Download Higher level paper 3 and more Study notes Psychology in PDF only on Docsity!
Higher level paper 3
Paper 3 assesses the approaches to research in psychology. The paper consists of a research scenario followed by three short-answer questions for a total of 24 marks.
Question 1
Question 1 will consist of all of the following questions, for a total of 9 marks. The questions will be assessed using an analytical mark scheme.
Questions Marks Identify the research method used and outline two characteristics of the method.
Describe the sampling method used in the study. 3 Suggest an alternative or additional research method giving one reason for your choice.
Question 2
Question 2 will consist of one of the following questions, for a total of 6 marks. The question will be assessed using an analytical mark scheme.
Questions Marks Describe the ethical considerations that were applied in the study and explain if further ethical considerations could be applied.
Describe the ethical considerations in reporting the results and explain additional ethical considerations that could be taken into account when applying the findings of the study.
Question 3
Question 3 will consist of one of the following questions, for a total of 9 marks. The question will be assessed using the rubric below.
Questions Marks Discuss the possibility of generalizing/transferring the findings of the study. 9 Discuss how a researcher could ensure that the results of the study are credible.
Discuss how the researcher in the study could avoid bias. 9
Higher level paper 3
Rubric for question 3
Mark band Level descriptor 0 The answer does not reach a standard described by the descriptors below. 1–3 The question is misunderstood and the central issue is not identified correctly, resulting in a mostly irrelevant argument. The response contains mostly inaccurate references to the approaches to research or these are irrelevant to the question. The reference to the stimulus material relies heavily on direct quotations from the text. 4–6 The question is understood but only partially answered resulting in an argument of limited scope. The response contains mostly accurate references to approaches to research which are linked explicitly to the question. The response makes appropriate but limited use of the stimulus material. 7–9 The question is understood and answered in a focused and effective manner with an accurate argument that addresses the requirements of the question. The response contains accurate references to approaches to research with regard to the question, describing their strengths and limitations. The response makes effective use of the stimulus material.
Research methods
You will be expected to:
- identify the research method used and outline two characteristics of the method - suggest an alternative or additional research method giving one reason for your choice. Usually, this reason will stem from a shortcoming of the research method in the stimulus material and/or a strength of the alternative method you suggest.
The research methods identified by the IB are divided into qualitative and quantitative methods. In quantitative data, the aim is to produce objective knowledge where the emphasis is on the isolation and measurement of key variables. Qualitative researchers are concerned with meaning and experience – that is, they are interested in how people make sense of the world and how they experience events. The two methods can be used in conjunction with one another, such as interview data bolstered by survey data.
Qualitative methods
Case studies
A case study is a detailed analysis over time of a singular area of interest (a case) to produce in-depth, context-dependent knowledge. The area of interest is defined by
Naturalistic observations
Naturalistic observations are observations of naturally occurring behaviour in a natural setting. Several different recording techniques can be used, but field notes are an important part of the data. Observations may be participant or non-participant observations.
Strengths of naturalistic observations
Naturalistic observations have high ecological validity as the collection of data takes place in a natural environment and it is assumed that the participants behave in natural ways (in contrast to research in laboratories).
Naturalistic observations can be used to collect data in cases where it would be impossible or unethical to do so otherwise.
Limitations of naturalistic observations
There can be ethical considerations concerning the appropriateness of observing strangers without their knowledge. The researcher should also be careful not to violate the privacy of participants.
Naturalistic observations generate a lot of data and researchers have to make a decision about what, when, and how they will observe it. This can be addressed by recording behaviour, which raises ethical issues, and/or having more than one researcher, which raises inter-observer reliability issues.
Participant observations
In participant observations , the researcher becomes part of the group he or she observes. The aim of this research strategy is to gain a close and intimate familiarity with a given area of interest in a natural setting. The researcher enters the social world of other people, but they also affect the researcher in certain ways. It is important that the researcher is aware of this and that continuous reflections become part of the interpretation of the data. Critical thinking like this is always important, but particularly when the researcher chooses to study a group in which he or she has a personal or political engagement. In the analysis, the researcher includes this and any other relevant biographical data because this is an important perspective in the interpretation of the data. This is an example of reflexivity.
Strengths of participant observations
Participant observations provide very detailed and in-depth personal knowledge of a topic, which cannot be gained by other methods.
They are one of the best methods to avoid researcher bias because the researchers seek to understand how and why the social processes are the way they are, instead of imposing their own reality on the phenomenon. The researcher cites the research in the universe of the participants.
They provide a holistic interpretation of a topic, because the researcher takes into account as many aspects as possible of that particular group of people, in order to synthesize observations into a whole. The researcher uses material from
Higher level paper 3
the participants themselves to generate ‘theory’, and tries to explain one set of observations in terms of its relationship with others.
Limitations of participant observations
The researcher can become too immersed in the environment. Proper reflexivity needs to be maintained.
Participant observations can be time-consuming and demanding. The researcher needs to be physically present and try to live the life of the people he or she is studying.
There is a risk that researchers lose objectivity, but this always has to be managed with qualitative data. Researchers are supposed to see the world from the point of view of the participants, but this may present problems in terms of objectivity. In participant observation there is a delicate balance between involvement and detachment.
Every participant observer has to ask themselves: To what extent has their mere presence changed the behaviour of the group they are observing?
Deception is necessary (for covert methods), but this raises serious ethical issues. For example, friendships are formed on false pretences and peoples’ feelings and lives are changed as a result of the research.
Non-participant observation
Non-participant observation means that the researcher is not part of the group being studied. It is a research technique by which the researcher observes participants, with or without their knowledge. The researcher does not take an active part in the situation as in participant observation. Some observational research takes place in psychological laboratories using one-way mirrors.
Strengths of non-participant observation
Non-participant observations can be seen as more objective because the researcher is not taking part in the behaviour being studied.
They can be seen as more ethical because the researcher cannot be said to actively influence the behaviour they are studying.
Limitations of non-participant observation
Participants often react to being observed. This is called reactivity , and it is assumed that reactivity will make the data less trustworthy/valid. This can be addressed by not informing people they are being studied, which raises clear ethical issues.
Overt and covert observation
Participant and non-participant observations can be overt or covert. The researcher decides in advance which technique is most appropriate for the research. In an overt observation, the participants know they are being observed whereas in a covert observation, the participants are not aware of being studied, so they have not agreed to it. Therefore, in a covert observation the researcher has to ‘make up a story’ to justify his or her presence in the setting in order to mask his or her real purpose for
Strengths of semi-structured interviews
Semi-structured interviews still allow for a ‘primal telling’ of experiences in the interviewee’s own language and expression while still following a semi-structured pattern. There is less potential bias by the researcher because there is some structure to the questions.
They have the flexibility of open-ended approaches, as well as the advantage of a structural approach. It enables the researcher to make interventions, asking participants to either clarify or expand on areas of interest.
They allow for analysis in a variety of ways because it is compatible with many methods of data analysis.
They allow for some consistency between different researchers.
Limitations of semi-structured interviews
Semi-structured interviews can limit how much the researcher pursues interesting data trails if they tie themselves too tightly to their schedule.
Researchers could impose their own expectations ( confirmation bias ) on the data through the use of specific questioning. Decision trails are necessary to improve credibility/trustworthiness.
Focus groups
A focus group normally consists of around six to ten people. Members of a focus group often have a common characteristic that is relevant for the topic of investigation, which is why purposive sampling is often used. The researcher has the role of facilitator, which means they are in charge of the group to make sure it stays on task by monitoring and prompting the group discussion.
Strengths of focus groups
Focus groups offer a quick and convenient way to collect large amounts of data from several individuals simultaneously.
They are particularly useful for exploring people’s knowledge and experiences because it can be used to gain insight into what they think, how they think, and why they think that way.
They highlight cultural values or group norms.
Limitations of focus groups
Focus groups are not suitable for producing intimate data from the participants.
The presence of other participants may result in group dynamics such as conformity and groupthink , where individuals express views they do not hold as individuals in a group.
Quantitative methods
Experiments
Experiments are designed with one clear independent variable (IV) and a dependent variable (DV). All other factors that could affect the DV are controlled as far as possible. The IV may be graduated, resulting in a range of conditions on a scale. Alternatively there may be only two conditions for the IV: one is the control , the other the test condition. This is a simple experiment.
Strengths of experiments
Experiments can establish a cause-effect relationship between an IV and DV (validity).
They can be easily replicated by other researchers (reliability).
Limitations of experiments
There is a lack of ecological validity in experiments as the environments and testing methods have to be so tightly controlled.
The isolation of variables sometimes means more nuanced factors are ignored or downplayed as the emphasis is placed on establishing cause-effect between variables rather than a grand narrative to explain complex events.
Field experiments
In field experiments , the researcher manipulates the IV but conducts the experiment in a real-life environment. As a result extraneous variables cannot be controlled.
Strengths of field experiments
There is a higher degree of ecological validity as the environments are more natural.
The participants do not have to know they are being studied so they do not react as much, if at all, to the presence of a researcher.
Limitations of field experiments
Field experiments lack complete replication as they take place in a natural environment.
There are problems with informed consent as not every participant will be aware they are taking part in a social science study.
Quasi-experiments
In quasi-experiments , participants are grouped based on a characteristic of interest, such as gender , ethnicity , or scores on a depression scale.
Strengths of quasi-experiments
Quasi-experiments allow one characteristic to be isolated and researched in a controlled way.
There is a higher degree of ecological validity as the environments are more natural.
Higher level paper 3
Surveys
Surveys can be quantitative or qualitative in nature. Quantitative surveys usually involve tightly focused questions that can be answered with a numbered answer response on a scale.
Strengths of surveys
A large amount of data can be collected from large populations in a relatively quick and easy way.
Patterns of behaviour can be seen before more in-depth research is carried out.
Limitations of surveys
The researcher does not manipulate the variables, so it is not possible to establish a cause-effect relationship.
The data is not very in-depth or rich.
Sampling methods
You will be expected to describe the sampling method used in the study.
Researchers cannot research an entire population. They first have to decide what group they are interested in (known as the target population ) and then select a group of people from it. This is the sample. The method they use to extract the sample will influence the characteristics of the sample.
Sampling method
Sample
Target population
The following are common methods:
Random sampling: the process where every member in the target population has an equal chance of being selected.
Convenience/opportunity sampling: the process of selecting people who are able to participate in the study at a given time. They may be known to the researcher or within a place the researcher has access to.
Volunteer sampling: when individuals choose to participate in the study.
Higher level paper 3
A diagram showing the relationship between the target population, sampling method, and sample.
Purposive sampling: participants are chosen because they possess characteristics relevant to the research study.
Snowball sampling: participants who are already in a study help the researcher to recruit more participants through their social network. This is particularly useful and gains access to subgroups or people who might not otherwise allow themselves to be interviewed.
Ethical considerations
You will be expected to:
- describe the ethical considerations that were applied in the study and explain whether further ethical considerations could be applied - describe the ethical considerations in reporting the results and explain additional ethical considerations that could be taken into account when applying the findings of the study.
There are, overall, the same ethical issues involved in qualitative research as in quantitative research. These include informed consent, protection of participants from psychological or physical harm, respect for the participants’ integrity and privacy, and the right to withdraw from the research. However, there are special ethical considerations to be made due to the very nature of qualitative research. The characteristics of qualitative or field research usually include long term and close personal contact with participants, which may have implications for what the participants disclose to the researcher.
Informed consent
Informed consent should always be obtained wherever possible unless it conflicts with the aims of the research. This is stressed in all guidelines on ethical conduct in research by reputable RECs. However, in some cases, where it would not otherwise be possible to study a phenomenon (e.g. use of violence in a street gang), ethics committees may offer dispensation from the rule because the goal of the research is to obtain knowledge that may eventually prevent violence.
However, generally, participants should know their participation is voluntary. This is particularly important if the research is conducted by people who have some kind of relation to members of the sample, since participation could then be motivated by feelings of obligation. The researcher must provide the participants with sufficient information about the study, such as who funded the study, who will conduct the study, how the data will be used, and what the research requires of the participants
- for example, in terms of time and the topics the study will address. It should also be made clear that consent can always be renegotiated. In cases where children aged under 16 years are involved, consent must be obtained from parents or legal guardians.
Protecting participants from harm
Researchers should take preventive action in all research to avoid harming participants. This is particularly true in sensitive research topics, such as drug abuse,
The following forms of generalization can be distinguished in qualitative research:
Representational generalization: findings from qualitative research studies can be applied to populations outside the population of the study. Qualitative research normally involves small samples that are not selected to be statistically representative, and non-standardized interview methods may be used. This makes it difficult to generalize findings. However, if evidence from other studies confirms the findings, it is argued that generalization is possible. For example, qualitative interviews may be followed by surveys (a quantitative method) to collect data from a representative sample so that the findings can be generalized to a larger population.
Inferential generalization: findings of the study can be applied to settings outside the setting of the study. This is also called transferability or external validity. If the study on homeless people is a pilot programme to test the effectiveness of a service to resettle homeless people, the question is whether the findings can be applied to other services that provide help to the homeless. Whether or not the findings can be transferred to another setting will depend on the depth of the description of the researched context and the phenomenon. This description may allow for inferences to be made, but it will rest as a hypothesis until it is supported or disproved by further evidence.
Theoretical generalization: theoretical concepts derived from the study can be used to develop further theory. The findings from a study might lead to inferences about possible effective policies to help homeless people. In that way, the findings from the study may contribute to wider social theory.
Achieving credibility
You will be expected to discuss how a researcher could ensure that the results of the study are credible.
It is usually difficult to replicate findings in qualitative research because qualitative data relies on researcher interpretation, subjective decisions (e.g. choosing participants, deciding on questions, deciding on interview settings, choosing segments of interviews, interpreting the data), which all have the influence of the researchers’ personal decisions. Therefore, credibility is used in qualitative research to indicate whether or not the findings of the study are in line with the participants’ perceptions and experiences.
The following techniques increase credibility in qualitative research:
- inclusion of samples from interviews - claims supported with excerpts from the interview - use of a ‘decision trail’ - explanations for the decisions the researcher came to (to help the reader understand where, why, and how the researcher conducted the research in the way they did) - use of peer review to check the interpretations - other researchers who are interested in the same area can add further insight as well as question the original findings.
The use of reflexivity
Reflexivity is based on the assumption that it is important the researcher is aware of his or her own contribution to the construction of meaning in the research process. Reflexivity is a process that occurs throughout the research. It allows the researcher to reflect on ways in which bias may occur. Researchers should provide sufficient details about issues that may potentially bias the investigation. For example, revealing where they stand in terms of political ideology.
The use of triangulation
Triangulation is the validation of data through cross verification from two or more sources. The sources are usually theoretical and/or, methodological.
Methodological triangulation: different methods (e.g. interviews plus observations and questionnaires and diary analysis) are used to research the same phenomena.
Theoretical triangulation: the search for evidence or approaches that could contradict their interpretation is conducted through a different theoretical lens (e.g. a feminist lens; a behaviourist lens; a collectivist lens).
Researcher triangulation: the use of other researchers who would bring different perspectives and experience that might challenge the findings of the lead researcher.
Avoiding bias
You will be expected to discuss how the researcher in the study could avoid bias.
Bias refers to human factors that may affect the results of the study. The following are common biases.
Researcher bias
Researcher bias is when the researcher themselves influences the results of the study because of a personal view they hold. For example, they may want a certain treatment to work or they hold a political view on how a certain group is being treated by a government. This may manifest itself in terms of who and how they choose for the study, how they act towards participants, how they emphasize and de-emphasize certain themes in the data, and the conclusions they come to. The researcher should apply reflexivity to control this during the study and then provide information to the reader in the final report.
Participant bias, or demand characteristics
Participant bias is when participants act according to how they think the researcher may want them to act. For example, the social desirability effect refers to the idea that participants may give answers they presume are socially desirable but not necessarily what they truly believe. Researchers need to ask: What have I done to control this? How might the participants act under different conditions? How can I ask the same question in different ways to see if the participants are consistent?
Higher level paper 3
new therapy; educational campaign) and what would be the ethical considerations surrounding a potential application?
Question 3
Discuss how the researcher in the study could avoid bias. (9)
This question wants you to consider how the researcher could avoid bias should the research be carried out again. You will need to spot ways in which bias has already affected the methodology of the research. You will need to discuss the various ways bias can be avoided.
OR
Discuss how a researcher could ensure that the results of the study are credible. (9)
This question wants you to consider how the researcher could improve the credibility should the research be carried out again. You will need to spot ways in which credibility has already been challenged in the methodology of the research. You will need to discuss the various ways credibility can be improved.
OR
Discuss the possibility of generalizing/transferring the findings of the study. (9)
This question wants you to consider how the findings of the study can be generalized (quantitative studies) or transferred (qualitative studies). You will need to discuss the various forms of generalization and transferability.
Higher level paper 3
Scenario 1
The aim of this case study was to investigate gender differences in online learning for students in higher education in a US university. A US Department of Education statistic suggests university enrolments in the US will be more than 20 million by
- As student enrolment increases, there will be pressure on classroom and lecture hall space and so it is expected that more universities will make use of computers to deliver education and communicate with students. Therefore, using computer-based communication (CBC) is one of the main ways these institutions are addressing rising student enrolment. For example, digital seminars can be delivered online where participants take part via cameras and microphones. A seminar is a small group focused learning environment where students can discuss issues led by the tutor.
A female researcher in the USA was interested in communication patterns of students using computer-based communication (CBC) while studying at university. The researcher herself was a tutor at the same university where she carried out her research. The research project used unstructured interviews to collect data from 60 participants (47 female; 13 male) who were chosen using convenience sampling. The sample consisted of adult professionals studying for bachelor and master’s degrees. They were asked to sign informed consent forms and were fully debriefed after the interviews were completed. They were guaranteed anonymity and confidentiality. At the end of the interviews the researcher carried out a focus group with ten female participants who were chosen using convenience sampling. They were asked to discuss their experiences of being in a CBC environment. Participant quotes and stories from the focus group were used heavily in the results section of the report.
The overall results showed male and female preferred learning styles and communication patterns, and participation barriers were compared for differences in gender. Results showed there are gender differences between male and females in communication styles. For example, there was a tolerance of male domination in online communication patterns, which was seen as effectively silencing female students and making it more difficult for them to communicate on an equal footing with the males. Implications for practice were discussed. The main results that emerged were that training was needed for the male participants to help them understand how they could improve their communication styles to better accommodate the female participants.
Question 1
Identify the research method used and outline two characteristics of the method. (3)
Describe the sampling method used in the study. (3)
Suggest an alternative or additional research method giving one reason for your choice. (3)
Question 2
Describe the ethical considerations that were applied in the study and explain if further ethical considerations could be applied. (6)
Question 3
Discuss the possibility of generalizing/transferring the findings of the study. (9)
Scenario 2
The aim of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of drama therapy and art therapy on crime rates with young offenders who commit petty crime in the Netherlands and Germany. Petty crime is defined as low-level or less-serious crime such as stealing from shops or spraying graffiti on walls. Previous research had suggested such therapies were not good value for the tax payer and there was a possibility that future governments may reduce funding.
Two researchers (one male; one female), working in a university social science department, used surveys to collect data from 42 experienced art therapists working in five institutions in the Netherlands and Germany who were found using snowball sampling. They were asked to sign informed consent forms and were guaranteed anonymity and confidentiality. The survey asked questions about the effectiveness of drama therapy and art therapy on crime rates with young offenders, which were scaled from one through to five. For example, one question was: How effective do you think art therapy has been on helping young offenders you have worked with transition into a non-criminal lifestyle? There was a space at the end of the surveys for the participants to add further thoughts. The surveys were conducted on a digital internet platform. The results were published in a peer-reviewed journal and quotes from the participants were used to add support for the quantitative results.
The overall results showed drama and art therapy was seen as an effective way to help young offenders deal with their emotional problems; it reduced the chances of young offenders reoffending; it required more funding to make it more accessible for more young people. Some participants expressed concern that funding may be cut in the future and they worried about the effect on the young people they worked with.
Question 1
Identify the research method used and outline two characteristics of the method. (3)
Describe the sampling method used in the study. (3)
Suggest an alternative or additional research method giving one reason for your choice. (3)
Question 2
Describe the ethical considerations in reporting the results and explain additional ethical considerations that could be taken into account when applying the findings of the study. (6)
Question 3
Discuss how a researcher could ensure that the results of the study are credible. (9)
Answers
Question 1
Identify the research method used and outline two characteristics of the method. (3)
The research method is a quantitative survey to investigate the effectiveness of drama therapy and art therapy on crime rates with young offenders who commit petty crime in the Netherlands and Germany. Quantitative surveys usually involve tightly focused questions that can be answered by placing a number on a scale.
Describe the sampling method used in the study. (3)
The sampling method used in the study was snowball sampling, which means some initial therapists who are already in a study helped the researcher to recruit more participants through their social network. This is particularly useful for gaining access to subgroups or people who might not otherwise allow themselves to be interviewed. This may have meant the therapists decided that being involved in the study would bring benefits to themselves or the profession.
Suggest an alternative or additional research method giving one reason for your choice. (3)
An additional research method could be the use of unstructured interviews. These are interviews where the questions are not prearranged. They contain open questions and are informal, free flowing, and resemble a probing conversation. These will produce in-depth, rich and nuanced data and allow the researcher to go beyond the results of the survey. They allow the researcher to be creative and adapt to the situation, which meant they could have asked follow-up questions to any response the therapists gave.
Question 2
Describe the ethical considerations in reporting the results and explain additional ethical considerations that could be taken into account when applying the findings of the study. (6)
The participants were asked to sign informed consent forms and were guaranteed anonymity and confidentiality. However, the qualitative nature of one part of the survey may mean the therapists’ identities could be revealed as their responses may be recognizable. It should have been clear in the consent process to make sure the participants knew that what they said may well be used as a quote in the published report to allow them the opportunity to consider how much information they may wish to reveal in the qualitative element of the survey. Moreover, the political nature of the debate (regarding funding for these types of therapies) should mean the authors take great care to make sure the identities of the participants are completely protected. Social science research can influence public opinion, which in turn influences government decisions and so greater care should have been taken to produce more in- depth and less one-sided results.
Question 3
Discuss how a researcher could ensure that the results of the study are credible. (9)
The results can be seen to lack credibility because they state the therapies are effective, but this was based on a sample of therapists. It would be expected for therapists to claim their work was effective. Therefore, the researchers could have used triangulation to help ensure that the results of the study were more credible. Triangulation is the validation of data through cross-verification from two or more sources. For example,
Higher level paper 3
