Summary
Summary paper 2 psychology AQA : Biopsychology - Synaptic transmission
- Module
- Research methods
- Institution
- AQA
Summary notes on synaptic transmission from Paper 2 Biopsychology
[Show more]
Seller
Follow
Content preview
Experimental Methods → Types of Experiments → Experimental design →Involves manipulation of variables to determine cause and effect , 3 main types → independent groups design, repeated
ALL EXPERIMENTS INVOLVE MANIPULATION OF IV + MEASURING EFFECT ON
participants randomly allocated , all procedures standardised, so the measures design + matched pairs design
DV
same for all participants Independent Groups Design (IGD) → uses diff ppts in each
Aim: general statement of what the researcher intends to investigate,
purpose of the study, aims are developed from theories. Lab experiments → high control environment, standardised procedure, randomly of the experimental conditions so each ppt only does 1
condition (experimental/control) diff ppts are tested
Hypothesis → Clear,precise, testable statement that states the allocated experimental groups
against each other
+HIgh degree of control, so greater accuracy
relationship between the variables being investigated. +No order effect, as diff ppts so no effect whereby order
+Easy to replicate, so others can repeat + check results
2 Types, directional + non-directional in which conditions are done may affect outcome
+Cause+Effect, other variables are controlled so you can establish cause + effect of
Directional → one tailed → clear difference that is anticipated between 2 -Individual differences may affect results as there’s
manipulated variables
conditions, contains words like more/less, higher/lower different participants in each group so differences may
-Low ecological validity, done in artificial scenarios so unlike real life, difficult to
Non-Directional → 2 tailed, hypothesis simply states there will be a not be down to a manipulation of the IV e.g participants
generalise results
difference between conditions the difference isn’t specified in one condition may be + intelligent than other group
-Demand characteristics, participants aware they’re being tested so may display
What Hypothesis to use? +Save times. As you can test both participants at the
demand characteristics, act unnaturally.
Directional is usually used when findings from previous research suggest same time
a particular outcome Quasi experiments → the IV occurs naturally, e.g sex → so study on effects of sex on -Less economical, as 2x participants needed
Non-directional when there’s no previous research or research say learning the 2 conditions of gender occur naturally
+ Shares the same strengths as lab experiments due to its controlled conditions
Repeated Measure Design (RMD) →
contradicts
- Can’t randomly allocate participants to conditions→ may have confounding variables In repeated measures design each ppts tested in all
Variables → anything that can vary or change within an investigation conditions of an experiment, ppts are tested against
Independent Variable → Factor manipulated by researcher, its effect on DV is themselves
measured, can be changed by researcher +Because the same people are being measured in both
Research Methods
Dependent Variable → The factor measured by researcher, effects on DV conditions there’s no individual differences between
caused by manipulation of IV groups which may have caused a difference otherwise
To test IV, diff experimental conditions needed, can be 2 conditions the control +Fewer ppts and so more data is gathered per ppt
condition (comparison group) + experimental condition. -Order effects, with RMD ppts do all conditions + order in
Operationalisation → clearly defining variables into measurable factors → e.g which they do these conditions can affect the results,
ppts may perform worse in 2nd condition due to
affection, hard to measure but measurable factors would be hugs, smiles etc
Standardisation→ Using exactly the same formalised procedures and Field Experiments → fatigue/boredom
-Chance of DC as if they participate in all conditions more
Conducted in naturalistic, real world, environmental setting. IV manipulated
instructions for all participants in a research study likely they may guess the purpose of study + act a
+ experimenter tries to control as many other variables as possible
+Extraneous + Confounding variables → variables beside IV that could affect DV certain way due to this
need to be controlled so they don’t affect results, uncontrolled extraneous Natural experiments → Matched Pairs Design (MPD) →
variables can become confounding variables + confuse results by affecting DV In natural experiments IV changes naturally Different but similar participants are used in each
e.g. Researcher investigating effects of silence + background music on IL condition, ppts are matched on characteristics important
performance using 2 classes for each condition → in this case extraneous for particular study e.g age → identical twins are often
variables would be age, HW difficulty, intelligence + if not controlled they’d +& - used they're matched pairs
influence/confuse results + become confounding variables → would mean +High ecological validity → real world environment, relates to everyday behaviour +Order effects are less likely
researcher wouldn’t know if differences in HW performance was down to the + so can be generalised to other settings -Participants aren’t able to be matched exactly→ even if
difference in intelligence of conditions +No Demand Characteristics → participants unaware of the experiment so they identical twins are used there will be some difference
3 Main Types Of Extraneous Variables → act naturally, no demand characteristics
-Less control → more difficult to control extraneous variables so more difficult to
between them→ INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES
-Matching participants may be time consuming and
1.Participant Variables → factors like age, intelligence
establish cause + effect expensive→ especially if pre-test is required→ less
2.Situational Variables → experimental settings, like weather, noise levels, area
-Ethics → if participants aren’t aware they’re in an experiment there’s lack of economical than most other designs
where experiment is happening
informed consent
3.Experimenter Variables → concerns changes in appearance, personality or
conduct of research, e.g researchers of diff ages, → male/female researchers
may get diff results
, Sampling → Researchers generally don’t have means to test whole population so sampling is Pilot Studies → Ethical Issues →
used → part of the population, who are ideally representative of pop e.g same characteristics asSmall-scale practice investigations researchers assess + act on ethical considerations involved in a research before it’s
population it was taken from carried out prior to research to identify conducted. main consideration: health+dignity of participants is protected. BPS= code of
Random Sampling → each member of pop has equal chance of being selected, one way is potential problems with ethics, all psychologists should follow + most research institutions have ethical
design,method/analysis so they can be committees to approve research projects before they commence → Researches should,
place all names in container + pick the amount needed. Another way is list of all members of
fixed → pps may suggest changes e.g if before conducting research seek peer advice, consult likely participants for their views,
pop obtained → all names on list are assigned a number → sample generated through lottery
they guess purpose of study that led to consider alternative research methodologies, establish cost-benefit analysis of short +
method . This results in a sample selected in an unbiased fashion
DC changes may be made to avid this long-term consequences. If during research process neg consequences due to research
+Unbiased selection, increases the chances of getting an unbiased + representative sample
+Generalisability, because the sample should be fairly representative results will be Control groups & conditions→ become clear research should be stopped + effort to correct neg consequences.
generalisable to the target population Group receiving the placebo sets the Code of Ethics →
-Unrepresentative, just because selection is unbiased it doesn't guarantee an unbiased baseline and is there to act as a purpose Informed consent: investigators should give participants sufficient details of investigation
selection as all females + no males could be selected through this method of comparison so they can decide if they want to participate. Parental consent should be obtained if
-Difficult + time consuming to conduct If a change in behaviour of experimental child is under 16. can’t get informed consent from those under influence of alcohol, drugs
or if they’re mentally unfit to give consent.
Systematic sampling → group is greater than that of the control
Avoidance of deception: withholding of info or misleading participants is unacceptable if
group→ researcher is able to conclude
Involves taking every nth person from list to create a sample, involves calculating the size of the participants are likely to object once debriefed. Participants shouldn’t be deliberately
cause and effect was the IV
pop + the assessing what size the sample needs to be too work out sampling interval e.g every mislead without sci or medical justification. Can’t gain informed consent if deception
20th participant occurs. Often necessary that participants don’t know the purpose of study to gain
+Unbiased selection → no bias in selecting therefore increasing chance of unbiased
representative sample
+Generalisability, results are representative of population therefore you can generalise results
Research Methods realistic results in these cases deception has to be dealt with in an ethical way…
If deception is used, participants must be told immediately afterwards + given opp to
withhold their data from study
-May not be representative, unbiased selection doesn’t guarantee unbiased sample e.g all
females could be selected through this way Demand Characteristics → Adequate briefing/debriefing → all relevant details of study should be explained to
participants before + after, debrief important if deception is used, pps should leave study
Stratified Sampling → Research, involves interaction between
participant + researcher the interactions can
in no worse condition than when they started.
Small-scale reproduction, involves dividing pop into characteristics important for research e.g affect findings → several features of researchProtection of PPS → investigators have responsibility to protect participants from
age, class etc then the pop is randomly sampled within each category physical + mental harm through research
studies that enable participants to guess what
+Representative, selection occurs from representative sub-groups within population so should study is about → this can cause demand Right to withdraw → pps should be aware they can leave the study at any time + can
be fairly representative withdraw their data after study is done
characteristics
+Unbiased, it’s performed upon sub-group of population selection is unbiased Confidentiality → participants data shouldn’t be disclosed to anyone unless agreed in
-Please-U, guessing purpose of study +
-Time-consuming, dividing of population into categories + then randomly selecting can be time giving answers/results to please researcher advance, numbers used instead of names in published papers
consuming Observational research → should happen in public places only where people expect to
-Screw you effect, guessing purpose of study
Opportunity Sampling → selecting those who are available + willing to take part e.g asking and giving the wrong results to annoy the
be observed by strangers
Incentives to take part → pps shouldn’t be offered bribes/rewards for taking part, puts
people in the street who are passing researcher
pressure on them to take part
+Convenient, easy to form as they use people who are readily available -acting unnaturally because of nervousness
-Presumptive consent → gained by people of sim background to pps, if they say they
-Unrepresentative, sample likely to be baise as certain types of participants won’t take part or fear of evaluation
would be willing to participate then deemed actual participants would also say the same.
therefore findings can’t be generalised Acting unnaturally due to social desirability
-Prior general consent → where pps agree to be deceived without knowing how
-Self-selected, as participants have the option to decline to take part those taking part are self bias -Retrospective consent → asking participants for consent after they’ve participated →
selected Investigator effects → chance they won’t consent after having took part
Volunteer Sampling → ppl volunteer to participate, so they select themselves are participants, How researchers unconsciously affect results
often through replying to ads Physical characteristics → age,gender, Single-blind procedure reduces demand characteristics, ppants are unaware which
+Ease of formation,requires little effort from researchers as pps volunteer ethnicity, males by unwilling to admit sexist condition of study they are in so difficult to guess what’s expected of them → in a drug
+Less chance of screw you effect as the volunteers participate so less chance they will views to females trial they wouldn’t know if they were taking real drug or a placebo
deliberately try to sabotage study Personal characteristics → accent, tone can Double-Blind procedure → used to reduce investigator effects, both participant +
-Unrepresentative, sample will be biased volunteers are certain type of people and so you can’t affect results, participants may respond researcher are unaware of which condition participant is in prevents investigator
generalise results differently to someone with a stern voice
unconsciously giving participants clues about which condition they’re in → reducing DC
-Demand characteristics, if they volunteer they may be eager to please the researcher and Unconscious bias → when interpreting data +
→ so in drug trial nether experiment nor researcher would be aware of which condition
therefore give answers they think researcher wants to hear find what they expect to find
the participants were in
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller rifapachath. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for £7.49. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
68175 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy revision notes and other study material for 15 years now