Overview – Self-report

Self-report is a psychological research method where participants provide information about themselves, such as their thoughts, feelings, and behaviours, without interference from the experimenter. The self-report method works by asking participants to directly report on their own internal states or past actions rather than having a researcher observe them directly.

In psychology, there are 2 main types of self-report:

Researchers must also consider self-report design – the way participants provide information about themselves. This includes the type of questions asked (e.g. open questions vs. closed questions, or rating scales).


Types of self-report


In psychology, there are 2 main types of self-report:

Other examples of self-report methods include psychometric tests and diaries.


Questionnaires

A questionnaire is a self-report method where participants are given a standardised set of written questions to complete – either on paper, online, or through post/email. Rather than researchers directly observing behaviour, participants provide information about their own thoughts, feelings, experiences, or behaviours.

Questionnaires usually collect data from many participants and can produce either qualitative data (detailed descriptions of opinions and experiences) or quantitative data (numerical results that can be compared and analysed statistically).

Evaluation: Questionnaires

Strengths of questionnaires:
  • Large amounts of data: Questionnaires can be given to many participants quickly, allowing researchers to collect a large and diverse sample.
  • Easy to analyse: Closed questions produce quantitative data that can be quickly compared and statistically analysed.
Weaknesses of questionnaires:
  • Social desirability bias: Participants may give answers that make them appear more socially acceptable rather than providing their true thoughts or behaviours. Note: This applies to interviews too and self-report in general.
  • Low validity: Participants may misunderstand questions or give inaccurate answers, meaning the results may not reflect their true behaviour or opinions.

Interviews

An interview is a self-report method where researchers ask participants questions directly, either face-to-face, over the phone, or online. Unlike questionnaires, interviews allow researchers to interact with participants and ask follow-up questions to gain more detailed information.

Interviews can be categorised into 3 types depending on how much structure and control the researcher uses:

Structured interviews

A structured interview uses a fixed set of pre-determined questions that are asked in the same order to every participant.

Key features:

  • All participants receive identical questions.
  • Questions are usually closed questions, producing mainly quantitative data.
  • Researchers cannot easily ask follow-up questions.

Example:

A researcher investigating stress levels in students asks every participant the same set of 10 questions using a rating scale from 1 (not stressed) to 5 (extremely stressed).

Semi-structured interviews

A semi-structured interview combines a set of pre-determined questions with the opportunity for researchers to ask follow-up questions.

Key features:

  • All participants are asked the same main questions.
  • Researchers can explore interesting answers in more depth.
  • Produces a mixture of quantitative and qualitative data.

Example:

A researcher investigating experiences of social media asks all participants the same questions but follows up by asking them to explain why they gave certain answers.

Unstructured interviews

A unstructured interview has no fixed set of questions, allowing the conversation to develop naturally based on the participant’s responses.

Key features:

  • Researchers use broad topics rather than a fixed question list.
  • Participants can provide detailed explanations in their own words.
  • Produces mainly qualitative data.

Example:

A researcher investigating experiences of mental health asks participants broad questions and allows them to discuss their experiences freely.

Comparison and evaluation of interview types:

Structured Interviews Semi-structured Interviews Unstructured Interviews
Summary Researchers use a fixed set of pre-determined questions asked in the same order to every participant. Researchers use a set of pre-determined questions but can ask follow-up questions to explore answers in more detail. Researchers use no fixed set of questions, allowing the interview to develop naturally based on participant responses.
Example A researcher investigating stress asks every student the same 10 questions using a rating scale from 1 (not stressed) to 5 (extremely stressed). A researcher investigating social media use asks all participants the same main questions but asks follow-up questions about interesting responses. A researcher investigating mental health asks broad questions and allows participants to discuss their experiences freely.
Strengths High reliability: Using identical questions and procedures makes interviews consistent and easy to replicate.
Easy to analyse: Standardised responses can be quickly compared and statistically analysed.
Detailed responses: Follow-up questions allow researchers to gain deeper insight into participants’ experiences.
Balance of reliability and validity: Standardised questions allow comparisons while flexibility improves understanding.
High validity: Participants can explain their experiences in detail, producing rich and meaningful data.
Flexible: Researchers can explore unexpected ideas that arise during the interview.
Weaknesses Limited detail: Fixed questions prevent participants from fully explaining their thoughts or experiences.
Lower validity: Participants may be forced to choose answers that do not accurately represent their views.
Time-consuming: Conducting and analysing follow-up questions takes longer than structured interviews.
Researcher bias: Different follow-up questions may be asked to different participants, reducing consistency.
Difficult to analyse: Detailed qualitative responses take longer to compare and interpret.
Lower reliability: Different researchers may ask different questions or interpret responses differently.

A weakness of all self-report studies is social desirability bias:

This is when participants give answers that make them appear better rather than reporting their true thoughts, feelings, or behaviours.

For example, participants in a questionnaire or interview about drug or alcohol consumption may underreport their consumption because they don’t want to sound irresponsible or unhealthy. Or, participants in a questionnaire or interview about political views may select the responses they believe are more socially acceptable rather than selecting the response that actually reflects their view.

This is a major limitation as it reduces the validity of self-report findings because the data collected may not accurately represent participants’ true behaviours or experiences.


Self-report design


Self-report design is about the way participants respond. Data can be structured in different ways, including:

These different designs can produce either qualitative or quantitative data.


Open or closed questions

Questions in a questionnaire or interview can be either open or closed:

Open Questions Closed Questions
Definition Questions that allow participants to respond in their own words without being restricted to specific answer options. Questions that provide a fixed set of response options for participants to choose from.
Example “How do you feel about online learning?” “How satisfied are you with online learning? (1 = Very dissatisfied, 5 = Very satisfied)”
Type of Data Qualitative data: Produces detailed descriptions of thoughts, feelings, and experiences. Quantitative data: Produces numerical data that can be easily compared and analysed statistically.
Advantages In-depth responses: Allows participants to provide detailed explanations and unexpected insights.
Higher validity: Participants can express their views freely without being restricted by answer choices.
Easy to analyse: Responses can be quickly compared and statistically tested.
More reliable: Standardised answers make it easier to compare responses between participants.
Disadvantages Difficult to analyse: Detailed responses take longer to categorise and compare.
Less reliable: Different researchers may interpret responses differently.
Limited detail: Fixed responses may not capture the full range of participants’ opinions.
Lower validity: Participants may be forced to choose an answer that does not accurately represent their views.

Rating scales

Rating scales allow participants to indicate the strength of their feelings, opinions, or experiences using a standardised scale. This allows researchers to measure attitudes and compare responses between participants. Their responses may be rated in 3 main ways:

  • Numerical rating scales
  • Likert rating scales
  • Semantic differential rating scales
Numerical Rating Scale Likert Rating Scale Semantic Differential Rating Scale
Definition A scale where participants rate something using numbers to show the strength of their opinion or experience. A scale where participants indicate their level of agreement with a statement using options such as strongly agree to strongly disagree. A scale where participants rate something between two opposite adjectives to measure attitudes or opinions.
Example “How stressed do you feel?
1 = Not stressed at all
10 = Extremely stressed”
“I feel stressed during exams.
Strongly agree / Agree / Neither agree nor disagree / Disagree / Strongly disagree”
“Online learning is:
1 = Boring ───────── 5 = Interesting”
Type of Data Quantitative data: Produces numerical scores that can be compared and statistically analysed. Quantitative data: Produces numerical scores based on the level of agreement with statements. Quantitative data: Produces numerical ratings showing participants’ attitudes towards a concept.
Advantages Easy to analyse: Numerical scores can be quickly compared between participants. Measures intensity of attitudes: Captures both whether someone agrees/disagrees and how strongly they hold that view. Measures subtle opinions: Captures degree of differences in attitudes between two opposite concepts.
Disadvantages Subjectivity and interpretation issues: Raw numbers lack qualitative context, so a ‘7/10’ means different things to different participants. Central tendency bias: Participants frequently default to the middle neutral option (‘neither agree nor disagree’) to avoid taking a firm stance. Selected words may not reflect participant’s views: E.g. Rating an experience between ‘happy’ and ‘sad’ – a participant might feel ‘angry’ instead, but this isn’t on the scale.

<<< Previous: The observational method

Next: Correlation studies >>>


<<< Back to OCR psychology revision notes
<<< Back to AQA psychology revision notes