explain the experimental method in psychology

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center

experimental psychology

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• American Psychological Association - Understanding Experimental Psychology

experimental psychology , a method of studying psychological phenomena and processes. The experimental method in psychology attempts to account for the activities of animals (including humans) and the functional organization of mental processes by manipulating variables that may give rise to behaviour; it is primarily concerned with discovering laws that describe manipulable relationships. The term generally connotes all areas of psychology that use the experimental method.

These areas include the study of sensation and perception , learning and memory , motivation , and biological psychology . There are experimental branches in many other areas, however, including child psychology , clinical psychology , educational psychology , and social psychology . Usually the experimental psychologist deals with normal, intact organisms; in biological psychology, however, studies are often conducted with organisms modified by surgery, radiation, drug treatment, or long-standing deprivations of various kinds or with organisms that naturally present organic abnormalities or emotional disorders. See also psychophysics .

Experimental Methods In Psychology

March 7, 2021 - paper 2 psychology in context | research methods.

There are three experimental methods in the field of psychology; Laboratory, Field and Natural Experiments. Each of the experimental methods holds different characteristics in relation to; the manipulation of the IV, the control of the EVs and the ability to accurately replicate the study in exactly the same way.

When conducting research, it is important to create an aim and a hypothesis,  click here  to learn more about the formation of aims and hypotheses.

We're not around right now. But you can send us an email and we'll get back to you, asap.

Experimental Method

The experimental method.

Experiments are one of the most popular and useful research methods in psychology. The key types are laboratory and field experiments.

Role in psychology

• Experiments play a major role throughout psychology.
• As a method, experiments allow one variable to be manipulated while keeping everything the same.
• This allows researchers to show cause and effect.

Laboratory experiments

• Some experiments take place under controlled condition, such as in a university room supervised by the researchers.
• These are called laboratory (or ‘lab’) experiments.
• The advantage of laboratory experiments is that they increase the level of control that a researcher can have.
• But they reduce the level of ecological validity of the research.

Field experiments

• Other experiments take place in a participant’s natural surroundings, such as their school or workplace.
• These are called field experiments.
• The advantage of field experiments is that they increase the ecological validity of the study by making the surroundings more realistic.
• But they reduce the level of control.

True experiments

• Both field experiments and lab experiments control the variables under investigation, and randomly allocate participants to groups.
• These characteristics mean that they are true experiments.

Quasi-Experiments

Quasi-experiments are not true experiments because they lack control over the experimental groups used.

Lack of random allocation

• For example, if one of the variables under investigation is gender, people can’t be randomly allocated to ‘male’ and ‘female’ conditions.
• A study is termed a quasi-experiment if it lacks random allocation to groups but is like a true experiment in most or all other ways.

Examples of quasi-experiments

• Other examples of quasi-experiments include studies which compare different types of personality (e.g. introverts versus extroverts) or compare people who have a psychological disorder with a control group who do not.
• Such studies cannot randomly allocate people to groups.

Quasi vs lab

• Quasi-experiments could take place in a lab, and all other aspects of the research and data gathering can be controlled.
• This means they are easy to mix up with laboratory experiments.

Natural Experiments

Natural experiments are logically similar to true experiments, but the situation happens by itself and so is completely uncontrolled by the researcher.

• For example, it wouldn’t be ethically correct to expose people to a lot of stress to investigate its effects.
• In such situations, a researcher may use a natural experiment.

Similarity to true experiments

• For example, they could compare the educational outcomes of school pupils who experience a lot of stress versus those who do not.

Differences to true experiments

• In contrast to a true experiment or a quasi-experiment, the variable under investigation happens by itself and so is completely uncontrolled by the researcher.
• The researcher also has no control at all over who is in each ‘experimental’ group.

Location of natural experiments

• Because natural experiments are not set up by the researcher, they always take place in participants’ everyday surroundings such as their home or school.
• This means they are easy to mix up with field experiments.

1 Social Influence

1.1 Social Influence

1.1.1 Conformity

1.1.2 Asch (1951)

1.1.3 Sherif (1935)

1.1.4 Conformity to Social Roles

1.1.5 BBC Prison Study

1.1.6 End of Topic Test - Conformity

1.1.7 Obedience

1.1.8 Analysing Milgram's Experiment

1.1.9 Agentic State & Legitimate Authority

1.1.10 Variables of Obedience

1.1.11 Resistance to Social Influence

1.1.12 Minority Influence & Social Change

1.1.13 Minority Influence & Social Impact Theory

1.1.14 End of Topic Test - Social Influences

1.1.15 Exam-Style Question - Conformity

1.1.16 Top Grade AO2/AO3 - Social Influence

2.1.1 Multi-Store Model of Memory

2.1.2 Short-Term vs Long-Term Memory

2.1.3 Long-Term Memory

2.1.4 Support for the Multi-Store Model of Memory

2.1.5 Duration Studies

2.1.6 Capacity Studies

2.1.7 Coding Studies

2.1.8 The Working Memory Model

2.1.9 The Working Memory Model 2

2.1.10 Support for the Working Memory Model

2.1.11 Explanations for Forgetting

2.1.12 Studies on Interference

2.1.13 Cue-Dependent Forgetting

2.1.14 Eye Witness Testimony - Loftus & Palmer

2.1.15 Eye Witness Testimony Loftus

2.1.16 Eyewitness Testimony - Post-Event Discussion

2.1.17 Eyewitness Testimony - Age & Misleading Questions

2.1.18 Cognitive Interview

2.1.19 Cognitive Interview - Geiselman & Fisher

2.1.20 End of Topic Test - Memory

2.1.21 Exam-Style Question - Memory

2.1.22 A-A* (AO3/4) - Memory

3 Attachment

3.1 Attachment

3.1.1 Caregiver-Infant Interaction

3.1.2 Condon & Sander (1974)

3.1.3 Schaffer & Emerson (1964)

3.1.4 Multiple Attachments

3.1.5 Studies on the Role of the Father

3.1.6 Animal Studies of Attachment

3.1.7 Explanations of Attachment

3.1.8 Attachment Types - Strange Situation

3.1.9 Cultural Differences in Attachment

3.1.10 Disruption of Attachment

3.1.11 Disruption of Attachment - Privation

3.1.12 Overcoming the Effects of Disruption

3.1.13 The Effects of Institutionalisation

3.1.14 Early Attachment

3.1.15 Critical Period of Attachment

3.1.16 End of Topic Test - Attachment

3.1.17 Exam-Style Question - Attachment

3.1.18 Top Grade AO2/AO3 - Attachment

4 Psychopathology

4.1 Psychopathology

4.1.1 Definitions of Abnormality

4.1.2 Definitions of Abnormality 2

4.1.3 Phobias, Depression & OCD

4.1.4 Phobias: Behavioural Approach

4.1.5 Evaluation of Behavioural Explanations of Phobias

4.1.6 Depression: Cognitive Approach

4.1.7 OCD: Biological Approach

4.1.8 Evidence for the Biological Approach

4.1.9 End of Topic Test - Psychopathy

4.1.10 Exam-Style Question - Phobias

4.1.11 Top Grade AO2/AO3 - Psychopathology

5 Approaches in Psychology

5.1 Approaches in Psychology

5.1.1 Psychology as a Science

5.1.2 Origins of Psychology

5.1.3 Reductionism & Problems with Introspection

5.1.4 The Behaviourist Approach - Classical Conditioning

5.1.5 Pavlov's Experiment

5.1.6 Little Albert Study

5.1.7 The Behaviourist Approach - Operant Conditioning

5.1.8 Social Learning Theory

5.1.9 The Cognitive Approach 1

5.1.10 The Cognitive Approach 2

5.1.11 The Biological Approach

5.1.12 Gottesman (1991) - Twin Studies

5.1.13 Brain Scanning

5.1.14 Structure of Personality & Little Hans

5.1.15 The Psychodynamic Approach (A2 only)

5.1.16 Humanistic Psychology (A2 only)

5.1.17 Aronoff (1957) (A2 Only)

5.1.18 Rogers' Client-Centred Therapy (A2 only)

5.1.19 End of Topic Test - Approaches in Psychology

5.1.20 Exam-Style Question - Approaches in Psychology

5.2 Comparison of Approaches (A2 only)

5.2.1 Psychodynamic Approach

5.2.2 Cognitive Approach

5.2.3 Biological Approach

5.2.4 Behavioural Approach

5.2.5 End of Topic Test - Comparison of Approaches

6 Biopsychology

6.1 Biopsychology

6.1.1 Nervous System Divisions

6.1.2 Neuron Structure & Function

6.1.3 Neurotransmitters

6.1.4 Endocrine System Function

6.1.5 Fight or Flight Response

6.1.6 The Brain (A2 only)

6.1.7 Localisation of Brain Function (A2 only)

6.1.8 Studying the Brain (A2 only)

6.1.9 CIMT (A2 Only) & Postmortem Examinations

6.1.10 Biological Rhythms (A2 only)

6.1.11 Studies on Biological Rhythms (A2 Only)

6.1.12 End of Topic Test - Biopsychology

6.1.13 Top Grade AO2/AO3 - Biopsychology

7 Research Methods

7.1 Research Methods

7.1.1 Experimental Method

7.1.2 Observational Techniques

7.1.3 Covert, Overt & Controlled Observation

7.1.4 Self-Report Techniques

7.1.5 Correlations

7.1.6 Exam-Style Question - Research Methods

7.1.7 End of Topic Test - Research Methods

7.2 Scientific Processes

7.2.1 Aims, Hypotheses & Sampling

7.2.2 Pilot Studies & Design

7.2.3 Questionnaires

7.2.4 Variables & Control

7.2.5 Demand Characteristics & Investigator Effects

7.2.6 Ethics

7.2.7 Limitations of Ethical Guidelines

7.2.8 Consent & Protection from Harm Studies

7.2.9 Peer Review & The Economy

7.2.10 Validity (A2 only)

7.2.11 Reliability (A2 only)

7.2.12 Features of Science (A2 only)

7.2.13 Paradigms & Falsifiability (A2 only)

7.2.14 Scientific Report (A2 only)

7.2.15 Scientific Report 2 (A2 only)

7.2.16 End of Topic Test - Scientific Processes

7.3 Data Handling & Analysis

7.3.1 Types of Data

7.3.2 Descriptive Statistics

7.3.3 Correlation

7.3.4 Evaluation of Descriptive Statistics

7.3.5 Presentation & Display of Data

7.3.6 Levels of Measurement (A2 only)

7.3.7 Content Analysis (A2 only)

7.3.8 Case Studies (A2 only)

7.3.9 Thematic Analysis (A2 only)

7.3.10 End of Topic Test - Data Handling & Analysis

7.4 Inferential Testing

7.4.1 Introduction to Inferential Testing

7.4.2 Sign Test

7.4.3 Piaget Conservation Experiment

7.4.4 Non-Parametric Tests

8 Issues & Debates in Psychology (A2 only)

8.1 Issues & Debates in Psychology (A2 only)

8.1.1 Culture Bias

8.1.2 Sub-Culture Bias

8.1.3 Gender Bias

8.1.4 Ethnocentrism

8.1.5 Cross Cultural Research

8.1.6 Free Will & Determinism

8.1.7 Comparison of Free Will & Determinism

8.1.8 Reductionism & Holism

8.1.9 Reductionist & Holistic Approaches

8.1.10 Nature-Nurture Debate

8.1.11 Interactionist Approach

8.1.12 Nature-Nurture Methods

8.1.13 Nature-Nurture Approaches

8.1.14 Idiographic & Nomothetic Approaches

8.1.15 Socially Sensitive Research

8.1.16 End of Topic Test - Issues and Debates

9 Option 1: Relationships (A2 only)

9.1 Relationships: Sexual Relationships (A2 only)

9.1.1 Sexual Selection & Human Reproductive Behaviour

9.1.2 Intersexual & Intrasexual Selection

9.1.3 Evaluation of Sexual Selection Behaviour

9.1.4 Factors Affecting Attraction: Self-Disclosure

9.1.5 Evaluation of Self-Disclosure Theory

9.1.6 Self Disclosure in Computer Communication

9.1.7 Factors Affecting Attraction: Physical Attributes

9.1.8 Matching Hypothesis Studies

9.1.9 Factors Affecting Physical Attraction

9.1.10 Factors Affecting Attraction: Filter Theory 1

9.1.11 Factors Affecting Attraction: Filter Theory 2

9.1.12 Evaluation of Filter Theory

9.1.13 End of Topic Test - Sexual Relationships

9.2 Relationships: Romantic Relationships (A2 only)

9.2.1 Social Exchange Theory

9.2.2 Evaluation of Social Exchange Theory

9.2.3 Equity Theory

9.2.4 Evaluation of Equity Theory

9.2.5 Rusbult’s Investment Model

9.2.6 Evaluation of Rusbult's Investment Model

9.2.7 Relationship Breakdown

9.2.8 Studies on Relationship Breakdown

9.2.9 Evaluation of Relationship Breakdown

9.2.10 End of Topic Test - Romantic relationships

9.3 Relationships: Virtual & Parasocial (A2 only)

9.3.1 Virtual Relationships in Social Media

9.3.2 Evaluation of Reduced Cues & Hyperpersonal

9.3.3 Parasocial Relationships

9.3.4 Attachment Theory & Parasocial Relationships

9.3.5 Evaluation of Parasocial Relationship Theories

9.3.6 End of Topic Test - Virtual & Parasocial Realtions

10 Option 1: Gender (A2 only)

10.1 Gender (A2 only)

10.1.1 Sex, Gender & Androgyny

10.1.2 Gender Identity Disorder

10.1.3 Biological & Social Explanations of GID

10.1.4 Biological Influences on Gender

10.1.5 Effects of Hormones on Gender

10.1.6 End of Topic Test - Gender 1

10.1.7 Kohlberg’s Theory of Gender Constancy

10.1.8 Evaluation of Kohlberg's Theory

10.1.9 Gender Schema Theory

10.1.10 Psychodynamic Approach to Gender Development 1

10.1.11 Psychodynamic Approach to Gender Development 2

10.1.12 Social Approach to Gender Development

10.1.13 Criticisms of Social Theory

10.1.14 End of Topic Test - Gender 2

10.1.15 Media Influence on Gender Development

10.1.16 Cross Cultural Research

10.1.17 Childcare & Gender Roles

10.1.18 End of Topic Test - Gender 3

11 Option 1: Cognition & Development (A2 only)

11.1 Cognition & Development (A2 only)

11.1.1 Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development 1

11.1.2 Piaget's Theory of Cognitive Development 2

11.1.3 Schema Accommodation Assimilation & Equilibration

11.1.4 Piaget & Inhelder’s Three Mountains Task (1956)

11.1.5 Conservation & Class Inclusion

11.1.6 Evaluation of Piaget

11.1.7 End of Topic Test - Cognition & Development 1

11.1.8 Vygotsky

11.1.9 Evaluation of Vygotsky

11.1.10 Baillargeon

11.1.11 Baillargeon's studies

11.1.12 Evaluation of Baillargeon

11.1.13 End of Topic Test - Cognition & Development 2

11.1.14 Sense of Self & Theory of Mind

11.1.15 Baron-Cohen Studies

11.1.16 Selman’s Five Levels of Perspective Taking

11.1.17 Biological Basis of Social Cognition

11.1.18 Evaluation of Biological Basis of Social Cognition

11.1.19 Important Issues in Social Neuroscience

11.1.20 End of Topic Test - Cognition & Development 3

11.1.21 Top Grade AO2/AO3 - Cognition & Development

12 Option 2: Schizophrenia (A2 only)

12.1 Schizophrenia: Diagnosis (A2 only)

12.1.1 Classification & Diagnosis

12.1.2 Reliability & Validity of Diagnosis

12.1.3 Gender & Cultural Bias

12.1.4 Pinto (2017) & Copeland (1971)

12.1.5 End of Topic Test - Scizophrenia Diagnosis

12.2 Schizophrenia: Treatment (A2 only)

12.2.1 Family-Based Psychological Explanations

12.2.2 Evaluation of Family-Based Explanations

12.2.3 Cognitive Explanations

12.2.4 Drug Therapies

12.2.5 Evaluation of Drug Therapies

12.2.6 Biological Explanations for Schizophrenia

12.2.7 Dopamine Hypothesis

12.2.8 End of Topic Test - Schizoprenia Treatment 1

12.2.9 Psychological Therapies 1

12.2.10 Psychological Therapies 2

12.2.11 Evaluation of Psychological Therapies

12.2.12 Interactionist Approach - Diathesis-Stress Model

12.2.13 Interactionist Approach - Triggers & Treatment

12.2.14 Evaluation of the Interactionist Approach

12.2.15 End of Topic Test - Scizophrenia Treatments 2

13 Option 2: Eating Behaviour (A2 only)

13.1 Eating Behaviour (A2 only)

13.1.1 Explanations for Food Preferences

13.1.2 Birch et al (1987) & Lowe et al (2004)

13.1.3 Control of Eating Behaviours

13.1.4 Control of Eating Behaviour: Leptin

13.1.5 Biological Explanations for Anorexia Nervosa

13.1.6 Psychological Explanations: Family Systems Theory

13.1.7 Psychological Explanations: Social Learning Theory

13.1.8 Psychological Explanations: Cognitive Theory

13.1.9 Biological Explanations for Obesity

13.1.10 Biological Explanations: Studies

13.1.11 Psychological Explanations for Obesity

13.1.12 Psychological Explanations: Studies

13.1.13 End of Topic Test - Eating Behaviour

14 Option 2: Stress (A2 only)

14.1 Stress (A2 only)

14.1.1 Physiology of Stress

14.1.2 Role of Stress in Illness

14.1.3 Role of Stress in Illness: Studies

14.1.4 Social Readjustment Rating Scales

14.1.5 Hassles & Uplifts Scales

14.1.6 Stress, Workload & Control

14.1.7 Stress Level Studies

14.1.8 End of Topic Test - Stress 1

14.1.9 Physiological Measures of Stress

14.1.10 Individual Differences

14.1.11 Stress & Gender

14.1.12 Drug Therapy & Biofeedback for Stress

14.1.13 Stress Inoculation Therapy

14.1.14 Social Support & Stress

14.1.15 End of Topic Test - Stress 2

15 Option 3: Aggression (A2 only)

15.1 Aggression: Physiological (A2 only)

15.1.1 Neural Mechanisms

15.1.2 Serotonin

15.1.3 Hormonal Mechanisms

15.1.4 Genetic Factors

15.1.5 Genetic Factors 2

15.1.6 End of Topic Test - Aggression: Physiological 1

15.1.7 Ethological Explanation

15.1.8 Innate Releasing Mechanisms & Fixed Action Pattern

15.1.9 Evolutionary Explanations

15.1.10 Buss et al (1992) - Sex Differences in Jealousy

15.1.11 Evaluation of Evolutionary Explanations

15.1.12 End of Topic Test - Aggression: Physiological 2

15.2 Aggression: Social Psychological (A2 only)

15.2.1 Social Psychological Explanation

15.2.2 Buss (1963) - Frustration/Aggression

15.2.3 Social Psychological Explanation 2

15.2.4 Social Learning Theory (SLT) 1

15.2.5 Social Learning Theory (SLT) 2

15.2.6 Limitations of Social Learning Theory (SLT)

15.2.7 Deindividuation

15.2.8 Deindividuation 2

15.2.9 Deindividuation - Diener et al (1976)

15.2.10 End of Topic Test - Aggression: Social Psychology

15.2.11 Institutional Aggression: Prisons

15.2.12 Evaluation of Dispositional & Situational

15.2.13 Influence of Computer Games

15.2.14 Influence of Television

15.2.15 Evaluation of Studies on Media

15.2.16 Desensitisation & Disinhibition

15.2.17 Cognitive Priming

15.2.18 End of Topic Test - Aggression: Social Psychology

16 Option 3: Forensic Psychology (A2 only)

16.1 Forensic Psychology (A2 only)

16.1.1 Defining Crime

16.1.2 Measuring Crime

16.1.3 Offender Profiling

16.1.4 Evaluation of Offender Profiling

16.1.5 John Duffy Case Study

16.1.6 Biological Explanations 1

16.1.7 Biological Explanations 2

16.1.8 Evaluation of the Biological Explanation

16.1.9 Cognitive Explanations

16.1.10 Moral Reasoning

16.1.11 Psychodynamic Explanation 1

16.1.12 Psychodynamic Explanation 2

16.1.13 End of Topic Test - Forensic Psychology 1

16.1.14 Differential Association Theory

16.1.15 Custodial Sentencing

16.1.16 Effects of Prison

16.1.17 Evaluation of the Effects of Prison

16.1.18 Recidivism

16.1.19 Behavioural Treatments & Therapies

16.1.20 Effectiveness of Behavioural Treatments

16.1.21 Restorative Justice

16.1.22 End of Topic Test - Forensic Psychology 2

17 Option 3: Addiction (A2 only)

17.1 Addiction (A2 only)

17.1.1 Definition

17.1.2 Brain Neurochemistry Explanation

17.1.3 Learning Theory Explanation

17.1.4 Evaluation of a Learning Theory Explanation

17.1.5 Cognitive Bias

17.1.6 Griffiths on Cognitive Bias

17.1.7 Evaluation of Cognitive Theory (A2 only)

17.1.8 End of Topic Test - Addiction 1

17.1.9 Gambling Addiction & Learning Theory

17.1.10 Social Influences on Addiction 1

17.1.11 Social Influences on Addiction 2

17.1.12 Personal Influences on Addiction

17.1.13 Genetic Explanations of Addiction

17.1.14 End of Topic Test - Addiction 2

17.2 Treating Addiction (A2 only)

17.2.1 Drug Therapy

17.2.2 Behavioural Interventions

17.2.3 Cognitive Behavioural Therapy

17.2.4 Theory of Reasoned Action

17.2.5 Theory of Planned Behaviour

17.2.6 Six Stage Model of Behaviour Change

17.2.7 End of Topic Test - Treating Addiction

Jump to other topics

Unlock your full potential with GoStudent tutoring

Affordable 1:1 tutoring from the comfort of your home

Tutors are matched to your specific learning needs

30+ school subjects covered

Top Grade AO2/AO3 - Biopsychology

Observational Techniques

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Experimental Research

23 Experiment Basics

Learning objectives.

• Explain what an experiment is and recognize examples of studies that are experiments and studies that are not experiments.
• Distinguish between the manipulation of the independent variable and control of extraneous variables and explain the importance of each.
• Recognize examples of confounding variables and explain how they affect the internal validity of a study.
• Define what a control condition is, explain its purpose in research on treatment effectiveness, and describe some alternative types of control conditions.

What Is an Experiment?

As we saw earlier in the book, an  experiment is a type of study designed specifically to answer the question of whether there is a causal relationship between two variables. In other words, whether changes in one variable (referred to as an independent variable ) cause a change in another variable (referred to as a dependent variable ). Experiments have two fundamental features. The first is that the researchers manipulate, or systematically vary, the level of the independent variable. The different levels of the independent variable are called conditions . For example, in Darley and Latané’s experiment, the independent variable was the number of witnesses that participants believed to be present. The researchers manipulated this independent variable by telling participants that there were either one, two, or five other students involved in the discussion, thereby creating three conditions. For a new researcher, it is easy to confuse these terms by believing there are three independent variables in this situation: one, two, or five students involved in the discussion, but there is actually only one independent variable (number of witnesses) with three different levels or conditions (one, two or five students). The second fundamental feature of an experiment is that the researcher exerts control over, or minimizes the variability in, variables other than the independent and dependent variable. These other variables are called extraneous variables . Darley and Latané tested all their participants in the same room, exposed them to the same emergency situation, and so on. They also randomly assigned their participants to conditions so that the three groups would be similar to each other to begin with. Notice that although the words  manipulation  and  control  have similar meanings in everyday language, researchers make a clear distinction between them. They manipulate  the independent variable by systematically changing its levels and control  other variables by holding them constant.

Manipulation of the Independent Variable

Again, to  manipulate an independent variable means to change its level systematically so that different groups of participants are exposed to different levels of that variable, or the same group of participants is exposed to different levels at different times. For example, to see whether expressive writing affects people’s health, a researcher might instruct some participants to write about traumatic experiences and others to write about neutral experiences. The different levels of the independent variable are referred to as conditions , and researchers often give the conditions short descriptive names to make it easy to talk and write about them. In this case, the conditions might be called the “traumatic condition” and the “neutral condition.”

Notice that the manipulation of an independent variable must involve the active intervention of the researcher. Comparing groups of people who differ on the independent variable before the study begins is not the same as manipulating that variable. For example, a researcher who compares the health of people who already keep a journal with the health of people who do not keep a journal has not manipulated this variable and therefore has not conducted an experiment. This distinction  is important because groups that already differ in one way at the beginning of a study are likely to differ in other ways too. For example, people who choose to keep journals might also be more conscientious, more introverted, or less stressed than people who do not. Therefore, any observed difference between the two groups in terms of their health might have been caused by whether or not they keep a journal, or it might have been caused by any of the other differences between people who do and do not keep journals. Thus the active manipulation of the independent variable is crucial for eliminating potential alternative explanations for the results.

Of course, there are many situations in which the independent variable cannot be manipulated for practical or ethical reasons and therefore an experiment is not possible. For example, whether or not people have a significant early illness experience cannot be manipulated, making it impossible to conduct an experiment on the effect of early illness experiences on the development of hypochondriasis. This caveat does not mean it is impossible to study the relationship between early illness experiences and hypochondriasis—only that it must be done using nonexperimental approaches. We will discuss this type of methodology in detail later in the book.

Independent variables can be manipulated to create two conditions and experiments involving a single independent variable with two conditions are often referred to as a single factor two-level design .  However, sometimes greater insights can be gained by adding more conditions to an experiment. When an experiment has one independent variable that is manipulated to produce more than two conditions it is referred to as a single factor multi level design .  So rather than comparing a condition in which there was one witness to a condition in which there were five witnesses (which would represent a single-factor two-level design), Darley and Latané’s experiment used a single factor multi-level design, by manipulating the independent variable to produce three conditions (a one witness, a two witnesses, and a five witnesses condition).

Control of Extraneous Variables

As we have seen previously in the chapter, an  extraneous variable  is anything that varies in the context of a study other than the independent and dependent variables. In an experiment on the effect of expressive writing on health, for example, extraneous variables would include participant variables (individual differences) such as their writing ability, their diet, and their gender. They would also include situational or task variables such as the time of day when participants write, whether they write by hand or on a computer, and the weather. Extraneous variables pose a problem because many of them are likely to have some effect on the dependent variable. For example, participants’ health will be affected by many things other than whether or not they engage in expressive writing. This influencing factor can make it difficult to separate the effect of the independent variable from the effects of the extraneous variables, which is why it is important to control extraneous variables by holding them constant.

Extraneous Variables as “Noise”

Extraneous variables make it difficult to detect the effect of the independent variable in two ways. One is by adding variability or “noise” to the data. Imagine a simple experiment on the effect of mood (happy vs. sad) on the number of happy childhood events people are able to recall. Participants are put into a negative or positive mood (by showing them a happy or sad video clip) and then asked to recall as many happy childhood events as they can. The two leftmost columns of  Table 5.1 show what the data might look like if there were no extraneous variables and the number of happy childhood events participants recalled was affected only by their moods. Every participant in the happy mood condition recalled exactly four happy childhood events, and every participant in the sad mood condition recalled exactly three. The effect of mood here is quite obvious. In reality, however, the data would probably look more like those in the two rightmost columns of  Table 5.1 . Even in the happy mood condition, some participants would recall fewer happy memories because they have fewer to draw on, use less effective recall strategies, or are less motivated. And even in the sad mood condition, some participants would recall more happy childhood memories because they have more happy memories to draw on, they use more effective recall strategies, or they are more motivated. Although the mean difference between the two groups is the same as in the idealized data, this difference is much less obvious in the context of the greater variability in the data. Thus one reason researchers try to control extraneous variables is so their data look more like the idealized data in  Table 5.1 , which makes the effect of the independent variable easier to detect (although real data never look quite  that  good).

One way to control extraneous variables is to hold them constant. This technique can mean holding situation or task variables constant by testing all participants in the same location, giving them identical instructions, treating them in the same way, and so on. It can also mean holding participant variables constant. For example, many studies of language limit participants to right-handed people, who generally have their language areas isolated in their left cerebral hemispheres [1] . Left-handed people are more likely to have their language areas isolated in their right cerebral hemispheres or distributed across both hemispheres, which can change the way they process language and thereby add noise to the data.

In principle, researchers can control extraneous variables by limiting participants to one very specific category of person, such as 20-year-old, heterosexual, female, right-handed psychology majors. The obvious downside to this approach is that it would lower the external validity of the study—in particular, the extent to which the results can be generalized beyond the people actually studied. For example, it might be unclear whether results obtained with a sample of younger lesbian women would apply to older gay men. In many situations, the advantages of a diverse sample (increased external validity) outweigh the reduction in noise achieved by a homogeneous one.

Extraneous Variables as Confounding Variables

The second way that extraneous variables can make it difficult to detect the effect of the independent variable is by becoming confounding variables. A confounding variable  is an extraneous variable that differs on average across  levels of the independent variable (i.e., it is an extraneous variable that varies systematically with the independent variable). For example, in almost all experiments, participants’ intelligence quotients (IQs) will be an extraneous variable. But as long as there are participants with lower and higher IQs in each condition so that the average IQ is roughly equal across the conditions, then this variation is probably acceptable (and may even be desirable). What would be bad, however, would be for participants in one condition to have substantially lower IQs on average and participants in another condition to have substantially higher IQs on average. In this case, IQ would be a confounding variable.

To confound means to confuse , and this effect is exactly why confounding variables are undesirable. Because they differ systematically across conditions—just like the independent variable—they provide an alternative explanation for any observed difference in the dependent variable.  Figure 5.1  shows the results of a hypothetical study, in which participants in a positive mood condition scored higher on a memory task than participants in a negative mood condition. But if IQ is a confounding variable—with participants in the positive mood condition having higher IQs on average than participants in the negative mood condition—then it is unclear whether it was the positive moods or the higher IQs that caused participants in the first condition to score higher. One way to avoid confounding variables is by holding extraneous variables constant. For example, one could prevent IQ from becoming a confounding variable by limiting participants only to those with IQs of exactly 100. But this approach is not always desirable for reasons we have already discussed. A second and much more general approach—random assignment to conditions—will be discussed in detail shortly.

Treatment and Control Conditions

In psychological research, a treatment is any intervention meant to change people’s behavior for the better. This intervention includes psychotherapies and medical treatments for psychological disorders but also interventions designed to improve learning, promote conservation, reduce prejudice, and so on. To determine whether a treatment works, participants are randomly assigned to either a treatment condition , in which they receive the treatment, or a control condition , in which they do not receive the treatment. If participants in the treatment condition end up better off than participants in the control condition—for example, they are less depressed, learn faster, conserve more, express less prejudice—then the researcher can conclude that the treatment works. In research on the effectiveness of psychotherapies and medical treatments, this type of experiment is often called a randomized clinical trial .

There are different types of control conditions. In a no-treatment control condition , participants receive no treatment whatsoever. One problem with this approach, however, is the existence of placebo effects. A placebo is a simulated treatment that lacks any active ingredient or element that should make it effective, and a placebo effect is a positive effect of such a treatment. Many folk remedies that seem to work—such as eating chicken soup for a cold or placing soap under the bed sheets to stop nighttime leg cramps—are probably nothing more than placebos. Although placebo effects are not well understood, they are probably driven primarily by people’s expectations that they will improve. Having the expectation to improve can result in reduced stress, anxiety, and depression, which can alter perceptions and even improve immune system functioning (Price, Finniss, & Benedetti, 2008) [2] .

Placebo effects are interesting in their own right (see Note “The Powerful Placebo” ), but they also pose a serious problem for researchers who want to determine whether a treatment works. Figure 5.2 shows some hypothetical results in which participants in a treatment condition improved more on average than participants in a no-treatment control condition. If these conditions (the two leftmost bars in Figure 5.2 ) were the only conditions in this experiment, however, one could not conclude that the treatment worked. It could be instead that participants in the treatment group improved more because they expected to improve, while those in the no-treatment control condition did not.

Fortunately, there are several solutions to this problem. One is to include a placebo control condition , in which participants receive a placebo that looks much like the treatment but lacks the active ingredient or element thought to be responsible for the treatment’s effectiveness. When participants in a treatment condition take a pill, for example, then those in a placebo control condition would take an identical-looking pill that lacks the active ingredient in the treatment (a “sugar pill”). In research on psychotherapy effectiveness, the placebo might involve going to a psychotherapist and talking in an unstructured way about one’s problems. The idea is that if participants in both the treatment and the placebo control groups expect to improve, then any improvement in the treatment group over and above that in the placebo control group must have been caused by the treatment and not by participants’ expectations. This difference is what is shown by a comparison of the two outer bars in Figure 5.4 .

Of course, the principle of informed consent requires that participants be told that they will be assigned to either a treatment or a placebo control condition—even though they cannot be told which until the experiment ends. In many cases the participants who had been in the control condition are then offered an opportunity to have the real treatment. An alternative approach is to use a wait-list control condition , in which participants are told that they will receive the treatment but must wait until the participants in the treatment condition have already received it. This disclosure allows researchers to compare participants who have received the treatment with participants who are not currently receiving it but who still expect to improve (eventually). A final solution to the problem of placebo effects is to leave out the control condition completely and compare any new treatment with the best available alternative treatment. For example, a new treatment for simple phobia could be compared with standard exposure therapy. Because participants in both conditions receive a treatment, their expectations about improvement should be similar. This approach also makes sense because once there is an effective treatment, the interesting question about a new treatment is not simply “Does it work?” but “Does it work better than what is already available?

The Powerful Placebo

Many people are not surprised that placebos can have a positive effect on disorders that seem fundamentally psychological, including depression, anxiety, and insomnia. However, placebos can also have a positive effect on disorders that most people think of as fundamentally physiological. These include asthma, ulcers, and warts (Shapiro & Shapiro, 1999) [3] . There is even evidence that placebo surgery—also called “sham surgery”—can be as effective as actual surgery.

Medical researcher J. Bruce Moseley and his colleagues conducted a study on the effectiveness of two arthroscopic surgery procedures for osteoarthritis of the knee (Moseley et al., 2002) [4] . The control participants in this study were prepped for surgery, received a tranquilizer, and even received three small incisions in their knees. But they did not receive the actual arthroscopic surgical procedure. Note that the IRB would have carefully considered the use of deception in this case and judged that the benefits of using it outweighed the risks and that there was no other way to answer the research question (about the effectiveness of a placebo procedure) without it. The surprising result was that all participants improved in terms of both knee pain and function, and the sham surgery group improved just as much as the treatment groups. According to the researchers, “This study provides strong evidence that arthroscopic lavage with or without débridement [the surgical procedures used] is not better than and appears to be equivalent to a placebo procedure in improving knee pain and self-reported function” (p. 85).

• Knecht, S., Dräger, B., Deppe, M., Bobe, L., Lohmann, H., Flöel, A., . . . Henningsen, H. (2000). Handedness and hemispheric language dominance in healthy humans. Brain: A Journal of Neurology, 123 (12), 2512-2518. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/brain/123.12.2512 ↵
• Price, D. D., Finniss, D. G., & Benedetti, F. (2008). A comprehensive review of the placebo effect: Recent advances and current thought. Annual Review of Psychology, 59 , 565–590. ↵
• Shapiro, A. K., & Shapiro, E. (1999). The powerful placebo: From ancient priest to modern physician . Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. ↵
• Moseley, J. B., O’Malley, K., Petersen, N. J., Menke, T. J., Brody, B. A., Kuykendall, D. H., … Wray, N. P. (2002). A controlled trial of arthroscopic surgery for osteoarthritis of the knee. The New England Journal of Medicine, 347 , 81–88. ↵

A type of study designed specifically to answer the question of whether there is a causal relationship between two variables.

The variable the experimenter manipulates.

The variable the experimenter measures (it is the presumed effect).

The different levels of the independent variable to which participants are assigned.

Holding extraneous variables constant in order to separate the effect of the independent variable from the effect of the extraneous variables.

Any variable other than the dependent and independent variable.

Changing the level, or condition, of the independent variable systematically so that different groups of participants are exposed to different levels of that variable, or the same group of participants is exposed to different levels at different times.

An experiment design involving a single independent variable with two conditions.

When an experiment has one independent variable that is manipulated to produce more than two conditions.

An extraneous variable that varies systematically with the independent variable, and thus confuses the effect of the independent variable with the effect of the extraneous one.

Any intervention meant to change people’s behavior for the better.

The condition in which participants receive the treatment.

The condition in which participants do not receive the treatment.

An experiment that researches the effectiveness of psychotherapies and medical treatments.

The condition in which participants receive no treatment whatsoever.

A simulated treatment that lacks any active ingredient or element that is hypothesized to make the treatment effective, but is otherwise identical to the treatment.

An effect that is due to the placebo rather than the treatment.

Condition in which the participants receive a placebo rather than the treatment.

Condition in which participants are told that they will receive the treatment but must wait until the participants in the treatment condition have already received it.

Research Methods in Psychology Copyright © 2019 by Rajiv S. Jhangiani, I-Chant A. Chiang, Carrie Cuttler, & Dana C. Leighton is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

Experimental Psychology: 10 Examples & Definition

Dave Cornell (PhD)

Dr. Cornell has worked in education for more than 20 years. His work has involved designing teacher certification for Trinity College in London and in-service training for state governments in the United States. He has trained kindergarten teachers in 8 countries and helped businessmen and women open baby centers and kindergartens in 3 countries.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Chris Drew (PhD)

This article was peer-reviewed and edited by Chris Drew (PhD). The review process on Helpful Professor involves having a PhD level expert fact check, edit, and contribute to articles. Reviewers ensure all content reflects expert academic consensus and is backed up with reference to academic studies. Dr. Drew has published over 20 academic articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education and holds a PhD in Education from ACU.

Experimental psychology refers to studying psychological phenomena using scientific methods. Originally, the primary scientific method involved manipulating one variable and observing systematic changes in another variable.

Today, psychologists utilize several types of scientific methodologies.

Experimental psychology examines a wide range of psychological phenomena, including: memory, sensation and perception, cognitive processes, motivation, emotion, developmental processes, in addition to the neurophysiological concomitants of each of these subjects.

Studies are conducted on both animal and human participants, and must comply with stringent requirements and controls regarding the ethical treatment of both.

Definition of Experimental Psychology

Experimental psychology is a branch of psychology that utilizes scientific methods to investigate the mind and behavior.

It involves the systematic and controlled study of human and animal behavior through observation and experimentation .

Experimental psychologists design and conduct experiments to understand cognitive processes, perception, learning, memory, emotion, and many other aspects of psychology. They often manipulate variables ( independent variables ) to see how this affects behavior or mental processes (dependent variables).

The findings from experimental psychology research are often used to better understand human behavior and can be applied in a range of contexts, such as education, health, business, and more.

Experimental Psychology Examples

1. The Puzzle Box Studies (Thorndike, 1898) Placing different cats in a box that can only be escaped by pulling a cord, and then taking detailed notes on how long it took for them to escape allowed Edward Thorndike to derive the Law of Effect: actions followed by positive consequences are more likely to occur again, and actions followed by negative consequences are less likely to occur again (Thorndike, 1898).

2. Reinforcement Schedules (Skinner, 1956) By placing rats in a Skinner Box and changing when and how often the rats are rewarded for pressing a lever, it is possible to identify how each schedule results in different behavior patterns (Skinner, 1956). This led to a wide range of theoretical ideas around how rewards and consequences can shape the behaviors of both animals and humans.

3. Observational Learning (Bandura, 1980) Some children watch a video of an adult punching and kicking a Bobo doll. Other children watch a video in which the adult plays nicely with the doll. By carefully observing the children’s behavior later when in a room with a Bobo doll, researchers can determine if television violence affects children’s behavior (Bandura, 1980).

4. The Fallibility of Memory (Loftus & Palmer, 1974) A group of participants watch the same video of two cars having an accident. Two weeks later, some are asked to estimate the rate of speed the cars were going when they “smashed” into each other. Some participants are asked to estimate the rate of speed the cars were going when they “bumped” into each other. Changing the phrasing of the question changes the memory of the eyewitness.

5. Intrinsic Motivation in the Classroom (Dweck, 1990) To investigate the role of autonomy on intrinsic motivation, half of the students are told they are “free to choose” which tasks to complete. The other half of the students are told they “must choose” some of the tasks. Researchers then carefully observe how long the students engage in the tasks and later ask them some questions about if they enjoyed doing the tasks or not.

6. Systematic Desensitization (Wolpe, 1958) A clinical psychologist carefully documents his treatment of a patient’s social phobia with progressive relaxation. At first, the patient is trained to monitor, tense, and relax various muscle groups while viewing photos of parties. Weeks later, they approach a stranger to ask for directions, initiate a conversation on a crowded bus, and attend a small social gathering. The therapist’s notes are transcribed into a scientific report and published in a peer-reviewed journal.

7. Study of Remembering (Bartlett, 1932) Bartlett’s work is a seminal study in the field of memory, where he used the concept of “schema” to describe an organized pattern of thought or behavior. He conducted a series of experiments using folk tales to show that memory recall is influenced by cultural schemas and personal experiences.

8. Study of Obedience (Milgram, 1963) This famous study explored the conflict between obedience to authority and personal conscience. Milgram found that a majority of participants were willing to administer what they believed were harmful electric shocks to a stranger when instructed by an authority figure, highlighting the power of authority and situational factors in driving behavior.

9. Pavlov’s Dog Study (Pavlov, 1927) Ivan Pavlov, a Russian physiologist, conducted a series of experiments that became a cornerstone in the field of experimental psychology. Pavlov noticed that dogs would salivate when they saw food. He then began to ring a bell each time he presented the food to the dogs. After a while, the dogs began to salivate merely at the sound of the bell. This experiment demonstrated the principle of “classical conditioning.”

10, Piaget’s Stages of Development (Piaget, 1958) Jean Piaget proposed a theory of cognitive development in children that consists of four distinct stages: the sensorimotor stage (birth to 2 years), where children learn about the world through their senses and motor activities, through to the the formal operational stage (12 years and beyond), where abstract reasoning and hypothetical thinking develop. Piaget’s theory is an example of experimental psychology as it was developed through systematic observation and experimentation on children’s problem-solving behaviors .

Types of Research Methodologies in Experimental Psychology 

Researchers utilize several different types of research methodologies since the early days of Wundt (1832-1920).

1. The Experiment

The experiment involves the researcher manipulating the level of one variable, called the Independent Variable (IV), and then observing changes in another variable, called the Dependent Variable (DV).

The researcher is interested in determining if the IV causes changes in the DV. For example, does television violence make children more aggressive?

So, some children in the study, called research participants, will watch a show with TV violence, called the treatment group. Others will watch a show with no TV violence, called the control group.

So, there are two levels of the IV: violence and no violence. Next, children will be observed to see if they act more aggressively. This is the DV.

If TV violence makes children more aggressive, then the children that watched the violent show will me more aggressive than the children that watched the non-violent show.

A key requirement of the experiment is random assignment . Each research participant is assigned to one of the two groups in a way that makes it a completely random process. This means that each group will have a mix of children: different personality types, diverse family backgrounds, and range of intelligence levels.

2. The Longitudinal Study

A longitudinal study involves selecting a sample of participants and then following them for years, or decades, periodically collecting data on the variables of interest.

For example, a researcher might be interested in determining if parenting style affects academic performance of children. Parenting style is called the predictor variable , and academic performance is called the outcome variable .

Researchers will begin by randomly selecting a group of children to be in the study. Then, they will identify the type of parenting practices used when the children are 4 and 5 years old.

A few years later, perhaps when the children are 8 and 9, the researchers will collect data on their grades. This process can be repeated over the next 10 years, including through college.

If parenting style has an effect on academic performance, then the researchers will see a connection between the predictor variable and outcome variable.

Children raised with parenting style X will have higher grades than children raised with parenting style Y.

3. The Case Study

The case study is an in-depth study of one individual. This is a research methodology often used early in the examination of a psychological phenomenon or therapeutic treatment.

For example, in the early days of treating phobias, a clinical psychologist may try teaching one of their patients how to relax every time they see the object that creates so much fear and anxiety, such as a large spider.

The therapist would take very detailed notes on how the teaching process was implemented and the reactions of the patient. When the treatment had been completed, those notes would be written in a scientific form and submitted for publication in a scientific journal for other therapists to learn from.

There are several other types of methodologies available which vary different aspects of the three described above. The researcher will select a methodology that is most appropriate to the phenomenon they want to examine.

They also must take into account various practical considerations such as how much time and resources are needed to complete the study. Conducting research always costs money.

People and equipment are needed to carry-out every study, so researchers often try to obtain funding from their university or a government agency. 

Origins and Key Developments in Experimental Psychology

Wilhelm Maximilian Wundt (1832-1920) is considered one of the fathers of modern psychology. He was a physiologist and philosopher and helped establish psychology as a distinct discipline (Khaleefa, 1999).  

In 1879 he established the world’s first psychology research lab at the University of Leipzig. This is considered a key milestone for establishing psychology as a scientific discipline. In addition to being the first person to use the term “psychologist,” to describe himself, he also founded the discipline’s first scientific journal Philosphische Studien in 1883.

Another notable figure in the development of experimental psychology is Ernest Weber . Trained as a physician, Weber studied sensation and perception and created the first quantitative law in psychology.

The equation denotes how judgments of sensory differences are relative to previous levels of sensation, referred to as the just-noticeable difference (jnd). This is known today as Weber’s Law (Hergenhahn, 2009).    

Gustav Fechner , one of Weber’s students, published the first book on experimental psychology in 1860, titled Elemente der Psychophysik. His worked centered on the measurement of psychophysical facets of sensation and perception, with many of his methods still in use today.    

The first American textbook on experimental psychology was Elements of Physiological Psychology, published in 1887 by George Trumball Ladd .

Ladd also established a psychology lab at Yale University, while Stanley Hall and Charles Sanders continued Wundt’s work at a lab at Johns Hopkins University.

In the late 1800s, Charles Pierce’s contribution to experimental psychology is especially noteworthy because he invented the concept of random assignment (Stigler, 1992; Dehue, 1997).

Go Deeper: 15 Random Assignment Examples

This procedure ensures that each participant has an equal chance of being placed in any of the experimental groups (e.g., treatment or control group). This eliminates the influence of confounding factors related to inherent characteristics of the participants.

Random assignment is a fundamental criterion for a study to be considered a valid experiment.

From there, experimental psychology flourished in the 20th century as a science and transformed into an approach utilized in cognitive psychology, developmental psychology, and social psychology .

Today, the term experimental psychology refers to the study of a wide range of phenomena and involves methodologies not limited to the manipulation of variables.

The Scientific Process and Experimental Psychology

The one thing that makes psychology a science and distinguishes it from its roots in philosophy is the reliance upon the scientific process to answer questions. This makes psychology a science was the main goal of its earliest founders such as Wilhelm Wundt.

There are numerous steps in the scientific process, outlined in the graphic below.

1. Observation

First, the scientist observes an interesting phenomenon that sparks a question. For example, are the memories of eyewitnesses really reliable, or are they subject to bias or unintentional manipulation?

2. Hypothesize

Next, this question is converted into a testable hypothesis. For instance: the words used to question a witness can influence what they think they remember.

3. Devise a Study

Then the researcher(s) select a methodology that will allow them to test that hypothesis. In this case, the researchers choose the experiment, which will involve randomly assigning some participants to different conditions.

In one condition, participants are asked a question that implies a certain memory (treatment group), while other participants are asked a question which is phrased neutrally and does not imply a certain memory (control group).

The researchers then write a proposal that describes in detail the procedures they want to use, how participants will be selected, and the safeguards they will employ to ensure the rights of the participants.

That proposal is submitted to an Institutional Review Board (IRB). The IRB is comprised of a panel of researchers, community representatives, and other professionals that are responsible for reviewing all studies involving human participants.

4. Conduct the Study

If the IRB accepts the proposal, then the researchers may begin collecting data. After the data has been collected, it is analyzed using a software program such as SPSS.

Those analyses will either support or reject the hypothesis. That is, either the participants’ memories were affected by the wording of the question, or not.

5. Publish the study

Finally, the researchers write a paper detailing their procedures and results of the statistical analyses. That paper is then submitted to a scientific journal.

The lead editor of that journal will then send copies of the paper to 3-5 experts in that subject. Each of those experts will read the paper and basically try to find as many things wrong with it as possible. Because they are experts, they are very good at this task.

After reading those critiques, most likely, the editor will send the paper back to the researchers and require that they respond to the criticisms, collect more data, or reject the paper outright.

In some cases, the study was so well-done that the criticisms were minimal and the editor accepts the paper. It then gets published in the scientific journal several months later.

That entire process can easily take 2 years, usually more. But, the findings of that study went through a very rigorous process. This means that we can have substantial confidence that the conclusions of the study are valid.

Experimental psychology refers to utilizing a scientific process to investigate psychological phenomenon.

There are a variety of methods employed today. They are used to study a wide range of subjects, including memory, cognitive processes, emotions and the neurophysiological basis of each.

The history of psychology as a science began in the 1800s primarily in Germany. As interest grew, the field expanded to the United States where several influential research labs were established.

As more methodologies were developed, the field of psychology as a science evolved into a prolific scientific discipline that has provided invaluable insights into human behavior.

Bartlett, F. C., & Bartlett, F. C. (1995).  Remembering: A study in experimental and social psychology . Cambridge university press.

Dehue, T. (1997). Deception, efficiency, and random groups: Psychology and the gradual origination of the random group design. Isis , 88 (4), 653-673.

Ebbinghaus, H. (2013). Memory: A contribution to experimental psychology.  Annals of neurosciences ,  20 (4), 155.

Hergenhahn, B. R. (2009). An introduction to the history of psychology. Belmont. CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning .

Khaleefa, O. (1999). Who is the founder of psychophysics and experimental psychology? American Journal of Islam and Society , 16 (2), 1-26.

Loftus, E. F., & Palmer, J. C. (1974).  Reconstruction of auto-mobile destruction : An example of the interaction between language and memory.  Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal behavior , 13, 585-589.

Pavlov, I.P. (1927). Conditioned reflexes . Dover, New York.

Piaget, J. (1959).  The language and thought of the child  (Vol. 5). Psychology Press.

Piaget, J., Fraisse, P., & Reuchlin, M. (2014). Experimental psychology its scope and method: Volume I (Psychology Revivals): History and method . Psychology Press.

Skinner, B. F. (1956). A case history in scientlfic method. American Psychologist, 11 , 221-233

Stigler, S. M. (1992). A historical view of statistical concepts in psychology and educational research. American Journal of Education , 101 (1), 60-70.

Thorndike, E. L. (1898). Animal intelligence: An experimental study of the associative processes in animals. Psychological Review Monograph Supplement 2 .

Wolpe, J. (1958). Psychotherapy by reciprocal inhibition. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.

Appendix: Images reproduced as Text

Definition: Experimental psychology is a branch of psychology that focuses on conducting systematic and controlled experiments to study human behavior and cognition.

Overview: Experimental psychology aims to gather empirical evidence and explore cause-and-effect relationships between variables. Experimental psychologists utilize various research methods, including laboratory experiments, surveys, and observations, to investigate topics such as perception, memory, learning, motivation, and social behavior .

Example: The Pavlov’s Dog experimental psychology experiment used scientific methods to develop a theory about how learning and association occur in animals. The same concepts were subsequently used in the study of humans, wherein psychology-based ideas about learning were developed. Pavlov’s use of the empirical evidence was foundational to the study’s success.

Experimental Psychology Milestones:

1890: William James publishes “The Principles of Psychology”, a foundational text in the field of psychology.

1896: Lightner Witmer opens the first psychological clinic at the University of Pennsylvania, marking the beginning of clinical psychology.

1913: John B. Watson publishes “Psychology as the Behaviorist Views It”, marking the beginning of Behaviorism.

1920: Hermann Rorschach introduces the Rorschach inkblot test.

1938: B.F. Skinner introduces the concept of operant conditioning .

1967: Ulric Neisser publishes “Cognitive Psychology” , marking the beginning of the cognitive revolution.

1980: The third edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-III) is published, introducing a new classification system for mental disorders.

The Scientific Process

• Observe an interesting phenomenon
• Formulate testable hypothesis
• Select methodology and design study
• Submit research proposal to IRB
• Collect and analyzed data; write paper
• Submit paper for critical reviews

• Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 23 Achieved Status Examples
• Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 25 Defense Mechanisms Examples
• Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 15 Theory of Planned Behavior Examples
• Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 18 Adaptive Behavior Examples

• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 23 Achieved Status Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 15 Ableism Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 25 Defense Mechanisms Examples
• Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 15 Theory of Planned Behavior Examples

Leave a Comment Cancel Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

7 Important Methods in Psychology With Examples

Psychology is a scientific study of the human mind, mental processes, and behavior. It is called a scientific study because psychologists also do various systematic research and experiments to study and formulate psychological theories like other scientists. Psychological researches involve understanding complex mental processes, human behavior, and collecting different types of data (physiological, psychological, physical, and demographic data), psychologists use various research methods as it is difficult to obtain accurate and reliable results if we use a single research method for collecting research data. The type of method they use depends upon the type of research. Broadly, researches are divide into two types, i.e., experimental and non-experimental researches. Experimental researches involve two or more variables, and it studies the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable (cause-effect relationship), whereas non-experimental researches do not involve the manipulations of variables. The concept of variables is briefly explained further in this article. Let’s get familiar with some widely used methods of collecting psychology research data.

1. Experimental Method

To understand the experimental method, firstly we need to be familiar with the term ‘variable.’ A variable is an event or stimulus that varies, and its values can be measured. It is to be noted that we can not regard any object as a variable; in fact, the attributes related to that object are called variables. For example, A person is not a variable, but the height of the person is a variable because different people may have different heights. In the experiment method of data collection, we mainly concern with two types of variables, i.e., independent variables and dependent variables. If the value of the variable is manipulated by the researcher to observe its effects, then it is called the independent variable, and the variable that is affected by the change in the independent variable is called the dependent variable. For example, if we want to study the influence of alcohol on the reaction time and driving abilities of the driver, then the amount of alcohol that the driver consumes is the independent variable, and the driving performance of the driver is called the dependent variable. Experimental methods are conducted to establish the relationship between the independent variable (cause) and dependent variables (effect). The experiments are conducted very carefully, and any variables other than the independent variable are kept constant or negligible so that an accurate relationship between the cause and effect can be established. In the above example, other factors like the driver’s stress, anxiety, or mood (extraneous variables) can interfere with the dependent variable (driving ability). It is difficult to avoid these extraneous variables; extraneous variables are the undesired variables that are not studied under the experiments, and their manipulation can alter the results of the study, but we should always try to make them constant or negligible for accurate results.

Control Group and Experimental Group

Experiments generally consist of several research groups that are broadly categorized into control groups and experimental groups. The group that undergoes the manipulation of the independent variable is called the experimental group, whereas the group that does not undergoes the independent variable manipulation, but its other factors or variables are kept the same as the experimental group, is called a control group. The control group basically acts as a comparison group as it is used to measure the changes caused by the independent variable on the experimental group. For example, if a researcher wants to study that how does the conduction of exams affects the learning ability of the student, then, here, the learning ability of the student is the dependent variable and exams are the independent variable. In this experiment, some lectures will be delivered to the students of the same class and of nearly the same learning abilities (based on their previous exam scores or other criteria), and then the students are divide into different groups, one group is not subjected to give the exams, while the other group has to give the exam of what they have learned in the lesson. The group of students that were not subjected to give the exams is called the control group, and the group of students that were subjected to give the exams is called the experimental group. The number of experimental groups can be more than one based on how often does the exams are conducted for each group. At the end of the experiments, the researcher can find the results by comparing the experimental group with the control group.

Types of Experimental Method

Some major types of the experimental method include,

1. Lab Experiments

It is difficult to conduct some experiments in natural settings as many extraneous variables can become a problem for the research. So, researchers conduct the experiments in a controlled manner in laboratories or research centers. It is easy to manage the independent and dependent variables in the controlled settings. For example, if the researcher wants to study the effect of different kinds of music like pop, classical, etc., on the health of the patients, then the researcher will conduct this study in a room rather than in a natural environment as it’s easy to keep extraneous variables constant in the closed settings. Here, music is the independent variable and health is the dependent variable. If the same experiment is conducted outside the lab, then extraneous variables like sunlight, weather, noise, etc., may interfere with the study and manipulate the results of the research.

2. Field Experiments

Sometimes, lab experiment results face criticism for their lack of generalizability as they are not conducted in real-life settings. Field experiments are conducted in the natural environment and real-life settings like schools, industries, hospitals, etc., so they are more ecologically valid than lab experiments. For example, if we want to study whether classroom learning or open environment learning is the best teaching method for students, the researcher would prefer the field experiment over the lab experiment. However, in field experiments, it is very difficult to control the undesired or extraneous variables, which makes it difficult to establish an accurate cause-effect relationship. Moreover, they consume more time than the lab experiments.

3. Quasi Experiments

In lab experiments or fields experiments, sometimes, it is difficult to manipulate some variables due to ethical issues or other constraints. Quasi-experiments are conducted in this situation. In quasi-experiments, the researcher studies that how does a single or many independent variables impact the dependent variable but without manipulating the independent variable. For instance, if the researcher wants to study the effect of terrorism or bomb blasts on the children who have lost their families, then it is difficult to create this situation artificially, so researchers use the quasi-experiments approach. Here, the researcher selects the independent variable instead of manipulating it and compare it with the dependent variable. The researchers will take a group of children who have lost their families (experimental group), and the children who suffered the bomb blast but did not lose their families (control group), and by comparing both these groups, the researcher can analyze the effect of terrorism on the children who lost their families.

2. Observational Method

The observational method is a non-experimental and qualitative research method in which the behavior of the subject under research is observed. An observational method is a great tool for data collection in psychology because the researcher does not require any special types of equipment to collect the research data. We observe several items throughout our day, but psychological researches are different from our daily observations as it involves some important steps such as selection of the area of interest, noting the observations, and analyzing the obtained data. Gathering the data through observation is itself a skill as an observer should be well aware of his actual area of research and he/she should have a clear picture in mind that what qualities or attributes he should observe, and what he should avoid. The researcher should have a good understanding of the correct methods of recording and analyzing the gathered data. The major problem of the observational method is the observer’s biases, there are high chances that the observer may judge the event according to his/her biases rather than interpreting the event in its natural form. We can relate it to a famous saying,

We see things as we are and not as things are”

So, it is the responsibility of the observer to make accurate observations by minimizing his/her biases.

Types of Observations

The observational methods are broadly categorized into the following types,

1. Naturalistic Observation

If the researcher has made the observations in real-life or natural settings such as schools, institutes, homes, open environments, etc., without interfering with the phenomena under observation, then it is known as naturalistic observation. In this type of observation, the researcher does not manipulate or control any situation, and he/she only records the spontaneous behavior of the subject (individual or event under investigation) in their natural environment. Naturalistic observations provide more generalized results because of the natural settings, but it’s difficult to manage the extraneous variables in natural observations and ethical issues of privacy interference and observer bias are some other major problems of naturalistic observations.

2. Controlled Observation

The observations that are conducted in the closed settings, i.e., their various conditions and variable are highly under control, are known as controlled observations. In these observations, variables are manipulated according to the need of the research. For example, if the researcher wants to study the effect of induced workload on the worker’s performance, the research should be conducted in a controlled setting as the researcher can control the independent variable (workload). However, due to the controlled settings approach, these observations are far less to ecological validity than the naturalistic observations, and the behavior of the participants or subjects that are being studied may change because of their awareness of being observed.

3. Participant Observation

The types of observation in which the observer or the researcher itself becomes part of the research are called participant observations. The other participants in the research may or may not be informed about the presence of the observer in the group. However, if the participants are not aware of the observer’s presence, then the results gathered will be more reliable and satisfy ecological validity. In participant observation as the researcher acts as an active member of the observed group, the observer has to be cautious about the fact that other members of the group won’t recognize him/her, and he/she should maintain the proper relationships and a good rapport with the participants under investigation. The strength of the participant observation is that it provides the researcher a holistic approach to understand the process not only from his/her own perspective but also from the participant’s perspective, which reduces the research biases. However, Participant observation is time-consuming, and the findings of this type of observation are usually not generalizable because of the small research groups.

4. Non-Participant Observation

In this type of research, the observer is not present in the research, but he/she uses other means to observe the spontaneous activities or behavior of the individual or group members, this may include installing the camera in the rooms that need to be observed. The main benefit of non-participants’ observation is that the actual behavior of the participants can be observed without making them aware of being under observation. An example of non-participation observation is a school principal who observes the classroom activities of the teacher and students through the CCTV cameras in his/her office.

3. Case Study

In the case study method, the researcher does qualitative research and in-depth analysis of a specific case (subject under investigation). The results obtained from this method are highly reliable; in fact, many famous theories such as the psychoanalytic theory of Sigmund Freud and Jean Piaget’s cognitive development theory are the results of well-structured and proper case studies of the subjects. The case study method allows the researcher to deeply study the psyche of the cases. The researcher does the case studies of the people or events that provide some critical information about the new or less discovered phenomena of the human mind. The number of cases can be one or more, or they are of different or same characteristics, for example, a patient suffering from a mental disorder, a group of people belonging to the same gender, class, or ethnicity, and effect on the people of various natural or man-made disasters such as flood, tsunami, terrorism, and industrialization. Case studies involve the multi-method approach as it uses various other research methods like unstructured interviews, psychological testings, and observations to get detailed information about the subjects. It is the best method to deeply understand and analyze the impact of certain traumatic events on the psychological health of the individual, and it is widely used by clinical psychologists to diagnose various psychological disorders of the patients.

4. Correlational Research

The researcher uses the correlational method if he/she wants to examine the relationship between the two variables. It is to be noted that here researcher does not vary the independent variable as he is only concerned about whether the two variables are linked to each other or not. For example, if you are interested in finding the relation between yoga and the psychological health of the person, then you simply try to find the relationship between these two factors rather than manipulating anything. The degree of the association between the variables is represented by the correlational coefficients ranges from +1.0 to -1.0. The correlation can be of three types, i.e., positive correlation, negative correlation, or zero correlation. If we increase or decrease the value of one variable, the value of another variable also increases or decreases respectively, then it is called a positive correlation, and the value of the correlation coefficient would be near +1.0. If we increase or decrease the value of one variable, the value of another variable decreases or increases respectively, then it is called the negative correlation, and the value of correlational coefficient would be near -1.0, and if the changes in the value of one variable do not affect the other variable, then there does not exist any relationship between the variables, and it is called zero correlation with the correlation value near or equal to zero.

5. Content Analysis

In content analysis research methods, the researcher analyses and quantifies various types of content pieces such as articles, texts, interviews, researches, and other important documents to get useful information about their area of research. Content analyses involve various steps that are data collection, examining the research data, and getting familiar with it, developing ṭhe set of rules for selecting coding units, making coding units (coding unit is the smallest parts of the content that is analyzed) as per the developed rules, and then, finally, analyzing the findings and drawing conclusions. Content analysis is generally of two types, i.e., conceptual analysis, and relational analysis. These are briefly discussed below.

Conceptual Analyses

It involves the selection of the concept (word, phrase, sentence), and then examining the occurrence of the selected concept in the available research data. In conceptual analyses, the researcher selects the sample according to the research question and divides the content into different categories, which makes it easier to focus on the specific data that gives useful information about the research, and then coding and analyzing the results.

Relational Analyses

The initial steps of the relational analyses are the same as the conceptual analyses like selecting the concept, but it’s different from the conceptual analyses because it involves finding the associations or relationships among the concepts. In conceptual analyses, we analyze every concept, but in relational analyses, the individual concepts do not have any importance, instead, the useful information is assessed by finding the associations among the concepts present in the research data.

6. Survey Research Method

Survey research is the most popular mean of data collection in almost every branch of social sciences. It finds its applications in election poll results (election surveys), literacy rate, and population rate analysis. The survey research methods help the researchers understand the actual ground reality of the event by analyzing the social views, attitudes, behavior, and opinions of the people. The researchers use various techniques of survey research methods, which are briefly discussed below.

1. Direct Interviews

An interview process involves direct communication between the interviewer/researcher (who asks the question) and the interviewee/respondent (who answers the questions). Interviews give better in-depth results than any other technique of data collection as the researcher gets first-hand information about the respondent’s mind through communication and observation of his/her behavior. Interviews may be structured or unstructured, when the researcher prepares the sequential list of the questions about when and what questions to be asked in the interview, it is called a structured interview, whereas if the questions to be asked in the interview are not pre-planned, and flexibility is provided to the interviewer to ask questions according to the situation, then it is called the unstructured interview. The responses to the questions in the case of structured interviews are also specified to some extent, such questions are called close-ended questions, while in the case of unstructured interviews, the respondent is free to answer the questions according to his/her desire, and these types of questions are called open-ended questions. For instance, if you ask the respondent whether he/she likes the coffee, then the answer would be either yes or no, i.e., a close-ended question. However, if you ask the respondents about their hobbies, then the respondent will answer it according to his/her will, hence it is an open-ended question. An interview can be of the following types, depending upon the number of interviewers and interviewees involved in the interview. For example,

• One to One Interview: When only the interviewer and one interviewee are present in the interview process.
• Individual to group Interview: When one interviewer interviews a group of people.
• Group to Individual: It is also called group panel interview, in this case, an individual is interviewed by a group of interviewers.
• Group to Group: When a group of interviewers, interviews a group of interviewees.

The most important thing in direct interviews is that the researcher/interviewer should have good interviewing skills, and the ability to build a good rapport with the respondent and making him/her comfortable enough to give accurate answers to the questions asked. The main purpose of conducting an interview is to gather the data about the subject, but the interviewer should be sensitive to the emotions and behavior of the respondent and should not pressurize him/her to give the answers to which he/she is not comfortable enough. The process of the interview is very time-consuming, so it is not much effective as in psychology researches, it would become tedious to take interviews of a large section of society, which is why it is usually preferred for some specific population that may include illiterate or blind people as the interviewer can verbally ask them questions and make sure that whether they understood the questions or not.

2. Telephonic or Digital Surveys

Telephonic surveys involve asking questions about the survey through direct calls or messages. Digital surveys through ‘Google forms’ are also commonly used these days. Telephone and digital surveys are easy to conduct, and they do not consume much time. However, they have many limitations such as the results obtained through them are not much reliable because in this method the researcher does not have proper evidence of certain factors like respondents’ age, gender, and qualifications, etc., and the respondents may have given the manipulative or vague answers.

3. Questionnaires

Questionnaires consist of a well-structured set of questions that are distributed to the people to mark or write the answers. The questions can be open-ended or close-ended, depending upon the type of survey. It is one of the most commonly used survey techniques as it is easy to conduct, less time-consuming, and a cost-effective method to collect research information. It is a better method than the interview for obtaining accurate answers because, in this method, the proper assurance of confidentiality is provided to the respondent, hence the respondent is more likely to mark the accurate answer. Earlier, only paper-based questionnaires were used, but due to the advancement of technology, digital questionnaires, which are sent to people through emails or google forms, are also used these days.

7. Psychological Testing

Psychological testing is also known as psychometrics. Psychological tests are scientifically proven and standardized tests that are constructed by psychologists. These are used to assess the various characteristics of humans such as attitude, aptitude, personality, intelligence quotient, and emotional quotient. There are many psychological tests available these days such as aptitude testing, mental health assessment, educational testing, personality assessment, etc., which are used for different purposes. The multiple-choice questions (MCQs) of the psychological tests are carefully designed, and the factors like gender, age, class, qualification, etc., are considered before conducting these tests. Psychological tests can be conducted offline (pen-paper-based) or online (digital format), depending upon the applicability and availability. The necessary part of the psychological tests is that the participants or the subjects, upon whom the test is conducted, should be properly informed about the testing procedure, and proper instructions about marking or filling the test, time durations of the test, should be verbally provided to them for their better understanding. These tests are constructed by following a systematic approach and three important factors, i.e., validity, reliability, and norms. These are briefly discussed below,

• Validity : The most obvious criterion of constructing the test is that it should be valid. The validity of the test implies that the test should measure what it is designed for. For example, the psychological health assessment test should measure the psychological health of the person rather than the physical health.
• Reliability : The results obtained by the psychological test should be reliable, i.e., there should be almost negligible variations in test scores if the same test is repeated upon the same subjects after some time.
• Norm : For every psychological test, norms are developed, these are the standard values that represent the average performance of the subject or the group of subjects in the tasks that are provided them. Norms enable psychologists to interpret and compare the results obtained by the psychological tests. There are various types of norms for different types of psychological tests such as descriptive norms,  grade norms, age norms, and percentile norms.

Rorschach Psychological Test

Related Posts

8 Everyday Life Examples Of Priming

18 Bias Examples in Real Life

13 Examples Of Operant Conditioning in Everyday Life

8 Placebo Effect Examples in Real Life

Examples of Abnormal Psychology

Altruism in Psychology: Explained with Examples

Thank you for sharing this very useful knowledge for a psychology student (in this case). Very explanatory, clear to understand. successes.

Well explained 👏 Thanks

Add Comment Cancel Reply

Research Methods In Psychology

Saul McLeod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

Research methods in psychology are systematic procedures used to observe, describe, predict, and explain behavior and mental processes. They include experiments, surveys, case studies, and naturalistic observations, ensuring data collection is objective and reliable to understand and explain psychological phenomena.

Hypotheses are statements about the prediction of the results, that can be verified or disproved by some investigation.

There are four types of hypotheses :

• Null Hypotheses (H0 ) – these predict that no difference will be found in the results between the conditions. Typically these are written ‘There will be no difference…’
• Alternative Hypotheses (Ha or H1) – these predict that there will be a significant difference in the results between the two conditions. This is also known as the experimental hypothesis.
• One-tailed (directional) hypotheses – these state the specific direction the researcher expects the results to move in, e.g. higher, lower, more, less. In a correlation study, the predicted direction of the correlation can be either positive or negative.
• Two-tailed (non-directional) hypotheses – these state that a difference will be found between the conditions of the independent variable but does not state the direction of a difference or relationship. Typically these are always written ‘There will be a difference ….’

All research has an alternative hypothesis (either a one-tailed or two-tailed) and a corresponding null hypothesis.

Once the research is conducted and results are found, psychologists must accept one hypothesis and reject the other. 

So, if a difference is found, the Psychologist would accept the alternative hypothesis and reject the null.  The opposite applies if no difference is found.

Sampling techniques

Sampling is the process of selecting a representative group from the population under study.

A sample is the participants you select from a target population (the group you are interested in) to make generalizations about.

Representative means the extent to which a sample mirrors a researcher’s target population and reflects its characteristics.

Generalisability means the extent to which their findings can be applied to the larger population of which their sample was a part.

• Volunteer sample : where participants pick themselves through newspaper adverts, noticeboards or online.
• Opportunity sampling : also known as convenience sampling , uses people who are available at the time the study is carried out and willing to take part. It is based on convenience.
• Random sampling : when every person in the target population has an equal chance of being selected. An example of random sampling would be picking names out of a hat.
• Systematic sampling : when a system is used to select participants. Picking every Nth person from all possible participants. N = the number of people in the research population / the number of people needed for the sample.
• Stratified sampling : when you identify the subgroups and select participants in proportion to their occurrences.
• Snowball sampling : when researchers find a few participants, and then ask them to find participants themselves and so on.
• Quota sampling : when researchers will be told to ensure the sample fits certain quotas, for example they might be told to find 90 participants, with 30 of them being unemployed.

Experiments always have an independent and dependent variable .

• The independent variable is the one the experimenter manipulates (the thing that changes between the conditions the participants are placed into). It is assumed to have a direct effect on the dependent variable.
• The dependent variable is the thing being measured, or the results of the experiment.

Operationalization of variables means making them measurable/quantifiable. We must use operationalization to ensure that variables are in a form that can be easily tested.

For instance, we can’t really measure ‘happiness’, but we can measure how many times a person smiles within a two-hour period. 

By operationalizing variables, we make it easy for someone else to replicate our research. Remember, this is important because we can check if our findings are reliable.

Extraneous variables are all variables which are not independent variable but could affect the results of the experiment.

It can be a natural characteristic of the participant, such as intelligence levels, gender, or age for example, or it could be a situational feature of the environment such as lighting or noise.

Demand characteristics are a type of extraneous variable that occurs if the participants work out the aims of the research study, they may begin to behave in a certain way.

For example, in Milgram’s research , critics argued that participants worked out that the shocks were not real and they administered them as they thought this was what was required of them. 

Extraneous variables must be controlled so that they do not affect (confound) the results.

Randomly allocating participants to their conditions or using a matched pairs experimental design can help to reduce participant variables. 

Situational variables are controlled by using standardized procedures, ensuring every participant in a given condition is treated in the same way

Experimental Design

Experimental design refers to how participants are allocated to each condition of the independent variable, such as a control or experimental group.

• Independent design ( between-groups design ): each participant is selected for only one group. With the independent design, the most common way of deciding which participants go into which group is by means of randomization. 
• Matched participants design : each participant is selected for only one group, but the participants in the two groups are matched for some relevant factor or factors (e.g. ability; sex; age).
• Repeated measures design ( within groups) : each participant appears in both groups, so that there are exactly the same participants in each group.
• The main problem with the repeated measures design is that there may well be order effects. Their experiences during the experiment may change the participants in various ways.
• They may perform better when they appear in the second group because they have gained useful information about the experiment or about the task. On the other hand, they may perform less well on the second occasion because of tiredness or boredom.
• Counterbalancing is the best way of preventing order effects from disrupting the findings of an experiment, and involves ensuring that each condition is equally likely to be used first and second by the participants.

If we wish to compare two groups with respect to a given independent variable, it is essential to make sure that the two groups do not differ in any other important way. 

Experimental Methods

All experimental methods involve an iv (independent variable) and dv (dependent variable)..

The researcher decides where the experiment will take place, at what time, with which participants, in what circumstances,  using a standardized procedure.

• Field experiments are conducted in the everyday (natural) environment of the participants. The experimenter still manipulates the IV, but in a real-life setting. It may be possible to control extraneous variables, though such control is more difficult than in a lab experiment.
• Natural experiments are when a naturally occurring IV is investigated that isn’t deliberately manipulated, it exists anyway. Participants are not randomly allocated, and the natural event may only occur rarely.

Case studies are in-depth investigations of a person, group, event, or community. It uses information from a range of sources, such as from the person concerned and also from their family and friends.

Many techniques may be used such as interviews, psychological tests, observations and experiments. Case studies are generally longitudinal: in other words, they follow the individual or group over an extended period of time. 

Case studies are widely used in psychology and among the best-known ones carried out were by Sigmund Freud . He conducted very detailed investigations into the private lives of his patients in an attempt to both understand and help them overcome their illnesses.

Case studies provide rich qualitative data and have high levels of ecological validity. However, it is difficult to generalize from individual cases as each one has unique characteristics.

Correlational Studies

Correlation means association; it is a measure of the extent to which two variables are related. One of the variables can be regarded as the predictor variable with the other one as the outcome variable.

Correlational studies typically involve obtaining two different measures from a group of participants, and then assessing the degree of association between the measures. 

The predictor variable can be seen as occurring before the outcome variable in some sense. It is called the predictor variable, because it forms the basis for predicting the value of the outcome variable.

Relationships between variables can be displayed on a graph or as a numerical score called a correlation coefficient.

• If an increase in one variable tends to be associated with an increase in the other, then this is known as a positive correlation .
• If an increase in one variable tends to be associated with a decrease in the other, then this is known as a negative correlation .
• A zero correlation occurs when there is no relationship between variables.

After looking at the scattergraph, if we want to be sure that a significant relationship does exist between the two variables, a statistical test of correlation can be conducted, such as Spearman’s rho.

The test will give us a score, called a correlation coefficient . This is a value between 0 and 1, and the closer to 1 the score is, the stronger the relationship between the variables. This value can be both positive e.g. 0.63, or negative -0.63.

A correlation between variables, however, does not automatically mean that the change in one variable is the cause of the change in the values of the other variable. A correlation only shows if there is a relationship between variables.

Correlation does not always prove causation, as a third variable may be involved. 

Interview Methods

Interviews are commonly divided into two types: structured and unstructured.

A fixed, predetermined set of questions is put to every participant in the same order and in the same way. 

Responses are recorded on a questionnaire, and the researcher presets the order and wording of questions, and sometimes the range of alternative answers.

The interviewer stays within their role and maintains social distance from the interviewee.

There are no set questions, and the participant can raise whatever topics he/she feels are relevant and ask them in their own way. Questions are posed about participants’ answers to the subject

Unstructured interviews are most useful in qualitative research to analyze attitudes and values.

Though they rarely provide a valid basis for generalization, their main advantage is that they enable the researcher to probe social actors’ subjective point of view. 

Questionnaire Method

Questionnaires can be thought of as a kind of written interview. They can be carried out face to face, by telephone, or post.

The choice of questions is important because of the need to avoid bias or ambiguity in the questions, ‘leading’ the respondent or causing offense.

• Open questions are designed to encourage a full, meaningful answer using the subject’s own knowledge and feelings. They provide insights into feelings, opinions, and understanding. Example: “How do you feel about that situation?”
• Closed questions can be answered with a simple “yes” or “no” or specific information, limiting the depth of response. They are useful for gathering specific facts or confirming details. Example: “Do you feel anxious in crowds?”

Its other practical advantages are that it is cheaper than face-to-face interviews and can be used to contact many respondents scattered over a wide area relatively quickly.

Observations

There are different types of observation methods :

• Covert observation is where the researcher doesn’t tell the participants they are being observed until after the study is complete. There could be ethical problems or deception and consent with this particular observation method.
• Overt observation is where a researcher tells the participants they are being observed and what they are being observed for.
• Controlled : behavior is observed under controlled laboratory conditions (e.g., Bandura’s Bobo doll study).
• Natural : Here, spontaneous behavior is recorded in a natural setting.
• Participant : Here, the observer has direct contact with the group of people they are observing. The researcher becomes a member of the group they are researching.  
• Non-participant (aka “fly on the wall): The researcher does not have direct contact with the people being observed. The observation of participants’ behavior is from a distance

Pilot Study

A pilot  study is a small scale preliminary study conducted in order to evaluate the feasibility of the key s teps in a future, full-scale project.

A pilot study is an initial run-through of the procedures to be used in an investigation; it involves selecting a few people and trying out the study on them. It is possible to save time, and in some cases, money, by identifying any flaws in the procedures designed by the researcher.

A pilot study can help the researcher spot any ambiguities (i.e. unusual things) or confusion in the information given to participants or problems with the task devised.

Sometimes the task is too hard, and the researcher may get a floor effect, because none of the participants can score at all or can complete the task – all performances are low.

The opposite effect is a ceiling effect, when the task is so easy that all achieve virtually full marks or top performances and are “hitting the ceiling”.

Research Design

In cross-sectional research , a researcher compares multiple segments of the population at the same time

Sometimes, we want to see how people change over time, as in studies of human development and lifespan. Longitudinal research is a research design in which data-gathering is administered repeatedly over an extended period of time.

In cohort studies , the participants must share a common factor or characteristic such as age, demographic, or occupation. A cohort study is a type of longitudinal study in which researchers monitor and observe a chosen population over an extended period.

Triangulation means using more than one research method to improve the study’s validity.

Reliability

Reliability is a measure of consistency, if a particular measurement is repeated and the same result is obtained then it is described as being reliable.

• Test-retest reliability :  assessing the same person on two different occasions which shows the extent to which the test produces the same answers.
• Inter-observer reliability : the extent to which there is an agreement between two or more observers.

Meta-Analysis

Meta-analysis is a statistical procedure used to combine and synthesize findings from multiple independent studies to estimate the average effect size for a particular research question.

Meta-analysis goes beyond traditional narrative reviews by using statistical methods to integrate the results of several studies, leading to a more objective appraisal of the evidence.

This is done by looking through various databases, and then decisions are made about what studies are to be included/excluded.

• Strengths : Increases the conclusions’ validity as they’re based on a wider range.
• Weaknesses : Research designs in studies can vary, so they are not truly comparable.

Peer Review

A researcher submits an article to a journal. The choice of the journal may be determined by the journal’s audience or prestige.

The journal selects two or more appropriate experts (psychologists working in a similar field) to peer review the article without payment. The peer reviewers assess: the methods and designs used, originality of the findings, the validity of the original research findings and its content, structure and language.

Feedback from the reviewer determines whether the article is accepted. The article may be: Accepted as it is, accepted with revisions, sent back to the author to revise and re-submit or rejected without the possibility of submission.

The editor makes the final decision whether to accept or reject the research report based on the reviewers comments/ recommendations.

Peer review is important because it prevent faulty data from entering the public domain, it provides a way of checking the validity of findings and the quality of the methodology and is used to assess the research rating of university departments.

Peer reviews may be an ideal, whereas in practice there are lots of problems. For example, it slows publication down and may prevent unusual, new work being published. Some reviewers might use it as an opportunity to prevent competing researchers from publishing work.

Some people doubt whether peer review can really prevent the publication of fraudulent research.

The advent of the internet means that a lot of research and academic comment is being published without official peer reviews than before, though systems are evolving on the internet where everyone really has a chance to offer their opinions and police the quality of research.

Types of Data

• Quantitative data is numerical data e.g. reaction time or number of mistakes. It represents how much or how long, how many there are of something. A tally of behavioral categories and closed questions in a questionnaire collect quantitative data.
• Qualitative data is virtually any type of information that can be observed and recorded that is not numerical in nature and can be in the form of written or verbal communication. Open questions in questionnaires and accounts from observational studies collect qualitative data.
• Primary data is first-hand data collected for the purpose of the investigation.
• Secondary data is information that has been collected by someone other than the person who is conducting the research e.g. taken from journals, books or articles.

Validity means how well a piece of research actually measures what it sets out to, or how well it reflects the reality it claims to represent.

Validity is whether the observed effect is genuine and represents what is actually out there in the world.

• Concurrent validity is the extent to which a psychological measure relates to an existing similar measure and obtains close results. For example, a new intelligence test compared to an established test.
• Face validity : does the test measure what it’s supposed to measure ‘on the face of it’. This is done by ‘eyeballing’ the measuring or by passing it to an expert to check.
• Ecological validit y is the extent to which findings from a research study can be generalized to other settings / real life.
• Temporal validity is the extent to which findings from a research study can be generalized to other historical times.

Features of Science

• Paradigm – A set of shared assumptions and agreed methods within a scientific discipline.
• Paradigm shift – The result of the scientific revolution: a significant change in the dominant unifying theory within a scientific discipline.
• Objectivity – When all sources of personal bias are minimised so not to distort or influence the research process.
• Empirical method – Scientific approaches that are based on the gathering of evidence through direct observation and experience.
• Replicability – The extent to which scientific procedures and findings can be repeated by other researchers.
• Falsifiability – The principle that a theory cannot be considered scientific unless it admits the possibility of being proved untrue.

Statistical Testing

A significant result is one where there is a low probability that chance factors were responsible for any observed difference, correlation, or association in the variables tested.

If our test is significant, we can reject our null hypothesis and accept our alternative hypothesis.

If our test is not significant, we can accept our null hypothesis and reject our alternative hypothesis. A null hypothesis is a statement of no effect.

In Psychology, we use p < 0.05 (as it strikes a balance between making a type I and II error) but p < 0.01 is used in tests that could cause harm like introducing a new drug.

A type I error is when the null hypothesis is rejected when it should have been accepted (happens when a lenient significance level is used, an error of optimism).

A type II error is when the null hypothesis is accepted when it should have been rejected (happens when a stringent significance level is used, an error of pessimism).

Ethical Issues

• Informed consent is when participants are able to make an informed judgment about whether to take part. It causes them to guess the aims of the study and change their behavior.
• To deal with it, we can gain presumptive consent or ask them to formally indicate their agreement to participate but it may invalidate the purpose of the study and it is not guaranteed that the participants would understand.
• Deception should only be used when it is approved by an ethics committee, as it involves deliberately misleading or withholding information. Participants should be fully debriefed after the study but debriefing can’t turn the clock back.
• All participants should be informed at the beginning that they have the right to withdraw if they ever feel distressed or uncomfortable.
• It causes bias as the ones that stayed are obedient and some may not withdraw as they may have been given incentives or feel like they’re spoiling the study. Researchers can offer the right to withdraw data after participation.
• Participants should all have protection from harm . The researcher should avoid risks greater than those experienced in everyday life and they should stop the study if any harm is suspected. However, the harm may not be apparent at the time of the study.
• Confidentiality concerns the communication of personal information. The researchers should not record any names but use numbers or false names though it may not be possible as it is sometimes possible to work out who the researchers were.

Learning Materials

• Business Studies
• Combined Science
• Computer Science
• Engineering
• English Literature
• Environmental Science
• Human Geography
• Macroeconomics
• Microeconomics
• Experimental Method

A key aim of psychology is to learn and understand more about psychological phenomena. This is usually done through a process called the experimental method . The experimental method in psychology research attempts to investigate the cause-and-effect relationship between variables . The crucial aspect of the experimental method is that it follows a 'scientific routine' to increase the chances of establishing valid and reliable results. As you can expect with all kinds of research, there are many advantages and disadvantages of the experimental method in psychology research. 

Create learning materials about Experimental Method with our free learning app!

• Instand access to millions of learning materials
• Flashcards, notes, mock-exams and more
• Everything you need to ace your exams

Millions of flashcards designed to help you ace your studies

• Cell Biology

What are the three different designs that can be used in the experimental method? 

What is the definition of the experimental method?

What are the three main features of the experimental method?

What does IV stand for, and what is its definition?

What does DV stand for, and what is its definition?

What do extraneous variables affect? 

Can a research be considered valid if many extraneous variables have been found to affect the study? 

What are the different techniques used to improve the validity of research? 

What is an independent group design?

What is a repeated measures design?

What is a matched pairs design?

• Approaches in Psychology
• Basic Psychology
• Biological Bases of Behavior
• Biopsychology
• Careers in Psychology
• Clinical Psychology
• Bartlett War of the Ghosts
• Brain Development
• Bruner and Minturn Study of Perceptual Set
• Case Studies Psychology
• Computation
• Conservation of Number Piaget
• Constructive Processes in Memory
• Correlation
• Data handling
• Depth Cues Psychology
• Designing Research
• Developmental Research
• Dweck's Theory of Mindset
• Ethical considerations in research
• Factors Affecting Perception
• Factors Affecting the Accuracy of Memory
• Formulation of Hypothesis
• Gibson's Theory of Direct Perception
• Gregory's Constructivist Theory of Perception
• Gunderson et al 2013 study
• Hughes Policeman Doll Study
• Issues and Debates in Developmental Psychology
• Language and Perception
• McGarrigle and Donaldson Naughty Teddy
• Memory Processes
• Memory recall
• Nature and Nurture in Development
• Normal Distribution Psychology
• Perception Research
• Perceptual Set
• Piagets Theory in Education
• Planning and Conducting Research
• Population Samples
• Primary and Secondary Data
• Quantitative Data
• Quantitative and Qualitative Data
• Quantitative and Qualitative Methods
• Research Procedures
• Serial Position Effect
• Short-term Retention
• Structures of Memory
• Tables, Charts and Graphs
• The Effects of Learning on Development
• The Gilchrist And Nesberg Study Of Motivation
• Three Mountains Task
• Types of Variable
• Types of bias and how to control
• Visual Cues and Constancies
• Visual illusions
• Willingham's Learning Theory
• Cognition and Development
• Cognitive Psychology
• Data Handling and Analysis
• Developmental Psychology
• Eating Behaviour
• Emotion and Motivation
• Famous Psychologists
• Forensic Psychology
• Health Psychology
• Individual Differences Psychology
• Issues and Debates in Psychology
• Personality in Psychology
• Psychological Treatment
• Relationships
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Schizophrenia
• Scientific Foundations of Psychology
• Scientific Investigation
• Sensation and Perception
• Social Context of Behaviour
• Social Psychology

The experimental method is a research process that involves following scientific guidelines to test hypotheses and establish causal relationships between variables .

• To begin with our learning of the experiment method, we will start with a quick recap covering the elements that make up research.
• We will then move on to discuss the experimental method in psychology research.
• To finish off, we will discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the experimental method in psychology.

Experimental Method of Research

Before we get into the experimental method in psychology research, let's take a quick look at what are the basic components that make up scientific research .

Hypotheses and variables

The hypothesis is an important component of research. The hypothesis is formed at the start of an experiment with the purpose of stating what the researcher expects to find in their study. The hypothesis is important because it is used to identify if the results support or negate psychological theories.

The h ypothesis is a specific, testable statement about the expected outcomes after comparing two (or more) variables.

The hypothesis needs to state the variables being investigated in the research.

The independent variable (IV) is the variable that the researcher manipulates/ changes in their study. This is the variable that the researcher believes these changes in the IV will cause a change in the dependent variable (DV).

The DV is the variable that is being observed and measured. The DV is thought of as the effect that is caused by the changes in the IV.

There are other types of variables, such as extraneous variables, participant variables and situational variables. These are variables that may cause changes in the DV. Ideally, psychology research that follows the scientific method should not have these types of variables. However, it is next to impossible to control for every potential variable that should not affect the DV.

Stages of the experimental method in psychology research

The experimental method has a standardised procedure and has several fixed steps to it that are usually carried out in a lab setting .

• Identify the topic of interest/research and form a hypothesis.
• Identify the IV(s) and DV(s), determine the design and type of experiment, and determine how to measure the IV and DV, e.g. self-report measure, observations, etc.
• Prepare the materials needed in the study and recruit participants through an appropriate sampling method.
• Conduct the experiment in a carefully planned scientific manner, collect the data and statistically analyse the results.
• Write up the lab report, evaluate the study and give suggestions for further research.

Experimental Method Example

A hypothetical study has been described below to show how the experimental method is used in psychology research.

• The researchers researched previously published work on the effects of caffeine on reaction times. The researchers hypothesised that drinking caffeine would affect reaction times based on the previous findings.
• The researchers identified reaction time as the DV and caffeine as the IV; they decided to carry out the study in a lab setting.
• The next stage involved preparing a test that measured reaction times, and participants were randomly assigned to three groups (drink with high levels of caffeine, drink with low levels of caffeine and no caffeine).
• The study was then carried out in a manner to prevent the reliability and validity of the study from being lowered.
• The results of the study were written up in the correct psychology format.

The Features of the Experimental Method

There are three essential requirements of research that follows the experimental method.

We will now discuss each of these and identify how researchers can try and make sure that their research meets these requirements.

Research needs to be considered empirical. Empirical research means that the findings should be reflective of objective facts that the researcher has observed rather than their subjective opinion.

The next requirement, reliability, is important as it makes sure that research findings are consistent across time, in different situations, settings and when applied to other people. When research is found to be reliable, then it is thought that the research findings are representative of the population and can be applied to real-life settings.

Reliability refers to how consistent the results of an experiment are. If the results are similar when the same procedure has been carried out on different occasions, settings or using different participants, then the findings will be considered reliable.

Testing the same study vigorously using the same methodology but on different days, settings, and times or using different samples is used to identify if a study is reliable.

The third requirement of research that follows the experimental method is validity.

Validity is how well a test measures what it intends to.

Validity is important because if the researcher is not in fact measuring what they claim they are measuring, then the results are not accurate and cannot be accurately interpreted or applied. For example, if a test claims it measures personality type but instead measures emotion level, it cannot be a valid test.

The researcher should ensure that their subjective opinion does not influence the research methodology and analysis to ensure research is valid. Researchers can try and combat this through:

Random allocation : Participants are randomly assigned to the experimental or control group; this is used to ensure that individual differences do not cause the results.

Single/Double-blind technique: The researcher is unaware of which experimental condition the participants are in. This prevents the researcher from giving subconscious hints that may influence the participants' behaviour.

Studies that do not use this may measure participants' artificial responses, so the results may not be considered valid.

Types of Experimental Method in Psychology: Experimental Designs

The allocation of participants in experimental/ control conditions is important to ensure that a study is valid. The experimental design is the different ways the participants are split into different conditions/groups of the IV. There are different types of experimental designs .

The independent group's design (IGD)

The IGD is when different participants are assigned to each condition.

When investigating the effect of sleep on reaction times, if using an IGD you would have one group with less sleep (4 hours) and one group with more sleep (11 hours), and the results between the two groups would be compared.

The advantages of this design are that it is less time-consuming than the alternative methods. As different participants are used for each condition there is less chance of participants guessing the hypothesis and altering their behaviour and order effects is not an issue.

However, the disadvantages of this design are that the researcher needs to recruit more participants compared to the other designs. Moreover, there is an increased chance of individual differences influencing the results.

The repeated measures design (RMD)

The RMD is when the same participants are used in all of the conditions.

RMD may be used when investigating if participants are better at memorising information from educational videos or from reading books. The study would involve testing memory after watching an educational video and after reading a book. Each participant would be tested in both conditions.

The advantages of this design are that individual differences will not influence the results of the study as each participant is tested in both conditions and fewer participants may be required to be recruited in comparison to IGD.

In contrast, a disadvantage of this design is that there is a higher risk of order effects influencing the results. This is the idea that the order of conditions tested may influence the study's results.

The matched pairs design (MPD)

The MPD is when participants in each condition are matched on specific variables relevant to the study, e.g. gender, age, IQ, etc.

The advantages of the MPD are that there is no chance of order effects since each condition has a different set of participants and there is less risk of individual differences affecting the results since participants have been matched on such variables.

The disadvantages of this design are that matching participants may be a difficult, costly and time-consuming process.

Advantages and Disadvantages of the Experimental Method in Psychology

Let's move on to discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the experimental method as a whole.

Advantages of the experimental method

• The experimental method gives researchers a high level of control since they choose the IVs and DVs, how to measure them, and the procedure of the study. This means the studies are likely to be high in validity.
• Because of the standardised procedures, experiments can be replicated and their reliability can be tested.

The experimental method allows cause and effect relationships to be determined, which is the goal of psychological research.

The conclusions of these experiments allow useful applications to the real world.

Disadvantages of the experimental method

• Results are subject to human error and subjectivity, e.g. researcher bias, social desirability bias, order effects, etc and so it can be difficult to strictly adhere to the experimental method.
• The procedure of the experimental method can be time-consuming and costly.
• Can include practical problems, e.g. some variables may be hard to manipulate or measure.
• Extraneous variables sometimes can't be controlled, which can lower the validity of a study and its results.
• Participants' behaviour can be influenced by the researcher or the conditions of the experiment.

The Experimental Method - Key Takeaways

• The experimental method is a research process that involves following scientific guidelines to test hypotheses and establish causal relationships between variables.
• There are three important requirements of scientific research that follow the experimental method; these are that research should be empirical, reliable and valid.
• The experimental designs used in psychology research are the independent measures design, repeated measures design and matched pairs design .
• There are advantages and disadvantages of the experimental method in psychology.

Flashcards in Experimental Method 17

The independent measures design, repeated measures design and matched pairs design. 

The experimental method is a research process that involves following scientific guidelines to test hypotheses and establish causal relationships between variables. 

Research should be empirical, reliable and valid. 

Independent Variable (IV) - is the variable that the researcher manipulates/ changes in their study. This is the variable that the researcher believes these changes in the IV will cause a change in the dependent variable (DV). 

Dependent Variable (DV)  - The DV is the variable that is being observed and measured. The DV is thought of as the effect caused by the changes in the independent variable. 

Learn with 17 Experimental Method flashcards in the free Vaia app

We have 14,000 flashcards about Dynamic Landscapes.

Already have an account? Log in

Frequently Asked Questions about Experimental Method

What are the five steps in the experimental method?

The five steps of the experimental method are:

Who used the experimental method?

Some famous researchers who used the experimental method in psychology research are Loftus and Palmer's (1974) experiment on the accuracy of eyewitness testimony, Asch's (1951) Conformity study, and Milgram's (1963) Obedience experiment. 

What is the quasi-experimental method?

The quasi-experimental method is similar to the experimental method in that it tests how changes in the independent variable affect the dependent variable. 

The difference between the two types of the experimental method is that quasi-experimental methods do not randomly assign participants to control and experimental groups, whereas the experimental method does.   

What is the experimental method of psychology?

The experimental method is a research process that involves following scientific guidelines to test hypotheses and establish causal relationships between variables. 

What are the main advantages of the experimental method?

The main advantages of the experimental method are:

• Because of the standardised procedures, experiments can be replicated, and their reliability can be tested.

Test your knowledge with multiple choice flashcards

Can the experimental method be used to identify if there is a cause-and-effect relationship between variables? 

Join the Vaia App and learn efficiently with millions of flashcards and more!

Keep learning, you are doing great.

Discover learning materials with the free Vaia app

Vaia is a globally recognized educational technology company, offering a holistic learning platform designed for students of all ages and educational levels. Our platform provides learning support for a wide range of subjects, including STEM, Social Sciences, and Languages and also helps students to successfully master various tests and exams worldwide, such as GCSE, A Level, SAT, ACT, Abitur, and more. We offer an extensive library of learning materials, including interactive flashcards, comprehensive textbook solutions, and detailed explanations. The cutting-edge technology and tools we provide help students create their own learning materials. StudySmarter’s content is not only expert-verified but also regularly updated to ensure accuracy and relevance.

Vaia Editorial Team

Team Psychology Teachers

• 10 minutes reading time
• Checked by Vaia Editorial Team

Study anywhere. Anytime.Across all devices.

Create a free account to save this explanation..

Save explanations to your personalised space and access them anytime, anywhere!

By signing up, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and the Privacy Policy of Vaia.

Sign up to highlight and take notes. It’s 100% free.

Join over 22 million students in learning with our Vaia App

The first learning app that truly has everything you need to ace your exams in one place

• Flashcards & Quizzes
• AI Study Assistant
• Study Planner
• Smart Note-Taking

Privacy Overview

Get unlimited access with a free vaia account..

• Instant access to millions of learning materials.
• Flashcards, notes, mock-exams, AI tools and more.
• Everything you need to ace your exams.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

6.3 Conducting Experiments

Learning objectives.

• Describe several strategies for recruiting participants for an experiment.
• Explain why it is important to standardize the procedure of an experiment and several ways to do this.
• Explain what pilot testing is and why it is important.

The information presented so far in this chapter is enough to design a basic experiment. When it comes time to conduct that experiment, however, several additional practical issues arise. In this section, we consider some of these issues and how to deal with them. Much of this information applies to nonexperimental studies as well as experimental ones.

Recruiting Participants

Of course, you should be thinking about how you will obtain your participants from the beginning of any research project. Unless you have access to people with schizophrenia or incarcerated juvenile offenders, for example, then there is no point designing a study that focuses on these populations. But even if you plan to use a convenience sample, you will have to recruit participants for your study.

There are several approaches to recruiting participants. One is to use participants from a formal subject pool —an established group of people who have agreed to be contacted about participating in research studies. For example, at many colleges and universities, there is a subject pool consisting of students enrolled in introductory psychology courses who must participate in a certain number of studies to meet a course requirement. Researchers post descriptions of their studies and students sign up to participate, usually via an online system. Participants who are not in subject pools can also be recruited by posting or publishing advertisements or making personal appeals to groups that represent the population of interest. For example, a researcher interested in studying older adults could arrange to speak at a meeting of the residents at a retirement community to explain the study and ask for volunteers.

The Volunteer Subject

Even if the participants in a study receive compensation in the form of course credit, a small amount of money, or a chance at being treated for a psychological problem, they are still essentially volunteers. This is worth considering because people who volunteer to participate in psychological research have been shown to differ in predictable ways from those who do not volunteer. Specifically, there is good evidence that on average, volunteers have the following characteristics compared with nonvolunteers (Rosenthal & Rosnow, 1976):

• They are more interested in the topic of the research.
• They are more educated.
• They have a greater need for approval.
• They have higher intelligence quotients (IQs).
• They are more sociable.
• They are higher in social class.

This can be an issue of external validity if there is reason to believe that participants with these characteristics are likely to behave differently than the general population. For example, in testing different methods of persuading people, a rational argument might work better on volunteers than it does on the general population because of their generally higher educational level and IQ.

In many field experiments, the task is not recruiting participants but selecting them. For example, researchers Nicolas Guéguen and Marie-Agnès de Gail conducted a field experiment on the effect of being smiled at on helping, in which the participants were shoppers at a supermarket. A confederate walking down a stairway gazed directly at a shopper walking up the stairway and either smiled or did not smile. Shortly afterward, the shopper encountered another confederate, who dropped some computer diskettes on the ground. The dependent variable was whether or not the shopper stopped to help pick up the diskettes (Guéguen & de Gail, 2003). Notice that these participants were not “recruited,” but the researchers still had to select them from among all the shoppers taking the stairs that day. It is extremely important that this kind of selection be done according to a well-defined set of rules that is established before the data collection begins and can be explained clearly afterward. In this case, with each trip down the stairs, the confederate was instructed to gaze at the first person he encountered who appeared to be between the ages of 20 and 50. Only if the person gazed back did he or she become a participant in the study. The point of having a well-defined selection rule is to avoid bias in the selection of participants. For example, if the confederate was free to choose which shoppers he would gaze at, he might choose friendly-looking shoppers when he was set to smile and unfriendly-looking ones when he was not set to smile. As we will see shortly, such biases can be entirely unintentional.

Standardizing the Procedure

It is surprisingly easy to introduce extraneous variables during the procedure. For example, the same experimenter might give clear instructions to one participant but vague instructions to another. Or one experimenter might greet participants warmly while another barely makes eye contact with them. To the extent that such variables affect participants’ behavior, they add noise to the data and make the effect of the independent variable more difficult to detect. If they vary across conditions, they become confounding variables and provide alternative explanations for the results. For example, if participants in a treatment group are tested by a warm and friendly experimenter and participants in a control group are tested by a cold and unfriendly one, then what appears to be an effect of the treatment might actually be an effect of experimenter demeanor.

Experimenter’s Sex as an Extraneous Variable

It is well known that whether research participants are male or female can affect the results of a study. But what about whether the experimenter is male or female? There is plenty of evidence that this matters too. Male and female experimenters have slightly different ways of interacting with their participants, and of course participants also respond differently to male and female experimenters (Rosenthal, 1976). For example, in a recent study on pain perception, participants immersed their hands in icy water for as long as they could (Ibolya, Brake, & Voss, 2004). Male participants tolerated the pain longer when the experimenter was a woman, and female participants tolerated it longer when the experimenter was a man.

Researcher Robert Rosenthal has spent much of his career showing that this kind of unintended variation in the procedure does, in fact, affect participants’ behavior. Furthermore, one important source of such variation is the experimenter’s expectations about how participants “should” behave in the experiment. This is referred to as an experimenter expectancy effect (Rosenthal, 1976). For example, if an experimenter expects participants in a treatment group to perform better on a task than participants in a control group, then he or she might unintentionally give the treatment group participants clearer instructions or more encouragement or allow them more time to complete the task. In a striking example, Rosenthal and Kermit Fode had several students in a laboratory course in psychology train rats to run through a maze. Although the rats were genetically similar, some of the students were told that they were working with “maze-bright” rats that had been bred to be good learners, and other students were told that they were working with “maze-dull” rats that had been bred to be poor learners. Sure enough, over five days of training, the “maze-bright” rats made more correct responses, made the correct response more quickly, and improved more steadily than the “maze-dull” rats (Rosenthal & Fode, 1963). Clearly it had to have been the students’ expectations about how the rats would perform that made the difference. But how? Some clues come from data gathered at the end of the study, which showed that students who expected their rats to learn quickly felt more positively about their animals and reported behaving toward them in a more friendly manner (e.g., handling them more).

The way to minimize unintended variation in the procedure is to standardize it as much as possible so that it is carried out in the same way for all participants regardless of the condition they are in. Here are several ways to do this:

• Create a written protocol that specifies everything that the experimenters are to do and say from the time they greet participants to the time they dismiss them.
• Create standard instructions that participants read themselves or that are read to them word for word by the experimenter.
• Automate the rest of the procedure as much as possible by using software packages for this purpose or even simple computer slide shows.
• Anticipate participants’ questions and either raise and answer them in the instructions or develop standard answers for them.
• Train multiple experimenters on the protocol together and have them practice on each other.
• Be sure that each experimenter tests participants in all conditions.

Another good practice is to arrange for the experimenters to be “blind” to the research question or to the condition that each participant is tested in. The idea is to minimize experimenter expectancy effects by minimizing the experimenters’ expectations. For example, in a drug study in which each participant receives the drug or a placebo, it is often the case that neither the participants nor the experimenter who interacts with the participants know which condition he or she has been assigned to. Because both the participants and the experimenters are blind to the condition, this is referred to as a double-blind study. (A single-blind study is one in which the participant, but not the experimenter, is blind to the condition.) Of course, there are many times this is not possible. For example, if you are both the investigator and the only experimenter, it is not possible for you to remain blind to the research question. Also, in many studies the experimenter must know the condition because he or she must carry out the procedure in a different way in the different conditions.

Record Keeping

It is essential to keep good records when you conduct an experiment. As discussed earlier, it is typical for experimenters to generate a written sequence of conditions before the study begins and then to test each new participant in the next condition in the sequence. As you test them, it is a good idea to add to this list basic demographic information; the date, time, and place of testing; and the name of the experimenter who did the testing. It is also a good idea to have a place for the experimenter to write down comments about unusual occurrences (e.g., a confused or uncooperative participant) or questions that come up. This kind of information can be useful later if you decide to analyze sex differences or effects of different experimenters, or if a question arises about a particular participant or testing session.

It can also be useful to assign an identification number to each participant as you test them. Simply numbering them consecutively beginning with 1 is usually sufficient. This number can then also be written on any response sheets or questionnaires that participants generate, making it easier to keep them together.

Pilot Testing

It is always a good idea to conduct a pilot test of your experiment. A pilot test is a small-scale study conducted to make sure that a new procedure works as planned. In a pilot test, you can recruit participants formally (e.g., from an established participant pool) or you can recruit them informally from among family, friends, classmates, and so on. The number of participants can be small, but it should be enough to give you confidence that your procedure works as planned. There are several important questions that you can answer by conducting a pilot test:

• Do participants understand the instructions?
• What kind of misunderstandings do participants have, what kind of mistakes do they make, and what kind of questions do they ask?
• Do participants become bored or frustrated?
• Is an indirect manipulation effective? (You will need to include a manipulation check.)
• Can participants guess the research question or hypothesis?
• How long does the procedure take?
• Are computer programs or other automated procedures working properly?
• Are data being recorded correctly?

Of course, to answer some of these questions you will need to observe participants carefully during the procedure and talk with them about it afterward. Participants are often hesitant to criticize a study in front of the researcher, so be sure they understand that this is a pilot test and you are genuinely interested in feedback that will help you improve the procedure. If the procedure works as planned, then you can proceed with the actual study. If there are problems to be solved, you can solve them, pilot test the new procedure, and continue with this process until you are ready to proceed.

Key Takeaways

• There are several effective methods you can use to recruit research participants for your experiment, including through formal subject pools, advertisements, and personal appeals. Field experiments require well-defined participant selection procedures.
• It is important to standardize experimental procedures to minimize extraneous variables, including experimenter expectancy effects.
• It is important to conduct one or more small-scale pilot tests of an experiment to be sure that the procedure works as planned.
• Practice: List two ways that you might recruit participants from each of the following populations: (a) elderly adults, (b) unemployed people, (c) regular exercisers, and (d) math majors.
• Discussion: Imagine a study in which you will visually present participants with a list of 20 words, one at a time, wait for a short time, and then ask them to recall as many of the words as they can. In the stressed condition, they are told that they might also be chosen to give a short speech in front of a small audience. In the unstressed condition, they are not told that they might have to give a speech. What are several specific things that you could do to standardize the procedure?

Guéguen, N., & de Gail, Marie-Agnès. (2003). The effect of smiling on helping behavior: Smiling and good Samaritan behavior. Communication Reports, 16 , 133–140.

Ibolya, K., Brake, A., & Voss, U. (2004). The effect of experimenter characteristics on pain reports in women and men. Pain, 112 , 142–147.

Rosenthal, R. (1976). Experimenter effects in behavioral research (enlarged ed.). New York, NY: Wiley.

Rosenthal, R., & Fode, K. (1963). The effect of experimenter bias on performance of the albino rat. Behavioral Science, 8 , 183-189.

Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (1976). The volunteer subject . New York, NY: Wiley.

Research Methods in Psychology Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Experimental Psychology Studies Humans and Animals

Understanding Experimental Psychology

Our personalities, and to some degree our life experiences, are defined by the way we behave. But what influences the way we behave in the first place? How does our behavior shape our experiences throughout our lives? 

Experimental psychologists are interested in exploring theoretical questions, often by creating a hypothesis and then setting out to prove or disprove it through experimentation. They study a wide range of behavioral topics among humans and animals, including sensation, perception, attention, memory, cognition and emotion.

Experimental Psychology Applied

Experimental psychologists use scientific methods to collect data and perform research. Often, their work builds, one study at a time, to a larger finding or conclusion. Some researchers have devoted their entire career to answering one complex research question. 

These psychologists work in a variety of settings, including universities, research centers, government agencies and private businesses. The focus of their research is as varied as the settings in which they work. Often, personal interest and educational background will influence the research questions they choose to explore. 

In a sense, all psychologists can be considered experimental psychologists since research is the foundation of the discipline, and many psychologists split their professional focus among research, patient care, teaching or program administration. Experimental psychologists, however, often devote their full attention to research — its design, execution, analysis and dissemination. 

Those focusing their careers specifically on experimental psychology contribute work across subfields . For example, they use scientific research to provide insights that improve teaching and learning, create safer workplaces and transportation systems, improve substance abuse treatment programs and promote healthy child development.

Related books

Deliberate Practice in Interpersonal Psychotherapy

APA Handbook of Health Psychology

Methodological Issues and Strategies, 5e

Essentials of Constructivist Critical Incident ...

How to Mix Methods

Psychology subfields

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

Chapter 6: Experimental Research

Experimental Design

Learning Objectives

• Explain the difference between between-subjects and within-subjects experiments, list some of the pros and cons of each approach, and decide which approach to use to answer a particular research question.
• Define random assignment, distinguish it from random sampling, explain its purpose in experimental research, and use some simple strategies to implement it.
• Define what a control condition is, explain its purpose in research on treatment effectiveness, and describe some alternative types of control conditions.
• Define several types of carryover effect, give examples of each, and explain how counterbalancing helps to deal with them.

In this section, we look at some different ways to design an experiment. The primary distinction we will make is between approaches in which each participant experiences one level of the independent variable and approaches in which each participant experiences all levels of the independent variable. The former are called between-subjects experiments and the latter are called within-subjects experiments.

Between-Subjects Experiments

In a  between-subjects experiment , each participant is tested in only one condition. For example, a researcher with a sample of 100 university  students might assign half of them to write about a traumatic event and the other half write about a neutral event. Or a researcher with a sample of 60 people with severe agoraphobia (fear of open spaces) might assign 20 of them to receive each of three different treatments for that disorder. It is essential in a between-subjects experiment that the researcher assign participants to conditions so that the different groups are, on average, highly similar to each other. Those in a trauma condition and a neutral condition, for example, should include a similar proportion of men and women, and they should have similar average intelligence quotients (IQs), similar average levels of motivation, similar average numbers of health problems, and so on. This matching is a matter of controlling these extraneous participant variables across conditions so that they do not become confounding variables.

Random Assignment

The primary way that researchers accomplish this kind of control of extraneous variables across conditions is called  random assignment , which means using a random process to decide which participants are tested in which conditions. Do not confuse random assignment with random sampling. Random sampling is a method for selecting a sample from a population, and it is rarely used in psychological research. Random assignment is a method for assigning participants in a sample to the different conditions, and it is an important element of all experimental research in psychology and other fields too.

In its strictest sense, random assignment should meet two criteria. One is that each participant has an equal chance of being assigned to each condition (e.g., a 50% chance of being assigned to each of two conditions). The second is that each participant is assigned to a condition independently of other participants. Thus one way to assign participants to two conditions would be to flip a coin for each one. If the coin lands heads, the participant is assigned to Condition A, and if it lands tails, the participant is assigned to Condition B. For three conditions, one could use a computer to generate a random integer from 1 to 3 for each participant. If the integer is 1, the participant is assigned to Condition A; if it is 2, the participant is assigned to Condition B; and if it is 3, the participant is assigned to Condition C. In practice, a full sequence of conditions—one for each participant expected to be in the experiment—is usually created ahead of time, and each new participant is assigned to the next condition in the sequence as he or she is tested. When the procedure is computerized, the computer program often handles the random assignment.

One problem with coin flipping and other strict procedures for random assignment is that they are likely to result in unequal sample sizes in the different conditions. Unequal sample sizes are generally not a serious problem, and you should never throw away data you have already collected to achieve equal sample sizes. However, for a fixed number of participants, it is statistically most efficient to divide them into equal-sized groups. It is standard practice, therefore, to use a kind of modified random assignment that keeps the number of participants in each group as similar as possible. One approach is block randomization . In block randomization, all the conditions occur once in the sequence before any of them is repeated. Then they all occur again before any of them is repeated again. Within each of these “blocks,” the conditions occur in a random order. Again, the sequence of conditions is usually generated before any participants are tested, and each new participant is assigned to the next condition in the sequence.  Table 6.2  shows such a sequence for assigning nine participants to three conditions. The Research Randomizer website will generate block randomization sequences for any number of participants and conditions. Again, when the procedure is computerized, the computer program often handles the block randomization.

Random assignment is not guaranteed to control all extraneous variables across conditions. It is always possible that just by chance, the participants in one condition might turn out to be substantially older, less tired, more motivated, or less depressed on average than the participants in another condition. However, there are some reasons that this possibility is not a major concern. One is that random assignment works better than one might expect, especially for large samples. Another is that the inferential statistics that researchers use to decide whether a difference between groups reflects a difference in the population takes the “fallibility” of random assignment into account. Yet another reason is that even if random assignment does result in a confounding variable and therefore produces misleading results, this confound is likely to be detected when the experiment is replicated. The upshot is that random assignment to conditions—although not infallible in terms of controlling extraneous variables—is always considered a strength of a research design.

Treatment and Control Conditions

Between-subjects experiments are often used to determine whether a treatment works. In psychological research, a  treatment  is any intervention meant to change people’s behaviour for the better. This  intervention  includes psychotherapies and medical treatments for psychological disorders but also interventions designed to improve learning, promote conservation, reduce prejudice, and so on. To determine whether a treatment works, participants are randomly assigned to either a  treatment condition , in which they receive the treatment, or a control condition , in which they do not receive the treatment. If participants in the treatment condition end up better off than participants in the control condition—for example, they are less depressed, learn faster, conserve more, express less prejudice—then the researcher can conclude that the treatment works. In research on the effectiveness of psychotherapies and medical treatments, this type of experiment is often called a randomized clinical trial .

There are different types of control conditions. In a  no-treatment control condition , participants receive no treatment whatsoever. One problem with this approach, however, is the existence of placebo effects. A  placebo  is a simulated treatment that lacks any active ingredient or element that should make it effective, and a  placebo effect  is a positive effect of such a treatment. Many folk remedies that seem to work—such as eating chicken soup for a cold or placing soap under the bedsheets to stop nighttime leg cramps—are probably nothing more than placebos. Although placebo effects are not well understood, they are probably driven primarily by people’s expectations that they will improve. Having the expectation to improve can result in reduced stress, anxiety, and depression, which can alter perceptions and even improve immune system functioning (Price, Finniss, & Benedetti, 2008) [1] .

Placebo effects are interesting in their own right (see  Note “The Powerful Placebo” ), but they also pose a serious problem for researchers who want to determine whether a treatment works.  Figure 6.2  shows some hypothetical results in which participants in a treatment condition improved more on average than participants in a no-treatment control condition. If these conditions (the two leftmost bars in  Figure 6.2 ) were the only conditions in this experiment, however, one could not conclude that the treatment worked. It could be instead that participants in the treatment group improved more because they expected to improve, while those in the no-treatment control condition did not.

Fortunately, there are several solutions to this problem. One is to include a placebo control condition , in which participants receive a placebo that looks much like the treatment but lacks the active ingredient or element thought to be responsible for the treatment’s effectiveness. When participants in a treatment condition take a pill, for example, then those in a placebo control condition would take an identical-looking pill that lacks the active ingredient in the treatment (a “sugar pill”). In research on psychotherapy effectiveness, the placebo might involve going to a psychotherapist and talking in an unstructured way about one’s problems. The idea is that if participants in both the treatment and the placebo control groups expect to improve, then any improvement in the treatment group over and above that in the placebo control group must have been caused by the treatment and not by participants’ expectations. This  difference  is what is shown by a comparison of the two outer bars in  Figure 6.2 .

Of course, the principle of informed consent requires that participants be told that they will be assigned to either a treatment or a placebo control condition—even though they cannot be told which until the experiment ends. In many cases the participants who had been in the control condition are then offered an opportunity to have the real treatment. An alternative approach is to use a waitlist control condition , in which participants are told that they will receive the treatment but must wait until the participants in the treatment condition have already received it. This disclosure allows researchers to compare participants who have received the treatment with participants who are not currently receiving it but who still expect to improve (eventually). A final solution to the problem of placebo effects is to leave out the control condition completely and compare any new treatment with the best available alternative treatment. For example, a new treatment for simple phobia could be compared with standard exposure therapy. Because participants in both conditions receive a treatment, their expectations about improvement should be similar. This approach also makes sense because once there is an effective treatment, the interesting question about a new treatment is not simply “Does it work?” but “Does it work better than what is already available?

The Powerful Placebo

Many people are not surprised that placebos can have a positive effect on disorders that seem fundamentally psychological, including depression, anxiety, and insomnia. However, placebos can also have a positive effect on disorders that most people think of as fundamentally physiological. These include asthma, ulcers, and warts (Shapiro & Shapiro, 1999) [2] . There is even evidence that placebo surgery—also called “sham surgery”—can be as effective as actual surgery.

Medical researcher J. Bruce Moseley and his colleagues conducted a study on the effectiveness of two arthroscopic surgery procedures for osteoarthritis of the knee (Moseley et al., 2002) [3] . The control participants in this study were prepped for surgery, received a tranquilizer, and even received three small incisions in their knees. But they did not receive the actual arthroscopic surgical procedure. The surprising result was that all participants improved in terms of both knee pain and function, and the sham surgery group improved just as much as the treatment groups. According to the researchers, “This study provides strong evidence that arthroscopic lavage with or without débridement [the surgical procedures used] is not better than and appears to be equivalent to a placebo procedure in improving knee pain and self-reported function” (p. 85).

Within-Subjects Experiments

In a within-subjects experiment , each participant is tested under all conditions. Consider an experiment on the effect of a defendant’s physical attractiveness on judgments of his guilt. Again, in a between-subjects experiment, one group of participants would be shown an attractive defendant and asked to judge his guilt, and another group of participants would be shown an unattractive defendant and asked to judge his guilt. In a within-subjects experiment, however, the same group of participants would judge the guilt of both an attractive and an unattractive defendant.

The primary advantage of this approach is that it provides maximum control of extraneous participant variables. Participants in all conditions have the same mean IQ, same socioeconomic status, same number of siblings, and so on—because they are the very same people. Within-subjects experiments also make it possible to use statistical procedures that remove the effect of these extraneous participant variables on the dependent variable and therefore make the data less “noisy” and the effect of the independent variable easier to detect. We will look more closely at this idea later in the book.  However, not all experiments can use a within-subjects design nor would it be desirable to.

Carryover Effects and Counterbalancing

The primary disad vantage of within-subjects designs is that they can result in carryover effects. A  carryover effect  is an effect of being tested in one condition on participants’ behaviour in later conditions. One type of carryover effect is a  practice effect , where participants perform a task better in later conditions because they have had a chance to practice it. Another type is a fatigue effect , where participants perform a task worse in later conditions because they become tired or bored. Being tested in one condition can also change how participants perceive stimuli or interpret their task in later conditions. This  type of effect  is called a  context effect . For example, an average-looking defendant might be judged more harshly when participants have just judged an attractive defendant than when they have just judged an unattractive defendant. Within-subjects experiments also make it easier for participants to guess the hypothesis. For example, a participant who is asked to judge the guilt of an attractive defendant and then is asked to judge the guilt of an unattractive defendant is likely to guess that the hypothesis is that defendant attractiveness affects judgments of guilt. This  knowledge  could lead the participant to judge the unattractive defendant more harshly because he thinks this is what he is expected to do. Or it could make participants judge the two defendants similarly in an effort to be “fair.”

Carryover effects can be interesting in their own right. (Does the attractiveness of one person depend on the attractiveness of other people that we have seen recently?) But when they are not the focus of the research, carryover effects can be problematic. Imagine, for example, that participants judge the guilt of an attractive defendant and then judge the guilt of an unattractive defendant. If they judge the unattractive defendant more harshly, this might be because of his unattractiveness. But it could be instead that they judge him more harshly because they are becoming bored or tired. In other words, the order of the conditions is a confounding variable. The attractive condition is always the first condition and the unattractive condition the second. Thus any difference between the conditions in terms of the dependent variable could be caused by the order of the conditions and not the independent variable itself.

There is a solution to the problem of order effects, however, that can be used in many situations. It is  counterbalancing , which means testing different participants in different orders. For example, some participants would be tested in the attractive defendant condition followed by the unattractive defendant condition, and others would be tested in the unattractive condition followed by the attractive condition. With three conditions, there would be six different orders (ABC, ACB, BAC, BCA, CAB, and CBA), so some participants would be tested in each of the six orders. With counterbalancing, participants are assigned to orders randomly, using the techniques we have already discussed. Thus random assignment plays an important role in within-subjects designs just as in between-subjects designs. Here, instead of randomly assigning to conditions, they are randomly assigned to different orders of conditions. In fact, it can safely be said that if a study does not involve random assignment in one form or another, it is not an experiment.

An efficient way of counterbalancing is through a Latin square design which randomizes through having equal rows and columns. For example, if you have four treatments, you must have four versions. Like a Sudoku puzzle, no treatment can repeat in a row or column. For four versions of four treatments, the Latin square design would look like:

There are two ways to think about what counterbalancing accomplishes. One is that it controls the order of conditions so that it is no longer a confounding variable. Instead of the attractive condition always being first and the unattractive condition always being second, the attractive condition comes first for some participants and second for others. Likewise, the unattractive condition comes first for some participants and second for others. Thus any overall difference in the dependent variable between the two conditions cannot have been caused by the order of conditions. A second way to think about what counterbalancing accomplishes is that if there are carryover effects, it makes it possible to detect them. One can analyze the data separately for each order to see whether it had an effect.

When 9 is “larger” than 221

Researcher Michael Birnbaum has argued that the lack of context provided by between-subjects designs is often a bigger problem than the context effects created by within-subjects designs. To demonstrate this problem, he asked participants to rate two numbers on how large they were on a scale of 1-to-10 where 1 was “very very small” and 10 was “very very large”.  One group of participants were asked to rate the number 9 and another group was asked to rate the number 221 (Birnbaum, 1999) [4] . Participants in this between-subjects design gave the number 9 a mean rating of 5.13 and the number 221 a mean rating of 3.10. In other words, they rated 9 as larger than 221! According to Birnbaum, this difference is because participants spontaneously compared 9 with other one-digit numbers (in which case it is relatively large) and compared 221 with other three-digit numbers (in which case it is relatively small) .

Simultaneous Within-Subjects Designs

So far, we have discussed an approach to within-subjects designs in which participants are tested in one condition at a time. There is another approach, however, that is often used when participants make multiple responses in each condition. Imagine, for example, that participants judge the guilt of 10 attractive defendants and 10 unattractive defendants. Instead of having people make judgments about all 10 defendants of one type followed by all 10 defendants of the other type, the researcher could present all 20 defendants in a sequence that mixed the two types. The researcher could then compute each participant’s mean rating for each type of defendant. Or imagine an experiment designed to see whether people with social anxiety disorder remember negative adjectives (e.g., “stupid,” “incompetent”) better than positive ones (e.g., “happy,” “productive”). The researcher could have participants study a single list that includes both kinds of words and then have them try to recall as many words as possible. The researcher could then count the number of each type of word that was recalled. There are many ways to determine the order in which the stimuli are presented, but one common way is to generate a different random order for each participant.

Between-Subjects or Within-Subjects?

Almost every experiment can be conducted using either a between-subjects design or a within-subjects design. This possibility means that researchers must choose between the two approaches based on their relative merits for the particular situation.

Between-subjects experiments have the advantage of being conceptually simpler and requiring less testing time per participant. They also avoid carryover effects without the need for counterbalancing. Within-subjects experiments have the advantage of controlling extraneous participant variables, which generally reduces noise in the data and makes it easier to detect a relationship between the independent and dependent variables.

A good rule of thumb, then, is that if it is possible to conduct a within-subjects experiment (with proper counterbalancing) in the time that is available per participant—and you have no serious concerns about carryover effects—this design is probably the best option. If a within-subjects design would be difficult or impossible to carry out, then you should consider a between-subjects design instead. For example, if you were testing participants in a doctor’s waiting room or shoppers in line at a grocery store, you might not have enough time to test each participant in all conditions and therefore would opt for a between-subjects design. Or imagine you were trying to reduce people’s level of prejudice by having them interact with someone of another race. A within-subjects design with counterbalancing would require testing some participants in the treatment condition first and then in a control condition. But if the treatment works and reduces people’s level of prejudice, then they would no longer be suitable for testing in the control condition. This difficulty is true for many designs that involve a treatment meant to produce long-term change in participants’ behaviour (e.g., studies testing the effectiveness of psychotherapy). Clearly, a between-subjects design would be necessary here.

Remember also that using one type of design does not preclude using the other type in a different study. There is no reason that a researcher could not use both a between-subjects design and a within-subjects design to answer the same research question. In fact, professional researchers often take exactly this type of mixed methods approach.

Key Takeaways

• Experiments can be conducted using either between-subjects or within-subjects designs. Deciding which to use in a particular situation requires careful consideration of the pros and cons of each approach.
• Random assignment to conditions in between-subjects experiments or to orders of conditions in within-subjects experiments is a fundamental element of experimental research. Its purpose is to control extraneous variables so that they do not become confounding variables.
• Experimental research on the effectiveness of a treatment requires both a treatment condition and a control condition, which can be a no-treatment control condition, a placebo control condition, or a waitlist control condition. Experimental treatments can also be compared with the best available alternative.
• You want to test the relative effectiveness of two training programs for running a marathon.
• Using photographs of people as stimuli, you want to see if smiling people are perceived as more intelligent than people who are not smiling.
• In a field experiment, you want to see if the way a panhandler is dressed (neatly vs. sloppily) affects whether or not passersby give him any money.
• You want to see if concrete nouns (e.g.,  dog ) are recalled better than abstract nouns (e.g.,  truth ).
• Discussion: Imagine that an experiment shows that participants who receive psychodynamic therapy for a dog phobia improve more than participants in a no-treatment control group. Explain a fundamental problem with this research design and at least two ways that it might be corrected.
• Price, D. D., Finniss, D. G., & Benedetti, F. (2008). A comprehensive review of the placebo effect: Recent advances and current thought. Annual Review of Psychology, 59 , 565–590. ↵
• Shapiro, A. K., & Shapiro, E. (1999). The powerful placebo: From ancient priest to modern physician . Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. ↵
• Moseley, J. B., O’Malley, K., Petersen, N. J., Menke, T. J., Brody, B. A., Kuykendall, D. H., … Wray, N. P. (2002). A controlled trial of arthroscopic surgery for osteoarthritis of the knee. The New England Journal of Medicine, 347 , 81–88. ↵
• Birnbaum, M.H. (1999). How to show that 9>221: Collect judgments in a between-subjects design. Psychological Methods, 4(3), 243-249. ↵

An experiment in which each participant is only tested in one condition.

A method of controlling extraneous variables across conditions by using a random process to decide which participants will be tested in the different conditions.

All the conditions of an experiment occur once in the sequence before any of them is repeated.

Any intervention meant to change people’s behaviour for the better.

A condition in a study where participants receive treatment.

A condition in a study that the other condition is compared to. This group does not receive the treatment or intervention that the other conditions do.

A type of experiment to research the effectiveness of psychotherapies and medical treatments.

A type of control condition in which participants receive no treatment.

A simulated treatment that lacks any active ingredient or element that should make it effective.

A positive effect of a treatment that lacks any active ingredient or element to make it effective.

Participants receive a placebo that looks like the treatment but lacks the active ingredient or element thought to be responsible for the treatment’s effectiveness.

Participants are told that they will receive the treatment but must wait until the participants in the treatment condition have already received it.

Each participant is tested under all conditions.

An effect of being tested in one condition on participants’ behaviour in later conditions.

Participants perform a task better in later conditions because they have had a chance to practice it.

Participants perform a task worse in later conditions because they become tired or bored.

Being tested in one condition can also change how participants perceive stimuli or interpret their task in later conditions.

Testing different participants in different orders.

Research Methods in Psychology - 2nd Canadian Edition Copyright © 2015 by Paul C. Price, Rajiv Jhangiani, & I-Chant A. Chiang is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Sweepstakes
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

Scientific Method Steps in Psychology Research

Steps, Uses, and Key Terms

Verywell / Theresa Chiechi

How do researchers investigate psychological phenomena? They utilize a process known as the scientific method to study different aspects of how people think and behave.

When conducting research, the scientific method steps to follow are:

• Observe what you want to investigate
• Ask a research question and make predictions
• Test the hypothesis and collect data
• Examine the results and draw conclusions
• Report and share the results 

This process not only allows scientists to investigate and understand different psychological phenomena but also provides researchers and others a way to share and discuss the results of their studies.

Generally, there are five main steps in the scientific method, although some may break down this process into six or seven steps. An additional step in the process can also include developing new research questions based on your findings.

What Is the Scientific Method?

What is the scientific method and how is it used in psychology?

The scientific method consists of five steps. It is essentially a step-by-step process that researchers can follow to determine if there is some type of relationship between two or more variables.

By knowing the steps of the scientific method, you can better understand the process researchers go through to arrive at conclusions about human behavior.

Scientific Method Steps

While research studies can vary, these are the basic steps that psychologists and scientists use when investigating human behavior.

The following are the scientific method steps:

Step 1. Make an Observation

Before a researcher can begin, they must choose a topic to study. Once an area of interest has been chosen, the researchers must then conduct a thorough review of the existing literature on the subject. This review will provide valuable information about what has already been learned about the topic and what questions remain to be answered.

A literature review might involve looking at a considerable amount of written material from both books and academic journals dating back decades.

The relevant information collected by the researcher will be presented in the introduction section of the final published study results. This background material will also help the researcher with the first major step in conducting a psychology study: formulating a hypothesis.

Step 2. Ask a Question

Once a researcher has observed something and gained some background information on the topic, the next step is to ask a question. The researcher will form a hypothesis, which is an educated guess about the relationship between two or more variables

For example, a researcher might ask a question about the relationship between sleep and academic performance: Do students who get more sleep perform better on tests at school?

In order to formulate a good hypothesis, it is important to think about different questions you might have about a particular topic.

You should also consider how you could investigate the causes. Falsifiability is an important part of any valid hypothesis. In other words, if a hypothesis was false, there needs to be a way for scientists to demonstrate that it is false.

Step 3. Test Your Hypothesis and Collect Data

Once you have a solid hypothesis, the next step of the scientific method is to put this hunch to the test by collecting data. The exact methods used to investigate a hypothesis depend on exactly what is being studied. There are two basic forms of research that a psychologist might utilize: descriptive research or experimental research.

Descriptive research is typically used when it would be difficult or even impossible to manipulate the variables in question. Examples of descriptive research include case studies, naturalistic observation , and correlation studies. Phone surveys that are often used by marketers are one example of descriptive research.

Correlational studies are quite common in psychology research. While they do not allow researchers to determine cause-and-effect, they do make it possible to spot relationships between different variables and to measure the strength of those relationships. 

Experimental research is used to explore cause-and-effect relationships between two or more variables. This type of research involves systematically manipulating an independent variable and then measuring the effect that it has on a defined dependent variable .

One of the major advantages of this method is that it allows researchers to actually determine if changes in one variable actually cause changes in another.

While psychology experiments are often quite complex, a simple experiment is fairly basic but does allow researchers to determine cause-and-effect relationships between variables. Most simple experiments use a control group (those who do not receive the treatment) and an experimental group (those who do receive the treatment).

Step 4. Examine the Results and Draw Conclusions

Once a researcher has designed the study and collected the data, it is time to examine this information and draw conclusions about what has been found.  Using statistics , researchers can summarize the data, analyze the results, and draw conclusions based on this evidence.

So how does a researcher decide what the results of a study mean? Not only can statistical analysis support (or refute) the researcher’s hypothesis; it can also be used to determine if the findings are statistically significant.

When results are said to be statistically significant, it means that it is unlikely that these results are due to chance.

Based on these observations, researchers must then determine what the results mean. In some cases, an experiment will support a hypothesis, but in other cases, it will fail to support the hypothesis.

So what happens if the results of a psychology experiment do not support the researcher's hypothesis? Does this mean that the study was worthless?

Just because the findings fail to support the hypothesis does not mean that the research is not useful or informative. In fact, such research plays an important role in helping scientists develop new questions and hypotheses to explore in the future.

After conclusions have been drawn, the next step is to share the results with the rest of the scientific community. This is an important part of the process because it contributes to the overall knowledge base and can help other scientists find new research avenues to explore.

Step 5. Report the Results

The final step in a psychology study is to report the findings. This is often done by writing up a description of the study and publishing the article in an academic or professional journal. The results of psychological studies can be seen in peer-reviewed journals such as  Psychological Bulletin , the  Journal of Social Psychology ,  Developmental Psychology , and many others.

The structure of a journal article follows a specified format that has been outlined by the  American Psychological Association (APA) . In these articles, researchers:

• Provide a brief history and background on previous research
• Present their hypothesis
• Identify who participated in the study and how they were selected
• Provide operational definitions for each variable
• Describe the measures and procedures that were used to collect data
• Explain how the information collected was analyzed
• Discuss what the results mean

Why is such a detailed record of a psychological study so important? By clearly explaining the steps and procedures used throughout the study, other researchers can then replicate the results. The editorial process employed by academic and professional journals ensures that each article that is submitted undergoes a thorough peer review, which helps ensure that the study is scientifically sound.

Once published, the study becomes another piece of the existing puzzle of our knowledge base on that topic.

Before you begin exploring the scientific method steps, here's a review of some key terms and definitions that you should be familiar with:

• Falsifiable : The variables can be measured so that if a hypothesis is false, it can be proven false
• Hypothesis : An educated guess about the possible relationship between two or more variables
• Variable : A factor or element that can change in observable and measurable ways
• Operational definition : A full description of exactly how variables are defined, how they will be manipulated, and how they will be measured

Uses for the Scientific Method

The  goals of psychological studies  are to describe, explain, predict and perhaps influence mental processes or behaviors. In order to do this, psychologists utilize the scientific method to conduct psychological research. The scientific method is a set of principles and procedures that are used by researchers to develop questions, collect data, and reach conclusions.

Goals of Scientific Research in Psychology

Researchers seek not only to describe behaviors and explain why these behaviors occur; they also strive to create research that can be used to predict and even change human behavior.

Psychologists and other social scientists regularly propose explanations for human behavior. On a more informal level, people make judgments about the intentions, motivations , and actions of others on a daily basis.

While the everyday judgments we make about human behavior are subjective and anecdotal, researchers use the scientific method to study psychology in an objective and systematic way. The results of these studies are often reported in popular media, which leads many to wonder just how or why researchers arrived at the conclusions they did.

Examples of the Scientific Method

Now that you're familiar with the scientific method steps, it's useful to see how each step could work with a real-life example.

Say, for instance, that researchers set out to discover what the relationship is between psychotherapy and anxiety .

• Step 1. Make an observation : The researchers choose to focus their study on adults ages 25 to 40 with generalized anxiety disorder.
• Step 2. Ask a question : The question they want to answer in their study is: Do weekly psychotherapy sessions reduce symptoms in adults ages 25 to 40 with generalized anxiety disorder?
• Step 3. Test your hypothesis : Researchers collect data on participants' anxiety symptoms . They work with therapists to create a consistent program that all participants undergo. Group 1 may attend therapy once per week, whereas group 2 does not attend therapy.
• Step 4. Examine the results : Participants record their symptoms and any changes over a period of three months. After this period, people in group 1 report significant improvements in their anxiety symptoms, whereas those in group 2 report no significant changes.
• Step 5. Report the results : Researchers write a report that includes their hypothesis, information on participants, variables, procedure, and conclusions drawn from the study. In this case, they say that "Weekly therapy sessions are shown to reduce anxiety symptoms in adults ages 25 to 40."

Of course, there are many details that go into planning and executing a study such as this. But this general outline gives you an idea of how an idea is formulated and tested, and how researchers arrive at results using the scientific method.

Erol A. How to conduct scientific research ? Noro Psikiyatr Ars . 2017;54(2):97-98. doi:10.5152/npa.2017.0120102

University of Minnesota. Psychologists use the scientific method to guide their research .

Shaughnessy, JJ, Zechmeister, EB, & Zechmeister, JS. Research Methods In Psychology . New York: McGraw Hill Education; 2015.

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Published: 14 August 2024

Understanding cultural variation in cognition one child at a time

• Manuel Bohn   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0001-6006-1348 1 , 2 ,
• Frankie T. K. Fong 2 , 3 ,
• Sarah Pope-Caldwell 2 ,
• Roman Stengelin   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2212-4613 2 , 4 &
• Daniel B. M. Haun 2  

Nature Reviews Psychology ( 2024 ) Cite this article

Metrics details

• Human behaviour

Cross-cultural developmental research is crucial for understanding the roots of human cognition. Although group-level analyses can reveal how culture co-varies with cognition, individual-level analyses are needed to discern how specific cultural and ecological factors influence cognitive development.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Subscribe to this journal

Receive 12 digital issues and online access to articles

55,14 € per year

only 4,60 € per issue

Buy this article

• Purchase on Springer Link
• Instant access to full article PDF

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Lew-Levy, S., Reckin, R., Lavi, N., Cristóbal-Azkarate, J. & Ellis-Davies, K. How do hunter-gatherer children learn subsistence skills? A meta-ethnographic review. Hum. Nat. 28 , 367–394 (2017).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Karasik, L. B., Adolph, K. E., Tamis-Lemonda, C. S. & Bornstein, M. H. WEIRD walking: cross-cultural research on motor development. Behav. Brain Sci. 33 , 95–96 (2010).

Stengelin, R., Hepach, R. & Haun, D. B. M. Cultural variation in young children’s social motivation for peer collaboration and its relation to the ontogeny of theory of mind. PLoS ONE 15 , e0242071 (2020).

Gracia, P., Garcia-Roman, J., Oinas, T. & Anttila, T. Child and adolescent time use: a cross-national study. J. Marriage Fam. 82 , 1304–1325 (2020).

Article   Google Scholar  

Jenni, O. G. & O’Connor, B. B. Children’s sleep: an interplay between culture and biology. Pediatrics 115 (Suppl. 1), 204–216 (2005).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Coppens, A. D. & Rogoff, B. Cultural variation in the early development of initiative in children’s prosocial helping. Soc. Dev. 31 , 656–678 (2022).

Casillas, M., Brown, P. & Levinson, S. C. Early language experience in a Tseltal Mayan village. Child Dev. 91 , 1819–1835 (2020).

Bergelson, E. et al. What do North American babies hear? A large-scale cross-corpus analysis. Dev. Sci. 22 , e12724 (2019).

Bohn, M. et al. A universal of human social cognition: children from 17 communities process gaze in similar ways. Preprint at PsyArXiv https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/z3ahv (2024).

Greenwood, C. R., Thiemann-Bourque, K., Walker, D., Buzhardt, J. & Gilkerson, J. Assessing children’s home language environments using automatic speech recognition technology. Comm. Disord. Q 32 , 83–92 (2011).

Bergelson, E. et al. Everyday language input and production in 1,001 children from six continents. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 120 , e2300671120 (2023).

Long, B. et al. The BabyView camera: designing a new head-mounted camera to capture children’s early social and visual environments. Behav. Res. Methods 56 , 3523–3534 (2024).

Sullivan, J., Mei, M., Perfors, A., Wojcik, E. & Frank, M. C. SAYCam: a large, longitudinal audiovisual dataset recorded from the infant’s perspective. Open Mind 5 , 20–29 (2021).

Byers-Heinlein, K., Bergmann, C. & Savalei, V. Six solutions for more reliable infant research. Infant Child Dev 31 , e2296 (2022).

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Institute of Psychology in Education, Leuphana University Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany

Manuel Bohn

Department of Comparative Cultural Psychology, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany

Manuel Bohn, Frankie T. K. Fong, Sarah Pope-Caldwell, Roman Stengelin & Daniel B. M. Haun

School of Psychology, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand

Frankie T. K. Fong

Department of Psychology and Social Work, University of Namibia, Windhoek, Namibia

Roman Stengelin

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Manuel Bohn .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Bohn, M., Fong, F.T.K., Pope-Caldwell, S. et al. Understanding cultural variation in cognition one child at a time. Nat Rev Psychol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-024-00351-8

Download citation

Published : 14 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s44159-024-00351-8

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Does social anxiety look the same in the online and offline world?

• Published: 14 August 2024

Cite this article

• Sonja Biglbauer   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7650-6265 1  

Socially anxious individuals often have dysfunctional social relationships because they avoid face-to-face interactions. New technology, however, presents them with opportunities to connect virtually. This study examined whether the intensity of social anxiety varies depending on whether interactions occur offline or online and whether the Clark and Wells’ ( 1995 ) cognitive-behavioral model of social anxiety is applicable to understanding online interactions. Participants in this study were 295 female social media users (Facebook and/or Instagram) aged 18–35 years. An online questionnaire included the Social Anxiety Scale for Social Media Users (SAS-SMU) to explore the intensity of social anxiety both in online and offline contexts. To examine the Clark and Wells’ model in online context, we asked participants to report associated assumptions, perceived social danger, safety behaviors, and somatic and cognitive symptoms of social anxiety after imagining themselves in three online situations (posting a status, posting a photo, starting a conversation on chat). Socially anxious individuals reported significantly higher social anxiety levels in offline compared to online interactions. Structural equation modelling used to test a somewhat simplified Clark and Wells’ model in online context resulted in a pattern of significant associations that was mostly in line with the conceptual expectations.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Data availability

The dataset and relevant syntax are available as supplementary material.

Abbott, M. J., & Rapee, R. M. (2004). Post-Event Rumination and Negative Self-Appraisal in Social Phobia before and after Treatment. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 113 (1), 136–144. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-843X.113.1.136

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Ahmed, A., Hassan, A., Aziz, S., Abd-alrazaq, A. A., Ali, N., Alzubaidi, M., Al-Thani, D., Elhusein, B., Siddig, M. A., Ahmed, M., & Househ, M. (2023). Chatbot features for anxiety and depression: A scoping review. Health Informatics Journal , 29 (1). https://doi.org/10.1177/14604582221146719

Alden, L. E., & Crozier, W. R. (2005). Introduction: Social anxiety as a clinical condition. In W. R. Crozier & L. E. Alden (Eds.), The essential handbook of social anxiety for clinicians (pp. 123–131). John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Google Scholar  

Alkis, Y., Kadirhan, Z., & Sat, M. (2017). Development and validation of social anxiety scale for social media users. Computers in Human Behavior, 72 , 296–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.011

Article   Google Scholar  

Asher, M., & Aderka, I. M. (2018). Gender differences in social anxiety disorder. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 74 (10), 1730–1741. https://doi.org/10.1002/jclp.22624

Bendig, E., Erb, B., Schulze-Thuesing, L., & Baumeister, H. (2019). Next generation: Chatbots in clinical psychology and psychotherapy to foster mental health - A scoping review. Verhaltenstherapie, 29 (4), 266–280. https://doi.org/10.1159/000499492

Biglbauer, S., & Korajlija, A. L. (2023). Do socially anxious and non-anxious individuals differ in their social media use? Computers in Human Behavior , 149 . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107970

Byrne, B. M. (2016). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (3. edition). Routledge.

Caplan, S. E. (2007). Relations among loneliness, social anxiety, and problematic internet use. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 10 (2), 234–242. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2006.9963

Carruthers, S. E., Warnock-Parkes, E. L., & Clark, D. M. (2019). Accessing social media: Help or hindrance for people with social anxiety? Journal of Experimental Psychopathology, 10 (2), 204380871983781. https://doi.org/10.1177/2043808719837811

Clark, D. M. (2001). A cognitive perspective on social phobia. In W. Crozier & L. E. Alden (Eds.), International handbook of social anxiety: Concepts, research and interventions relating to the self and shyness (p. 405). Wiley.

Clark, D. M., & Wells, A. (1995). A cognitive model of social phobia. In R. G. Heimberg, M. R. Liebowitz, D. A. Hope, & F. R. Schneier (Eds.), Social phobia: Diagnosis, assessment, and treatment (pp. 69–93). Guilford Press.

Cole, D. A., Perkins, C. E., & Zelkowitz, R. L. (2016). Impact of homogeneous and heterogeneous parceling strategies when latent variables represent multidimensional constructs. Psychological Methods, 21 (2), 164–174. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000047

Hackmann, A., Clark, D. M., & McManus, F. (2000). Recurrent images and early memories in social phobia. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 38 (6), 601–610. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(99)00161-8

Hinrichsen, H., & Clark, D. M. (2003). Anticipatory processing in social anxiety: Two pilot studies. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 34 (3–4), 205–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7916(03)00050-8

Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6 (1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

JASP Team (2024). JASP (Version 0.19.0)[Computer software].

Kindred, R., & Bates, G. W. (2023). The Influence of the COVID-19 Pandemic on social anxiety: A systematic review. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 20 (3). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20032362

Kline, R. B. (2023). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling . Guilford Press.

Lai, F., Wang, L., Zhang, J., Shan, S., Chen, J., & Tian, L. (2023). Relationship between social media use and social anxiety in college students: Mediation effect of communication capacity. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health , 20 (4). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20043657

Leary, M. R. (2001). Social anxiety as an early warning system: A refinement and extension of the self-presentation theory of social anxiety. In S. G. Hofmann & P. M. DiBartolo (Eds.), From social anxiety to social phobia: Multiple perspectives (pp. 321–334). Allyn & Bacon.

Leigh, E., & Clark, D. M. (2018). Understanding social anxiety disorder in adolescents and improving treatment outcomes: Applying the cognitive model of Clark and Wells (1995). Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 21 (3), 388–414. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-018-0258-5

Little, T. D. (2013). Longitudinal Structural Equation Modeling . Guilford Press.

Little, T. D., Cunningham, W. A., Shahar, G., & Widaman, K. F. (2002). To parcel or not to parcel: Exploring the question, weighing the merits. Structural Equation Modeling, 9 (2), 151–173. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0902_1

Murphy, E. C., & Tasker, T. E. (2011). Lost in a crowded room: A correlational study of Facebook & social anxiety. In J. Barlow (Ed.),  Interface: The journal of education, community and values (vol. 11. pp. 89–94). The Berglund Center for Internet Studies. http://commons.pacificu.edu/inter11

O’Day, E. B., & Heimberg, R. G. (2021). Social media use, social anxiety, and loneliness: A systematic review. Computers in Human Behavior Reports , 3 (October 2020), 100070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2021.100070

Pierce, T. (2009). Social anxiety and technology: Face-to-face communication versus technological communication among teens. Computers in Human Behavior, 25 (6), 1367–1372. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.06.003

Sadeh-Sharvit, S., Del Camp, T., Horton, S. E., Hefner, J. D., Berry, J. M., Grossman, E., & Hollon, S. D. (2023). Effects of an artificial intelligence platform for behavioral interventions on depression and anxiety symptoms: Randomized clinical trial. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 25 , 1–11. https://doi.org/10.2196/46781

Schreiber, F., Höfling, V., Stangier, U., Bohn, C., & Steil, R. (2012). A cognitive model of social phobia: Applicability in a large adolescent sample. International Journal of Cognitive Therapy, 5 (3), 341–358. https://doi.org/10.1521/ijct.2012.5.3.341

Shaw, A. M., Timpano, K. R., Tran, T. B., & Joormann, J. (2015). Correlates of Facebook usage patterns: The relationship between passive Facebook use, social anxiety symptoms, and brooding. Computers in Human Behavior, 48 , 575–580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.02.003

Spurr, J. M., & Stopa, L. (2003). The observer perspective: Effects on social anxiety and performance. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41 (9), 1009–1028. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(02)00177-8

Stein, D. J., Lim, C. C. W., Roest, A. M., de Jonge, P., Aguilar-Gaxiola, S., Al-Hamzawi, A., Alonso, J., Benjet, C., Bromet, E. J., Bruffaerts, R., de Girolamo, G., Florescu, S., Gureje, O., Haro, J. M., Harris, M. G., He, Y., Hinkov, H., Horiguchi, I., Hu, C., … Williams, D. R. (2017). The cross-national epidemiology of social anxiety disorder: Data from the World Mental Health Survey Initiative. BMC Medicine , 15 (1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12916-017-0889-2

Verduyn, P., Gugushvili, N., Massar, K., Täht, K., & Kross, E. (2020). Social comparison on social networking sites. Current Opinion in Psychology, 36 , 32–37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2020.04.002

Wiederhold, B. K. (2020). Social media use during social distancing. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 23 (5), 275–276. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2020.29181.bkw

Yen, J. Y., Yen, C. F., Chen, C. S., Wang, P. W., Chang, Y. H., & Ko, C. H. (2012). Social anxiety in online and real-life interaction and their associated factors. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 15 (1), 7–12. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2011.0015

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Behavioral Disorders, Faculty of Education and Rehabilitation Sciences, University of Zagreb, Borongajska Cesta 83f, Zagreb, 10000, Croatia

Sonja Biglbauer

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sonja Biglbauer .

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval.

Approval for the current study was obtained from the ethics committee of the Department of Psychology, Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, University of Zagreb (approval #EPOP_2021_22_15 from 15 October 2021). All procedures used in this study adhere to the tenets of the Declaration of Helsinki.

Conflict of interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (SAV 111 kb)

Supplementary file2 (docx 13 kb), rights and permissions.

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Biglbauer, S. Does social anxiety look the same in the online and offline world?. Curr Psychol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-06386-7

Download citation

Accepted : 06 July 2024

Published : 14 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-06386-7

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Social anxiety
• Social media
• Mental health
• Social networking sites
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Interact Blog

Learn list building with quizzes

• Make a quiz with AI

Everything you need to build your list with a quiz.

Browse hundreds of customizable and conversion focused templates organized by industry.

Connect your our custom built integrations and all the Zaps you’ll ever need.

Browse some of the top performing quizzes in the wild!

Quiz tutorials, list building, case studies, and everything else to grow your business with a quiz.

Creator stories from business owners just like you.

This comprehensive quiz course is your step-by-step guide all the way through from ideation to execution.

We’re all about creating connections and bringing humanity back into the world of marketing.

Get the goods on what our customers are saying about us!

Let’s grow together!

Existing customer? Login

Experimental Psychology at Wellesley College Quiz Questions and Answers

How comfortable are you dissecting a brain, even if it is for the sake of science?

• Totally fine, I’m here for it! Knowledge at all costs.
• A little squeamish but I’d manage.
• Absolutely not. I’m a lover, not a fighter, and brains are too much for me.
• I’d rather learn through other methods.

How do you feel about the idea of studying abnormal psychology, such as dreams and hypnotism?

• Fascinating! I want to know everything about the subconscious mind.
• A bit creepy, but I can’t look away.
• I’d prefer to focus on more “normal” aspects of psychology.
• I find it disrespectful to pathologize human experience.

You have a choice of studying either sensation experiments (like touch and taste) or reaction time experiments. Which do you choose and why?

• Sensation experiments, because they seem more hands-on and engaging.
• Reaction time experiments, because I’m intrigued by the precision and measurement involved.
• I’m torn – both areas seem equally interesting to me!
• I’d need more information about both before making a decision.

Which of these areas of study within experimental psychology would you enjoy the most?

• Association and memory experiments
• Sensation and perception experiments
• Attention and reaction time experiments
• Abnormal psychology and hypnotism

Someone asks, “How’s the psychology class going?”. What’s the actual answer?

• “It’s mind-blowing! I’m learning so much about how my brain works.”
• “It’s challenging but interesting. The lab work is a new experience for me.”
• “Honestly, it’s a lot of information to process. I prefer the discussions to the experiments.”
• “I’m not sure yet. Ask me again after we study hypnotism, that’s what I’m really here for.”

What’s your favorite memory related to learning about psychology?

• That time in high school when we debated the nature of consciousness.
• Reading a book that completely changed my understanding of human behavior.
• Having a deep conversation with a friend about dreams and their meanings.
• I haven’t had a “favorite memory” related to psychology yet, but I’m open to it!

What causes, topics, or interests, are you most passionate about when it comes to understanding the human mind?

• The biological basis of behavior and how our brains create our realities.
• The power of the unconscious and its influence on our thoughts, feelings, and actions.
• The nature of consciousness and the search for the “self.”
• The ways we learn, remember, and make decisions.

How would your friends and family describe your learning style when it comes to a subject like psychology?

• “A total bookworm! Always has their nose in a psychology textbook.”
• “A hands-on learner. They need to experiment and see things in action.”
• “A deep thinker. They love to analyze theories and debate different perspectives.”
• “A social butterfly! They learn best through discussions and group projects.”

Tell us a little about your view on the role of introspection in understanding the human mind. Is it valuable? Limited?

• I think introspection is essential. It’s the only way to truly access our own subjective experiences.
• I see it as a starting point, but it needs to be combined with objective observation and experimentation.
• I’m skeptical of its reliability. Our biases and interpretations can cloud our self-perceptions.
• I think introspection has a place, but I’m more interested in what we can learn through scientific methods.

What’s the first thing that comes to mind when you hear the term “experimental psychology?”

• Lab coats, data analysis, and groundbreaking discoveries!
• A way to test theories and gain a more objective understanding of human behavior.
• A blend of science and philosophy, exploring the mysteries of the mind.
• To be honest, I’m not entirely sure, but I’m curious to find out more.

How prepared do you feel to design and conduct your own psychology experiment?

• Bring it on! I’m ready to formulate a hypothesis, gather data, and analyze the results.
• I’d need some guidance, but I’m up for the challenge.
• I wouldn’t know where to begin. Experimental design seems pretty complex.
• I think I’d be better suited to interpreting the results of experiments rather than conducting them.

What happens if an experiment you conduct yields unexpected or contradictory results?

• That’s the best part! It’s an opportunity to re-evaluate my assumptions and explore new avenues.
• I would try to identify any flaws in my methodology or potential confounding variables.
• I might get discouraged and question my ability to conduct sound research.
• It would depend on the experiment. I might be excited by unexpected findings, or I might need to adjust my approach.

What do you think you need to learn to feel more confident in your understanding of experimental psychology?

• A strong foundation in research methods and statistical analysis.
• More experience designing and conducting experiments firsthand.
• A deeper understanding of the historical context and evolution of psychological thought.
• Greater exposure to different schools of thought within psychology and their criticisms of each other.

How often do you read scientific journals or research articles related to psychology?

• I make it a regular habit to stay updated on current findings.
• I dabble here and there when something piques my interest.
• Rarely. I tend to get my psychology fix from books or documentaries.
• Never. I find scientific writing to be dense and inaccessible.

How confident are you in your ability to distinguish between credible and unreliable sources of information about psychology?

• Very confident. I’m always on the lookout for biases, logical fallacies, and unsupported claims.
• Fairly confident, but there’s always room for improvement. I know to be wary of sensationalized headlines.
• Not as confident as I could be. It’s easy to get swayed by compelling narratives, even if they lack scientific rigor.
• I rely on trusted experts to guide my understanding. I figure they’ve already vetted the information.

How do you handle encountering psychological theories or concepts that challenge your existing beliefs?

• I embrace the opportunity for intellectual growth and try to consider alternative viewpoints.
• I approach them with a healthy dose of skepticism, but I’m open to having my mind changed.
• It can be difficult, but I try to be objective and examine the evidence.
• I tend to stick to my convictions. It takes a lot to persuade me to change my mind.

Do you keep a dream journal or make any effort to analyze your dreams?

• Absolutely! It’s fascinating to uncover the hidden meanings and symbolism in my dreams.
• I jot down dreams occasionally, but I don’t always analyze them.
• Not really. My dreams are usually forgotten by the time I wake up.
• I’m not sure I believe dreams hold any significant meaning.

How well do you think you stick to your convictions when presented with new information about the human mind, even if that information contradicts what you previously thought?

• I try to be open-minded. I’d rather adjust my beliefs than cling to outdated or inaccurate information.
• I consider myself flexible, but some core beliefs are harder to shake.
• It depends on the information and the strength of the evidence. I need to be convinced.
• My convictions are a part of who I am. I’m not easily swayed by every new study or theory that comes along.

Which of the following is most accurate when it comes to your understanding of the brain and its functions?

• I’m fascinated by neuroscience and eager to learn more about the biological underpinnings of behavior.
• I have a basic understanding, but I’m more interested in the psychological and social factors that shape us.
• The brain is a complex organ, and I’m still trying to wrap my head around all its intricacies.
• Honestly, brain science is not my strong suit. I’m more of a “big picture” thinker.

To what degree do you experience “colored hearing” or other forms of synesthesia?

• I experience it vividly! Numbers, letters, and sounds often evoke distinct colors for me.
• I’ve noticed subtle instances of it, like associating certain letters with colors.
• I’m not sure. What does synesthesia feel like?
• I don’t think I experience it. My senses feel pretty separate.

Which of these best describes your current approach to learning about psychology?

• I’m actively seeking out new information and experiences to deepen my understanding.
• I enjoy learning about psychology casually, but it’s not my main focus.
• I’m just starting to dip my toes into the vast ocean of psychology knowledge.
• I’m content with my current level of understanding.

What is your current biggest challenge when it comes to understanding the complexities of the human mind?

• Reconciling the different perspectives and schools of thought within psychology.
• Filtering through the sheer volume of information available and identifying what’s credible.
• Applying psychological principles to my own life and relationships.
• Staying updated on the latest research and findings.

What’s the first thing that comes to mind when you encounter a psychological concept that you find difficult to grasp?

• Curiosity! I’m eager to research it further and find resources that explain it in a way I can understand.
• A sense of determination. I’ll keep studying until it clicks.
• A bit of frustration, especially if it’s something I feel I “should” understand.
• Acceptance. Not every concept will resonate with me, and that’s okay.

How do you handle disagreements or debates about psychological theories or interpretations?

• I enjoy a good intellectual sparring match! As long as it’s respectful and we can agree to disagree.
• I listen carefully to different viewpoints and try to find common ground.
• I tend to avoid conflict. I’d rather hear everyone’s perspective without taking sides.
• It depends on the context and the people involved. Some debates are more worthwhile than others.

How would you describe your relationship to the study of psychology?

• We’re in a committed, long-term relationship! I’m hooked.
• It’s more of a casual fling at this point. I’m enjoying it, but I’m not sure it’s love.
• We’re just getting to know each other. I’m intrigued, but there’s still so much to discover.
• It’s complicated.

Are you stuck in any particular way of thinking about psychology, or are you open to exploring new perspectives?

• I’m always open to new perspectives! I believe there’s always more to learn.
• I have my preferred theories and approaches, but I’m willing to consider alternatives.
• I’m still developing my own views on psychology.
• I haven’t given it much thought.

What would you say are your top struggles right now in terms of your own personal growth and self-understanding?

• Overthinking and self-criticism. My inner critic can be pretty loud.
• Setting boundaries and asserting my needs. I tend to be a people-pleaser.
• Procrastination and self-sabotage. I get in my own way.
• I’m not sure I’m struggling. I’m pretty content with where I’m at.

What is your ultimate “psychology” goal – what do you hope to gain from learning more about this field?

• To gain a deeper understanding of myself and others.
• To improve my relationships and communication skills.
• To make a positive impact on the world by contributing to our understanding of human behavior.
• To satisfy my intellectual curiosity.

What do you think is missing in your current understanding of psychology?

• More practical applications. I want to know how to translate theory into real-life change.
• A stronger foundation in research methods. I need to feel confident in my ability to critically evaluate studies.
• Greater exposure to diverse perspectives.
• I’m not sure anything is missing. I’m happy with my current level of understanding.

What is your current level of expertise in the history of psychology?

• I’m well-versed in the major schools of thought and influential figures.
• I know the basics, but there are gaps in my knowledge.
• I’m familiar with Freud and maybe a few others.
• History isn’t really my thing, but I’m open to learning more.

The topic of “animal psychology” comes up. How do you respond?

• Fascinating! I’m curious about the similarities and differences between human and animal minds.
• I think it’s important to consider the ethical implications of studying animals.
• It’s not something I’ve given much thought.
• To be honest, I’d rather focus on humans.

What word do you experience most – Joy, Fear, Anger, or Sadness?

• Joy. I try to approach life with a positive attitude.
• Fear. The world can feel like a scary place sometimes.
• Anger. There’s a lot to be angry about these days.
• Sadness. Life has its share of disappointments.

Which of the following do you notice yourself worrying about on a day-to-day basis?

• My relationships with others and whether I’m being a good friend, partner, etc.
• My career and future prospects. I want to make sure I’m on the right path.
• My health and well-being. I try to take care of myself, but it’s a constant concern.
• Nothing in particular. I’m not much of a worrier.

How confident and prepared do you feel in your ability to handle the challenges of learning complex psychological concepts?

• I feel confident! I’m a fast learner and I’m not afraid of a challenge.
• I’m prepared to put in the work, but I know it might require effort.
• It depends on the concept. Some topics are more intimidating than others.
• I’m a bit apprehensive. Psychology seems like a vast and complex field.

How well do you think you can apply psychological principles to your own life and relationships?

• I’m always looking for ways to use psychology to improve my understanding of myself and others.
• I try, but it can be tough to translate theory into practice.
• I’m not sure I’m there yet.
• I’m not convinced that psychology has all the answers.

How connected do you feel to your own emotions and those of others?

• I’m very in tune with my own emotions and empathetic towards others.
• I’m working on being more present and aware of my feelings.
• I tend to intellectualize my emotions.
• I have a hard time expressing my feelings.

I believe that understanding the historical context of psychology is crucial for appreciating its evolution and current state. What are your thoughts?

• I completely agree! History provides a foundation.
• I see its value, but I’m more interested in practical applications.
• I’m not sure it’s essential, but I’m open to learning more.
• I’d rather focus on current theories and research.

I’m afraid that diving too deeply into psychology might reveal uncomfortable truths about myself or challenge my worldview. How about you?

• I embrace the potential for growth and self-discovery, even if it’s uncomfortable at times.
• I think it’s important to face our shadows. Self-awareness is key.
• I can understand that fear. It can be daunting to question our beliefs.
• I’m not sure I’m ready for that level of introspection.

Which of the following is most likely to frustrate you when learning about psychology?

• Encountering contradictory theories or studies.
• Trying to apply abstract concepts to real-life situations.
• Lacking the time or resources to delve deeper into topics that interest me.
• Feeling like I’m not making progress.

What is the trickiest part about understanding the relationship between the brain and behavior?

• The brain is incredibly complex, and there’s still so much we don’t know.
• It’s difficult to isolate specific brain regions and functions responsible for particular behaviors.
• I’m not sure. It all seems pretty straightforward to me.
• I find the whole concept to be a bit overwhelming.

Do you find yourself leaning more towards nature (biology) or nurture (environment) when it comes to explaining human behavior?

• I think it’s a complex interplay of both. It’s never just one or the other.
• I’m more inclined towards nature. Our genes play a significant role.
• I believe nurture has a greater influence. Our environment shapes who we become.
• I’m not sure. It’s a chicken-or-egg situation.

Do you have a specific support system in place, such as a study group or a mentor, to help you navigate challenging academic subjects?

• Yes, I find it incredibly helpful to connect with others. Two minds are better than one!
• I’m trying to build a stronger support network.
• Not really, but it’s something I’ve considered.
• I prefer to work independently.

How do you determine your own learning objectives each semester when approaching a new area of study?

• I set realistic goals and break down larger concepts into smaller, manageable steps.
• I think about what I’m genuinely curious about and pursue those interests.
• I focus on what’s required of me to succeed in the course.
• I’m not sure. I often feel overwhelmed at the beginning of a new term.

Are your study habits consistently leading you to achieve your academic goals?

• For the most part, yes. I’ve found strategies that work for me.
• I’m always trying to improve my study habits.
• Sometimes they do, sometimes they don’t. It depends on the subject matter and my motivation level.
• I’m not sure what effective study habits even look like.

How do you manage the inevitable stress and pressure that come with being a dedicated student, especially in a demanding field like psychology?

• Self-care is essential! I prioritize sleep, exercise, and activities that bring me joy.
• I have my coping mechanisms: spending time in nature, listening to music, or connecting with loved ones.
• I’m still figuring out what stress management techniques work best for me.
• Stress is just a part of life. I power through it.

What is the best quiz for you business?

Quizzes are super effective for lead generation and selling products. Find the best quiz for your business by answering a few questions.