Research Methods Study Guide: Variables, Validity and Experimental Design in 59 Flashcards
Study research methods with 59 flashcards: independent and dependent variables, confounds, validity, Type I/II errors, p-hacking, preregistration and research ethics.
Studying. But it's also a video game. 🎮
Flashcards, quizzes and games that make you actually remember.
Posted by
FLIP IT TeamRelated reading
Learn Statistics for Psychology: 40 Flashcards from Standard Deviation to Factor Analysis
Master psychology statistics with deck YS4685: 40 flashcards on z-scores, t-tests, ANOVA, effect size, power, regression and the central limit theorem.
Most students lose points on research methods not because the ideas are hard, but because the terms come in near-identical pairs: internal vs external validity, Type I vs Type II error, within- vs between-subjects, reliability vs validity. The Research Methods & Experimental Design deck on Flip It (deck code NL6803, 59 cards) is built around exactly those contrasts,.
Study this deck: Research Methods & Experimental Design
1 / 10Empirical research in psychology
Tap the card for the answer · swipe right if you knew it, left if not
What the 59 cards cover
The deck moves in four blocks:
- Variables and design: independent, dependent, confounding and control variables, random assignment, control vs experimental group, within-subjects vs between-subjects design, longitudinal vs cross-sectional studies, quasi-experimental design, blocking, operationalization, Design of Experiments (DOE).
- Non-experimental methods: correlational study and the correlation coefficient (−1 to +1), case study, naturalistic observation, participant observation, survey, random sample, sampling bias, and the classic question of why correlation does not imply causation.
- Inference and measurement: hypothesis and null hypothesis, statistical significance (p < 0.05), Type I and Type II error, statistical power, ANOVA, test-retest reliability, inter-rater reliability, construct validity, replication and replicability.
- Ethics and research integrity: informed consent, debriefing, confidentiality, when deception is allowed, the Institutional Review Board, double-blind and triple-blind designs, p-hacking, preregistration, false positives driven by publication pressure.
Sample cards
| Front | Back |
|---|---|
| Confounding variable | An extraneous variable that systematically varies with the independent variable and could provide an alternative explanation for the results |
| Random assignment | Assigning participants to experimental conditions randomly to control for confounding variables |
| Internal validity | The extent to which a study accurately establishes a causal relationship between variables, free from confounding factors |
| External validity | The extent to which findings can be generalized to other settings, populations and time periods |
| Type I error | A false positive: rejecting the null hypothesis when it is actually true |
| Type II error | A false negative: failing to reject the null hypothesis when it is actually false |
| Statistical power | Probability that a test will correctly reject a false null hypothesis |
| Within-subjects design | The same participants are exposed to all conditions, controlling for individual differences |
| Triple-blind study | Double-blind design extended to the analysis phase: data go to an unrelated analyst who scrambles them |
| Preregistration | Researchers send their data analysis plan to a journal before data collection to prevent data manipulation |
How to study this deck
Learn the pairs as pairs. When a card like Type I error comes up, say the Type II definition out loud before flipping. The deck pairs them deliberately (internal/external validity, reliability/validity, within/between-subjects), so treat each pair as one unit and you halve what you need to remember.
Attach every term to one imaginary experiment. Pick a simple study, for example does caffeine improve reaction time, and run each card through it: caffeine dose is the independent variable, reaction time the dependent variable, sleep the confound, the placebo condition the control group, and a p-hacked result the one where you kept removing outliers until p dropped under 0.05. Terms that share a concrete example stop feeling abstract.
Do the ethics cards last, as a story. Informed consent → deception (only if necessary) → debriefing → confidentiality → IRB review is a chronological sequence, which is far easier to recall than five isolated definitions.
Two passes of the full deck, then daily review of the cards you missed, is enough for an intro psychology or statistics exam. Open Flip It at flip-it.app, search deck code NL6803, and start with the variables block.
Ready to learn faster? 🚀
Join FLIP IT for free and turn studying into a game.