data that is high in eco-validity.
Structured v unstructured observations
Structured-using behaviour checklists to consistently record data.Rating behaviours on scales or coding behaviours. To ensure good inter-rater reliablity-essential that observers are familiar with and practiced at using whatever structure has been agreed upon to gather data.
+Behaviour is recorded in a consisitent manner so that data has internal reliability. +As process is standardised it could be replicated so findings could be checked for external reliability.
-Establishing high inter-rater reliability takes time and may never be perfect. - behaviours that researchers have set out might not occur.
Unstructured-researchers may simply try to record what p's actually do as it occurs. Filmed records, audio recordings or hand written notes could be made.
+Allows researcher to record what is happening without constraints of pre-determined checklist so allows for more unexpected behaviours.+data gathered is often very detailed and descriptive-less reductionist.
-Analysis of data may be more diffcult due to its depth/detail. - much lower chance of inter-observer reliability as observers aren't following a pre-determined checklist.
Self-report: Allows P to provide info on him/herself usually in form of interview or questionnaire.
+ Allows researcher to gather info about varaibles which may be difficult to investigate in other ways cuz they're very personal or occur rarely.+ enables researcher to gather both quan and qual data depending upon type of q's asked.
-P's may not respond in a truthful way- they may be unsure of whatquestion is asking so may guess incorrectly-more likely on a questionnaire where researcher is not able to clarify. - Risk of researcher bias in terms of q's being asked.
Interviews: May be face-to face. Format= structured/unstructured.
SI- involves researcher asking p's pre-determined set of questions.
UI-involves researcher supporting the participant as they talk about what they need to
+ allows researcher to clarify q's if they are ambiguous cuz they are asking the questions directly of the P and respond to their queries. + SI are easy to standardize and replicate.
-Risk of researcher bias is increased-it may not be simply what the P is questioned about that reflects the researcher's beliefs about what is important but also how they ask the q's in terms of the words they use and non-verbal cues eg toneof voice. - takes longer to gather data cuz p's are questioned individually by the researcher.
Open-ended q's allow p's to respond freely and in some depth if necessary. such q's tend to yield qualitative data.
Closed questions: restrict the responses p's can give amd result in quan data being gathered.
Fixed choice questions: allow p's to selected 1 of 2 responses e.g. yes/no.
Likert scales- involvep's indicating the degree to which theyagreew with a statement relating to whatever it is the researcheris investigating attitudes towards.
+Takes less time to gather data cuz a group of p's can be questioned simultaneously. + p's may be more honestwhen subject matter is sensitive cuz they are able to answer anonymously and can avoid having to look at another person in the eye as thewy answer. - may appear less personal so it is more difficult to establish trust and warmth between P and researcher. -because researcher is absent when p's respond any ambiguous q's cannot be clarified and unexpected responses can be expanded upon spontaneously.