Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
Multiple Intelligence Task (Natural/Field Experiments (Advantages ('…
Multiple Intelligence Task
Natural/Field Experiments
Interpretivists argue that natural/field experiments are a better alternative
They follow the same principles as artificial experiments, however don't attempt to control all of their variables and let behaviour and situations take their 'natural course'
Subjects don't normally know that they are being studies and hence they should act more naturally
Rosenthal & Jacobson (1968): 'Teacher Expectations & the Effects of Labelling'
Wanted to study the effects of labelling within the classroom
Told teachers that one groupd of students were 'high flyers' whilst a different group were 'less able'
Teachers interacted with the students accordingly to the labels
Colin Brown & Pat Gay (1985) 'Racial Discrimination Experiment'
To test the extent of racial discrimination in employment, Brown & Gat sent a white actor and a black actor to the same job interviews to see who was more likely to be offered jobs.
They also send out application forms for jobs using the same details apart from changing the ethnicity and names of the 'applicants'
They used the surnames Evans & Patel and found that the white applicant was more likely to be offered the job in most cases.
J.W Sissons (1970) 'The PaddingtonTrain Station Experiment
Sissons wanted to explore people's perceptions on social class & set upa field experiment in Paddington Train Station.
He dressed an actor as a business man and then as a labourer and asked him to ask passengers by for directions
More people stopped and gave directions to the 'businessman"
Advantages
'Natural Experiment' creates high validity
Lessens the Hawthorne Effect
Small scale means that fewer subjects are needed
Acknowledges differences between individuals
Removes volunteer bias
Disadvantages
Cannot control all variables
Unreliable
Ethics
Cannot be sure what TV created the dependent variable
Qualitative data difficult to quantify
The Comparative Method
As a response to the interpretivist criticism of artificial experiments, positivists have developed the comparative method that tires to remove the 'human element' out of the research yet retains the priniciples of scientific experiments
Durkheim (1897): Suicide
Durkheim's study is a famous example of the comparative method in action
Durkheim hypothesised that low levels of social integration was casually linked to suicide rates
Advantages
Avoids artificiality
Historical references
Lessens ethical problems with such research
Eliminates the Hawthorne Effect
Value-free
Reliable
Disadvantages
Cannot control variables
Invalidity
Difficult to pinpoint casual variables
Statistics still need to be 'Interpreted'
Artificial/Laboratory Experiments
Scientific Method preferred by positivists
Allows a researcher to test a hypothesis by looking for casual relationships between 'variables'
Aim to uncover predictable, formulaic laws of human behaviour
Conducted in an artificial environment so that all variables can be controlled
They follow the HYPOTHERTICO-DEDUCTIVE METHOD
The Hypothetico-Deductive Method
positivists claim that, by following this method all researchers are able to create truly Value-Free, Scientific Research.
a phenomena is observed
a hypothesis is formulated
an experiment is set up to test the hypothesis
effects or variable changes are observed and noted
conclusion are drawn
hypothesis is accepted or rejected
a theory is formuated
other researchers scrutinise the theory
Always has to be a control group & experiment group so that comparison can be made and variable tested
Advantages
quantitive data
high in reliability
allows for correlations in the data to be made easily
uncovers formulaic laws of human behaviour
Disadvantages
cannot control all the variables when dealing with society and individuals
volunteer bias
small scale
experiment bias