A-Level Psychology Essays | Student Resources

Strengths and Weaknesses (Fagen et al.)

Using PEEL method (Point-Explanation-Example-Link)

📘

AS Level

Paper 1 Evaluation Essays

P – The study used structured observation
E – Observers only had to focus on limited range of behaviours
E – For example, use of behavioural checklist to measure the success of trunk here, trunk up, steady, bucket and blow
L – Results are more reliable due to standardisation in behaviours being observed

P – The study followed the ethical guidelines for animals
E – Housing conditions catered to the needs of animals
E – Although elephants were chained, the setup allowed enough laxity in the chains for elephants to walk around, they were also provided with sufficient food consisting of fresh grasses and dhana.
L – Animals does not suffer from distress or deprivation

P – The study collected quantitative data
E – Quantitative data allowed for easier statistical analysis and comparison
E – For example, success rate of trunk wash improved from 39.0% after 10 sessions to 89.3% after 35 sessions
L – Researches can draw more valid conclusions due to lower chances of misinterpretation

P – The study consisted of a gender bias sample
E – Findings cannot be generalised to elephants of both sexes
E – For example, all 4 juvenile and 1 adult elephants are females
L – Findings are not representative of all elephants because different sex have different dynamics

P – There might be potential distress to animals
E – Trunk wash is not something that the elephants were used to
E – For example, the initial introduction of syringe for the injection of saline water was required for the trunk wash process
L – It was seen as an aversive stimulus for elephants

P – The study is relatively subjective
E – Success of trunk wash process was based on trainer’s subjective judgement whether behaviours are sufficient to pass the trunk wash
E –Elephants’ performance were evaluated from the 10th session, with success defined as performing the correct behaviour in response to 80% of cues by the trainer
L – Potential researcher bias will reduce internal validity of findings as results might be influenced by trainer’s perception and feelings