Research methods analysis.
...o it is possible to manipulate the independent variable alone and therefore observe, objectively, the effect of that one particular variable. There are many obvious advantages to carrying out laboratory experiments, they allow cause and effect to be established and they allow for the precise control of variables. Studies such as Milgrams (1963) into obedience show just how useful this method is. Milgram used a laboratory experiment to show how much people will obey others and shed much light on the area of social influence in showing that people were a lot more obedient than otherwise predicted. There are disadvantages to the laboratory experiment method though, mainly because of the setting in which the experiment takes place. The high level of control in a laboratory experiment may cause difficulty in generalising from the laboratory setting to the real world, as in the real world people may behave differently and do things that the controls of the experiment do not allow them to do. Laboratory experiments may seem very artificial and many types of behaviour, including social influence cannot be studied in such an artificial situation with much validity. Field experiments go some way to resolve this problem. A field experiment uses the same methods of manipulating an independent variable but does it in a more natural setting. For example, a laboratory experiment may require volunteers to participate in an experiment who then display demand characteristics and un-natural behaviour, as they know they are being observed. However, a field experiment does not encounter this, as the experiment takes place in a natural setting where participants generally participate unaware they are being observed. Field experiments have also proven useful in the area of social influence. Asch (1951) performed a field experiment in which participants believed they were involved in a recognition task, although in reality they were being monitored on whether they would publicly give clearly wrong answers to recognition tasks just because several other participants (who were actually confederates) did so. Asch found that many did give wrong answers. This naturally raises ethical concerns because participants are not asked permission, do not give their consent and it is very hard to then debrief them afterwards. In the case of Asch, the participants were deceived into believing they were taking part in a study that was unrelated to what Asch was actually observing. The sample used is also very hard to predict and so the results may not be reliable or valid. The field experiment also does not offer as much control as an experiment in a laboratory, but it does have the advantage of being far less artificial. A natural experiment is a non-experimental method. In a natural experiment a variable has been altered but where it differs from experimental methods is that there is no manipulation from the experimenter and all variables that are changed occur naturally, and would of happened whether or not the situation was being observed. In a natural experiment, psychologists take advantage of what is already being manipulated around them and measure the effect that such manipulations have. This method still allows cause and effect to be established because the effect of one variable is being measured according to a change in another. This method also offers good validity because the setting is so natural and each situation would occur anyway. This does offer possibilities to social researchers, who could use changes in society to observe any effect or influence. For example, a school which begun a new method of teaching could be used as a natural experiment and the influence that the change in teaching method has could be measured. As with all methods, there are drawbacks to this method though. It is very hard to isolate one variable if the experimenter has no actual input in to what is happening, and so the dependent variable being measured may not be the result of one single variable but instead a combination of many. The school that begun a new method of teaching for example, may also have hired a new catering staff and any influence on the students could be equally attributed to either variable. A similar method to a natural experiment is observation. Observation is another useful method to identify cause and effect but the psychologist must still adhere to scientific principles - and it is very hard to observe behaviour and then interpret it objectively using this method. This means that psychologists must have a clearly set out and well-defined procedure and coding. Psychologists must have a hypothesis to work towards or against and it is essential that all the variables they plan to observe are objectively measurable. This is not a good method to investigate social influence and offers little advantage over the natural experiment and experimental methods. It would be too easy to attribute certain behaviour to the influence of something that is in reality un-related. Psychologists would possibly only see what they wanted, ignoring evidence that contradicted their hypothesis. With no external manipulation of an independent variable the observer could wait indef...