BM Ch11

Cards (49)

  • one-group, pretest-posttest design
    one group, measure before and after exposure to IV, no comparison group
  • threats to validity in one-group pretest/posttests
    maturation, history, regression, attrition, testing, instrumentation, combined
  • maturation threats
    getting used to the conditions, a change in behaviour that emerges almost spontaneously over time
  • example of maturation threats
    spontaneous remission
  • including a comparison group can prevent...
    maturation, history, regression, testing threats
  • history threats
    something else has happened between the two tests
  • regression threats
    regressing to the mean - when a score is particularly high/low, the next score is likely to be closer to the mean, becomes a threat if a group is chosen due to particularly high/low prestest
  • attrition(/mortality) threats

    a reduction in participants when they drop out of the study
  • attrition is a threat when...
    the loss is systematic (one type of participant)
  • preventing attrition threats
    remove their pretest score, or check it to identify if it is particularly high or low
  • testing threats
    specific type of order effect, a change in the participant due to taking the test multiple times
  • testing threats specific examples
    practice/fatigue effects
  • preventing testing threats
    switch to posttest-only, use alternative tests for each
  • instrumentation threats
    when a measuring instrument changes over time, or the tests for before and after are different but not sufficiently equivalent
  • preventing instrumentation threats
    switch to posttest-only, ensure tests are equivalent, counterbalance test types
  • combined threats: selection-history threat
    outside factor affects those at one level of the IV
  • combined threats: selection-attrition threat
    one experimental group experiences attrition
  • threats to internal validity (all studies)
    observer bias, demand characteristics, placebo effect
  • observer bias
    when researchers' expectations influence their interpretation of the results
  • observer bias threatens...

    internal and construct validity
  • demand characteristics
    cues in an experiment that tell the participant what behaviour is expected, therefore changing their behaviour
  • double-blind studies
    neither participant nor researcher knows which group a participant is in
  • masked design (blind design)
    participant knows what group they are in, the observer does not
  • placebo effect
    when the participant receives a treatment and does improve, but only because they believe their treatment is valid
  • placebo effect may include...
    placebo side effects
  • double-blind placebo control study
    a study that uses a treatment group and a placebo group and in which neither the research staff nor the participants know who is in which group
  • double-blind placebo control studies may also include...
    no treatment groups
  • null effects/results
    no significant covariance in IV and DV (very common)
  • cause of null effects
    incorrect theory (IV does not affect DV), study poorly designed
  • not enough between-groups difference
    weak manipulations, insensitive measures, ceiling and floor effects
  • weak manipulations
    small, negligible differences between the levels of the IV
  • insensitive measures
    operationalisation not sensitive enough
  • ceiling effects
    all scores squeezed together at high end
  • floor effects
    all scores squeezed together at the low end
  • ceiling and floor effects are special cases of...
    weak manipulations and insensitive measures
  • manipulation checks used to detect...
    weak manipulations, ceilings and floors
  • design confounds in reverse
    reverse or counteract the true result
  • too much within-groups variability
    measurement error, individual differences, situation noise, problem with statistical validity - disrupts detection of a true difference
  • problem with statistical validity
    greater overlap = smaller effect size = less likely to be significant
  • measurement error (human or instrument)
    lots of measurement error = greater spread