Andrade (Evaluation Essay)

P – Point (Strength/Weakness)E – Explain the pointE – Example from the studyR – Relate to the point on why is it a strength / weakness in the study
High in reliabilityThe extent to which a procedure, task, or measure is consistent. This is because the study had a standardised procedure for participants to follow.

The telephone message 2.5 minutes with an average speed of 227 words per minute was the same for all participants and the instructions were standardised.

OR

All participants in the doodling group received a pencil and a piece of A4 paper with 10 shapes (1 cm diameter squares and circles in alternating rows) and a space for writing the target information. Participants in the no doodling group (control group) were given lined paper and a pencil to only write the target information and not doodle.

The standardised procedure of apparatus used for all participants eases the process of replication of future research hence the study has high reliability.
Low on ecological validityThis refers to the extent that the setting a study has been conducted in can be relevant to everyday life. Sometimes the task given to participants might also not be something that happens in everyday life – the term “mundane realism” describes this. If a task involves something that could happen in everyday life then we say it has high mundane realism.Participants in the doodling group were asked to shade in the squares and circles on a piece of A4 paper.Shading in shapes as doodling is not representative of real life as doodling is commonly implemented as a form of aimless sketching pattern and/or figures rather than restricted shading of shapes. Therefore the task of doodling through shading of shapes is low in mundane realism.
High in validity

The extent a researcher is testing what they claim to be testing.

OR

This is because the study was high in controls which ensured that there were no extraneous variables affecting the results of the study.

For example, participants were randomly assigned into the control or doodling group. This is to avoid the possibility that doodlers would choose to be in the doodling group and vice versa.

OR

Participants were recruited via opportunity sampling just as they have completed another study prior to this.

This is to ensure that participants’ variable such as doodling ability is randomised to minimise the effect on the memory scores for names and places.

OR

As they were already bored to begin with, which fits the purpose of the study, making sure that they were bored & thus investigating if doodling would affect their concentration.

Low on generalisability

How widely findings apply to other settings and populations.

OR

This is because, an unequal number of participants participated in this study which may lead to gender bias.

There were 20 participants in the doodling group with 17 females and 3 males. There were 20 participants in the control group with 18 females and 2 males.There were more female (25) participants than male (5) making it not representative of the population. There may be individual differences between males and females in concentration methods and ability to doodle.
Ethical issue (deception )

The ethical issue of deception was breached (overlooked) in this study. This is as participants were deliberately  misinformed about the aim or the procedure of the study.

OR

Participants should not be deceived about aspects of a study unless the study would otherwise be useless due to demand characteristics (could be further linked to validity).

Participants were asked write down the names of party goers mentioned in the telephone message and they were not informed on the memory test that was given after the message has ended.

As participants were deceived, participants were not able to give informed consent to participate in the study. This would further tarnish the image of the field of psychological research & the public would be reluctant to participate in future research.

OR

As participants were deceived, participants were not able to give informed consent to participate in the study and may have been exposed to possible distress from the recall test or from the results of the test that could have pointed at some deficiencies in their concentration capabilities. This would further tarnish the image of the field of psychological research and the public would be reluctant to participate in future research.

Quantitative data (strength)

Describing human behaviour and experience using numbers and statistical analysis.

OR

Data that focus on numbers and frequencies rather than on meaning or experience.

Researcher identified the number of names of party goers and names of places recalled and calculated the mean score. The mean score of the names of people and names of place were subtracted to identify the memory score.

This allowed researcher to gather numerical data that are objective and requires little interpretation. Therefore, the researcher is able to analyse and compare the overall mean recall names of people and places of the doodling group was 7.9 which is 29% more than the mean of 5.8 for the no doodling group.

Other analysis:

Deception. Participants should not be deceived about aspects of a study unless the study would otherwise be useless due to demand characteristics. – Validity