RESEARCH METHODS IN SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY

Objectives:

After reading this chapter, you will be able to answer the following questions:

• What are the objectives of research in social psychology?

• What are different research methods in social psychology?

• What is archival research?

• What is meta-analysis?

Summary

The field of social psychology relies heavily on empirical research which is the systematic
investigation of observable phenomena (behavior, events), in the world. Researchers try to
collect information about behavior and events in an accurate and unbiased form. Although there
are many ways of collecting data about social behavior, most social psychological studies use
one or another of four main methods. These methods are surveys, field studies, naturalistic
observation, archival research based on content analyses, correlation method and experiments.
Meta-analysis is a technique that allows an investigator to bring order out of his apparent chaos.
For much of the twentieth century the participants in research by social psychologists often
White, often middle-class, and often college students. In the past 25 years, there has been
increasing interest in studying racial and ethnic minority groups in the United States, and
members of other cultures around the world.

Introduction

The field of social psychology relies heavily on empirical research which is the systematic
investigation of observable phenomena (behavior, events), in the world. Researchers try to
collect information about behavior and events in an accurate and unbiased form. This
information, which may be either quantitative or qualitative, enables social psychologists to
describe reality in detail and to develop theories about social behavior.

When conducting empirical research, investigators usually employ a methodology, which is a set
of systematic procedures that guide the collection and analyses of data. In a typical study,
investigators first develop a research design. Then they go into a laboratory or field setting and
collect the data. Next they code and analyze the data to test hypothesis and arrive at various
conclusions about the behaviors or events under investigation. Throughout this process,
investigators follow specific procedures to ensure the validity of the findings.
When investigators report their research to the wider community of social psychologists, they
describe not only the results but also the methodology used to obtain the results, by reporting
their methods; they make it possible for other investigators to independently verify their findings
by replicating the study. Other investigators might wish to replicate the study to see whether they
can obtain the same findings in other settings with different human subjects. Through this
process, investigators with differing perspectives can identify and eliminate biases in the original
study. If the results are replicable, they stand a better chance of being accepted by other social
psychologists as reliable findings.

RESEARCH METHODS

Although there are many ways of collecting data about social behavior, most social
psychological studies use one or another of four main methods. These methods are surveys,
naturalistic observation, archival research based on content analyses and experiments.

SURVEYS

A survey is a procedure for collecting information by asking members of some population a set
of questions and recording their responses. The survey technique is very useful for identifying
the average or a typical response to a question, as well as the distribution of responses within the
population. It is also useful for identifying how groups of respondents differ from one another.

Purpose of a Survey

Investigators often conduct surveys to obtain self-reports from individuals about their own
attributes- i.e. their attitudes, behavior, and experiences. Information of this type enables
investigators to discover the distribution of attributes in the population and to determine whether
a relationship exists between two or more attributes of interest. One form of survey- the public
opinion poll has become very common. Several organizations specialize in conducting surveys
that measure the frequency and strength of favorable or unfavorable attitudes toward public
issues, political figures, and candidates for office. These polls play significant role in politics in
few countries, for their findings increasingly influence public policy and the positions taken by
political figures.

Investigators also often use surveys to obtain data about various social problems. For instance
government agencies and individual researchers have conducted surveys on pregnancy and
contraception use among teenagers and on alcohol and drug use by teenagers. Information about
the extent of such activities and the people involved in them is requisite to developing effective
social policies.

Finally, investigators often conduct surveys with the primary objective of making basic
theoretical contributions to social psychology. For instance, many studies of socialization
processes and outcomes, psychological well-being, discrimination and prejudice, attitude
behavior relationship, and collective behavior have used survey method.

Types of surveys

There are two basic types of surveys- those based on interviews and those based on
questionnaires.

In an interview survey, a person serves as an interviewer and records the answers from the
respondents. To ensure that each respondent in the study receives the same questions, the
interviewer usually refers from an interview schedule. This schedule indicates the exact order
and wording of questions in certain studies, however, the interviewer has flexibility in
determining the exact order and wording of questions, but he or she is expected to make sure that
certain topics are covered. One advantage of using an interview is that the interviewer can adjust
the questioning to the respondent. That is, he or she can look for verbal or non-verbal signs that
the respondents does not understand a question and repeat or clarify the question as needed.

In a questionnaire survey, the questions appear on paper, and the respondents read and answer
them at their own pace. No interviewer is present. One advantage of questionnaires over
interviews is that questionnaires cost less to administer. That is, the cost to conduct interviews is
rather large as the interviewer needs to be trained; however, surveys using questionnaire method
are cost- effective. The major disadvantage of questionnaire lies in the response rate- the
percentage of people contacted who completes the survey. Whereas an interview study can
obtain response rates of 75-80 percent or more, mailed questionnaires rarely attain more than a
50 percent response rate. Because a high response rate is very desirable, this is a significant
disadvantage for mailed questionnaires.

A compromise between interviews and questionnaires is the telephone interview. This is the
standard method used by public opinion polling organizations. The telephone interview uses a
trained interviewer to ask the questions, but it sacrifices the visual feedback available in a face-to
face interview. It is cheaper than the face-to face interview, although it typically involves a
somewhat lower response rate. The researchers ensure that the measures they use have reliability
and validity.

The Questions

The phrasing of questions used in surveys requires close attention by investigator. Subtle
differences in the form, wording, and context of survey questions can produce differences in
responses. Certain guidelines are:

First, the more precise and focused a question, the greater will be its reliability and validity. If a
question is expressed in vague, ambiguous, abstract or global terms, respondents may interpret it
in different ways, and this in turn will produce uncontrolled variations in responses.
A second consideration in formulating survey questions is the exact choice of terms used. It is
based to avoid jargon or specialized terminology unless one is interviewing a sample of
specialists. Likewise, it is important to adjust questions to the educational and reading level of
the respondents.

A third consideration is the length of questions. Several studies have shown that questions of
moderate length elicit more complete answers than very short ones.

A fourth consideration is whether the topic under investigation is potentially a threatening or

embarrassing one. In general threatening questions requiring quantified answers are better asked
by presenting a range of alternative answers than by asking a question requiring an exact
number.

Measuring Attitudes

Perhaps the most common purpose of surveys is to measure people’s attitudes toward some
event, persons, or object. Because attitudes are mental states, and they cannot be directly
observed. The most direct way of finding out someone’s attitude is to ask a direct question and
record the person’s answer. It is also the technique used by newspaper and television reporters.
To make the process more systematic, social psychologists use several methods, including the
single-item measure, like Likert scales, and semantic differential techniques.

Strengths of Surveys

Than observational studies, surveys can provide an accurate and precise description of the
characteristics of a specific population at a moderate cost. Using measures that are reliable and
valid, employing a sampling design that guarantees representativeness, and ensuring a high
response rate, the survey can produce a clear portrait of the attitudes and social characteristics of
a population.

Weaknesses of Surveys

Both questionnaires and interviews rely on self reports by respondents. Under certain conditions,
however, self-reports can be invalid sources of information.

First, some people may not respond truthfully to questions about themselves.

Second, even when the respondents wants to report honestly, they may give wrong information
due to imperfect recall or poor memory, especially in surveys investigating the past (for example,
historical events or childhood memories).

Third, some respondents answering self-report questions have a tendency to fall into a response
set. That is, they answer all questions the way (for example, always agree or disagree) or they
give extreme answers too frequently. If many respondents adopt a response set, this will
introduce bias into the survey’s results.
FIELD STUDIES AND NATURALISTIC OBSERVATION

Observational research – often termed a field study- . Typically, the data are collected by one or
more researchers who directly observe the activity of people and record information about it.
Field studies have been used to investigate many forms of social behavior in their natural
settings. For instance, researchers have observed and recorded data about social interaction
between judges and lawyers in the court room, between teachers and students in the class room,
between couples in informal settings.

Field studies are usually less intrusive than surveys or experiments. A field study involves
nothing more intrusive than recording an observation about the behavior of interest.

Field study differs in how the observers collect and record information. In some studies,
observers watch carefully while the phenomenon of interest is occurring and then make notes
about their observations from memory at a later time. The advantage of recording afterward is
that the observer is less likely to arouse curiosity, suspicion, or antagonism in the participants. In
other studies, the observers may record field notes at the same time that they observe the
behavior. For instance, in research on police-citizen encounters, trained observers coded the
interaction as it occurred. Although taking notes in this manner could potentially be intrusive, it
permits more details to be recorded and minimizes any distortion by selective memory on the
part of the investigator.

In still other field studies, researchers make audio or video recordings of interaction, and then
analyze the tapes later. The tape recordings may seem a superior alternative to the use of human
observers, but this is not always the case. The use of recordings minimizes the information
obtained, but it can also inadvertently influence behavior if the participants discover that they are
being taped.

Participant Observation

When the behavior of interest occurs in public settings, such as restaurants, courtrooms, or retail
stores, researchers can simply go to the settings and observe the actions directly. The researchers
do not need to interact with the people being observed or reveal their identities. However, when
the behavior of interest is private or restricted in nature, observation is usually more difficult. To
investigate activities of this type, researchers occasionally use the technique of participant
observation. In participant observation, members of the research team not only make systematic
observations of others’ behavior but also interact with them and play an active role in the
ongoing events. Frequently, the fact of being an active participant enables the investigators to
approach and observe behavior that otherwise would be inaccessible. In participant observation,
researchers usually do not engage in overt coding or any other activity that would disrupt the
normal flow of interaction. In some instances, they may even need to use an assumed identity,
lest their true identity as investigators disrupt the interaction.
Unobtrusive Measures

Field studies sometimes use unobtrusive measures, which are measurement techniques that do
not intrude on the behavior under study and that avoid causing a reaction from the people whose
behavior is being studied. For example, some unobtrusive measures rely on the physical
evidence left behind by people after they have exited from a situation.

One example is the analysis of inventory records and bar bills to unobtrusively measure the
alcohol consumption patterns at various night clubs and bars.

Strengths and Weaknesses of Field Studies

Like any research method, field studies have both strengths and weaknesses. A major strength is
that observational techniques allow researchers to study social activity in real-world settings.
Careful observation can provide a wealth of information about behavior as it actually occurs in
natural settings.

Weaknesses of field studies include their sensitivity to the specific recording methods used.
Observations recorded after the fact are often less reliable and valid than those recorded on the
spot or those based on audio-videotaping. Furthermore, the validity of the observations may
depend in part on the identities that the investigators publicly project while making their
observations; validity may be destroyed if the researchers have been operating covertly and the
subjects suddenly discover that they are under observation.

In some cases, field investigators do not get informed consent from the people being observed
prior to the collection of data. Permission for using the data is sought only after the behavior has
been observed or the conversation tape-recorded. Some people consider this as a serious
drawback and object to participant observation on ethical grounds. Of course, this concern has to
be weighed against the fact that if permission were sought in advance, the behavior under
investigation might never occur or might take a different form.

ARCHIVAL RESEARCH

Although social psychological researchers often prefer to collect original data, it is sometimes
possible to test hypotheses and theories by using data that already existed. The term archival
research denotes the acquisition and analyses of information collected previously by others.
When archival data of suitable quality exist, a researcher may decide that analyzing them is
preferable to collecting and analyzing new data. Archival research usually costs less than
alternative methods.

There are many sources of archival data: the government agencies, insurance companies, and banks.
These typically entail over-time data with respect to various measures of financial and economic
performances. Another source of archival data is newspapers. Newspaper articles are a rich source of
information about past events.
Strengths and Weaknesses of Archival Research

One significant advantage of archival research is its comparatively low cost. By reusing existing
information, the investigator avoids the cost of avoiding new data. A second advantage is that an
investigator may complete a study more quickly than otherwise. A third advantage is that an
investigator can test hypotheses about phenomenon that occur over extended period of time.

One major disadvantage of archival research is the lack of control over the type and quality of
information. An investigator must work with whatever others have collected. This may or may
not include data on all the variables the investigator wishes to study. Moreover, there may be
doubts regarding the quality of the original research design or the procedures used for collecting
data. Another disadvantage is that some sets of records contain large amount of inconsistent or
missing information. Obviously this will hinder the study and limit the validity of any findings.

EXPERIMENTS

The experiment is the most highly controlled method of the research methodologies available to
social psychologists, and it is a powerful method for establishing causality between variables.
For a study to be a true experiment, it must have two specific characteristics:

1. The researcher must manipulate one or more of the independent variables that are
hypothesized to have a causal impact on the independent variable(s) of concern.
2. The researcher must assign the participants randomly to the various treatments- that is, to
the different levels of each of the independent variables.

Random assignment is desirable because mitigates the effects of extraneous variables. Thus,
random assignment enables the investigator to infer that any observed differences between
groups on the dependent variables are due only to the effect of the independent variable(s), not to
extraneous variables.

Laboratory and Field Experiments

It is useful to distinguish between laboratory experiments and field experiments. Laboratory

experiments are those conducted in a laboratory setting, where the investigator can control much
of the participants’ physical surroundings. This control enables the experimenter to measure and
manipulate the independent variables.

Field experiments, in contrast, with laboratory experiments, are studies where investigators
manipulate variables in natural, non-laboratory settings. Usually these settings are already
familiar to the participants. Compared with laboratory experiments, field experiments have the
advantage of high external validity. When conducted in natural and uncontrived settings, they
usually have greater mundane realism than laboratory experiments. Moreover, participants in
field experiments may not be particularly conscious for their status and experimental subjects- a
fact that reduces participants’ reactivity. The primary weakness of field experiments, of course,
is that in natural settings, experimenters sometimes have difficulty manipulating independent
variables exactly as they would wish and often have little control over extraneous variables. This
means that the internal validity of field experiments is often lower than in comparison with
laboratory experiments.

Strengths of Experiments

The strength of experimental studies lies in their high level of internal validity. This makes
experiments especially well suited for testing causal hypothesis. Experiments excel over other
methods.

Field experiments, however, often surpass laboratory experiments with respect to external
validity. Experiments have been used to test many causal hypotheses drawn from social
exchange theory and cognitive theory. Hundreds of experiments have been conducted in an effort
to identify the cause of racial and ethnic prejudice.

Weaknesses of Experiments

One weakness of experimentation is that investigators cannot study many social phenomena by
this method. Often, they lack the capacity to manipulate the independent variables of interest or
to implement random assignment. Numerous ethical, financial, and practical considerations in
everyday life restrict what investigators can manipulate experimentally.

Some experiments take place in settings that seem artificial to participants and have low external
validity, which is the extent to which the experimental settings appear similar to natural,
everyday situations.

Correlation Method

At various times, one would have probably noticed that some events appear to be related to the
occurrence of others; as one event changes, there would be changes in other event too. For
example, when interest rates rise, the stock market often falls. When two events are related in
this way, they are said to be correlated or that a correlation exists between them. The term
correlation refers to a tendency for one event to change as the other changes. When a correlation
exists, it is possible to predict one variable from information about one or more other variables.

Using correlational method, social psychologists make careful observations of each variable and
then perform appropriate statistics to determine whether, and to what extent, different variables
are related to each other. For example, to find out the relationship between good mood and
helping behavior, researchers collect data from participants using questionnaires that assess their
mood fluctuations, how many times they are helpful to other each day, how many times do they
do a favor, or make a donation etc… and based on results determine the relationship between
good mood and helping behavior.
However, this method only determines the relationship and not the cause and effect relationship
between the variables. Despite this drawback, this method is useful in natural settings, as a large
amount of information can be obtained in a relatively short period of time.

META-ANALYSIS

Social psychologists have been conducted empirical research for almost a century. There have
been dozens and sometimes hundreds of studies of some phenomena. Unfortunately, the results
of different studies on a specific question do not always agree. For instance, some studies show
that contact with members of a group produces more positive attitudes (reproduces prejudice)
towards that group; other studies find that contact has no effect on attitudes. Meta-analysis is a
technique that allows an investigator to bring order out of his apparent chaos.

Meta-analysis is a statistical technique that allows researcher to combine the results from all
previous studies on a question to determine what they conclude. The researchers locate all
previous studies on the question using computerized searches of libraries and databases. Then,
the investigator applies statistics that measure how big the difference is between the results and
averages final result over all the studies that were located.

RESEARCH IN DIVERSE POPULATIONS

For much of the twentieth century the participants in research by social psychologists often
White, often middle-class, and often college students. In the past 25 years, there has been
increasing interest in studying racial and ethnic minority groups in the United States, and
members of other cultures around the world.

While conducting research on diverse groups on should take into account the cultural history and
present social and economic circumstances for the group(s). the measures must be linguistically
equivalent- that is, be worded so that they are understood in the same way by all participants; if
the participants speak a different primary language from that of the instrument, a careful process
of translation should be employed to produce equivalent instruments. Measures should be
standardized or interpreted using data from the population(s) being studied.