Identify the research method used and outline two characteristics of the method and Suggest an alternative or additional research method giving one reason for your choice.

Reasons to choose an interview

- may be the only way to get an insight into participants' subjective experiences and interpretations since these phenomena are unobservable - interviews can be used to understand participant's opinions, attitudes, and the meanings they attach to certain events - the only way to understand how participants respond to past events is also only through self report - in-depth individual interviews are useful when the topic is too sensitive for people to discuss in a group setting

focus group

A special type of semi-structured interview that is conducted simultaneously with a small group of people. The unique feature of this method is that participants are encouraged to interact with each other. This creates group dynamics that are observed and analyzed by the researcher. The interviewer in this case also acts as a facilitator who keeps the interaction focused on the research questions. Common reasons to choose focus group: - participants interact with each other rather than the researcher. this makes their behavior more natural. Moreover, interaction between participants may reveal more aspects than would be revealed in a one-on-one conversation with the researcher - It is easier to respond to sensitive questions when you are in a group - Multiple perspectives are discussed which allows researchers to get a more holistic understanding of the topic Limitations - dominant respondents ca disrupt group dynamics. Their assertiveness may affect the behavior of other participants and distort their responses - it is more difficult to preserve confidentiality in a group - focus groups are especially demanding in terms of sampling and creating interview transcripts

case study

An in-depth investigation of an individual or a group. Case studies often involve a variety of other methods to deepen the understanding of an individual or a group of interest. Even though case studies are essentially a combination of other methods, they are considered as a separate research method for the following reasons: - the individual or the group that is the object of a case study is unique in some way. The purpose is to gain deep understanding of this particular individual or group - since the researcher is interested in this particular case, sampling is not an issue - there is less focus on generalizability of results - the case is studied very thoroughly, using a combination of different methods, and often longitudinally Reasons to choose case study - useful to investigate phenomena that cannot be studied otherwise (brain damage) - can contradict established theories and in this way urge scientists to develop new ones Limitations - researcher bias and participant bias are problems because the researcher interacts with the participant for prolonged periods of time, which may compromise impartiality and influence how natural the participant's behavior is - generalization of findings from a single case to other settings or a wider population is particularly problematic - in case studies it is especially difficult to protect the confidentiality of participants and their data

laboratory observation

Carried out in a specially designed environment. Participants are invited to the laboratory and most often they know that they are participating in psychological research. PROS - It is possible to recreate situations that do not frequently emerge in real life - It is possible to isolate the behavior of interest more efficiently CONS - Artificiality of the procedure may influence the behavior of participants

naturalistic observation

Carried out in real-life settings that have not been arranged for the purposed of the study. PROS - sometimes it is the only option, for example when it is unethical to encourage a particular behavior in a laboratory (such as violence) - participants' behavior is not influence by the artificiality of the research procedure CONS -It may be time-consuming because the behavior of interest only occurs at certain terms

structured observation

Observation information is recorded systematically and in a standardized way, for example using a checklist of observed behaviors prepared in advance. PROS - The procedure is standardized so one can use multiple observers in the same research study CONS - may be inflexible - certain aspects of behavior that were not included in the checklist will be missed

non-participant obsevation

Observer is not a participant. PROS - more impartial CONS - some details about the observed group can only be understood from the perspective of a group member

overt observation

Occurs when participants are aware of the fact that they are being observed. PROS - participants give informed consent, so ethical guidelines are followed CONS - participants' expectations may influence their behavior

unstructured interview

Such interviews are participant-driven. Every next question is determined by the interviewee's answer to the previous one. PROS - very effective for investigating unique cases or cases where no theoretical expectations exist that would inform the wording of the questions CONS - The most "qualitative" of all three types. - more time consuming and results are more difficult to analyze and interpret

Semi-structured interview

Such interviews do not specify an order or a particular list of questions. The interview guide is somewhat like a checklist: the researcher knows that certain questions must be asked, but there is also flexibility to ask additional follow-up questions. PROS - it fits the natural flow of conversation better - better suited for smaller research projects - more effective in studying the unique experiences of each participant CONS - less comparability across researchers and participants

structured interview

Such interviews include a fixed list of questions that need to be asked in a fixed order. PROS - especially useful when the research project involves several interviewers and it is essential to ensure that they all conduct the interview in a standardized way CONS - Some participants may have unique circumstances or opinions that cannot be accommodated in a structured interview

participant observation

The observer becomes part of the observed group PROS - allows the researcher to experience the phenomenon "from within" and gain important insights CONS - there is a risk that the observer will become too involved with the group and lose objectivity

Covert observation

The researcher does not inform the members of the group about the reasons of their presence PROS - participants do not suspect that they are being observed so they behave naturally CONS - often participants do not consent to being observed, which raises ethical issues

unstructured observation

There is no checklist and observers simply register whatever behavior they find noteworthy. PROS - more flexible - the researcher is not limited by prior theoretical expectations CONS - less structured means less comparable across researchers and across participants