Unit - II

Relation of social psychology with other disciplines-

Social psychology is an interdisciplinary field, meaning it shares significant connections with
various other academic disciplines. While it primarily focuses on understanding how
individuals' thoughts, feelings, and behaviors are influenced by social contexts and
interactions, it intersects with a wide range of other fields. Here’s how social psychology relates
to other key disciplines:
1. Sociology
• Relation: Sociology studies society, social institutions, and large-scale social structures,
while social psychology focuses on individual behavior within social contexts.
• Overlap: Both disciplines explore social influence, norms, and group behavior, but
sociology tends to emphasize group-level phenomena (e.g., societal changes, social
systems), while social psychology looks more at individual psychological processes (e.g.,
conformity, group dynamics, attitudes).
• Example: Both disciplines study phenomena like group behavior, but sociology might
analyze the structure of a social movement, while social psychology would look at the
psychological mechanisms behind individuals’ participation in that movement.
2. Psychology
• Relation: Social psychology is a subfield of psychology, which is the broader study of
mental processes and behavior. Social psychology specifically focuses on how people’s
thoughts, emotions, and behaviors are influenced by others and by social contexts.
• Overlap: Psychology provides foundational theories and methods, and social psychology
builds on these by exploring topics like social cognition, identity, attitudes, and
interpersonal relationships.
• Example: While clinical psychology may focus on individual therapy and behavior
disorders, social psychology studies how social influences shape behaviors and attitudes,
like in the study of prejudice or persuasion.
3. Anthropology
• Relation: Anthropology studies human societies, cultures, and their development. Social
psychology shares an interest in how culture and society influence individual behaviors
and attitudes.
• Overlap: Both disciplines explore topics like group behavior, cultural norms, and
socialization processes. However, anthropology tends to focus more on the cultural and
evolutionary aspects, while social psychology tends to investigate the psychological
mechanisms that underlie social behavior.
 • Example: Social psychologists may study how cultural norms shape individual behavior,
while anthropologists might explore how different cultures develop those norms and
values over time.
4. Political Science
• Relation: Political science is concerned with the theory and practice of politics,
governance, and policy-making. Social psychology informs political science by explaining
how individuals' attitudes, perceptions, and behaviors are shaped by political contexts
and group dynamics.
• Overlap: Both disciplines look at topics like leadership, influence, and group decision-
making. Social psychology provides insights into voter behavior, political attitudes, and
the psychology of political campaigns.
• Example: Social psychologists might study how groupthink influences political decisions,
while political scientists focus on the structures of government that allow such behavior
to occur.
5. Economics
• Relation: Economics focuses on the production, distribution, and consumption of goods
and services, as well as human decision-making in economic contexts. Social psychology
contributes by examining how social influences, emotions, and biases affect economic
decisions and consumer behavior.
• Overlap: The concept of "behavioral economics" draws heavily from social psychology,
especially in understanding how non-rational factors (such as social pressure or framing)
influence economic choices.
• Example: Social psychologists may study how individuals' decisions are influenced by
social norms (e.g., purchasing behaviors influenced by peer pressure) or how people
make judgments in uncertain economic environments.
6. Education
• Relation: Education focuses on teaching and learning processes. Social psychology
contributes to education by examining how social factors such as peer influence,
teacher-student relationships, and classroom dynamics affect learning and educational
outcomes.
• Overlap: Both fields are concerned with how individuals behave in group settings. Social
psychologists might explore how social identity, group membership, and classroom
environments influence student motivation, academic performance, and socialization.
• Example: Social psychologists may examine the role of group norms and peer pressure in
academic achievement, while educators focus on creating teaching strategies to foster
positive group interactions.
7. Neuroscience
• Relation: Neuroscience is the study of the nervous system, including the brain’s role in
behavior and cognitive processes. Social psychology and neuroscience intersect in the
growing field of social neuroscience, which explores how brain processes are involved in
social behaviors like empathy, decision-making, and aggression.
• Overlap: Social psychologists examine how social experiences and interactions influence
behavior, while neuroscience looks at the underlying brain mechanisms. Social
neuroscience explores the neural basis of social processes like conformity, emotional
regulation, and group behavior.
• Example: Researchers may study how brain activity correlates with behaviors like
prejudice or how social feedback influences neural responses to reward and
punishment.
8. Communication Studies
• Relation: Communication studies examine the processes of human communication,
including verbal and nonverbal exchanges. Social psychology focuses on how
communication influences social behavior, attitudes, and group dynamics.
• Overlap: Both fields examine persuasion, influence, and the ways in which messages
(whether verbal, nonverbal, or media-based) affect attitudes and behavior. Social
psychologists often study communication in terms of persuasion, group dynamics, and
media influence on behavior.
• Example: Social psychologists might investigate how persuasive messages change
individuals’ attitudes or how group communication affects decision-making, while
communication studies would explore the strategies and channels of communication
itself.
9. Law
• Relation: Law focuses on the rules that govern society, while social psychology is
interested in understanding how people behave within legal contexts (e.g., jury
decisions, eyewitness testimony, and the psychology of criminal behavior).
• Overlap: Social psychology influences law in understanding how social factors such as
biases, group pressure, and authority affect legal decisions and actions.
• Example: Social psychologists may study how jurors' group dynamics and biases
influence verdicts, while legal scholars focus on the procedural and institutional aspects
of the justice system.
10. History
• Relation: History is concerned with studying past events and their causes. Social
psychology can help explain why individuals and groups acted the way they did in
 historical contexts, particularly focusing on collective behavior, social movements, and
the psychology of historical events.
• Overlap: Social psychologists might look at how social forces such as group identity,
conformity, and authority shaped key historical events, while historians explore these
events within their broader social, political, and cultural contexts.
• Example: Social psychology might provide insights into why people followed a particular
leader during a social movement, while historians would explore the political, economic,
and social conditions of the time.
Conclusion
Social psychology is deeply intertwined with many disciplines. By examining the ways in which
individuals think, feel, and behave in social contexts, social psychology provides valuable
insights into areas like group dynamics, communication, decision-making, and behavior in
various institutional settings. The reciprocal influence between social psychology and these
other fields enhances our understanding of human behavior in social, cultural, and institutional
contexts.
Theories, Intervention Techniques, Research Methods
With a problem-oriented, inductive approach, applied social psychologists are able to apply
many theories, intervention techniques and research methods. Also, since social problems
often have many causes, many variables must be considered. Some theories may be more
applicable to a particular problem than others. For instance, anonymous behaviour is unlikely
to be affected by social influence. In a case like that, theories like the theory of normative
behaviour are less likely to apply. Similarly, intervention techniques must be appropriate to the
problem. They tend to be more effective when they specifically address factors that contribute
to the problem behaviour, and attempt to improve those factors that can be improved.
Knowing which factors cause or inhibit certain behaviour is essential in choosing appropriate
ways to deal with it.

Challenges and Ethical Considerations

Applied social psychology faces several challenges and ethical considerations:
1. Balancing Theory and Practice: Integrating theoretical knowledge with practical
applications requires careful consideration to ensure that interventions are both
scientifically sound and effective in real-world settings.
2. Value Dependency: Researchers’ personal values can influence the choice of research
topics and the interpretation of findings. Maintaining objectivity and transparency is
crucial to ensure the integrity of applied social psychological research.
 3. Ethical Responsibility: Applied social psychologists have a responsibility to consider the
potential impacts of their work on individuals and society, ensuring that interventions
promote well-being and do not cause harm.
4. Interdisciplinary Collaboration: Addressing complex social problems often requires
collaboration with other disciplines, such as sociology, economics, and public health.
Effective interdisciplinary communication and cooperation are essential for successful
applied research.
5. Scalability and Sustainability: Ensuring that interventions are scalable and sustainable
over the long term is a key challenge. Applied social psychologists must consider the
feasibility and longevity of their solutions.
Conclusion
Applied social psychology is a dynamic and impactful field that leverages social psychological
theories and methods to address real-world social problems. By integrating theoretical insights
with practical applications, applied social psychology contributes to improving individual and
societal well-being across a wide range of domains, including the environment, health,
intergroup relations, public policy, and organizational behavior.
From a sociological perspective, applied social psychology offers valuable tools for
understanding and addressing the complex interplay of individual behavior and social
dynamics. As the field continues to evolve, ongoing research and collaboration will be essential
to advancing our understanding of social problems and developing effective, evidence-based
solutions that promote a more just and equitable society. Through a commitment
to scientific rigor, ethical responsibility, and practical relevance, applied social psychology will
continue to play a vital role in shaping a better future for all.

Methods of social psychology:

Simply, the scientific method is a systematic method for gathering knowledge about the world
around us. The key word here is that it is systematic meaning there is a set way to use it. What
is that way? Well, depending on what source you look at it can include a varying number of
steps. For our purposes, the following will be used:
Table 2.1: The Steps of the Scientific Method

Step Name Description

To study the world around us you have to wonder about it.

Ask questions and be This inquisitive nature is the hallmark of critical thinking, or
0
willing to wonder. our ability to assess claims made by others and make
objective judgments that are independent of emotion and
 based on hard evidence, and required to be a scientist. We
might wonder why our friend chose to go to a technical school
or the military over the four year university we went to, which
falls under attribution theory in social psychology.

Through our wonderment about the world around us and why

events occur as they do, we begin to ask questions that
require further investigation to arrive at an answer. This
Generate a research
investigation usually starts with a literature review, (library or
question or identify a
1 google) to see what questions have been investigated already
problem to
and what answers have been found, so that we can
investigate.
identify gaps or holes in this body of work. As you read
articles you would try and figure out what has and has not
been done to give your future research project direction.

We now attempt to formulate an explanation of why the

event occurs as it does. This systematic explanation of a
phenomenon is a theory and our specific, testable prediction
is the hypothesis. We will know if our theory is correct
Attempt to explain the
because we have formulated a hypothesis which we can now
2 phenomena we wish
test. You might examine whether or not your friend made his
to study.
choice because he is genuinely interested in learning a trade
or serving his country, or if he was pushed to do this by his
parents. The former would be a dispositional or personal
reason while the latter would be situational.

It goes without saying that if we cannot test our hypothesis,

then we cannot show whether our prediction is correct or
not. Our plan of action of how we will go about testing the
hypothesis is called our research design. In the planning
3 Test the hypothesis.
stage, we will select the appropriate research method to
answer our question/test our hypothesis. In this case that is
to what extent parenting and attachment serve as situational
factors affecting career choice decisions.

We need to see if a cause and effect statement can be made,

4 Interpret the results. assuming our method allows for this inference. Statistical
significance is an indication of how confident we are that our
results are due to our manipulation or design and not chance.
 Typically we set this significance at no higher than 5% due to
chance.

We need to accurately interpret our results and not overstate

Draw conclusions our findings. To do this, we need to be aware of our biases
5
carefully. and avoid emotional reasoning so that they do not cloud our
judgment.

Once we have decided on whether our hypothesis is correct

or not, we need to share this information with others so that
they might comment critically on our methodology, statistical
Communicate our
analyses, and conclusions. Sharing also allows
6 findings to the larger
for replication or repeating the study to confirm its results.
scientific community.
Communication is accomplished via scientific journals,
conferences, or newsletters released by many of the
organizations.

Step 3 called on the scientist to test their hypothesis. Psychology as a discipline uses five
main research designs. These include observational research, case studies, surveys,
correlational designs, and experiments.

2.2.1. Observational Research

In terms of naturalistic observation, the scientist studies human or animal behavior in its
natural environment which could include the home, school, or a forest. The researcher counts,
measures, and rates behavior in a systematic way and at times uses multiple judges to ensure
accuracy in how the behavior is being measured. This is called inter-rater reliability as you will
see in Section 2.3. The advantage of this method is that you witness behavior as it occurs and it
is not tainted by the experimenter. The disadvantage is that it could take a long time for the
behavior to occur and if the researcher is detected then this may influence the behavior of
those being observed. In the case of the latter, the behavior of the observed becomes artificial.
Laboratory observation involves observing people or animals in a laboratory setting. The
researcher might want to know more about parent-child interactions and so brings a mother
and her child into the lab to engage in preplanned tasks such as playing with toys, eating a
meal, or the mother leaving the room for a short period of time. The advantage of this method
over the naturalistic method is that the experimenter can use sophisticated equipment and
videotape the session to examine it at a later time. The problem is that since the subjects know
the experimenter is watching them, their behavior could become artificial from the start.
2.2.1.1. Example of an observational social psychology study. Griffiths (1991) studied the
gambling behavior of adolescents by observing the clientele of 33 arcades in the UK. He used
participant (when the researcher becomes an active participant in the group they are studying)
and non-participant observation methodologies and found that adolescent gambling
depended on the time of day and the time of year, and regular players had stereotypical
behaviors and conformed to specific rules of etiquette. They played for fun, to win, to socialize,
for excitement, and/or to escape.
Mostly used
• Study of Social Interactions: Sociologists use observation to study how individuals
behave in groups and how societal norms influence behavior. It helps explore topics like
group dynamics, social roles, rituals, and cultural practices.
Merits of Observational Research:
1. Natural Setting:
• Real-World Context: Observational research is conducted in natural
environments, which allows researchers to study behaviors as they occur
naturally, without artificial interference. This enhances the ecological validity of
the findings.
2. Rich, Detailed Data:
• In-depth Information: It provides rich, qualitative data that offers a deep
understanding of the behaviors, interactions, and contexts being studied.
Researchers can capture subtle nuances and complex interactions that might be
missed in structured surveys or experiments.
3. Non-Intrusiveness:
• Low Risk of Bias: Because participants are unaware of being studied
(in naturalistic observation), there is less risk of demand characteristics (where
participants alter their behavior because they know they are being observed).
4. Flexibility:
• Exploration of Unpredictable Phenomena: Observational research allows for the
study of complex social phenomena that might be difficult to study in a controlled
experiment. It is especially useful when little is known about the phenomenon or
when conducting experiments would be impractical or unethical.
5. No Need for Manipulation:
• Ethical and Feasible: Since observational research does not involve manipulating
variables or exposing participants to potentially harmful experimental conditions,
it is often used when manipulation would be unethical (e.g., studying aggressive
behavior without inducing it).
Demerits of Observational Research:
1. Lack of Control:
• Confounding Variables: In observational studies, researchers cannot control
external factors that might influence the behavior being studied. Without control
over these variables, it is difficult to establish clear cause-and-effect relationships.
2. Observer Bias:
• Subjectivity: The researcher’s expectations, beliefs, or biases may influence what
they choose to observe or how they interpret behaviors. This can lead to observer
bias, where the data collected may be skewed according to the researcher’s
subjective perspective.
3. Ethical Issues:
• Privacy Concerns: Observing individuals without their knowledge (in covert
observation) can raise serious ethical concerns regarding privacy, consent, and the
potential for harm.
4. Limited Generalizability:
• Small Sample Sizes: Observational studies are often conducted with small, specific
groups, which may limit the ability to generalize the findings to a larger
population. Moreover, observations in specific contexts may not apply to different
settings or cultures.
5. Time and Resource Intensive:
• Data Collection and Analysis: Observational research often requires significant
amounts of time for both data collection and analysis. Researchers need to be
present in the setting for long periods to capture meaningful behaviors and
interactions, which can be resource-intensive.
6. Difficulty in Replication:
• Lack of Standardization: Observational research is often context-dependent,
which makes it difficult to replicate the study in another setting or with a different
sample. This lack of standardization can limit the reliability of findings.
2.2.2. Case Studies
Psychology can also utilize a detailed description of one person or a small group based on
careful observation. This was the approach the founder of psychoanalysis, Sigmund Freud, took
to develop his theories. The advantage of this method is that you arrive at a rich description of
the behavior being investigated but the disadvantage is that what you are learning may be
unrepresentative of the larger population and so lacks generalizability. Again, bear in mind
that you are studying one person or a very small group. Can you possibly make conclusions
about all people from just one or even five or ten? The other issue is that the case study is
subject to the bias of the researcher in terms of what is included in the final write up and what
is left out. Despite these limitations, case studies can lead us to novel ideas about the cause of
behavior and help us to study unusual conditions that occur too infrequently to study with
large sample sizes and in a systematic way. Though our field does make use of the case study
methodology, social psychology does not frequently use the design.
2.2.2.1. Example of a case study from clinical psychology. In 1895, the book, Studies on
Hysteria, was published by Josef Breuer (1842-1925) and Sigmund Freud (1856-1939), and
marked the birth of psychoanalysis, though Freud did not use this actual term until a year later.
The book published several case studies, including that of Anna O., born February 27, 1859 in
Vienna to Jewish parents Siegmund and Recha Pappenheim, strict Orthodox adherents and
considered millionaires at the time. Bertha, known in published case studies as Anna O., was
expected to complete the formal education of a girl in the upper middle class which included
foreign language, religion, horseback riding, needlepoint, and piano. She felt confined and
suffocated in this life and took to a fantasy world she called her “private theater.” Anna also
developed hysteria to include symptoms such as memory loss, paralysis, disturbed eye
movements, reduced speech, nausea, and mental deterioration. Her symptoms appeared as
she cared for her dying father and her mother called on Breuer to diagnose her condition (note
that Freud never actually treated her). Hypnosis was used at first and relieved her symptoms.
Breuer made daily visits and allowed her to share stories from her private theater which he
came to call “talking cure” or “chimney sweeping.” Many of the stories she shared were
actually thoughts or events she found troubling and reliving them helped to relieve or
eliminate the symptoms. Breuer’s wife, Mathilde, became jealous of her husband’s relationship
with the young girl, leading Breuer to terminate treatment in the June of 1882 before Anna
had fully recovered. She relapsed and was admitted to Bellevue Sanatorium on July 1,
eventually being released in October of the same year. With time, Anna O. did recover from
her hysteria and went on to become a prominent member of the Jewish Community, involving
herself in social work, volunteering at soup kitchens, and becoming ‘House Mother’ at an
orphanage for Jewish girls in 1895. Bertha (Anna O.) became involved in the German Feminist
movement, and in 1904 founded the League of Jewish Women. She published many short
stories; a play called Women’s Rights, in which she criticized the economic and sexual
exploitation of women, and wrote a book in 1900 called The Jewish Problem in Galicia, in
which she blamed the poverty of the Jews of Eastern Europe on their lack of education. In
1935 she was diagnosed with a tumor and was summoned by the Gestapo in 1936 to explain
anti-Hitler statements she had allegedly made. She died shortly after this interrogation on May
28, 1936. Freud considered the talking cure of Anna O. to be the origin of psychoanalytic
therapy and what would come to be called the cathartic method.
Mostly used- Understanding Group Dynamics: In social psychology, case studies can help
explore group behaviors, social influence, and group dynamics. They can reveal how individuals
behave in group settings and how social forces shape behavior.
 • Example: A case study of a group of people involved in a social protest can provide
insights into group cohesion, conformity, and collective behavior.
Merits of Case Study:
1. In-Depth Understanding:
• Rich Detail: A case study allows for an in-depth exploration of a specific subject,
providing detailed and nuanced insights. It often uncovers the complexities and
multifaceted nature of a phenomenon that cannot be captured through other
methods.
2. Real-World Context:
• Natural Setting: Case studies are typically conducted in real-world settings,
providing an authentic and accurate representation of behaviors, events, or
processes in their natural context. This helps increase the ecological validity of the
findings.
3. Flexible Methodology:
• Versatility: Case studies are highly flexible and can incorporate various methods of
data collection (e.g., interviews, observations, archival research, psychological
tests). This allows for a holistic view of the subject under study.
4. Generation of Hypotheses:
• Theory Building: Case studies can serve as a starting point for generating
hypotheses or theories that can later be tested through more controlled or large-
scale research. They are often used in exploratory research to identify areas for
future study.
5. Holistic Approach:
• Comprehensive Exploration: Because case studies focus on the entire context of
the subject, they allow researchers to explore various dimensions (psychological,
social, environmental, etc.) that contribute to a phenomenon.
6. Unique and Rare Situations:
• Study of Uncommon Phenomena: Case studies are particularly useful for studying
rare or unique situations that are difficult to replicate in controlled experiments,
such as unusual medical conditions or exceptional individuals.
Demerits of Case Study:
1. Limited Generalizability:
 • Non-Representative Sample: Since case studies focus on a single individual or a
small group, the findings may not be generalizable to larger populations. The
results might not apply to other settings, people, or circumstances.
2. Subjectivity and Bias:
• Researcher Influence: Case studies often involve subjective interpretation by the
researcher, which can lead to bias in data collection and analysis. The researcher’s
personal views, expectations, or interpretations can influence the conclusions
drawn from the case study.
3. Lack of Control:
• No Causal Inferences: Case studies do not involve controlled experimentation, so
they cannot establish cause-and-effect relationships. They can highlight
associations or correlations, but they cannot definitively show what causes what.
4. Time-Consuming:
• Extensive Data Collection: Case studies require a significant amount of time and
effort to gather, analyze, and interpret detailed data. This can make them
resource-intensive and lengthy to complete.
5. Ethical Concerns:
• **Privacy and Confidentiality

2.2.3. Surveys/Self-Report Data

A survey is a questionnaire consisting of at least one scale with some number of questions
which assess a psychological construct of interest such as parenting style, depression, locus of
control, attitudes, or sensation seeking behavior. It may be administered by paper and pencil or
computer. Surveys allow for the collection of large amounts of data quickly but the actual
survey could be tedious for the participant and social desirability, when a participant answers
questions dishonestly so that he/she is seen in a more favorable light, could be an issue. For
instance, if you are asking high school students about their sexual activity they may not give
genuine answers for fear that their parents will find out. Or if you wanted to know about
prejudicial attitudes of a group of people, you could use the survey method. You could
alternatively gather this information via an interview in a structured or unstructured fashion.
Important to survey research is that you have random sampling or when everyone in the
population has an equal chance of being included in the sample. This helps the survey to be
representative of the population and in terms of key demographic variables such as gender,
age, ethnicity, race, education level, and religious orientation.
Mostly used for study
 • Study of Attitudes and Behaviors: Surveys are frequently used in social psychology to
study people's attitudes, opinions, beliefs, and behaviors in relation to different social
phenomena. Researchers use surveys to assess social issues, group dynamics, prejudice,
social norms, and more.
• Example: A survey may be conducted to understand public opinions about racial
discrimination, gender equality, or political views.

Merits of the Survey Method:

1. Large Sample Size:
• Representative Data: Surveys can gather data from a large number of
respondents, making it possible to generalize findings to a broader population.
This is particularly useful in studies where the goal is to identify patterns or trends
across large groups.
2. Cost-Effective:
• Efficient for Large Samples: Surveys are often more cost-effective compared to
other research methods, especially when conducted online or via telephone. They
allow researchers to reach a large audience without incurring significant costs.
3. Standardized Data Collection:
• Consistency and Comparability: Surveys ensure that data is collected in a
standardized way across all respondents, allowing for easier comparison and
analysis. This reduces the variability introduced by different data collection
methods.
4. Versatility:
• Wide Range of Topics: Surveys can be used to collect information on a variety of
topics, from opinions and attitudes to behaviors and demographic data. They can
also be tailored to different respondent groups (e.g., children, adults, employees).
5. Data Analysis:
• Quantifiable and Analyzable: The data collected from surveys is often numerical
(e.g., Likert scale responses), making it easy to analyze using statistical techniques.
This allows researchers to identify trends, correlations, and patterns within the
data.
6. Anonymity and Confidentiality:
• Increased Honesty: When surveys are anonymous (especially in self-administered
formats like online surveys), respondents may be more willing to provide honest
answers, particularly on sensitive or personal topics.
 7. Quick Data Collection:
• Fast to Administer: Surveys can be administered quickly, especially when using
electronic platforms. This allows researchers to gather large amounts of data in a
short period of time.
Demerits of the Survey Method:
1. Response Bias:
• Distorted Responses: Surveys are susceptible to response biases, where
participants may not answer truthfully. This can be due to factors like social
desirability (giving answers they think are socially acceptable) or
misunderstanding the questions.
2. Limited Depth of Data:
• Superficial Information: Surveys often focus on closed-ended questions (e.g.,
multiple choice, Likert scale), which can limit the depth of understanding. They do
not capture the nuances or complex reasoning behind participants' responses.
3. Low Response Rate:
• Non-Response Bias: One of the main challenges with surveys is obtaining a high
response rate. If a significant portion of the sample does not respond, it may
introduce bias, as the non-respondents may differ from the respondents in key
ways.
4. Survey Design Issues:
• Poorly Designed Questions: The effectiveness of a survey depends heavily on the
quality of its questions. Ambiguous, leading, or poorly worded questions can
confuse respondents and produce unreliable or invalid data.
5. Sampling Errors:
• Non-Representative Samples: If the sample chosen for the survey is not
representative of the broader population, the results may not be valid or
generalizable. This can occur due to biased sampling methods, such as choosing
respondents from a specific demographic group.
6. Inability to Establish Causality:
• Correlational Nature: While surveys can identify correlations between variables,
they cannot establish cause-and-effect relationships. They provide valuable
information on associations but do not determine how or why a particular
outcome occurs.
 7. Social Desirability Bias:
• Conformity to Social Norms: Respondents may provide answers that align with
societal expectations rather than their true feelings or behaviors. This bias is
especially pronounced in surveys dealing with socially sensitive topics.
8. Misinterpretation of Questions:
• Respondent Misunderstanding: Participants may misunderstand or misinterpret
survey questions, especially if they are not clearly worded. This can result in
inaccurate or inconsistent data.

2.2.4. Correlational Research

This research method examines the relationship between two variables or two groups of
variables. A numerical measure of the strength of this relationship is derived, called
the correlation coefficient, and can range from -1.00, a perfect inverse relationship meaning
that as one variable goes up the other goes down, to 0 or no relationship at all, to +1.00 or a
perfect relationship in which as one variable goes up or down so does the other. In terms of a
negative correlation we might say that as a parent becomes more rigid, controlling, and cold,
the attachment of the child to the parent goes down. In contrast, as a parent becomes warmer,
more loving, and provides structure, the child becomes more attached. The advantage of
correlational research is that you can correlate anything. The disadvantage is that you can
correlate anything. Variables that really do not have any relationship to one another could be
viewed as related. Yes. This is both an advantage and a disadvantage. For instance, we might
correlate instances of making peanut butter and jelly sandwiches with someone we are
attracted to sitting near us at lunch. Are the two related? Not likely, unless you make a really
good PB&J but then the person is probably only interested in you for food and not
companionship. The main issue here is that correlation does not allow you to make a causal
statement.
2.2.5. Example of a Study Using Survey and Correlational Designs
Roccas, Sagiv, Schwartz, and Knafo (2002) examined the relationship of the big five personality
traits and values by administering the Schwartz (1992) Values survey, NEO-PI, a positive affect
scale, and a single item assessing religiosity to introductory to psychology students at an Israeli
university. For Extraversion, it was found that values that define activity, challenge, excitement,
and pleasure as desirable goals in life (i.e. stimulation, hedonism, and achievement) were
important while valuing self-denial or self-abnegation, expressed in traditional values, was
antithetical.
For Openness, values that emphasize intellectual and emotional autonomy, acceptance and
cultivation of diversity, and pursuit of novelty and change (i.e. universalism, self-direction, and
stimulation) were important while conformity, security, and tradition values were
incompatible. Benevolence, tradition, and to a lesser degree conformity, were important for
Agreeableness while power and achievement correlated negatively. In terms of
Conscientiousness (C), there was a positive correlation with security values as both share the
goal of maintaining smooth interpersonal relations and avoiding disruption of social order and
there was a negative correlation with stimulation, indicating an avoidance of risk as a motivator
of C.
Finally, there was little association of values with the domain of Neuroticism but a closer
inspection of the pattern of correlations with the facets of N suggests two components. First,
the angry hostility and impulsiveness facets could be called extrapunitive since the negative
emotion is directed outward and tends to correlate positively with hedonism and stimulation
values and negatively with benevolence, tradition, conformity, and C values. Second, the
anxiety, depression, self-consciousness, and vulnerability facets could be called intrapunitive
since the negative emotion is directed inward. This component tends to correlate positively
with tradition values and negatively with achievement and stimulation values.
Mostly Used
Group behavior, examining prejudice and discrimination, understanding attitudes and behavior
Merits of the Correlational Method:
1. Identifying Relationships Between Variables:
• Understanding Associations: The primary strength of the correlational method is
that it can reveal whether and how two or more variables are related. This helps
identify patterns or trends in data that might not be obvious without quantitative
analysis.
2. No Manipulation Required:
• Ethical and Practical: Since correlational research involves observing naturally
occurring variables rather than manipulating them, it avoids ethical concerns that
might arise in experimental designs. For example, researchers don’t need to
randomly assign participants to different groups or expose them to potentially
harmful conditions.
3. Suitable for Preliminary Research:
• Exploratory Nature: Correlational research is often used as a preliminary step
before more controlled experimental studies. It can help generate hypotheses or
identify areas that warrant further exploration.
4. Large Sample Size:
• Generalizability: Correlational research can involve large, diverse samples, which
makes it easier to generalize findings to broader populations. This is particularly
valuable when studying population-wide trends or behaviors.
 5. Easy to Conduct:
• Relatively Simple Method: Correlational studies are often easier and less
resource-intensive to conduct compared to experimental designs. Researchers can
use pre-existing data or surveys to examine relationships between variables
without needing extensive manipulation or control.
6. Longitudinal Studies:
• Track Changes Over Time: Correlational methods can be used in longitudinal
studies to track changes in variables over time and examine how they are related
across different points.
Demerits of the Correlational Method:
1. Cannot Establish Causality:
• Correlation Does Not Equal Causation: One of the biggest limitations of the
correlational method is that it cannot establish cause-and-effect relationships. It
only shows that two variables are related, not that one causes the other. This
makes it difficult to draw definitive conclusions about the nature of the
relationship.
2. Third Variable Problem:
• Unaccounted Variables: There may be a third, unmeasured variable (confounder)
influencing the observed correlation between two variables. This third variable
can create a false impression of a direct relationship between the variables being
studied.
3. Directionality Problem:
• Unclear Causal Direction: Correlational studies cannot determine the direction of
the relationship between variables. In other words, it is unclear whether variable
A causes variable B, or whether variable B causes variable A.
4. Limited Control Over Variables:
• Potential for Confounding: In correlational research, researchers have limited
control over variables, making it difficult to rule out other influences. As a result,
the findings may not accurately represent the true nature of the relationships
between variables.
5. Overemphasis on Statistical Significance:
• Risk of Misinterpretation: Researchers may focus too much on statistical
significance (such as p-values) without considering the practical significance or
real-world implications of the relationship. A statistically significant correlation
may still be too weak to have meaningful effects.
 6. Potential for Oversimplification:
• Oversimplifying Relationships: Correlational studies often focus on examining a
single relationship between two variables, but real-world phenomena are usually
more complex. By focusing only on the correlation, researchers may overlook
other important factors or nuances.
7. Risk of Confirmation Bias:
• Selective Reporting: Researchers may unintentionally look for correlations that
confirm their hypotheses, ignoring data that does not fit their expectations. This
confirmation bias can skew the interpretation of results.

2.2.6. Experiments
An experiment is a controlled test of a hypothesis in which a researcher manipulates one
variable and measures its effect on another variable. The variable that is manipulated is called
the independent variable (IV) and the one that is measured is called the dependent variable
(DV). A common feature of experiments is to have a control group that does not receive the
treatment or is not manipulated and an experimental group that does receive the treatment
or manipulation. If the experiment includes random assignment participants have an equal
chance of being placed in the control or experimental group. The control group allows the
researcher to make a comparison to the experimental group, making a causal statement
possible, and stronger.
2.2.6.1. Example of an experiment. Allison and Messick (1990) led subjects to believe they
were the first of six group members to take points from a common resource pool and that they
could take as many points as desired which could later be exchanged for cash. Three variables
were experimentally manipulated. First, subjects in the low payoff condition were led to
believe the pool was only 18 or 21 points in size whereas those in the high payoff condition
were told the pool consisted of either 24 or 27 points. Second, the pools were divisible (18 and
24) or nondivisible (21 or 27). Third, half of the subjects were placed in the fate control
condition and told that if the requests from the six group members exceeded the pool size,
then no one could keep any points, while the other half were in the no fate control condition
and told there would be no penalties for overconsumption of the pool. Finally, data for a
fourth variable, social values, was collected via questionnaire four weeks prior to participation.
In all, the study employed a 2 (fate control) x 2 (payoff size) x 2 (divisibility) x 2 (social values)
between-subjects factorial design.
Results showed that subjects took the least number of points from the resource pool when the
resource was divisible, the payoffs were low, and there was no fate control. On the other hand,
subjects took the most points when the resource was nondivisible, the payoffs were high, and
subjects were noncooperative. To further demonstrate this point, Allison and Messick (1990)
counted the number of inducements to which participants were exposed. This number ranged
from 0 to 4 inducements. Subjects took between one-fifth and one-fourth when there were
one or two inducements, took about one-third when there were three inducements, and
about half of the pool when all four were present. They state that an equal division rule was
used when there were no temptations to violate equality but as the number of temptations
increased, subjects became progressively more likely to overconsume the pool. The authors
conclude that the presence of competing cues/factors tends to invite the use of self-serving
rules to include “First-come, first-served” and “People who get to go first take more.”
Mostly used
to study social influence and conformity, exploring attitude change, group behavior, exploring
emotion and empathy, understanding prosocial behavior.
Merits of the Experimental Method:
1. Causal Inference:
• Establishes Causality: The key strength of the experimental method is its ability to
establish cause-and-effect relationships between variables. By manipulating the
independent variable and observing its effect on the dependent variable,
researchers can determine whether changes in one variable cause changes in
another.
2. Control Over Variables:
• Control Over Confounding Variables: In a well-designed experiment, researchers
can control for extraneous variables (confounders) that could influence the
outcome. This allows for a clearer understanding of the relationship between the
independent and dependent variables.
3. Replication:
• Reliable and Reproducible: Experiments are typically structured in a way that
allows them to be replicated. This is crucial for verifying results and ensuring the
reliability and validity of findings. Replication strengthens the generalizability of
the research.
4. Objectivity:
• Reduced Bias: Experimental methods help reduce researcher bias because they
rely on standardized procedures and clear measurements. The manipulation of
independent variables is usually systematic, and data is often collected using
objective instruments or procedures.
5. Precision:
• Clear Measurement: Experiments often involve quantitative data, which allows
for precise measurement of the variables and their relationships. This precision
 aids in statistical analysis, which helps clarify the strength and nature of the
effects being studied.
6. Internal Validity:
• High Internal Validity: Experimental designs, particularly randomized controlled
trials (RCTs), tend to have high internal validity. This means that the changes
observed in the dependent variable are more likely to be caused by the
manipulation of the independent variable, rather than other external factors.
7. Clear Hypothesis Testing:
• Hypothesis Testing: Experiments are well-suited to testing hypotheses because
researchers can directly manipulate variables and measure their effects. This
allows for a focused examination of specific predictions made by a theory.
Demerits of the Experimental Method:
1. Limited External Validity (Generalizability):
• Artificiality: Experiments, particularly those conducted in laboratories, may not
accurately reflect real-world situations. The controlled environment may not fully
capture the complexity and variability of natural settings, which can limit the
generalizability of the results to real-world contexts.
2. Ethical Concerns:
• Manipulating Variables: Some experimental manipulations may raise ethical
issues, particularly when they involve deceiving participants or exposing them to
potentially harmful situations. For example, it may not be ethical to manipulate
participants' health or expose them to stressful or harmful conditions.
3. Demand Characteristics:
• Participant Awareness: Participants in experiments may become aware of the
study's purpose or the hypothesis being tested, which could lead to demand
characteristics—where participants change their behavior to align with the
expectations of the researcher. This can threaten the internal validity of the
experiment.
4. Cost and Time:
• Resource Intensive: Experimental research, especially large-scale studies or field
experiments, can be expensive and time-consuming to conduct. Resources must
be allocated for participant recruitment, equipment, and data analysis.
5. Not Suitable for All Research Topics:
 • Limited Scope: Experimental methods are not appropriate for all types of research
questions, particularly those involving subjective experiences, past events, or
complex social phenomena that cannot be easily manipulated or controlled.
6. Risk of Oversimplification:
• Complexity of Human Behavior: Experiments often isolate a small number of
variables, which can oversimplify complex behaviors and phenomena. Human
behavior is influenced by multiple factors, and isolating variables may fail to
capture the full picture.
7. Selection Bias:
• Sampling Issues: In experiments, the way participants are selected and assigned
to groups can introduce bias. For example, if participants are not randomly
assigned to groups, the results may not accurately reflect the population from
which they were drawn.