Relationships & the Media (DP IB Psychology): Revision Note

Here is an example of a Paper 3 source and a 6-mark SAQ using technology (HL extension) in the Human Relationships context:

Source 3

A parasocial relationship (PR) is a one-sided relationship: one of the partners is unaware that the relationship exists. A PR tends to be focused on someone famous or well-known, e.g., a sportsperson, a pop star, a ‘reality’ celebrity, a film star, or a writer. A PR can be with someone fictional, as is the case with the study outlined below.

Schmid & Klimmt (2011) investigated PRs using a sample of 2551 Harry Potter fans from Germany (individualistic culture) and Mexico (collectivistic culture). The participants filled in an online questionnaire, including open questions (qualitative data), assessing their PR with Harry.

Participants from Mexico rated Harry as being higher in sociability (i.e., outgoing, friendly, approachable) than the fans from Germany did but this was the only real difference overall. Participants from both countries reported similar levels of PRs⁠ with Harry, which⁠ suggests that PRs may be a cross-cultural phenomenon.

Q3. Discuss how the researchers could improve the credibility of the findings in this source.

[6 marks]

Model answer:

In this study the researchers would first have to consider how valid and insightful their methodology is. This would involve having to analyse the open questions on the questionnaire to ensure that they adhere to the research aim. The questions should elicit rich, thick data from participants and this could be checked by an independent expert. Using questions starting with 'Tell me about...' 'How do you feel about...' or 'Explain what Harry means to you...' would be credible, as they would prompt a free and subjective response per participant.

As two different countries/cultures were used in this study, the researchers would have to ensure that no cross-cultural misunderstandings occurred, which could be achieved by asking independent experts to check the language used in the instructions per country so that nothing is lost in translation. They should also practise reflexivity to avoid cultural bias and/or confirmation bias so that they are not entering into the study with any preconceived ideas which would decrease the credibility of the findings.

Guidance

• The command term “Discuss” requires you to offer a considered review, acknowledging limitations as well as strengths, offering suggestions for improvement, demonstrating insight of the topic

• A discussion of how to improve credibility could include:

  • Checking the findings with participants

  • Using a focus group to validate the research, particularly the findings

  • Ask colleagues/experts to review the findings

  • Using reflexivity

  • Highlighting strengths and limitations of the procedure, sample, etc.