Descriptive methods

Social psychologists have a toolkit of descriptive methods to observe, measure, and record behavior in real-world situations. The typical descriptive methods include naturalistic observation, case studies, archives, surveys, and psychological tests (Kenrick, Neuberg, & Cialdini, 2007, p. 18).

Naturalistic observation

Naturalistic observation involves observing behavior in a natural setting. Naturalistic observation allows the researchers to observe spontaneous rather than artificial behavior. A limitation of natural observation is that bias can shade what the researcher sees and reports.

Case studies

Social psychologists develop case studies when they want to observe an individual or a group intensely. The case study is particularly useful for gaining an understanding of unusual behavior. However, researcher bias can limit case studies. For example, the researcher may report only the behavior that supports the hypothesis. An additional problem with case studies is that they might be on isolated and rare cases that do not generalize, offering limited relevancy outside of the case study.

Archives

Examining similar cases in archives can enhance the relevancy of case studies. Researchers use the archival method to test hypotheses against data collected for other purposes.

Surveys

Using the survey method, researchers ask a random sample of people questions about their beliefs, opinions, and behaviors, then extrapolate results to a population (Kenrick, Neuberg, & Cialdini, 2007). Survey results allow social psychologists to identify correlation among variables, like the connection between a demographic trait and health. Surveys can provide an incomplete snapshot of a population by taking unrepresentative samples and introducing researcher bias through the wording and order of questions and selecting and ordering response options (Myers, 2008). Whether by accident or by design, such weaknesses make surveys ideal tools for manipulating attitudes and behavior.

Psychological tests

Psychological tests assess the differences between the abilities, cognitions, motivations, and behaviors of respondents. All psychological tests have issues with reliability and validity. Consistency of test results threatens reliability; respondents can get different results every time they take an assessment. This can reflect an inaccurate assessment or indicate that the assessment is measuring a dynamic process. Different personality characteristics emerge depending on the context. Assessments that do not measure what they are designed to measure threaten test validity.