A research methodology describes the techniques and procedures used to identify and analyze information regarding a specific research topic. It is a process by which researchers design their study so that they can achieve their objectives using the selected research instruments. It includes all the important aspects of research, including research design, data collection methods, data analysis methods, and the overall framework within which the research is conducted. While these points can help you understand what is research methodology, you also need to know why it is important to pick the right methodology.

A laboratory experiment is a type of experimental research conducted in an environment that is properly controlled - not necessarily a laboratory; thus, measurements are accurate and objective. Fawole, Egbokhare, Itiola, Odejide & Olayinka (2006) wrote that the experimental type of research has three characteristics as follows:

1. An independent variable (IV) is manipulated, 

2. Other variables except the independent variables are held constant (i.e. experimental control or extraneous variables), and 

3. An effect of the variables that were manipulated is observed in the dependent variable (DV) to know if there is a change or not.

In summary, the process suggests that a person can think of the independent variable as the cause and the dependent variable as the effect-cause-and-effect relationship. In other words, a change in the dependent variable is the result of the manipulation that has taken place in the independent variable. Besides the three characteristics identified above, in laboratory experiments, there should be an experimental group and a control group. The experimental group consists of individuals who are exposed to the treatment or experimental intervention in a laboratory experiment. It is the group that is exposed to the independent variable at once or in various degrees depending on the research objectives. In experimental research, the control group consists of individuals who are not exposed to any treatment condition at all. It is crucial to note that in an experiment, the experimental and control groups are alike, except for the treatment that the participants in the experimental group receive which serves as the independent variable. 

In a laboratory setting, the experimenter chooses the place where the experiment will be conducted, the time this will be done; who will be the participants, and in what circumstances; which are done under standardized procedures. For example, a researcher may want to examine the effect of noise on the level of assimilation. Here, the independent variable is the noise, while the dependent variable is the level of assimilation. This type of research is ideal in a laboratory setting with simple experimental control where the experimenter can have absolute control of the conditions. In a practical sense, participants are assigned randomly into either experimental or control groups. The researcher exposes participants in the experimental group to a noisy situation and measures their levels of assimilation based on a particular reading within a specific time limit. Participants in the control group were not exposed to any noisy situation, but they were measured on the same readings that were used for the experimental group and the same time limit. The level of assimilation of the two groups is compared to establish if there is a change and be able to affirm that, the reduction in the level of assimilation in the experimental group is the result of the exposure to noisy conditions. 

Laboratory experiment as a research method has some strengths. Laboratory experiments are easier to replicate due to the use of standardized procedures. This makes this form of research method second to none compared to any other methods of research in psychology. Another area of strength in laboratory experiments is that it allows a clear-cut control of extraneous variables. This, no doubt, allows a cause-and-effect relationship to be well-established in an experiment. In other words, there is what is called internal validity; suggesting that the manipulated variable caused a change in the dependent variable as found. This is why psychologists would typically prefer the use of experimental methods for research whenever possible. However, no research method does not have limitations. In laboratory experiments, for instance, the artificial nature of the setting may result in unnatural behavior in participants that does not reflect real life. This area of shortcoming makes findings from laboratory experiments lack what is called external validity; suggesting that findings cannot be generalized to real-life situations.

Another limitation of laboratory experiments is the demand characteristic sometimes called the experimenter effect. Demand characteristics may disrupt the results of an experiment and become confounding variables.

Field experiments are conducted in the everyday (i.e. real-life) environment of the participants. In the field experiment, the independent variable is still manipulated, though in a real-life location. What this suggests is that the experimenter may not have control over extraneous variables as he/she does in laboratory experiments. Field experiments are conducted outside the laboratory setting. It is conducted in the “natural” setting. A field experiment is the opposite of a laboratory experiment in that, it is not conducted in closed controlled conditions like in a laboratory experiment.  Field and laboratory experiments are undertaken both in the physical and social sciences. Sometimes, field experiments are conducted where laboratory experiments cannot be undertaken. The process of a field experiment shows that a scientific method is applied to experimentally examine an intervention in the real world rather than in the laboratory. It generally randomizes participants into treatment and control groups and compares outcomes between these groups. Field experiments are often regarded as having a greater degree of external validity than laboratory experiments because of the ‘natural’ setting condition. However, it suffers from the likelihood of contamination.

Psychology: Psychologists use field research methods to study human behavior in natural settings. For instance, a psychologist might conduct field research on the effects of stress on students in a school setting.

A case study is a comprehensive investigation of a single person, group, event, or community. It usually includes gathering data or observations of a person or small group through observation, interview, and documentary evidence. Of course, a variety of data collection techniques may be used in case studies. Case studies could either be qualitative or quantitative depending on whether you use numbers or not. A quantitative case study could be a study of the family in Nigeria, for example, when you use actual statistics of the number of families in the country. It could be a qualitative case study where you explore the significance of the family as an agent of socialization by doing several in-depth interviews with a limited number of participants. 

In regular circumstances of conducting case studies, especially when the participants are not deceased, typical techniques used include interviewing the participants, interviewing individuals who are very close to the

participants, direct observation of the participants, examination of records concerning the participants, and psychological testing. Case studies are mostly appropriate for investigating certain phenomena, such as psychological disorders. They can also help in providing compelling, real-life illustrations that help support a hypothesis or a theory. Case studies provide rich qualitative data and have a high level of ecological validity. It

is widely used by psychologists. Sigmund Freud used case studies to investigate into personal lives of his patients to understand and help them overcome their ailments. Case studies are detailed investigations of individuals, groups, institutions, or other social units. To conduct a case study, the researcher endeavors to analyze the variables pertinent to the subject under investigation (Polit & Hungler, 1983). The major difference between case studies and other research studies is that the focus of attention is the individual case and not the whole population of cases. Most studies search for what is pervasive.

In addition, the focus of the case study may not be on a generalization of findings, but rather, on understanding the details of that case in its complexity. A case study focuses on a restricted system, usually under natural conditions for the system to be understood in its environment (Stake, 1988). The case study provides detailed (rich qualitative) information and offers insight for further studies. It does enable inquiries of otherwise impractical (unethical) situations. In psychology, when you use a case study as a research method, it often sheds light on aspects of human thinking and behavior that would not be practical to study in other methods of research. For psychoanalytic and humanistic psychologists, methods of research that only examine the measurable features of human beings may not give insights into the subjective dimension of experience which is very important, hence, they would prefer using case study as a research method. Case studies can help create new thinking that might be confirmed by other research methods.

Case studies, however, have some particular problems of which subjectivity is one. Case studies are highly subjective. The observer or the investigator may not be correct in his/her conclusion since it is not empirical; thus, the results cannot be generalized to the broader population. This is because it deals with only one person, event, or group. We can never be sure whether conclusions drawn from this particular case apply elsewhere. Furthermore, the results of the case study cannot be generalized because it cannot be concluded that the case investigated was representative of the wider body of similar instances (McLeod, 2008)

Case studies are difficult to replicate because they are based on the study of qualitative data which mostly is dependent on the explanation the psychologist places on the information he or she has acquired. McLeod (2008) noted that there is a lot of scope for observer bias and it could be that the subjective opinions of the psychologist intrude on the assessment of what the data means. A major example is the case of Freud, who had been criticized for producing case studies in which information was sometimes distorted to fit particular theories about human behavior.

Click to read some examples of Case Studies:

In correlational studies, the researcher tries to determine whether a relationship occurs between two or more quantifiable variables; and what the degree of the relationship is. Correlation simply means association or relationship. It is the extent to which two or more variables, which are measured using ordinal, interval, or ratio scales are related. In correlational studies, the researcher does not investigate causal effects where a variable causes a change in another variable. Rather, the researcher simply examines and establishes whether two or more variables can be said to go together.

In correlational studies, the relationship between variables can either be positive, negative, or zero. A positive relationship exists in two variables if an increase in one variable results in an increase in the other which is referred to as a positive correlation. For example, looking at the relationship between height and weight, one can say taller people tend to be heavier. This suggests a positive relationship between height and weight. In other words, the higher the height, the higher the weight. This can also be interpreted as the lower the height, the lower the weight. A negative relationship exists if an increase in one variable results in a decrease in the other which is referred to as negative correlation. For example, looking at the relationship between height above sea level and temperature; one could notice that as you climb a mountain (increase in height) it gets colder (decrease in temperature). It means, the higher the height above sea level, the lower the temperature. Zero correlation happens when there is no relationship between variables. For example, it is said there is no relationship between the level of sociability and the size of an individual’s foot. Also, no relationship exists between the color or race of a man and the level of his/her intelligence.

It has been debated that a correlational study is not investigative enough because it only examines the relationship between variables. However, the fact remains that correlational studies have areas of strength. This is the fact that the researcher investigates naturally occurring variables that may not be ethical to test experimentally. For example, it would be unethical to experiment on whether smoking causes lung cancer. As it is clear that no method of research is absolute in investigation, the correlational method of research is not and cannot be taken to suggest causation. Even if there is a very strong association between two variables, we cannot assume that one causes the other. Also, the correlational method does not give the opportunity to more possible findings other than associations among variables of the study.

READ MORE

EXAMPLES OF CORRELATIONAL RESEARCH

Cross-sectional studies involve examining individuals who are different on certain features at one specific point in time for a research purpose. In other words, it is a research method where data are gathered at once from participants who may have some similar characteristics such as educational background, socio-economic status, and ethnicity but differ in certain major factors of interest to the researcher. These key factors may include age, salary level, geographical location, and the like. In this type of research method, participants are usually separated into groups. For instance, researchers interested in this method might form cohorts of participants who are in their twenties, thirties, forties, and fifties for research purposes.

Cross-sectional studies are frequently used in an area of specialization called developmental psychology and some other disciplines in social sciences and education. In developmental psychology, for example, a researcher might select groups of individuals who remarkably possess some similar characteristics, but differ in age or state of origin. Any disparity observed at the end of such investigation can be attributed to differences in age or state of origin; no other variables.

One thing about cross-sectional studies is that you do not manipulate variables; rather, they are measured as presently occurring in a population of interest. That is why this type of research method cannot be said to have a causal effect between variables in a study. Rather, these methods are mostly used to infer possible relationships, sometimes as preliminary data to support future research. In summary, certain key features of cross-sectional studies include the fact that they are conducted at a particular point in time and do not involve the manipulation of variables in the study.

Also, cross-sectional studies allow researchers to examine numerous variables at a time and it is sometimes used to establish the prevalence of a phenomenon in a particular population.  A cross-sectional study is less expensive to conduct and the process mostly includes the use of a self-report questionnaire to gather information from a remarkably large number of participants. Cross-sectional studies may be found appropriate as research methods when investigating whether certain behaviors might be related to a particular disease. For example, a cross-sectional study can be conducted to know whether certain lifestyle is linked to obesity in a particular population. The method allows looking at clues that will help in guiding future experimental studies on particular public health issues. For example, a researcher might be interested in knowing how physical exercise influences the cognitive health of individuals as they grow in age. The researcher might decide to gather data from different age groups of people on how much physical exercise they engage in perhaps in a week; and how they perform on cognitive tests.

Engaging in such a study might give the investigators clues about the kinds of exercise that ensure effective cognitive health or are beneficial to the optimal cognitive health of individuals in specific age groups. Also, the findings of this type of study will stimulate future experimental studies on the subject matter.

READ 

A longitudinal study assesses patterns of change in the behavior of a group or groups of people over time. In other words, it involves taking multiple measures of the behaviors of participants over a lengthy period. A study of such enables adequate or comprehensive interpretations of data than when it is a cross-sectional study where you gather the information at once. An example of a longitudinal study might be a case of investigating how human memory changes or is static at different stages of life. Considering the duration of conducting longitudinal studies, they require resources and are expensive compared to cross-sectional studies. Though, effective in research on developmental stages of life, longitudinal studies have some disadvantages such as the possibility of attrition; where participants are dropped out of a study. No doubt, a case of attrition can influence the validity of a longitudinal study.

Another interesting method of research in psychology is the practice of the psychophysiological process in understanding how to provide answers to questions about relationships among psychology, physiology, and behavior. A psychophysiological study is defined as any research conducted where the independent variables are a behavioral or mental concept and the dependent variable is a physiological measure. Physiological measures take many forms and range from blood flow or neural activity in the brain to heart rate variability and eye movement. All these measures can provide information about an individual’s emotional and cognition processes and the interactions between both. For example, with psychophysiological study, you can understand physiological processes that are associated with feelings of happiness or sadness in human beings through various physiological apparatus or self-report scales. With this type of method of research, we can easily describe someone’s cognitive or emotional state based on his self-report, physiology, or overt behavior.