Research Methodologies in Developmental Psychology

Why Research?  In order for a theory to be taken seriously, there must be evidence to show that the theory is correct.  Research is how psychologists gather evidence to prove their theories.  There is no such thing as a perfect research method, so different types of research must be conducted to strengthen a theory.

Naturalistic Observation  This type of research involves a researcher observing an environment without interfering or intervening with the environment and the subjects being studied.  The subjects do NOT know they are being observed.  The researcher is like a security camera, records everything, but does nothing.  For example, if we were studying how teenagers interact with each other on the weekend, we may observe them at a popular hangout and makes notes on their behaviour.

Pros and Cons Pros  Rich and realistic descriptions about the natural environment.  No manipulation of the environment.  More accurate behaviour from observed subjects. Cons  Difficult to draw meaningful conclusions as we cannot determine cause and effect.  Lack of control of the environment, so are our conclusions correct?  The observer may misinterpret behaviours.

Participant Observation  When the researcher engages with the group being studied as a participant.  The researcher is like a spy infiltrating an enemy camp.  For example, the psychologist Rosenhan and his colleagues pretended to be mentally ill in order to join and study patients and staff in a mental hospital.

Pros and Cons Pros  Researchers gain access to groups and situations that would either deny entry or change their behaviour under observation.  Realistic and natural environment with little manipulation by researchers. Cons  Participants may realize they are being studied and will alter their behaviour.  The researcher, as a newcomer, will indirectly change group behaviour.  The researcher may become too close to participants and alter the results to be more desirable.

Experiments  Experiments often take place in lab settings where the researcher has complete control over the environment.  They allow the researcher to determine cause and effect relationships.  The participants are always aware that they are participating in an experiment and usually know what is being tested.

 For example, the psychologists Darley and Latane wanted to study helping behaviour and the bystander effect after a New York woman was brutally murdered in front of 38 witnesses.  They hypothesized that helping behaviour would increase as group size decreased.  Participants arrived at the lab to take part of a study and while they were waiting a fake participant faked a seizure.  The amount of participants waiting in the lab was controlled by the researchers.

Pros and Cons Pros  Allows us to make causal statements because the environment is tightly controlled.  Participants and variables (things being studied) can be easily manipulated to suit the researchers needs.  Bias is often removed.  Control groups can be created (these groups tell what happens when no variables are tested). Cons  The amount of control in an experiment can create an artificial environment.  Harder to apply results to the real world.  Some things cannot be tested in an experimental setting because it would be unethical or dangerous to test (eg: the forbidden experiment).

Field Experiments  The researcher sets up all aspects of an event and has almost complete control over the social context and the environment.  The subjects are not aware that they are in an experiment or that the researcher is controlling the environment.  The researcher is like a puppet master.  For example, the psychologists Piliavin, Piliavin, and Rodin had an actor fake a heart attack on a subway train to test helping behaviour.

Pros and Cons Pros  The researcher has a large amount of control and can normally determine cause and effect conclusions.  The subjects are not aware of the experiment, so their reactions are realistic.  The environment appears realistic, so reactions are more genuine than a lab experiment. Cons  Not as realistic as an observation.  People may realize the environment is being controlled.  Is it ethical to subject people to stressful or dangerous situations?

Interviews  The researcher sits down face to face with the participants and asks them a series of questions.  The interviews are usually filmed or recorded to add to the researchers notes.  The questions are prepared in advance.  For example, the FBI created their system of profiling serial killers by interviewing captured serial killers, like Ted Bundy, and making a list of common traits.

Pros and Cons Pros  Allows for a wider range of response from participants.  Participants can provide greater detail and insight to their behaviours.  Allows us to study rarer psychological issues. Cons  Very time consuming.  Participants can lie or alter their answers to be more desirable.  No cause and effect relationships can be determined.

Surveys and Questionnaires  The researchers asks questions to participants about what the researcher is studying. Participants respond through paper and pencil answers.  For example, a mass survey in Ontario was done to determine the stress levels and mental health on students in Ontario public schools.

Pros and Cons Pros  Lots of information from lots of people in a short amount of time.  There is more privacy in surveys and questionnaires, so participants are more likely to share their true feelings. Cons  Participants may misinterpret questions or not answer questions at all.  Responder bias – the participants may lie to please the researcher or themselves.  If there are too many questions, the participant may respond inaccurately in order to finish the survey.  No causal relationships can be determined.