The three major things that differ experiments from the descriptive and correlational approaches.

The researchers now wanted to study how the sexual arousal had changed. When the subjects had been drinking for a while the researchers observed all of them and the collected data are showed in the table below.

A pattern observed between two different variables is called a correlation. The correlational approach is commonly used in non-experimental studies, since finding patterns is one of the important ways of increasing our understanding of behaviour. When dealing with correlational research one must keep in mind that it involves measuring variables, not manipulating them.

1. The researcher measures one variable (X).
2. The researcher measures a second variable (Y)
3. The researcher statistically determines whether X and Y are related.

The most important benefit is that correlational data allow us to make predictions. The major disadvantage of correlational research is that correlation does not demonstrate causation. You can draw any conclusions of your own.

By using a measurement called a correlational coefficient, it is possible to show that there is a moderately strong relationship between the two variables. A correlation can either be negative or positive. When measuring the correlational coefficient, the values should be as close to 1.0 or -1.0 as possible. Sometimes people see patterns between variables where none actually exists. This is called an illusory correlation. An example of illusory correlation is when a person is waiting for the elevator. Often they tap the edge of the door, push the close button repeatedly or engage in other actions which may actually do nothing to alter the programmed cycle of the elevator. Since the person’s actions sometimes coincide with the door closing, he or she really thinks that it worked.

The most basic goal in science is to describe phenomena. Dealing with descriptive research in psychology, means that researchers seek to identify how humans and other animals behave, particularly in natural setting. Case studies, natural observation and surveys are common descriptive methods. A case study is a detailed description of a single individual, typically used to provide information on the person’s history and to aid in interpreting the person’s behaviour. Case studies have several advantages, but also some drawbacks. One advantage is that when a rare phenomenon occurs, the case study method enables scientists to study it intensively and collect a large amount of data. A second advantage is that a case study may challenge the validity of a theory or widely held scientific belief. The biggest advantage is that case studies can be a vibrant source of new ideas and hypothesis that may be examined using more controlled research methods. The most important limitation of a case study is that they are a poor method of determining cause-effect relations. Naturalistic observation is a research method which is based on observing behaviour in a natural setting, without interfering or attempting to control conditions. A survey is a technique for determining attitudes of many individuals by providing a pre-planned series of questions to which individuals respond.

My personal opinion of these three methods is that I think the experimental method is the best. Then you can draw conclusions and you can find out the cause. In descriptive methods; surveys for example, then people might give the wrong answer so the result will not be 100% correct. Correlational research is also good in a way. Although you can’t find out the cause, you can make predictions.