Characteristics of theories:

➔ Based on hypothesis
➔ Backed up by evidence
➔ Testable
➔ Based on approach

3 Main Psychological Theories

Biological Theory
Based on the assumption that human behavior has its roots in physiological processes.

Cognitive Theory
is Based on the assumption that the way we perceive and think about the world and ourselves
affects our behavior.

Sociocultural Theory
is Based on the assumption that our behavior is influenced by other people and the
environment.

Evaluating Theories (TEACUP)

Testable
A good theory must be falsifiable. If we cannot test it, it is not a good theory.

Empirical Support
A good theory has evidence to support it. The evidence is not anecdotal in nature. Good
empirical support is not from a highly artificial situation, and it is reliable—that is, the evidence
can be replicated.

Application
A good theory can be applied to many different situations, or it improves a very specific behavior
—for example, a treatment for depression.

Construct Validity
A good theory makes sure that its variables are clearly defined so that they can be reliably
measured.

Unbiased
A good theory does not show bias toward a gender or culture. Many early theories in
psychology were androcentric or ethnocentric.

Predicts Behavior
A good theory does not just describe what is happening, it predicts behavior.
vf
Types of Hypotheses
Null hypothesis (H0)
states that there will be no relationship between the independent and dependent variables.

Alternative hypothesis (H1)

Clearly predicts the relationship between the independent and dependent variables.

Terminology

Standardized procedure
The idea is that directions given to participants during an experiment are the same. This is the
most basic form of "control" for a study.

Random allocation to conditions

In a true experiment, participants are randomly allocated to conditions in order to avoid
sampling bias.

Types of Experiments

Lab Experiment: An experiment done under highly controlled conditions.

Field Experiment: an experiment done in a natural setting. There is less control over variables.
True Experiment: An IV is manipulated and a DV is measured under controlled conditions.
Participants are randomly allocated to conditions.
Quasi Experiment: No IV is manipulated and participants are not randomly allocated to
conditions. Instead, it is their traits that set them apart.
Natural Experiment: An experiment that is the result of a "naturally occurring event."
Sampling Techniques
Self-selected Sampling or Volunteer Sampling
People who sign-up are usually motivated and are less likely to drop out of the research.
However, that may lead to a sample that is not representative of the target population.

Opportunity sampling or Convenience Sampling

This is when you use a pre-existing sample. The groupings often tend to be relatively
homogeneous. However, they are also not usually representative of a target population

Random Sampling
Sample in which everyone in the target population had the same probability of being chosen.
This is often seen as an ideal sampling technique, but if the target population is too large, then it
is not possible. In addition, if the target population is very heterogeneous, then you could still
generate a biased sample.

Purposive Sampling
A sample that looks for people with a very specific set of traits, is often accomplished by a self-
selected sample.

Snowball Sampling or Network Sampling

This is another type of purposive sampling, but network sampling is used when you are looking
for participants from a specific group who would not respond to an ad.

Stratified Sampling
Sampling attempts to make a sample that reflects the sub-groups within a target population. The
problem with it is that one must be careful about how one labels the groups within a community.
Ethical Considerations (CARDUD)
Consent
Psychologists must gain informed consent by telling the participants about the purpose of the
research and the procedures that will be used. Participants must be made aware of any
potential risks, adverse effects, or discomfort that may occur during the study.

Anonymity
The data collected from participants must not contain names and should be able to be traced to
any individual. This may be done by assigning codes to research participants and not asking for
specific identifying information like name or address.

Right to withdraw
Participants may leave a study at any time if they feel uncomfortable. They should be told at the
start of the study that they have the right to withdraw. The participants should not have pressure
placed upon them to continue if they do not want to continue in the study.

Deception
There are two types of deception. In deception by the commission, the researcher deliberately
misleads the participants. This may be done by using confederates or giving deceptive
instructions. Deception by omission is when research does not mislead a participant but does
not give the participant all the information about a study. Researchers should avoid deceiving
participants about the nature of the research unless there is no alternative.

Undue stress or harm

Researchers must ensure that participants are protected from physical and mental harm. The
level of stress or risk of harm must be no greater than in daily life.

Debriefing
After the research is over the researcher should discuss the procedure and the findings with the
participants. Participants must be told if they have been deceived and given reasons why. The
aim of the debriefing is not just to provide information, but to help the participant leave the
experimental situation in a similar frame of mind as when he/she entered it.
Research Designs
Repeated Measures Design
There is one sample of participants that receives each condition of an experiment.
Independent Samples Design
The participant is randomly allocated to one condition of the experiments.
Repeated measures design
strengths • Each participant is compared to him
or herself. Participant variables are
therefore controlled.
• Fewer participants are required.
limitations • Demand characteristics - the
participants may guess the goal of
the experiment and change their
behavior
• Often it is not possible to use the
same materials. Using the same
materials results in a confounding
variable
• Participant attrition.
• Order effects - because the
participants must experience more
than one condition, there may be
confounding variables.
Independent sample design
•order effects are controlled for since
each participant only experiences
one condition
• Demand characteristics are less
likely as the participants will most
likely not guess the hypothesis
• The same materials can be used for
all conditions.
• Participant variability - each group
will have different participants. The
personal differences in each group -
e.g., one group may have more non-
native English speakers or better
memorizers - may affect the outcome
of your experiment.
• More participants are required
Validity
Refers to the 'truthfulness' of a measure, and whether it really measures what it is purported to.
Types of validity include:

• Internal validity
Focused entirely within a study.

• External validity
Focused beyond the study,

• Construct validity
Focused on how concepts are operationalized in a study.

Reliability
Refers to how consistently a study, test, or measure produces the same results. More
specifically, psychologists are usually interested in three types of reliability

Demand Characteristics
Extraneous variables may nudge participants to consciously or unconsciously change their
responses or behavior to an experiment. Types of demand characteristics include

• Screw-you effect
When a participant attempts to discern the experimenter's hypotheses in order to destroy the
credibility of the study, all out of spite.

• Expectancy effect
When someone expects a given result, that expectation unconsciously affects the outcome or
report of the expected result.

• Optimism bias
When a participant believes that they are less likely to suffer from misfortune and more likely to
attain success.

• Social desirability bias

When participants tend to display less socially undesirable behaviors and to display more
desirable behaviors in an experiment.

• Reactivity
the condition in which a participant being observed is changed in some way by the act of
observation.
Ethical Considerations in Reporting Results
Confidentiality and Anonymity
The main issue is privacy, especially in cases where data may be shared or published. No
participant should ever be identifiable from the published research, including the data.

Stigmatization
is When someone views you in a negative way because you have a distinguishing characteristic
or personal trait that's thought to be, or is, a disadvantage (a negative stereotype).

Scholarly Integrity
Not fabricating data, retracting or correcting errors, not plagiarizing, not misrepresenting
findings, including questionable generalisability.

Terminology
Priming
Activating representations or associations in memory just before carrying out an action or task.

Researcher Bias
When the experimenter sees what he or she is looking for. In other words, the expectations of
the researcher consciously or unconsciously affect the findings of the study.

Double-blind control
In this design, not only do the participants not know whether they are in the experimental or
control group, but the person carrying out the experiment does not know the aim of the study,
nor which group is the treatment, and which one is the control group.

Participant variability
A limitation of a study when the characteristics of the sample affect the dependent variable.
This can be controlled by selecting a random sample and randomly allocating the participants to
the treatment and control groups.

Artificiality
This is when the situation created is unlikely to occur in real life, weakening its validity.
Correlational studies
Reasons to carry out:
1. There is no causal relationship between the variables, but there is an apparent statistical
relationship.
2. The relationship between the variables may be causal, but the researcher cannot manipulate
the independent variable.
3. They are useful for predicting relationships between variables, which can then be studied
further using other methods.
4. Correlational studies offer predictive validity, meaning they can be used to verify theories.
5. They are also useful for testing concurrent validity, when a new test or measurement is
validated against an existing test or measurement.
6. For conducting tests of reliability, between one measurement or test and another, or between
researchers

What types of correlations can be made?

A positive correlation is when both variables are affected in the same way. As x increases, y
increases.
A negative correlation means that as one variable increases, the other decreases.
The variables in correlational research are known as co-variables.

What is one issue that lies within correlational conclusions?

'Third variables'
Part of the issue comes down to the so-called 'third variables.’ Although the correlation between
body mass and vocabulary is supported by statistical analysis with a strong positive correlation,
the analysis completely misses a third variable which, is in turn related to both body mass and
vocabulary, namely: age. As a person develops towards adulthood they acquire both mass and
vocabulary.
A researcher could study the average number of hours that a child watches television and the
child's level of aggression. This would be difficult to do as an experiment because it would be
unethical. When the data are gathered, the researcher might find that as the number of hours of
television viewing increased, so did the level of aggression in the child. This would be a positive
correlation. However, it would not be possible to say whether the television viewing caused the
aggression, or if it was the aggression that led the child to watch more television. This is called
bidirectional ambiguity.
Bidirectional ambiguity is seen in correlational research. Since no independent variable is
manipulated, it is impossible to know if x causes y, y causes x, if they interact to cause behavior,
or whether it is just coincidental and the results are actually due to a third variable.

A curvilinear relationship is a type of relationship between two variables where when one
variable increases, so do the other variable, but only up to a certain point, after which, as one
variable continues to increase, the other decreases. If you were to graph this kind of curvilinear
relationship, you will come up with an inverted U.
The other type of curvilinear relationship is one where when one variable increases, the other
decreases up to a certain point, after which, both variables increase together. This will give you
a U-shaped curve.

experimental correlational

Used to test cause-and-effect relationships Used to test the association between

between variables. variables

An independent variable is manipulated and a Variables are only observed with no

dependent variable is measured. manipulation by the researcher.

Extraneous variables are controlled so that Limited control is used, so other variables
they do not influence the variable being may play a role in the relationship.
measured.

High internal validity allows us to draw High external validity; you can generalize
conclusions about causality. your conclusions to other populations or
settings.

Correlational
pros cons

➔ They are useful for investigating ➔ They do not establish causation, and
variables that are impossible, there is often a 'third variable' or
unethical, or impractical to study several 'third variables' in play that
otherwise, including topics like might explain the correlation.
intelligence or personality. ➔ They have little depth. Correlations
➔ They provide straightforward only go as deep as the data provided,
quantitative comparisons allowing for with no elaboration of the hows or
both statistical analysis and clarity of whys of the correlation. So it could be
interpretation. The relationships are said that correlations describe and
usually 'easy' to see in the data. predict, but do not explain
➔ They allow for the investigation of the
relationship between two variables
without the need for random
assignment, which sometimes makes
correlations easier to conduct.
➔ They have predictive capabilities,
meaning that correlational results can
be used to predict future behaviors,
and to further refine research into a
given topic
correlational study should have no manipulation by the researcher and it must yield statistical
results. The most common way that we obtain data for a "correlational study" is by using
questionnaires and/or surveys. Another data collection technique is the use of psychometric
tests - e.g. IQ tests, measures of depressive symptoms, and tests of attitudes.
RESEARCH DESIGN
Baseline: The level of responding before any treatment is introduced and therefore acts as a
control condition. For example, measuring normal brain activity before being asked to recall a
stressful event.
Confederate: A helper of a researcher who pretends to be a real participant.
Control condition: A condition that does not receive the treatment or intervention that the other
conditions do. It is used to see what would happen if the independent variable were not
manipulated.
Correlational research: The researcher measures two or more variables without manipulating
an independent variable and with little or no attempt to control extraneous variables.
Counterbalancing: A technique used to deal with order effects when using a repeated
measures design. When a study is counterbalanced, the sample is divided in half, with one half
completing the two conditions in one order and the other half completing the conditions in the
reverse order.
Cross-sectional design: Comparing two or more groups on a particular variable at a specific
time. The opposite is a longitudinal design where the researcher measures change in an
individual over time.
Dependent variable: The variable that is measured and is hypothesized to be the effect of the
independent variable.
One-tailed hypothesis: a scientific prediction stating that an effect will occur and whether that
effect will specifically increase or specifically decrease, depending on changes to the
independent variable.
Two-tailed hypothesis: A hypothesis that one experimental group will differ from another
without specification of the expected direction of the difference - that is, without predicting an
increase or decrease in behaviour.
Factorial Design: A design including multiple independent variables.
Hypothesis: a testable statement of what the researcher predicts will be the outcome of the
study which is usually based on established theory.
Independent samples design: also called an independent measures design and between-
groups design. More than one experimental group is used and participants are only in one
group. Each participant is only in one condition of the independent variable.
Independent variable: the variable that is manipulated by the researcher.
Meta-analysis: Pooling data from multiple studies of the same research question to arrive at
one combined answer.
Non-equivalent group design: A between-subjects design in which participants have not been
randomly assigned to conditions. A typical example would be to look at gender differences with
regard to a certain behavior.
Operationalization: the process by which the researcher decides how a variable will be
measured. For example, "marital satisfaction" cannot be measured directly, so the researcher
would have to decide what traits will be measured in order to measure the construct.
Pretest-posttest design: The dependent variable is measured before the independent variable
has been manipulated and then again after it has been manipulated.
p-value: The probability that, if the null hypothesis were true, the result found in the sample
would occur.
Random allocation: A method of controlling extraneous variables across conditions by using a
random process to decide which participants will be in which conditions. This includes random
number generators and pulling names out of a hat.
Repeated measures design: Also called a "within groups" design. The same participants take
part in each condition of the independent variable. This means that each condition of the
experiment includes the same group of participants.
Single-blind testing: An experiment in which the researchers know which participants are
receiving a treatment and which are not; however, the participants do not know which condition
they are in.
Double-blind testing: an experimental procedure in which neither the researcher doing the
study nor the participants know the specific type of treatment each participant receives until
after the experiment is over; a double-blind procedure is used to guard against both
experimenter bias and placebo effects.

Evaluating research
Bidirectional ambiguity: A limitation of many correlational studies. It is not possible to know if
x causes y, y causes x, if they interact to cause behaviour, or whether it is just coincidental and
no relationship truly exists.
Construct validity: The degree to which a study consistently measures a variable. For
example, if a researcher develops a new questionnaire to evaluate respondents' levels of
aggression, the construct validity of the instrument would be the extent to which it actually
assesses aggression as opposed to assertiveness, social dominance, or imitability.
Demand characteristics: Cues that may influence or bias participants' behavior, for example,
by suggesting the outcome or response that the experimenter expects or desires.
Ecological fallacy: A mistaken conclusion drawn about individuals based on findings from
groups to which they belong. For example, if a researcher uses Japanese participants in the
sample and assumes that since they are Japanese, they must be collectivistic. The ecological
fallacy is controlled for by giving a test to measure the assumed variable.
Ecological validity: The degree to which results obtained from research or experimentation are
representative of conditions in the wider world. Ecological validity is influenced by the level of
control in the environment (hence, ecological).
Expectancy effect: When a researcher's expectations about the findings of the research are
inadvertently communicated to participants and influence their responses. This distortion of
results arises from participants' reactions to subtle cues unintentionally given by the researcher
for example, through body movements, gestures, or facial expressions.
External validity: the extent to which the results of a study can be generalized beyond the
sample that was tested.
Extraneous variable: Also known as a confounding variable. A variable that is not under
investigation in an experiment may potentially affect the dependent variable if it is not
properly controlled.
Fatigue effect: A type of order effect where a participant decreases in performance in later
conditions because they are tired or bored with the activity.
Interference effect: A type of order effect where the first condition may influence the outcome
of the second condition. For example, when giving to sets of words to remember, when a
participant remembers a word from the first condition when trying to recall words in the second
condition.
Internal validity: When an experiment was conducted using appropriate controls so that it
supports the conclusion that the independent variable caused observed differences in the
dependent variable.
Mundane Realism: The participants and the situation studied are representative of everyday
life. If a study is highly artificial, it is said to lack mundane realism.
Order effects: Differences in research participants' responses that result from the order in
which they participate in the experimental conditions. Examples include fatigue effect,
interference effects, or practice effect.
Participant attrition: the rate at which participants drop out of a study over time. This often
occurs when research has many steps or takes place over a long period of time.
Placebo effect: a beneficial effect produced by a placebo drug or treatment, which cannot be
attributed to the properties of the placebo itself, and must, therefore, be due to the patient's
belief in that treatment.
Practice effect: A type of order effect where a participant improves in performance in later
conditions because practice has lead to the development of skill or learning.
Random error: Error that is due to chance alone. Random errors occur when unexpected or
uncontrolled factors affect the variable being measured or the process of measurement.
Reactivity: When participants change their behaviour due to their awareness of being
observed.
Reliability: the consistency of a measure -that is, the degree to which a study is free of random
error, obtaining the same results across time with the same population.
Sampling bias: When a sample is selected in such a way that it is not representative of the
population from which it was drawn. When a sample is biased, population validity is decreased.
Type I Error: When the null hypothesis is rejected although it is true; when the research
concludes there is a relationship in the population when in fact there is not.
Type Il Error: When the null hypothesis is retained although it is false; when the research
concludes there is no relationship in the population when in fact there is one.
Validity: the degree to which a test measures what it claims to measure.

Quantitative vs qualitative
Where quantitative research goes for the isolation of variables and the identification of specific
factors shaping human psychology in numerical terms, qualitative research goes for a greater
depth of understanding about why people think, feel and act the way they do, all while
acknowledging the wider context in which human psychology happens.
Qualitative research is more subjective, and this is purposeful.
Qualitative research is generally exploratory in nature, seeking understanding and insight into
human behavior by exploring human psychology from within the individual's subjective
perspectives and experiences. it is well suited for research in the earliest investigations of a
research question. Qualitative research methods are known to be flexible and adaptable, but in
some ways that only makes it more difficult to pin down what counts as a qualitative method.
Having said that,
the most common qualitative methods used in psychological research are:
➔ Naturalistic observations
➔ Interviews
➔ Case studies

Naturalistic observations
Most qualitative research collects verbal data in some form, especially in interviews and often in
case studies. Observational research is unique in that it goes beyond what people say to
investigate what they do.
The problem is that individuals react to observation, and change their behavior as soon as they
know they are being watched. Siblings, for example, are known to behave more positively
towards each other when they know they are being observed, and this kind of participant
reactivity is evident in all kinds of observational situations.
The fact is, people, tend to behave differently when they are aware they are being observed,
and that makes it very difficult to measure natural behavior in a natural setting through
observation. As soon as an observation starts, the behavior changes.
Research using naturalistic observation is generally believed to have more external validity,
meaning that the results of the research can be generalized to wider populations.

Types of observations
Participant vs. non-participant – this has to do with whether the researcher participates as a
member of the observed group or whether the researcher observes from a distance, without
joining the group.
Covert vs. overt – this refers to whether participants know they are being observed or not.
Natural vs. artificial – it is possible to conduct observations in artificial settings, where the
observation might be more systematic, but the focus here is on naturalistic observations.
Systematic vs. unsystematic – this refers to the level of standardization in how observed
behavior is measured, with some observations using a fixed coding scheme and others using
more flexible techniques for measurement in response to changes in the observational field.

Interview characteristics
conversation as a central feature
of the generation of verbal data in interview transcripts
flexibility and openness
an emphasis on subjective meaning and experience.

Interview pros and cons

Pros:
First-hand verbal data can provide deep insights on subjective experiences with psychological
phenomena.
The flexibility of less-structured interviews allows researchers to explore emergent themes,
which is particularly advantageous when little is known about the research question.
Unstructured interviews and semi-structured interviews are well-suited to the investigation of
sensitive topics, although this requires that participants trust the researcher enough to respond
honestly.
Transcripts allow for continuing analysis of research data.
Focus group interviews in particular allow for the exploration of collective viewpoints, which is
useful for understanding the social dimensions of psychological phenomena
Interview findings can be triangulated and validated through follow-up surveys investigating the
same research question in a structured quantitative form.

Cons:
Interviews are thought to have low reliability due to inconsistencies between interviewers.
The lack of standardisation also limits reliability, but may have a positive effect on validity as it
allows researchers to explore in more depth.
Interviews are generally prone to a wide range of researcher effects related to tone, demeanour,
style of dress, gender, age, etc., so the interaction between researcher and participant must be
accounted for along with the verbal data itself through consideration of reflexivity.
Verbal data is based on self-reports, which are frequently criticised for lacking both reliability
and validity, because perceptions of self are not always accurate.
Requires a considerable amount of skill and training before researchers are able to conduct
interviews effectively.

Case studies
A case study is the most difficult research method to distinguish from other methods, precisely
because case studies collect data using a variety of other research methods. This means that a
single case study might include interview data, observational data, and experimental data all
woven into one convergent braid of case study data.

Case studies characteristics

focus on the context of the case and the psychological phenomena under investigation
they use a variety of methods of data collection
they are an in-depth investigation on a small sample.

Case study pros and cons

Pros:
They are useful for investigating real-life phenomena in depth and in context. Case studies allow
researchers to investigate the meaningful aspects of real-life experience in a holistic way.
They provide opportunities for researching complex phenomena that cannot be explored with
other methods.
The variety of data sources allows for convergence, which in turn leads to greater depth and
insight.
A single case study is enough to contradict a whole theory.
cons :
The variety of data sources can leave researchers overwhelmed and feeling lost in the data.
They are time-consuming and may require more planning than other methods.
Case studies have traditionally been criticised for their lack of rigour, but this really depends on
the skill of the researcher and the quality of the case study design.
They are also frequently criticised for a lack of reliability, because the method is not consistent
from one case to the next.
There is a strong influence of researcher bias on case study data, because of the many
interactions between researcher and participant. This is a particular issue in longitudinal studies
which allow bias to develop due to close interaction over the long term.
There can be ethical issues related to anonymity, as case studies may be focused on one
individual who could be easily identified. Therefore, many case studies use pseudonyms or
initials (e.g. HM) in reference to participants.

Types of case studies

TERMINOLOGY
A prior coding: A process of coding qualitative data whereby the researcher develops the
codes ahead of time based on a theoretical framework, the interview question, or pre-existing
knowledge.
Case study: The study a particular person, group, or situation over a period of time.
Case studies are technically not a research method - but a combination of research methods.
Content analysis: A data analysis technique used to interpret textual material. This is done by
looking for data or themes in a text - for example, a transcript of an interview. The researcher
may decide what to look for before reading the interview. This is a priori coding. This then
converts the qualitative data into quantitative data. This is a deductive approach. The
researcher may also wait until she has all the interviews and then note what trends "emerge"
from the text. This is an inductive approach.
Covert observation: An observation in which the identity of the researcher, the nature of the
research project, and the fact that participants are being observed are hidden from those who
are being studied. The opposite of an overt observation.
Credibility: This word is often seen as a synonym for validity in qualitative research.
Cross-sectional design: Comparing two or more groups on a particular variable at a specific
time. The opposite is a longitudinal design where the researcher measures change in an
individual over time.
Data triangulation: Collecting data from more than one source. Also called "source
triangulation." For example, collecting data from four different hospitals.
Emergent thematic coding: A qualitative data analysis approach in which a text is read
several times to identify themes that emerge from the data. This is a common method for
interpreting interviews.
Epistemological reflexivity: When a researcher reflects on their choice of method or materials
may have influenced the findings of the study - for example, how did using a participant
observation affect the potential behavior of the people being studied?
Event sampling: A data collection strategy for observational studies. This is when the
researcher makes note only when a specific behaviour is observed. For example, only when
aggression is observed on the playground.
Focus group: A group interview, using 5 - 12 participants who share a common trait or interest.
Inter-rater reliability: the degree of agreement among researchers recording behaviour during
an observation.
Longitudinal study: research over a period of time using observations, interviews or
psychometric testing. (Similar to a repeated measures design in an experiment).
Meta-analysis: Pooling data from multiple studies of the same research question to arrive at
one combined answer.
Method triangulation: the use of more than one method to carry out a study. Case studies
often use method triangulation. This is important because it increases the credibility of the
study - we know it was not the choice of the research method alone that led to the findings.
Narrative interview: An interview in which the researcher asks an open-ended question and
invites the interviewee to respond. The interviewee is not asked any other questions and the
interviewer only asks for clarifications. The goal is that questions asked by the interviewer will
not influence the interviewee.
Naturalistic observation: An observation carried out in a participant's natural environment.
The
opposite of a lab or controlled observation.
Outcomes based research: an attempt by healthcare agencies to see how certain healthcare
practices, treatments, and other interventions affect a person's health. This type of research
focuses on the results.
Participant attrition: the rate at which participants drop out of a study over time. This often
occurs when research has many steps or takes place over a long period of time.
Participant observation: An observational study where the researcher joins the group that is
being observed. The opposite of a non-participant observation.
Personal reflexivity: When researchers reflect on how their own biases may have affected
their research process and the findings of their research.
Point sampling: A data collection method used when carrying out an observation of a group
where the researcher records the behavior of an individual and then moves on to the next
participant until all have been observed.
Process-based research: an attempt by the health care agencies to see how certain health-
care practices, treatments, and other interventions affect a person's health over time. This type
of research is focused on the changes over time, rather than the final results.
Prospective research: A study that attempts to find a correlation between two variables by
collecting data early in the life of participants and then continuing to test them over a period of
time to measure change and development.
Quota sampling: Similar to a stratified sample, but there is no random selection of participants
from the population. For example, you want a sample that reflects your country's population.
your country is 40% of one culture and 60% of another, then the sample would have that same
proportion - but they are not chosen randomly. It might be the first 40 people that sign up from
culture x and then the first 60 of culture y.
Snowball sampling: A sampling technique where research participants recruit other
participants for a study.
Structured interview: a type of interview in which the interviewer asks a particular set of
predetermined questions. The questions are created in advance and all participants are asked
the same questions in the same order.
Time sampling: A data collection method used when carrying out an observation of a group
where notes are taken at specific times - for example, every five minutes or every hour.
Theory triangulation: The use of more than one theoretical approach to investigate a question
- for example, looking at a patient like HM from a biological, cognitive and sociocultural
perspective.
Transferability: the degree to which the results of qualitative research can be generalized or
transferred to other contexts or settings.
Unstructured interview: an interview in which there is no specific set of predetermined
questions. The interviews are more like an everyday conversation and tend to be more informal
and open-ended.