1

IB Psychology
Notes for P3
• Question 1 (3 marks each: Answer all)

(a) Identify the method used and outline two characteristics of the method.

(b) Describe the sampling method used in the study.

(c) Suggest an alternative or additional research method giving one reason for your choice

• Question 2 (6 marks: answer the one provided)

Describe the ethical considerations that were applied in the study

and explain if further ethical considerations could be applied.

Describe the ethical considerations in reporting the results

and explain ethical considerations that could be taken into account when applying the
findings of the study.

• Question 3 (9 marks: Answer the one provided)

Discuss the possibility of generalizing the findings of the study.

Qualitative: transferability
Quantitative: generalisability= external validity

Discuss how a researcher could ensure that the results of the study are credible.
Qualitative: credibility = trustworthiness
Quantitative: internal validity

Discuss how the researcher in the study could avoid bias.

Qualitative: more on researcher’s bias to reduce participant’s bias
Quantitative: control confounding variables to minimize bias
 2
QUALITATIVE Research Methods

Qualitative research is exploratory and used to gain an insight into psychological phenomena of
interest. Further research into the topic may well include quantitative studies with more data.

1a. Identify the method used and outline two characteristics of the method [3]

Observations are “experiential” and all data is generated by the selective attention and
interpretation of the researcher, making reflexivity especially important.

Naturalistic observation (Where):

● Subjects' behaviour is observed in a naturalistic environment
● Field notes and other data gathering techniques are used
● Observations may be followed by interviews

Covert observation (How):

● Participants are not aware that they are being observed.
● Usually take place in naturalistic environments in qualitative research.
Strengths: Access to groups that may not agree to be observed’
Avoidance of participant bias.
Ethical concern: No consent before observation
Require debriefing and consent to using their data for research
purposes after observation.

Overt observation (How):

● Participants are aware that they are being observed.
● Usually take place in naturalistic environments in qualitative research.

Strength: Informed consent

Limitations: May have social desirability effect intentionally or non intentionally.

Participant observation:
● When the researcher becomes part of the observed group. Can be covert or overt.
● Strength: Gain first hand experience and gain valuable insights
● Drawbacks: Possible loss of objectivity due to deep involvement.
● Opposed to non-participant observation
The researcher stays removed from the group they are observing

Structured observation:
● Predetermined information is recorded in a systematic and standardized way. (Quantitative)
● Questions designed to elicit the required data

Unstructured observation:
● No predetermined structure and information in the observation.
● The researcher registered whatever behavior that they found noteworthy.
 3
QUALITATIVE Research Methods

Interviews allow us to gain insights on more subjective non observable phenomena including
attitudes, values and patterns of interpretation.

Interview data comes in audio or video recording which is converted into interview transcript, may
also include interview notes with observation of the participants in the interview context.
Transcripts are later coded and analyzed in line with aims of the research.

Structured interviews:
● Predetermined set of questions to be asked in specific order.
★ Often include closed questions with no possibility of elaboration

Semi-structured Interviews:
● An interview that follows an outline of specific topics or themes to be covered, but allows for
deviation and elaboration. A checklist of topics to cover or questions to ask without
predetermined sequence.
● Can include a combination of open and closed questions.
● Informal including follow up questions and fits the natural flow of conversation.
● Facilitate rapport between the interviewer and respondent useful for socially sensitive topics.

Unstructured interviews:
● The interviewer has topics to cover, but there is a lot of freedom and the precise questions
and order are not fixed.
● The interview evolves as a result of the interactions between the researcher and the
interviewee.
● Participant driven questions where following questions are determined by previous answers.
● Overall purpose is kept in mind and the topic of exploration is kept on track.
● Can include open and closed questions

Focus Group interview:

● Group semi-structured interview with 6-10 people.
● The group is made of similar relevant characteristics
● The facilitator interacts with the participants
● More natural and comfortable environment than face to face interview

Content Analysis: Inductive content analysis includes:

● Writing transcript
● Identify initial themes
● Low level themes grouped with high level themes
● Summary table of themes
● Conclusions are made

Case Study:
● Using multiple methods above together
● Get in depth thorough investigation of an individual or a group.
● Often done longitudinally
● Individual or group that is the object of the case study is unique in some way
● Sampling is not an issue as this particular case is the interest instead of the population this
case represents.
 4
QUANTITATIVE Research Methods

1a. Identify the method used and outline two characteristics of the method [3]

True Experiment
● Involves at least two conditions. State the different IVs and DV.
● Control for confounding variables. Give examples.
● Conducted in a lab setting.
● Based on a hypothesis that predicts a causal relationship between the IV and DV
● Can establish cause and effect relationship between manipulation of IV and DV
● Involves random allocation of participants to the experimental and control groups.

Field Experiment
● Involves at least two conditions.
● Conducted in a field setting
● Based on a hypothesis that predicts a causal relationship between the IV and DV
● Can establish cause and effect relationship between manipulation of IV and DV
● Involves random allocation of participants to different groups.

Quasi Experiment
● Involves at least two conditions.
● Independent variable is not manipulated by the resarcher.
● Differences between participants are pre-existing
● Correlational relationships can be determined but not causal.
● Can be conducted in lab or in field setting

Natural Experiment
● Involves at least two conditions.
● There is no independent variable.
● Differences in conditions are manipulated by nature
● Correlational relationships can be determined but not causal.
● Can be conducted in field setting

Survey
● Questions designed to elicit the required data
● Can be quantified to make comparisons
● Larger samples size
 5
QUALITATIVE Sampling Method

1b. Describe the sampling method used in the study [3]

Sampling in qualitative research is non-probabilistic (not random). May have self selection bias.

Quota Sampling:
● Non-probability sample
● Participants were chosen because they possess characteristics salient to the research study.
● The number, proportion and characteristic of the sample are predetermined before the study
begins.

Purposive Sampling:
● Non-probability sample
● Participants were chosen because they possess characteristics salient to the research study.
● Recruited through advertising to specific group of people
● May include snowballing
● (Similar to quota sampling except the number and proportion of samples are not
predetermined)

Snowball Sampling:
● Non-probability sample
● Small number of participants are asked to invite others.
● Used especially when members are hard to reach e.g. drug users.
● Suffers from self-selection bias and cannot be easily generalized

Convenience Sampling:
● Non-probability sample, participants are not chosen randomly
● Using samples that are easily accessible or available and willingness to participate.
● Most time and cost effective.
● Suffers from self-selection bias and cannot be easily generalized

Theoretical Sampling:
● Non-probability sample
● Gain enough participants until the point of data saturation.
● Until no new information is obtained from the new participant.

Sampling in quantitative research is probabilistic.

 6
QUANTITATIVE Sampling Method

1b. Describe the sampling method used in the study [3]

Sampling in quantitative research is probabilistic. Experiments aim at discovering universal laws of

behavior applicable to large groups of people across a variety of situations, being a truly nomothetic
method. The samples aim to represent the target population.

Random Sampling
● Sufficient number of participants will increase representativeness of the sample.
● Each participant has an equal chance of being selected

Stratified Sampling
● Aim for a specific characteristic
● Recruit participants that keep the same proportion in the sample.
● Researchers divide subjects into subgroups called strata based on characteristics that they
share

Opportunity Sampling (similar to convenience)

● Selecting participants based on their availability and willingness to participate
● Participants represent the population of interest
● Usually selected from the same area

Self-selected Sampling
● Participants volunteer to be apart of the study
● The recruited by advertisements
 7
ALTERNATIVE OR ADDITIONAL research method

1c. Suggest an alternative or additional research method giving one reason for your choice [3]

Alternative/additional research methods that could be used to study the same topic that will add
data to the aim of the study. Below are some common examples used, though you can have other
possible methods depending on the question.

A survey

Rationales for using surveys could include, but are not limited to:
● Using a survey as an alternative method with random sampling of participants would be
more representative of the population and easier to generalize results.
● A survey could ask students more specific questions related to the topic. Give examples.
● Data from a survey as an additional research method could be used to compare if the results
of the experiment corresponded with students' own perception
● The survey as an additional method would add further data into a complex problem that
researchers could then decide to explore using qualitative methods
● The survey enables a relatively rapid and inexpensive collection of a large amount of data.

Focus group interviews

Rationales for using focus group interviews could include, but are not limited to:
● Exploring the student’s own perception of the issue of as an additional method. The
facilitator would encourage the participants to share their views and experiences.
● A qualitative approach such as this would give a more subjective view. Such data could be
compared to the findings of the experiment and thus give a more holistic view of the issue
investigated.
● Data from focus groups on participants’ experiences could give the researchers insight into
aspects of the problem that they had not thought of themselves.
● Data from a focus group as an alternative method could give researchers an idea of how
students perceive the issue and then use this data for further research, perhaps using an
experiment.

A semi-structured interview

Reasons (with rationale) for using a semi-structured interview could be but are not limited to:
● The semi-structured interview is based on an interview guide with a list of potential questions
and topics that need to be covered during the interview. The focus can be considered a very
sensitive topic. Therefore, a semi-structured one-to-one interview could be more appropriate
if the researcher wants to explore how individuals experienced these situations.
● The semi-structured interview is flexible. There are both closed and open-ended questions
and the interviewer can ask respondents to elaborate on answers, which could potentially
lead to a better understanding of participants' own subjective understanding of this very
sensitive issue.
● The one-to-one setting in a semi-structured interview is likely to establish a good rapport
between the interviewer and the respondent. This could be extremely important in a
research study on a sensitive issue.
 8
ETHICS - Were applied and could be applied

2. Describe the ethical considerations that were applied in the study and explain if further ethical
considerations could be applied.

(Make sure you choose ethical considerations that are relevant to the stimulus materials and is able to
“describe” and “explain” them correctly in context)

Informed Consent
● Is consent signed before the start of the study?
● Are participants fully informed about the aim and procedures of the study?

Protection from harm

● Is it an ethically neutral (non-sensitive) topic?
● Is there possible long term psychological harm to the participants?
● Are they informed that they could contact the researchers if they had any questions about
the study?

Debriefing
● Are participants fully informed about the study once the experiment was completed including
how the data would be used?

Anonymity
● Are participants identifiable from data sets?
● Is there any sensitive information that may result in self stigmatization?

Confidentiality
● Is there any personal information collected?
● Are participants ensured that all data would be kept in secure storage and destroyed
afterwards?

Rights to withdraw
● Are they informed about the right to withdraw at any time without consequences?

Deception
● Is it clearly justified why deception is needed in this particular study?

Approval from ethics committee

● Has the study been reviewed and approved by an ethics committee?
 9
Ethics (were applied and could be applied) - Example of how to write for each:

For describing the ethical considerations that were applied in the study: [1] per relevant point made, up to a
maximum of [3].
● Consent: The participants signed a consent form before the start of the study. In
principle,participants should be fully informed about the aim and procedures of a study before it
starts. However, in this experiment deception was used because it would be impossible to conduct
this experiment if the hypothesis was revealed to participants before the study.Informed consent is a
requirement in all research and in line with ethical guidelines in psychological research.
● Sensitivity of topic: The lecture was based on an ethically neutral (non-sensitive) topic.
● Debriefing: The participants were debriefed after they had completed the study. Therefore
participants were fully informed about the study once the experiment was completed,including how
the data would be used. They should also explain the risk of possible psychological harm.
● Anonymity: Participants in a study must be sure that nobody can identify them in research reports.
This is particularly important in socially sensitive studies such as this,because of the risk of
self-stigmatization. The stimulus material specifically mentions that participants were not named in
the research report.

For explaining further ethical considerations that could be applied: [1] per relevant point made with a
maximum of [3].
● Anonymity: It may be difficult to ensure because students in this study sit close to one another in
the simulated class setting. A way to deal with this could be to test students individually. In the
context of this study it may be less important because there is not much personal information
involved so it would be difficult to identify students from their data set.
● Confidentiality: The researchers could ensure that participants knew that the data would be kept in
secure storage and destroyed afterwards to ensure confidentiality.
● Deception: Deception was used in this experiment.. Candidates should explain and justify the use
of deception in the study, for example, explaining that a research ethics application form to an ethics
committee could ensure that deception is acceptable in this particular study.
● Rights to withdraw participation: Participants should be informed of their rights to withdraw from
the research once it has started, as well as consequences of doing so. In this study, that was not
done.Receiving course credit for participation in research is a common way to recruit participants at
many universities. An ethical issue here is whether students feel coerced to participate. Students
who do not wish to participate in this research should not be disadvantaged in any way and they
should be offered a comparable alternative task to receive the same credits.
● Right to withdraw data: A further ethical consideration to apply could be to inform students during
debriefing that they could still withdraw their data. However, participants in this study are students
who receive course credit for their participation so they might not feel they can withdraw their data
because they have given consent. However, students should be informed that they are not obliged
to participate if they would rather not.
● Protection from harm: (1) In a study like this on a quite sensitive issue that could potentially cause
some psychological harm to participants, the researchers should inform them after the study that
they could contact the researchers if they have any questions.
(2)The researchers should make sure that participants did not risk any long-term psychological
harm after the unpleasant experience, for example by offering a follow-up session after the
experiment to those who asked for it. Athorough debriefing session could also serve as a way to
fully inform participants about the aim of the study and at the same time touch upon the ethical
issues involved.
 10
ETHICS - Reporting results and applying findings

2. Describe the ethical considerations in reporting the results and explain ethical considerations that could
be taken into account when applying the findings of the study.

(Make sure you choose ethical considerations that are relevant to the stimulus materials and is able to
“describe” and “explain” them correctly in context)

To report the results means including the participant data and reporting them to be published.

Informed consent/ Debriefing

● Are participants fully informed about how the data would be used?
● Are participants fully debriefed to minimize any long term psychological effect?

Right to withdraw data

Are participants aware that they can inform the researcher if they want to withdraw their data?

Approval from ethics committee

● Has the results been reviewed and approved by an ethics committee to be reported?

Anonymity
● Are participants identifiable from data sets?
● Is there any sensitive information that may result in self stigmatization?

Objectivity
● Does the researcher remain value-free and unbiased when analyzing and reporting the
data?

Disclosure
● Who funded this research?
● What was the motivation for the study?

Effects of reporting findings

● Could the findings lead to prejudicial treatment against a specific group?
● To what extent could the reporting of the findings lead to potential social stigma or
discrimination?

To apply the findings means that the results of a study are being used to inform and/or justify some
kind of further action. When research findings are publicized, people are likely to take them as fact
and policies may be based on them.

● Are the limitations of the studies explicitly communicated to all constituents?

● Are findings are stated precisely and cautiously to avoid misunderstandings or
misinterpretations of the research.
● Is the extent of the generalisability of the study to other contexts being considered? The
findings could be limited to a specific context resulting in inappropriate information being
generalized.
● Is it ethical to apply these findings if it have not been replicated to ensure reliability?
 11
Ethics (reporting results and applying findings) - example of how to write for each:

2. Describe the ethical considerations in reporting the results and explain additional ethical considerations
that could be taken into account when applying the findings of the study. [6]

Ethical considerations when reporting the findings:

● Researchers should inform participants about the findings of the study and how they intend to use
the results. They should explicitly state that they are planning to use the results of the study to
design prevention programs. For example, adolescents have revealed that they use drugs like
ecstasy, which can have fatal consequences. Knowing this might prevent them from taking the drug
and would be information essential to designing future programs.
● Parental consent is not mentioned in the stimulus material. Since some of the participants are
minors it would be ethically correct to include parental consent if the results of the study are to be
applied in the design of future prevention programmes. The researchers should request permission
from an ethical committee before the study begins. The ethical committee should also give
permission to apply the results.
● Anonymity should be guaranteed especially given the sensitive nature of the subject matter.
● It is important that the researchers do not exploit or harm the participants, especially those who may
be vulnerable like the homeless adolescents in the sample. Therefore, it could be an important
ethical consideration before applying the results to provide some support to the most vulnerable
participants. Researchers should be conscious about legal issues surrounding the use minors or
vulnerable people in this type of research. Any reasonable alternative point/s with explanation.
● Participants should be debriefed. This is especially important given the sensitive nature of the
questioning and subject matter.
● The study needs to be cleared by an ethic committee prior to ensure all appropriate measures are
put in place before the start of the investigation.

Ethical considerations that could be taken into account when applying the findings of the study: ([1]
per relevant point, max [2] marks).

● Consideration of the scope and extent of the generalisability of the study to other contexts is
important as these findings could be limited to a specific context resulting in inappropriate
information in a generalized health campaign or prevention strategy.
● Awareness of researchers’ own biases and expectations (reflexivity) which could skew the findings
and influence the relevance of the findings for health campaigns.
● Replication of the findings by an independent researcher to test the reliability. If the results cannot
be replicated the use of the findings in a health campaign could be at best pointless and at worst
harmful.
 12
QUALITATIVE - Credibility (trustworthiness)

3. Discuss how a researcher could ensure that the results of the study are credible [9]
(Answer 3-4 points fully elaborated, each point with 3 sentences or more)

Credibility: This term is used in qualitative research to indicate whether or not the findings of the
study are congruent with the participants’ perceptions and experiences. The research is only
credible to the degree the participant agrees that they reflect his/her own reality. Credibility in
qualitative research is an equivalent of internal validity in the experimental method. Another term for
credibility is trustworthiness.

How to increase the credibility of the study?

Method Triangulation: The use of different data collection methods with the same sample.
For example: Doing a naturalistic observation followed by structured interview and focus group
interviews.

Data Triangulation: The use of different data sources within the same method.
For example, interviewing at different times of the day, interviewing in public vs in private,
interviewing the participant, their friends and family for multiple perspectives.

Researcher Triangulation: The use of more than one researcher to carry out the research and
review the data and find consistent data across the researchers to minimize researcher bias.
For example, having three researchers working to transcribe and interpret the same interview.

Establishing a Rapport: The participant is more likely to open up and be honest if there is a
trusting relationship with the researcher, especially if the topic is sensitive. A researcher can make
the participant more comfortable with non judgemental language, making sure the participants
understand there is no right or wrong answer and affirming their rights to withdraw at any time
without consequences.

Iterative Questioning: Researcher should return to the same question rephrased if ambiguous
answers are spotted due to sensitivity of topic.

Reflexivity: Reflection on the strengths and limitations of the methods. For example, understanding
that participants may behave differently during known observations with researchers' presence
(Epistemological). Researchers should reflect on the possibility that their own biases might
have interfered with the observations or Interpretations. For example, certain beliefs that are rooted
from past experiences (Personal).

Credibility Checks: When the data, interpretations and conclusions are shared with the
participants for them to clarify if their intentions were correct. Any errors will be corrected and
additional information can be provided if necessary.

Researcher Credibility: Does the researcher have enough personal and professional experience
with regard to the topic under investigation? Is the researcher trained with regard to the method
used?

Thick descriptions: Also referred to as rich descriptions, means to include the context and
interpretation of descriptions so that it has sufficient details to be understood holistically. E.g. Instead
of recording, “he smiled”, we can say “he smiled when… in….
 13
QUALITATIVE - Reducing researcher and participant’s bias

3. Discuss how the researcher in the study could avoid bias. [9]
(Answer 3-4 points fully elaborated, each point with 3 sentences or more)

Bias refers to factors that may affect the results of the study.
The following are common biases.

Researcher bias is when the researcher acts differently towards participants, which may influence or
alter the participant’s behaviour. In qualitative research, the researcher must assess personal biases
in relation to the study (for example, topic, choice of participants and method) and should apply
reflexivity to control for this.

Participant bias, or demand characteristics, is when participants act according to how the
researcher may want them to act, for example, due to the social desirability effect.

Sampling bias occurs when the sample is not representative of the target population, whether the
sample is based on selection criteria (qualitative research) or probability sampling (quantitative
research).

Participants bias

Acquiescence bias: The tendency of the participant to agree with the researcher, or give answers
with a positive nature.

This bias can be reduced by asking participants with non leading, open ended, neutral questions.

Social desirability bias: Tendency for participants to behave in ways that make them liked or
matching the expectation of how they should behave. This can happen intentionally or
unintentionally, especially in sensitive topics.

This bias can be reduced by non judgemental phrasing of questions, or disengage the participant by
asking questions about a third person.

Dominant respondent bias: Happens in group interviews when one participant is dominant to
guide answers in a specific direction and talk most of the time.

This bias can be reduced if the researcher is aware and keeps the dominant respondent in check so
that all participants have the equal opportunity to speak, feel safe and comfortable to voice their
opinions in the group.

Sensitivity bias: the tendency for participants to not answer questions honestly or distort answers
due to the sensitive nature of the topic.

This bias can be reduced by building good rapport with the participants such that the researcher
behaves professionally, follows ethical guidelines, ensures confidentiality, makes the participant
comfortable and not perceived as being judged when answering.
 14
QUALITATIVE - Reducing researcher and participant’s bias

Researcher bias

Confirmation bias: When researcher’s nonverbal behavior, phrasing of the questions selective
attention and interpretation of data is biased to confirm their prior beliefs. Contradicting information
may be disregarded.

This bias can be reduced with reflexivity where biases are identified and corrected.

Leading question bias: When a participant answers in a particular way because of how the
question is phrased.

Interviews need to be trained to ask open ended, neutral questions that do not suggest a particular
answer. Questions should be worded in participants' own language (especially during follow ups).

Question order bias: When responses to one question influence the response to the following
question to give consistent information.

To minimize this bias, general questions should be asked before specific ones, positive before
negative ,behavior before attitude.

Sampling bias: When sample is not the best fit for the research question.

Biased reporting: When findings of the study are not equally represented in the research report.
Related to confirmation bias, where information may be distorted and interpreted with bias.

Reflexivity, integrity and training of researchers are meant to counteract biased reporting.
 15
QUANTITATIVE - Controlling confounding variables

3. Discuss how the researcher in the study could avoid bias. [9]
(Answer with 3-4 points fully elaborated, each point with 3 sentences or more)

Reliability and validity

Reliability is the consistency of a study in terms of the extent to which a test or measure produces
the same results in repeated trials.
Validity is the degree to which the results accurately reflect what the research is measuring. There
are two forms:
External validity is the extent to which the results of a study can be generalized or
transferred to another sample or context. (e.g. people and settings)
Internal validity refers to the rigour of the study and the extent to which the researcher took
alternative explanations into account.

Internal validity: the methodological quality of the experiment. internal validity links directly to bias:
the less bias, the higher the internal validity of the experiment.

The threats of internal validity

1) Selection
2) History
3) Maturation
4) Testing effect
5) Instrumentation
6) Regression of the mean
7) Experimentation mortality
8) Demand characteristics
9) Experimenter bias
 16
QUALITATIVE Generalization (transferability)

3. Discuss the possibility of generalizing the findings of the study. [9]

(Answer 3-4 points fully elaborated, each point with 3 sentences or more)

"Transferability" is how we describe generalizability in qualitative research. Transferability is to what

extent could the findings be “transferred” to the population from which the sample was drawn?

Findings from a study can be transferred to settings and/or populations outside the study only if the
findings of a particular study are corroborated by findings of similar studies (for example, in multiple
case studies).

Representational (sample to population) generalization:

Can the findings be applied to the population from which the sample was drawn?

Example: A study was conducted in a local gym. Sample may not be representative if the
researcher only goes during morning, weekend, January (new year resolution), or just by the
treadmills.

The researcher should select a sample that is best representative of the population. This type of
generalization is difficult in qualitative research due to non probabilistic sampling.

Termed “population validity” (part of external validity) in quantitative research.

Inferential (case to case) generalization:

Can the findings be applied (or transferred) to another group of population, setting or context?

Example: The study was conducted in a local gym. Important variables should be considered before
applying the study to different gyms. Some variables include size of gym, fees of gym, location of
gym, types of activities in the gym and so on.

In order to achieve inferential generalization, the researcher should include thick descriptions so that
the reader has sufficient information to decide whether or not the context described is similar to the
new situation.

Related to “ecological validity” (part of external validity) in quantitative research.

Theoretical generalization: Can the findings generate a theory to be applied to another situation or
context?

This theory generated should show a clear relationship with the variables involved, that is applicable
to a different context. Theory plays a greater role in qualitative than quantitative research and
theoretical generalization is achievable through rigorous analysis and interpretation of the research
findings if data was saturated (new data will not give additional insights), descriptions were thick,
analysis was in depth and free of biases.

Similar to construct validity (part of internal validity) in quantitative research.

 17
QUALITATIVE Generalization - Representational/ Inferential/ Theoretical (Example on how to write)

3. Discuss the possibility of generalizing the findings of the study. [9]

The command term “discuss” requires candidates to offer a considered and balanced review of the
possibility of generalizing the findings of the study in the stimulus material. Conclusions should be
presented clearly and supported by appropriate knowledge of generalization in qualitative research as the
study in the stimulus material is qualitative.

The aim of the study was to find factors that influenced decision making in relation to drug use and the
inductive content analysis revealed a number of factors such as “desire to relax”, “decrease inhibition”,
“increase energy” or “increase motivation and get things done”.

Candidates could argue that generalization in this study could be a possibility depending on the richness of
the collected data but that generalization overall could only happen to some extent. Possible parts of an
argument could include but are not limited to:

● Generalization in qualitative research is not based on statistical representation as in quantitative

research. The study in the stimulus question is based on a rather small purposive sample, that is the
participants are selected based on the salient characteristics of having experience with drug use. If
the data is sufficiently rich and perhaps corroborated by other similar studies it may be possible to
generalize the findings to similar populations. However, as the participants came from very different
backgrounds and the only thing they had in common was that they used drugs (the selection
criteria) it is perhaps not a possibility after all.

● If theoretical concepts are developed based on the study these could be used to develop further
theory. It seems that this could be a possibility in this study because the findings that “social
pressure” is not the main factor in the decision to use drugs may be contrary to traditional theory
related to drug use.

● The inductive content analysis revealed a number of factors such as “desire to relax”, “decrease
inhibition”, “increase energy” or “increase motivation and get things done”. The findings also
indicated that media messages played a role and that drug use was decided rather by personal
choice than social pressure. The researchers argue that future research should take into account
the relative importance of each factor found in this study using a quantitative approach to research.
This indicates that the various factors identified in this study could be transferred to another study
and form the basis of a quantitative study, for example a survey.
 18
Qualitative Generalization - Representational/ Inferential/ Theoretical (Example on how to write)

The aim of the study was to examine trends in aggressive behavior during hockey tournaments. The study
utilized 79 male varsity ice hockey players at the university as participants. The researchers employed
cameras to record three games and analyzed the recordings using an operationalized checklist. Aggressive
behaviors were identified based on the "intent to harm" criterion, and 14 specific behaviors were labeled
as "aggression." A total of 74 aggressive behaviors were observed, with only 14 receiving on-ice
penalization.

Candidates could argue that generalization in this study could be a possibility depending on the richness of
the collected data but that generalization overall could only happen to some extent. Possible parts of an
argument could include but are not limited to:

Generalization in qualitative research is not based on statistical representation as in quantitative research.

The study in the stimulus question is based on a relatively small sample of male varsity ice hockey players.
In terms of representational/ sample to population generalisation, the findings may only be applicable to
similar populations of male varsity ice hockey players in similar tournament settings. However, the sample
size and specific context of the study may limit the generalizability of the findings to other populations or
different hockey settings. This type of generalization is difficult in qualitative research due to
non-probabilistic sampling.

The study focused on identifying trends in aggressive behavior during hockey tournaments. If the data
collected is sufficiently rich and comprehensive, it may be possible to generalize the observed trends to
other hockey tournaments or similar competitive contexts (inferential/ case to case generalisation).
However, it is important to consider potential variations across different levels of play, such as amateur
versus professional leagues or different age groups, which could affect the generalizability of the findings.

The researchers utilized an operationalized checklist to identify and categorize aggressive behaviors. If the
checklist and coding scheme used in this study are well-established and have been validated in previous
research, it increases the possibility of generalizing the findings. However, if the checklist is specific to this
study and lacks external validation, the generalizability of the findings may be limited.

If theoretical concepts are developed based on the study these could be used to develop further theory.
Though, the researcher need to make sure that rigorous analysis and interpretation of the research findings
are done if data was saturated (new data will not give additional insights), descriptions were thick, analysis
was in depth and free of biases.
It seems that study is not enough to develop theory as it does not show a clear relationship with the
variables involved, that is applicable to a different context.

Candidates may, in their discussion of generalization of findings from this qualitative research, briefly refer
to statistical generalization (quantitative research) as part of their argument. This should be given credit as
long as the main focus is on generalization from this qualitative research study.
 19
QUANTITATIVE : Statistical generalization

3. Discuss the possibility of generalizing the findings of the study. [9]

The command term “discuss” requires candidates to offer a considered and balanced review of the
possibility of generalizing the findings of the study in the stimulus material. Conclusions should be
presented clearly and supported by appropriate knowledge of generalization in qualitative research
as the study in the stimulus material is qualitative.

(Answer 3-4 points fully elaborated, each point with 3 sentences or more)

Generalization means drawing inferences from findings in this experiment to something outside the
study (external validity). Depends on the representativeness of the sample.

This is based on probability sampling and the results are applicable to the whole target population.

Statistical generalization (also accept: nomothetic generalization).

Participants representativeness: Characteristics of the sample represent the population?

Sampling Method: More generalisable if sampling is probabilistic (randomized), or may include self
selection bias.

Sample size: Large sample size will add statistical power, and make the data more generalisable
as large population size is more likely to level out any differences between participants.

Study replication: Potential for generalization is enhanced if replicated studies arrived at the same
conclusion, confirming validity of the findings.
 20
QUANTITATIVE - Statistical generalization (Example on how to write)

Discuss the possibility of generalizing/transferring the findings of the study.[9]

Generalization means drawing inferences from results of a study to something outside the study (external
validity). The study in the stimulus is quantitative. The most appropriate model of generalization would be
statistical generalization but that would require a random sample because this is typically representative of
the target population.

Discussion points related to the possibility of generalizing/transferring the findings of the study in the
stimulus material could include, but are not limited to:
● The sampling method (a convenience sample). In this study the population is university students in
North America enrolled in an introductory psychology course. The study used convenience sampling
and students could sign up for participation in the study or not (self-selection). This means that it is a
non-probability sample rather than a random sample (probability sampling).
● The sample was relatively small with only 40 participants and therefore the sample is not considered
statistically representative of the population even though the researchers had recruited an even
number of males and females.
● The fact that students received credit for participation could also result in selection bias. When there
is requirement to participate, students may be more likely to sign up for one study and not another
on the basis of a convenient appointment time, rather than because they are making an informed
choice about the kind of study they want to participate in.
● If the researchers added more participants to the sample it would enhance the possibility of
generalization, as well as adding to statistical power. The more participants, the greater the chance
that differences between participants will be balanced out, and therefore generalization is more
likely to happen.
● If replications of this study arrived at the same conclusion (planned replication) the potential for
generalization is enhanced. If the same theory of cause-effect relationship between multitasking and
lowered performance found support in additional studies it would be more likely to confirm validity of
the original findings. The result of this experiment has been supported by previous research and this
indicates some external validity of the findings.
● Candidates who use the terms generalization and transferability interchangeably should not be
penalized.
 21

QUANTITATIVE: Statistical generalization (Example on how to write)

Discuss the possibility of generalizing the findings of the study.[9]

The study in the stimulus material is a quantitative study so it is expected that candidates use terminology
related to generalization in quantitative research. Use of concepts related to qualitative research such as
“theoretical generalisation” and “inferential generalisation” should not be awarded credit.

The command term “discuss” requires candidates to offer a review of the possibility of generalizing the
findings of the study in the stimulus material.

Discussion related to the possibility of generalizing the findings of the study in the stimulus material could
include but are not limited to:
● Generalization means drawing inferences from findings in this experiment to something outside the
study (external validity). The study in the stimulus is quantitative and therefore a model of
generalization could be statistical generalization (also accept: nomothetic generalization). Although
the participants in this study are randomly allocated to the two conditions, the sample is not
randomized (as it was a convenience sample). Therefore,generalization would be problematic.
● In this study, the target population is psychology students who as part of their education are
expected to sign up for a certain number of research studies. The study used convenience
sampling, which is a non-probability sample, but it is also an easy and quick way to select a sample.
However, this sampling method has received a lot of criticism, as psychology students at
universities cannot be expected to represent a wider population.Therefore, it can be argued that it
might at best be possible to generalize these results to psychology students at universities. Some
would argue that a convenience sample only represents itself.
● The sampling method (based on convenience) is not considered statistically representative of a
target population as it suffers from self-selection bias. One way to ensure generalization in a study
is to choose a random sample (probability sampling).
● The fact that students received credit for participation could result in selection bias. Whenthere is a
requirement to participate, students may be more likely to sign up for one study and not another on
the basis of a convenient appointment time, rather than because they are making an informed
choice about the kind of study they want to participate in.
● The sample was relatively small with only 26 participants. However, the researchers had ensured
that the sample included both males and females as well as different ethnic groups. If the
researchers added more participants to the sample it would enhance the possibility of
generalization, as well as adding to statistical power. The more participants,the greater the chance
that differences between participants will be leveled out and therefore generalization is more likely
to be possible.
● If replications of this study arrived at the same conclusion, the potential for generalization is
enhanced. If the same theory of cause-effect relationship between social exclusion and decrease in
prosocial behavior found support in additional studies it would be more likely to confirm the validity
of the original findings.
22