How do we turn a methodological implication into a implication for the theory being discussed? For example with Buss's cross-cultural study, i wrote about the use of self-reports leading to social desirability bias which could decreases the validity of the findings. How is this an implication for the sexual selection theory?
I would say that it reduces the study's ability to provide credibility for the theory.
How do we turn a methodological implication into a implication for the theory being discussed? For example with Buss's cross-cultural study, i wrote about the use of self-reports leading to social desirability bias which could decreases the validity of the findings. How is this an implication for the sexual selection theory?
Well our teacher suggests that after we evaluate studies we just say something like "... And so these listed issues question whether the study can be used effectively to support/contradict the idea that sexual selection....."
How do we turn a methodological implication into a implication for the theory being discussed? For example with Buss's cross-cultural study, i wrote about the use of self-reports leading to social desirability bias which could decreases the validity of the findings. How is this an implication for the sexual selection theory?
Theres nothing much more you can say other than the fact that the use of an unreliable self report technique makes it very difficult to establish whether the theory of sexual selection is related to human reproductive behaviour today. Its just hard to establish the credibility of the theory, because the measurement is likely to be somewhat inaccurate.
If they ask a question about institutional aggression, will it be between or within groups OR both?
They won't specify which, they'll just ask for explanations of institutional aggression (it can be one explanation) and you can talk about both (but not if it asks for one)
They won't specify which, they'll just ask for explanations of institutional aggression (it can be one explanation) and you can talk about both (but not if it asks for one)
So we'd never get a 24 marker solely on institutional aggression within groups for example? Great!
Also what are people predicting for aggression? I haven't done any past papers (just making mindmaps of the essays now) so I have no idea what they've been asking.
Also what are people predicting for aggression? I haven't done any past papers (just making mindmaps of the essays now) so I have no idea what they've been asking.
Start timing yourself with past papers- otherwise you may struggle in the real thing.
My top prediction is institutional aggression. Maybe genetics, or evolutionary explanations(eg male jealousy)