Please enable JavaScript.
Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.
deconstruction - Coggle Diagram
deconstruction
Sample
-
Errors
-
was selected by a pre-grouped together group -> was 2 psychology classes. this means that every single particpant has this linking them with EVERYONE else. usually the only linking factor between all test subjects is the age rane/gender that is being tested. using students from a range of subjects would allow for possibly more variety, and would also be a much better sample size in that it was random. the original people were not random at all.
-
if the sample was of stage 1 students, then it was inaccurate, due to the accelerated students, meaning there was a large quantity who did not accurately fit the age group wanted.
Strengths
Can give a decent understanding regarding the age group within this small area of the community and their memory recall, however the information cannot be taken far outside of this small community.
Improvements
select a more random group of people in order to cover a larger community. if it were to expand out of psychology classes it owuld be more representative of GIHS students as a whole
select a larger sample size to gather data that can more accurately represent the chosen group of people. as always, the more test subject,s the more accurate/reliable your findings will be. if this were to go out into the real world, then the sample size would need to increase quite dramatically.
Method
Weaknesses
participants had to set their own timers so as to not disturb the other participants due to the timings of audios overlapping. this meant that the timing was somewhat reliant on an honety system, and patici
having the timer directly in front of you is pressuring and can make the situation way more stressful than it would have been without a timer directly in front of you.
Errors
participants had to rate their music confidence this rating scale had no defined scoring, meaning that each participant could have their own definitions for each number. this then means that one persons score of 1 can be the equivalent another person's 7
-
Improvements
get participants to state their musical background -> whether they play/have played an instrument, how long they have played for, what sort of level they are at, and any other information that may be important about musical knowledge.
have each test group either participate in separate rooms, or at separate times so that they do not need to set their own timers, and can use one as a group, eliminating that element of the honesty system and also possibly lowering the stress that comes along with being able to check the timer at any given time.
Data Collection
-
-
-
Improvements
have each different group complete the experiment in separate rooms. this would eliminate most of the trust issues, as they would be timed properly, and listening to the audio correctly. they would also be experiencing the exact same environment, and undertaking the procedure exactly the same.
confidentiality
results are not confidential --> anyone can access the edit history/see participants typing. there is also the student identification number, meaning that participants could be found by any other participant if wanted - this is an ethical violation.
due to each participant being able to see other students results, they may change theirs to better suit the majority. most students probably would not want to be the one outlier, and so might make up numbers as to appear more 'normal'