COMPONENT

2
SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY – MILGRAM
SAMPLE

o A study at YALE University

o A self selecting sample (answered advertisements)
o 40 Males between 20 and 50 years old
o Range of jobs from postal clerks to engineers, with varying educational levels
o Each PP paid $4.50

PROCEDURES

o They were told they were paid for turning up, didn’t have to take part
o Draw rigged lots for who was going to be ‘teacher’ or ‘learner’
o Both men shown the room where the learner was going to be strapped
o Mr Wallace said he’d had surgery for a heart condition recently
o Ppt was given a test shock
o Two men separated, the ppt couldn’t see the learner but could hear him
o Ppt was instructed to issue a shock at each wrong answer
o Shock voltage increased 15 volts each time
o Told to keep going till learner got all the answers right
o Mr Wallace’s complaints became more and more serious as shocks increased
o Began to complain about his heat and demand to be let out
o 300v = pounded on the wall
o 315v+= was silent
o Researcher delivered standardised verbal prods
o ‘please continue’
o ‘please go on’
o ‘the experiment requires that you continue’
o ‘it is absolutely essential that you continue’
o ‘you have no other choice, you must go on’
o Obedience was measured by the maximum point on the shock generator where the teacher
refused to go any further. The experiment ended when they refused or after they had
shocked to the 450 volt level.
o Participants were interviewed and dehoaxed (debriefed). They were told the full aims and
nature of the study, were reunited with Mr Wallace and reassured that they had behaved
absolutely normally – no matter what they actually did. There was an extensive interview
and all questions were answered. The participants were sent a follow-up questionnaire
some time later and offered counselling.

FINDINGS

Preliminary Findings

o After discussing his experiment with 14 psychology majors, and a number of colleagues,
Milgram found that they estimated that only 0.3% of participants would administer the full
450volts.
 Results of Experiment

o The participants who did not disobey were called “obedient” subjects. Those who did
disobey were called “defiant” subjects

o All Pps gave a minimum of 300 volts (intense shock) this was the point at which the learner
began protesting.

o 5 Pps went no further.

o 26 Pps administered the full 450 volts (XXX). (4 stopped at 315V, 2 at 330v, 1 at 345,360 &
375v’s.)

o 14 of the 40 Pps showed signs of nervousness particularly nervous laughter.

o 3 Pp’s had full blown seizures so severe the research had to be stopped.

o Milgram also recorded qualitative findings from what the Pp’s said ““He’s
banging in there. I’m gonna chicken out. I’d like to continue, but I can’t do that
to a man…I’m sorry, I can’t do that to a man. I’ll hurt his heart. You take your
check…No really I couldn’t do it.” [the subject refused to give any more
shocks]

o Some participants were observed to sweat, tremble, stutter, bite their lips
groan and dig their fingernails into their flesh.

o In the post experimental interview participants were asked how painful to on

a scale of 1: Not at all painful – 14: Extremely painful were the shocks that you
administered to the learner. The modal score was 13.42

CONCLUSIONS

o Milgram concluded that it is the circumstances in which the participants found themselves that
amalgamated to create a situation in which it proved difficult to disobey. (i.e. situational rather
than dispositional factors led to obedience)

He suggested 13 elements in this situation that had contributed to these levels of obedience,
for example:

1. The location of the study at a prestigious university provided authority.

2. Participants assumed that the experimenter knew what he was doing and had a worthy
purpose, so should be followed.
 3. The participant receiving the shocks is believed to be participating voluntarily as they are
willingly taking part and has therefore given consent to receive the shocks.

4. The participant playing the role of teacher also volunteered to take part and didn’t wish to
disrupt the study because he too felt under obligation to the experimenter due to giving
consent to participate.

5. The Procedure strengthened the sense of obligation to the experimenter for example the
participants had been paid for turning up.

6. The role of teacher/learner were rigged to look like they had been selected by fair means,
giving the learner no basis for complain on this basis.

7. This was an unusual (novel) situation for most participants that occurred in a closed setting.
Therefore, there was no opportunity for them to discuss their options with others which
may have changed the outcome.

8. The participant assumed that the discomfort caused was minimal and temporary, and that
the scientific gains were important.

9. The learner continued to respond up to 300v causing the teacher to believe the learner was
still willing to participate. At this point the teacher did not know that the learner would fail
to respond to any other instructions.

10. The participant is placed in a position where he must respond to conflicting demands
neither of which can be satisfactorily resolved.

11. The importance of the experiment carries the weight of scientific authority which may be
seen to outweigh the experience of the learner.

12. The participant has very little time to think about their decisions and has already progressed
through two-thirds of the shock generator before the learner begins to verbally protest.
The teacher has gradually committed to the task making it increasingly difficult to then
refuse to continue.

13. The conflict was between two deeply ingrained behavioural tendencies – not to harm other
people, and second to obey those whom we perceive to be legitimate authorities.

DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY – KOHLBERG

SAMPLE

o 75 American boys
o Aged 10-16 years
o Involved until they were 22-28 years

PROCEDURES

● Longitudinal study over 12 years

 ● Investigating the development of moral reasoning with age

● Used interviews asking the children about 3/9 dilemmas e.g. Heinz dilemma
o Asked open ended questions about these dilemmas, gaining qualitative data.
“Should Heinz steal the drug, why or why not?”
o The focus was on the boys reasoning rather than their answer
o The following questions in the interview we were developed from earlier answers to
investigate moral reasoning. E.g. “Does it make a difference if he loves his wife? Why
or why not?”
● Re-interviewed every 3 years

● Boys answers were analysed and common themes identified so stage theory could be
constructed
● Cross cultural comparison made by comparing the sample to Great Britain, Canada, Taiwan,
Mexico and Turkey. (Made culturally relevant e.g. wife dying of starvation in Taiwan)

FINDINGS

From analysis of the answers given by the boys Kohlberg constructed a typology (Classification
according to general types) containing 3 distinct levels of moral thinking and within each of these
levels distinguishes two related stages.

These levels and stages may be considered separate moral philosophies, distinct views of socio-
moral world.

The preconventional level usually occupied by children 4-10 years

o Accept the rules of authority figures, judge actions based on consequences. E.g. actions that
bring rewards are good, punishment bad.
o Stage 1: Orientation toward punishment and unquestioning deference to superior
power. The physical consequences of action regardless of their human meaning or
value determine its goodness or badness. (Behaviour is guided by if you will be
rewarded or punished) Heinz dilemma: boy says Heinz should NOT steal the drug as
he will go to prison, he is a bad person.
o Stage 2: Right action consists of that which instrumentally satisfies one's own needs
and occasionally the needs of others. Human relations are viewed in terms like those
of the marketplace. Elements of fairness, of reciprocity and equal sharing are
present, but they are always interpreted in a physical, pragmatic way. Reciprocity is
a matter of "you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" not of loyalty, gratitude or
justice. (Self interest, if I get punished and go to prison that will be unpleasant for
me, if my wife dies that will be unpleasant for me) Heinz dilemma: boy says Heinz
should steal the drug because he will be happier because his wife survives.
The conventional level

o The conformist, conforming to social rules is desirable but not out of self interest.
 o Stage 3: Good-boy-good-girl orientation. Good behaviour is that which pleases or
helps others and is approved by them. There is much conformity to stereotypical
images of what is majority or "natural" behaviour. Behaviour is often judged by
intention -"he means well" becomes important for the first time, and is overused, as
by Charlie Brown in Peanuts. One seeks approval by being "nice." (Main concern is
how others will interpret your behaviour) Heinz dilemma: boy says Heinz will not
steal the drug because stealing is bad he tried his best to get the drug without
breaking the drug. No-one will blame him if he dies.
o Stage 4: Orientation toward authority, fixed rules and the maintenance of the social
order. Right behaviour consists of doing one's duty, showing respect for authority
and maintaining the given social order for its own sake. One earns respect by
performing dutifully. (Keeping to the rules/laws) Heinz dilemma: boy says Heinz
should steal the drug and take the punishment.
The postconventional level

o Move beyond unquestioning compliance towards autonomy (independence) and the social
norms of their own social system.

o Stage 5: A social-contract orientation, generally with legalistic and utilitarian

overtones. Right action tends to be defined in terms of general rights and in terms of
standards which have been critically examined and agreed upon by the whole
society. There is a clear awareness of the relativism of personal values and opinions
and a corresponding emphasis upon procedural rules for reaching consensus. Aside
from what is constitutionally and democratically agreed upon, right or wrong is a
matter of personal "values" and "opinion." The result is an emphasis upon the
"legal point of view," but with an emphasis upon the possibility of changing law in
terms of rational considerations of social utility, rather than freezing it in, the terms
of Stage 4 "law and order”. Outside the legal realm, free agreement and contract
are the binding elements of obligation. This is the “official” morality of American
government, and finds its ground in the thought of the writers of the Constitution.
(Your own beliefs are what guides your moral behaviour) Heinz dilemma: boy says
Heinz should steal the drug and life is more important than money & the law.
o Stage 6: Orientation toward the decisions of conscience and toward chosen ethical
principles appealing to logical comprehensiveness, universality and consistency.
These principles are abstract and ethical (the Golden Rule, the categorical
imperative); they are not concrete moral rules like the Ten Commandments. Instead
they are universal Principles of justice, of the reciprocity and equality of human
rights, and of respect for the dignity of human beings as individual persons.(Moral
behaviour is guided by universal, world principles of what is acceptable. e.g. Nelson
Mandela.) Heinz dilemma: boy says Heinz shouldn’t steal the drug as others may
need the drug to be developed so it needs to be available to all.
Findings from cross cultural comparisons

o Cross cultural comparison made by comparing the sample to Great Britain, Canada, Taiwan,
Mexico and Turkey. Suggested the stages are invariant and universal. (Cannot skip a stage
and go back, all follow the same order)
o The results in Taiwan and Mexico were the same except that their development was a little
slower.
o Middle class children moved faster and further through the stages than lower class children.
o The sequence is not dependent upon a particular religion.
CONCLUSIONS

o The stages are invariant and universal

o Each new stage represents a more equilibrated (maintain a balance) form of moral
reasoning, each resulting in a more logically mature form of understanding.

Moral reasoning classes can help to improve children’s moral development. Discussions with
children at stage 3 can result in them moving to stage 4.

DECIDING ON A RESEARCH QUESTION

AIM: A statement of what the researchers intend to

find out in a research study

ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESIS: The testable prediction of the expected

outcome of your research

EXPERIMENTAL HYPOTHESIS: The term used to describe the alternative

hypothesis in an experiment

NULL HYPOTHESIS: States that there is no relationship or difference

between two variables being studied. States
that results are due to chance and are not
significant in terms of supporting the idea being
investigated

“there will be no significant

relationship/difference between _____, any
difference will be due to chance”

INDEPENDENT VARIABLE: Variable that is manipulated

DEPENDANT VARIABLE: Variable that is measured

CONFOUDNING VARIABLE: Variables in a study that are not being

measured or manipulated by the researcher but
affects SOME of the ppts behaviour but not
others, having negative consequences for
validity

EXTRNEOUS VARIABLE: Variables in a study that are not being

 measured or manipulated by the researcher but
affects the results of ALL of the ppts behaviour
equally

Can be identified and controlled for before a

study

CO-VARIABLES Indicate two or more quantities being

measured in a correlation by the researcher
that may/may not vary with each other

OPERATIONALISATION OF VARIABLES: Giving a precise definition of he behaviour

being manipulated/ observed/ measured.
Allows for repetition and raises reliability as it is
an agreed value

TYPES OF DATA
QUALITATIVE

Data which are in-depth, descriptive and Typical methods:

meaningful, and are often taken from real
contexts ● Unstructured interviews

● Case studies

✔ Data is rich and detailed � Difficult to draw conclusions and detect

patterns
✔ Ppts have freedom of expression
� Can be affected by subjective analysis

QUANTITATIVE

Data which are numerical, often involving Typical methods:

measurement of a narrow aspect of behaviour
● Structured questionnaires

● experiments

✔ Easier to analyse as average and ranges can � Topic under investigation can be forced to
be produced fit a set measure
✔ Easier to draw conclusions from data � Can over-simplify complex behaviour
METHODOLIGES
EXPERIMENTS
Definition of an experiment: An experiment is an investigation in which a hypothesis is scientifically
tested. In an experiment, an independent variable (the cause) is manipulated and the dependent
variable (the effect) is measured; any extraneous variables are controlled.

Key features:

● control over variables, careful measurement, and establishing cause and effect relationships.

QUASI EXPERIMENTS
NATURAL:

● IV varies naturally (no manipulation)

● Used when unethical or impractical to manipulate the IV

● DV can be tested in a lab

DIFFERENCE STUDY:

● IV varies naturally (no manipulation) the difference already exists so it is not really a variable
(e.g. age)
● Used when the researcher is interested in the difference

● The DV can be tested in a lab

STRENGTHS

✔ More practical and ethical in most cases

✔ Can take place in a lab, advantage of equipment and high control

WEAKNESSES

� Difficult to recruit participants

� Less control over the other variables

� Cultural bias – less diverse or representative

OBSERVATIONS
● A non-experimental method of investigation, no manipulation and we cannot draw cause and
effect. The researcher simply observes behaviour and looks for patterns

NATURALISTIC: behaviour is studied in a natural situation where everything has been left as it
normally is -VS-
CONTROLLED: some variables are controlled by the researcher, reducing the naturalness of the
behaviour being studied. Ppts are likely to know that they’re being observed, may take place in a lab

STRUCTURED: the researcher has a system that is used to record behaviour. A coding system
(behaviour is operationalised into different categories) is used to tally the number of times of
behaviour occurs, various sampling procedures will be used to decide what behaviour to observe
and when.
-VS-
UNSTRCUTURED: researcher will record all relevant behaviour but has no system, may be due to the
behaviour being studied being unpredictable. May be the first step, then results used for a coding
system for further structured observations

PARTICIPANT: the observer joins a group and observes their activities, while at the same time taking
care to observe what is going on. Deeper insight but difficult to record findings
-VS-
NON-PARTICIPANT: the researcher simply observes the activities but doesn’t take part in them. E.g.
an Ofsted Inspector; he or she is watching the lesson you are in, but they aren’t teaching, and they
aren’t acting as a student. Easier to record data + unbiased

OVERT: The researcher is open about their intentions in the field and ensuring all members of the
social group are aware of what is happening. -VS-

COVERT: the researcher not informing members of the group the reason for their presence; keeping
their true intentions secret.

TIME SAMPLING: recording data at particular intervals

-VS-
EVENT SAMPLING: counting each time a particular behaviour is observed

RELIABILITY VALIDITY

✔ Inter-rater reliability can be used ✔ High ecological validity as involve more

natural behaviours
� Can be difficult to replicate, as take place at
specific place and time ✔ What people say often ≠ what they do, may
be more valid than other methods like
questionnaires
� Controlled + overt observations = more
artificial
� May be a sample bias = not representative

� Little/no control over extraneous variables

CONTENT ANALYSIS
● Non- experimental technique, type of observation

● Observe and analyse the content of things produced by people, such as TV shows, magazines
etc
● Researcher aims to identify patterns and trends and to describe the content in a systematic
way so that conclusions can be drawn
● PRIMARY DATA: data that has been collected directly by the researcher, solely for the
purpose of their investigation.
● SECONDARY DATA: information that someone else has collected e.g. the work of other
psychologists that has been published in journals or government statistics

WHAT HAPPENS IN CONTENT ANALYSIS

● SAMPLE:
o The sample is artefacts, not people
o Needs to be representative, e.g. if studying car adverts in magazines, you’d need to
use a wide range of different magazines
● CODING SYSTEMING:
o Researcher has to create a coding systems, breaks the info down into categories
o QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS: Tallying each time a behaviour is seen in an artefact
● QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS: an alternative to a coding system. The researcher has categories
and choses a particular example to illustrate this category. Instead of counting the data, it is
described

TYPES OF ANALYSIS

● FREQUENCY: the number of times certain words come up

● CONCORDANCE: the number of times certain phrases come up (looks for similarities)

● INTERPRETATIVE: Read transcript several times, identify emergent themes, organise themes
into clusters, produce frequency table of themes

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

✔ Involves secondary data = very few ethical � Open to researcher bias, analysis is based
issues as no direct contact with participants on their own opinion – however, less bias is
is required. likely if more than one researcher carries
o Develop by saying which issues it out the analysis.
avoids. o Develop by adding why bias would
be reduced.
✔ High ecological validity + mundane realism
as based on real communications that are � Written content can be misinterpreted, not
 current such as recent newspapers or possible to ask the person to explain what
children’s books. realism. they wrote.
o Develop by comparing it to a lab o Develop why suggesting what
experiment. impact this would have on the
results.
✔ Can be easily replicated by others. As long
as the same artefacts that are being � Subjective interpretation of the data
analysed are available to others (the same (observer bias). Can affect the objectivity
magazines, TV shows etc), the analysis and validity of findings.
could be repeated, and reliability assessed. o Different observers might interpret
o Develop by suggesting how the meanings of the categories in
reliability could be assessed. the coding system differently.
� Can’t establish cause and effect
o Develop by suggesting what this
would reduce and compare it to a
method that has more ability to
establish cause and effect.

INTERVIEWS
● A way of gathering information from people (usually verbal) on a topic (variable) of interest to
the researcher, can be either qualitative or quantitative
● Non-experimental, type of self-report method

● STRUCTURED: The questions are asked in a set / standardized order and the interviewer will not
deviate from the interview schedule or probe beyond the answers received (so they are not
flexible), uses closed questions

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

✔ Requires less interviewing skill, can by done � Reliability may be affected by the same
by non-professional interviewers interviewer behaving differently on
different occasions
✔ Easier to analyse as the answers are pre-
determined � Different questions may be interpreted in
different ways by the ppts
✔ Can easily be repeated as the questions are
standardised � Ppts. answers may be restricted by the
questions asked
✔ Quantative data can be collected and
statistically analysed
● SEMI-STRUCTURED: Combines a pre-determined set of open questions (questions that prompt
discussion) with the opportunity for the interviewer to explore particular themes or responses
further.

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

✔ In depth qualitative data can be collected � Interviewer bias may be an issue, may lead
the ppts when asking them to develop their
✔ Information can be accessed that might not
responses
be revealed by pre-determined questions
� Reliability may be affected by different
interviewers asking different questions/
same question in different way
� More difficult to analyse data as there’s
more of it

QUESTIONNAIRES
● Non-experimental, self-report method

● Ppt records their own responses

● OPEN QUESTION: ppt can give any answer they wish - qualitative

● CLOSED QUESTION: there is a set number of responses which the ppt selects from –
quantitative
● SEMNTIC DIFERENTIAL SCALE: ppt selects a point on a rating scale that has 2 bi-polar adjectives
at each end. No natural/middle section - quantitative
● LIKERT SCALE: ppt expresses the level of agreement with a particular view – quantitative

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

✔ Closed questions produce quantitative data � In closed questions, respondents may be

which is easier to analyse forced to select answers that do not reflect
their thought/feelings. Affects validity
✔ Open questions produce qualitative data
which may provide in-depth answers, rich � Open questions can be difficult to analyse
in detail = allowing to gain new insight due to large number of possible answers =
difficult to draw conclusions
✔ Questionnaires are easy to repeat, meaning
that data can be collected from large � Different questions may be interpreted
numbers of ppts differently by different ppts. affecting
validity
✔ Ppts are more likely to reveal personal info
in questionnaire > a face to face interview
CORRELATIONS
● Non-experimental method

● A relationship between two covariables. A correlation design is a way to test the relationship
between these two variables. A ppt provides data for both variables
● Allows us to test whether 2 or more phenomena are related, and if so how strongly

● Used when it would be unethical or impractical to manipulate for research

● The correlation coefficient is measured from -1 to +1

● A correlation can be negative, positive or no correlation. The larger the number, the stronger the
correlation

TYPES OF CORRELATION

CORRELATION AND CAUSATION

● 3 possible explanations for when a relationship is found

o X caused Y
o Y caused X
o A 3rd variable (Z) caused the change to both X and Y
▪ Aka an intervening variable

CORRELATION COEFFICIENTS

● POSITIVE CORRELATION
o As one variable increases, the other also increases
o 0 to +1
o e.g. the taller a person is, the heavier they are
 ● NEGATIVE CORRELATION
o As one variable increases, the other decreases
o 0 to -1
o E.g. the more alcohol you drink, the less you can remember
● NO CORRELATION
o There is no relationship between the variables
o Close to 0
o E.g. shoe size and IQ

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

✔ Precise information on the degree of � No cause and effect relationship,

relationship between variable can be found relationship could be explained by an
through the correlation coefficient intervening variable = open to
o Can be used to suggest ideas for misinterpretation
experiments to determine cause + � May lack interval + external validity
effect
o For example, method to measure
✔ Little manipulation of behaviour required, on variable may lack validity or
just measures existing variables = high sample may lack generalisability
mundane realism/ecological validity
✔ Can be used when impractical or unethical
to manipulate variables
✔ Can make use of existing data = quick and
easy

CASE STUDIES
● Non-experimental technique

● An in depth and detailed study of one person or a small group of people. Uses a range of
sources from both the person under investigation and from their family/friends
● Often combines many different types of research methods

STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

✔ Provides detailed (rich qualitative) � Can’t generalize the results to the wider
information population.
✔ Provides insight for further research � Researchers' own subjective feeling may
influence the case study (researcher bias).
✔ Permitting investigation of otherwise
impractical (or unethical) situations. � Difficult to replicate.
 � Time consuming.

BRAIN SCANS
PET SCANS

Injects radioactive tracer into ppt, the most

active areas of the brain use glucose and
radiation detectors can ‘see’ the radioactive
areas so building up a picture of the activity in
the brain.
£920+
E.g. Raine

✔ Take between 10-40 minutes to complete � Very costly and so not easily available for
and are painless. psychological research.
✔ Can show the brain ‘in action’ � Ppt injected with radioactive substance it
can only be used a few times.
✔ Reveal chemical information not available
via other scans, can differentiate between � Less precise than MRI
benign and malignant tumours.

MRI SCANS
Uses a magnetic field, causes the atoms of the
brain to change their alignment when on + emit
radio signals when off.

A detector reads the signals and uses them to £350 - £700

map the structure of the brain.

E.g. Maguire 2000. used MRI scans to

demonstrate taxi drivers had a larger
hippocampus

✔ Gives a more detailed image of the soft � Take a long time and can be
tissue in the brain than CAT scans uncomfortable + movement can affect
images
✔ fMRI measures changes in blood flow =
no radioactive substances � No cause & effect relationships can be
established.
✔ Both anatomical AND functioning
information by taking repeated images
of the brain
✔ Can have multiple scans as no radiation
 CAT SCANS
Takes a series of X-rays and combining them to
form a 2D/3D picture of the area being
scanned.

Usually a dye is injected into the patient as a £450 - £600

contrast material then placed in a cylindrical
CAT scan.

E.g. Johnstone 1976 used CAT scans to show

differences in ventricles of Schizophrenics

✔ High quality images � Can only provide structural information

✔ Useful for revealing abnormal � Requires more radiation than

structures in the brain traditional x-rays

CROSS SECTIONAL STUDY

● Takes place on one specific moment in time, compares different groups of people at that
time
● Ppts are tested once, usually to find a relationship between one variable and another

STRENGTHS

✔ Reasonably cheap and practical, ppts only tested once + no follow up study needed

✔ Ppts easily obtained as less pressure to commit than longitudinal

✔ Less ethical considerations than longitudinal

WEAKNESSESS

� Less rich/detailed data than longitudinal with regards to individual ppt differences

� Data collected is from a snapshot in time, harder to identify and analyse developmental
trends

LONGITUDINAL STUDY
● Follows one group of people over a period of time, can be as little as a month or many years/
decades
● Behaviour tested at beginning of study then regular intervals
 ● Aim is to compare data of each test to see how time affects whatever is being tested

STRENGTHS

✔ Same group of ppts used for whole study, so ppt variable don’t affect data

✔ Best way of spotting developmental trends as tests are repeated at regular intervals/
findings compared

WEAKNESSES

� Problem of attrition, ppts may more away or no longer want to participate = disrupts study

� Withdrawal of ppts mean that if remaining ones all share a characteristic then findings are
biased
� Practical difficulties e.g. can be expensive, time consuming
o If researchers change over time, then data collection and analysis may vary in
strength

SELF-REPORTS
● Methods of gathering data where participants provide information about themselves
without interference from the experimenter.

VALDITY RELIABILITY

● Issue of whether it is actually ● How consistent a test is within itself, all

measuring what it intends to measure questions should be consistently asking
o E.g. leading questions the same thing
o Provide unambiguous pre-
● Social desirability bias
determined answers so ppt is
o Lie scale and be introduced, clear about their response
questions added as a “truth-
detector” ● Check for consistency over-several
occasions, e.g. give out questionnaire
again
● Inter-interviewer reliability so results
can be compared, helps prevent
subjectiveness

LOCATION OF RESEARCH
LOCATION DESCRIPTION STRENGTHS LIMITATIONS
 LAB ● High level of control ✔ Variables easy to � Ppt effects still occur,
over main aspects = measure demand characteristic
�
can establish cause +
✔ Easy to repeat May cause artificial
effect
behaviour
● Artificial setting ✔ Better access to
equipment � Can suitable for all
● Ppts know they’re research (e.g.
✔ Confounding +
being studied inaccessible/ impractical
extraneous variables behaviour)
can be better
controlled

FIELD ● Manipulates the IV ✔ Minimise � More difficult to

but little control over artificialness, less measure variables
�
other aspects likely to be aware
Difficult to control for
they’re being
● Cause and effect confounding/extraneous
studied
● May have a natural ✔ Allows huge range of � Results may differ each
setting contexts that would time, exact conditions
be difficult in a lab may not be replicate
able

ONLINE ● Social networking ✔ access to more ppts � methods are limited

+ more diverse
● Email questionnaires � ethical issues, consent +
sample
confidentiality
● Calls and texts ✔ cost effective
� difficult to appropriately
● Skype ✔ quick data analysis debrief
● etc � can’t tell if ppts lie

PARTICIPANTS
● target population: a group of people that a researcher wishes to investigate

● sampling frame: the group of ppts choses from the target population

TECHNIQUE DESCRIPTION STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

�
OPPORTUNITY Uses ppts who are
✔ easy and convenient may not be
available at the time
compared to _____ representative

�
SELF SELECTED Ppts volunteer when
✔ Gains willing ppts = less Can be highly
asked/ respond to advert
likely to drop out unrepresentative
 �
RANDOM Every member of target
✔ Fairest way to select May not be
pop is available to
researcher, equal chance sample, as equal representative,
of being chosen opportunity randomly choose
similar ppts

�
SYSTEMATIC List of target pop (e.g.
✔ Tends to be Not fairest as not
school register)
representative as every ppt has
Names systematically researcher has some equal chance, e.g
chosen, every nth name control first person

�
STRATIFIED Sample divided into sub-
✔ Fair as ppts have equal Time consuming
groups according to
(random) chance of being picked to identify and
frequency in target pop.
allocate all
✔ Likely to be
Certain number of ppts groups
chosen proportionally representative of target
from each group pop

�
QUOTA Used when needed to
✔ Likely to be Less fair as
provide representation
(not random, representative of target researcher
hand picked) Selected by volunteer or pop as proportional choses
researcher
�
representation of
Time consuming
subgroups

�
SNOWBALL Ask ppts to give names of
✔ Can access those who Unlikely to be
other possible ppts
wouldn’t normally representative,
come forward ppts recommend
ppl they know,
✔ Locate groups who are
likely to be
difficult to access similar

SAMPLING FOR OBSERVATIONS:

● Event sampling: allows researchers to observe ongoing behaviours that vary overtime in a
naturally occurring environment
o E.g. sitting in a pub all day and ticking off when you see a behaviour
● Time sampling: ppts are observed for a specific amount of time, useful for recording
observations of frequent behaviour
o E.g. going to the pub for an hour at night to see rowdy behaviour

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
DESIGN STRENGTHS WEAKNESSES

INDEPENDENT �
Ppts. only take part in one
✔ Ppt. variables are Individual differences
MEASURES experimental condition minimised between ppts of each
group. E.g. memory
✔ Order effects avoided.
Unlikely to work out aim
from one condition

REPEATED �
Ppts. take part in both
✔ Ppt variables are Order effects:
MEASURES experimental conditions
eliminated
� Boredom
✔ Fewer participants are
� Practice
needed = less time
consuming � Fatigue

� Demand characteristics

MATCHED �
Ppts. are matched in each
✔ Individual differences Can be difficult and time
condition for characteristics
that may have an effect on minimised and consuming to match for
their performance. controlled required characteristics

e.g. gender

LEVELS OF MEASUREMENT
● Nominal:
o Also known as frequency data
o Assigning how many occur in each group
o E.g. how many boys
● Ordinal:
o Data put into logical order
o ranked or on a rating scale, the values collected have an order to them
o e.g. 1-10 attractiveness
● Interval:
o Equal meaningful intervals between measurements of raw scores
o e.g. time
● Ratio:
o Equal intervals between measurements, but the scale has a “true” zero
o E.g. test scores or number of children

GRAPHICAL RESEARCH
● Continuous data: numerical, can be on a scale

● Discrete data: categories or values (e.g. gender)

FREQUENCY TABLES
● Might be given a table that contains raw data, or a table with a measure of central tendency
(either mean ,mode or median) or the range

GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION
● Line graphs:
o Graphs that show information that is connected in some way (such as change in a
performance on a test over time)
● Bar charts:
o Height of each bar represents the frequency of that item
o Categories (discrete data) are placed on the horizontal X axis and frequency on the
vertical Y axis
o The bars do not touch
● Histograms:
o Y axis must always start at 0 and there are no gaps between the bars
o Suitable for continuous data
▪ E.g. how many students scored what on a test

● Pie charts:
o A chart that represents data as “slices” to show their size in relation to each other
o Often presented as percentages
● Scatter graphs:
o Used when conducting correlational research
o When you have paired numerical data and are trying to determine whether 2 co-
variables are related
o Show positive, negative or uncorrelated data at a glance

DISTRIBUTION CURVES
● Normal:
o ‘Bell curve’ shape
o Highest frequency in the middle/ around the mean then falls either side
o Majority falls within 1 standard deviation on either side of the mean
● Positive skewed:
o If the mode and mein are lower than the mean
o Asymmetrical and points in positive direction
o E.g. if everyone did badly on a test
● Negative skewed:
o The mode and median are higher than the mean
o E.g if everyone did well on a test
DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS
MEASURES OF CENTRAL TENDANCY
Informs us about central or “typical” values for a set of data, providing a useful description of a data
set

● Mean:
o Adding up all the values and dividing by the no of values
o Can only be used with ratio and interval level data
✔ Makes use of all the data

� May not be representative if there are extreme values, would skew the position of
central tendency
● Median:
o All the data is ordered then the middle value found
o Will be 2 central values if there is an even number of data, must add the 2 together and
divide by 2 to get the median
o Ordinal and interval/ratio (if skewed)
✔ Not effected by extreme scores

� Not as sensitive as the mean as doesn’t take into account all of the numbers

● Mode:
o Number that appears most often (the highest frequency count for nominal data)
o For interval and ordinal, it’s the data item that occurs most frequently
o Bi-modal = when two categories have the same frequency
o Can be used for all types od data
✔ Useful for data in categories

� Not useful if there is more than one mode + weak measure of central tendency

MEASURE OF DISPERSION
Informs us how the data is dispersed/ how spread out is the data

● Range:
o The arithmetic distance between the top and bottom value
o Tells us what the highest and lowest values are + the difference between them
✔ Easy to calculate

� Affected by extreme values

� Fails to take into account the distribution of number

▪ E.g. doesn’t indicate whether most value are closes grouped around the mean or
spread evenlly
● Standard deviation:
o Provides some idea about the distribution of scores around the mean
o Smaller the standard deviation = the more narrow the range between the lowest and
highest scores
o The larger the population, the more likely to have a normal distribution

INFERENTIAL STATISTICS
TYPES OF TEST

SIGNIFICANCE LEVELS
● Probability levels (significance levels) are expressed as decimals or percentages.

● They represent how confident the researcher is that the results obtained are actually due to the
Independent Variable rather than other confounding or chance factors.
● 95% is showing that the researcher is saying that there is a 5% chance that results occurred due
to chance, this would be p≤0.05
JUSTIFIYING A STATS TEST

RELIABILITY
RELIABILITY: the consistency of a measure. A measure is reliable if we get the same result
repeatedly, a research method is reliable if it is repeated and the same results are found.

INTERNAL RELIABILITY: refers to the consistency of them measuring tool. E.g. items in a
questionnaire or the wording of an interview

EXTERNAL RELIABILITY: refers to the consistency of the findings over time

WAYS OF DEALING WITH RELIABLILTY ISSUES

o Use more than one researcher
o Repeat the study
o Standardise procedures
o Operationalise terms
o Standardise questions and possible answers

ASSESSING RELIABILITY
o INTER-RATER:
o If the measure depends upon interpretation of behaviour, we can compare the results
from two or more researchers
o If there is high agreements = the measure if reliable
o SPLIT-HALF:
o Splitting a test into two halves, and comparing the score in halves
o If a correlation coefficient of at lest 0.8 if found then the measure is reliable
o TEST-RETEST
o The measure is administered to the same group of people twice
o If the results of the two tests are similar = the test is reliable

VALIDITY
VALDITY: the extent to which something accurately measures what it is supposed to measure

INTERNAL VALIDITY: whether the IV really had an effect on the DV or whether a confounding
variable caused it

EXTERNAL VALIDITY: whether the findings of a study can really be generalised beyond the present
study
RELIABILITY ISSUES
RESEARCHER BIAS: the researchers performing the research influence the results, in order to
portray a certain outcome.

DEMAND CHARACTERISTICS: high risk that participants will change their natural behaviour in line
with their interpretation of the aims of a study

SOCIAL DESIREABILITY: participants' behaviour is distorted as they modify it in order to be seen in a

positive light.

o The researcher is using an unrepresentative sample

o The researchers are having an influence on the participants responses
o The research setting is artificial
o The participants are trying to work out the aim of the study and act accordingly (good/bad).
o The participants are worried about the impression they are giving to others particularly the
researcher.

WAYS OF DEALING WITH RELIABILTY ISSUES

o INTERNAL VALIDITY:
o Eliminating extraneous variables
o 2/4/5 Using single or double blind control
o Standardising procedures
o EXTERNAL VALIDITY:
o Ensure generalisability by:
o Including a wide range of participants
o Ensuring the study represents the real world and real life experience

ASSESSING VALIDITY
o PREDICTIVE:
o Is our measure associated with future behaviour?
▪ For example, if someone scores high on our IQ test, we would expect them to
perform well in GCSE exams, or do well in their career.
▪ Can investigate predictive validity by following up our participants to see if
future performance is similar to performance on our measure
o CONCURRENT:
o How well does the measure agree with existing measures?
▪ For example, does our IQ test agree with established tests of IQ?

▪ Can ensure concurrent validity by testing participants with both the new test
and an established test. If our test has concurrent validity, there should be close
agreement between the scores on both measures.
o CONSTRUCT:
o Is the method actually measuring all parts of what we are aiming to test? (the
construct)
▪ For example, if we use a maths test to test intelligence, are we missing out on
other factors involved such as language ability or spatial awareness.
 ▪ To maintain construct validity, we need to define what it is we are aiming to
measure, and make sure that all parts of that definition are being measured.
o FACE:
o Does the method used actually seem to measure what you intended?
▪ For example, does an IQ test actually measure levels of intelligence, or is it
measuring ability to solve puzzles?
▪ To ensure face validity, the researcher can ask their participants (lay people)
what the study appears to be measuring, if they all agree on intelligence or IQ
then the study has face validity.
o CONTENT
o Does the method used actually seem to measure what you intended?
▪ For example, does an IQ test actually measure levels of intelligence, or is it
measuring ability to solve puzzles?
▪ To ensure content validity, a panel of experts (on IQ for example) may be asked
to assess the measure for validity

ETHICS
ETHICAL ISSUES
o PRIVACY
o Refers to a zone of inaccessibility of mind and body, and a trust that this will not be
invaded
o HOW TO DEAL WITH IT:
▪ Observations should only be made in public places where people might expect
to be seen by strangers
▪ Interviews and questionnaires should not ask for personal sensitive information.
o LIMITATIONS:
▪ Very difficult to avoid when studying Pp without their awareness

o RIGHT TO WITHDRAW
o Pps can leave at anytime during the research, regardless of having been paid for taking
part.
o Pp’s should also be told that they can withdraw their data too (preferably by deleting
or destroying it in their presence)
o HOW TO DEAL WITH IT:
▪ Pp’s should always be aware that they can leave the study at anytime, regardless
of whether or not incentives have been offered.
▪ Very young children any distress should be interpreted as them expressing their
right to withdraw
o LIMITATIONS:
 ▪ From the researchers point of view it may be necessary to keep the Ps in the
study until they have completed the task.

o DECEPTION
o A Pp is not told the true aims of a study.
o Pps should be treated with respect and so not expect to be deceived or lied to by the
researcher.
o HOW TO DEAL WITH IT:
▪ If its needed it should be approved by an ethics committee

▪ Pp’s should be fully debriefed after the study

▪ Told the true nature of the study, even if not completely deceived, they may not
have been told the full aims of the study.
▪ Any issues or concerns should be dealt with at the debrief.

▪ Pp’s should be given the right to withdraw their data during the debrief
o LIMITATIONS:
▪ If the researcher tells the participants the full and true aims of the research they
may act differently. Their behaviour may then be less truthful or natural than if
they were naeive of the true aim of the research.
▪ Deception means the Pp’s cant give informed consent

▪ Decisions by ethics committees are subjective

o PROTECTION FROM HARM

o Avoid any risks greater than that experienced in everyday life. Stop if harm is
suspected.
o HOW TO DEAL WITH IT:
▪ Stop if harm is suspected

▪ Gain informed consent prior to the start of the study to harm but maintain right
to withdraw
▪ Pps should be in the same state after the study as when they started
o LIMITATIONS:
▪ Researchers often investigate many important areas that may cause physical
and psychological distress to Ps.
▪ Sometimes harm is unexpected

o CONFIDENTIAILTY
o The communication of personal information from one person to another & the trust
that information will be protected
o HOW TO DEAL WITH IT:
 ▪ Ps should not be filmed or recorded without their knowledge.

▪ Fake names (Pseudonym) give anonymity

▪ Data protection makes this a legal right

o LIMITATIONS
▪ Sometimes it may be obvious who has been involved in the study even with
anonymity.
▪ E.g. A study at sixth form college in Nottingham

o INFORMED CONSENT
o Ps need to be aware of exactly what they will be doing and why before they can give
their informed consent to take part in the study.
o Under 16’s/ Pps with impairments requires special safeguarding
o Consent from parents
o HOW TO DEAL WITH IT:
▪ Presumptive consent – asking a group of people who are similar to the Pps
whether they would agree to take part in the study. If this group of people
agrees then it is presumed that the real Pps would.
▪ At debrief full informed consent obtained retrospectively
o LIMITATIONS:
▪ Having informed consent may invalidate the results of the study if too much
information is given to the Ps.

o ANIMALS
o Minimise stress and suffering for all animals
o Always consider the possibility of other options to animal research
o Be as economical as possible in the number of animals used
o HOW TO DEAL WITH IT:
▪ Replace – animals with alternatives e.g. brain scans

▪ Reduce – number of animals used

▪ Refine – procedures so they cause less suffering

o LIMITATIONS:
▪ The UK Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986

▪ Research should only take place at licensed laboratories, with licensed

researchers on licensed projects. (3 licences)
MANAGING ETHICAL RISKS
ETHICAL COMITTEE

o Every research proposal must be approved before it begins.

o It looks at all possible ethical issues raised in research proposals and how the researcher
suggests that these issues will be dealt with.
o The committee weighs up the benefits of the research against costs to the participants before
passing and researchers proposals.

ISSUES

o Cost- benefit decisions are flawed because they involve subjective judgements from the
members of the committee.
o The costs of the research are not always apparent until after the study has been conducted.

ETHICAL GUIDELINES

o Rules are not legally enforceable by law and they can be ignored by researchers.
o The only penalty for a breach of the guidelines is a ban from the BPS.
o However, these ‘rules’ have to be general as it is impossible to anticipate every situation that
a researcher may come across during their research
o The British Psychological Society (BPS), produce ethical guidelines and codes of conduct that
tell psychologists what behaviours are not acceptable and tell them how to deal with ethical
problems.

ROLE OF THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY

PEER REVIEW
MAIN AIMS

o To allocate research funding

o Help to decide whether projects are worthwhile
o To validate quality and relevance of research
o All elements of research are assessed
o To suggest alterations or improvements

THE PROCESS

1. Researcher submits article to journal

2. Journal is assessed by editor of journal
3. If accepted, the article is sent to reviewers (who is also an expert in the field)
4. Reviewers are normally kept anonymous from the articles author
5. Reviewers submit their comments to the editor
6. Editor may reject the article or return it to the author for revisions
7. Revised article is re-submitted to editor for publication

EVALUATION
 o ANONYMITY
o Stops bias towards results, being over-lenient or over-critical
o BIAS TOWARDS POSITIVE RESULTS
o Significant “headline grabbing” research may be given more attention
o “file drawer problem” = ‘boring’ research may be overlooked
o PROBLEMATIC PUBLISHED RESEARCH
o The Burt Affair
o Suggested that there was a correlation between race and intelligence
o RESISTING CHANGE IN THE STATUS QUO

FORMATTING REPORTS