Psychology G544 Revision Notes

Psychology G544 Section A Revision Notes

Hypothesis

Experimental hypothesis – predicts the effect of the IV on the DV.
Operationalised hypothesis – shows how variables are going to be tested, by describing them.
Null hypothesis – states that there will be no effect of the IV on the DV.
One tailed hypothesis – predicts the direction in which results are expected to occur (directional) ie, revision improves exam performance.
Two tailed hypothesis – states there is some kind of difference between two events (non-directional) ie, revision will affect exam performance.

Experiments

Independent variable – the variable that you manipulate (cause)
Dependent variable – the variable that you measure (effect)

Experimental design
|Design |Repeated measures |Independent measures |Matched pairs |
|Explanation |Performance of participants in one condition |Performance of participants in one condition |Participants in each condition matched to eac|
| |compared with performance of the same |compared with performance of different |other on variables, such as age, sex, IQ, etc|
| |participants in another condition |participants in another condition |(so it’s like they are the same person in |
| | | |different conditions) |
|Strengths |Avoids participant variables/individual |No order effects, as different participants |Overcomes problems of individual differences |
| |differences, as the same participants are |used in each condition |and, as they are matched on traits and also |
| |used | |overcomes problem of order effects, because |
| | | |different participants are used |
|Weaknesses |There could be order effects – person may |Problem of participant variables/individual |Can be costly and time-consuming because |
| |gain practice, become bored or tired |differences because different participants |there needs to be some technique of matching |
| | |are being used and everyone’s different, so |the participants. |
| | |there could be differences in performance of | |
| | |participants. | |

Type of experiment
|Experiment |Laboratory |Field |Quasi (natural) |
|Explanation |Conducted in highly controlled conditions and|Conducted in the participants’ own |The independent variable is |
| |usually in laboratory settings |environment |naturally-occurring, and therefore not |
| | | |manipulated |
|Strengths |There are high levels of control (objective),|High in ecological validity, because it is |The IV is not manipulated, so there is less |
| |so extraneous variables are avoided, and the |conducted in the participant’s natural |control, making the situation more |
| |IV can be isolated to measure the effect on |environment, so therefore they will act |ecologically valid, so it is more |
| |the DV, and therefore we can infer cause and |normally, and the results will be |generalisable to other situations/people. |
| |effect |representative of everyday life and can be | |
| | |generalised to other settings. | |
| |Highly reliable because of the high levels of| | |
| |control and these high levels of control |The participants may not know they are being | |
| |produce a standardised procedure, making it |studied, so will be less likely to respond to| |
| |easy to repeat to look for consistent or |demand characteristics, which makes the study| |
| |similar findings. |more valid (because you’re measuring what | |
| | |you’re supposed to measure). | |
|Weaknesses |Low in ecological validity because laboratory|The researcher cannot isolate the IV to |The researcher has to wait for the conditions|
| |experiments do not relate to everyday life, |measure the effect on the DV as they cannot |to happen naturally, because they are not |
| |as the situation is full of control. |fully control the situation. Therefore, we |allowed to manipulate the IV. Therefore, they|
| |Therefore, it may be hard to generalise |cannot really infer cause and effect as we |could be waiting a long time or they may not |
| |results to other situations, which are not as|cannot be sure that the IV is effecting the |have that many participants, so the sample |
| |controlled, as the participant could behave |DV and that it is not another variable, such |isn’t representative of the target |
| |differently in a controlled situation. |as an extraneous variable. |population. |
| | | | |
| |High levels of control could produce an |Not very reliable, because there is not a lot| |
| |artificial situation, and therefore the |of control and no complete standardised | |
| |participants could show demand |procedure. Therefore, it is harder to | |
| |characteristics or respond to |replicate in exactly the same way, so it will| |
| |social-desirability bias if they guess the |be hard to find the same findings again. | |
| |aim from the controls. | | |
| | |There could be ethical issues to do with | |
| |Task could be low in mundane realism, and not|consent and withdrawal, because the | |
| |representative of a task completed in |participant often does not know they are | |
| |everyday life. |being studied, and it would lower the | |
| | |validity if they did know they were being | |
| | |studied. | |

Self-Report

|Self-report method |Questionnaire |Interview |Psychometric test |
|Explanation |Questions where the participant gives a |Questions asked face-to-face or over the |Questionnaire that measures a psychological |
| |written response or responds on the computer |phone |variable ie, what type of person someone is |
| | | |or how they learn best |
|Strengths |Data can be collected from a large number of |Structured interviews can easily be repeated |Provides lots of quantitative data, which is |
| |people quickly and cheaply. |as there is a pre-determined set of |easy to analyse and compare with other |
| | |questions, and therefore it is reliable and |participants. |
| |People may be more willing to give away |standardised. | |
| |personal information on paper than they would| |Data can be collected from a large number of |
| |face-to-face, especially if the questionnaire|Detailed information can be gained if it is |people quickly and cheaply because it is easy|
| |is anonymous. |unstructured because the researcher can dig |to give out. |
| | |deeper. | |
| |Questionnaires are reliable, as the same | | |
| |questionnaire can be given out again | | |
| |(standardised). | | |
|Weaknesses |People may just tick any box, without reading|There could be interviewer-bias or |Designer bias because the designer interprets|
| |the question properly, because they cannot be|social-desirability bias because the |the data and they could interpret it |
| |bothered. |participant may respond in a way they think |differently to another person. |
| | |the interviewer wants them to, and therefore | |
| |Sample filling in questionnaires could be |the data is not completely accurate. |Labelling somebody as a particular person |
| |biased because only literate people with time| |could encourage them to behave in that way |
| |would fill them in. | |and cause harm (ethics). |

Rating/likert scale;
On a scale of 1-5 (1 being very happy and 5 being very sad), how happy are you with your life?
1 2 3 4 5
+ Quantitative numerical data collected, which is easy to analyse and easy to compare with other results as no interpretation of the researcher is needed
- Participants’ choices limited, so no in-depth information gathered, so researchers do not know why the participants rated themselves at a particular level

Fixed choice response; (closed question)
Are you male or female? (Please circle)
Male Female
+ - Same strengths and weaknesses as above

Open ended question;
What do you think of the current issues facing England today?
+ In-depth qualitative data can be gathered as the participants can give reasons for their answer and explain themselves. This gives the participant freedom to write what they want and to gain their opinion
- Researchers may interpret a participants’ answer in the wrong way or differently from how another researcher may interpret it. It is also harder to compare responses from open-ended questions because it is not quantitative data

Interviews;
You can have different types of interviews, including structured, where you pre-plan the questions you will ask, and only ask those questions to obtain responses, unstructured, where you do not plan the interview at all and let it flow freely or semi-structured, where you partially plan the questions but then let it flow naturally.

These different types of interview all have their advantages and disadvantages. With structured interviews, you only obtain the information you have set out to obtain, but with unstructured, you can get lots of information which may not be completely relevant to what you are trying to find out.

Observation

|Type of observation |Naturalistic |Controlled |Participant |
|Explanation |Participants’ behaviour recorded in their own|Participants’ behaviour recorded in a |Researcher pretends to be a participant to |
| |environment |situation created by the researcher |observe them |
|Strengths |High ecological validity, because they are in|Levels of control quite high, as the |Adds to richness of data, especially if |
| |their own natural environment, and so won’t |situation is manually created by the |they become a trusted member of the group, |
| |respond to demand characteristics or |researcher, so therefore extraneous variables|and is therefore high in validity. |
| |social-desirability bias due to high levels |are controlled, so the observation is | |
| |of control (as it isn’t highly controlled) |reliable, and can be repeated again in the |There could be access to data which is |
| | |same way (standardised procedure) |unobtainable by other methods, so more |
| | | |in-depth information is discovered. |
|Weaknesses |If participants realise they are being |Participant is likely to know they are being |The researcher could alter the group in |
| |watched, they may respond to demand |observed because the situation is controlled,|some way when they join, lowering the |
| |characteristics, making it less valid. |which could create demand characteristics or |validity. |
| | |social-desirability bias, lowering the | |
| |As it is in the participants’ own |validity. |Observer-bias, because the observer is only|
| |environment, the environment is not | |recording what they want to see, or they |
| |controlled, and therefore will be harder to | |could become emotionally involved with the |
| |replicate. | |group, and report observations in a |
| | | |subjective way. |
| |No manipulation of the IV (as it is not an | | |
| |experiment), so we cannot infer cause and | | |
| |effect. | | |

As well as participant observation, there is non-participant observation, which is where the researcher is not part of the group, and observes them from outside of the group.
There are two more different types of observation, which include;
Covert observation – where the researcher doesn’t inform the participants that they are being observed and doesn’t gain permission to study them.
Overt observation – where the researcher informs the participants that they are being observed and gains permission to study them.

Event sampling – recording behaviours every time a particular behaviour occurs.
+ No behaviour is missed, so a full set of data is gathered
- Difficult to record behaviour if many behaviours are displayed at once

Time sampling – recording behaviours at particular time intervals ie, every minute.
+ Less intensive as there aren’t many behaviours displayed at one time
- Behaviour that occurs outside of the time intervals cannot be recorded and are therefore missed

Correlation

Correlation Hypothesis

Alternate hypothesis (two-tailed [non-directional]) – There will be a significant correlation between the …
Null – There will be no significant correlation between the …
One-tailed (directional) – There will be a significant positive/negative correlation between the …

REMEMBER … correlations are NOT experiments, therefore you cannot say there will be a significant difference between … You cannot infer cause and effect, as one variable does not cause the other, and you do not isolate the IV to measure the effect of the DV. In effect, you have two variables which you measure, which may or may not have some sort of relationship.

Positive Correlation Negative Correlation No Correlation
[pic][pic][pic]

Sampling

|Type of sampling method |Volunteer |Opportunity |Random |
|Explanation |Made up of people who have volunteered |Made up of participants who happen to be in |Made up of a random group of participants, |
| |to take part. Researcher publicises the|the right place at the right time. Researcher|usually by picking names out of a hat |
| |study and waits for people to put their|approaches the people and asks them to take | |
| |name forward. |part. | |
|Strengths |No problems with ethics because the |Very easy to obtain, as it is quick and |Very representative because it is a random |
| |participants have put themselves |efficient to ask people |sample and is likely to cover the target |
| |forward | |population, as it includes lots of |
| | | |different people |
|Weaknesses |Unlikely to be representative of the |Not very representative because you simply |Difficult to obtain this type of sample |
| |target population because they have |take the first participants you see. |because of the large population of people. |
| |volunteered and could be motivated in |Therefore, some people could miss out on the | |
| |some way (ie, money) |opportunity or you may only select people who| |
| | |are similar in some way (ie, psychology | |
| | |students that were out of their lesson early)| |

In the b) question of Section A (13+6 marker), remember to include the following; 1. Sampling method you are going to use o How many participants? o Where will you find them? o How will you approach them? o What age range, what sex? Will you have equal numbers of each sex? Why? (more generalisable) o Why are you using the particular sampling method you are using? 2. What will you do when you have your participants? o Will you brief them and ask for consent or will this affect the results? o Will you ask them to meet you somewhere at a particular time or will you ask them to come with you now? o Will you take them to a room? What will the room be like? Or will you test them in the place you are currently at? o Will you test them separately or in a group? o Will you split them into groups or if it is an experiment, will you test the same participants in different conditions (repeated measures) or will you test different participants in different conditions (independent measures OR matched pairs)? o Will you carry out a pilot test? 3. How are you going to test the participants? o Self-report method of questionnaire/interview (make sure you tell the examiner some questions) o If it is an experiment, what is the IV and what is the DV? o What controls will you use to avoid extraneous variables? Will you use any controls? Why? o If it is a self-report, how will you give the questions to them? In what order and why? o If it is an observation, what behaviour will you record? o Will you split the behaviours up into categories and tally them? 4. How will you collect the data? 5. Will you debrief the participants or tell them the full aim at the end? [ETHICS]

Remember to think WHAT? WHEN? HOW? WHY?
Make sure you MINI-EVALUATE and explain your reasons for why you have chosen to do what you are doing.

Statistical Tests (Non-parametric tests)

Nominal data – involves data being in categories or frequencies (for example, frequency of how many said yes)
Ordinal data – involves numbers that can be put in order but do not have any mathematical properties, like rating scales. It is like a ranking order (individual scores and not necessarily equal units)
Interval data – involves using a scale that has equal intervals between the units (for example, minutes or seconds)

| |Independent Measures Design |Repeated Measures Design |Correlation |
|Nominal Data (categories) |Chi-squared |Sign test |N/A |
|Ordinal Data (numbers) |Mann Whitney |Wilcoxon |Spearman’s Rho |

Usually, in the paper, you will get a question asking you what statistical test you would use for the practical project you have designed and why. Make sure you tell the examiner the exact statistical test you would use, and tell them you would use it because your project uses either nominal or ordinal data and because it is either independent measures, repeated measures or a correlation study. This is all that you can say, and you do not need to tell them how you use the test!

NICK IS COOL
NOMINAL INDEPENDENT MEASURES CHI-SQUARED

NICK RIDES SCOOTER
NOMINAL REPEATED MEASURES SIGN TEST

OLLIE IS MAD
ORDINAL REPEATED MEASURES MANN WHITNEY

OLLIE RUNS WILD
ORDINAL REPEATED MEASURES WILCOXON

OLLIE CAN SWIM
ORDINAL COLLERATION SPEARMAN’S RHO

Psychology G544 Section B Revision Notes

In this section of the paper, you will have to answer one question out of the two, and it is either focused on an approach/perspective, issue or debate. Usually, you will get at least one approach/perspective question, but be prepared to get any type of question. The exam papers are set out in a structured way, with the a) question asking you to describe the approach/issue/debate or to give the assumptions (if it is an approach/perspective). The b) question usually asks you to mention and describe two synoptic examples of the approach/issue/debate, which you should contextualise to the question. Make sure you show the examiner that you have knowledge of studies from both the AS and A2 parts of Psychology, as it will increase your mark. The best way to do this is to choose one study from AS illustrating the topic and then one from A2. The c) question will usually ask you for strengths and weaknesses of the issue. Don’t forget to give synoptic examples to back up your points. D) asks you to compare the approach/issue/debate with another approach/issue/debate in psychology. Sometimes they give you the topic to compare it with, but sometimes they don’t. Ensure that you choose a topic you are confident talking about if you have the choice, and also make sure you again use synoptic examples. The last question e) is very open, and could ask you how the topic helps everyday life or how it influences something. You will need to look at exam papers to get the gist of these questions, as they can be tricky to tackle at first.

Approaches

Physiological/Biological Approach

Assumptions; 1. All behaviour has a genetic basis, and is therefore influenced by our DNA, genes and biological molecules.

|Strengths |Weaknesses |
|Very scientific and objective, and often uses laboratory experiments, with high|Very reductionist, as the approach simplifies complex human behaviour down to |
|levels of control. The independent variable is isolated and manipulated to |one simple factor. It ignores the interaction of elements, such as the |
|measure the effect on the dependent variable, so cause and effect can be |environment, causing human behaviour, and simply explains behaviour as a result|
|inferred. |of our biology. |
| |For example, Brunner’s study into a family in the Netherlands who had slight |
| |mental retardation and who showed violent behaviour, simply looked at a urine |
| |sample and found they had a deficit of an enzyme which caused a rare disorder, |
| |but they ignore other factors, such as the environment and how their upbringing|
| |could have affected their behaviour. |
|As it uses laboratory experiments and high levels of control, there is often a |Very deterministic, as it is scientific and therefore says that everyone is |
|standardised procedure with highly scientific equipment, so the approach is |determined by their biology, and that no other factor can play a part in their |
|very reliable, as we can check for consistency by repeating it. |behaviour. |
|For example, Maguire’s study into the effect of the number of years of knowing | |
|the knowledge on the size of the hippocampi of the brain. The study used highly| |
|scientific equipment of MRI scanners which looked at the structure of the | |
|brain, so they were able to come to this conclusion. | |
|Supports the nature side of the nature/nurture debate, and provides good strong|Research tends to be low in ecological validity, as the situation and task is |
|evidence for ‘psychology is a science’, as scientific methods are used. |too controlled (low mundane realism) and therefore does not reflect everyday |
| |life, so it is difficult to generalise the findings. There could also be demand|
| |characteristics or social-desirability bias because of the high levels of |
| |control, making it less valid. |
| |For example, the study conducted by Sperry, who looks at the brains of |
| |split-brain patients. He makes the patients look at things with one eye |
| |covered, so information is only going to one hemisphere of the brain. This is |
| |not representative of everyday life, as we use both eyes so information goes to|
| |both sides of the brain. However, he wanted to be simplistic to find out more |
| |information on the roles of each hemisphere and what a person can do in |
| |different situations (ie, being able to pick out an object) |

Cognitive Approach

Assumptions; 1. The human brain is like a computer; it receives, interprets and responds to information. 2. Peoples’ problems often arise due to faulty or irrational thinking, which can be traced and often remedied using cognitive therapy.

|Strengths |Weaknesses |
|Tends to use laboratory experiments, which are highly controlled and objective,|As laboratory experiments are often used, research is low in ecological |
|so the independent variable can be isolated and manipulated to measure the |validity, because the situation is too controlled, and therefore doesn’t relate|
|effect on the dependent variable, as there are no extraneous variables, which |to everyday life, so we need to be careful when generalising the results. |
|means cause and effect can be established. |For example, Dement and Kleitman’s research into REM sleep and brain activity |
|For example, Loftus’ experiment into weapon focus uses a laboratory experiment |on dream content, where the participants had to sleep in a laboratory, and were|
|with a standardised procedure, and an experimental group (gun) and control |continuously woken up by a doorbell throughout the night, and had electrodes |
|group (cheque) are the IV and the DV is measured by a questionnaire and by eye |attached to their scalp and eye lids. This is not representative of how a |
|fixation data, so cause and effect can be inferred. |person normally sleeps, so we cannot be sure they got a normal night’s sleep |
| |and that they dreamt how they would usually. It is not normal for a person to |
| |be woken up at regular intervals either and may have been hard for them to |
| |sleep with electrodes attached to them. |
|Great application to real-life, and research has had a big influence on |Can be low in validity, because participants may guess the aim and respond to |
|everyday life in the real world. |demand characteristics or social-desirability bias, because of the levels of |
|For example, Fisher’s cognitive interview showed that the cognitive interview |control, and therefore we cannot be sure we are measuring what we are supposed |
|elicits much more information than normal interview techniques. |to be measuring, if the participants are not showing their true unbiased |
| |behaviour in the situation. |
| |For example, in Loftus and Palmer’s experiment, the participants could have |
| |guessed the aim and changed their speed estimate to suit the independent |
| |variable of the verb. |
|Very effective as a therapy, supporting the assumption that people’s problems |Reductionist and deterministic. The approach simplifies complex human behaviour|
|are due to faulty or irrational thinking that can be remedied. |to a person’s thoughts, ignoring other factors such as a person’s social |
|For example, Meichenbaum’s stress inoculation therapy uses cognitive therapy to|situation (friends) and their biology. It also assumes that a person’s problems|
|change the person’s thinking patterns to overcome their stress, and to tackle |can be solved by changing the way a person thinks, when in fact the problem |
|the situation. |could be much deeper and involve an interaction of factors to overcome it. |

Developmental Approach

Assumptions; 1. All behaviour in adulthood is affected by experiences in childhood. 2. Changes occur over a person’s lifetime as a result of inherited factors or lifetime experiences (both nature and nurture).

|Strengths |Weaknesses |
|Often studies behaviour over a long period of time, and |It is difficult to replicate longitudinal studies, as it is expensive and extremely |
|therefore uses a longitudinal study. The development of a person|time-consuming. Therefore, they are not reliable, because they cannot be repeated in the same|
|or a group of people can be studied, without the issue of |way to check for consistent results. |
|individual differences, because the same person is being |It would be hard to replicate Farrington’s study because he looks at people for 40 years of |
|followed. This provides in-depth rich qualitative data of one |their life, so it would be very time consuming and also very unreliable, because there is |
|person over a period of time. |absolutely no way it could be repeated in the same way as the original study. |
|For example, Farrington looks at offending behaviour of boys | |
|from the age of 8 to 48 and comes to conclusions about | |
|offending, such as the chances of a person reconvicting if they | |
|start offending at a younger age than someone else. | |
|Research in this area provides us with an understanding of how |In order to make valid comparisons, people need to be studied for a long period of time. |
|humans develop and change over the whole of their lifetime, and |However, this is not always possible because there are high attrition rates, as people may |
|can influence everyday life, such as education. |drop out or die. |
|For example, Samuel and Bryant’s study into the age at which |For example, Yochelson and Samenow looked at the criminal thinking patterns of criminals, and|
|children can conserve has changed education in terms of how |of the 255 criminals, only 30 completed the programme. This shows how longitudinal studies |
|teachers teach children and what methods they use to teach them.|can be a problem because of these high attrition rates. |
| |Some studies under the developmental approach have very limited samples, from which |
| |researchers want to generalise results from. The approach looks for general patterns of |
| |development based on non-representative samples. |
| |For example, Freud tries to generalise the findings from the case study of Little Hans’ and |
| |he assumes that all children go through the psychosexual stages. |
| | |
| |They can also be ethnocentric, as they only look at children from one area/culture, and try |
| |to generalise the findings to other cultures, when the traditions and values are different in|
| |other place. For example, some children work instead of getting an education at a young age. |
| |For example, Samuel and Bryant generalise their findings to other cultures about |
| |conservation, when the research was only based on children from one town in the UK and |
| |therefore ignores cultural differences in regards to how children may learn differently in |
| |different parts of the World. |
| |Very deterministic, as it assumes that all children go through the same stages. |
| |For example, Freud with psychosexual stages. |
| |Samuel and Bryant with stages of conservation. |
| |Piaget assumed younger children do not have the ability to think in the same way as older |
| |children. |

Social Approach

Assumptions; 1. Behaviour is influenced by the people around us and the society they have created (the situation). 2. All behaviour occurs in a social context, even when nobody else is present.

|Strengths |Weaknesses |
|The approach often uses real life situations to study the social context of |There is a huge problem with ethics in these types of studies, as the |
|situations. Therefore, the social approach is often high in ecological |participants usually do not know they are being studied, so they cannot give |
|validity, as the results relate to everyday life, and can be generalised to |their consent. They also are not given the right to withdraw because they do |
|other situations. |not know they are being studied in the first place. In some social approach |
|For example, Piliavin’s study was a field experiment, which had high ecological|studies, the participants are subjected to psychological harm and physiological|
|validity as it was set in the participants natural environment on the New York |harm |
|subway. Therefore, the participants wouldn’t have known they were being |For example, in Milgram’s experiment, the participants are told they have the |
|studied, and couldn’t have responded to demand characteristics or |right to withdraw but the experimenter technically doesn’t allow them to. The |
|social-desirability bias in terms of helping behaviour. |participant could experience harm in some way, because some of them shocked |
| |people at a rate that would kill a person many times and may not have thought |
| |they would be able to do this. |
|This approach tends to look at very relevant and useful situations, and look at|As field experiments are often used, the participant is in their own |
|how a person’s behaviour can be influenced. This has helped to improve many |environment, but there is a lack of control in the study, so extraneous |
|issues. |variables cannot be controlled. Therefore, the studies are not that reliable |
|For example, Waxler-Morrison’s study on social networks influencing breast |because they cannot be repeated in exactly the same way. There is no completely|
|cancer survival shows how important social networks are in enhancing a woman’s |controlled standardised procedure. |
|life and enabling them to cope better. | |
|It uses a wide range of methods, from field experiments to laboratory |Very reductionist and deterministic. It simplifies complex human behaviour by |
|experiments to look at the effects of social situations on behaviour. Field |only looking at situational factors such as the environment. It ignores factors|
|experiments are good because they are high in ecological validity, and hence |such as the physiological side of things, and also ignores cognitive factors, |
|people can be studied in their natural environment without demand |because someone could have a cognitive problem or physiological problem (ie, |
|characteristics and social-desirability bias so the results are applicable to |downsyndrome) which causes them to act differently in social situations. It is |
|real life situations. |deterministic because it assumes that people will act in accordance to the |
|For example, Piliavin uses a field experiment. |situation, and change their behaviour. |
|However, Milgram uses a laboratory experiment to look at the effect of | |
|authoritive figures on a person. | |

Individual Differences Approach

Assumptions; 1. Behaviour which deviates from the norm is seen to be abnormal. 2. To understand the complexity of human behaviour, it is necessary to study the differences between people, from looking at the unique characteristics of the individual, rather than by looking at the similarities between people.

|Strengths |Weaknesses |
|Many useful applications to real life and allows us to understand human |As case studies are used, there are very few participants, and therefore we |
|behaviour as we can find causes for some disorders. |cannot really generalise the findings to other people/groups, especially as it |
|For example, Rosenhan’s study led to the improvement of people’s lives who had |is to do with individual differences – people experience different symptoms, |
|mental health disorders, as they changed the way that they diagnosed and |etc. Therefore, we can question if it is useful to real life, because the |
|treated them, as they found out that ‘labelling’ could have serious effects |symptoms are so wide-ranging. |
|with their health, as the label stayed with them forever, even if they didn’t |For example, Freud’s case study on Little Hans is individual, and his problems |
|relapse. |reflect his experiences. His phobia of a horse which reflected his phobia of |
| |his dad is unique, and it is unlikely someone else would have this exact |
| |problem because they would have different experiences and a different |
| |upbringing, so we can’t generalise the results to other people. |
|A much more holistic approach than any other approach that we study (ignoring |Tend to use case study method to gain a more holistic approach, which sticks to|
|the humanistic approach), as it is not reductionist in any way. It looks at |looking at one person at a time. However, the researchers in the case study can|
|factors as a whole, and uses a variety of methods to come to a conclusion, as |become too emotionally attached with the individual, which could bias the |
|well as using qualitative and quantitative data. It does not simplify any |findings and cause other problems, to do with the ethics of the study. |
|complex disorder down to its phenomenon. |For example, was Eve’s case of MPD real or was she just a good actor?? |
|For example, in Thigpen and Cleckley’s study, they are not reductionist in any | |
|way, and look at her experiences from the past, her cognitive side (from the | |
|interviews), and her mental side, and do not assume anything [not | |
|deterministic]. | |
|There is use of both quantitative and qualitative data. Quantitative data is |The approach tends to rely on dispositional explanations rather than |
|obtained from psychometric tests, where differences between personalities and |situational ones. It explains individual differences as resulting from a |
|other traits can be found between people. This provides data which is easy to |person’s own characteristics and ignores the situation a person is in. |
|analyse and compare, and is objective. |For example, the behaviour of the pseudopatients in Rosenhan’s study was |
| |misinterpreted as being part of the illness (constant writing, and trying to |
| |get out hospital) when in fact it was a result of the hospital environment and |
| |the fact that they weren’t real patients. This shows that they assume people |
| |experience similar symptoms and that it is down to the illness, and not the |
| |environment. |

Perspectives

Behaviourist Perspective

Assumptions; 1. All behaviour is the result of learning (conditioning) from the environment. 2. Conditioning involves associative learning – association between stimuli and responses which did not exist before learning took place. 3. Psychologists should only study directly observable and measurable behaviour.
OPERANT CONDITIONING – uses reinforcement and punishment to strengthen or weaken behaviours (SKINNER)
CLASSICAL CONDITIONING – uses association to learn behaviours (PAVLOV)

|Strengths |Weaknesses |
|The approach studies behaviour in a very scientific way, as it usually uses |As laboratory experiments tend to be used, the studies are very low in |
|laboratory experiments in very controlled conditions, so extraneous variables |ecological validity, so we have to be careful when applying the findings to |
|are avoided, so the IV can be isolated to measure the effect on the DV, and |everyday life. This issue could cause demand characteristics or |
|therefore cause and effect can be inferred. |social-desirability bias. |
|For example, there is a direct link between aggressive and non-aggressive/no | |
|role models on a child’s behaviour, as shown by Bandura. | |
|Huge practical application to real-life, because there is support for classical|Huge problem with ethics, because children or animals are generally used, who |
|and operant conditioning, which is a mechanism for learning in the classroom. |cannot really give their full consent. |
|Provides support for teachers when bringing in teaching methods, and also helps|For example, Little Albert was only a baby, so he could not give his consent |
|parents to shape their child. It is a strong and highly influential perspective|and the experiment could have caused him psychological harm because he was |
|in psychology as it thoroughly explains behaviour. |taught by associative learning (CLASSICAL CONDITIONING) to not like objects |
|For example, Skinners’ study shows how rats can press a lever (reinforcement) |which were once his favourite. |
|and they will get food. | |
|Bandura’s experiment shows how role models are highly influential on young | |
|children, which can help parents with their children in terms of video games, | |
|DVDs, having a good role model in the family, etc. | |
|Farrington, support that upbringing (environment) can cause a person to turn to| |
|crime – if the role model of a person is a criminal, etc. | |
|Many therapies have come out of it, such as behavioural therapies, which has |It only focuses on observable behaviour, and is therefore reductionist. It |
|helped to get rid of some behaviours. |doesn’t look at other explanations for why behaviour may be there. |
| |For example, with schizophrenia, it is often not observable because it occurs |
| |in the persons mind. Therefore, this is a weakness of the approach because it |
| |is reductionist, which could cause them to miss out very important factors. |
| |Very deterministic, as it assumes behaviour will be learnt by classical or |
| |operant conditioning. It assumes that everyone will learn in this way, and that|
| |behaviour cannot take place in any other format. |

Psychodynamic Perspective

Assumptions; 1. The mind is split into 3 –the preconscious, unconscious and conscious. The unconscious forms a large part of our mental life, and can influence our thinking and physical well-being. 2. Childhood experiences have an effect on our behaviour in later life, as they are very important in shaping our adult personality.

|Strengths |Weaknesses |
|Often uses the case study method, with one participant, and studies them over a|As case studies are used, the samples are extremely small and so the results or|
|long period of time, so in-depth rich qualitative data can be gathered into the|information obtained cannot be generalised to other samples, because it is not |
|experiences of one person. |representative. Case studies are also very individual and cannot be replicated |
|For example, Freud looked at the case of Little Hans who had a phobia of horses|on other people, because of individual differences, and hence are not very |
|and consequently of his father. He explained this in terms of the Oedipus |reliable. |
|complex. |For example, Thigpen and Cleckley’s study on Eve is not generalisable to other |
| |people because it is an individual case, and also it cannot be repeated because|
| |it is longitudinal and is therefore not very representative of the target |
| |population, as people have different experiences in their childhood. |
| |The perspective is very subjective, and cannot be tested objectively, as the |
| |psychologists make their own interpretations. This makes them very bias as |
| |well. There are no scientific findings or methods used to back up the data, so |
| |it is not very reliable at all. |

Issues

The issues that you need to know about include; ethics, ecological validity, reliability, validity, longitudinal and snapshot, and also quantitative and qualitative data. You should be able to describe each of these issues, give strengths and weaknesses of them, and you should also have synoptic examples to illustrate the issues.

Ethics

Ethical issues include;
Deception;
This ethical issue means deceiving the participants in terms of not telling them the full aims of the study and then using their results when you still haven’t told them the full aim.

Consent;
Informed consent should always be obtained from participants before starting the study. They should be given information about what they will be asked to do during the study and they should confirm verbally or in writing that they understand the study and are willing to take part.

In terms of children, parental consent should be obtained and the children should be asked for assent (to say whether they are happy to continue)

For example, Piliavin did not obtain any consent from his participants because it was a field experiment, and if he did ask for consent, it would have taken a long time and would also have affected the results, because the participants would have responded to demand characteristics and social-desirability bias to make themselves seem like a better person in regards to their helping (bystander) behaviour.

Confidentiality;
Participants should not be named or identified in the write-up of the study, or when showing the results in a graph. The participants should also not talk about their performance with anyone. This is to respect their privacy and the individuals should be told that their results and information will remain confidential.

Psychological/Physical Harm;
It is essential that research avoids presenting participants with tasks that might induce unpleasant emotions or states of mind such as anxiety, fear, stress, unhappiness, etc as well as avoiding physical harm.

To avoid this type of harm, researchers could inform the participants of what they might come across in the study that could cause them harm when they obtain consent, and in a way this offers them the right to withdraw.

In Milgram’s study, the participants could have experienced psychological harm because they were administering deathly electric shocks to the ‘students’, which caused them to become stressed, anxious and upset, which was determined by the observation of the participants, as they were sweating a lot.

Debriefing;
At the end of the study, the participants should be told the real aims, and they should be given the opportunity to ask the researchers questions. The participants should be allowed to ask for the results of the study and they should be informed that any discussion or publication of the study will ensure anonymity of the participants.

Right to withdraw;
The researcher must tell the participants that they have the right to withdraw from the study when they give their informed consent, and that they also have the right not to answer any question.

Strengths and weaknesses of conducting psychological research which raises ethical issues (June 2010)
|Strengths |Weaknesses |
|Sometimes the issue of deception can enhance the ecological validity and |The participants of the study are being objected to psychological harm and are |
|(internal) validity of the study, because it is less likely that there will be |being deceived because they are not being told the full aim. Therefore, they |
|demand characteristics and social-desirability bias, because the participants |could agree to take part in a study because they have been told a ‘fake’ aim, |
|do not know the full aim and so cannot react in any particular way. |when in fact they wouldn’t have agreed if they were told the real aim of the |
| |study. |
|Findings are more useful because participants are being studied in their |Participants do not know they are being studied, so information which is |
|natural environment in a normal situation and do not know they are being |private could be published by the researchers. |
|studied, so they act completely normally. | |
| |The issue of ethical issues could give psychological research a bad reputation,|
| |so in future people may be less likely to give their permission to take part or|
| |they may be more aware that they could be being studied, and act differently, |
| |affecting the ecological validity of the study. |

Ecological Validity

Ecological validity refers to the extent that the situation or task in the study truly reflects behaviour in real life settings. Using an environment which is natural or normal to the participant is likely to be higher in ecological validity, and is more likely to obtain results that represent everyday life, and in that way, are more generalisable to the target population and to other settings. However, if a study is set up in laboratory settings or where this is high control, it is not in the participants’ natural settings and does not reflect everyday life, so the ecological validity is low. Where the task that the participant is asked to do is not reflective of a normal task a person would do, for example, sleeping in a laboratory, it would be said to be low in mundane realism.

Strengths and limitations of conducting psychological research where ecological validity is low (January 2010)
|Strengths |Weaknesses |
|Where ecological validity is low, there are likely to be controlled conditions,|Research is likely to be reductionist, as the situation is very controlled, and|
|where the IV is isolated and manipulated to measure the effect on the DV, so |only looks at one factor. It simplifies complex human behaviour by isolating |
|cause and effect can be inferred. |the IV. It does not look at a combination of factors. |
|Loftus and Palmers’ experiment into the effect of changing a verb in a question| |
|on the participants speed estimate of how fast the car was going when it | |
|‘******’ another car isolated the IV so they could infer cause and effect | |
|between the verb and speed estimate. | |
|As the situation is controlled, there is more likely to be a standardised |It is harder for us to generalise/apply the results where there is low |
|procedure, and in this way, it is said to be more reliable, because the study |ecological validity, because there is likely to be demand characteristics or |
|can be repeated in exactly the same way to look for consistencies in results. |social-desirability bias, where the participants change their behaviour to what|
|Bruce conducted an experiment into recognising faces, which used a laboratory |they think the researchers want to see. |
|experiment with standardised images and composite images. This was a |Dement and Kleitman’s experiment into eye movement and dreaming was very low in|
|standardised procedure as all participants saw the images and had to match the |ecological validity, because it studied participants whilst they slept in a |
|composites to the original. Therefore, it can be repeated in the same way to |lab, and they were asked not to drink any alcohol or caffeine on the day. They |
|check for reliability. |had electrodes attached to their scalp and eye lids, and were woken up |
| |continuously throughout their sleep, so they would not have gained a normal |
| |nights’ sleep, which could have affected the results, since the dream content |
| |and REM could have been affected. Also, the participant may drink caffeine or |
| |alcohol on a normal day, and hence this would lower the ecological validity. |
|Highly scientific equipment is likely to be used where the ecological validity |There will be a lack of qualitative data, since highly scientific equipment |
|is low, because scientific equipment is not something we come across every day.|only produces objective data. Therefore, we cannot gather opinions or reasons |
|This allows objective measurements to be made, where quantitative data can be |for the quantitative data, so there is no in-depth rich data which gives us |
|collected, which is easy to analyse and then compare. |more of an insight into why a behaviour is occurring. |
|For example, Dement and Kleitmans sleep laboratory used electrodes connected to| |
|the scalp and eye lids. Not representative of how a person normally sleeps, as | |
|you don’t sleep with equipment attached to yourself. | |

Reliability

Reliability refers to how consistent the findings are. If we were to repeat the study, would we find exactly the same or similar findings? The only way we can accurately repeat a study is if we have high levels of control or a standardised procedure, because we need to be able to repeat the study in exactly the same way. We need to manipulate the independent variable to measure the effect on the dependent variable, and therefore the most reliable method is the laboratory experiment. A field experiment does not infer high reliability because not all variables are controlled, as field experiments are the participants’ natural setting. Therefore, we are not able to repeat the study in exactly the same way, because the environment could have changed slightly between studies.

Strengths and limitations of psychological research with low reliability
|Strengths |Weaknesses |
|Low reliability means that the levels of control are not high, so the situation|Low reliability infers that the situation is not highly controlled, and |
|is more natural, and therefore it has higher ecological validity. This means |therefore extraneous variables have not been avoided, so we cannot isolate the |
|the environment is representative of everyday life, so the results can be |IV to measure the effect on the DV, so it is harder to infer cause and effect. |
|applied to everyday life and to other natural settings. | |
|As there is less control, there is likely to be less chance of demand |We can question the internal validity of this type of psychological research, |
|characteristics or social-desirability bias because the situation is not |because if there is low reliability, there are not many controls, and so we |
|artificial and it is less likely that the participant will change their |cannot be sure we are measuring what we are supposed to measure, because there |
|behaviour to suit the aim. |may be extraneous variables. |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |

Validity

Validity is a wide topic area as it covers many different aspects. The term validity basically means are you measuring what you are supposed to measure? If there are extraneous variables, then you cannot be sure you’re measuring what you’re supposed to be measuring because extraneous variables could be affecting the measurement and you cannot infer cause and effect because you have not isolated the independent variable, so you can’t be sure it is just the independent variable that is having the effect on the dependent variable. There are many different types of validity, which include internal, external, concurrent, face, ecological, population and content validity.

|Internal |Does the study measure what it’s supposed to within the study itself? |
|External |Does the study measure what it claims to outside the study? |
|Concurrent |Comparing the measure with an already existing established measure of the same variable to check for concurrent validity (and hence |
| |reliability because you are checking the measure works and measures what it is supposed to [validity]) |
|Face |Are you measuring what you want to measure? Does it do what it says it does? |
|Ecological |Does the study (situation and task) reflect everyday life? |
|Population |The extent to which the results of a study can be generalised to the target population |
|Content |Does the measure cover all the variables it is supposed to cover? |

These different terms are very confusing – be aware that you don’t need to be able to define all of these different types of validity. If you are going to get a question on validity, it will ask you about ecological validity or validity itself. It is just good to know about the different types because it shows you are more aware of the issue. Try to learn some of the terms to impress the examiners (ie, concurrent validity is used in Baron-Cohen’s study into autistic/asperger’s/tourettes people because he uses the Happes Strange Stories Task to check the measure of the Eyes Task.

Strengths and limitations of psychological research that is highly valid
|Strengths |Weaknesses |
|Research that is highly valid is often highly reliable, because if you’re | |
|measuring what you’re supposed to measure, then you are isolating the IV to | |
|measure the effect on the DV, so there are no extraneous variables and it can | |
|be repeated in exactly the same way. | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | |

Longitudinal and Snapshot

Longitudinal – a study carried out over a long period of time, and usually looks at the development of a person and their behaviour (classified as longitudinal if it aims to look at the effect of variables over time)

Snapshot – a study conducted on one occasion. It looks at a person’s behaviour in one moment of time, and this type of study usually looks at many different individuals, and then cross compares data to come to a conclusion
Refers to the length of time of each participant’s involvement, rather than how long it takes for the researchers to collect the data.

Strengths and limitations of psychological research using longitudinal studies
|Strengths |Weaknesses |
|Longitudinal studies are carried out over a long period of time, so researchers|These types of studies are very expensive and time-consuming, and also need a |
|can look at the development of individuals, and come to conclusions about |high level of commitment from participants. Some participants may drop out |
|particular stages everyone passes through or patterns. |because they are ill or they may not want to be part of the study. |
|Lots of qualitative data can be collected, which gives reasons for behaviours, |Qualitative data is subjective, and therefore down to the interpretation of the|
|and is rich and in-depth. |researcher. It is hard to analyse and also hard to compare with other data. |

Strengths and limitations of psychological research using snapshot studies
|Strengths |Weaknesses |
|Snapshot studies are quick and easy to conduct, as they do not go on for a long|Ethnocentric, as research usually only looks at one culture and then tries to |
|period of time. Therefore, participants do not need to be committed, and lots |apply it to lots of different cultures. |
|of data can be collected on one occasion, which means conclusions can be drawn | |
|straight away. | |
|Tend to collect quantitative data, and test participants objectively using |There is a lack of detailed in-depth rich qualitative data, which means there |
|scientific methods. This type of data is very easy to analyse and compare, as |are no opinions (subjective) data gathered, and also there are no reasons for |
|it is numerical data, and therefore it is easy to come to conclusions. |peoples choices or for the participants behaviour. |

Quantitative and Qualitative Data

Quantitative data – numerical data expressed as quantities or numbers that can be analysed statistically in order to provide comparisons between groups of participants

Qualitative data – descriptive data which is not numerical and is a rich source of information on behaviours and attitudes on what people think or feel and gives reasons for behaviours

Strengths and limitations of psychological research using quantitative data
|Strengths |Weaknesses |
|Numerical data, so easy to analyse and therefore very easy to compare and draw |Lack of in-depth rich meaningful data, so there is no data giving opinions or |
|conclusions between people. Hence, it is useful as good comparisons can be |reasons for choices, so does not give the opportunity for participants to |
|made. |explain behaviour. |
|Reliable data as it is quantitative and so can be obtained in exactly the same |Reductionist, because there is no qualitative data to back up findings. Only |
|way (by repeating the study as usually quantitative data is obtained in highly |looks at easily quantifiable data and ignores other aspects, especially |
|controlled conditions). |reasons. |

Strengths and limitations of psychological research using qualitative data
|Strengths |Weaknesses |
|In-depth rich meaningful data, which provides reasons for particular behaviours|Subjective data so it is down to the researchers interpretation, which could |
|and also allows the participants to explain their opinions. |make it bias. |
|More holistic than just using quantitative data, because it actually explains |Qualitative data is very hard to analyse and therefore compare because of |
|things in more detail, and provides reasons and explanations for behaviours. |individual differences. This means it is hard to draw meaningful conclusions |
| |from this type of data. |

Debates

There are many new debates in psychology that you have to know for this exam, and there are often two sides to the debate. Make sure you look at both sides before coming to any conclusion. These debates include; 1. Determinism V Free will 2. Reductionism V Holism 3. Nature V Nurture 4. Ethnocentrism 5. Psychology as a Science 6. Individual V Situational explanations 7. Usefulness of psychological research
For this type of question, you need to know about the debate, and be able to describe it, you need to know the strengths and weaknesses of each side of the debate in psychology and also be able to link in synoptic examples that explain and support the debates.

Determinism V Free will

Determinism - the view that all behaviours are determined by factors beyond our control, and are in a way determined before we actually do them. o Hard determinism o Soft determinism

Free will – the view that our behaviours are the products of our own choice and will.

Strengths and limitations of psychological research that is deterministic
|Strengths |Weaknesses |
|Deterministic views are often scientific views, and so there are high levels |Reductionist, as it is heavily scientific and therefore only looks at one |
|ofcontrol, which avoids extraneous variables so the IV can be isolated to |aspect of complex human behaviour and ignores other factors. This affects the |
|measure the effect on the DV and therefore cause and effect can be established.|usefulness of research because it simplifies human behaviour. |
| |Ethnocentric to some extent, because it assumes findings can be applied to all |
| |cultures, when only the Western ways have been studied. Western ways are |
| |different from other cultures, so research cannot be applied to other cultures.|
| |As deterministic views are based on scientific information, research would be |
| |low in ecological validity, so we have to be careful when applying the findings|
| |to everyday life because high controls can cause participants to show demand |
| |characteristics or social-desirability bias. |

Reductionism V Holism

Reductionism – the process of breaking down complex human behaviour into their constituent parts. o It over-simplifies complex human behaviour down to simple factors

Holism – an approach that takes into account a wide range of factors to explain complex human behaviour. o It does not break it down into smaller sub-sections, and looks at behaviour as a whole

Strengths and limitations of psychological research that is reductionist
|Strengths |Weaknesses |
|Consistent with scientific approach, and therefore uses laboratory experiment |Low ecological validity, because on a daily basis variables are not isolated to|
|with high levels of control so it avoids extraneous variables. The IV can be |measure the effect of them and therefore it does not reflect everyday life. |
|isolated to measure the effect on the DV, and cause and effect can be inferred.|Affects generalisability to target population because we can’t generalise the |
| |results to people living a normal life in a normal World if the study was |
| |carried out in an artificially controlled situation. |
|Usually quantitative data is collected from highly scientific equipment, which |Lack of qualitative data so there are no reasons or explanations to |
|are easy to analyse and compare, and are not down to any interpretation by the |quantitative data, so it lacks in-depth descriptive data. |
|researcher. | |
| | |

Nature V Nurture

Nature – describes behaviours that are innate (born into us or genetically determined by genes and DNA)

Nurture – describes behaviours that are acquired as a result of experience or because of environmental influences

Strengths and limitations of the nurture side of the nature/nurture debate
|Strengths |Weaknesses |
| |Deterministic because it offers no scope for free will. It assumes that |
| |behaviour is learnt from the environment and that the environment will change |
| |our behaviour. |
| | |
| | |

Ethnocentrism

The belief that one’s own ethnic group or culture is superior to another ethnic group or culture. It is the inability to think outside one’s own cultural experience and a tendency to assume that what happens in our own culture is common to other cultures. o Sometimes psychologists draw conclusions from studies focused on one culture or group and assume it can be generalised to other groups or cultures. o This is common when research is based on the Western way.

Psychology as a Science

Psychology is generally seen as being a Science, because if it wasn’t a Science, it wouldn’t be seen as a valid or reliable subject.

Strengths and limitations of the ‘psychology as a science’ debate
|Strengths |Weaknesses |
|Highly controlled, so that the independent variable can be isolated meaning |High control means the situation will be artificial and therefore would not |
|there are no extraneous variables which allows us to measure the IVs effect on |reflect a person’s normal environment, hence it would be low in ecological |
|the dependent variable. This means it is also highly valid because we are |validity, and we would have to be careful about applying results because there |
|measuring what we are supposed to be measuring – cause (IV) and effect (DV). |could be demand characteristics or social-desirability bias. |
|Reliable, as standardised procedures are commonly used, with high levels of |Reductionist and deterministic as it assumes that everyone will go through the |
|control, which therefore makes them more replicable. |same patterns, etc and that a particular behaviour is a cause of something |
| |else, and also it doesn’t look at things as a whole, and simplifies complex |
| |human behaviour down to very small factors. |
|Objective, as it does not take into account any subjective opinions of people, |No qualitative data is collected when using scientific methods and therefore we|
|and only looks at fact. |do not obtain reasons for peoples’ behaviour or obtain opinions. |
|Produces quantitative data, which is easy to analyse and compare with other | |
|quantitative data, providing straight forward conclusions. | |

Individual and Situational Explanations

Individual – looks at the characteristics of a person (ie, their personality) and assumes that the individual characteristics of a person is consistent across situations.
Ie, Thomas et al. 10% of babies born with difficult temprements – an emphasis on nature, and this characteristic is consistent across situations.

Situational – looks at the situation a person is in and assumes that the behaviour of a person depends on the situation the person is in.
Ie, Reicher looked at the way we identify within a group, and how the guards failed to develop a strong group identity but the prisoners were the complete opposite.

Usefulness of Psychological Research

This is part of the specification but you will be able to evaluate the usefulness of psychological research by looking at all the other factors this booklet has looked at; how the ethics, ecological validity, type of study (longitudinal or snapshot) and quantitative and qualitative data affect the usefulness. We have also looked at the debates; determinism and free will, reductionism and holism, nature-nurture, ethnocentrism, psychology as a science and individual and situational explanations, and you will be able to bring this into whether psychological research is useful or not.