Scribd
Upload
7 views13 pages

RM8 - Types of Experiment EVALUATION For GC

The document outlines various types of experiments in research methods, including laboratory, field, natural, and quasi-experiments, detailing their strengths and limitations. It emphasizes concepts such as ecological validity, internal validity, and the impact of extraneous variables on research outcomes. Additionally, it includes a knowledge application section for practical understanding of experimental design and evaluation.

Uploaded by

adegunlejoshua314
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
7 views13 pages

RM8 - Types of Experiment EVALUATION For GC

The document outlines various types of experiments in research methods, including laboratory, field, natural, and quasi-experiments, detailing their strengths and limitations. It emphasizes concepts such as ecological validity, internal validity, and the impact of extraneous variables on research outcomes. Additionally, it includes a knowledge application section for practical understanding of experimental design and evaluation.

Uploaded by

adegunlejoshua314
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 13

Research Methods

TYPES OF EXPERIMENT - EVALUATION


Extraneous Cause &
Starter: Recap! variable effect
Who’s this? Ecological Demand
characteristics
validity
Reliability Experimenter
bias

Mundane Participant
realism variables
Operationalisation
Internal
validity
Random allocation
Knowledge Application
Types of experiment evaluation – Gap
fill
1. Read through the strengths and limitations of the different types of
experiment
2. Complete the gaps using the key terminology listed below
3. What is the difference between a participant effect and a
participant variable? Can you explain this difference with examples?

Ecological validity; Reliability; Mundane realism; Ethical; Generalise; Participant effects;


Internal validity; Participant; Experimenter bias; Extraneous variables; Operationalised;
Cause & effect; Randomly allocated; Demand characteristics
Laboratory experiments - Strengths
▪There is a high control of extraneous variables so you can be
sure nothing else affects the DV other than the IV - a cause &
effect relationship can be established – high in internal
validity.
▪Easily replicated – can check reliability of study.
Laboratory experiments - Limitations
▪Lacks ecological validity due to artificial setting which means
it is difficult to generalise to real life behaviour.
▪More likely to have demand characteristics as participants
clearly know they are in a study.
▪The IV or DV may be operationalised in such a way that it
doesn’t represent everyday experiences (lacks mundane
realism) such as using film clips to test eyewitness testimony
is not a ‘real’ experience.
Field experiments - Strengths
▪Higher ecological validity as it is in a natural setting (higher
mundane realism), which means it can be generalised to real
life behaviour.
▪Can reduce chance of participant effects like demand
characteristics if they do not know they are taking part –
higher internal validity
Field experiments - Limitations
▪Less control of extraneous variables – so cause & effect relationship
between IV and DV less easily established.
▪Less easy to replicate to check reliability.
▪IV in a field experiment may be operationalised in such a way that it
lacks mundane realism so field experiments are not necessarily more
like everyday life experiences than lab experiments or may convey
the aim/ hypothesis – lack of ecological validity.
▪Ethical issue – if participants do not know that they are being studied
is it right to manipulate and record their behaviour? Debriefing them
may be difficult.
Natural experiments - Strengths
▪Allows psychologists to study ‘real’ problems such as the
effects of a disaster on health – increased mundane realism
and ecological validity.
▪Allows research where IV can’t be manipulated for ethical or
practical reasons.
Natural experiments - Limitations
▪Less control of extraneous variables. So…Cannot
demonstrate cause & effect relationship.
▪Very unlikely to be able to replicate study – difficult to assess
reliability.
▪Random allocation of participants not possible so there could
be participant variables (uncontrolled confounding variables)
– a threat to internal validity.
Quasi experiments - Strengths
▪Less experimenter bias in participant condition allocation, as
the researcher does not pick which condition to put
participants in.
Quasi experiments - Limitations
▪More chance of EV’s, especially participant variables, as
participants are not randomly allocated to each condition.
▪Participants may be aware of being studied, creating demand
characteristics and reducing internal validity.
▪The dependent variable may be a fairly artificial task,
reducing mundane realism and ecological validity.
Knowledge Application
An experiment

Watch the video clip of an experiment, then:


1. Identify the type of experiment, the IV and the DV.
2. What are the strengths and limitations of this type of
study?
3. Can you think of any extraneous variables that could effect
the results?
Plenary

You might also like