VALIDITY AND RELIABILITY IN PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH
Dement, W. & KLEITMAN, N. (1957) Journal of Experimental psychology, 53, 339 - 46
• STUDY PERIODS OF PROLONGED RAPID EYE MOVEMENTS (REM) DURING THE SLEEP • CONNECTION BETWEEN THESE PERIODS AND THE EXPERIENCE OF DREAMS • 7 MALES, 2 FEMALES, 61 NIGHTS • 5 SUBJECTS – INTENSIVE STUDY • 4 SUBJECTS - CONTROL GROUP • MEASURE EEG, RECORD DREAM EXPERIENCE
HYPOTHESIS • Significant association between REM sleep and dreaming. • Significant positive correlation between the estimate of the duration of dreams and the length of eye-movement • Significant association between the pattern of eye movement and the context of the dream RESULTS • All subjects show REM periods every nights • Dreams recall predominantly after REM period • No dreams recall after non-REM period
No recall Dream recall Dream recall
STRENGHTS • Replication - the experimental method consists of standardised procedures and measures which allow it to be easily repeated. • Particularly valid – experiment seems to measure eye movement and length of REM period
WEAKNESSES • Lack of ecological validity • the situation in which the participants had to sleep was unusual and could have affected their sleep patterns. • Nature of the method of waking participants may have affected their ability to recall their dream.
• Sample size - the sample size was small and only included 2 females so we could argue that the results were biased towards the dream pattern of men rather than women • Large differences between individuals in the reports of dreaming during REM. • Not supported findings a relationship between eye movements and what the person is dreaming about. • The method was very tightly controlled. For example the researchers were able to control the location, sleeping time and the participants use of stimulants.
• This authors concluded by stating that an objective measurement of dreaming had been accomplished by recording rapid eye movement during sleep. • Furthermore Dement and Kleitman’s conclusions have been replicated many times by other psychologists. • We cannot generalise from the results of a single experiment therefore the more often an experiment is repeated, with the same results obtained, the more confident we can be about the results.
GIBSON, E.J. & WALK, R.D. (1960) The ‘visual cliff’, Scientific American, 202, 64 – 71
• What does a new born baby see when it first open its eyes? • The question is significant because it bears on the important nature nurture debate within the field of visual perception. • Finding an answer might allow us to understand which of our perceptual abilities are inborn, and which abilities we have to learn.
• DEVELOPMENTAL PERSPECTIVE • Study of 36 infants, aged 6 - 14 months • Non-human animals were tested (lambs, chicks, kittens, turtles) at the age at which they show locomotion • The baby is placed in the middle of the glass, and its mother tries to get it to crawl either over the shallow end or over the deep end. HYPOTHESIS • Human babies have the ability to perceive depth, however can be implicated after the started moving. • Some animals are born with the ability to perceive depth.
RESULTS • 27 babies moved onto shallow side at least once. • 9 babies stayed where they were, did not crawl. • Only 3 babies crawled over the deep. • The failure of 25 per cent of the babies to respond at all. • A number of babies appeared to become very distressed.
• Reliable - other studies have found same results with same procedures. • Valid - experiment seems to measure depth perception. Realistic visual cliff, could eliminate other senses like touch so they were measuring visual perception. • Ecological validity - cliff mirrors other experiences of drops in the environment. • Shows our behaviour is determined (controlled) by our biology which controls our senses (vision in this case).
• Individual differences at work - a few babies still crawled onto the deep side. • Sample too small to be representative of all babies, also American, so culturally biased. • Experimenter bias - the mums could give their babies subtle signals to not cross over to the deep side e.g. body language and this may have affected some babies. • Ethics - babies were distressed at being called over to the deep side by their mums. Should they be put under this distress?
• Evidence for nature side of debate - we are genetically pre-wired to respond to our environment in certain ways e.g. avoid drops! • High internal validity - the researchers did measure what they claimed. The infant’s movement was a good measure of their ability to perceive depth. Also, babies are less likely to respond to demand characteristics as they won’t understand what the researcher is trying to find out!
• Ethnocentric - a lot of research is American and these findings are then used to explain behaviour in all cultural groups, but this is not correct. • Babies know they are being watched so may react to this in some way, lowering validity of results. • Babies were quite mature as they could have learned depth perception through their environment by that age, so we can’t see if depth perception is inborn (i.e. innate). • We can not tell what is going on in a baby’s mind so this calls into question the validity of the findings.
• Basic affordances are recognized by babies after born. • The survival of a species requires that its members develop discrimination of depth by the time they are able to move independently, be it at 1 day (the chick & goat) or 6-14 months (human). • That such a vital ability does not depend on possibly fatal accidents of learning in the lives of individuals is consistent with evolutionary theory. • Naturists belief - human born with certain capacities, however may not be functioning well until we mature physically. • Nurturists belief – human get these abilities through experience • Researchers could see if cliff avoidance behaviours were evident from birth in animal species.
• VALIDITY Good specification of experiment could eliminate differences. (apparatus of walking cliff) The researchers need to measure what they claimed. (babies movement onto sides of “cliff”; period of REM)
• RELIABILITY The experimental method consists of standardised procedures and measures which allow it to be easily repeated.
• SAMPLE SIZE Group size has to be large enough for good reliable results.
Published on Feb 28, 2013
Two pieces of research presented explore the ways journal items are judged in an effort to achieve increased reliability of research quality...