Practical Investigation Flashcards
Summarise your practical Investigation for social psychology + strengths and improvements
Social Psych
Aim- Investigate if gender affects self-reported obedience levels
Sample- Opportunity sample of 11 Males+ 11 Females over age 16 in West Midlands area
Method- Standardised self-report questionnaire, used open and closed Q’s, examples: Do you obey authority? Define obedience.
Quantitative data analysis- Scoring System i.e. likert scales 1-10, attitude scales yes=1 no=0
Results- Mean- Males-47.4, females-48.6, Range- Males- 24, Females-10, SD-Males-8.39, Females-7.79
Conclusions- Women have slightly higher (But not significant enough) obedience level compared to men.
Difference of means and SD’s of groups not significant enough to show difference
Method- Qualitative data analysis- Inductive thematic approach (Devising subthemes based on questionnaire answers)
Conclusion- According to thematic analysis, obedience of genders doesn’t differ much, obedience of authority is based in religion and/or morals
Strengths- Questionnaire uses standardised questions which makes it easy to replicate and test for reliability
Questionnaire can gain large detail/opinions from qualitative responses
Questionnaire found that women and men have a low difference in obedience levels, this can be applied to police and authority figures in general as they know that, whatever a man will obey, a woman will to, vice versa, allows for techniques to be found to increase obedience.
Weaknesses- Questionnaire uses limited sample (22 16+ year olds), only includes 16+ year olds which can decrease generalisability of “self-reported obedience levels between genders” to other age groups i.e. young children where difference may be found
Questionnaire only uses sample of people from West Midlands, this means that results regarding gender differences in obedience cannot be generalised to other cultures and countries where difference may be found due to values etc
Summarise your practical Investigation for cognitive psychology + strengths and improvements
Cognitive Psych
Aim- Investigate effect of acoustic similarity/dissimilarity on Short-term memory learning/recall
Sample- 20 Students from our college (Opportunity sample)
Method- Laboratory experiment where ppts were read one of two monosyllabic word lists (Acoustically similar or dissimilar words) and then recalled them from memory
Words were read at rate one word per every 3 seconds and were matched on frequency, difficulty (To say, remember), familiarity and word length (So that confounding variable of word-length effect doesn’t lower internal validity)
Results- Mean- Acoustically similar- 5.5, Acoustically dissimilar- 8.1. Range- Acoustically similar-6, acoustically dissimilar-5, SD- Acoustically similar-2, acoustically dissimilar- 1.6
Conclusions- Short-term memory encodes acoustically and faces confusion with acoustically similar words.
Justification- Faces confusion with word and letter sounds
Evaluation
Strengths- Study used standardised procedure (Having same time limit before recall), which allows for it to be replicated and tested for reliability.
Study concluded STM encodes acoustically, faces confusion with acoustically similar words and their sounds, this can be applied to revision/rehearsal and using reading aloud to identify acoustic mistakes and amend them/expand awareness of them.
Study conducted in controlled, laboratory environment, strong in the fact that Situational EV’s such as noise and distractions were controlled, leading to higher internal validity as cause-and- effect between IV and DV can be easily established
Weaknesses- Study used small sample (20 students from our college) which is also unrepresentative of other age groups, schools and educational levels, which means that results regarding STM learning/recall cannot be generalised to other schools, education levels, age groups, to resolve this, sample can be larger and recruited via volunteer sample where various age groups, educational levels and schools will be gathered and tested.
Study used unusual task (recalling word lists) which is unrealistic of everyday life, this lowers mundane realism of study and external and ecological validity of results, to improve we can use a more realistic task and alter it slightly I.E. recalling acoustically similar/dissimilar phone numbers instead of word lists which makes study and results more reminiscent of everyday life.
What are Results and conclusions for Social psychology practical?
Results- Mean- Males-47.4, females-48.6, Range- Males- 24, Females-10,
SD-Males-8.39, Females-7.79
Conclusions- Women have slightly higher (But not significant enough) obedience level compared to men.
Difference of means and SD’s of groups not significant enough to show difference
Method- Qualitative data analysis- Inductive thematic approach (Devising subthemes based on questionnaire answers)
Conclusion- According to thematic analysis, obedience of genders doesn’t differ much, obedience of authority is based in religion and/or morals
What are Results for Cognitive psychology practical?
Results-
Mean- Acoustically similar- 5.5, Acoustically dissimilar- 8.1.
Range- Acoustically similar-6, acoustically dissimilar-5,
SD- Acoustically similar-2, acoustically dissimilar- 1.6
Conclusions-
Short-term memory encodes acoustically and faces confusion with acoustically similar words.
Justification- Faces confusion with word and letter sounds
