1. Points to use to evaluate research and theories
[Type text]
*based on the DREAMS mnemonic from various AS courses
Evaluation point
D Design of the study – you can comment on any aspect of the design, such as the good / poor
control of extraneous variables, variable operationalisation, task suitability, choice of experimental design
(repeated measures, independent groups), and the relative strengths / weaknesses of these
R Replicability – it is a strength if the study can be repeated easily, and if the same results can be
obtained; if the study is convoluted, or insufficient details are provided, replication would be difficult (a
weakness)
R* Reductionism* - where a theory is reductionistic this is a weakness, but a necessary one; it reduces
an aspect of human behaviour to just one component or factor (eg. biology, cognitions, unconscious factors)
and ignores all others. This is an over-simplification of complex human behaviours and processes; however, it
is necessary to do this to operationalise variables adequately, and to control for extraneous variables
E Ecological validity – a study is high in ecological validity if the results can be generalised to other
settings (a strength); don’t forget mundane realism, population validity (generaliseable to other populations)
and internal validity (presence of confounds; whether testing what it claims)
E Extrapolation – where a study is carried out on animals, or where a theory is based on animal
research, this is a weakness as we cannot extrapolate findings from non-humans to humans as our mental
capacities are not the same.
E Evidence* - you can comment on how conclusive the findings are. Do they show a causal or
correlational relationship? Correlational studies cannot reveal causal relationships between variables, just
associations. Are there contradictory or mixed findings? Contradictory findings suggest the need to draw
conclusions tentatively, and for further research to confirm findings.
E Ethics – it is a weakness if the study raises any ethical issues, although a purist would argue that most
do. Were these not dealt with well by the researchers? However, some deception is necessary to prevent
demand characteristics from affecting participant behaviour, thereby distorting data.
E* Ethnocentric* - it is a weakness if you can say that the findings, or theory, apply more to one culture
than they do to all; most studies and theories have a bias towards the West, or were carried out/created there,
and do not necessarily explain behaviour in non-Western countries
A Approach* - you can comment on possible alternative explanations of the findings. How would a
different approach explain them? (eg. i) psychological: behavioural, cognitive, psychodynamic, social learning
theory; ii) biological: genetic, biochemical, physiological abnormality). Using a different approach may be better,
or it may give a more complete account of human behaviour to use a combined bio-psycho-social model.
A* Applicability* - if the findings, or theory, have practical value and usefulness to human beings,
society etc. this is a strength. Have they helped to advance our understanding of human nature? Have they
bequeathed effective treatments? Have they generated further research?
A Androcentrism – if a study tells us more about one gender (usually males), or only recognises their
viewpoint, then this is a weakness; where male samples are used this is often the case too.
M Method – you can comment on any aspect of the method; this refers to the researchers choice of
experimental or non-experimental method (lab experiment, field experiment, observation, interview etc. and
their relative strengths / weaknesses), self-report, case study, correlational study – they all have strengths and
weaknesses to comment on.
S Sample – you can comment on any aspect of the sample and sampling method; was the sample very
specific in age, gender, occupation, abilities? Was it small? These are weaknesses. The best sample is a large
one, and one which has been randomly selected. However, this is hard to achieve and costly to the project.
S* Socio-political impact* - you can comment on the bigger picture, to the broader implications;
have findings helped to liberate or change views? To inform policy-making or laws?
*these points can be applied to theories, the others to studies
![Points to use to evaluate research and theories
[Type text]
*based on the DREAMS mnemonic from various AS courses
Evaluation point
D Design of the study – you can comment on any aspect of the design, such as the good / poor
control of extraneous variables, variable operationalisation, task suitability, choice of experimental design
(repeated measures, independent groups), and the relative strengths / weaknesses of these
R Replicability – it is a strength if the study can be repeated easily, and if the same results can be
obtained; if the study is convoluted, or insufficient details are provided, replication would be difficult (a
weakness)
R* Reductionism* - where a theory is reductionistic this is a weakness, but a necessary one; it reduces
an aspect of human behaviour to just one component or factor (eg. biology, cognitions, unconscious factors)
and ignores all others. This is an over-simplification of complex human behaviours and processes; however, it
is necessary to do this to operationalise variables adequately, and to control for extraneous variables
E Ecological validity – a study is high in ecological validity if the results can be generalised to other
settings (a strength); don’t forget mundane realism, population validity (generaliseable to other populations)
and internal validity (presence of confounds; whether testing what it claims)
E Extrapolation – where a study is carried out on animals, or where a theory is based on animal
research, this is a weakness as we cannot extrapolate findings from non-humans to humans as our mental
capacities are not the same.
E Evidence* - you can comment on how conclusive the findings are. Do they show a causal or
correlational relationship? Correlational studies cannot reveal causal relationships between variables, just
associations. Are there contradictory or mixed findings? Contradictory findings suggest the need to draw
conclusions tentatively, and for further research to confirm findings.
E Ethics – it is a weakness if the study raises any ethical issues, although a purist would argue that most
do. Were these not dealt with well by the researchers? However, some deception is necessary to prevent
demand characteristics from affecting participant behaviour, thereby distorting data.
E* Ethnocentric* - it is a weakness if you can say that the findings, or theory, apply more to one culture
than they do to all; most studies and theories have a bias towards the West, or were carried out/created there,
and do not necessarily explain behaviour in non-Western countries
A Approach* - you can comment on possible alternative explanations of the findings. How would a
different approach explain them? (eg. i) psychological: behavioural, cognitive, psychodynamic, social learning
theory; ii) biological: genetic, biochemical, physiological abnormality). Using a different approach may be better,
or it may give a more complete account of human behaviour to use a combined bio-psycho-social model.
A* Applicability* - if the findings, or theory, have practical value and usefulness to human beings,
society etc. this is a strength. Have they helped to advance our understanding of human nature? Have they
bequeathed effective treatments? Have they generated further research?
A Androcentrism – if a study tells us more about one gender (usually males), or only recognises their
viewpoint, then this is a weakness; where male samples are used this is often the case too.
M Method – you can comment on any aspect of the method; this refers to the researchers choice of
experimental or non-experimental method (lab experiment, field experiment, observation, interview etc. and
their relative strengths / weaknesses), self-report, case study, correlational study – they all have strengths and
weaknesses to comment on.
S Sample – you can comment on any aspect of the sample and sampling method; was the sample very
specific in age, gender, occupation, abilities? Was it small? These are weaknesses. The best sample is a large
one, and one which has been randomly selected. However, this is hard to achieve and costly to the project.
S* Socio-political impact* - you can comment on the bigger picture, to the broader implications;
have findings helped to liberate or change views? To inform policy-making or laws?
*these points can be applied to theories, the others to studies](https://image.slidesharecdn.com/evaluationchecklist-140828083401-phpapp02/85/Evaluation-checklist-1-320.jpg)
