36 Marks Specialist Study Approx

6 Questions Choose ONE study 45 mins

(a,b,c,d,e,f) from choice of 3

Section B
4 Issues
R o u g h O u t l i n e… S e c t i o n B
3 listed studies
From Your Chosen Study:
(a) Outline the aims / hypotheses / background [2]
(b) Describe the [Method / Data / Sample or sampling technique]
AND give one advantage / disadvantage [6]
(c) Describe… (in relation to your chosen study)
Issues: Ethics, Data, E.V., Longitudinal /snapshot. OR
Methods: Experiments, Questionnaires, Correlations, Case studies etc [6]
(d) One advantage AND one disadvantage of [issue or method] [6]
(e) Outline the results OR conclusions [8]
(f) Suggest 1/2 changes & outline the implications…
[ Methodological/ethical/results/Data/’blank’ ] [8]
 B
Section B (e/f)

/ I m p l i c a t i o n s
Changes: 
ƒ A detailed suggestion with a developed example.
ƒ ‘Sufficient detail to allow replication’
Implications:
ƒ Read the question! What type of implication are you 
being asked about? 
ƒ Results, Methodological, Ethical, Data, Realism?
ƒ Effect needs to be discussed in detail.
Q (e / f) Changes & Implications
Changes
ƒ Change Lab to Field 
ƒ Independent groups to repeated measures 
ƒ Longitudinal to Snapshot
ƒ Observations (Covert to Overt)
ƒ Use Questionnaires instead of unethical tasks
ƒ Make tasks more realistic
ƒ Use of specialised equipment
ƒ Different sample / cross cultural
Implications
ƒ Ethical
ƒ Results (Better, worse, 
stay the same?)
ƒ Methodological
Who? What? When?
Where? How?
Who: Sample details/participants

What: Behaviour categories on a 
coding scheme / experiment task

Where: Location – lab vs field; 

setting for observation.

How: Where the observer will be, 
timings, sampling technique

When: Time of day carried out

2 (at least) Evaluation points
in context to the source.
 Writing Procedures
ƒ Sampling technique (Self‐selected, Opportunity, 
HOW Random, Snowball)
ƒ Recruitment details e.g adverts etc
ƒ Participant details 
WHO
e.g Numbers, type of person sought.
ƒ Surveys = Identify type of scales (Open, Closed, 
Likert, Semantic Differential) 
+ Give examples in context!
ƒ Observations = Outline coding scheme, Overt / Covert 
WHAT ƒ Experiments = Identify design, the task, allocation 
to conditions, IVs & DVs, blind researchers, counter 
balancing.
ƒ Correlations = The task (If used), the co‐variables 
– how will they be measured?
WHERE Locations
WHEN Time of day
Section B (e)
 Milgram: Change 1
ƒ Use a questionnaire and outline
hypothetical situations.
ƒ Ps = 25M/25F, range of ages,
ethnicities, & occupations.
ƒ Self-selected sampling using
advert.
ƒ Stories of situations involving
Milgram
different authority figures.
Milgram: Change 2
ƒ Change location from Yale to a
place with less prestige.
ƒ Use Milgrams original sampling
method - 40Ms.
ƒ Ind. Grps with (1) At a well
known University (2) Office block
in suburbs.
ƒ Employ an Ethics committee
sensitive to Ps distress. Stress the
right to withdraw.
Milgram: Implications 1
ƒ Anonymity should help avoid D.C,
increasing validity. (Results)
ƒ reliability increased by ease of
replicability (Results)
ƒ Cost of advert & hiring researchers to
analyse data (Methodological)
ƒ Time taken to recruit Ps, formulate
stories, & analyse data
(Methodological)
ƒ Ethically more sound than original!
Milgram: Implications 2
ƒ Moving equipment between 2
locations will be costly & time
consuming + potentially very costly
to rent out an office
(Methodological)
ƒ Able to pinpoint cause & effect
with comparison group (Results)
(e) Plan – Suggest how your chosen study 
could be made more ethical – May 2009
ƒ Informed Consent
o Leaflets / posters.
ƒ Right to withdraw
o More stops
o Move to shopping centre
ƒ Debrief
o Direct interviews on tube
o Hand out leaflets as they leave
ƒ Distress
o Female as victims to reduce distress
o Older Confederates? Possibly less threatening…
ƒ Protection of Colleagues
o Move location – out of area
o A disguise!
 Section B – Piliavin May 09
(e) Suggest how your chosen study could be made more ethical
ƒ It could have been made more ethical by informing the participants that
the experiment was going to take place but not informing them when it
would. However, this creates demand characteristics as the participants
would be expecting it and may not act in a way that they previously or
ordinarily would have acted.
ƒ It could also have been more ethical by informing the participants after
the experiment took place. Though this would have to occur after the
experiment was repeated and by that point the participants would have
seen the fall a time before and any stress or distress caused by it would
have already occurred. Also, some participants may refuse consent after
this and the results would have to be scrapped which would waste time,
money and effort.
ƒ If the participants were told beforehand that the investigation was going
to occur, they may not take any real falls seriously and the person could
get hurt. The same applies to participants told afterwards who may also
suspect that any falls were part of an investigation so this is not really an
option anyway.
 Section B – Piliavin ‐ Implications
(e) Outline the ethical implications of the changes you have suggested
for your chosen study
All the changes listed above would improve the ethics in the study by
Piliavin. A covert observation would remove the element of deception in the
study, and give the participants a right to withdraw, and would also inform
them that they had been involved.
ƒ Debriefing would also protect the welfare of participants as it would
show them that their behaviour was normal and remove any distress from
observing a victim collapse.
ƒ However, there are also other implications on the experiment of these
changes. Although they would make the study more ethical, they would also
open up the study to demand characteristics and social desirability bias.
ƒ Participants would guess the aims of the study and act according to what
they believed the researcher wanted or the way which would portray them
in the best light. This would reduce the validity of the results, and limit
the usefulness of the study to bring any benefits.
o Likely Answers: Improved validity/ecological validity; Improved 
reliability; Improved generalisability; Improved usefulness.
Reicher & Haslam: Change 1
ƒ Self Report of real Prisoners &
guards
ƒ Self selected from prisons from
length & breadth of UK
ƒ Qs measuring: Occasions when
one group undermined another,
examples of solidarity.
Reicher & Haslam: Change 2
ƒ Employ a female only sample
ƒ Same ethical guidelines as
original sample but hold semi
structured interviews.
ƒ Examine loyalty to groups.
Reicher & Haslam: Implications 1
ƒ Increased validity for using real Ps
(Results)
ƒ Ethical concerns…
ƒ Possible difficulties in obtaining
permission from prison, especially in
using prisoners. (Methodological)
Reicher & Haslam: Implications 1
ƒ Increased generalisation (Results)
ƒ Time consuming to screen Ps and
employ similar ethics committee
(Methodological)
ƒ Costly! Making a mock prison &
hiring researchers & medical
supervisors. (Methodological)
Loftus & Palmer (1974)

Suggested Change
Conduct a field study arrange
a real car crash for Ps to
observe…
Change sample – mixture of
different ages
Conduct a cross cultural
study…e.g Russia, China,
Africa
Loftus & Palmer
Implications
Higher E.V;
Ethical problems! Distress, Deception
Methodological problems – time & money
to arrange this…
Reliability – harder to replicate
Generalisation increased – Ps become
more representative of a wider
population
Generalisation increased
Methodological problems…time & money
to arrange this.
Loftus & Palmer: Change 1
ƒ Investigate the effect of leading
Qs on a shadow / mock jury.
ƒ Condition A – LQs, Condition B No
LQs.
ƒ DV: Rate likelihood of guilt using
self report / rating scales.
Loftus & Palmer: Change 2
ƒ Set up a ‘live event’ to witness
which Ps are not prepared for. E.g
Ask to fill in a ‘dummy’ questionnaire
and have a confederate interrupt
proceedings by asking simple
question of experimenter.
ƒ DV = answer to simple questions
about appearance /
characteristics of confederate.
Loftus & Palmer: Implication 1
ƒ Validity is increased as you are
more directly measuring the effect of
LQs on juries & eye witness testimony.
(Results)
ƒ Low EV as it’s not a real trial
(Results)
ƒ Potentially time consuming & costly
to arrange a shadow jury to listen to
a whole case. (Methodological)
Loftus & Palmer: Implication 2
ƒ Increased validity as Ps are not
being prepared to remember
stimulus. (Results)
ƒ More like how we experience
events in real life (EV - Results)
ƒ Less chance of distress than original
study (Ethics)
ƒ Relatively easy to set-up and
standardise; minimal costs involved
(Methodological)
Baron-Cohen: Change 1
ƒ Use real people with masks so
only eyes are showing!
ƒ An alternative would be to film
these models…
ƒ DVs could remain essentially the
same, as could foil terms. Still use
judges to rate expressions.
Baron-Cohen: Change 2
ƒ Change sample – Original only
used 4 Autistics vs 12 Asps. This is a
disparate group.
ƒ OR Try & recruit more fem Auts as
this is an overlooked area of Autism.
ƒ Could use Communication
publication again.
Baron-Cohen: Implication 1
ƒ Higher E.V – better than black &
White static pics (Results)
ƒ Time & money to arrange hiring of
‘models’ & have them available for
trials. Could have students do
this…(Methodological)
ƒ Problems with consistency unless a
video tape was used. (Reliability –
Results)
Baron-Cohen: Implication 2
ƒ Generalisation increased – Ps
become more representative of a
wider population (Results)
ƒTime & money’ + difficulty of getting
Fem Ps as they are rarer.
(Methodological)
Savage-Rumbaugh: Change 1
ƒ Compare the 2 species more
directly and add a 3rd group…?
ƒ Bonobos & Common chimps had
different training methods.
ƒ Directly compare with human
infants - raise them in same
environment.
Savage-Rumbaugh: Change 2
ƒ Study more Bonobos… 20 may be a
realistic number.
ƒ The findings produced here near to
be replicated on a larger scale.
Savage-Rumbaugh: Implication 1
ƒ Validity - More accurate as all
groups have same conditions
(Results)
ƒ Sig. Time & money issues – would be
a huge study, especially if
longitudinal. (Methodological)
ƒ If using Human infants strict consent
will need to be sought. Snatching
children is frowned upon. (Ethics)
Savage-Rumbaugh: Implication 2
ƒ Generalisation – Increased. Kanzi
may have been ‘special’, although
sister did display many of his traits as
well. (Results)
ƒ Difficultly in obtaining these animals.
Illegal to export from Zaire + the
expense of running a huge study like
this. (Methodological)
ƒ Animals born into captivity due to
research. Can’t release them…(Ethics)
 Samuel & Bryant

Suggested Change Implications

ƒ Change form a snap shot to a
longitudinal study – examine
precisely at what age a child can
conserve.
ƒ Begin study at start of pre-
operation stage & see it through
until the concrete operational
stage (7-11)
This type of longitudinal study would be
potentially expensive and time
consuming; children may drop out –
subject attrition. (Methodological)
May confirm Samuel & Bryant that most
children can conserve younger than
Piaget predicted. Increased Validity.
(Results)

ƒ Task change: Use sweets E.V: Increased – children may have

or juice to make it a more been confused by the novel tasks in this
study (Results)
everyday task for the
children involved.
B a n d u r a
 (f) Plan – Suggest a change to 
Bandura’s procedure…
ƒ From Lab to field – Observe at home or in 
playground. Increases the EV. 
ƒ Use video clips instead of live models – more 
standardisation & therefore more reliable.
ƒ Do a correlational study of programmes being 
watched against behaviour in class / playground. 
Increases ethics as you are not exposing them to 
content they wouldn’t already have been watching.
ƒ But… correlation doesn’t prove causation…
 Changes / Implications
Implications could be focused on: Methodological, Ethical, Results

Changes could include:

o From Lab to field – observe at home or in playground.
Increases the EV.
o Use video clips instead of live models – more
standardisation & therefore more reliable.
o Do a correlational study of programmes being watched
against behaviour in class / playground. Increase ethics as
you are not exposing them to content they wouldn’t already
have been watching. But… correlation doesn’t prove
causation…
(f) Outline one change to the procedure of your chosen study 
(Bandura) & explain how this might affect the results [8]

Suggested plan:
Paragraph one:
ƒ Outline suggested change - Sufficient detail to allow replication!
ƒ Must be very closely linked to study …reference parts of the original e.g
Unlike in the original procedure where participants did…
ƒ In questions like this you must consider the implications of your changes
here. Don’t suggest impractical changes!

Paragraph two
ƒ Implications MUST be related to results in this case.
ƒ How can the results possibly be affected?
(i) They can improve
(ii) they can stay the same
(iii) They may get ‘worse’. JUSTIFY this.
(f) Outline one change to the procedure of your chosen study 
(Bandura) & explain how this might affect the results [8]

Paragraph one
(P) One potential change to the Bandura study could involve changing the setting of
the experiment. The original study placed children in a laboratory setting and
moved them one at a time through 3 different rooms; some of which were
unfamiliar to the children. I propose to change the location that the children were
observed in.
(E) For example, after first showing the children an aggressive / non aggressive
video in class you could observe them playing in the playground at lunchtime. This
would make the study higher in Ecological validity as it would then be a naturalistic
observation. You could preserve the inter-rater reliability of the original study by
placing covert observers either end of the playground so they could witness the
same events. Demand Characteristics may occur but as children are used to being
supervised at break times, this shouldn’t significantly influence them.
(C) It’s important to ensure that studies place people in realistic situations as often
as is possible as its difficult to generalise results that are based on unrealistic
tasks or environments.
(f) Outline one change to the procedure of your chosen study 
(Bandura) & explain how this might affect the results [8]

Paragraph two
(P) The proposed change is likely to increase the Ecological validity of the study and
this will affect the results in a number of different ways.
(E) For example, in this revised procedure children would be interacting with each
other rather than playing alone in an unfamiliar room. This could lead to an increase
in imitative aggression as children may be influenced not only by the condition they
were in but also by how their friends were acting in the playground.
Elsewhere, the results may remain roughly the same. For example, it’s likely that
the same gender differences will be observed, with females being more verbally
aggressive and males being more physically aggressive.
(C) Overall, these changes will make the study higher in Ecological validity, children
playing in their natural environment and interacting with each other. However, the
overall validity may be lowered by the fact that they may be copying the play of an
influential friend rather than the video they had seen earlier.
Freud: Change 1
ƒ Compare Little Hans with other
Boys of a similar age.
ƒ Recruit boys via GPs ‘Anxiety UK’
(Was National Phobic Society)
www.anxietyuk.org.uk
ƒ Aim for a range of ages before,
during, and after the Oedipus
stage.
ƒ Historical context may be needed
here…
Freud: Change 2
ƒ Remove the potential bias of Hans’s
father by having Freud conduct one
to one semi-structured interviews
himself. (Self Report data)
ƒ After all, Freud is the ‘expert’ &
would have greater insight. The
father may have missed something
that Freud would have spotted.
ƒ Have another therapist weigh in
with observations
Freud: Implication 1
ƒ Increase generalisability from the
limitations of a single case study.
(Results)
ƒ Will take time to recruit boys with
Phobias – quite a specific sample
(Methodological)
Freud: Implication 2
ƒ Very time consuming for Freud to
have to conduct so many interviews
(Methodological).
ƒ Having an expert conduct the
interview may increase the reliability &
validity of the data (Results)…but might
reduce E.V as Hans wouldn’t be in his
natural environment all the time
ƒ Other therapist would add inter-rater
reliability. (Results)
Maguire: Change 1
ƒ Pre-test the Taxi drivers before
they embark on their Knowledge
training.
ƒ This change would employ a
repeated measures design - each
P could act as their own control
before & after training.
Maguire: Change 2
ƒ Use different participants as a
comparison group...
ƒ Pilots, Army navigators, Guides.
ƒ Boat Captains - Note: “...because
Pilots just go up & down” Freddie
Miller ©
Maguire: Implication 1
ƒ Opportunity to examine cause and
effect & increase validity (Results)
ƒ Expanded longitudinal study will be
time consuming, some Ps may not
finish training (Attrition rate) -
expense of collecting data over time
& hiring additional researchers
(Methodological)
Maguire: Implication 2
ƒ Recruitment difficulties for Pilots – liase
with UK Forces offices.
(Methodological); Increased
Generalisation – new group would act
as a comparison for taxi drivers. Results
are likely to confirm those of Maguire
Dement & Kleitman
(1957)
(e) Suggest two changes to your chosen study and outline any
methodological implications these changes may have. [8]
Changes / Implications
Idea one
ƒ (C) From laboratory to Field – move experiment to Participants own
homes.
ƒ (i) Higher EV – Ps sleeping in their own beds in more familiar
environment; lower control; Less reliable – different types of
environment between participants; costly + time consuming to move to
Ps houses;
Idea Two
ƒ (C) Use more Ps then original study - 9 [7M/2F] + only 5 studied
intensively. Need to state How many Ps & how you would recruit them.
ƒ (i) Increased generalisability but… if self selected it would be limited
as the same type of people tend to volunteer for things.
ƒ (i) More researchers needs to run experiment; more costly; more time
consuming.
In your exercise books write these ideas out in PEC format
Split Brain Studies

LEFT RIGHT
 Changes / Implications
Change 1
ƒ Use fMRI techniques to measure changes in brain 
activity in split brain patients whilst they perform 
various tasks.
Implications: Cost & Expertise required 
(Methodological); Increased accuracy and access to 
sub‐cortical regions (Validity)
Change 2
ƒ Perform a longitudinal study & assess patients 
before split brain operation. Provides a point of 
comparison not available in original study
Implications: Difficult to get hold of participants + 
Possible attrition rate (Methodological); Would 
increase validity. 
Griffiths: Change 1
ƒ Griffiths suggested that different
forms of gambling would have their
own distinct Psychology.
ƒ Look at other ‘skill’ based
gambling such as Horse Racing &
examine heuristics.
ƒ Can adopt the same TA method
when ‘punters’ are choosing which
horses to bet on.
Griffiths: Change 2
ƒ Longitudinal study over a number
of years with habitual gamblers to
chart the formation of their thinking
patterns over time. Identity common
‘thinking errors’.
ƒ Semi –structured interviews.
Example Qs:
ƒ How soon in the day do you start to
think about gambling?, What are the
important factors when deciding
if/when to bet?
Griffiths: Implication 1
ƒ Self-selected sample of regular
gamblers (Not students this time!)
from different parts of the country.
Cost & time of recruitment. +_ ad in
The Sporting Life!(Methodological)
ƒ Ethics – could be said to be
encouraging gamblers in their habit.
ƒ Generalisation – opportunity to
compare different forms of gambling
to identify common patterns.
Griffiths: Implication 2
ƒ Potential issues with recruitment as
people might be wary of an in depth
study of their gambling habits…
(Methodological + Ethics)
ƒ Attrition is likely to be a factor
(Methodological)
ƒ Increased accuracy & insight into
thinking patterns & habits as they
develop over time (validity – Results)
ƒ Ethics committee needed to offer
support to gamblers.
Rosenhan(1973)

Rosenhan asked the question:

“ If sanity & insanity exist how shall we know them? "
He proceeded to answer this through the medium of two
devilishly-clever experiments…

On being sane in insane places

Rosenhan: Change 1
ƒ Undertake large scale survey of
patients who recently spent time in a
Psychiatric wing / hospital…
ƒ Include details of types of Qs & rating
scales. E.g ‘The quality of care was
excellent’, ‘I felt my illness made nurses
react to me negatively’.
ƒ Self-selected sampling: Ad in Local &
National newspapers, “Recently
received Psychiatric care? We’d like
to hear how you were treated...”
Rosenhan: Change 2
ƒ Cross cultural study in places such
as Asia / Africa / Russia examine
attitudes & quality of care in mental
health hospitals.
ƒ Semi-structured interviews with
former patients & hospital staff.
ƒ Staff: ‘Describe the attitude
towards mental health patients in
your hospital’
Rosenhan: Implication 1
ƒ Methodological – co-ordinate with
GPs & hospitals to allow patients to be
contacted. Distributing questionnaires
and analysing data of any returned.
Time&money spent on recruitment &
advertising.
ƒ Results – problems with D.C & social
desirability. Worries that responses
might affect future treatment.
Generalisation – would need to target
different hospitals in different areas.
Rosenhan: Implication 2
ƒ Studies like these can quickly become
very costly & time consuming & so
perhaps liaise with a University dept in a
major capital. (Methodological)
ƒ Increased generalisation and less
ethnocentric (Results)
ƒ Aspects involving self-report are subject
to social desirability bias & Demand
characteristics (Validity, Results)
Thigpen & Cleckley: Change 1
ƒ Conduct an observation in her
own home using cameras in agreed
rooms.
ƒ Coding scheme would look for
changes to clothes, mannerisms,
voice, characteristic ‘signature’
behaviours
ƒ Multiple ‘live’ researchers to
monitor live events, separate team to
view tapes. (Inter-rater reliability)
Thigpen & Cleckley: Change 2
ƒ Cross cultural study of this
phenomenon using semi structured
interviews with patients and
practitioners.
ƒ There are different cultural norms
for variations in behaviour.
ƒ Liaise with e.g Asian mental health
services & practitioners that use ‘The
Chinese Classification of Mental
Disorders’ (CCMD-3)
Thigpen & Cleckley: Implication 1
ƒ Ethics – Filming will need careful
consent from patient and immediate
family.
ƒ Expense of installing camera and
analysing potentially hundreds of hours
worth of audio and visual footage.
Man power intensive…
(Methodological)
ƒ Validity – more chance of measuring
appearance of alters + easier to spot
someone faking it. (Results)
Thigpen & Cleckley: Implication 2
ƒ Generalisation – Increased; makes
the study less ethnocentric (Results)
ƒ A large scale study like this would be
extremely costly and time consuming
to undertake. (Methodological)