To investigate which gender is more helpful between the ages of 16 and 17. Section 2 The questionnaire contained ten questions. Within the questions I included the following types of questions: 1. Three forced questions. For example; are you male or female? 2. Three open questions. For example; someone asks you for help on their very difficult homework. What do you do? 3. Two closed questions. For example; someone has just fallen over in front of you. Do you: a) Laugh? b) Laugh & help them up? c) Help them up or, d) nothing. 4. Two questions including the Likert scale. For example; if you saw someone struggling with their bags how inclined would you feel to help them? (1being very much so and 5 being not at all).
Each question apart from the first two were given a score between zero and five. The first two questions were missed out from the scoring as they were asked purely so that the data could be organised. The score of zero which was given to the questions meant that the persons answer was the least helpful and the score of five represents the fact the participants answer displayed the most helpfulness. The higher the score the participant achieved on their overall questionnaire means the more helpful the participant is.
Section 3 My sample was chosen through opportunity sampling it was from sixth form students at Brentwood School between the ages 16 and 17. Five girls and five boys chosen through opportunity sampling were given the questionnaire. The questionnaire took part in a quiet corner of a classroom. I asked the questions and the participants told me their answers verbally whilst I wrote their answers down on a sheet of paper. The questionnaire took part during the school week in lesson time. The target population for the questionnaire is students between the ages of 16 and 17.
Section 4 To collect my data I asked 10 participants a series of 10 questions. I then scored the participants on each question and added them all together. Each participant could have achieved an overall score of 40. The higher the score the participant achieved the more helpful they are. Section 5 Table of Data (Scores for each Question)The highest overall score achieved was 35 by the females and the lowest score of 16 was achieved by the males. The mean of the female score was very slightly higher than the male mean score. It was higher by 1.8. The standard deviation of the two genders also only varied very slightly.
After analysing my data I have seen that gender makes no difference to how helpful someone is. However, this is only true for the ages between 16 and 17 as this is the target population who I asked my questions to. Evaluation A weakness in a way that my questionnaire was made was that some of the questions were long winded and may have been confusing to the participants. Also some questions were repeated but with a different scenario, so the participants may have become bored.
An alternative rating system that could have been used was that I could have rated any answer that showed helpfulness with a one but any others as zero. This would have been quicker and less complicated and it would have made the numbers more manageable in the results. A strength in the way that I selected my sample is that anyone could take part and there was no difficulty in finding a participant in a time that was convenient for both investigator and participant. However, bias could occur in opportunity sampling as the researcher could know the characters of the participants and choose them accordingly. An improvement on opportunity sampling would be to use random sampling as it would not be possible for bias to occur.
The way data was collected was not very organised and could have been improved by giving a copy of the questionnaire to each participant so they could answer the questions privately. This may have further improved the results as the questions may have been answered more truthfully if the participant was answering questions on their own. The validity of the questionnaire could be tested by asking various people whether they thought the questions were relevant to my aim.
A way to test the reliability of the questionnaire would be to carry it out again and see whether the outcome was similar to the previous questionnaire. I had to consider the ethical issue of privacy when I was conducting my investigation. I made sure the questions I asked did not invade the participant’s privacy. Overall I believe the way my questionnaire was carried out was successful. However, in my opinion with a few changes my questionnaire could have been more efficient and produced more satisfactory results.