Karteikarten
Method (Design, Materials/Apparatus, Procedure)
Karten in diesem Stapel (111)
- 1MILGRAM: DESIGNLaboratory experiment with no IV / Controlled observation /
Scenario study - 2MILGRAM: PROCEDUREPurpose of experiment explained - effect of punishment on learning.
Drew slips of paper from a hat - rigged so participant was always teacher.
Taken to adjacent rooms, learner strapped into 'electric chair' apparatus
Electrodes attached to learner's wrist - 3MILGRAM: PROCEDURE (2)Sample shock given - 45 Volts - to convince participant of authenticity
Learning task - word pair task - shock for each wrong answer increasing in 15V increments
300 V shock - learner kicked the wall, then became unresponsive - 4MILGRAM: PROCEDURE (3)315V - kicked wall again, no further feedback from victim
Experimenter - series of standardised 'prods' if participant unwilling to go on
A participant who broke off before 450V was deemed a 'defiant' participant
'Obedient' - complied fully, administered all shock levels - 5MILGRAM: PROCEDURE (4)Participants were interviewed and a friendly reconciliation was arranged between participant and victim, an effort was made to reduce any tensions that arose and ensure the participant would leave in a state of well being.
- 6MILGRAM: MATERIALS/APPARATUS'Electric chair'
Electrodes
Electric shock generator
Electrode paste - 'to avoid blisters and burns'
Electronic recording equipment / tape recorder - 7BOCCHIARO ET AL.: DESIGNLaboratory experiment with no IV / Scenario study
- 8BOCCHIARO ET AL.: PROCEDUREInformed of task, potential benefits/risks of participation, and right to withdraw
Experimenter greeted participants entering lab
Asked to provide names of fellow students
Presented cover story - 9BOCCHIARO ET AL.: DESCRIBE THE EXPERIMENTERMale
Dutch
Formerly dressed
Stern demeanor - 10BOCCHIARO ET AL.: PROCEDURE (2)Second with with a mailbox and a Research Committee form - participants left alone for 7 minutes
Two personality inventories (the HEXACO-I-R test, and a measure of Social Value Orientation (SVO)) administered
Participant probed about suspiciousness about the nature of the study - 11BOCCHIARO ET AL.: PROCEDURE (3)Full debrief by experimenter - trained to use simple language and proceed slowly
Care was taken to ensure participants did not feel uncomfortable about being obedient or having been deceived
Asked not to discuss the study and to complete a form to give consent for their data to be used. Given an email address to complain or ask questions - 12BOCCHIARO ET AL.: MATERIALS/APPARATUSResearch Committee forms
Consent forms for data
Personality inventories
Cover story - 13PILIAVIN ET AL.: DESIGNField experiment
Snapshot study
Used observation to collect data
Independent measures - may have been repeated for some if they saw the trials multiple times - 14PILIAVIN ET AL.: PROCEDURENew York 8th Avenue Independent Subway - 7 1/2 minutes
Weekdays 11am-3pm 15 April 1968 - 26 June 1968
Four teams of students - 1 victim, 1 model, 2 observers in each - board the train and approx. 70 seconds into journey victim staggers forward and collapses - 15PILIAVIN ET AL.: PROCEDURE (2)Remains lying on floor until someone helps
Staged 103 times with 6-8 trials run per day per team
The students would disembark the train and cross over to the over platform to carry out the next trial going in the opposite direction - 16PILIAVIN ET AL.: PROCEDURE: THE VICTIMMale
Identically dressed in Eisenhower jackets, old trousers, no tie
Aged 26-35
Three were white and one was black
38 trials - smelled of alcohol, carried a liquor bottle wrapped in a brown bag
65 trials - appeared sober, carried a cane - 17PILIAVIN ET AL.: PROCEDURE: THE MODELWhite
Male
Informal clothes
Not all dressed the same - 18PILIAVIN ET AL.: PROCEDURE: THE CRITICAL AREACritical area - early (the model stood in the critical area and assisted the victim approx. 70 seconds after collapse)
Critical area - late (model stood in the critical area, assisted after approx. 150 seconds) - 19PILIAVIN ET AL.: PROCEDURE: THE ADJACENT AREAAdjacent area - early (model stood in the middle of the adjacent area and assisted the victim approx 70 seconds after collapse)
Adjacent area - late (model stood in the middle of the adjacent area and assisted approx 150 seconds after collapse) - 20PILIAVIN ET AL.: PROCEDUREWhen the model provided assistance, he raised the victim to a sitting position and stayed with him for the remainder of the trial.
- 21PILIAVIN ET AL.: PROCEDURE: OBSERVERSTwo in each team
Female
Took seats in the adjacent area
Recorded comments made by nearby passengers for the duration of the ride
Attempted to elicit comments from passengers sat next to them - 22PILIAVIN ET AL.: PROCEDURE: OBSERVER 1Noted the race, sex and location of every passenger in the critical area
Counted the total number of individuals who came to the victim's aid and noted their race, sex and initial location - 23PILIAVIN ET AL.: PROCEDURE: OBSERVER 2Noted the race, sex and location of every passenger in the adjacent area
Recorded the length of time it took (the 'latency') for the first helper to arrive
If the model intervened to help, the latency of the first helper's arrival after the model. - 24PILIAVIN ET AL.: MATERIALS/APPARATUSBlack cane
Liquor bottle wrapped tightly in a brown paper bag - 25LEVINE ET AL.: DESIGNCorrelation study
Field experiment
Independent measures - 26LEVINE ET AL.: PROCEDURE: i) DROPPED PENConfederates walked toward a solitary pedestrian passing in the opposite direction
10-15 feet away - drop pen behind without appearing to notice, in full view of pedestrian who he would continue walking past
214 men and 210 women approach - 27LEVINE ET AL.: PROCEDURE: ii) HURT LEGWalking with a heavy limp and wearing a large, clearly visible leg brace, confederates would drop and unsuccessfully struggle to reach down for a pile of magazines within 20 feet of a passing pedestrian
253 men and 240 women approached - 28LEVINE ET AL.: PROCEDURE: iii) HELPING A BLIND PERSON ACROSS THE STREETConfederates - dark glasses, white canes City centre intersections with pedestrian crossings, traffic signals and moderate, steady pedestrian flow.
Just before the light turned green, they would step up to the corner, hold out their cane and wait until someone offered help.
281 trials conducted - 29LEVINE ET AL.: AT WHAT POINT WERE PARTICIPANTS RECORDED AS HAVING HELPED?i) Called back to confederate, or picked up the pen and took it to him
ii) offering help, or beginning to help without offering
iii) MINIMUM - Informing the confederate that the light was green - 30LEVINE ET AL.: PROCEDUREEach measure was administered in 2+ locations, in main city centre districts, during main business hours during the summer months of one of more years between 1992-1997
i & ii) Only individuals walking alone were selected. Children (under 17) and those not physically capable of helping were excluded - 31LEVINE ET AL.: PROCEDURE: HOW WERE PARTICIPANTS SELECTED RANDOMLY?By approaching the second potential participant who crossed a predetermined line
- 32LEVINE ET AL.: MATERIALS/APPARATUSPen
Magazines
Dark glasses
White canes - 33LOFTUS & PALMER: DESIGNBoth experiments:
Laboratory experiment
Independent measures - 34LOFTUS & PALMER: PROCEDURE: EXPERIMENT 1Shown the 7 film clips
Given a questionnaire to complete after each
2 parts to each questionnaire - give an account of the accident, answer a set of questions relating to the accident
Counteract order effects - groups presented with a different order of films - 35LOFTUS & PALMER: PROCEDURE: EXPERIMENT 1Experiment 1 lasted around 90 minutes
IV manipulated by changing the wording of the critical question about the speed of the vehicles at the time of the accident, using a different verb
Distracter questions used so participants cannot respond to the demand characteristics
Theorised that the stronger the verb, the higher the speed estimate. - 36LOFTUS & PALMER: PROCEDURE: EXPERIMENT 1Each subject received one of the five critical questions in their questionnaire.
IV - the verb used in the critical question
DV - mean speed estimate in miles per hour per condition - 37LOFTUS & PALMER: MATERIALS/APPARATUS: EXPERIMENT 17 film segments from the Evergreen Safety Council of the Seattle Police Department (4/7 contained staged crashes)
Sets of questionnaires corresponding to the film clips - 38LOFTUS & PALMER: PROCEDURE: EXPERIMENT 2Participants watched the film clip of the multiple car crash
Filled in one of the three versions of questionnaire one on one day
Returned a week later to complete questionnaire 2
IV - wording of question
DV - whether answer was yes or no to seeing broken glass - 39LOFTUS & PALMER: PROCEDURE: EXPERIMENT 2: QUESTIONNAIRE 1Asked participants to describe the accident in their own words and answer a series of questions.
Critical question - estimate the speed of the vehicles
There were 3 conditions with 2 conditions being asked leading questions about the speed of the vehicle.
50 asked with the verb 'smashed', 50 asked with 'hit', and 50 not asked about the speed so acted as a control condition - 40LOFTUS & PALMER: PROCEDURE: EXPERIMENT 2: QUESTIONNAIRE 210 questions about the accident
Critical questions: 'did you see any broken glass?'
Participants responded by ticking either yes or no - 41LOFTUS & PALMER: MATERIALS/APPARATUS: EXPERIMENT 2A film showing a multiple car crash lasting less than 1 minute (crash lasted less than 4 seconds)
2 questionnaires - 42GRANT ET AL.: DESIGNLaboratory experiment
Independent measures design - 43GRANT ET AL.: PROCEDURERead aloud standardised instructions that described the task as part of a class project and which emphasised that they were voluntary.
Read article on psychoimmunology once - all wore headphones while they read - noisy condition heard moderately loud background noise
Procedure lasted around 30 minutes in total - 44GRANT ET AL.: PROCEDUREBetween test and study conditions, participants had a 2 minute break during which they rested without headphones
Short answer (recall) test
Multiple choice (recognition) test
Debriefed
Reading time was recorded with no difference reported between conditions - 45GRANT ET AL.: MATERIALS/APPARATUSEach experimenter provided their own cassette taps player and headphones
Article on psychoimmunology
Recognition Test
Recall Test
Master tape on background noise - 46MORAY: DESIGNLaboratory experiments
Experiment 1 - repeated measures
Experiments 2 & 3 - independent measures - 47MORAY: PROCEDURE: EXPERIMENT 1A short list of simple words was spoken 35 times as the 'rejected' or 'blocked' message
At the end of the shadowing task, participants were asked to recall all they could remember of the rejected message.
Approx. 30 seconds after, given a recognition task of 21 words ( from the shadowed passage, 7 from the rejected message, 7 similar but not present in either passage (control condition)) - 48MORAY: PROCEDURE: EXPERIMENT 2To test whether an affective cue (person's own name) would penetrate the 'block' and be attended to.
Compared with non-affective instructions.
Participants heard 2 passages of light fiction at once - one in each ear.
Both began with an instruction to listen to their right ear, and in two cases immediately followed by a warning that they would receive instructions to change ears. - 49MORAY: PROCEDURE: EXPERIMENT 2Participants were told that the aim for them was to make as few errors in the shadowing of the passage as possible Participants had 10 trials
Performance on the shadowing task were tape recorded and analysed - 50MORAY: PROCEDURE: EXPERIMENT 3Asked to shadow one of two simultaneous dichotic messags
Sometimes numbers were put in the messages
Control passages with no digits were included
IV - manipulation of the instructions given to 'set' the two groups
One group was told they would be asked questions about the shadowed message at the end of each message
The other group was told to remember as many of the digits as possible - 51MORAY: MATERIALS/APPARATUSBrenell mark IV stereophonic tape recorder, modified with twin amplifiers to give two independent outputs through attenuators, one output going to each of the earpieces of a pair of headphones
- 52SIMONS & CHABRIS: DESIGNLaboratory experiment
Independent measures - 53SIMONS & CHABRIS: PROCEDUREScripted and standardised and a team of 21 experimenters gathered data from the 228 participants
Always tested individually and informed that the task would involve watching a clip of basketball players and they should pay attention to either the white team or the black team and count the number of passes. - 54SIMONS & CHABRIS: PROCEDURE (2)Easy - the participant kept a mental note of all the passes their team made
Hard - the participant kept separate mental notes of the number of aerial passes and the number of bounced passes their team made
16 test conditions in total - each participant tested on one after giving their informed consent - 55SIMONS & CHABRIS: PROCEDURE (3)After watching the video, asked to record the number of passes on paper and then asked a number of surprise questions
i) did you notice anything unusual?
ii) did you notice anything other than the 6 players?
iii) did you see a gorilla (woman carrying an umbrella) walk across the screen?
If they said yes, they were asked to provide details.
If they mentioned the unexpected event, the rest of the questions were not asked
Asked if they had seen anything similar before, if yes their data was not used in the results.
Fully debriefed, including a repeat showing of the video if necessary. - 56SIMONS & CHABRIS: MATERIALS/APPARATUS4 videotapes - each 75 seconds in duration
- 57BANDURA ET AL.: DESIGNLaboratory experiment
Independent measures
Matched pairs - 58BANDURA ET AL.: PROCEDURE: STAGE 1Lasted around 10 minutes
Children taken individually to a room
Model invited to join the game
Shown high interest activities
Model sat at another table with toys the child wasn't allowed to play with e.g. Bobo doll
Non-aggressive condition - model played with the toys and ignored the Bobo doll
Aggressive condition - model played with tinker toys for 1 minute then was aggressive towards the Bobo doll - 59BANDURA ET AL.: PROCEDURE: STAGE 2Aggression arousal
Children taken to a smaller room by the experimenter containing attractive toys
Allowed to play with the toys for 2 minutes and then told they were the experimenter's very best toys and not just anyone could play with them, and she had decided to keep them for the other children
There were some other toys in another room the children could play with - 60BANDURA ET AL.: PROCEDURE: STAGE 3Room 3
There were a range of toys, always set up in the same place for each child - aggressive toys - a Bobo doll, some dart guns,a ball hanging from the ceiling
Non aggressive toys - crayons, a tea set, cars, farm animals, trucks
Allowed to play for 20 minutes while being observed through a one way mirror
A time point sample was used - every 5 seconds a note was made of the behaviour shown on one of the behavioural categories - 61BANDURA ET AL.: PROCEDURE: MEASURES OF IMITATIONImitation of physical aggression - e.g. hitting Bobo with a mallet
Imitation of verbal aggression - e.g. repeating phrases such as 'sock him' - 62BANDURA ET AL.: PROCEDURE: MEASURES OF PARTIAL IMITATIONMallet aggression - e.g. hitting other objects with mallet
- 63BANDURA ET AL.: PROCEDURE: MEASURES OF NON-IMITATIVE AGGRESSIONNon-imitative verbal and physical aggression - e.g. aggressive acts directed at other objects and hostile remarks the model hadn't said
Aggressive gun play - the model hadn't done - 64BANDURA ET AL.: PROCEDURE: NON-AGGRESSIVE MEASURESNon-aggressive measures - e.g. sitting quietly, playing non-aggressively
- 65BANDURA ET AL.: PROCEDURETo ensure objectivity, there was a second observer for half of the subjects and the observer didn;t know which category the child had been inexcept for the male aggressive model (the experimenter who was observing).
- 66BANDURA ET AL.: MATERIALS/APPARATUSToys e.g. Bobo doll, dart guns
- 67CHANEY ET AL.: DESIGNField experiment
Repeated measures - 68CHANEY ET AL.: PROCEDUREThe parents were given a questionnaire to answer about their current inhaler which included a consent form for them to sign
They were then given the Funhaler to use for 2 weeks with the instructions that parents had to use it with their child.
At various times, the parents were contacted on a random basis and asked if they had used the Funhaler on the previous day. - 69CHANEY ET AL.: PROCEDURE (2)At the end of the 2 weeks, they were contacted again and given another questionnaire to complete.
The Funhaler was designed to incentivise the children to use their inhaler more frequently to manage their asthma. The toy would only be activated if the breath was deep enough. It was tested to ensure it delivered the appropriate dosage. - 70CHANEY ET AL.: MATERIALS/APPARATUSBreath-a-Tech inhalers
Funhaler inhalers
Questionnaires - 71KOHLBERG: DESIGNLongitudinal study
- 72KOHLBERG: PROCEDURE12 years
2 hour interviews every 3 years
Presented with hypothetical moral dilemmas, all deliberately philosophical
Their answers and the reasoning behind their answers were linked to 25 basic moral concepts or aspects - 73KOHLBERG: MATERIALS/APPARATUSScenarios
Questions - 74LEE ET AL.: DESIGNLaboratory experiment / Quasi experiment
Snapshot study
Cross cultural
Cross sectional (various ages)
Independent measures design - 75LEE ET AL.: PROCEDURERandomly allocated to either social story or physical story condition
Seen individually
The rating chart was explained
When answering the questions, they could use the words, symbols or sometimes both
Each child listened to all 4 stories
The meaning of the chart symbols was repeated each time the question was asked - 76LEE ET AL.: PROCEDURE (2)The good and naughty meanings were alternated so that the researchers knew the child wasn't just saying the first option each time.
Counterbalancing was used by randomly allocating stories to one of two orders and then giving half of the children one order and the rest of the children the second order. - 77LEE ET AL.: MATERIALS/APPARATUS4 types of stories:
Pro social setting - truth telling (physical/social)
Pro social - lie telling (physical/social)
Anti social - truth telling (physical/social)
Anti social - lie telling (physical/social) - 78SPERRY: DESIGNQuasi experiment
- 79SPERRY: PROCEDUREParticipant covered one eye and was instructed to look at a fixed point in the centre of a projection screen.
Pictures were presented to the left or right visual field by projecting slides onto the right or left of the screen at a very high speed, one picture every 0.1 second or faster.
Below the screen there was a gap so that the participant could reach objects but not see his or her hands. - 80SPERRY: MATERIALS/APPARATUSTachistope
A standard projector
Visual and tactile tests - 81CASEY ET AL.: DESIGNQuasi experiment
Longitudinal - 82CASEY ET AL.: PROCEDURE: EXPERIMENT 1Cool version - the participant is told which gender is the target. Four conditions - male go, female go, male no-go, female no-go. 160 male or female faces are projected on the screen one at a time for 500 milliseconds with a 1 second interval. Each face has a go/no-go option. The participants are told to press the button for go but not for no-go.
Hot version - the same task but the faces are happy or fearful - 83CASEY ET AL.: PROCEDURE WHAT IS RECORDED IN BOTH EXPERIMENTS?Accuracy and reaction times
- 84CASEY ET AL.: PROCEDURE: EXPERIMENT 2fMRI used
The participant is told which gender is the target
48 male or female faces are projected onto a screen one at a time for 500 ms with a 1 second interval
Each face has a go/no-go option
The participants are told to press the button for go but not for no-go - 85CASEY ET AL.: PROCEDURE: EXPERIMENT 2fMRI imaging of the right prefrontal cortex and the ventral striatum was undertaken for 26 participants
- 86CASEY ET AL.: MATERIALS/APPARATUSComputer and keyboard
Pictures of male and female faces - 87BLAKEMORE & COOPER: DESIGNLaboratory experiment
Independent measures - 88BLAKEMORE & COOPER: PROCEDUREThe kittens were raised from birth in a dark room
2 weeks old - put into a special apparatus for 5 hours a day
The kitten stood on a glass table inside a cylinder which was covered with either vertical or horizontal black and white stripes - 89BLAKEMORE & COOPER: PROCEDURE (2)They could not see their own body - wore a collar that restricted their visual field
5 months old - taken out of the cylinder and taken into a well lit room, with tables and chairs, and observed - 90BLAKEMORE & COOPER: MATERIALS/APPARATUSSpecial apparatus - cylinder with glass platform with black and white stripes
Collar that restricted visual field - 91MAGUIRE ET AL.: DESIGNLaboratory experiment with a quasi design
Independent measures
Matched pairs - 92MAGUIRE ET AL.: PROCEDURE: STAGE 1MRI scans of brains of 50 healthy, right handed, male, non-taxi drivers aged 33-61 were analysed to establish a comparison database of 'average hippocampi' (analysis by voxel based morphometry, VBM)
- 93MAGUIRE ET AL.: PROCEDURE: STAGE 2MRI scans of brains of 16 taxi drivers and of 16 matched controls were analysed by VBM and compared to this database
- 94MAGUIRE ET AL.: PROCEDURE: CONTROLThe expert conducting the analysis did not know whether each MRI scan was o a taxi driver brain or not
- 95FREUD: DESIGNCase study
Longitudinal - 96FREUD: PROCEDUREHans' father wrote to Freud when Hans was 5 years old saying 'He is afraid a horse will bite him in the street, and this fear seems connected with his having been frightened by a large penis'.
Reports of Hans' dreams, of conversations between Little Hans and his father and of interpretations were sent between Hans' father and Freud. - 97BARON-COHEN ET AL.: DESIGNQuasi-experimental method
Matched participant design - 98BARON-COHEN ET AL.: PROCEDURE: THE EYES TASKParticipants were shown 25 photographs of the eye region of a person's face for 3 seconds each, taken from magazines in black and white, and all standardised to the same size.
Asked 'what word best describes what this person is thinking or feeling?'
They had to choose between two semantic opposite mental state terms given underneath each photo.
Male and female faces
Maximum score = 25 - 99BARON-COHEN ET AL.: PROCEDURE: HAPPE'S STRANGE STORIESParticipants presented with two examples of each of 12 story types.
A character says something that is not literally true and the participant is asked to explain why the character said what he or she did.
Included to validate the Eyes Task as a theory of mind task. - 100BARON-COHEN ET AL.: PROCEDURE: GENDER RECOGNITION TASKInvolved participants looking at the same sets of eyes used in the Eyes Task, but had to identify their gender.
Maximum score = 25
Included as a control task to allow B-C to check whether deficits on the Eyes Tasks were due to other factors - 101BARON-COHEN ET AL.: PROCEDURE: BASIC EMOTION RECOGNITION TASKParticipants were shown photographs of 6 whole faces, displaying the 6 basic emotions - happy, sad, angry, afraid, disgust and surprise.
Included as a control task to allow B-C to check whether deficits on the Eyes Tasks were due to other factors - 102BARON-COHEN ET AL.: MATERIALS/APPARATUSPhotographs of eyes
- 103GOULD/YERKES: DESIGNA review article
Quasi experimental - 104GOULD/YERKES: PROCEDURE: TEST TYPESArmy Alpha test - written exam
Army Beta - set of pictures, given to recruits who failed the Alpha test or could not read, but it involved writing the answers.
If a recruit failed the Beta then they were supposed to be tested individually. - 105GOULD/YERKES: PROCEDURE: QUESTIONSAnalogies
Filling in the next number in a sequence
Multiple choice - 106GOULD/YERKES: PROCEDUREEach man was graded A to E
Grade D men - 'rarely suited for tasks requiring special skill' and could not be expected to 'read and understand written instructions' - 107GOULD/YERKES: MATERIALS/APPARATUSAlpha test
Beta test
Individual spoken examination - 108HANCOCK ET AL.: DESIGNSelf report
Quasi experimental - 109HANCOCK ET AL.: PROCEDUREPsychopathy was determined using the Psychopathy Checklist-Revised (PCL-R)
The Wmatrix linguistic tool (Rayson, 2008) was used to examine parts of speech and semantic content while the Dictionary of Affect and Language (DAL) tool (whissell and Dewson, 1986) was used to examine the emotional characteristics of the narratives. - 110HANCOCK ET AL.: PROCEDURE (2)At the start of each interview, the purpose of the study was explained to each offender verbally, as was the procedure that would be followed.
Participants were then asked to describes their homicide offence in as much detail as possible, omitting no details.
Interviews were audiotaped and lasted approximately 25 minutes
Narratives were turned into typed transcripts, with efforts being made to make these as verbatim as possible. - 111HANCOCK ET AL.: MATERIALS/APPARATUSPCL-R
DAL
Wmatrix
Informationen
- Beschreibung
- A-Level Psychology (CORE STUDIES) Karteikarten am Method (Design, Materials/Apparatus, Procedure), erstellt von Beth Tonks am 02/01/2017.
- Erstellt von
- Beth Tonks
- Aufrufe
- 0
- Bewertung