Psychological Experimental Design- Living reference work entry
- First Online: 15 February 2024
- Cite this living reference work entry
- Zhang Houcan 2 &
- He Dongjun 3
13 Accesses Psychological experimental design refers to the experimental design and methodological approaches devised by researchers before conducting an experiment based on the research objectives. It can be broadly or narrowly defined. Broadly, psychological experimental design refers to the general procedure of scientific research, including problem formulation, hypothesis development, selection of variables, manipulation, and control, as well as statistical analysis of results and paper writing, among other series of activities. Narrowly, psychological experimental design refers to the specific experimental plan or model that researchers develop for arranging variables and procedures, along with the related statistical analysis. The main components of psychological experimental design include how to reasonably arrange the experimental procedures and how to perform statistical analysis on the experimental data. The main steps can be summarized as follows: (1) formulate hypotheses based on... This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access. Access this chapterInstitutional subscriptions Further ReadingKantowitz BH, Roediger HL, Elmes DG (2015) Experimental psychology, 10th edn. Cengage Learning, Boston Google Scholar Zhang X-M, Hua S (2014) Experimental psychology. Beijing Normal University Publishing Group, Beijing Download references Author informationAuthors and affiliations. Faculty of Psychology, Beijing Normal University, Beijing, China Zhang Houcan School of Psychology, Chengdu Medical University, Chengdu, China You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar Corresponding authorCorrespondence to He Dongjun . Rights and permissionsReprints and permissions Copyright information© 2024 Encyclopedia of China Publishing House About this entryCite this entry. Houcan, Z., Dongjun, H. (2024). Psychological Experimental Design. In: The ECPH Encyclopedia of Psychology. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-6000-2_490-1 Download citationDOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-6000-2_490-1 Received : 04 January 2024 Accepted : 05 January 2024 Published : 15 February 2024 Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore Print ISBN : 978-981-99-6000-2 Online ISBN : 978-981-99-6000-2 eBook Packages : Springer Reference Behavioral Science and Psychology Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences Policies and ethics - Find a journal
- Track your research
Experimental Method In PsychologySaul McLeod, PhD Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology. Learn about our Editorial Process Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc Associate Editor for Simply Psychology BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors. On This Page: The experimental method involves the manipulation of variables to establish cause-and-effect relationships. The key features are controlled methods and the random allocation of participants into controlled and experimental groups . What is an Experiment?An experiment is an investigation in which a hypothesis is scientifically tested. An independent variable (the cause) is manipulated in an experiment, and the dependent variable (the effect) is measured; any extraneous variables are controlled. An advantage is that experiments should be objective. The researcher’s views and opinions should not affect a study’s results. This is good as it makes the data more valid and less biased. There are three types of experiments you need to know: 1. Lab ExperimentA laboratory experiment in psychology is a research method in which the experimenter manipulates one or more independent variables and measures the effects on the dependent variable under controlled conditions. A laboratory experiment is conducted under highly controlled conditions (not necessarily a laboratory) where accurate measurements are possible. The researcher uses a standardized procedure to determine where the experiment will take place, at what time, with which participants, and in what circumstances. Participants are randomly allocated to each independent variable group. Examples are Milgram’s experiment on obedience and Loftus and Palmer’s car crash study . - Strength : It is easier to replicate (i.e., copy) a laboratory experiment. This is because a standardized procedure is used.
- Strength : They allow for precise control of extraneous and independent variables. This allows a cause-and-effect relationship to be established.
- Limitation : The artificiality of the setting may produce unnatural behavior that does not reflect real life, i.e., low ecological validity. This means it would not be possible to generalize the findings to a real-life setting.
- Limitation : Demand characteristics or experimenter effects may bias the results and become confounding variables .
2. Field ExperimentA field experiment is a research method in psychology that takes place in a natural, real-world setting. It is similar to a laboratory experiment in that the experimenter manipulates one or more independent variables and measures the effects on the dependent variable. However, in a field experiment, the participants are unaware they are being studied, and the experimenter has less control over the extraneous variables . Field experiments are often used to study social phenomena, such as altruism, obedience, and persuasion. They are also used to test the effectiveness of interventions in real-world settings, such as educational programs and public health campaigns. An example is Holfing’s hospital study on obedience . - Strength : behavior in a field experiment is more likely to reflect real life because of its natural setting, i.e., higher ecological validity than a lab experiment.
- Strength : Demand characteristics are less likely to affect the results, as participants may not know they are being studied. This occurs when the study is covert.
- Limitation : There is less control over extraneous variables that might bias the results. This makes it difficult for another researcher to replicate the study in exactly the same way.
3. Natural ExperimentA natural experiment in psychology is a research method in which the experimenter observes the effects of a naturally occurring event or situation on the dependent variable without manipulating any variables. Natural experiments are conducted in the day (i.e., real life) environment of the participants, but here, the experimenter has no control over the independent variable as it occurs naturally in real life. Natural experiments are often used to study psychological phenomena that would be difficult or unethical to study in a laboratory setting, such as the effects of natural disasters, policy changes, or social movements. For example, Hodges and Tizard’s attachment research (1989) compared the long-term development of children who have been adopted, fostered, or returned to their mothers with a control group of children who had spent all their lives in their biological families. Here is a fictional example of a natural experiment in psychology: Researchers might compare academic achievement rates among students born before and after a major policy change that increased funding for education. In this case, the independent variable is the timing of the policy change, and the dependent variable is academic achievement. The researchers would not be able to manipulate the independent variable, but they could observe its effects on the dependent variable. - Strength : behavior in a natural experiment is more likely to reflect real life because of its natural setting, i.e., very high ecological validity.
- Strength : Demand characteristics are less likely to affect the results, as participants may not know they are being studied.
- Strength : It can be used in situations in which it would be ethically unacceptable to manipulate the independent variable, e.g., researching stress .
- Limitation : They may be more expensive and time-consuming than lab experiments.
- Limitation : There is no control over extraneous variables that might bias the results. This makes it difficult for another researcher to replicate the study in exactly the same way.
Key TerminologyEcological validity. The degree to which an investigation represents real-life experiences. Experimenter effectsThese are the ways that the experimenter can accidentally influence the participant through their appearance or behavior. Demand characteristicsThe clues in an experiment lead the participants to think they know what the researcher is looking for (e.g., the experimenter’s body language). Independent variable (IV)The variable the experimenter manipulates (i.e., changes) is assumed to have a direct effect on the dependent variable. Dependent variable (DV)Variable the experimenter measures. This is the outcome (i.e., the result) of a study. Extraneous variables (EV)All variables which are not independent variables but could affect the results (DV) of the experiment. EVs should be controlled where possible. Confounding variablesVariable(s) that have affected the results (DV), apart from the IV. A confounding variable could be an extraneous variable that has not been controlled. Random AllocationRandomly allocating participants to independent variable conditions means that all participants should have an equal chance of participating in each condition. The principle of random allocation is to avoid bias in how the experiment is carried out and limit the effects of participant variables. Order effectsChanges in participants’ performance due to their repeating the same or similar test more than once. Examples of order effects include: (i) practice effect: an improvement in performance on a task due to repetition, for example, because of familiarity with the task; (ii) fatigue effect: a decrease in performance of a task due to repetition, for example, because of boredom or tiredness. Experimental Research Design — 6 mistakes you should never make!Since school days’ students perform scientific experiments that provide results that define and prove the laws and theorems in science. These experiments are laid on a strong foundation of experimental research designs. An experimental research design helps researchers execute their research objectives with more clarity and transparency. In this article, we will not only discuss the key aspects of experimental research designs but also the issues to avoid and problems to resolve while designing your research study. Table of Contents What Is Experimental Research Design?Experimental research design is a framework of protocols and procedures created to conduct experimental research with a scientific approach using two sets of variables. Herein, the first set of variables acts as a constant, used to measure the differences of the second set. The best example of experimental research methods is quantitative research . Experimental research helps a researcher gather the necessary data for making better research decisions and determining the facts of a research study. When Can a Researcher Conduct Experimental Research?A researcher can conduct experimental research in the following situations — - When time is an important factor in establishing a relationship between the cause and effect.
- When there is an invariable or never-changing behavior between the cause and effect.
- Finally, when the researcher wishes to understand the importance of the cause and effect.
Importance of Experimental Research DesignTo publish significant results, choosing a quality research design forms the foundation to build the research study. Moreover, effective research design helps establish quality decision-making procedures, structures the research to lead to easier data analysis, and addresses the main research question. Therefore, it is essential to cater undivided attention and time to create an experimental research design before beginning the practical experiment. By creating a research design, a researcher is also giving oneself time to organize the research, set up relevant boundaries for the study, and increase the reliability of the results. Through all these efforts, one could also avoid inconclusive results. If any part of the research design is flawed, it will reflect on the quality of the results derived. Types of Experimental Research DesignsBased on the methods used to collect data in experimental studies, the experimental research designs are of three primary types: 1. Pre-experimental Research DesignA research study could conduct pre-experimental research design when a group or many groups are under observation after implementing factors of cause and effect of the research. The pre-experimental design will help researchers understand whether further investigation is necessary for the groups under observation. Pre-experimental research is of three types — - One-shot Case Study Research Design
- One-group Pretest-posttest Research Design
- Static-group Comparison
2. True Experimental Research DesignA true experimental research design relies on statistical analysis to prove or disprove a researcher’s hypothesis. It is one of the most accurate forms of research because it provides specific scientific evidence. Furthermore, out of all the types of experimental designs, only a true experimental design can establish a cause-effect relationship within a group. However, in a true experiment, a researcher must satisfy these three factors — - There is a control group that is not subjected to changes and an experimental group that will experience the changed variables
- A variable that can be manipulated by the researcher
- Random distribution of the variables
This type of experimental research is commonly observed in the physical sciences. 3. Quasi-experimental Research DesignThe word “Quasi” means similarity. A quasi-experimental design is similar to a true experimental design. However, the difference between the two is the assignment of the control group. In this research design, an independent variable is manipulated, but the participants of a group are not randomly assigned. This type of research design is used in field settings where random assignment is either irrelevant or not required. The classification of the research subjects, conditions, or groups determines the type of research design to be used. Advantages of Experimental ResearchExperimental research allows you to test your idea in a controlled environment before taking the research to clinical trials. Moreover, it provides the best method to test your theory because of the following advantages: - Researchers have firm control over variables to obtain results.
- The subject does not impact the effectiveness of experimental research. Anyone can implement it for research purposes.
- The results are specific.
- Post results analysis, research findings from the same dataset can be repurposed for similar research ideas.
- Researchers can identify the cause and effect of the hypothesis and further analyze this relationship to determine in-depth ideas.
- Experimental research makes an ideal starting point. The collected data could be used as a foundation to build new research ideas for further studies.
6 Mistakes to Avoid While Designing Your ResearchThere is no order to this list, and any one of these issues can seriously compromise the quality of your research. You could refer to the list as a checklist of what to avoid while designing your research. 1. Invalid Theoretical FrameworkUsually, researchers miss out on checking if their hypothesis is logical to be tested. If your research design does not have basic assumptions or postulates, then it is fundamentally flawed and you need to rework on your research framework. 2. Inadequate Literature StudyWithout a comprehensive research literature review , it is difficult to identify and fill the knowledge and information gaps. Furthermore, you need to clearly state how your research will contribute to the research field, either by adding value to the pertinent literature or challenging previous findings and assumptions. 3. Insufficient or Incorrect Statistical AnalysisStatistical results are one of the most trusted scientific evidence. The ultimate goal of a research experiment is to gain valid and sustainable evidence. Therefore, incorrect statistical analysis could affect the quality of any quantitative research. 4. Undefined Research ProblemThis is one of the most basic aspects of research design. The research problem statement must be clear and to do that, you must set the framework for the development of research questions that address the core problems. 5. Research LimitationsEvery study has some type of limitations . You should anticipate and incorporate those limitations into your conclusion, as well as the basic research design. Include a statement in your manuscript about any perceived limitations, and how you considered them while designing your experiment and drawing the conclusion. 6. Ethical ImplicationsThe most important yet less talked about topic is the ethical issue. Your research design must include ways to minimize any risk for your participants and also address the research problem or question at hand. If you cannot manage the ethical norms along with your research study, your research objectives and validity could be questioned. Experimental Research Design ExampleIn an experimental design, a researcher gathers plant samples and then randomly assigns half the samples to photosynthesize in sunlight and the other half to be kept in a dark box without sunlight, while controlling all the other variables (nutrients, water, soil, etc.) By comparing their outcomes in biochemical tests, the researcher can confirm that the changes in the plants were due to the sunlight and not the other variables. Experimental research is often the final form of a study conducted in the research process which is considered to provide conclusive and specific results. But it is not meant for every research. It involves a lot of resources, time, and money and is not easy to conduct, unless a foundation of research is built. Yet it is widely used in research institutes and commercial industries, for its most conclusive results in the scientific approach. Have you worked on research designs? How was your experience creating an experimental design? What difficulties did you face? Do write to us or comment below and share your insights on experimental research designs! Frequently Asked QuestionsRandomization is important in an experimental research because it ensures unbiased results of the experiment. It also measures the cause-effect relationship on a particular group of interest. Experimental research design lay the foundation of a research and structures the research to establish quality decision making process. There are 3 types of experimental research designs. These are pre-experimental research design, true experimental research design, and quasi experimental research design. The difference between an experimental and a quasi-experimental design are: 1. The assignment of the control group in quasi experimental research is non-random, unlike true experimental design, which is randomly assigned. 2. Experimental research group always has a control group; on the other hand, it may not be always present in quasi experimental research. Experimental research establishes a cause-effect relationship by testing a theory or hypothesis using experimental groups or control variables. In contrast, descriptive research describes a study or a topic by defining the variables under it and answering the questions related to the same. good and valuable Very very good Good presentation. Rate this article Cancel Reply Your email address will not be published. Enago Academy's Most Popular ArticlesGraphical Abstracts Vs. Infographics: Best practices for using visual illustrations for increased research impactDr. Sarah Chen stared at her computer screen, her eyes staring at her recently published… 10 Tips to Prevent Research Papers From Being Retracted Research paper retractions represent a critical event in the scientific community. When a published article… Google Releases 2024 Scholar Metrics, Evaluates Impact of Scholarly ArticlesGoogle has released its 2024 Scholar Metrics, assessing scholarly articles from 2019 to 2023. This… Ensuring Academic Integrity and Transparency in Academic Research: A comprehensive checklist for researchersAcademic integrity is the foundation upon which the credibility and value of scientific findings are… How to Optimize Your Research Process: A step-by-step guide For researchers across disciplines, the path to uncovering novel findings and insights is often filled… Choosing the Right Analytical Approach: Thematic analysis vs. content analysis for… Comparing Cross Sectional and Longitudinal Studies: 5 steps for choosing the right… Sign-up to read more Subscribe for free to get unrestricted access to all our resources on research writing and academic publishing including: - 2000+ blog articles
- 50+ Webinars
- 10+ Expert podcasts
- 50+ Infographics
- 10+ Checklists
- Research Guides
We hate spam too. We promise to protect your privacy and never spam you. - AI in Academia
- Career Corner
- Diversity and Inclusion
- Infographics
- Expert Video Library
- Other Resources
- Enago Learn
- Upcoming & On-Demand Webinars
- Peer Review Week 2024
- Open Access Week 2023
- Conference Videos
- Enago Report
- Journal Finder
- Enago Plagiarism & AI Grammar Check
- Editing Services
- Publication Support Services
- Research Impact
- Translation Services
- Publication solutions
- AI-Based Solutions
- Thought Leadership
- Call for Articles
- Call for Speakers
- Author Training
- Edit Profile
I am looking for Editing/ Proofreading services for my manuscript Tentative date of next journal submission: In your opinion, what is the most effective way to improve integrity in the peer review process? Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices. 10 Experimental researchExperimental research—often considered to be the ‘gold standard’ in research designs—is one of the most rigorous of all research designs. In this design, one or more independent variables are manipulated by the researcher (as treatments), subjects are randomly assigned to different treatment levels (random assignment), and the results of the treatments on outcomes (dependent variables) are observed. The unique strength of experimental research is its internal validity (causality) due to its ability to link cause and effect through treatment manipulation, while controlling for the spurious effect of extraneous variable. Experimental research is best suited for explanatory research—rather than for descriptive or exploratory research—where the goal of the study is to examine cause-effect relationships. It also works well for research that involves a relatively limited and well-defined set of independent variables that can either be manipulated or controlled. Experimental research can be conducted in laboratory or field settings. Laboratory experiments , conducted in laboratory (artificial) settings, tend to be high in internal validity, but this comes at the cost of low external validity (generalisability), because the artificial (laboratory) setting in which the study is conducted may not reflect the real world. Field experiments are conducted in field settings such as in a real organisation, and are high in both internal and external validity. But such experiments are relatively rare, because of the difficulties associated with manipulating treatments and controlling for extraneous effects in a field setting. Experimental research can be grouped into two broad categories: true experimental designs and quasi-experimental designs. Both designs require treatment manipulation, but while true experiments also require random assignment, quasi-experiments do not. Sometimes, we also refer to non-experimental research, which is not really a research design, but an all-inclusive term that includes all types of research that do not employ treatment manipulation or random assignment, such as survey research, observational research, and correlational studies. Basic conceptsTreatment and control groups. In experimental research, some subjects are administered one or more experimental stimulus called a treatment (the treatment group ) while other subjects are not given such a stimulus (the control group ). The treatment may be considered successful if subjects in the treatment group rate more favourably on outcome variables than control group subjects. Multiple levels of experimental stimulus may be administered, in which case, there may be more than one treatment group. For example, in order to test the effects of a new drug intended to treat a certain medical condition like dementia, if a sample of dementia patients is randomly divided into three groups, with the first group receiving a high dosage of the drug, the second group receiving a low dosage, and the third group receiving a placebo such as a sugar pill (control group), then the first two groups are experimental groups and the third group is a control group. After administering the drug for a period of time, if the condition of the experimental group subjects improved significantly more than the control group subjects, we can say that the drug is effective. We can also compare the conditions of the high and low dosage experimental groups to determine if the high dose is more effective than the low dose. Treatment manipulation. Treatments are the unique feature of experimental research that sets this design apart from all other research methods. Treatment manipulation helps control for the ‘cause’ in cause-effect relationships. Naturally, the validity of experimental research depends on how well the treatment was manipulated. Treatment manipulation must be checked using pretests and pilot tests prior to the experimental study. Any measurements conducted before the treatment is administered are called pretest measures , while those conducted after the treatment are posttest measures . Random selection and assignment. Random selection is the process of randomly drawing a sample from a population or a sampling frame. This approach is typically employed in survey research, and ensures that each unit in the population has a positive chance of being selected into the sample. Random assignment, however, is a process of randomly assigning subjects to experimental or control groups. This is a standard practice in true experimental research to ensure that treatment groups are similar (equivalent) to each other and to the control group prior to treatment administration. Random selection is related to sampling, and is therefore more closely related to the external validity (generalisability) of findings. However, random assignment is related to design, and is therefore most related to internal validity. It is possible to have both random selection and random assignment in well-designed experimental research, but quasi-experimental research involves neither random selection nor random assignment. Threats to internal validity. Although experimental designs are considered more rigorous than other research methods in terms of the internal validity of their inferences (by virtue of their ability to control causes through treatment manipulation), they are not immune to internal validity threats. Some of these threats to internal validity are described below, within the context of a study of the impact of a special remedial math tutoring program for improving the math abilities of high school students. History threat is the possibility that the observed effects (dependent variables) are caused by extraneous or historical events rather than by the experimental treatment. For instance, students’ post-remedial math score improvement may have been caused by their preparation for a math exam at their school, rather than the remedial math program. Maturation threat refers to the possibility that observed effects are caused by natural maturation of subjects (e.g., a general improvement in their intellectual ability to understand complex concepts) rather than the experimental treatment. Testing threat is a threat in pre-post designs where subjects’ posttest responses are conditioned by their pretest responses. For instance, if students remember their answers from the pretest evaluation, they may tend to repeat them in the posttest exam. Not conducting a pretest can help avoid this threat. Instrumentation threat , which also occurs in pre-post designs, refers to the possibility that the difference between pretest and posttest scores is not due to the remedial math program, but due to changes in the administered test, such as the posttest having a higher or lower degree of difficulty than the pretest. Mortality threat refers to the possibility that subjects may be dropping out of the study at differential rates between the treatment and control groups due to a systematic reason, such that the dropouts were mostly students who scored low on the pretest. If the low-performing students drop out, the results of the posttest will be artificially inflated by the preponderance of high-performing students. Regression threat —also called a regression to the mean—refers to the statistical tendency of a group’s overall performance to regress toward the mean during a posttest rather than in the anticipated direction. For instance, if subjects scored high on a pretest, they will have a tendency to score lower on the posttest (closer to the mean) because their high scores (away from the mean) during the pretest were possibly a statistical aberration. This problem tends to be more prevalent in non-random samples and when the two measures are imperfectly correlated. Two-group experimental designsPretest-posttest control group design . In this design, subjects are randomly assigned to treatment and control groups, subjected to an initial (pretest) measurement of the dependent variables of interest, the treatment group is administered a treatment (representing the independent variable of interest), and the dependent variables measured again (posttest). The notation of this design is shown in Figure 10.1. Statistical analysis of this design involves a simple analysis of variance (ANOVA) between the treatment and control groups. The pretest-posttest design handles several threats to internal validity, such as maturation, testing, and regression, since these threats can be expected to influence both treatment and control groups in a similar (random) manner. The selection threat is controlled via random assignment. However, additional threats to internal validity may exist. For instance, mortality can be a problem if there are differential dropout rates between the two groups, and the pretest measurement may bias the posttest measurement—especially if the pretest introduces unusual topics or content. Posttest -only control group design . This design is a simpler version of the pretest-posttest design where pretest measurements are omitted. The design notation is shown in Figure 10.2. The treatment effect is measured simply as the difference in the posttest scores between the two groups: The appropriate statistical analysis of this design is also a two-group analysis of variance (ANOVA). The simplicity of this design makes it more attractive than the pretest-posttest design in terms of internal validity. This design controls for maturation, testing, regression, selection, and pretest-posttest interaction, though the mortality threat may continue to exist. Because the pretest measure is not a measurement of the dependent variable, but rather a covariate, the treatment effect is measured as the difference in the posttest scores between the treatment and control groups as: Due to the presence of covariates, the right statistical analysis of this design is a two-group analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). This design has all the advantages of posttest-only design, but with internal validity due to the controlling of covariates. Covariance designs can also be extended to pretest-posttest control group design. Factorial designsTwo-group designs are inadequate if your research requires manipulation of two or more independent variables (treatments). In such cases, you would need four or higher-group designs. Such designs, quite popular in experimental research, are commonly called factorial designs. Each independent variable in this design is called a factor , and each subdivision of a factor is called a level . Factorial designs enable the researcher to examine not only the individual effect of each treatment on the dependent variables (called main effects), but also their joint effect (called interaction effects). In a factorial design, a main effect is said to exist if the dependent variable shows a significant difference between multiple levels of one factor, at all levels of other factors. No change in the dependent variable across factor levels is the null case (baseline), from which main effects are evaluated. In the above example, you may see a main effect of instructional type, instructional time, or both on learning outcomes. An interaction effect exists when the effect of differences in one factor depends upon the level of a second factor. In our example, if the effect of instructional type on learning outcomes is greater for three hours/week of instructional time than for one and a half hours/week, then we can say that there is an interaction effect between instructional type and instructional time on learning outcomes. Note that the presence of interaction effects dominate and make main effects irrelevant, and it is not meaningful to interpret main effects if interaction effects are significant. Hybrid experimental designsHybrid designs are those that are formed by combining features of more established designs. Three such hybrid designs are randomised bocks design, Solomon four-group design, and switched replications design. Randomised block design. This is a variation of the posttest-only or pretest-posttest control group design where the subject population can be grouped into relatively homogeneous subgroups (called blocks ) within which the experiment is replicated. For instance, if you want to replicate the same posttest-only design among university students and full-time working professionals (two homogeneous blocks), subjects in both blocks are randomly split between the treatment group (receiving the same treatment) and the control group (see Figure 10.5). The purpose of this design is to reduce the ‘noise’ or variance in data that may be attributable to differences between the blocks so that the actual effect of interest can be detected more accurately. Solomon four-group design . In this design, the sample is divided into two treatment groups and two control groups. One treatment group and one control group receive the pretest, and the other two groups do not. This design represents a combination of posttest-only and pretest-posttest control group design, and is intended to test for the potential biasing effect of pretest measurement on posttest measures that tends to occur in pretest-posttest designs, but not in posttest-only designs. The design notation is shown in Figure 10.6. Switched replication design . This is a two-group design implemented in two phases with three waves of measurement. The treatment group in the first phase serves as the control group in the second phase, and the control group in the first phase becomes the treatment group in the second phase, as illustrated in Figure 10.7. In other words, the original design is repeated or replicated temporally with treatment/control roles switched between the two groups. By the end of the study, all participants will have received the treatment either during the first or the second phase. This design is most feasible in organisational contexts where organisational programs (e.g., employee training) are implemented in a phased manner or are repeated at regular intervals. Quasi-experimental designsQuasi-experimental designs are almost identical to true experimental designs, but lacking one key ingredient: random assignment. For instance, one entire class section or one organisation is used as the treatment group, while another section of the same class or a different organisation in the same industry is used as the control group. This lack of random assignment potentially results in groups that are non-equivalent, such as one group possessing greater mastery of certain content than the other group, say by virtue of having a better teacher in a previous semester, which introduces the possibility of selection bias . Quasi-experimental designs are therefore inferior to true experimental designs in interval validity due to the presence of a variety of selection related threats such as selection-maturation threat (the treatment and control groups maturing at different rates), selection-history threat (the treatment and control groups being differentially impacted by extraneous or historical events), selection-regression threat (the treatment and control groups regressing toward the mean between pretest and posttest at different rates), selection-instrumentation threat (the treatment and control groups responding differently to the measurement), selection-testing (the treatment and control groups responding differently to the pretest), and selection-mortality (the treatment and control groups demonstrating differential dropout rates). Given these selection threats, it is generally preferable to avoid quasi-experimental designs to the greatest extent possible. In addition, there are quite a few unique non-equivalent designs without corresponding true experimental design cousins. Some of the more useful of these designs are discussed next. Regression discontinuity (RD) design . This is a non-equivalent pretest-posttest design where subjects are assigned to the treatment or control group based on a cut-off score on a preprogram measure. For instance, patients who are severely ill may be assigned to a treatment group to test the efficacy of a new drug or treatment protocol and those who are mildly ill are assigned to the control group. In another example, students who are lagging behind on standardised test scores may be selected for a remedial curriculum program intended to improve their performance, while those who score high on such tests are not selected from the remedial program. Because of the use of a cut-off score, it is possible that the observed results may be a function of the cut-off score rather than the treatment, which introduces a new threat to internal validity. However, using the cut-off score also ensures that limited or costly resources are distributed to people who need them the most, rather than randomly across a population, while simultaneously allowing a quasi-experimental treatment. The control group scores in the RD design do not serve as a benchmark for comparing treatment group scores, given the systematic non-equivalence between the two groups. Rather, if there is no discontinuity between pretest and posttest scores in the control group, but such a discontinuity persists in the treatment group, then this discontinuity is viewed as evidence of the treatment effect. Proxy pretest design . This design, shown in Figure 10.11, looks very similar to the standard NEGD (pretest-posttest) design, with one critical difference: the pretest score is collected after the treatment is administered. A typical application of this design is when a researcher is brought in to test the efficacy of a program (e.g., an educational program) after the program has already started and pretest data is not available. Under such circumstances, the best option for the researcher is often to use a different prerecorded measure, such as students’ grade point average before the start of the program, as a proxy for pretest data. A variation of the proxy pretest design is to use subjects’ posttest recollection of pretest data, which may be subject to recall bias, but nevertheless may provide a measure of perceived gain or change in the dependent variable. Separate pretest-posttest samples design . This design is useful if it is not possible to collect pretest and posttest data from the same subjects for some reason. As shown in Figure 10.12, there are four groups in this design, but two groups come from a single non-equivalent group, while the other two groups come from a different non-equivalent group. For instance, say you want to test customer satisfaction with a new online service that is implemented in one city but not in another. In this case, customers in the first city serve as the treatment group and those in the second city constitute the control group. If it is not possible to obtain pretest and posttest measures from the same customers, you can measure customer satisfaction at one point in time, implement the new service program, and measure customer satisfaction (with a different set of customers) after the program is implemented. Customer satisfaction is also measured in the control group at the same times as in the treatment group, but without the new program implementation. The design is not particularly strong, because you cannot examine the changes in any specific customer’s satisfaction score before and after the implementation, but you can only examine average customer satisfaction scores. Despite the lower internal validity, this design may still be a useful way of collecting quasi-experimental data when pretest and posttest data is not available from the same subjects. An interesting variation of the NEDV design is a pattern-matching NEDV design , which employs multiple outcome variables and a theory that explains how much each variable will be affected by the treatment. The researcher can then examine if the theoretical prediction is matched in actual observations. This pattern-matching technique—based on the degree of correspondence between theoretical and observed patterns—is a powerful way of alleviating internal validity concerns in the original NEDV design. Perils of experimental researchExperimental research is one of the most difficult of research designs, and should not be taken lightly. This type of research is often best with a multitude of methodological problems. First, though experimental research requires theories for framing hypotheses for testing, much of current experimental research is atheoretical. Without theories, the hypotheses being tested tend to be ad hoc, possibly illogical, and meaningless. Second, many of the measurement instruments used in experimental research are not tested for reliability and validity, and are incomparable across studies. Consequently, results generated using such instruments are also incomparable. Third, often experimental research uses inappropriate research designs, such as irrelevant dependent variables, no interaction effects, no experimental controls, and non-equivalent stimulus across treatment groups. Findings from such studies tend to lack internal validity and are highly suspect. Fourth, the treatments (tasks) used in experimental research may be diverse, incomparable, and inconsistent across studies, and sometimes inappropriate for the subject population. For instance, undergraduate student subjects are often asked to pretend that they are marketing managers and asked to perform a complex budget allocation task in which they have no experience or expertise. The use of such inappropriate tasks, introduces new threats to internal validity (i.e., subject’s performance may be an artefact of the content or difficulty of the task setting), generates findings that are non-interpretable and meaningless, and makes integration of findings across studies impossible. The design of proper experimental treatments is a very important task in experimental design, because the treatment is the raison d’etre of the experimental method, and must never be rushed or neglected. To design an adequate and appropriate task, researchers should use prevalidated tasks if available, conduct treatment manipulation checks to check for the adequacy of such tasks (by debriefing subjects after performing the assigned task), conduct pilot tests (repeatedly, if necessary), and if in doubt, use tasks that are simple and familiar for the respondent sample rather than tasks that are complex or unfamiliar. In summary, this chapter introduced key concepts in the experimental design research method and introduced a variety of true experimental and quasi-experimental designs. Although these designs vary widely in internal validity, designs with less internal validity should not be overlooked and may sometimes be useful under specific circumstances and empirical contingencies. Social Science Research: Principles, Methods and Practices (Revised edition) Copyright © 2019 by Anol Bhattacherjee is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted. Share This BookWant to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices. 6.1 Experiment BasicsLearning objectives. - Explain what an experiment is and recognize examples of studies that are experiments and studies that are not experiments.
- Explain what internal validity is and why experiments are considered to be high in internal validity.
- Explain what external validity is and evaluate studies in terms of their external validity.
- Distinguish between the manipulation of the independent variable and control of extraneous variables and explain the importance of each.
- Recognize examples of confounding variables and explain how they affect the internal validity of a study.
What Is an Experiment?As we saw earlier in the book, an experiment is a type of study designed specifically to answer the question of whether there is a causal relationship between two variables. Do changes in an independent variable cause changes in a dependent variable? Experiments have two fundamental features. The first is that the researchers manipulate, or systematically vary, the level of the independent variable. The different levels of the independent variable are called conditions. For example, in Darley and Latané’s experiment, the independent variable was the number of witnesses that participants believed to be present. The researchers manipulated this independent variable by telling participants that there were either one, two, or five other students involved in the discussion, thereby creating three conditions. The second fundamental feature of an experiment is that the researcher controls, or minimizes the variability in, variables other than the independent and dependent variable. These other variables are called extraneous variables. Darley and Latané tested all their participants in the same room, exposed them to the same emergency situation, and so on. They also randomly assigned their participants to conditions so that the three groups would be similar to each other to begin with. Notice that although the words manipulation and control have similar meanings in everyday language, researchers make a clear distinction between them. They manipulate the independent variable by systematically changing its levels and control other variables by holding them constant. Internal and External ValidityInternal validity. Recall that the fact that two variables are statistically related does not necessarily mean that one causes the other. “Correlation does not imply causation.” For example, if it were the case that people who exercise regularly are happier than people who do not exercise regularly, this would not necessarily mean that exercising increases people’s happiness. It could mean instead that greater happiness causes people to exercise (the directionality problem) or that something like better physical health causes people to exercise and be happier (the third-variable problem). The purpose of an experiment, however, is to show that two variables are statistically related and to do so in a way that supports the conclusion that the independent variable caused any observed differences in the dependent variable. The basic logic is this: If the researcher creates two or more highly similar conditions and then manipulates the independent variable to produce just one difference between them, then any later difference between the conditions must have been caused by the independent variable. For example, because the only difference between Darley and Latané’s conditions was the number of students that participants believed to be involved in the discussion, this must have been responsible for differences in helping between the conditions. An empirical study is said to be high in internal validity if the way it was conducted supports the conclusion that the independent variable caused any observed differences in the dependent variable. Thus experiments are high in internal validity because the way they are conducted—with the manipulation of the independent variable and the control of extraneous variables—provides strong support for causal conclusions. External ValidityAt the same time, the way that experiments are conducted sometimes leads to a different kind of criticism. Specifically, the need to manipulate the independent variable and control extraneous variables means that experiments are often conducted under conditions that seem artificial or unlike “real life” (Stanovich, 2010). In many psychology experiments, the participants are all college undergraduates and come to a classroom or laboratory to fill out a series of paper-and-pencil questionnaires or to perform a carefully designed computerized task. Consider, for example, an experiment in which researcher Barbara Fredrickson and her colleagues had college students come to a laboratory on campus and complete a math test while wearing a swimsuit (Fredrickson, Roberts, Noll, Quinn, & Twenge, 1998). At first, this might seem silly. When will college students ever have to complete math tests in their swimsuits outside of this experiment? The issue we are confronting is that of external validity. An empirical study is high in external validity if the way it was conducted supports generalizing the results to people and situations beyond those actually studied. As a general rule, studies are higher in external validity when the participants and the situation studied are similar to those that the researchers want to generalize to. Imagine, for example, that a group of researchers is interested in how shoppers in large grocery stores are affected by whether breakfast cereal is packaged in yellow or purple boxes. Their study would be high in external validity if they studied the decisions of ordinary people doing their weekly shopping in a real grocery store. If the shoppers bought much more cereal in purple boxes, the researchers would be fairly confident that this would be true for other shoppers in other stores. Their study would be relatively low in external validity, however, if they studied a sample of college students in a laboratory at a selective college who merely judged the appeal of various colors presented on a computer screen. If the students judged purple to be more appealing than yellow, the researchers would not be very confident that this is relevant to grocery shoppers’ cereal-buying decisions. We should be careful, however, not to draw the blanket conclusion that experiments are low in external validity. One reason is that experiments need not seem artificial. Consider that Darley and Latané’s experiment provided a reasonably good simulation of a real emergency situation. Or consider field experiments that are conducted entirely outside the laboratory. In one such experiment, Robert Cialdini and his colleagues studied whether hotel guests choose to reuse their towels for a second day as opposed to having them washed as a way of conserving water and energy (Cialdini, 2005). These researchers manipulated the message on a card left in a large sample of hotel rooms. One version of the message emphasized showing respect for the environment, another emphasized that the hotel would donate a portion of their savings to an environmental cause, and a third emphasized that most hotel guests choose to reuse their towels. The result was that guests who received the message that most hotel guests choose to reuse their towels reused their own towels substantially more often than guests receiving either of the other two messages. Given the way they conducted their study, it seems very likely that their result would hold true for other guests in other hotels. A second reason not to draw the blanket conclusion that experiments are low in external validity is that they are often conducted to learn about psychological processes that are likely to operate in a variety of people and situations. Let us return to the experiment by Fredrickson and colleagues. They found that the women in their study, but not the men, performed worse on the math test when they were wearing swimsuits. They argued that this was due to women’s greater tendency to objectify themselves—to think about themselves from the perspective of an outside observer—which diverts their attention away from other tasks. They argued, furthermore, that this process of self-objectification and its effect on attention is likely to operate in a variety of women and situations—even if none of them ever finds herself taking a math test in her swimsuit. Manipulation of the Independent VariableAgain, to manipulate an independent variable means to change its level systematically so that different groups of participants are exposed to different levels of that variable, or the same group of participants is exposed to different levels at different times. For example, to see whether expressive writing affects people’s health, a researcher might instruct some participants to write about traumatic experiences and others to write about neutral experiences. The different levels of the independent variable are referred to as conditions , and researchers often give the conditions short descriptive names to make it easy to talk and write about them. In this case, the conditions might be called the “traumatic condition” and the “neutral condition.” Notice that the manipulation of an independent variable must involve the active intervention of the researcher. Comparing groups of people who differ on the independent variable before the study begins is not the same as manipulating that variable. For example, a researcher who compares the health of people who already keep a journal with the health of people who do not keep a journal has not manipulated this variable and therefore not conducted an experiment. This is important because groups that already differ in one way at the beginning of a study are likely to differ in other ways too. For example, people who choose to keep journals might also be more conscientious, more introverted, or less stressed than people who do not. Therefore, any observed difference between the two groups in terms of their health might have been caused by whether or not they keep a journal, or it might have been caused by any of the other differences between people who do and do not keep journals. Thus the active manipulation of the independent variable is crucial for eliminating the third-variable problem. Of course, there are many situations in which the independent variable cannot be manipulated for practical or ethical reasons and therefore an experiment is not possible. For example, whether or not people have a significant early illness experience cannot be manipulated, making it impossible to do an experiment on the effect of early illness experiences on the development of hypochondriasis. This does not mean it is impossible to study the relationship between early illness experiences and hypochondriasis—only that it must be done using nonexperimental approaches. We will discuss this in detail later in the book. In many experiments, the independent variable is a construct that can only be manipulated indirectly. For example, a researcher might try to manipulate participants’ stress levels indirectly by telling some of them that they have five minutes to prepare a short speech that they will then have to give to an audience of other participants. In such situations, researchers often include a manipulation check in their procedure. A manipulation check is a separate measure of the construct the researcher is trying to manipulate. For example, researchers trying to manipulate participants’ stress levels might give them a paper-and-pencil stress questionnaire or take their blood pressure—perhaps right after the manipulation or at the end of the procedure—to verify that they successfully manipulated this variable. Control of Extraneous VariablesAn extraneous variable is anything that varies in the context of a study other than the independent and dependent variables. In an experiment on the effect of expressive writing on health, for example, extraneous variables would include participant variables (individual differences) such as their writing ability, their diet, and their shoe size. They would also include situation or task variables such as the time of day when participants write, whether they write by hand or on a computer, and the weather. Extraneous variables pose a problem because many of them are likely to have some effect on the dependent variable. For example, participants’ health will be affected by many things other than whether or not they engage in expressive writing. This can make it difficult to separate the effect of the independent variable from the effects of the extraneous variables, which is why it is important to control extraneous variables by holding them constant. Extraneous Variables as “Noise”Extraneous variables make it difficult to detect the effect of the independent variable in two ways. One is by adding variability or “noise” to the data. Imagine a simple experiment on the effect of mood (happy vs. sad) on the number of happy childhood events people are able to recall. Participants are put into a negative or positive mood (by showing them a happy or sad video clip) and then asked to recall as many happy childhood events as they can. The two leftmost columns of Table 6.1 “Hypothetical Noiseless Data and Realistic Noisy Data” show what the data might look like if there were no extraneous variables and the number of happy childhood events participants recalled was affected only by their moods. Every participant in the happy mood condition recalled exactly four happy childhood events, and every participant in the sad mood condition recalled exactly three. The effect of mood here is quite obvious. In reality, however, the data would probably look more like those in the two rightmost columns of Table 6.1 “Hypothetical Noiseless Data and Realistic Noisy Data” . Even in the happy mood condition, some participants would recall fewer happy memories because they have fewer to draw on, use less effective strategies, or are less motivated. And even in the sad mood condition, some participants would recall more happy childhood memories because they have more happy memories to draw on, they use more effective recall strategies, or they are more motivated. Although the mean difference between the two groups is the same as in the idealized data, this difference is much less obvious in the context of the greater variability in the data. Thus one reason researchers try to control extraneous variables is so their data look more like the idealized data in Table 6.1 “Hypothetical Noiseless Data and Realistic Noisy Data” , which makes the effect of the independent variable is easier to detect (although real data never look quite that good). Table 6.1 Hypothetical Noiseless Data and Realistic Noisy Data Idealized “noiseless” data | Realistic “noisy” data | | | | | 4 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 6 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 7 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 6 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 8 | 2 | = 4 | = 3 | = 4 | = 3 | One way to control extraneous variables is to hold them constant. This can mean holding situation or task variables constant by testing all participants in the same location, giving them identical instructions, treating them in the same way, and so on. It can also mean holding participant variables constant. For example, many studies of language limit participants to right-handed people, who generally have their language areas isolated in their left cerebral hemispheres. Left-handed people are more likely to have their language areas isolated in their right cerebral hemispheres or distributed across both hemispheres, which can change the way they process language and thereby add noise to the data. In principle, researchers can control extraneous variables by limiting participants to one very specific category of person, such as 20-year-old, straight, female, right-handed, sophomore psychology majors. The obvious downside to this approach is that it would lower the external validity of the study—in particular, the extent to which the results can be generalized beyond the people actually studied. For example, it might be unclear whether results obtained with a sample of younger straight women would apply to older gay men. In many situations, the advantages of a diverse sample outweigh the reduction in noise achieved by a homogeneous one. Extraneous Variables as Confounding VariablesThe second way that extraneous variables can make it difficult to detect the effect of the independent variable is by becoming confounding variables. A confounding variable is an extraneous variable that differs on average across levels of the independent variable. For example, in almost all experiments, participants’ intelligence quotients (IQs) will be an extraneous variable. But as long as there are participants with lower and higher IQs at each level of the independent variable so that the average IQ is roughly equal, then this variation is probably acceptable (and may even be desirable). What would be bad, however, would be for participants at one level of the independent variable to have substantially lower IQs on average and participants at another level to have substantially higher IQs on average. In this case, IQ would be a confounding variable. To confound means to confuse, and this is exactly what confounding variables do. Because they differ across conditions—just like the independent variable—they provide an alternative explanation for any observed difference in the dependent variable. Figure 6.1 “Hypothetical Results From a Study on the Effect of Mood on Memory” shows the results of a hypothetical study, in which participants in a positive mood condition scored higher on a memory task than participants in a negative mood condition. But if IQ is a confounding variable—with participants in the positive mood condition having higher IQs on average than participants in the negative mood condition—then it is unclear whether it was the positive moods or the higher IQs that caused participants in the first condition to score higher. One way to avoid confounding variables is by holding extraneous variables constant. For example, one could prevent IQ from becoming a confounding variable by limiting participants only to those with IQs of exactly 100. But this approach is not always desirable for reasons we have already discussed. A second and much more general approach—random assignment to conditions—will be discussed in detail shortly. Figure 6.1 Hypothetical Results From a Study on the Effect of Mood on Memory Because IQ also differs across conditions, it is a confounding variable. Key Takeaways- An experiment is a type of empirical study that features the manipulation of an independent variable, the measurement of a dependent variable, and control of extraneous variables.
- Studies are high in internal validity to the extent that the way they are conducted supports the conclusion that the independent variable caused any observed differences in the dependent variable. Experiments are generally high in internal validity because of the manipulation of the independent variable and control of extraneous variables.
- Studies are high in external validity to the extent that the result can be generalized to people and situations beyond those actually studied. Although experiments can seem “artificial”—and low in external validity—it is important to consider whether the psychological processes under study are likely to operate in other people and situations.
- Practice: List five variables that can be manipulated by the researcher in an experiment. List five variables that cannot be manipulated by the researcher in an experiment.
Practice: For each of the following topics, decide whether that topic could be studied using an experimental research design and explain why or why not. - Effect of parietal lobe damage on people’s ability to do basic arithmetic.
- Effect of being clinically depressed on the number of close friendships people have.
- Effect of group training on the social skills of teenagers with Asperger’s syndrome.
- Effect of paying people to take an IQ test on their performance on that test.
Cialdini, R. (2005, April). Don’t throw in the towel: Use social influence research. APS Observer . Retrieved from http://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/getArticle.cfm?id=1762 . Fredrickson, B. L., Roberts, T.-A., Noll, S. M., Quinn, D. M., & Twenge, J. M. (1998). The swimsuit becomes you: Sex differences in self-objectification, restrained eating, and math performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75 , 269–284. Stanovich, K. E. (2010). How to think straight about psychology (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Research Methods in Psychology Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted. - Experimental Research Designs: Types, Examples & Methods
Experimental research is the most familiar type of research design for individuals in the physical sciences and a host of other fields. This is mainly because experimental research is a classical scientific experiment, similar to those performed in high school science classes. Imagine taking 2 samples of the same plant and exposing one of them to sunlight, while the other is kept away from sunlight. Let the plant exposed to sunlight be called sample A, while the latter is called sample B. If after the duration of the research, we find out that sample A grows and sample B dies, even though they are both regularly wetted and given the same treatment. Therefore, we can conclude that sunlight will aid growth in all similar plants. What is Experimental Research?Experimental research is a scientific approach to research, where one or more independent variables are manipulated and applied to one or more dependent variables to measure their effect on the latter. The effect of the independent variables on the dependent variables is usually observed and recorded over some time, to aid researchers in drawing a reasonable conclusion regarding the relationship between these 2 variable types. The experimental research method is widely used in physical and social sciences, psychology, and education. It is based on the comparison between two or more groups with a straightforward logic, which may, however, be difficult to execute. Mostly related to a laboratory test procedure, experimental research designs involve collecting quantitative data and performing statistical analysis on them during research. Therefore, making it an example of quantitative research method . What are The Types of Experimental Research Design?The types of experimental research design are determined by the way the researcher assigns subjects to different conditions and groups. They are of 3 types, namely; pre-experimental, quasi-experimental, and true experimental research. Pre-experimental Research DesignIn pre-experimental research design, either a group or various dependent groups are observed for the effect of the application of an independent variable which is presumed to cause change. It is the simplest form of experimental research design and is treated with no control group. Although very practical, experimental research is lacking in several areas of the true-experimental criteria. The pre-experimental research design is further divided into three types - One-shot Case Study Research Design
In this type of experimental study, only one dependent group or variable is considered. The study is carried out after some treatment which was presumed to cause change, making it a posttest study. - One-group Pretest-posttest Research Design:
This research design combines both posttest and pretest study by carrying out a test on a single group before the treatment is administered and after the treatment is administered. With the former being administered at the beginning of treatment and later at the end. In a static-group comparison study, 2 or more groups are placed under observation, where only one of the groups is subjected to some treatment while the other groups are held static. All the groups are post-tested, and the observed differences between the groups are assumed to be a result of the treatment. Quasi-experimental Research Design The word “quasi” means partial, half, or pseudo. Therefore, the quasi-experimental research bearing a resemblance to the true experimental research, but not the same. In quasi-experiments, the participants are not randomly assigned, and as such, they are used in settings where randomization is difficult or impossible. This is very common in educational research, where administrators are unwilling to allow the random selection of students for experimental samples. Some examples of quasi-experimental research design include; the time series, no equivalent control group design, and the counterbalanced design. True Experimental Research DesignThe true experimental research design relies on statistical analysis to approve or disprove a hypothesis. It is the most accurate type of experimental design and may be carried out with or without a pretest on at least 2 randomly assigned dependent subjects. The true experimental research design must contain a control group, a variable that can be manipulated by the researcher, and the distribution must be random. The classification of true experimental design include: - The posttest-only Control Group Design: In this design, subjects are randomly selected and assigned to the 2 groups (control and experimental), and only the experimental group is treated. After close observation, both groups are post-tested, and a conclusion is drawn from the difference between these groups.
- The pretest-posttest Control Group Design: For this control group design, subjects are randomly assigned to the 2 groups, both are presented, but only the experimental group is treated. After close observation, both groups are post-tested to measure the degree of change in each group.
- Solomon four-group Design: This is the combination of the pretest-only and the pretest-posttest control groups. In this case, the randomly selected subjects are placed into 4 groups.
The first two of these groups are tested using the posttest-only method, while the other two are tested using the pretest-posttest method. Examples of Experimental ResearchExperimental research examples are different, depending on the type of experimental research design that is being considered. The most basic example of experimental research is laboratory experiments, which may differ in nature depending on the subject of research. Administering Exams After The End of SemesterDuring the semester, students in a class are lectured on particular courses and an exam is administered at the end of the semester. In this case, the students are the subjects or dependent variables while the lectures are the independent variables treated on the subjects. Only one group of carefully selected subjects are considered in this research, making it a pre-experimental research design example. We will also notice that tests are only carried out at the end of the semester, and not at the beginning. Further making it easy for us to conclude that it is a one-shot case study research. Employee Skill EvaluationBefore employing a job seeker, organizations conduct tests that are used to screen out less qualified candidates from the pool of qualified applicants. This way, organizations can determine an employee’s skill set at the point of employment. In the course of employment, organizations also carry out employee training to improve employee productivity and generally grow the organization. Further evaluation is carried out at the end of each training to test the impact of the training on employee skills, and test for improvement. Here, the subject is the employee, while the treatment is the training conducted. This is a pretest-posttest control group experimental research example. Evaluation of Teaching MethodLet us consider an academic institution that wants to evaluate the teaching method of 2 teachers to determine which is best. Imagine a case whereby the students assigned to each teacher is carefully selected probably due to personal request by parents or due to stubbornness and smartness. This is a no equivalent group design example because the samples are not equal. By evaluating the effectiveness of each teacher’s teaching method this way, we may conclude after a post-test has been carried out. However, this may be influenced by factors like the natural sweetness of a student. For example, a very smart student will grab more easily than his or her peers irrespective of the method of teaching. What are the Characteristics of Experimental Research? Experimental research contains dependent, independent and extraneous variables. The dependent variables are the variables being treated or manipulated and are sometimes called the subject of the research. The independent variables are the experimental treatment being exerted on the dependent variables. Extraneous variables, on the other hand, are other factors affecting the experiment that may also contribute to the change. The setting is where the experiment is carried out. Many experiments are carried out in the laboratory, where control can be exerted on the extraneous variables, thereby eliminating them. Other experiments are carried out in a less controllable setting. The choice of setting used in research depends on the nature of the experiment being carried out. Experimental research may include multiple independent variables, e.g. time, skills, test scores, etc. Why Use Experimental Research Design? Experimental research design can be majorly used in physical sciences, social sciences, education, and psychology. It is used to make predictions and draw conclusions on a subject matter. Some uses of experimental research design are highlighted below. - Medicine: Experimental research is used to provide the proper treatment for diseases. In most cases, rather than directly using patients as the research subject, researchers take a sample of the bacteria from the patient’s body and are treated with the developed antibacterial
The changes observed during this period are recorded and evaluated to determine its effectiveness. This process can be carried out using different experimental research methods. - Education: Asides from science subjects like Chemistry and Physics which involves teaching students how to perform experimental research, it can also be used in improving the standard of an academic institution. This includes testing students’ knowledge on different topics, coming up with better teaching methods, and the implementation of other programs that will aid student learning.
- Human Behavior: Social scientists are the ones who mostly use experimental research to test human behaviour. For example, consider 2 people randomly chosen to be the subject of the social interaction research where one person is placed in a room without human interaction for 1 year.
The other person is placed in a room with a few other people, enjoying human interaction. There will be a difference in their behaviour at the end of the experiment. - UI/UX: During the product development phase, one of the major aims of the product team is to create a great user experience with the product. Therefore, before launching the final product design, potential are brought in to interact with the product.
For example, when finding it difficult to choose how to position a button or feature on the app interface, a random sample of product testers are allowed to test the 2 samples and how the button positioning influences the user interaction is recorded. What are the Disadvantages of Experimental Research? - It is highly prone to human error due to its dependency on variable control which may not be properly implemented. These errors could eliminate the validity of the experiment and the research being conducted.
- Exerting control of extraneous variables may create unrealistic situations. Eliminating real-life variables will result in inaccurate conclusions. This may also result in researchers controlling the variables to suit his or her personal preferences.
- It is a time-consuming process. So much time is spent on testing dependent variables and waiting for the effect of the manipulation of dependent variables to manifest.
- It is expensive.
- It is very risky and may have ethical complications that cannot be ignored. This is common in medical research, where failed trials may lead to a patient’s death or a deteriorating health condition.
- Experimental research results are not descriptive.
- Response bias can also be supplied by the subject of the conversation.
- Human responses in experimental research can be difficult to measure.
What are the Data Collection Methods in Experimental Research? Data collection methods in experimental research are the different ways in which data can be collected for experimental research. They are used in different cases, depending on the type of research being carried out. 1. Observational StudyThis type of study is carried out over a long period. It measures and observes the variables of interest without changing existing conditions. When researching the effect of social interaction on human behavior, the subjects who are placed in 2 different environments are observed throughout the research. No matter the kind of absurd behavior that is exhibited by the subject during this period, its condition will not be changed. This may be a very risky thing to do in medical cases because it may lead to death or worse medical conditions. 2. SimulationsThis procedure uses mathematical, physical, or computer models to replicate a real-life process or situation. It is frequently used when the actual situation is too expensive, dangerous, or impractical to replicate in real life. This method is commonly used in engineering and operational research for learning purposes and sometimes as a tool to estimate possible outcomes of real research. Some common situation software are Simulink, MATLAB, and Simul8. Not all kinds of experimental research can be carried out using simulation as a data collection tool . It is very impractical for a lot of laboratory-based research that involves chemical processes. A survey is a tool used to gather relevant data about the characteristics of a population and is one of the most common data collection tools. A survey consists of a group of questions prepared by the researcher, to be answered by the research subject. Surveys can be shared with the respondents both physically and electronically. When collecting data through surveys, the kind of data collected depends on the respondent, and researchers have limited control over it. Formplus is the best tool for collecting experimental data using survey s. It has relevant features that will aid the data collection process and can also be used in other aspects of experimental research. Differences between Experimental and Non-Experimental Research 1. In experimental research, the researcher can control and manipulate the environment of the research, including the predictor variable which can be changed. On the other hand, non-experimental research cannot be controlled or manipulated by the researcher at will. This is because it takes place in a real-life setting, where extraneous variables cannot be eliminated. Therefore, it is more difficult to conclude non-experimental studies, even though they are much more flexible and allow for a greater range of study fields. 2. The relationship between cause and effect cannot be established in non-experimental research, while it can be established in experimental research. This may be because many extraneous variables also influence the changes in the research subject, making it difficult to point at a particular variable as the cause of a particular change 3. Independent variables are not introduced, withdrawn, or manipulated in non-experimental designs, but the same may not be said about experimental research. Experimental Research vs. Alternatives and When to Use Them1. experimental research vs causal comparative. Experimental research enables you to control variables and identify how the independent variable affects the dependent variable. Causal-comparative find out the cause-and-effect relationship between the variables by comparing already existing groups that are affected differently by the independent variable. For example, in an experiment to see how K-12 education affects children and teenager development. An experimental research would split the children into groups, some would get formal K-12 education, while others won’t. This is not ethically right because every child has the right to education. So, what we do instead would be to compare already existing groups of children who are getting formal education with those who due to some circumstances can not. Pros and Cons of Experimental vs Causal-Comparative Research- Causal-Comparative: Strengths: More realistic than experiments, can be conducted in real-world settings. Weaknesses: Establishing causality can be weaker due to the lack of manipulation.
2. Experimental Research vs Correlational ResearchWhen experimenting, you are trying to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between different variables. For example, you are trying to establish the effect of heat on water, the temperature keeps changing (independent variable) and you see how it affects the water (dependent variable). For correlational research, you are not necessarily interested in the why or the cause-and-effect relationship between the variables, you are focusing on the relationship. Using the same water and temperature example, you are only interested in the fact that they change, you are not investigating which of the variables or other variables causes them to change. Pros and Cons of Experimental vs Correlational Research3. experimental research vs descriptive research. With experimental research, you alter the independent variable to see how it affects the dependent variable, but with descriptive research you are simply studying the characteristics of the variable you are studying. So, in an experiment to see how blown glass reacts to temperature, experimental research would keep altering the temperature to varying levels of high and low to see how it affects the dependent variable (glass). But descriptive research would investigate the glass properties. Pros and Cons of Experimental vs Descriptive Research4. experimental research vs action research. Experimental research tests for causal relationships by focusing on one independent variable vs the dependent variable and keeps other variables constant. So, you are testing hypotheses and using the information from the research to contribute to knowledge. However, with action research, you are using a real-world setting which means you are not controlling variables. You are also performing the research to solve actual problems and improve already established practices. For example, if you are testing for how long commutes affect workers’ productivity. With experimental research, you would vary the length of commute to see how the time affects work. But with action research, you would account for other factors such as weather, commute route, nutrition, etc. Also, experimental research helps know the relationship between commute time and productivity, while action research helps you look for ways to improve productivity Pros and Cons of Experimental vs Action ResearchConclusion . Experimental research designs are often considered to be the standard in research designs. This is partly due to the common misconception that research is equivalent to scientific experiments—a component of experimental research design. In this research design, one or more subjects or dependent variables are randomly assigned to different treatments (i.e. independent variables manipulated by the researcher) and the results are observed to conclude. One of the uniqueness of experimental research is in its ability to control the effect of extraneous variables. Experimental research is suitable for research whose goal is to examine cause-effect relationships, e.g. explanatory research. It can be conducted in the laboratory or field settings, depending on the aim of the research that is being carried out. Connect to Formplus, Get Started Now - It's Free! - examples of experimental research
- experimental research methods
- types of experimental research
- busayo.longe
You may also like: Simpson’s Paradox & How to Avoid it in Experimental ResearchIn this article, we are going to look at Simpson’s Paradox from its historical point and later, we’ll consider its effect in... Response vs Explanatory Variables: Definition & ExamplesIn this article, we’ll be comparing the two types of variables, what they both mean and see some of their real-life applications in research Experimental Vs Non-Experimental Research: 15 Key DifferencesDifferences between experimental and non experimental research on definitions, types, examples, data collection tools, uses, advantages etc. What is Experimenter Bias? Definition, Types & MitigationIn this article, we will look into the concept of experimental bias and how it can be identified in your research Formplus - For Seamless Data CollectionCollect data the right way with a versatile data collection tool. try formplus and transform your work productivity today.. Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices. 14.1 What is experimental design and when should you use it?Learning objectives. Learners will be able to… - Describe the purpose of experimental design research
- Describe nomethetic causality and the logic of experimental design
- Identify the characteristics of a basic experiment
- Discuss the relationship between dependent and independent variables in experiments
- Identify the three major types of experimental designs
Pre-awareness check (Knowledge) What are your thoughts on the phrase ‘experiment’ in the realm of social sciences? In an experiment, what is the independent variable? The basics of experimentsIn social work research, experimental design is used to test the effects of treatments, interventions, programs, or other conditions to which individuals, groups, organizations, or communities may be exposed to. There are a lot of experiments social work researchers can use to explore topics such as treatments for depression, impacts of school-based mental health on student outcomes, or prevention of abuse of people with disabilities. The American Psychological Association defines an experiment as: a series of observations conducted under controlled conditions to study a relationship with the purpose of drawing causal inferences about that relationship. An experiment involves the manipulation of an independent variable , the measurement of a dependent variable , and the exposure of various participants to one or more of the conditions being studied. Random selection of participants and their random assignment to conditions also are necessary in experiments . In experimental design, the independent variable is the intervention, treatment, or condition that is being investigated as a potential cause of change (i.e., the experimental condition ). The effect, or outcome, of the experimental condition is the dependent variable. Trying out a new restaurant, dating a new person – we often call these things “experiments.” However, a true social science experiment would include recruitment of a large enough sample, random assignment to control and experimental groups, exposing those in the experimental group to an experimental condition, and collecting observations at the end of the experiment. Social scientists use this level of rigor and control to maximize the internal validity of their research. Internal validity is the confidence researchers have about whether the independent variable (e.g, treatment) truly produces a change in the dependent, or outcome, variable. The logic and features of experimental design are intended to help establish causality and to reduce threats to internal validity , which we will discuss in Section 14.5 . Experiments attempt to establish a nomothetic causal relationship between two variables—the treatment and its intended outcome. We discussed the four criteria for establishing nomothetic causality in Section 4.3 : - plausibility,
- covariation,
- temporality, and
- nonspuriousness.
Experiments should establish plausibility , having a plausible reason why their intervention would cause changes in the dependent variable. Usually, a theory framework or previous empirical evidence will indicate the plausibility of a causal relationship. Covariation can be established for causal explanations by showing that the “cause” and the “effect” change together. In experiments, the cause is an intervention, treatment, or other experimental condition. Whether or not a research participant is exposed to the experimental condition is the independent variable. The effect in an experiment is the outcome being assessed and is the dependent variable in the study. When the independent and dependent variables covary, they can have a positive association (e.g., those exposed to the intervention have increased self-esteem) or a negative association (e.g., those exposed to the intervention have reduced anxiety). Since researcher controls when the intervention is administered, they can be assured that changes in the independent variable (the treatment) happens before changes in the dependent variable (the outcome). In this way, experiments assure temporality . Finally, one of the most important features of experiments is that they allow researchers to eliminate spurious variables to support the criterion of nonspuriousness . True experiments are usually conducted under strictly controlled conditions. The intervention is given in the same way to each person, with a minimal number of other variables that might cause their post-test scores to change. The logic of experimental designHow do we know that one phenomenon causes another? The complexity of the social world in which we practice and conduct research means that causes of social problems are rarely cut and dry. Uncovering explanations for social problems is key to helping clients address them, and experimental research designs are one road to finding answers. Just because two phenomena are related in some way doesn’t mean that one causes the other. Ice cream sales increase in the summer, and so does the rate of violent crime; does that mean that eating ice cream is going to make me violent? Obviously not, because ice cream is great. The reality of that association is far more complex—it could be that hot weather makes people more irritable and, at times, violent, while also making people want ice cream. More likely, though, there are other social factors not accounted for in the way we just described this association. As we have discussed, experimental designs can help clear up at least some of this fog by allowing researchers to isolate the effect of interventions on dependent variables by controlling extraneous variables . In true experimental design (discussed in the next section) and quasi-experimental design, researchers accomplish this w ith a control group or comparison group and the experimental group . The experimental group is sometimes called the treatment group because people in the experimental group receive the treatment or are exposed to the experimental condition (but we will call it the experimental group in this chapter.) The control/comparison group does not receive the treatment or intervention. Instead they may receive what is known as “treatment as usual” or perhaps no treatment at all. In a well-designed experiment, the control group should look almost identical to the experimental group in terms of demographics and other relevant factors. What if we want to know the effect of CBT on social anxiety, but we have learned in prior research that men tend to have a more difficult time overcoming social anxiety? We would want our control and experimental groups to have a similar portions of men, since ostensibly, both groups’ results would be affected by the men in the group. If your control group has 5 women, 6 men, and 4 non-binary people, then your experimental group should be made up of roughly the same gender balance to help control for the influence of gender on the outcome of your intervention. (In reality, the groups should be similar along other dimensions, as well, and your group will likely be much larger.) The researcher will use the same outcome measures for both groups and compare them, and assuming the experiment was designed correctly, get a pretty good answer about whether the intervention had an effect on social anxiety. Random assignment [/pb_glossary], also called randomization, entails using a random process to decide which participants are put into the control or experimental group (which participants receive an intervention and which do not). By randomly assigning participants to a group, you can reduce the effect of extraneous variables on your research because there won’t be a systematic difference between the groups. Do not confuse random assignment with random sampling . Random sampling is a method for selecting a sample from a population and is rarely used in psychological research. Random assignment is a method for assigning participants in a sample to the different conditions, and it is an important element of all experimental research in psychology and other related fields. Random sampling helps a great deal with external validity, or generalizability , whereas random assignment increases internal validity . Other Features of Experiments that Help Establish CausalityTo control for spuriousness (as well as meeting the three other criteria for establishing causality), experiments try to control as many aspects of the research process as possible: using control groups, having large enough sample sizes, standardizing the treatment, etc. Researchers in large experiments often employ clinicians or other research staff to help them. Researchers train their staff members exhaustively, provide pre-scripted responses to common questions, and control the physical environment of the experiment so each person who participates receives the exact same treatment. Experimental researchers also document their procedures, so that others can review them and make changes in future research if they think it will improve on the ability to control for spurious variables. An interesting example is Bruce Alexander’s (2010) Rat Park experiments. Much of the early research conducted on addictive drugs, like heroin and cocaine, was conducted on animals other than humans, usually mice or rats. The scientific consensus up until Alexander’s experiments was that cocaine and heroin were so addictive that rats, if offered the drugs, would consume them repeatedly until they perished. Researchers claimed this behavior explained how addiction worked in humans, but Alexander was not so sure. He knew rats were social animals and the experimental procedure from previous experiments did not allow them to socialize. Instead, rats were kept isolated in small cages with only food, water, and metal walls. To Alexander, social isolation was a spurious variable, causing changes in addictive behavior not due to the drug itself. Alexander created an experiment of his own, in which rats were allowed to run freely in an interesting environment, socialize and mate with other rats, and of course, drink from a solution that contained an addictive drug. In this environment, rats did not become hopelessly addicted to drugs. In fact, they had little interest in the substance. To Alexander, the results of his experiment demonstrated that social isolation was more of a causal factor for addiction than the drug itself. One challenge with Alexander’s findings is that subsequent researchers have had mixed success replicating his findings (e.g., Petrie, 1996; Solinas, Thiriet, El Rawas, Lardeux, & Jaber, 2009). Replication involves conducting another researcher’s experiment in the same manner and seeing if it produces the same results. If the causal relationship is real, it should occur in all (or at least most) rigorous replications of the experiment. Replicability[INSERT A PARAGRAPH ABOUT REPLICATION/REPRODUCTION HERE. CAN USE/REFERENCE THIS IF IT’S HELPFUL; include glossary definition as well as other general info] To allow for easier replication, researchers should describe their experimental methods diligently. Researchers with the Open Science Collaboration (2015) [1] conducted the Reproducibility Project , which caused a significant controversy regarding the validity of psychological studies. The researchers with the project attempted to reproduce the results of 100 experiments published in major psychology journals since 2008. What they found was shocking. Although 97% of the original studies reported significant results, only 36% of the replicated studies had significant findings. The average effect size in the replication studies was half that of the original studies. The implications of the Reproducibility Project are potentially staggering, and encourage social scientists to carefully consider the validity of their reported findings and that the scientific community take steps to ensure researchers do not cherry-pick data or change their hypotheses simply to get published. GeneralizabilityLet’s return to Alexander’s Rat Park study and consider the implications of his experiment for substance use professionals. The conclusions he drew from his experiments on rats were meant to be generalized to the population. If this could be done, the experiment would have a high degree of external validity , which is the degree to which conclusions generalize to larger populations and different situations. Alexander argues his conclusions about addiction and social isolation help us understand why people living in deprived, isolated environments may become addicted to drugs more often than those in more enriching environments. Similarly, earlier rat researchers argued their results showed these drugs were instantly addictive to humans, often to the point of death. Neither study’s results will match up perfectly with real life. There are clients in social work practice who may fit into Alexander’s social isolation model, but social isolation is complex. Clients can live in environments with other sociable humans, work jobs, and have romantic relationships; does this mean they are not socially isolated? On the other hand, clients may face structural racism, poverty, trauma, and other challenges that may contribute to their social environment. Alexander’s work helps understand clients’ experiences, but the explanation is incomplete. Human existence is more complicated than the experimental conditions in Rat Park. Effectiveness versus EfficacySocial workers are especially attentive to how social context shapes social life. This consideration points out a potential weakness of experiments. They can be rather artificial. When an experiment demonstrates causality under ideal, controlled circumstances, it establishes the efficacy of an intervention. How often do real-world social interactions occur in the same way that they do in a controlled experiment? Experiments that are conducted in community settings by community practitioners are less easily controlled than those conducted in a lab or with researchers who adhere strictly to research protocols delivering the intervention. When an experiment demonstrates causality in a real-world setting that is not tightly controlled, it establishes the effectiveness of the intervention. The distinction between efficacy and effectiveness demonstrates the tension between internal and external validity. Internal validity and external validity are conceptually linked. Internal validity refers to the degree to which the intervention causes its intended outcomes, and external validity refers to how well that relationship applies to different groups and circumstances than the experiment. However, the more researchers tightly control the environment to ensure internal validity, the more they may risk external validity for generalizing their results to different populations and circumstances. Correspondingly, researchers whose settings are just like the real world will be less able to ensure internal validity, as there are many factors that could pollute the research process. This is not to suggest that experimental research findings cannot have high levels of both internal and external validity, but that experimental researchers must always be aware of this potential weakness and clearly report limitations in their research reports. Types of Experimental DesignsExperimental design is an umbrella term for a research method that is designed to test hypotheses related to causality under controlled conditions. Table 14.1 describes the three major types of experimental design (pre-experimental, quasi-experimental, and true experimental) and presents subtypes for each. As we will see in the coming sections, some types of experimental design are better at establishing causality than others. It’s also worth considering that true experiments, which most effectively establish causality , are often difficult and expensive to implement. Although the other experimental designs aren’t perfect, they still produce useful, valid evidence and may be more feasible to carry out. Table 14.1. Types of experimental design and their basic characteristics. | | | ) | | | A. One-group pretest posttest | A. Pre- and posttests are administered, but no comparison group | XXXX | B. One-shot case study | B. No pretest | What is the average level of loneliness among graduates of a peer support training program? What percent of graduates rate their social support as “good” or “excellent”? | ) | | | C. Nonequivalent comparison group design | C. Similar to classical experimental design only without random assignment | XXXX | D. Static-group design | D. No pretest, posttest administered after the intervention | | E. Natural experiments | E. Naturally occurring event becomes “experimental condition”; observational study in which some cases are exposed to condition (which becomes the “experimental condition”) and others are not; changes in “experimental” group can be assessed; | | ( ) | | XXXX | F. Classical experimental design | F. Pre- and posttest; control group | | G. Posttest only control group | G. Does not use a pretest and assumes random assignment results in equivalent groups | | H. Solomon four group design | H. Random assignment, two experimental and two control groups, pretests for half of the groups and posttests for all | | Key Takeaways- Experimental designs are useful for establishing causality, but some types of experimental design do this better than others.
- Experiments help researchers isolate the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable by controlling for the effect of extraneous variables .
- Experiments use a control/comparison group and an experimental group to test the effects of interventions. These groups should be as similar to each other as possible in terms of demographics and other relevant factors.
- True experiments have control groups with randomly assigned participants; quasi-experimental types of experiments have comparison groups to which participants are not randomly assigned; pre-experimental designs do not have a comparison group.
TRACK 1 (IF YOU ARE CREATING A RESEARCH PROPOSAL FOR THIS CLASS): - Think about the research project you’ve been designing so far. How might you use a basic experiment to answer your question? If your question isn’t explanatory, try to formulate a new explanatory question and consider the usefulness of an experiment.
- Why is establishing a simple relationship between two variables not indicative of one causing the other?
TRACK 2 (IF YOU AREN’T CREATING A RESEARCH PROPOSAL FOR THIS CLASS): Imagine you are interested in studying child welfare practice. You are interested in learning more about community-based programs aimed to prevent child maltreatment and to prevent out-of-home placement for children. - Think about the research project stated above. How might you use a basic experiment to look more into this research topic? Try to formulate an explanatory question and consider the usefulness of an experiment.
- Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349 (6251), aac4716. Doi: 10.1126/science.aac4716 ↵
an operation or procedure carried out under controlled conditions in order to discover an unknown effect or law, to test or establish a hypothesis, or to illustrate a known law. treatment, intervention, or experience that is being tested in an experiment (the independent variable) that is received by the experimental group and not by the control group. Ability to say that one variable "causes" something to happen to another variable. Very important to assess when thinking about studies that examine causation such as experimental or quasi-experimental designs. circumstances or events that may affect the outcome of an experiment, resulting in changes in the research participants that are not a result of the intervention, treatment, or experimental condition being tested causal explanations that can be universally applied to groups, such as scientific laws or universal truths as a criteria for causal relationship, the relationship must make logical sense and seem possible when the values of two variables change at the same time as a criteria for causal relationship, the cause must come before the effect an association between two variables that is NOT caused by a third variable variables and characteristics that have an effect on your outcome, but aren't the primary variable whose influence you're interested in testing. the group of participants in our study who do not receive the intervention we are researching in experiments with random assignment the group of participants in our study who do not receive the intervention we are researching in experiments without random assignment in experimental design, the group of participants in our study who do receive the intervention we are researching The ability to apply research findings beyond the study sample to some broader population, This is a synonymous term for generalizability - the ability to apply the findings of a study beyond the sample to a broader population. performance of an intervention under ideal and controlled circumstances, such as in a lab or delivered by trained researcher-interventionists The performance of an intervention under "real-world" conditions that are not closely controlled and ideal the idea that one event, behavior, or belief will result in the occurrence of another, subsequent event, behavior, or belief Doctoral Research Methods in Social Work Copyright © by Mavs Open Press. All Rights Reserved. Share This BookHave a language expert improve your writingRun a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free. Methodology - What Is a Controlled Experiment? | Definitions & Examples
What Is a Controlled Experiment? | Definitions & ExamplesPublished on April 19, 2021 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on June 22, 2023. In experiments , researchers manipulate independent variables to test their effects on dependent variables. In a controlled experiment , all variables other than the independent variable are controlled or held constant so they don’t influence the dependent variable. Controlling variables can involve: - holding variables at a constant or restricted level (e.g., keeping room temperature fixed).
- measuring variables to statistically control for them in your analyses.
- balancing variables across your experiment through randomization (e.g., using a random order of tasks).
Table of contentsWhy does control matter in experiments, methods of control, problems with controlled experiments, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about controlled experiments. Control in experiments is critical for internal validity , which allows you to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between variables. Strong validity also helps you avoid research biases , particularly ones related to issues with generalizability (like sampling bias and selection bias .) - Your independent variable is the color used in advertising.
- Your dependent variable is the price that participants are willing to pay for a standard fast food meal.
Extraneous variables are factors that you’re not interested in studying, but that can still influence the dependent variable. For strong internal validity, you need to remove their effects from your experiment. - Design and description of the meal,
- Study environment (e.g., temperature or lighting),
- Participant’s frequency of buying fast food,
- Participant’s familiarity with the specific fast food brand,
- Participant’s socioeconomic status.
Receive feedback on language, structure, and formattingProfessional editors proofread and edit your paper by focusing on: - Academic style
- Vague sentences
- Style consistency
See an example You can control some variables by standardizing your data collection procedures. All participants should be tested in the same environment with identical materials. Only the independent variable (e.g., ad color) should be systematically changed between groups. Other extraneous variables can be controlled through your sampling procedures . Ideally, you’ll select a sample that’s representative of your target population by using relevant inclusion and exclusion criteria (e.g., including participants from a specific income bracket, and not including participants with color blindness). By measuring extraneous participant variables (e.g., age or gender) that may affect your experimental results, you can also include them in later analyses. After gathering your participants, you’ll need to place them into groups to test different independent variable treatments. The types of groups and method of assigning participants to groups will help you implement control in your experiment. Control groupsControlled experiments require control groups . Control groups allow you to test a comparable treatment, no treatment, or a fake treatment (e.g., a placebo to control for a placebo effect ), and compare the outcome with your experimental treatment. You can assess whether it’s your treatment specifically that caused the outcomes, or whether time or any other treatment might have resulted in the same effects. To test the effect of colors in advertising, each participant is placed in one of two groups: - A control group that’s presented with red advertisements for a fast food meal.
- An experimental group that’s presented with green advertisements for the same fast food meal.
Random assignmentTo avoid systematic differences and selection bias between the participants in your control and treatment groups, you should use random assignment . This helps ensure that any extraneous participant variables are evenly distributed, allowing for a valid comparison between groups . Random assignment is a hallmark of a “true experiment”—it differentiates true experiments from quasi-experiments . Masking (blinding)Masking in experiments means hiding condition assignment from participants or researchers—or, in a double-blind study , from both. It’s often used in clinical studies that test new treatments or drugs and is critical for avoiding several types of research bias . Sometimes, researchers may unintentionally encourage participants to behave in ways that support their hypotheses , leading to observer bias . In other cases, cues in the study environment may signal the goal of the experiment to participants and influence their responses. These are called demand characteristics . If participants behave a particular way due to awareness of being observed (called a Hawthorne effect ), your results could be invalidated. Using masking means that participants don’t know whether they’re in the control group or the experimental group. This helps you control biases from participants or researchers that could influence your study results. You use an online survey form to present the advertisements to participants, and you leave the room while each participant completes the survey on the computer so that you can’t tell which condition each participant was in. Although controlled experiments are the strongest way to test causal relationships, they also involve some challenges. Difficult to control all variablesEspecially in research with human participants, it’s impossible to hold all extraneous variables constant, because every individual has different experiences that may influence their perception, attitudes, or behaviors. But measuring or restricting extraneous variables allows you to limit their influence or statistically control for them in your study. Risk of low external validityControlled experiments have disadvantages when it comes to external validity —the extent to which your results can be generalized to broad populations and settings. The more controlled your experiment is, the less it resembles real world contexts. That makes it harder to apply your findings outside of a controlled setting. There’s always a tradeoff between internal and external validity . It’s important to consider your research aims when deciding whether to prioritize control or generalizability in your experiment. If you want to know more about statistics , methodology , or research bias , make sure to check out some of our other articles with explanations and examples. - Student’s t -distribution
- Normal distribution
- Null and Alternative Hypotheses
- Chi square tests
- Confidence interval
- Quartiles & Quantiles
- Cluster sampling
- Stratified sampling
- Data cleansing
- Reproducibility vs Replicability
- Peer review
- Prospective cohort study
Research bias - Implicit bias
- Cognitive bias
- Placebo effect
- Hawthorne effect
- Hindsight bias
- Affect heuristic
- Social desirability bias
Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.In a controlled experiment , all extraneous variables are held constant so that they can’t influence the results. Controlled experiments require: - A control group that receives a standard treatment, a fake treatment, or no treatment.
- Random assignment of participants to ensure the groups are equivalent.
Depending on your study topic, there are various other methods of controlling variables . An experimental group, also known as a treatment group, receives the treatment whose effect researchers wish to study, whereas a control group does not. They should be identical in all other ways. Experimental design means planning a set of procedures to investigate a relationship between variables . To design a controlled experiment, you need: - A testable hypothesis
- At least one independent variable that can be precisely manipulated
- At least one dependent variable that can be precisely measured
When designing the experiment, you decide: - How you will manipulate the variable(s)
- How you will control for any potential confounding variables
- How many subjects or samples will be included in the study
- How subjects will be assigned to treatment levels
Experimental design is essential to the internal and external validity of your experiment. Cite this Scribbr articleIf you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the “Cite this Scribbr article” button to automatically add the citation to our free Citation Generator. Bhandari, P. (2023, June 22). What Is a Controlled Experiment? | Definitions & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved September 3, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/controlled-experiment/ Is this article helpful?Pritha BhandariOther students also liked, extraneous variables | examples, types & controls, guide to experimental design | overview, steps, & examples, how to write a lab report, "i thought ai proofreading was useless but..". I've been using Scribbr for years now and I know it's a service that won't disappoint. It does a good job spotting mistakes” - Activities, Experiments, Online Games, Visual Aids
- Activities, Experiments, and Investigations
- Experimental Design and the Scientific Method
Experimental Design - Independent, Dependent, and Controlled VariablesTo view these resources with no ads, please login or subscribe to help support our content development. school subscriptions can access more than 175 downloadable unit bundles in our store for free (a value of $1,500). district subscriptions provide huge group discounts for their schools. email for a quote: [email protected] .. Scientific experiments are meant to show cause and effect of a phenomena (relationships in nature). The “ variables ” are any factor, trait, or condition that can be changed in the experiment and that can have an effect on the outcome of the experiment. An experiment can have three kinds of variables: i ndependent, dependent, and controlled . - The independent variable is one single factor that is changed by the scientist followed by observation to watch for changes. It is important that there is just one independent variable, so that results are not confusing.
- The dependent variable is the factor that changes as a result of the change to the independent variable.
- The controlled variables (or constant variables) are factors that the scientist wants to remain constant if the experiment is to show accurate results. To be able to measure results, each of the variables must be able to be measured.
For example, let’s design an experiment with two plants sitting in the sun side by side. The controlled variables (or constants) are that at the beginning of the experiment, the plants are the same size, get the same amount of sunlight, experience the same ambient temperature and are in the same amount and consistency of soil (the weight of the soil and container should be measured before the plants are added). The independent variable is that one plant is getting watered (1 cup of water) every day and one plant is getting watered (1 cup of water) once a week. The dependent variables are the changes in the two plants that the scientist observes over time. Can you describe the dependent variable that may result from this experiment? After four weeks, the dependent variable may be that one plant is taller, heavier and more developed than the other. These results can be recorded and graphed by measuring and comparing both plants’ height, weight (removing the weight of the soil and container recorded beforehand) and a comparison of observable foliage. Using What You Learned: Design another experiment using the two plants, but change the independent variable. Can you describe the dependent variable that may result from this new experiment? Think of another simple experiment and name the independent, dependent, and controlled variables. Use the graphic organizer included in the PDF below to organize your experiment's variables. Please Login or Subscribe to access downloadable content. Citing Research ReferencesWhen you research information you must cite the reference. Citing for websites is different from citing from books, magazines and periodicals. The style of citing shown here is from the MLA Style Citations (Modern Language Association). When citing a WEBSITE the general format is as follows. Author Last Name, First Name(s). "Title: Subtitle of Part of Web Page, if appropriate." Title: Subtitle: Section of Page if appropriate. Sponsoring/Publishing Agency, If Given. Additional significant descriptive information. Date of Electronic Publication or other Date, such as Last Updated. Day Month Year of access < URL >. Here is an example of citing this page:Amsel, Sheri. "Experimental Design - Independent, Dependent, and Controlled Variables" Exploring Nature Educational Resource ©2005-2024. March 25, 2024 < http://www.exploringnature.org/db/view/Experimental-Design-Independent-Dependent-and-Controlled-Variables > Exploringnature.org has more than 2,000 illustrated animals. Read about them, color them, label them, learn to draw them.5.1 Experiment BasicsLearning objectives. - Explain what an experiment is and recognize examples of studies that are experiments and studies that are not experiments.
- Distinguish between the manipulation of the independent variable and control of extraneous variables and explain the importance of each.
- Recognize examples of confounding variables and explain how they affect the internal validity of a study.
What Is an Experiment?As we saw earlier in the book, an experiment is a type of study designed specifically to answer the question of whether there is a causal relationship between two variables. In other words, whether changes in an independent variable cause a change in a dependent variable. Experiments have two fundamental features. The first is that the researchers manipulate, or systematically vary, the level of the independent variable. The different levels of the independent variable are called conditions . For example, in Darley and Latané’s experiment, the independent variable was the number of witnesses that participants believed to be present. The researchers manipulated this independent variable by telling participants that there were either one, two, or five other students involved in the discussion, thereby creating three conditions. For a new researcher, it is easy to confuse these terms by believing there are three independent variables in this situation: one, two, or five students involved in the discussion, but there is actually only one independent variable (number of witnesses) with three different levels or conditions (one, two or five students). The second fundamental feature of an experiment is that the researcher controls, or minimizes the variability in, variables other than the independent and dependent variable. These other variables are called extraneous variables . Darley and Latané tested all their participants in the same room, exposed them to the same emergency situation, and so on. They also randomly assigned their participants to conditions so that the three groups would be similar to each other to begin with. Notice that although the words manipulation and control have similar meanings in everyday language, researchers make a clear distinction between them. They manipulate the independent variable by systematically changing its levels and control other variables by holding them constant. Manipulation of the Independent VariableAgain, to manipulate an independent variable means to change its level systematically so that different groups of participants are exposed to different levels of that variable, or the same group of participants is exposed to different levels at different times. For example, to see whether expressive writing affects people’s health, a researcher might instruct some participants to write about traumatic experiences and others to write about neutral experiences. As discussed earlier in this chapter, the different levels of the independent variable are referred to as conditions , and researchers often give the conditions short descriptive names to make it easy to talk and write about them. In this case, the conditions might be called the “traumatic condition” and the “neutral condition.” Notice that the manipulation of an independent variable must involve the active intervention of the researcher. Comparing groups of people who differ on the independent variable before the study begins is not the same as manipulating that variable. For example, a researcher who compares the health of people who already keep a journal with the health of people who do not keep a journal has not manipulated this variable and therefore has not conducted an experiment. This distinction is important because groups that already differ in one way at the beginning of a study are likely to differ in other ways too. For example, people who choose to keep journals might also be more conscientious, more introverted, or less stressed than people who do not. Therefore, any observed difference between the two groups in terms of their health might have been caused by whether or not they keep a journal, or it might have been caused by any of the other differences between people who do and do not keep journals. Thus the active manipulation of the independent variable is crucial for eliminating potential alternative explanations for the results. Of course, there are many situations in which the independent variable cannot be manipulated for practical or ethical reasons and therefore an experiment is not possible. For example, whether or not people have a significant early illness experience cannot be manipulated, making it impossible to conduct an experiment on the effect of early illness experiences on the development of hypochondriasis. This caveat does not mean it is impossible to study the relationship between early illness experiences and hypochondriasis—only that it must be done using nonexperimental approaches. We will discuss this type of methodology in detail later in the book. Independent variables can be manipulated to create two conditions and experiments involving a single independent variable with two conditions is often referred to as a single factor two-level design. However, sometimes greater insights can be gained by adding more conditions to an experiment. When an experiment has one independent variable that is manipulated to produce more than two conditions it is referred to as a single factor multi level design. So rather than comparing a condition in which there was one witness to a condition in which there were five witnesses (which would represent a single-factor two-level design), Darley and Latané’s used a single factor multi-level design, by manipulating the independent variable to produce three conditions (a one witness, a two witnesses, and a five witnesses condition). Control of Extraneous VariablesAs we have seen previously in the chapter, an extraneous variable is anything that varies in the context of a study other than the independent and dependent variables. In an experiment on the effect of expressive writing on health, for example, extraneous variables would include participant variables (individual differences) such as their writing ability, their diet, and their gender. They would also include situational or task variables such as the time of day when participants write, whether they write by hand or on a computer, and the weather. Extraneous variables pose a problem because many of them are likely to have some effect on the dependent variable. For example, participants’ health will be affected by many things other than whether or not they engage in expressive writing. This influencing factor can make it difficult to separate the effect of the independent variable from the effects of the extraneous variables, which is why it is important to control extraneous variables by holding them constant. Extraneous Variables as “Noise”Extraneous variables make it difficult to detect the effect of the independent variable in two ways. One is by adding variability or “noise” to the data. Imagine a simple experiment on the effect of mood (happy vs. sad) on the number of happy childhood events people are able to recall. Participants are put into a negative or positive mood (by showing them a happy or sad video clip) and then asked to recall as many happy childhood events as they can. The two leftmost columns of Table 5.1 show what the data might look like if there were no extraneous variables and the number of happy childhood events participants recalled was affected only by their moods. Every participant in the happy mood condition recalled exactly four happy childhood events, and every participant in the sad mood condition recalled exactly three. The effect of mood here is quite obvious. In reality, however, the data would probably look more like those in the two rightmost columns of Table 5.1 . Even in the happy mood condition, some participants would recall fewer happy memories because they have fewer to draw on, use less effective recall strategies, or are less motivated. And even in the sad mood condition, some participants would recall more happy childhood memories because they have more happy memories to draw on, they use more effective recall strategies, or they are more motivated. Although the mean difference between the two groups is the same as in the idealized data, this difference is much less obvious in the context of the greater variability in the data. Thus one reason researchers try to control extraneous variables is so their data look more like the idealized data in Table 5.1 , which makes the effect of the independent variable easier to detect (although real data never look quite that good). | | | | | | 4 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 6 | 3 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 4 | 3 | 4 | 0 | 4 | 3 | 5 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 7 | 4 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 5 | 4 | 3 | 6 | 1 | 4 | 3 | 8 | 2 | = 4 | = 3 | = 4 | = 3 | One way to control extraneous variables is to hold them constant. This technique can mean holding situation or task variables constant by testing all participants in the same location, giving them identical instructions, treating them in the same way, and so on. It can also mean holding participant variables constant. For example, many studies of language limit participants to right-handed people, who generally have their language areas isolated in their left cerebral hemispheres. Left-handed people are more likely to have their language areas isolated in their right cerebral hemispheres or distributed across both hemispheres, which can change the way they process language and thereby add noise to the data. In principle, researchers can control extraneous variables by limiting participants to one very specific category of person, such as 20-year-old, heterosexual, female, right-handed psychology majors. The obvious downside to this approach is that it would lower the external validity of the study—in particular, the extent to which the results can be generalized beyond the people actually studied. For example, it might be unclear whether results obtained with a sample of younger heterosexual women would apply to older homosexual men. In many situations, the advantages of a diverse sample (increased external validity) outweigh the reduction in noise achieved by a homogeneous one. Extraneous Variables as Confounding VariablesThe second way that extraneous variables can make it difficult to detect the effect of the independent variable is by becoming confounding variables. A confounding variable is an extraneous variable that differs on average across levels of the independent variable (i.e., it is an extraneous variable that varies systematically with the independent variable). For example, in almost all experiments, participants’ intelligence quotients (IQs) will be an extraneous variable. But as long as there are participants with lower and higher IQs in each condition so that the average IQ is roughly equal across the conditions, then this variation is probably acceptable (and may even be desirable). What would be bad, however, would be for participants in one condition to have substantially lower IQs on average and participants in another condition to have substantially higher IQs on average. In this case, IQ would be a confounding variable. To confound means to confuse , and this effect is exactly why confounding variables are undesirable. Because they differ systematically across conditions—just like the independent variable—they provide an alternative explanation for any observed difference in the dependent variable. Figure 5.1 shows the results of a hypothetical study, in which participants in a positive mood condition scored higher on a memory task than participants in a negative mood condition. But if IQ is a confounding variable—with participants in the positive mood condition having higher IQs on average than participants in the negative mood condition—then it is unclear whether it was the positive moods or the higher IQs that caused participants in the first condition to score higher. One way to avoid confounding variables is by holding extraneous variables constant. For example, one could prevent IQ from becoming a confounding variable by limiting participants only to those with IQs of exactly 100. But this approach is not always desirable for reasons we have already discussed. A second and much more general approach—random assignment to conditions—will be discussed in detail shortly. Figure 5.1 Hypothetical Results From a Study on the Effect of Mood on Memory. Because IQ also differs across conditions, it is a confounding variable. Key Takeaways- An experiment is a type of empirical study that features the manipulation of an independent variable, the measurement of a dependent variable, and control of extraneous variables.
- An extraneous variable is any variable other than the independent and dependent variables. A confound is an extraneous variable that varies systematically with the independent variable.
- Practice: List five variables that can be manipulated by the researcher in an experiment. List five variables that cannot be manipulated by the researcher in an experiment.
- Effect of parietal lobe damage on people’s ability to do basic arithmetic.
- Effect of being clinically depressed on the number of close friendships people have.
- Effect of group training on the social skills of teenagers with Asperger’s syndrome.
- Effect of paying people to take an IQ test on their performance on that test.
Share This BookInformationInitiativesYou are accessing a machine-readable page. In order to be human-readable, please install an RSS reader. All articles published by MDPI are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. No special permission is required to reuse all or part of the article published by MDPI, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. For more information, please refer to https://www.mdpi.com/openaccess . Feature papers represent the most advanced research with significant potential for high impact in the field. A Feature Paper should be a substantial original Article that involves several techniques or approaches, provides an outlook for future research directions and describes possible research applications. Feature papers are submitted upon individual invitation or recommendation by the scientific editors and must receive positive feedback from the reviewers. Editor’s Choice articles are based on recommendations by the scientific editors of MDPI journals from around the world. Editors select a small number of articles recently published in the journal that they believe will be particularly interesting to readers, or important in the respective research area. The aim is to provide a snapshot of some of the most exciting work published in the various research areas of the journal. Original Submission Date Received: . - Active Journals
- Find a Journal
- Proceedings Series
- For Authors
- For Reviewers
- For Editors
- For Librarians
- For Publishers
- For Societies
- For Conference Organizers
- Open Access Policy
- Institutional Open Access Program
- Special Issues Guidelines
- Editorial Process
- Research and Publication Ethics
- Article Processing Charges
- Testimonials
- Preprints.org
- SciProfiles
- Encyclopedia
Article Menu- Subscribe SciFeed
- Recommended Articles
- Google Scholar
- on Google Scholar
- Table of Contents
Find support for a specific problem in the support section of our website. Please let us know what you think of our products and services. Visit our dedicated information section to learn more about MDPI. JSmol ViewerThe optimal experimental design for exponentiated frech’et lifetime products. 1. Introduction2. introduction to the testing procedure for the lifetime performance index and minimum sample size, 3. reliability sampling design, 3.1. the determination of the optimal m and n when the termination time t is fixed. - Inspection cost C I : the cost of using the inspection equipment for each inspection;
- Sample cost C s : the cost for one test unit in the sample;
- Operation cost C o : the cost per unit of time, encompassing expenses like personnel costs and the depreciation of test equipment;
- Installation cost C a : the fixed cost for installing all test units.
- Step 1: Provide the predetermined values of c 0 , c 1 , α , β , p , T , L , m 0 and the costs of C I = a C a , C s = b C a , C o = c C a .
- Step 2: Compute θ 0 = 1 − c 0 L and θ 1 = 1 − c 1 L
- Step 3: Set m = 1.
- Step 4: Calculate the sample size n using Equation (11), followed by determining the associated total cost TC ( m , n ) by the use of Equation (12).
- Step 5: If m < m 0 , then m = m + 1 and go to Step 4; otherwise, go to Step 6.
- Step 6: The optimal value of m denoted by m* is found to be the minimum value of m such that TC* = m i n m ≤ m 0 TC ( m , n ) is attained and the related sample size n* can be obtained by using Equation (11).
- Step 7: The critical value in the critical region can be calculated as C L 0 = 1 − L θ 0 + Z α w θ 0 .
3.2. The Determination of the Optimal m, t and n When the Termination Time T Is Varying- Step 1: Provide the predetermined values of c 0 , c 1 , α , β , p , L , m 0 and the costs of C I = a C a , C s = b C a , C o = c C a .
- Step 4: The optimal value of t* is determined to minimize the total cost TC ( m , t , n ) given in Equation (13). Calculate the sample size n using Equation (11) and then compute the related total cost TC ( m , t* , n ) by using Equation (13).
- Step 6: We determine the optimal choice of m denoted by m* as the minimum value of m such that TC** = m i n m ≤ m 0 TC ( m , t* , n ) is reached and then the corresponding sample size n* is determined by using Equation (11).
- Step 7: The critical value can be calculated as C L 0 = 1 − L θ 0 + Z α w θ 0 .
3.3. Example- Step 1: Take a random sample 36 in size with m* = 2 from the data set. Collect the progressive type I interval censored sample ( X 1 , X 2 ) (7, 24) at the pre-set times t 1 , t 2 (0.4, 0.8) with censoring schemes of R 1 , R 2 = 0, 5).
- Step 2: Calculate the maximum likelihood estimator for θ as θ ^ = 8.9934. We can find the maximum likelihood estimator for C L c as C L = 1 − θ ^ L = 1 − 8.9934 (0.00255) = 0.9907.
- Step 3: For the level of α = 0.01 test, the critical value is found to be C L 0 = 0.8707.
- Step 4: Since C ^ L = 0.9907 > C L 0 = 0.8707, we can infer that the null hypothesis H 0 : C L ≤ 0.75 should be rejected and conclude that the lifetime performance index attains the required target level c 0 , and we claim that the production process is capable.
- Step 1: Take a random sample 43 in size from the data set. Observe the progressive type I interval censored sample ( X 1 , X 2 , X 3 ) = (0, 2, 4) at the pre-set times t 1 , t 2 , t 3 = (0.15, 0.30, 0.45) with censoring schemes of R 1 , R 2 , R 3 = (5, 4, 28).
- Step 2: Calculate the maximum likelihood estimator for θ as θ ^ = 13.3962. Then, we can find the maximum likelihood estimator for C L as C ^ L = 1 − θ ^ L = 1 − 13.3962 (0.00255) = 0.9658.
- Step 3: For the level of the α = 0.01 test, the critical value is found to be C L 0 = 0.8541.
- Step 4: Since C ^ L = 0.9658 > C L 0 = 0.8541, we arrive at the same conclusion to substantiate the alternative hypothesis.
4. ConclusionsData availability statement, conflicts of interest. | | | | | 0.025 | | | | 0.05 | |
---|
| | p | | | | | | | | |
---|
0.01 | 0.20 | 0.050 | 20 | 1629 | 1650.8 | 0.7667 | 11 | 386 | 398.8 | 0.7847 | | | 0.075 | 18 | 1654 | 1673.8 | 0.7667 | 10 | 391 | 402.8 | 0.7847 | | | 0.100 | 17 | 1673 | 1691.8 | 0.7667 | 9 | 395 | 405.8 | 0.7847 | | 0.15 | 0.050 | 15 | 1371 | 1387.8 | 0.7678 | 9 | 328 | 338.8 | 0.7867 | | | 0.075 | 12 | 1398 | 1411.8 | 0.7678 | 8 | 333 | 342.8 | 0.7867 | | | 0.100 | 10 | 1419 | 1430.8 | 0.7678 | 8 | 336 | 345.8 | 0.7867 | | 0.10 | 0.050 | 10 | 1202 | 1213.8 | 0.7688 | 8 | 288 | 297.8 | 0.7886 | | | 0.075 | 9 | 1224 | 1234.8 | 0.7688 | 7 | 293 | 301.8 | 0.7886 | | | 0.100 | 8 | 1243 | 1252.8 | 0.7688 | 6 | 298 | 305.8 | 0.7886 | 0.05 | 0.20 | 0.050 | 18 | 1056 | 1075.8 | 0.7647 | 9 | 247 | 257.8 | 0.7808 | | | 0.075 | 16 | 1072 | 1089.8 | 0.7647 | 8 | 250 | 259.8 | 0.7808 | | | 0.100 | 15 | 1084 | 1100.8 | 0.7647 | 7 | 253 | 261.8 | 0.7808 | | 0.15 | 0.050 | 13 | 861 | 875.8 | 0.7659 | 8 | 203 | 212.8 | 0.7831 | | | 0.075 | 11 | 877 | 889.8 | 0.7659 | 7 | 206 | 214.8 | 0.7831 | | | 0.100 | 9 | 890 | 900.8 | 0.7659 | 6 | 209 | 216.8 | 0.7831 | | 0.10 | 0.050 | 9 | 732 | 742.8 | 0.7671 | 6 | 175 | 182.8 | 0.7852 | | | 0.075 | 8 | 745 | 754.8 | 0.7671 | 5 | 178 | 184.8 | 0.7853 | | | 0.100 | 7 | 756 | 764.8 | 0.7671 | 6 | 178 | 185.8 | 0.7853 | 0.10 | 0.20 | 0.050 | 16 | 802 | 819.8 | 0.7632 | 6 | 188 | 195.8 | 0.7778 | | | 0.075 | 14 | 814 | 829.8 | 0.7632 | 6 | 189 | 196.8 | 0.7778 | | | 0.100 | 13 | 823 | 837.8 | 0.7632 | 6 | 190 | 197.8 | 0.7778 | | 0.15 | 0.050 | 12 | 637 | 650.8 | 0.7644 | 6 | 150 | 157.8 | 0.7803 | | | 0.075 | 10 | 649 | 660.8 | 0.7644 | 5 | 153 | 159.8 | 0.7803 | | | 0.100 | 9 | 658 | 668.8 | 0.7644 | 5 | 154 | 160.8 | 0.7802 | | 0.10 | 0.050 | 9 | 528 | 538.8 | 0.7657 | 5 | 126 | 132.8 | 0.7826 | | | 0.075 | 7 | 539 | 547.8 | 0.7657 | 5 | 127 | 133.8 | 0.7826 | | | 0.100 | 7 | 546 | 554.8 | 0.7657 | 5 | 128 | 134.8 | 0.7826 | | | | | | 0.125 | | | | 0.15 | |
---|
| | p | | | | | | | | |
---|
0.01 | 0.20 | 0.050 | 3 | 54 | 58.8 | 0.8468 | 2 | 36 | 39.8 | 0.8707 | | | 0.075 | 3 | 54 | 58.8 | 0.8469 | 2 | 36 | 39.8 | 0.8708 | | | 0.100 | 3 | 54 | 58.8 | 0.8470 | 2 | 36 | 39.8 | 0.8708 | | 0.15 | 0.050 | 4 | 46 | 51.8 | 0.8509 | 3 | 31 | 35.8 | 0.8747 | | | 0.075 | 3 | 48 | 52.8 | 0.8503 | 3 | 31 | 35.8 | 0.8748 | | | 0.100 | 3 | 48 | 52.8 | 0.8505 | 2 | 33 | 36.8 | 0.8739 | | 0.10 | 0.050 | 3 | 43 | 47.8 | 0.8537 | 3 | 28 | 32.8 | 0.8785 | | | 0.075 | 3 | 43 | 47.8 | 0.8539 | 2 | 30 | 33.8 | 0.8778 | | | 0.100 | 3 | 43 | 47.8 | 0.8541 | 2 | 30 | 33.8 | 0.8779 | 0.05 | 0.20 | 0.050 | 2 | 33 | 36.8 | 0.8392 | 2 | 21 | 24.8 | 0.8618 | | | 0.075 | 2 | 33 | 36.8 | 0.8392 | 2 | 21 | 24.8 | 0.8618 | | | 0.100 | 2 | 33 | 36.8 | 0.8392 | 2 | 21 | 24.8 | 0.8619 | | 0.15 | 0.050 | 2 | 29 | 32.8 | 0.8434 | 1 | 20 | 22.8 | 0.8684 | | | 0.075 | 2 | 29 | 32.8 | 0.8434 | 1 | 20 | 22.8 | 0.8684 | | | 0.100 | 2 | 29 | 32.8 | 0.8435 | 1 | 20 | 22.8 | 0.8684 | | 0.10 | 0.050 | 2 | 26 | 29.8 | 0.8470 | 2 | 17 | 20.8 | 0.8700 | | | 0.075 | 2 | 26 | 29.8 | 0.8471 | 2 | 17 | 20.8 | 0.8701 | | | 0.100 | 2 | 26 | 29.8 | 0.8472 | 2 | 17 | 20.8 | 0.8702 | 0.10 | 0.20 | 0.050 | 1 | 25 | 27.8 | 0.8328 | 1 | 16 | 18.8 | 0.8535 | | | 0.075 | 1 | 25 | 27.8 | 0.8328 | 1 | 16 | 18.8 | 0.8535 | | | 0.100 | 1 | 25 | 27.8 | 0.8328 | 1 | 16 | 18.8 | 0.8535 | | 0.15 | 0.050 | 2 | 20 | 23.8 | 0.8376 | 1 | 14 | 16.8 | 0.8602 | | | 0.075 | 2 | 20 | 23.8 | 0.8376 | 1 | 14 | 16.8 | 0.8602 | | | 0.100 | 2 | 20 | 23.8 | 0.8377 | 1 | 14 | 16.8 | 0.8602 | | 0.10 | 0.050 | 2 | 18 | 21.8 | 0.8408 | 1 | 13 | 15.8 | 0.8640 | | | 0.075 | 2 | 18 | 21.8 | 0.8409 | 1 | 13 | 15.8 | 0.8640 | | | 0.100 | 2 | 18 | 21.8 | 0.8410 | 1 | 13 | 15.8 | 0.8640 | | | | | | 0.025 | | | | 0.05 | |
---|
| | p | | | | | | | | | | |
---|
0.01 | 0.20 | 0.050 | 20 | 0.03 | 1628 | 1649.6 | 0.7667 | 11 | 0.04 | 385 | 397.4 | 0.7847 | | | 0.075 | 18 | 0.04 | 1653 | 1672.6 | 0.7667 | 9 | 0.04 | 391 | 401.3 | 0.7847 | | | 0.100 | 14 | 0.04 | 1676 | 1691.5 | 0.7667 | 8 | 0.04 | 395 | 404.3 | 0.7848 | | 0.15 | 0.050 | 20 | 0.07 | 1358 | 1380.3 | 0.7679 | 10 | 0.07 | 327 | 338.7 | 0.7867 | | | 0.075 | 17 | 0.08 | 1386 | 1405.3 | 0.7679 | 9 | 0.08 | 332 | 342.7 | 0.7867 | | | 0.100 | 13 | 0.09 | 1411 | 1426.1 | 0.7678 | 8 | 0.10 | 336 | 345.8 | 0.7867 | | 0.10 | 0.050 | 19 | 0.11 | 1169 | 1191.0 | 0.7691 | 9 | 0.11 | 285 | 296.0 | 0.7887 | | | 0.075 | 15 | 0.12 | 1198 | 1215.8 | 0.7691 | 8 | 0.13 | 290 | 300.1 | 0.7887 | | | 0.100 | 13 | 0.13 | 1220 | 1235.7 | 0.7690 | 7 | 0.14 | 295 | 304.0 | 0.7887 | 0.05 | 0.20 | 0.050 | 17 | 0.03 | 1057 | 1075.5 | 0.7647 | 7 | 0.04 | 249 | 257.3 | 0.7809 | | | 0.075 | 14 | 0.03 | 1074 | 1089.5 | 0.7647 | 7 | 0.03 | 251 | 259.2 | 0.7809 | | | 0.100 | 12 | 0.04 | 1087 | 1100.4 | 0.7647 | 6 | 0.05 | 253 | 260.3 | 0.7809 | | 0.15 | 0.050 | 17 | 0.07 | 853 | 872.2 | 0.7659 | 8 | 0.09 | 203 | 212.7 | 0.7831 | | | 0.075 | 13 | 0.08 | 872 | 887.0 | 0.7659 | 6 | 0.08 | 208 | 215.5 | 0.7831 | | | 0.100 | 13 | 0.09 | 883 | 898.2 | 0.7659 | 7 | 0.10 | 208 | 216.7 | 0.7831 | | 0.10 | 0.050 | 15 | 0.11 | 714 | 731.6 | 0.7672 | 7 | 0.12 | 173 | 181.8 | 0.7853 | | | 0.075 | 12 | 0.12 | 731 | 745.5 | 0.7672 | 6 | 0.14 | 176 | 183.8 | 0.7853 | | | 0.100 | 11 | 0.14 | 743 | 756.6 | 0.7672 | 6 | 0.13 | 178 | 185.8 | 0.7853 | 0.10 | 0.20 | 0.050 | 15 | 0.03 | 803 | 819.4 | 0.7632 | 6 | 0.05 | 187 | 194.3 | 0.7779 | | | 0.075 | 14 | 0.04 | 813 | 828.6 | 0.7632 | 6 | 0.05 | 188 | 195.3 | 0.7779 | | | 0.100 | 12 | 0.04 | 823 | 836.5 | 0.7632 | 6 | 0.06 | 189 | 196.3 | 0.7779 | | 0.15 | 0.050 | 14 | 0.07 | 633 | 649.0 | 0.7644 | 7 | 0.09 | 149 | 157.6 | 0.7802 | | | 0.075 | 12 | 0.08 | 645 | 659.0 | 0.7644 | 5 | 0.09 | 153 | 159.5 | 0.7803 | | | 0.100 | 11 | 0.09 | 654 | 667.0 | 0.7644 | 5 | 0.09 | 154 | 160.5 | 0.7802 | | 0.10 | 0.050 | 13 | 0.11 | 517 | 532.4 | 0.7658 | 6 | 0.15 | 124 | 131.9 | 0.7826 | | | 0.075 | 12 | 0.12 | 527 | 541.5 | 0.7658 | 5 | 0.13 | 127 | 133.7 | 0.7826 | | | 0.100 | 10 | 0.13 | 537 | 549.3 | 0.7658 | 5 | 0.14 | 128 | 134.7 | 0.7826 | | | | | | 0.125 | | | | 0.15 | |
---|
| | p | | | | | | | | | | |
---|
0.01 | 0.20 | 0.050 | 3 | 0.06 | 53 | 57.2 | 0.8477 | 2 | 0.03 | 36 | 39.1 | 0.8707 | | | 0.075 | 2 | 0.04 | 55 | 58.1 | 0.8477 | 2 | 0.03 | 36 | 39.1 | 0.8708 | | | 0.100 | 2 | 0.04 | 55 | 58.1 | 0.8478 | 2 | 0.03 | 36 | 39.1 | 0.8708 | | 0.15 | 0.050 | 3 | 0.12 | 47 | 51.4 | 0.8512 | 2 | 0.11 | 32 | 35.2 | 0.8757 | | | 0.075 | 3 | 0.07 | 48 | 52.2 | 0.8503 | 2 | 0.12 | 32 | 35.2 | 0.8758 | | | 0.100 | 3 | 0.08 | 48 | 52.2 | 0.8505 | 2 | 0.13 | 32 | 35.3 | 0.8759 | | 0.10 | 0.050 | 3 | 0.12 | 43 | 47.4 | 0.8537 | 3 | 0.18 | 28 | 32.5 | 0.8785 | | | 0.075 | 3 | 0.13 | 43 | 47.4 | 0.8539 | 2 | 0.13 | 30 | 33.3 | 0.8778 | | | 0.100 | 3 | 0.15 | 43 | 47.5 | 0.8541 | 2 | 0.13 | 30 | 33.3 | 0.8779 | 0.05 | 0.20 | 0.050 | 2 | 0.04 | 33 | 36.1 | 0.8392 | 1 | 0.06 | 22 | 24.1 | 0.8632 | | | 0.075 | 2 | 0.05 | 33 | 36.1 | 0.8392 | 1 | 0.06 | 22 | 24.1 | 0.8632 | | | 0.100 | 2 | 0.05 | 33 | 36.1 | 0.8392 | 1 | 0.06 | 22 | 24.1 | 0.8632 | | 0.15 | 0.050 | 2 | 0.09 | 29 | 32.2 | 0.8434 | 1 | 0.12 | 20 | 22.1 | 0.8684 | | | 0.075 | 2 | 0.09 | 29 | 32.2 | 0.8434 | 1 | 0.12 | 20 | 22.1 | 0.8684 | | | 0.100 | 2 | 0.10 | 29 | 32.2 | 0.8435 | 1 | 0.12 | 20 | 22.1 | 0.8684 | | 0.10 | 0.050 | 2 | 0.12 | 26 | 29.2 | 0.8470 | 2 | 0.12 | 17 | 20.2 | 0.8700 | | | 0.075 | 2 | 0.13 | 26 | 29.3 | 0.8471 | 2 | 0.12 | 17 | 20.2 | 0.8701 | | | 0.100 | 2 | 0.13 | 26 | 29.3 | 0.8472 | 2 | 0.13 | 17 | 20.3 | 0.8702 | 0.10 | 0.20 | 0.050 | 1 | 0.05 | 25 | 27.0 | 0.8328 | 1 | 0.03 | 16 | 18.0 | 0.8535 | | | 0.075 | 1 | 0.05 | 25 | 27.0 | 0.8328 | 1 | 0.03 | 16 | 18.0 | 0.8535 | | | 0.100 | 1 | 0.05 | 25 | 27.0 | 0.8328 | 1 | 0.03 | 16 | 18.0 | 0.8535 | | 0.15 | 0.050 | 2 | 0.12 | 20 | 23.2 | 0.8376 | 1 | 0.10 | 14 | 16.1 | 0.8602 | | | 0.075 | 2 | 0.13 | 20 | 23.3 | 0.8376 | 1 | 0.10 | 14 | 16.1 | 0.8602 | | | 0.100 | 2 | 0.14 | 20 | 23.3 | 0.8377 | 1 | 0.10 | 14 | 16.1 | 0.8602 | | 0.10 | 0.050 | 2 | 0.12 | 18 | 21.2 | 0.8408 | 1 | 0.13 | 13 | 15.1 | 0.8640 | | | 0.075 | 2 | 0.12 | 18 | 21.2 | 0.8409 | 1 | 0.13 | 13 | 15.1 | 0.8640 | | | 0.100 | 2 | 0.12 | 18 | 21.2 | 0.8410 | 1 | 0.13 | 13 | 15.1 | 0.8640 | - Montgomery, D.C. Introduction to Statistical Quality Control ; John Wiley and Sons Inc.: New York, NY, USA, 1985. [ Google Scholar ]
- Tong, L.I.; Chen, K.S.; Chen, H.T. Statistical testing for assessing the performance of lifetime index of electronic components with exponential distribution. Int. J. Qual. Reliab. Manag. 2002 , 19 , 812–824. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Cohen, A.C.; Sackrowitz, H. Progressively Censored Data with Unbalanced Groups. Technometrics 1997 , 39 , 425–432. [ Google Scholar ]
- Balakrishnan, N.; Zhang, D. Progressively Censored Data Analysis with Applications. J. Stat. Plan. Inference 2003 , 113 , 37–52. [ Google Scholar ]
- Balakrishnan, N.; Aggarwala, R. Progressive Censoring: Theory, Methods and Applications ; Birkhäuser: Boston, MA, USA, 2000. [ Google Scholar ]
- Gupta, A.K.; Sinha, A. Inference for Progressive Censoring in Exponential Distributions with Applications to Lifetime Data. Commun. Stat.—Theory Methods 2022 , 51 , 4151–4168. [ Google Scholar ]
- Chen, M.; Zhang, X. Bayesian Methods for Progressive Censoring in Reliability Testing. J. Stat. Comput. Simul. 2023 , 93 , 1234–1251. [ Google Scholar ]
- Wang, Y.; Liu, J. Advanced Methods for Progressive Censoring in Survival Analysis. Stat. Med. 2023 , 42 , 1802–1820. [ Google Scholar ]
- Wu, S.F.; Lin, Y.P. Computational testing algorithmic procedure of assessment for lifetime performance index of products with one-parameter exponential distribution under progressive type I interval censoring. Math. Comput. Simul. 2016 , 120 , 79–90. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Wu, S.F.; Chen, Z.C.; Chang, W.J.; Chang, C.W.; Lin, C. A hypothesis testing procedure for the evaluation on the lifetime performance index of products with Burr XII distribution under progressive type I interval censoring. Commun. Stat.—Simul. Comput. 2018 , 47 , 2670–2683. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Wu, S.F.; Chang, W.T. The evaluation on the process capability index C L for exponentiated Frech’et lifetime product under progressive type I interval censoring. Symmetry 2021 , 13 , 1032. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Huang, S.R.; Wu, S.J. Reliability sampling plans under progressive type-I interval censoring using cost functions. IEEE Trans. Reliab. 2008 , 57 , 445–451. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Wingo, D.R. Maximum likelihood methods for fitting the Burr type XII distribution to life test data. Biom. J. 1983 , 25 , 77–84. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
- Gail, M.H.; Gastwirth, J.L. A scale-free goodness of fit test for the exponential distribution based on the Gini Statistic. J. R. Stat. Soc. B 1978 , 40 , 350–357. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
Click here to enlarge figure | The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
Share and CiteWu, S.-F. The Optimal Experimental Design for Exponentiated Frech’et Lifetime Products. Symmetry 2024 , 16 , 1132. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym16091132 Wu S-F. The Optimal Experimental Design for Exponentiated Frech’et Lifetime Products. Symmetry . 2024; 16(9):1132. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym16091132 Wu, Shu-Fei. 2024. "The Optimal Experimental Design for Exponentiated Frech’et Lifetime Products" Symmetry 16, no. 9: 1132. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym16091132 Article MetricsArticle access statistics, further information, mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi. Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals |
COMMENTS
Study with Quizlet and memorize flashcards containing terms like . In an experimental design, the _____ variable is manipulated by the researcher, with the goal of eliciting a significant response. Here, this was accomplished by pairing words and syllables according to one of three word types. Then researchers measured the _____ variable by asking subjects to assess pleasantness _____for each ...
Experimental design means planning a set of procedures to investigate a relationship between variables. To design a controlled experiment, you need: A testable hypothesis; At least one independent variable that can be precisely manipulated; At least one dependent variable that can be precisely measured; When designing the experiment, you decide:
Manipulated variable: The number of hours spent studying. This is the variable that the teacher manipulates to see how it affects exam scores. Response variable: The exam scores. This is the variable that changes as a result of the manipulated variable being changed. Controlled variables: We would want to make sure that each of the groups of ...
A manipulated variable is also sometimes called an independent variable. A response variable is the variable that changes as a result of the manipulated variable being changed. A response variable is sometimes called a dependent variable because its value often depends on the value of the manipulated variable. Often in experiments there are ...
Experimental design is a process of planning and conducting scientific experiments to investigate a hypothesis or research question. It involves carefully designing an experiment that can test the hypothesis, and controlling for other variables that may influence the results. Experimental design typically includes identifying the variables that ...
The design of experiments (DOE or DOX), also known as experiment design or experimental design, ... In some cases, independent variables cannot be manipulated, for example when testing the difference between two groups who have a different disease, or testing the difference between genders (obviously variables that would be hard or unethical to ...
Description. Experimental design was pioneered by R. A. Fisher in the fields of agriculture and education (Fisher 1935). In studies that use experimental design, the independent variables are manipulated or controlled by researchers, which enables the testing of the cause-and-effect relationship between the independent and dependent variables.
An experiment is a data collection procedure that occurs in controlled conditions to identify and understand causal relationships between variables. Researchers can use many potential designs. The ultimate choice depends on their research question, resources, goals, and constraints. In some fields of study, researchers refer to experimental ...
Understanding the role of variables in research is essential for designing and conducting experiments that produce accurate and reliable results. Learn about the different types of variables and how they are used in experimental design, with examples of independent and dependent variables
The independent variable is the variable that is manipulated by an experimenter. The dependent variable changes as a result of the independent variable. At least two groups need to be compared. One group will receive some special treatment, and they are called the experimental group.
Experimental design is one aspect of a scientific method. A well-designed, properly conducted experiment aims to control variables in order to isolate and manipulate causal effects and thereby maximize internal validity, support causal inferences, and guarantee reliable results. Traditionally employed in the natural sciences, experimental ...
The primary function of experimental design is to control variables, first by effectively manipulating or changing the stimulus variable under controlled conditions, allowing the observation of changes in the response variable. ... Single-factor nonequivalent groups design: When the manipulated variable is a subject variable (characteristics ...
-Independent variable is the variable (factor) that is purposely changed. It is the manipulated variable. -Dependent variable changes in response to the independent variable. It is the responding variable. -Confounding/nuisance variables are the variables that mask or distort the association between measured variables in a study. They are
Three types of experimental designs are commonly used: 1. Independent Measures. Independent measures design, also known as between-groups, is an experimental design where different participants are used in each condition of the independent variable. This means that each condition of the experiment includes a different group of participants.
The experimental method involves the manipulation of variables to establish cause-and-effect relationships. The key features are controlled methods and the random allocation of participants into controlled and experimental groups. ... An independent variable (the cause) is manipulated in an experiment, and the dependent variable (the effect) is ...
3. Quasi-experimental Research Design. The word "Quasi" means similarity. A quasi-experimental design is similar to a true experimental design. However, the difference between the two is the assignment of the control group. In this research design, an independent variable is manipulated, but the participants of a group are not randomly ...
10 Experimental research. 10. Experimental research. Experimental research—often considered to be the 'gold standard' in research designs—is one of the most rigorous of all research designs. In this design, one or more independent variables are manipulated by the researcher (as treatments), subjects are randomly assigned to different ...
The three types of variables are manipulated, control, and responding. A manipulated variable is changed by the scientist because it is what is being tested. Control variables remain the same ...
Practice: List five variables that can be manipulated by the researcher in an experiment. List five variables that cannot be manipulated by the researcher in an experiment. Practice: For each of the following topics, decide whether that topic could be studied using an experimental research design and explain why or why not.
It is the most accurate type of experimental design and may be carried out with or without a pretest on at least 2 randomly assigned dependent subjects. The true experimental research design must contain a control group, a variable that can be manipulated by the researcher, and the distribution must be random. ...
The independent variable is the cause. Its value is independent of other variables in your study. The dependent variable is the effect. Its value depends on changes in the independent variable. Example: Independent and dependent variables. You design a study to test whether changes in room temperature have an effect on math test scores.
Key Takeaways. Experimental designs are useful for establishing causality, but some types of experimental design do this better than others. Experiments help researchers isolate the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable by controlling for the effect of extraneous variables.; Experiments use a control/comparison group and an experimental group to test the effects of ...
Experimental design means planning a set of procedures to investigate a relationship between variables. To design a controlled experiment, you need: A testable hypothesis; At least one independent variable that can be precisely manipulated; At least one dependent variable that can be precisely measured; When designing the experiment, you decide:
The " variables " are any factor, trait, or condition that can be changed in the experiment and that can have an effect on the outcome of the experiment. An experiment can have three kinds of variables: i ndependent, dependent, and controlled. The independent variable is one single factor that is changed by the scientist followed by ...
Practice: List five variables that can be manipulated by the researcher in an experiment. List five variables that cannot be manipulated by the researcher in an experiment. Practice: For each of the following topics, decide whether that topic could be studied using an experimental research design and explain why or why not.
When the termination time for the experiment is varying, we find an optimal sampling design yielding minimized total experimental costs in Section 3.2. With the aim of illustrating how to apply our optimal experimental design, one practical example is provided in Section 3.3. Finally, the findings and conclusion are summarized in Section 4.
After 6 years of manipulated precipitation at our study site, we observed community composition changes with an important decrease of graminoid abundance under drought. The lower abundance of grasses in drought plots agrees with other experimental studies in calcareous grasslands (Morecroft et al., 2004; Sternberg et al., 1999).
Practice: List five variables that can be manipulated by the researcher in an experiment. List five variables that cannot be manipulated by the researcher in an experiment. Practice: For each of the following topics, decide whether that topic could be studied using an experimental research design and explain why or why not.