Practical 3

1. Field Studies Practical 3

2. Feedback on writeups - title Titles - generally pretty good Important to get information on where words were presented, and it was alright to include hemispheric specialisation In general titles were accurate, short and informative

3. Feedback (1) Title + subsections Subsections of method: easy 4 marks, people did it well

4. Feedback (2) Design type of study/ within/repeated measures design. (don’t need both) independent variable– whether word presented to left or right of central fixation point Dependent - No. of words recognised notice spelling - no ‘a’s

5. Feedback (2b) Design Unnecessary details You don’t need to explain why you randomised, why you chose a within subjects design, and the advantages of it. You do need to say that allocation to conditions was random, that you used a repeated measures design, and what the factors were.

6. Feedback (3) Participants/materials number/ generally fine and well done Status pretty accurate (course requirement). Apparatus - computers ok Materials – Needed description of features of the words - e.g Uppercase and in red!

7. Feedback (4) Procedure • instructions/ weak on practice vs experiment- need to be able to replicate, need to know how many trials, how many words presented to left and right, masking stimuli • Structure usually ok • Detail - occasional problems here e.g. Having to log on, the details of the look of the program with menus – no need to report • Reported speech - usually fine

8. Feedback (4) random allocation • Random allocation of participantsthis may be mentioned somewhere, it could be in design, participants or procedure. The randomisation method doesn’t need to be explained • ethics writers nowadays often mention that the study had satisfied ethical procedures

9. Feedback Appendix 1 • figure usually fine.

10. Feedback Appendix 2 • Legend – now in correct position, but rest of text a little weak • Ordinate has units - no. of words recognised • Condition 1 - Condition 2Pleased to see most avoided this and referred to left vs right

11. Feedback (8) Other points Language and style - not too bad, remember be concise, scientific! Appendices - generally fine

12. Learning Outcomes 1 Explain the distinction between field studies, quasi-experiments and true experiments. Describe some of the problems associated with observational data collection. Explain what is meant by ecological validity and why it is important. Carry out a field study

13. Learning Outcomes 2 field studies – out of lab quasi-experiments - no real manipulation of variable male vs female and true experiments. observational data collection – reliability, coding, cause and effect problems. ecological validity - realistic situation, may only see realistic behaviour in realistic settings.

14. What will happen: Put into groups of 6 Select a piece of research Make sure have fully prepared before leaving.

15. Observational – collision avoidance How do males and females react as they pass each other? Inward and outward turn Other things that might be worth checking on.

16. Field experiment - doors Do people help at doors, and will men help women more? Have an actor(s) to carry out research Code as ignore, token push, help Other factors – looks, encumbered

17. Study Area - Research around mobile use • The ubiquitous use of mobile phones has provided an opportunity to examine how they affect behaviour. • It is now illegal to use a phone whilst driving, but do they also pose a risk when walking. The following research has examined this: • unsafe use of mobiles • This piece of research is a naturalistic observation . A busy pathway is taken, and it is observed the behaviour of pedestrians with mobiles, or a check made on how they deal with a crossing. • Another paper on mobile use: • mobile phone use • has explored differences in sexes between the type of ring tone, and how often it is changed, but this sort of study would require a survey rather than a field study. However differences might emerge if one observed the frequency of texting vs speaking, the way in which the person and their friends react when a phone call is received.

18. Study Area - Observing laughter • It is often assumed that laughter is a response to joke which case one would expect the recipient of a joke be the one who is laughing, but, if laughter is more of a submissive gesture, then you might expect the giver to laugh more. • This is what the following research is related to. • The Science of Laughter: Far from mere reactions to jokes, hoots and hollers are serious business: They're innate -- and important -- social tools. By: Robert Provine

19. Field research - car observation-http://www.tc.gc.ca/roadsafety/tp2436/rs200405/gender.htm • Are females more likely to break the law in a car (use mobile, no seatbelt)? • Does it depend on the car make?

20. Field research - • Decide on an idea • Make sure the methodology is sorted • Check with lecturer ensure ethics etc ok • Return on time and prepare a brief oral presentation

21. Year 1 meetings We need people who will act as representatives for the class. Need some from lab 1 Attend 1 year meeting a semester (Wednesday) – get feelings from group on each module and discuss progress of degree – good and bad – lecturing – resources Attend programme meeting with students from each year + all staff Can put on c.v. Picture on board. Can get certificate through Student’s Union if enrol on their course.

22. Reps & Helpers • Can we have the names of the representatives

23. Research Participation for Points (Course Credit) • A ‘Research Participation points for Course Credit’ system operates • You collect 30 points (15 per semester) and receive course credit • Look at the notice board to sign up for experiments • Collect a form from the office to record your points • Any queries contact Paul Agnew paul.agnew@unn.ac.uk

24. Student Mentors • Student Mentors meet every week in this area – by the main experimental Lab • Friday 12-1 on a drop in basis • They are there to help and advise on anything you wish to discuss with them