Evaluating Cassiba et al
- Created by: user2005
- Created on: 01-05-23 13:40
View mindmap
- ETHICS
- No ethical issues as secondary data was used
- EVALUATING CASSIBBA ET AL (2013)
- SUBJECTIVE
- Subjective in the selection of studies BUT A CRITERIA WAS USED
- Based on the Strange Situation Procedure which may have had INTERPRETATION BIAS
- VALIDITY
- Internal validity: based on Ainsworth's experiment which used an artificial setting
- AAI- used interviews so data maybe inaccurate as ppts may have lied due to social desirability
- ISSUES & DEBATES
- NURTURE: shows how attached the child is within the env.
- REDUCTIONIST: only looks at Italian sample
- Not reductionist as it looks at BOTH CHILD & ADULT attachments
- SOCIAL CONTROL: how to raise children
- SOCIALLY SENSITIVE: Types A/C may insinuate bad parenting BUT that is not the case!
- PROCEDURE
- Used unpublished papers- avoids file drawer effect
- 1990-2009 resources were sued which reflects modern day parenting styles
- Tight controls were used (criteria's)
- HIGH VALIDITY due to quantitative analysis (OBJECTIVE)
- SAMPLE
- HIGHLY GENERALISABLE
- Directional hypothesis- researcher bias
- Baseline measure is BIASED as it is only based on an American sample
- Meta analysis- less reliable due to secondary data
- SUBJECTIVE
Comments
No comments have yet been made