Comparison of Methods for Studying Political Psychology - Coursework Example

Psychology Introduction From a descriptive point of view, political science refers to an interdisciplinary scholarly field devoted to understanding politicians, political behavior, and political science. Essentially, there are different methods that are considered essential in studying political psychology. These methods take account of survey research and experiments and depth interviews. With this understanding, this paper critically presents a comparison on the weaknesses and strengths for the methods used to study political psychology from a broad perspective. Comparing the Strengths and Weaknesses: Methods for Studying Political Psychology Evidently through different studies, every method of studying political psychology has some strengths and weaknesses. The study of political psychology is therefore, enhanced all the way through the use of psychological methods and theories, which have been approved by different psychologists (David, 2009, P. 17). It is worth to contemplate that the methods used to study political psychology are liable to some weaknesses and strengths. In this section, we will be analyzing the weaknesses and strengths of each method in depth through the use of vivid illustrations where necessary. Strengths and Weaknesses: Survey Research, Experiments The study of political psychology through the use of survey research and experiments is very significant towards understanding this field in depth (Freud, 2006, P. 28). To some extent, the use of survey research and experiments is considered as the best method to study political psychology, especially when compared to depth interviews as we are going to note throughout the discussion. Despite the fact that the method of survey research and experiments is helpful towards enhancing improved indulgent in relation to political psychology, it is worth to mention that the method is usually accompanied by some points of weaknesses and other points of strengths. To begin with are the strengths for studying political psychology (Maddux, 2005, P. 49). To some extent, the strengths of experiments comprise of internal reliability and validity. These strengths correspond to causing and effecting connections and readily determined. Through the use of research surveys, lots of information is usually collected speedily and cheaply. That is been the case this benefit supports population reliability and validity in the long run. However, it is worth to contemplate that the weakness of survey research method is liable to superficial questions. Such questions considerably do not promote the study of political psychology since some of them are usually not related to the subject matter (Freud, 2006, P. 39). What is more, questions delay the chances of going through different components of political psychology. Another major weakness of survey research method is based on ecological validity and inclusiveness (Smith & Bond, 2006, P. 74). This aspect does not promote the study, given that ecological validity results to slow learning concerning the area under discussion. Most outstandingly, survey research and experiments method can be considered to have more strengths than the weaknesses. In that case, the method is considered practical and more efficient in terms of studying political psychology (David, 2009, P. 24). In its implication, the points of strength outshine the points of weakness, a factor making the technique enhanced than the use of depth interviews method. Strengths and Weaknesses: Depth Interviews In terms of definition, depth interviews are a practical qualitative data compilation method that is mostly used in the study of political psychology. Depth interviews are therefore, valuable towards the study of political psychology (Maddux, 2005, P. 67). However, it is quite considerable to note that this method has some basic strengths and weaknesses like any other method of study in political psychology. In terms of its strengths, depth interviews are most suitable for situations in which one wants to inquire open-ended questions that draw out depth of information. Through the use of open ended questions, which form the basis of this method helps to shed light on the study of political psychology in due course (O’Shea, 2002, P. 76). This is based on the fact that open ended questions facilitate ways through which different aspect concerning political psychology are analyzed and discussed with the use of vivid examples where necessary. Depth interviews in that sense are exceptional tools to make use of in planning and evaluating the manner in which political psychology is studies. Another comparable strength of this method is that it relies on extension programs (David, 2009, P. 49). Such programs remain being significant for the reason that they use discovery-oriented method and an open-ended technique. Such techniques are unique and not found in other method used to study political psychology (Widiger, 2000, P. 39). This is an implication that this method allows the interviewer to intensely explore the respondent’s perspectives and feelings on the area under discussion. This significantly results in affluent background information that helps to shape additional questions applicable to the topic. The major characteristics of depth interviews that denote its strength are as the following (Freud, 2006, P. 50). First, open ended questions denote the strength of this technique. Such questions are made to be answered by the respondent’s o as to enhance improved study of political psychology. The second point of strength in this method is seeking interpretation and understanding. Evidently through statistics, it is understandable that other methods of studying political psychology do not facilitate this aspect (David, 2009, P. 57). Therefore, depth interviews promote the use of active skills of listening with the intention to reflect on what the speaker is taking about in the field of political psychology. On the point of weaknesses, this method tends to endorse slow learning and studying of political psychology (O’Shea, 2002, P. 59). This is because several questions are usually involved in this method. That is been the case, the use of many questions in the study of political psychology delays the chances of learning different things in the field. Analysis of the Comparison Evidently through this comparison, it is notable that the use of research survey and experiments method to study political psychology has several strengths than the use of depth interview (Friesen, 2010, P. 37). In that case, the points of weaknesses found through the use of research survey and experiments method are minimal as compared to the several weaknesses associated with the use of depth interviews. The most suitable method to use is the one with minimal points of weaknesses towards enhancing the study of political psychology (Raphael & Wilson, 2000, P. 40). This is an implication that the study of political psychology can be best enhanced through the use of research surveys and experiments (David, 2009, P. 68). This is because this method also supports the implementation of modern technology in carrying out the study in details. The involvement of technology critically helps to examine the best approaches that are suitable in the move to study political psychology. In order to make sure the study of political psychology is successful; elimination of the weaknesses should be enhanced through the use of methods, which correspond to what learners are comfortable with in the long run (Friesen, 2010, P. 49). In that case, developing improved understanding for the study of political psychology largely depends with the type of technique used. Conclusion Notably through this comparison, it is agreeable that the use of research survey and experiments as a method of studying political psychology is considered as the most effective technique to use. This is as compared to the method of depth interviews, which is liable to several points of weaknesses based on the several questions involved within. It is therefore; true to conclude that every method of studying political psychology has some strengths and weaknesses. The study of political psychology is therefore, enhanced all the way through the use of psychological methods and theories, which have been approved by different psychologists. Reference List David, H, 2009, .Political Psychology, Oxford: Oxford University Press, Freud, S, 2006, Ed. The Psychopathology of Everyday Life. New York: HarperCollins Press. Friesen, B. 2010, Designing and Conducting Your First Interview Project. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Maddux, J, 2005, Psychopathology: Foundations for a Contemporary Understanding. Lawrence Erlbaum. O’Shea, R, 2002, Writing for Psychology (4th Ed.). Melbourne, Australia: Thomson Learning. Smith, B, & Bond, H, 2006, Understanding social psychology across cultures: Living and working in a changing world (3rd rev. ed.). London, UK: Sage. Raphael, B & Wilson, J, 2000, Psychological debriefing: Theory, Practice, and Evidence. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Widiger, T, 2000, Adult Psychopathology: Issues and Controversies. Annual Review of Psychology. Read More