Brainscape's Knowledge GenomeTM


Top Flashcards (Certified)
All Flashcards

Psychology > Research Methods > Flashcards

Research Methods Flashcards

(111 cards)

Start Studying
1
Q

Types of hypothesis

A
  • null
  • alternative
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

Null hypothesis

A
  • IV will not affect the DV
  • no relationship between observed variables
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

Alternative hypothesis

A

IV will affect DV

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

Types of variable

A
  • independent
  • dependent
  • extraneous
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

Independent variable

A

What the researcher changes/manipulates to test its effect on the DV

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

Dependent variable

A

The outcome/effect that is being measured in a study

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

Extraneous variable

A

Unwanted variable that can affect the DV

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

Target population

A

Group of people that researcher wants to generalise findings to

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

Sample

A

Small portion of Ps from target population being studied

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

Types of Sampling

A
  • random
  • opportunity
  • systematic
  • stratified
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

Random sampling

A
  • selection of participants is random
  • e.g- names out of a hat or numbered and selected by computer
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
12
Q

Random sampling STRENGTH

A
  • unbiased results
  • all target population have equal chance of being picked
  • sample is more representative of target population, more validity
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
13
Q

Random sampling WEAKNESS

A
  • takes much time and effort
  • have to obtain list of all members of target population and number them, then may not want to take part
  • effort may not be with it
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
14
Q

Opportunity sampling

A

Asking those who are most easily available

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
15
Q

Opportunity sampling STRENGTH

A
  • quick and easy
  • choose people who are nearby and available
  • less time consuming
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
16
Q

Opportunity sampling WEAKNESS

A
  • greater chance of being biased
  • sample drawn from narrow part of target population, may only have 1 certain type of person - may be participant variables
  • reduces generalisability/reliability of results
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
17
Q

Systematic sampling

A

Selecting every ‘nth’ member of the target population as a participant

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
18
Q

Systematic sampling STRENGTH

A
  • avoids researcher bias
  • researcher has no say over who’s - selected
  • more representative
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
19
Q

Systematic sampling WEAKNESS

A
  • need bigger sample size
  • e.g- if you require 100 Ps for study and picked every 10 Ps, 1000 Ps would be needed
  • may be time consuming method
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
20
Q

Stratified sampling

A
  • sub-groups within target population identified
  • Ps chosen from each sub-group in proportion to their occurrence in target population
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
21
Q

Stratified sampling STRENGTH

A
  • most representative sampling method
  • all subgroups represented in proportion to target population
  • findings should have high reliability/validity to make generalisations to target population
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
22
Q

Stratified sampling WEAKNESS

A
  • time consuming method
  • have to identify sub-groups, select necessary Ps and attempt to get them proportionate
  • difficult/impractical method to use
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
23
Q

Experimental designs

A
  • independent groups
  • repeated measures
  • matched pairs
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
24
Q

Independent groups

A
  • Ps divided into (usually 2) subgroups
  • groups take part in different experimental condition
  • used for comparison
How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
25
Independent groups STRENGTH
- no practice effects - Ps only do 1 condition so won't benefit from practice, less likely to display demand characteristics as it will be harder for them to figure out aim of study - results will be more representative of how members of target population usually behave
26
Independent groups WEAKNESS
- may be participant variables - each group may contain more of a type of person than another, as each group only does 1 condition of IV, this may affect results - results may be less representative, can't be generalised to all of target population
27
Repeated measures
All Ps do all conditions of the experiment
28
Repeated measures STRENGTH
- requires less effort when gathering Ps - don't have to split Ps into groups of pairs based on certain characteristics, also require less - set-up of experiment will be less time-consuming
29
Repeated measures WEAKNESS
- higher risk of practice effects - as Ps do all conditions of experiment, they may improve with practice or display demand characteristics if they figure out aim of study, potentially avoided with counterbalancing - researcher may view improvement as result of IV rather than demand characteristics
30
Matched pairs
- Ps paired on relevant variables to study (eg: ethnicity, disabilities, gender) - one P goes into each group
31
Matched pairs STRENGTH
- reduced participant variables - Ps taking part matched on variable relevant to experiment - results will have more validity, more representitive of target population
32
Matched pairs WEAKNESS
- difficult to match people of personality variables - can generally only match people on fixed traits (sex,race,age), personality factors may be relevant to experiment - may produce results that aren't a result of IV
33
Types of experiment
- lab - field - natural
34
Lab experiment
- takes place in a controlled environment - researcher manipulates IV
35
Lab experiment STRENGTHS
- limits EVs - controlled environment, stops outside influence affecting DV, sure that IV affected DV - can establish cause and effect relationship, internal validity + - use standardised procedures - conditions controlled so can be replicated in other study to check reliability, difficult to do in field
36
Lab experiment WEAKNESS
- artificial environment - results may not reflect real-world situations, Ps may behave unnaturally, display demand characteristics if work out aim - lack ecological validity
37
Field experiment
- takes place in natural/everyday setting, - experimenter manipulates IV
38
Field experiment STRENGTH
- more realistic environment - thought to make responses and behaviours of Ps more realistic as not always aware they are being observed - high internal validity as behaviours of Ps can be generalised to wider population
39
Field experiment WEAKNESS
- difficult to replicate - environment of experiment may be difficult to recreate, Ps may be members of public with personality factors influencing the results which are unaccounted for - replication and reliability issues
40
Natural experiment
- takes place in natural/everyday environment - IV occurs naturally
41
Natural experiment STRENGTH
- Ps often produce no demand characteristics - Ps unaware of experiment so won't be able to work out aim of study and behave falsely - results most likely indicative of behaviour that can be generalised to wider population
42
Natural experiment WEAKNESS
- ethical issues - consent - Ps often not aware they are being studied so can't give informed consent, may not wish to take part and be monitored, may sometimes be okay if Ps debriefed after - not always ethically right to natural experiments
43
Interview
- researcher being in direct contact with P - face to face or phone/video call - researcher records responses of P
44
Types of interviews
- structured - semi-structured - unstructured
45
Structured interviews
- interviewer reads prepared questions only - follow up questions prepared before
46
Structured interviews STRENGTH
- can be easily replicated - questions all preset so can simply be said by another researcher - can easily check results for reliability and consistency is drawn conclusions
47
Structured interviews WEAKNESS
- often lack qualitative data - usually have mostly closed questions so give little insight into thoughts/feelings, maybe less relevant follow-up questions - less useful and detailed results
48
Semi-structured interviews
- some questions prepared before - follow up questions come from answers
49
Unstructured interviews
- Interviewer has general aim - few/no questions prepared before - new questions based on previous answers
50
Unstructured interviews STRENGTH
- allow Ps to explain responses - researcher asks new questions based on previous answers so can be asked to expand/explain - results more accurate/valuable than from structured
51
Unstructured interviews WEAKNESS
- require more skilled interviewers - need to articulate themselves better and quickly think of good questions, not like structured where questions can simply be read out - less opportunities to be carried out
52
Questionnaire
- researcher designs set of questions for Ps to answer - Ps taking part called 'respondents'
53
Types of questionnaire questions
- open - closed
54
Open questions
- Ps can answer how they want - produce qualitative data
55
Closed questions
- fixed range of possible answers - produce quantitative data
56
Questionnaires STRENGTH
- much data can be gathered quickly - can be sent out to many people physically/electronically to acquire many Ps responses - more data means results can be generalised to wider population
57
Questionnaires WEAKNESS
- Ps may misunderstand questions so answer them incorrectly - unlike in interview with researcher, Ps can't clarify meaning of question so may respond in a way not representative of their views - results may be less reliable/valid
58
Case studies
- in depth investigation into individual/group/event - usually involve unusual situations - can be used in everyday experiences - produce mostly qualitative data - usually longitudinal
59
Case studies STRENGTH
- info collected over long period of time - usually longitudinal so gradual changes and much data can be recorded over time - can provide in depth and accurate results
60
Case studies WEAKNESS
- target single/few individuals - situation/factors influencing outcomes unlikely to be relatable to others - results less representative of wider population, can't be generalised
61
Observation
Researcher watches/listens to Ps engaging in behaviour being studied and records behaviour
62
Types of observations
- naturalistic - controlled - covert - overt - participant - non-participant
63
Naturalistic observations
- recorded in a place where it would naturally occur - nothing controlled or changed
64
Controlled observations
Part of environment controlled by researcher
65
Covert observations
Ps not aware they are being observed/recorded
66
Overt observations
Ps told in advance they will be observed/recorded
67
Participant observations
Researcher becomes part of group they are studying
68
Non-participant observations
Researcher remains separate from group they are studying
69
Observations STRENGTH
- true to how Ps actually act - what people say is often different to what they really do, if Ps asked about behaviour, they may give socially desirable responses, observations allow true behaviour to be recorded - high ecological validity, representative of real-world behaviour
70
Observations WEAKNESS
- ethical issues - consent - Ps often not aware of observation so can't give informed consent, informing before may lead to altered behaviour as they are aware they are being observed - not informing Ps raises ethical issues of privacy + lack of consent
71
Categories of behaviour
- actions performed by Ps - determined beforehand that they will observe them - number of times action is observed is recorded
72
Inter-observer reliability
- 2 independent observers with same categories of behaviour - compare data for consistency - should produce same results - discuss differences
73
Correlation
A relationship between 2 variables
74
Types of correlation
- positive - negative - zero
75
Positive correlation
- as 1 variable increases/decreases, so does the other - cause and effect relationship
76
Negative correlation
- as 1 variable increases/decreases, the other does the opposite - cause and effect relationship
77
Zero correlation
No relationship between variables
78
Correlations STRENGTH
- good starting point for research - if two variables are related, gives researchers ideas for future investigations to find true cause of correlation - more scientifically useful
79
Correlations WEAKNESS
- doesn't provide all detail - only tells us if 2 variables are related, doesn't tell which variable caused relationship or if there is 3rd unknown variable influencing the other 2 - usually require further experimentation to establish all details
80
Standardised procedures
Set of sequences that apply to all Ps when necessary to ensure the experiment is unbiased
81
Types of instructions to participants
- briefing - debriefing
82
Briefing
Ps being encouraged to participate with a log of what is discussed to gain consent
83
Debriefing
- Ps being given detailed explanation of aims of a study at end - ethical issues raised and Ps can withdraw their data/contributions
84
Purpose of randomisation
To make sure there are no biases in a procedure
85
Methods of reducing researcher bias
- random allocation - counterbalancing
86
Random allocation
- when using independent groups design, Ps are randomly selected for the condition of the IV they do - e.g- names chosen out of a hat
87
Counterbalancing
- used to deal with order effects in repeated measures - sample divided in half, half completes conditions in one order, half the other - researcher sure the change in DV caused by IV not order effects
88
Ethical Issues
- concerns about what is morally right/wrong when using participants in research - when there is conflict between needs of research and rights of Ps
89
Ethical considerations
- consent - confidentiality - deception - privacy - protection from harm
90
Consent
- must be informed - given info and purpose of study - Ps given right to withdraw consent and leave
91
Confidentiality
- personal data protected and respected - researcher must guarantee anonymity and with hold Ps' names
92
Deception
- Ps not lied to about aims of study without justification - mild deception justifiable, major deception if benefits outweigh ethical cost - Ps must be debriefed and given true aims at end of study to gain retrospective informed consent
93
Privacy
- Ps have right to control info about themselves - researcher mustn't observe Ps without informed consent unless in public space
94
Protection from harm
- Ps physical and psychological safety protected, including stress + embarrassment - Ps reminded they can leave any time
95
Quantitative data
Data in numerical form
96
Quantitative data STRENGTH
- easy to analyse - can be converted to averages/graphs/charts to check for patterns/correlations - can be easily compared, more useful
97
Quantitative data WEAKNESS
- lacks depth and detail - obtain little info about thoughts/feelings - doesn’t reflect real-world complexity
98
Qualitative data
Data is descriptive/**non-numerical** form
99
Qualitative data STRENGTH
- more depth/detail - gain insight into thoughts + feelings, can better understand attitudes/beliefs - more psychologically useful
100
Qualitative data WEAKNESS
- difficult to check for reliability - information from Ps mostly subjective - results may be biased, can't be generalised
101
Primary data
collected firsthand by researcher
102
Primary data STRENGTH
- suits aims of research - authentic, comes first hand from Ps so can be trusted - data more useful
103
Primary data WEAKNESS
- takes time and effort to collect - must design and carry out study - slows down process, increases expense
104
Secondary data
- comes from other sources/studies - already published - collected by other researcher with different aim
105
Secondary data STRENGTH
- convenient to use - results already collected + checked - reduces expense + effort
106
Secondary data WEAKNESS
- may not fit what researcher wants - from different study with different aim, may have been poorly designed - may reduce validity
107
Validity
Whether results reflect real world behaviour
108
Reliability
- consistency - if you can repeat measurement and get same results, measurement is reliable
109
Bar chart
- displays data in categories - categoric data - spaces between bars
110
Histogram
- displays continuous data - no spaces between bars
111
Characteristic of normal distribution
Mean, median and mode all close together

Psychology (8 decks)

Brainscape helps you reach your goals faster, through stronger study habits.
© 2025 Bold Learning Solutions. Terms and Conditions