Evaluative Issues in

Psychological Studies: Paying

Homage to Formal Terms
(Cooligan)
Question: Have you PERVED on
the study?

Evaluation using PEE/ PEC

structured paragraphs
Psychology is a science
so you MUST evaluate
scientifically. This
requires you to use the
following structure
The order of the EE in
PEE is not important so
long as you use both
parts.

Paragraph structure
POINT

make your point

Evidence (also known as

context)

A scientific evaluation
MUST have
evidence. Use
SPECIFIC study
findings to back up
your claim. Saying a
study name is not
Stateevidence.
whether this is a

EXPLAIN ( also known as

comment)

good or bad thing

and WHY it is. Use
analogies to help
clarify any
explanation you use
STRETCH and CHALLENGE extra: Top students will
also give ON THE OTHER HAND to their
strengths and weaknesses within their point they
are making.

Example
POINT: A weakness of the developmental approach is that where children are
studied over a long period of time, it may be that researchers become
more subjective.
EVIDENCE: For example, Freuds study of Little Hans was conducted over 2
years and some of his conclusions about the reasons for Hans phobia of
horses are biased by Hans fathers accounts and the relationship that
develops with both Hans and his father. Not only this, but the longitudinal
case studies conducted by Freud mean that only a few subjects are used
to inform his opinions.
EXPLAIN (COMMENT): This is a weakness because the explanations may not
be valid, due to researcher bias and other explanations may not be
considered (Hans may have learned the fear through classical
conditioning after seeing a horse rear up). More importantly the studies
lack reliability, as they are based on individual cases and can not be
replicated.

How to evaluate effectively using

PERVED
Evaluation should ALWAYS be
balanced. If it is not it is biased
and unscientific. ON THE
OTHER HAND is a good
sentence starter to use after
you make a point.
To do this make a list of
strengths and weaknesses on
paper or in your mind and for
each letter think of why it could
be argued as good and why it
could be argued as bad.

Strengths

Weaknesses (on the other

hand)

o
o

P = Good because it uses a

scientific method
(experiment).
E = Highly controlled
environment and task
means that the studies
results might not reflect real
life performance of autistic
adults
R = Measurement may be
reliable as the procedure
was controlled and
standardised.
V = Controlled procedure
and environment and tests
against another measure of
TOM
E = Ethical in the areas of
confidentiality and
deception
D = data collected is
quantitative (easy to
compare)

o
o

o
o

P = bad because a lot of tests

which confuse the participant
E = sample maybe
representative of population
as most of autistic were male
(like real life). Study is
generalisable to other people.
Could be negative.
R = not replicated
V = does not measure all
content of behaviour. No
description of why choosen,
no thinking aloud.
E = possible psychological
harm through stress of feeling
stupid
D = no qualitative data. No
description of the process

What does PERVED mean???

Practical Procedures?
Ethical issues
Reliable measurement
Valid measurement
Ecologically Valid method
Data analysis

Practical Procedures
Will the participants be confused?
Is it well designed so there is no
experimenter bias?
Is the procedure designed scientifically?

Ethical Issues
Do participants have informed consent?
Does the study deceive participants during
the task?
Does the study harm participants?
Are participants identities confidential?
Does the study give the participants the
right to withdraw?

Reliable measure
Is there a CONTROLLED procedure
(remove sources of error)?
Is there inter rater reliability?
Is the study replicated?

Validity of measurement
Does the study measure what it intends to measure
(experimental realism)?
Does it have a CONTROLLED procedure (remove
sources of error)?
Does it measure all the CONTENT of the behaviour?
Does it check the results against other CONCURRENT
measurements of the same behaviour for correlation?
Is the measure RELIABLE?

Ecologically Valid method

Is the situation artificial?
Is the task one that people do in real life?
Is the sample REPRESENTATIVE of the
population (cross section)?
Is the study generalisable to other settings other
than the one used?

Data analysis
Is the data only quantitative?
Is the data only qualitative?
Is the data both (even if both there could
be more of one than the other)?