The Student Room Group

Scroll to see replies

mel0n
I think you'd manipulate it by changing between male and female, though. :lolwut: Lolol!

In question 1, what did you put as a confounding variable? I realllyyyy totally forgot it and just put demand characteristics down!! :frown:


I put age because maybe younger people are more likely to be more phobic :s-smilie:
Reply 121
xstarxsparklex
I put age because maybe younger people are more likely to be more phobic :s-smilie:


That seems logical. :dontknow:

I hope they're not strict with marking and stuff. What two essays did you answer?

I know this is probably totally wrong but to me it seems as if, even if your answer is right, they won't give you a mark unless it's one of the answers written on the mark scheme? I hope that's not true but last years paper some people got theirs back and some of their answers to research methods were right, but didn't get sufficient marks. :dontknow: Also they only mark the first thing you put down, right?

What is the experimental method? :ninja: I supposed it was a laboratory and wrote that it had high internal and low external as my strength and weakness. I just waffle way too much and don't get to the point so probably won't get the marks. :colondollar:
mel0n
I hope they're not strict with marking and stuff. What two essays did you answer?

I know this is probably totally wrong but to me it seems as if, even if your answer is right, they won't give you a mark unless it's one of the answers written on the mark scheme? I hope that's not true but last years paper some people got theirs back and some of their answers to research methods were right, but didn't get sufficient marks. :dontknow: Also they only mark the first thing you put down, right?

What is the experimental method? :ninja: I supposed it was a laboratory and wrote that it had high internal and low external as my strength and weakness. I just waffle way too much and don't get to the point so probably won't get the marks. :colondollar:


I did 3 and 4. I thought 5 said about ethics with human pps, but my friend said it was non-human pps. If she's right thank god I didn't do that question or else I'd have answered totally the wrong thing :P Which ones did you do?
I'm really not sure about the whole only marking the first thing you put down thing, but tbh it wouldn't surprise me! Eek!
As to the experimental method in q2, I put field experiment but actually I guess lab would make sense :/ In q1 did you put questionnaire or lab experiment? It was kinda...a questionnaire....in a lab :rolleyes: lol.
Reply 123
xstarxsparklex
I did 3 and 4. I thought 5 said about ethics with human pps, but my friend said it was non-human pps. If she's right thank god I didn't do that question or else I'd have answered totally the wrong thing :P Which ones did you do?
I'm really not sure about the whole only marking the first thing you put down thing, but tbh it wouldn't surprise me! Eek!
As to the experimental method in q2, I put field experiment but actually I guess lab would make sense :/ In q1 did you put questionnaire or lab experiment? It was kinda...a questionnaire....in a lab :rolleyes: lol.


You mean 1a? Was it not asking whether it was an independent measures design/repeated measures design/matched pairs design? And yeah it was a questionnaite in a lab, that kind of threw me off! :lolwut:

I went to my teacher straight after the exam and he was looking at the exam paper in his office. I told him about having put 'phobia' down as the IV instead of 'gender' and that I put gender down next to the 'phobia' and he said I wouldn't get the mark unless I'd have crossed the 'phobia' out. Hmmm.

I did question 3 and 4 as well! I didn't learn the animal ethics essay, I didn't really like it! What kind of content did you have for 3 and 4? I don't know if mine was right as such. :frown:
Okay for q2
I said it was a controlled observation as the variables were controlled, it was in a closed circuit (not on the motorway) and they had to observe them to find out the penalities and measure the time taken to complete it.

I did the dealing with issue essays - i like the animals one but i dont see how batesons cube/Home office etc. showed the ethical issues? so I just went with the scientifc one after spending 2 mins doing the animal one and crossing it out lol.
for the dealing - i said about prior general consent (gamson) and presumptive consent (milgram), cost benefit analysis (milgram) and withdrawing to protect form harm (zimbardo)
for the science - experimenter bias (rosenthal), demand characteristics (orne) and heather (lab) but didnt get a chance to finsih the question with my other points e.g. reductionism =/

for confounding variable i said experimenter may have been nice to females and not to males therefore they could rank phobias differently.

what did u guys say were the valditiy factors in question1 and reliability factors in question2?
I put 'concurrent validity ....and some of the phobias may have just been more common than others thus affecting how phobic people are'
and for the reliability question on (section B) i put that there could have been no interobserver reliability.
Oh man, i think i have messed up. I put phobias instead of gender for the independent variable as well. I also put that it was an observation not a lab experiment , my teacher said it was a natural experiment but i can't possibly see how it was.

On the essay questions i did 4 & 5. :smile:
Reply 126
jabed786
Okay for q2
I said it was a controlled observation as the variables were controlled, it was in a closed circuit (not on the motorway) and they had to observe them to find out the penalities and measure the time taken to complete it.

I did the dealing with issue essays - i like the animals one but i dont see how batesons cube/Home office etc. showed the ethical issues? so I just went with the scientifc one after spending 2 mins doing the animal one and crossing it out lol.
for the dealing - i said about prior general consent (gamson) and presumptive consent (milgram), cost benefit analysis (milgram) and withdrawing to protect form harm (zimbardo)
for the science - experimenter bias (rosenthal), demand characteristics (orne) and heather (lab) but didnt get a chance to finsih the question with my other points e.g. reductionism =/

for confounding variable i said experimenter may have been nice to females and not to males therefore they could rank phobias differently.

what did u guys say were the valditiy factors in question1 and reliability factors in question2?
I put 'concurrent validity ....and some of the phobias may have just been more common than others thus affecting how phobic people are'
and for the reliability question on (section B) i put that there could have been no interobserver reliability.


Ooohhh I thought concurrent/content/construct was only for if they ask how to test the validity?! What did the validity question ask.. I forgot? And the reliability issue question I think I said thattttt the study could be repeated at a later date with the same participants yet they may give different answers. :dontknow: I'm no good at research methods, meh!!

Bekkiiee-xo
Oh man, i think i have messed up. I put phobias instead of gender for the independent variable as well. I also put that it was an observation not a lab experiment , my teacher said it was a natural experiment but i can't possibly see how it was.

On the essay questions i did 4 & 5. :smile:


I just don't understand how it could have been natural experiment. :frown: People actually volunteered, whereas in a natural experiment noone volunteers because it just... happens, if that makes sense. O_O LOL. I am honestly probably wrong but mehhhh.
mel0n
Ooohhh I thought concurrent/content/construct was only for if they ask how to test the validity?! What did the validity question ask.. I forgot? And the reliability issue question I think I said thattttt the study could be repeated at a later date with the same participants yet they may give different answers. :dontknow: I'm no good at research methods, meh!!



I just don't understand how it could have been natural experiment. :frown: People actually volunteered, whereas in a natural experiment noone volunteers because it just... happens, if that makes sense. O_O LOL. I am honestly probably wrong but mehhhh.

you know I actually thought it could be either any 3 of them validity tests but I thought what if they are looking for something else as the question wasnt worded as it was in the specimen paper (in the specimen they ask it in a more clear way) but in the exam it asked something like'what factor could affect the validity blah blah' I was like o_0
why couldnt they just say something clear like 'how can we test the valditiy' lol

So I thought I'll just answer it half like concurrent and the other half in a random way lol so atleast I can grab 2 out of the 4 marks either way

and for reliability I cant believe I didnt put what you said, darn I think I over complicated that bit lol your way sounds correct

yeah I agree with you, I think your teacher overlooked the volunteering by accident and thought it was natural.
Its probably lab or controlled obsv. But I have a hunch it aint lab because the section A was lab as well and it would be odd to have two of the same methods in the paper.
Reply 128
jabed786
you know I actually thought it could be either any 3 of them validity tests but I thought what if they are looking for something else as the question wasnt worded as it was in the specimen paper (in the specimen they ask it in a more clear way) but in the exam it asked something like'what factor could affect the validity blah blah' I was like o_0
why couldnt they just say something clear like 'how can we test the valditiy' lol

So I thought I'll just answer it half like concurrent and the other half in a random way lol so atleast I can grab 2 out of the 4 marks either way

and for reliability I cant believe I didnt put what you said, darn I think I over complicated that bit lol your way sounds correct

yeah I agree with you, I think your teacher overlooked the volunteering by accident and thought it was natural.
Its probably lab or controlled obsv. But I have a hunch it aint lab because the section A was lab as well and it would be odd to have two of the same methods in the paper.


Yeah but then both questions included an Independent Measures design, iirc so it's a possibility! And I put down field experiment when it clearly wasn't! Because the whole thing was set up it's not like the participants didn't know they were taking part hmmm =\

I think I didn't link my answers to the studies enough. The validity one... what was the question? I mean, I can't remember what it asked..
mel0n
You mean 1a? Was it not asking whether it was an independent measures design/repeated measures design/matched pairs design?


Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh bumswizzles! That would make sense actually, considering they then asked about lab experiments later on. Two research methods in one section.....unlikely. Oops!
Ohh shame about the IV thing! Fingers crossed the examiner's in a 'nice' mood? :P:
Ohhh I didn't mind the animal question, as it was the one I'd most revised, but just...didn't do it :p:

In the disadvantages essay I did:
P1-Highly reliable yet lacks external validity due to artificial conditions........etc. E.g. Asch's conformity study.
P2-Claims to be objective, yet findings are inevitably subjective, as the research is a social process involving humans with their own career goals..........etc. E.g. Rosenthal's rat maze study.
P3-No qualitative data, thus lacking feelings, meanings and motivations......... etc. E.g. Buss' mate preference questionnaires.
P4-Reductionist and deterministic..........etc. E.g. Rahe's reductionist conclusion on 'stress and illness is caused by traumatic life events.'
Conclusion-Kuhn's conclusion that whether psychology should be studied scientifcally is a red herring as science isn't truly science, etc. Perhaps the way forward is to use triangulation....etc.

And then the dealing with ethical issues one:
Brief intro- 3 main ways are Right to withdraw, Debriefing and Prior general consent/Presumptive consent.
P1-Right to withdraw protects pps from harm. E.g. Zimbardo allowed 5 pps to withdraw early, etc.
P2-Right to withdraw doesn't protect pps from harm encountered before withdrawal. E.g Zimbardo's pps felt "humiliated and belittled" etc.
P3-Debriefing justifies deception. E.g. Milgram told pps the shocks were fake, etc.
P4-Debriefing doesn't justify extent of deception, which can cause distress. E.g. Milgram's study caused his pps distress- one having a seizure, etc.
P5-Prior general/presumptive consent is effectively informed consent. E.g. Milgram again :tongue:
P6-Prior general/presumptive consent is not the same as fully informed consent. E.g. Zimbardo's pps did not agree to be "humiliated and belittled" by the 'guards' etc.
Conclusion- Do the ends justify the means? When using humans- often no. Perhaps the way forward is to tighten up on the use of ethical committees, increase the power of the BPS and to do cost-benefit analysis for all research, etc. E.g. If research such as Zimbardo's can help to explain and thus eliminate torture such as that at Abu Ghraib, is the research ethically justifiable?

/Essay :p: Sorry...was trying to be brief but then got carried away. Is that similar to what you put? :smile:
xstarxsparklex
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh bumswizzles! That would make sense actually, considering they then asked about lab experiments later on. Two research methods in one section.....unlikely. Oops!
Ohh shame about the IV thing! Fingers crossed the examiner's in a 'nice' mood? :P:
Ohhh I didn't mind the animal question, as it was the one I'd most revised, but just...didn't do it :p:

In the disadvantages essay I did:
P1-Highly reliable yet lacks external validity due to artificial conditions........etc. E.g. Asch's conformity study.
P2-Claims to be objective, yet findings are inevitably subjective, as the research is a social process involving humans with their own career goals..........etc. E.g. Rosenthal's rat maze study.
P3-No qualitative data, thus lacking feelings, meanings and motivations......... etc. E.g. Buss' mate preference questionnaires.
P4-Reductionist and deterministic..........etc. E.g. Rahe's reductionist conclusion on 'stress and illness is caused by traumatic life events.'
Conclusion-Kuhn's conclusion that whether psychology should be studied scientifcally is a red herring as science isn't truly science, etc. Perhaps the way forward is to use triangulation....etc.

And then the dealing with ethical issues one:
Brief intro- 3 main ways are Right to withdraw, Debriefing and Prior general consent/Presumptive consent.
P1-Right to withdraw protects pps from harm. E.g. Zimbardo allowed 5 pps to withdraw early, etc.
P2-Right to withdraw doesn't protect pps from harm encountered before withdrawal. E.g Zimbardo's pps felt "humiliated and belittled" etc.
P3-Debriefing justifies deception. E.g. Milgram told pps the shocks were fake, etc.
P4-Debriefing doesn't justify extent of deception, which can cause distress. E.g. Milgram's study caused his pps distress- one having a seizure, etc.
P5-Prior general/presumptive consent is effectively informed consent. E.g. Milgram again :tongue:
P6-Prior general/presumptive consent is not the same as fully informed consent. E.g. Zimbardo's pps did not agree to be "humiliated and belittled" by the 'guards' etc.
Conclusion- Do the ends justify the means? When using humans- often no. Perhaps the way forward is to tighten up on the use of ethical committees, increase the power of the BPS and to do cost-benefit analysis for all research, etc. E.g. If research such as Zimbardo's can help to explain and thus eliminate torture such as that at Abu Ghraib, is the research ethically justifiable?

/Essay :p: Sorry...was trying to be brief but then got carried away. Is that similar to what you put? :smile:

where were you when I was stuck on these essays :p:
if you wrote all that you will defo get them 30 marks! (touch wood!)

i didnt get time to add in a few conclusive paragraphs since i ran out of time, i hope i get a B/A in this paper
jabed786
where were you when I was stuck on these essays :p:
if you wrote all that you will defo get them 30 marks! (touch wood!)

i didnt get time to add in a few conclusive paragraphs since i ran out of time, i hope i get a B/A in this paper


Sorry! :frown: I think I looked at this thread a while ago and forgot to look back again until today haha :biggrin:
Ohh well when we did a mock in class I ran out of time for conclusions and my teacher gave me 13/15 marks, so hopefully if that's the case here, 26/30 marks should get you an A :biggrin: Did you find the rest of it ok?
xstarxsparklex
Sorry! :frown: I think I looked at this thread a while ago and forgot to look back again until today haha :biggrin:
Ohh well when we did a mock in class I ran out of time for conclusions and my teacher gave me 13/15 marks, so hopefully if that's the case here, 26/30 marks should get you an A :biggrin: Did you find the rest of it ok?

yeah the rest ways ok, some bits were a bit :confused: but most were :yep:
i hope some people found it hard - i know that sounds mean but I dont want the grades boundaries to inflate.
Reply 133
xstarxsparklex
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh bumswizzles! That would make sense actually, considering they then asked about lab experiments later on. Two research methods in one section.....unlikely. Oops!
Ohh shame about the IV thing! Fingers crossed the examiner's in a 'nice' mood? :P:
Ohhh I didn't mind the animal question, as it was the one I'd most revised, but just...didn't do it :p:

In the disadvantages essay I did:
P1-Highly reliable yet lacks external validity due to artificial conditions........etc. E.g. Asch's conformity study.
P2-Claims to be objective, yet findings are inevitably subjective, as the research is a social process involving humans with their own career goals..........etc. E.g. Rosenthal's rat maze study.
P3-No qualitative data, thus lacking feelings, meanings and motivations......... etc. E.g. Buss' mate preference questionnaires.
P4-Reductionist and deterministic..........etc. E.g. Rahe's reductionist conclusion on 'stress and illness is caused by traumatic life events.'
Conclusion-Kuhn's conclusion that whether psychology should be studied scientifcally is a red herring as science isn't truly science, etc. Perhaps the way forward is to use triangulation....etc.

And then the dealing with ethical issues one:
Brief intro- 3 main ways are Right to withdraw, Debriefing and Prior general consent/Presumptive consent.
P1-Right to withdraw protects pps from harm. E.g. Zimbardo allowed 5 pps to withdraw early, etc.
P2-Right to withdraw doesn't protect pps from harm encountered before withdrawal. E.g Zimbardo's pps felt "humiliated and belittled" etc.
P3-Debriefing justifies deception. E.g. Milgram told pps the shocks were fake, etc.
P4-Debriefing doesn't justify extent of deception, which can cause distress. E.g. Milgram's study caused his pps distress- one having a seizure, etc.
P5-Prior general/presumptive consent is effectively informed consent. E.g. Milgram again :tongue:
P6-Prior general/presumptive consent is not the same as fully informed consent. E.g. Zimbardo's pps did not agree to be "humiliated and belittled" by the 'guards' etc.
Conclusion- Do the ends justify the means? When using humans- often no. Perhaps the way forward is to tighten up on the use of ethical committees, increase the power of the BPS and to do cost-benefit analysis for all research, etc. E.g. If research such as Zimbardo's can help to explain and thus eliminate torture such as that at Abu Ghraib, is the research ethically justifiable?

/Essay :p: Sorry...was trying to be brief but then got carried away. Is that similar to what you put? :smile:

WOWwowow omgyou wrote so much!! Another thing I failed to do was include lots of studies. :emo:

For the disadvantages I think:

-Lacks objectivity as demand characteristics and experimenter bias can influence the way a participant is treated and interpreted, thus lowering internal validity of findings produced.
-For a subject to be considered a science it needs to be falsifiable, and not all in Psychology adhere to this. Eg - Freud's notion of the mind being split into three bits can't be falsified by any findings.
-Been used to validate fraudulent claims. Eg - Cyril Burt's use of the scientific method led to changes in legislation and government policy. Led to the introduction of the 11 + exam but findings were based on fraudulent data so it produces a clear ethical issue as it put thousands of working class children at a disadvantage
-Some argue that the lab method discriminates against women and has been used to maintain male dominance - Eg - Feminist psychologists like Tavris. Obedience and conformity studies show women as more obedient and submissive but gender differences are not often replicated in less controlled conditions which highlights low internal and external validity of findings produced via the scientific method.
-Although it is possible to replicate with precision and control, when studying human behavious, findings are still questionable.
-Conclusion - at least some data collected from scientific investigation has been affected by demand characteristics and experimenter bias and therefore lacks ecological validity. Even methods such as brain scanning in Cognitive Psychology could be considered as reductionist and findings can't be generalised to wider population. Finally, Kuhn is probably right in suggesting that Psychology is still a pre-science due to it lacking a generally accepted paradigm.

Human ethical issues:

- Dealt with via the introduction and frequent updating of BPS/APA ethical guidelines. Universities have ethical committees to screen proposals.
- If issues arise before: dealt with via a cost vs benefit analysis and/or guidance from guidelines.
- Most arise after - Eg if deception/informed consent = issues - researcher should address this issue in their proposal by outlining how they will debrief and obtain presumptive consent.
- Milgrams obedience study raised many issues - no protection from harm, no anonymity, deception etc. He dealt with these by pointing out - informed consent was not possible cos without deception study would not have worked. 84% were later happy to have participated therefore it is justified and when it was investigated by APA it was found to be ethically acceptable having made an 'outstanding contribution' to social psychology
- Can avoid some issues by doing opposite of what is intended. Eg - Bandura modelled aggressive behaviour and was criticised but could have tried to model caring behaviours. The mechanism of Social Learning Theory would be the same but the behaviour would not be criticised.
- Curtiss demonstrated effects of privation on Genie - exploited her without consideration of ethical responsibilities. Curtiss tried to deal with it by donating proceeds of her book to Genie and although this is an attempt to recompensate it doesn't justify the unethical treatment.
- If lack of confidentiality and anonymity are issues - deal with them by stressing to participants that their data will not be used and names will not be published without their wishes and that they can withdraw data at any time. More sensetive issue would not have raised such issues.

I didn't cover enough ways of dealing with ethical issues and in both essays I didn't use as much studies as I should have!! I have depth, but no range either. :frown:
mel0n

I didn't cover enough ways of dealing with ethical issues and in both essays I didn't use as much studies as I should have!! I have depth, but no range either. :frown:

Wow! I think yours sounds pretty good to me!! It's different to what I've been taught, thus I think yours sounds waaaaaaaaaaaay more interesting :P
Do you know when results day is?
jabed786
yeah the rest ways ok, some bits were a bit :confused: but most were :yep:
i hope some people found it hard - i know that sounds mean but I dont want the grades boundaries to inflate.

Yeaaaah I reckon it'd be pretty hard to get full marks on the scenario questions....here's hoping anyway :p: It's not mean.....it's.....hoping for the best possible outcome for all involved...hmm...maybe :P
Reply 136
xstarxsparklex
Wow! I think yours sounds pretty good to me!! It's different to what I've been taught, thus I think yours sounds waaaaaaaaaaaay more interesting :P
Do you know when results day is?


Aaah I don't think I've been taught suitable enough stuff to get me a high grade. :frown:

And I think it's 11th of March. :afraid:
mel0n
Aaah I don't think I've been taught suitable enough stuff to get me a high grade. :frown:

And I think it's 11th of March. :afraid:


It's different, but it's good! It sounds more sophisticated than my very basic points :smile: Seriously, don't worry. There's more than one way to skin a cat, so they say. (Quite a horrible expression really :/ Highly unethical :p:) *Fingers crossed 'til results day*
Reply 138
xstarxsparklex
It's different, but it's good! It sounds more sophisticated than my very basic points :smile: Seriously, don't worry. There's more than one way to skin a cat, so they say. (Quite a horrible expression really :/ Highly unethical :p:) *Fingers crossed 'til results day*

Hahaha I'd say yours sounds more sophisticated! Your conclusions are awesome. I didn't even put a conclusion on my second essay! :frown:

And yes ahaha highly unethical! :laugh: I guess we'll just have to wait noww!
Anyhow I predict we have all finished out january exams? lets all doss about a little and relax. :smile:
Hopefully I or maybe one of you guys will start a py4 thread for us all to start sharing info and stuff.
btw speaking of that, if you check out the revision section of TSR they have some essays on the controversies.

Latest