Two main conditions have been used in this experiment. In the experimental condition; five people will stand in a line behind and to the right of the netball post, therefore creating a small audience facing the participant. They won’t speak or pass judgement in front of the participant. Each Participant takes 5 shots 3.5 metres away from the post. The control condition consists of only the researcher and the participant present in the sports hall with no other spectators. Each participant will take 5 shots from 3.5 metres away from the post.
In this experiment the independent variable is used as:
- The ability of the netball player, one group of netball players are the ten best in Tyne and Wear county (under 18), whilst the other ten players have no previous netballing experience at all.
- The second factor was whether or not there was an audience present. For the first condition there was no audience present (apart from the experimenter). Whilst for the second condition five people of the same age group (16 to 18) are present. The same people are kept as the audience throughout.
The dependant variable used is, The number of shots scored by a participant (in each condition) from 3.5 metres away from the post. Five shots are taken in each condition and the mean number of accurate shots will be calculated for each condition.
An extraneous variable was discovered, in having the researcher present during condition 1, (the control condition). This may have caused an audience effect, precisely the effect, which was being experimented on in condition 2. However the researcher has to be present due to accurate recording of the shooting scores. The problem of co-action could occur if this is not undertaken. Participants will obviously want to perform at the highest level possible if they are competing against co-actors and if they are asked to give their scores honestly there is a risk of them cheating and possibly increasing their total so as not to be embarrassed, thus providing an extraneous variable of co-action, this will become a confounding variable. This could be monitored by secretly observing the participants, however ethical issues may be raised and therefore the most ethically sound and accurate way to record this data is to monitor the results with only the experimenter present and note in the conclusion this extraneous variable.
I controlled for this extraneous variable by having the experimenter stand back from the participant out of sight and not speaking all the way through the experiment apart from the saying the instructions. This was to reduce any intimidation which may have occurred and to reduce the chance of any experimenter effects.
This task was one, which could have caused embarrassment to the participants and also future self-doubt regarding this sporting task. If the participants thought that they were under performing then they had the right to withdraw themselves, their data and their results from the study. Whilst at the same time, complete confidentiality of these results and any other information regarding the participant was kept because of, protection of the participants. I made sure that the right to withdraw was fully outlined in the consent form, which each participant signed. The participants were put under no pressure to either keep their results as part of the study or to withdraw them. This “Right to withdraw” option was also available at any time during or after the experiment was completed.
Participants
The target population for this experiment were the girls from Dame Allan’s school in Newcastle, aged between 16 and 18 who had previously had only limited netballing experience (only compulsory physical education lessons), and netball players aged between 16 and 18 who represent Tyne and Wear county, playing netball.
The sampling method used was that of opportunity sampling, 40 people were asked (10 of each ability) to take part, therefore gaining a sample of 20 participants from my study. I chose this sampling method as participants had to be willing and able to take part in this study. It was inexpensive and quick to select them and also the parent population of the Tyne and Wear netball County under 18 squad is limited to 20 people so therefore a method of stratified sampling could have proved difficult. The sample used was andocentric – using only females. These females were all aged between 16 and 18 years. The experienced county netball players from group A were from different schools, however all form the Tyne and Wear region. However the non-experienced netball players were all from the same school (Dame Allan’s in Newcastle) and therefore have had the same amount of experience of physical education lessons as each other.
Materials.
A photograph of the materials used can be found in appendix 8.
1 10-foot netball post,
1 mitre size 5 netball,
Sports hall.
I used this task and the materials because they directly relate to sport, unlike some of the previous research into sports psychology. The task was relatively easy to measure the results from. Whilst also, I’ve had a lot of experience in netball shooting and therefore I feel that I’m able to draw more accurate conclusions from something in my own personal field of expertise.
Procedure.
20 females were approached to take part in “a psychology experiment involving a sporting task.” – the task was not revealed prior to the experiment so as not to allow for any additional practice. 10 of these people were from Tyne and Wear county netball under 18 squad and 10 were all aged under 18 attending Dame Allan’s school – with no previous netball experience. The people asked were female due to netball being mainly exclusively a female orientated sport. Therefore a sample of 20 participants was obtained.
Group 1 were the experienced players and group 2 were the non-experienced players. There were also 2 conditions, Condition A; the shooting task of 5 shots from 3 metres away, without an audience and then Condition B; the same task but with 5 audience members standing on the back line around 5 metres away from the post, watching (in silence) the task being performed.
The structure used was ABAB for the experiment, group 1 performed condition A then condition B, then group 2 performed condition A then condition B.
Before each participant could take part, they were required to sign a consent form detailing the aims of this coursework, (for the purpose of my AS level psychology), the tasks which they’d have to undergo, details of their rights (withdrawal etc.), along with a place for them to sign. This consent form can be found in appendix …
The standardised instructions that were given before the test was to be conducted can also be seen in appendix … The standardised procedures in this experiment were that the task had to be conducted in silence, so as not to disrupt the participants concentration, and no communication between the audience and the participant. The audience’s sole purpose was to watch the 5 shots being taken in condition B. Also the audience were the same people for every participant and were all female.
After both conditions were complete, the participants were handed a debriefing sheet (see appendix 3), outlining the aims of the research, the hypothesis, a past study on which this experiment was based and again outlining (as in the consent form) the participants rights to withdraw, along with contact details.
After this had been done the participants were free to go. This experiment was replicated exactly as listed by all participants.
Results.
Raw data was collected and can be found in appendix …
Some patterns were visible in the raw data. Calculations of descriptive statistics can be found in appendix … and a summary table is shown below, the calculations for which can be found in appendix …
Summary table to show the averages of shots scored for both condition A (without an audience) and B (with an audience) with both expert and non expert results.
The results found were generally that the more experienced netball players scored more goals with an audience (mean of 4 out of 5), than without an audience (average mean out of 5). Whereas the less experienced players scored more goals without an audience present (mean 2.2) than with an audience (mean 1.4). It also has to be noted that overall the more experienced players scored a total of 77 goals out of 100, compared with 36 out of 100 by the non-experienced players. Therefore leaving a range of 41 goals between the two.
These results show the concept of having an audience present with an experienced player would facilitate their performance whereas with a non-experienced player it would inhibit their performance.
However, there were some anomalous results, not all of the experienced players performances improved, one experienced players score decreased from 3 scored in condition A, to 2 in condition B and another was 5 shots decreasing to 3. Indeed some of the non-expert players scores increased, From 1 to 3 in condition B. Some scores stayed the same in both conditions, most notably with the experienced players, 2 of them scored 5 shots in each condition, however this also happened with the non-experienced players, but their equal scores were lower, 0 and 0 then 1 and 1.
There was some overlap in the scores, in condition A, 7 non expert players scored equal or a better number of shots than that of the experts. Whilst in condition B, 3 non-experts scores were equal to that of their counterparts, the experts, however non were above. (See discussion for further reference).
As a result of these values and averages, the null hypothesis can be rejected as there was a difference in the two sets of scores and the experimental hypothesis of,
“It’s predicted that there will be a difference in the performance (number of shots scored) with an audience present, or not, between experienced, well-practiced county level netball players and in-experienced non-netball players.”
Can be supported.
