biological psychology practical investigation evaluation essay (8)

Evaluate bio practical investigation (8)
One strength of my practical investigation is that it was reliable. This is because participants
had standardised instructions which included the procedures they would follow throughout
the study. For example, their index and ring fingers on their right hand would be measured
with a ruler then used to calculate the finger quotient. This is done by dividing the length of
the index finger by the length of the ring finger. They would then complete the Bus Perry
questionnaire which assessed their physical aggression levels. These instructions were the
same for all participants in this investigation, therefore the reliability of the results can be
established because the standardised procedures can be easily replicated. This is important
as this helps to check for reliability of the findings. This means that if the study was
replicated on more types of participants, then it would be possible to determine whether the
results which suggest that as finger quotient decreases below 1, physical aggression
increases, may be reliable. On the other hand, finger quotient might not actually reflect the
actual testosterone levels or physical aggression levels. This is because other environmental
factors should be considered when measuring aggression, such as socialisation and
upbringing. This suggests that the findings may not be valid despite being reliable.

One weakness of this practical investigation is that it may not be generalisable. The aim was
to investigate the relationship between finger quotient and physical aggression. The results
from Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient test show that there was no significant
difference between finger quotient and physical aggression scores, thus accepting the null
hypothesis which states that there is no significant correlation between finger quotient and
physical aggression. One issue is that a small sample of 8 college students was used. This
means that this sample may not be representative of all college students, therefore findings
cannot be generalised to the whole population. This is because individual differences in the
participants are likely to skew the results in a small sample like this. This is a weakness as
the study may lack generalisability. On the other hand, ethical guidelines were closely
followed, as participants had informed consent because they were given instructions that
told them about the aim and the specific procedures they had to follow throughout the study.
They also had the right to withdraw from the study and their names were not used, thus
maintaining confidentiality. This is a strength as the study was reliable, therefore it can be
replicated on more participants without the issue of ethics preventing its replication.

In conclusion, my practical investigation aimed to investigate the relationship between finger
quotient and physical aggression in 8 college students. The findings show that there was no
significant correlation between these variables. However, in a small sample like this,
individual differences between the participants are likely to have a greater effect on the
findings than if a larger sample was tested. This means that the results may not be valid.
However, as the standardised procedures were precise and can be easily replicated, the
findings could be checked for reliability on a larger sample. This implies that the findings can
be generalised due to their reliability. Nonetheless, finger quotient may not be a valid
measure of physical aggression, therefore other social and psychological factors must be
considered so as to adopt a holistic approach to this investigation.