Shakir786
Badges: 8
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#1
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#1
Strengths or weakness' of this study?
In terms of:
Generalisability
reliability
applicability
validity
ethics
0
reply
Lilyghz
Badges: 12
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#2
Report 7 years ago
#2
Are you referring to the Bandura, Ross and Ross study with the bobo dolls?
0
reply
Shakir786
Badges: 8
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#3
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#3
YES
0
reply
Lilyghz
Badges: 12
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#4
Report 7 years ago
#4
(Original post by Shakir786)
Strengths or weakness' of this study?
In terms of:
Generalisability
reliability
applicability
validity
ethics
Generalisable to an extent because the findings can generalise to other boys and girls aged 3-5 but the findings do not apply to teenagers or adults.
It is reliable because it is a lab experiment therefore it has many tight controls and standardised procedures e.g. The types of toys available like the bobo doll and mallet, the aggressive acts from the role models were also carefully modelled like sitting on the doll and punching it, so the experiment can be replicated and tested for reliability.
There was also inter-rater reliability (other observers behind a one way mirror) so the findings are likely to be objective. I is also objective because it yielded quantitative data.
Can be applied to real life as we can see children observing and imitating adults in daily life, may explain gender behaviour.
Lacks ecological validity because it took place in a lab setting so the behaviour might have been unnatural, lacks experimental validity because having adults act aggressively towards toys does not represent daily life.
Population validity was also low because the sample only consisted of American children aged 3-5.
It may be criticised on ethical grounds because the children were taught aggressive behaviour and it was not known if they replicated the behaviour outside ethical grounds. There was also informed consent from their parents and nursery staff.

And if you want to be really fancy, offer an alternative explanation to criticise the study and say that the children could have behaved the way they did because of the agency theory as they could have felt like they needed to copy the models.




Lily

Posted from TSR Mobile
1
reply
Shakir786
Badges: 8
Rep:
? You'll earn badges for being active around the site. Rep gems come when your posts are rated by other community members.
#5
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#5
T h a n k y o u ! ! ! V e r y m u c h ! ! !
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Have you ever considered or are you currently considering an apprenticeship?

Yes, I am actively considering an apprenticeship (66)
12.24%
I am actively considering an alternative to uni that isn't an apprenticeship (9)
1.67%
I have considered an apprenticeship but it's not for me (141)
26.16%
I am considering a degree apprenticeship (44)
8.16%
I haven't considered an apprenticeship (261)
48.42%
Something else (let us know in the thread!) (18)
3.34%

Watched Threads

View All