Show Recommended textbook solutionsSocial Psychology10th EditionElliot Aronson, Robin M. Akert, Samuel R. Sommers, Timothy D. Wilson 525 solutions
Consumer Behavior: Buying, Having, Being13th EditionMichael R Solomon 449 solutions Myers' Psychology for the AP Course3rd EditionC. Nathan DeWall, David G Myers 955 solutions Psychology4th EditionLaura Namy, Scott Lilienfeld, Steven Lynn 256 solutions In a quasi-experiment by Minke (2011), the effectiveness of a Danish halfway house (a place for people with criminal backgrounds to learn skills for reintegrating into society) that mixes offenders with nonoffenders was compared with that of the control condition of halfway houses housing only offenders. The measurement of effectiveness was based on rate of recidivism (relapse in criminal behavior) in former inmates. Inmates in the mixed halfway house were provided with job training opportunities, while inmates in the only-offenders halfway house were not.selection-history threat Inmates in the mixed halfway house showed lower rates of recidivism only because they understood the purpose of the study.demand characteristics Inmates were allowed to choose their own halfway
house.selection effects In their measurement of recidivism, researchers did not include inmates who were sent directly to prison from their halfway house for violations.attrition threat Recommended textbook solutionsHDEV56th EditionSpencer A. Rathus 380 solutions Consumer Behavior: Buying, Having, Being13th EditionMichael R Solomon 449 solutions Social Psychology10th EditionElliot Aronson, Robin M. Akert, Timothy D. Wilson 525 solutions Social Psychology10th EditionElliot Aronson, Robin M. Akert, Samuel R. Sommers, Timothy D. Wilson 525 solutions Experiments also can be classified by setting. Field experiments and laboratory experiments share the properties of control, randomization, and manipulation and involve the same design characteristics but are conducted in different environments. Laboratory experiments take place in an artificial setting created specifically for the purpose of research. In the laboratory, the researcher has almost total control over the features of the environment, such as temperature, humidity, noise level, and participant conditions. Conversely, field experiments are exactly what the name implies: experiments that take place in a real, pre-existing social setting, such as a hospital or clinic, where the phenomenon of interest usually occurs. Pre-experimental designs follow similar experimental steps but do not include a control or comparison group. There is only a single group, with no comparison with an equivalent or nonequivalent nontreatment group. Examples are the one-group pretest-posttest (O1 → X → O2) and the one-group posttest-only (X → O1) designs, where X is the treatment or intervention, and O is the data-collection points. In the one-group pretest-posttest design, data are collected before and after an experimental treatment on this one group of participants. In this type of design, the participants act as their own controls, and no randomization occurs. Because controls and randomization are important characteristics that enhance the internal validity of the study, the evidence generated by the findings of this type of pre-experimental design needs to be interpreted with careful consideration of the design limitations. The advantage of these designs is that they can be used to evaluate treatments, ruling out ineffective treatments before large-scale experimental or quasiexperimental studies are initiated. The disadvantage of this design is that without a control or comparison group, it is difficult to make any conclusions as to whether the treatment, (X) really caused the outcomes or changes. various designs for research studies differ in the amount of control the researcher has over the antecedent and intervening variables that may affect the results of the study. True experimental designs, which yield level II evidence, offer the most possibility for control, whereas nonexperimental In which type of study would participants be randomly assigned to groups?In a true experiment, all study participants are randomly assigned either to receive the treatment (also known as the stimulus or intervention) or to act as a control in the study (meaning they do not receive the treatment).
When participants have randomly been placed in groups it is called?Random assignment refers to how you place those participants into groups (such as experimental vs. control). Knowing this distinction will help you clearly and accurately describe the methods you use to collect your data and conduct your study. September 23, 2022. Three Aspects of Validity in Qualitative Research.
When individuals can be randomly assigned to groups?Random assignment is a procedure used in experiments to create multiple study groups that include participants with similar characteristics so that the groups are equivalent at the beginning of the study.
Why would subjects be randomly assigned to the groups?Random assignment of participants helps to ensure that any differences between and within the groups are not systematic at the outset of the experiment. Thus, any differences between groups recorded at the end of the experiment can be more confidently attributed to the experimental procedures or treatment.
|