control in experiment meaning

Controlled Experiment

Saul 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.

This is when a hypothesis is scientifically tested.

In a controlled experiment, an independent variable (the cause) is systematically manipulated, and the dependent variable (the effect) is measured; any extraneous variables are controlled.

The researcher can operationalize (i.e., define) the studied variables so they can be objectively measured. The quantitative data can be analyzed to see if there is a difference between the experimental and control groups.

What is the control group?

In experiments scientists compare a control group and an experimental group that are identical in all respects, except for one difference – experimental manipulation.

Unlike the experimental group, the control group is not exposed to the independent variable under investigation and so provides a baseline against which any changes in the experimental group can be compared.

Since experimental manipulation is the only difference between the experimental and control groups, we can be sure that any differences between the two are due to experimental manipulation rather than chance.

Randomly allocating participants to independent variable groups 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.

What are extraneous variables?

The researcher wants to ensure that the manipulation of the independent variable has changed the changes in the dependent variable.

Hence, all the other variables that could affect the dependent variable to change must be controlled. These other variables are called extraneous or confounding variables.

Extraneous variables should be controlled were possible, as they might be important enough to provide alternative explanations for the effects.

In practice, it would be difficult to control all the variables in a child’s educational achievement. For example, it would be difficult to control variables that have happened in the past.

A researcher can only control the current environment of participants, such as time of day and noise levels.

Why conduct controlled experiments?

Scientists use controlled experiments because they allow for precise control of extraneous and independent variables. This allows a cause-and-effect relationship to be established.

Controlled experiments also follow a standardized step-by-step procedure. This makes it easy for another researcher to replicate the study.

Key Terminology

Experimental group.

The group being treated or otherwise manipulated for the sake of the experiment.

Control Group

They receive no treatment and are used as a comparison group.

Ecological validity

The degree to which an investigation represents real-life experiences.

Experimenter effects

These are the ways that the experimenter can accidentally influence the participant through their appearance or behavior.

Demand characteristics

The 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 that are not independent variables but could affect the results (DV) of the experiment. Extraneous variables should be controlled where possible.

Confounding variables

Variable(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 Allocation

Randomly allocating participants to independent variable conditions means that all participants should have an equal chance of participating in each condition.

Order effects

Changes 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.

What is the control in an experiment?

In an experiment , the control is a standard or baseline group not exposed to the experimental treatment or manipulation. It serves as a comparison group to the experimental group, which does receive the treatment or manipulation.

The control group helps to account for other variables that might influence the outcome, allowing researchers to attribute differences in results more confidently to the experimental treatment.

Establishing a cause-and-effect relationship between the manipulated variable (independent variable) and the outcome (dependent variable) is critical in establishing a cause-and-effect relationship between the manipulated variable.

What is the purpose of controlling the environment when testing a hypothesis?

Controlling the environment when testing a hypothesis aims to eliminate or minimize the influence of extraneous variables. These variables other than the independent variable might affect the dependent variable, potentially confounding the results.

By controlling the environment, researchers can ensure that any observed changes in the dependent variable are likely due to the manipulation of the independent variable, not other factors.

This enhances the experiment’s validity, allowing for more accurate conclusions about cause-and-effect relationships.

It also improves the experiment’s replicability, meaning other researchers can repeat the experiment under the same conditions to verify the results.

Why are hypotheses important to controlled experiments?

Hypotheses are crucial to controlled experiments because they provide a clear focus and direction for the research. A hypothesis is a testable prediction about the relationship between variables.

It guides the design of the experiment, including what variables to manipulate (independent variables) and what outcomes to measure (dependent variables).

The experiment is then conducted to test the validity of the hypothesis. If the results align with the hypothesis, they provide evidence supporting it.

The hypothesis may be revised or rejected if the results do not align. Thus, hypotheses are central to the scientific method, driving the iterative inquiry, experimentation, and knowledge advancement process.

What is the experimental method?

The experimental method is a systematic approach in scientific research where an independent variable is manipulated to observe its effect on a dependent variable, under controlled conditions.

What Is a Controlled Experiment?

Definition and Example

• Scientific Method
• Chemical Laws
• Periodic Table
• Projects & Experiments
• Biochemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Medical Chemistry
• Chemistry In Everyday Life
• Famous Chemists
• Activities for Kids
• Abbreviations & Acronyms
• Weather & Climate
• Ph.D., Biomedical Sciences, University of Tennessee at Knoxville
• B.A., Physics and Mathematics, Hastings College

A controlled experiment is one in which everything is held constant except for one variable . Usually, a set of data is taken to be a control group , which is commonly the normal or usual state, and one or more other groups are examined where all conditions are identical to the control group and to each other except for one variable.

Sometimes it's necessary to change more than one variable, but all of the other experimental conditions will be controlled so that only the variables being examined change. And what is measured is the variables' amount or the way in which they change.

Controlled Experiment

• A controlled experiment is simply an experiment in which all factors are held constant except for one: the independent variable.
• A common type of controlled experiment compares a control group against an experimental group. All variables are identical between the two groups except for the factor being tested.
• The advantage of a controlled experiment is that it is easier to eliminate uncertainty about the significance of the results.

Example of a Controlled Experiment

Let's say you want to know if the type of soil affects how long it takes a seed to germinate, and you decide to set up a controlled experiment to answer the question. You might take five identical pots, fill each with a different type of soil, plant identical bean seeds in each pot, place the pots in a sunny window, water them equally, and measure how long it takes for the seeds in each pot to sprout.

This is a controlled experiment because your goal is to keep every variable constant except the type of soil you use. You control these features.

Why Controlled Experiments Are Important

The big advantage of a controlled experiment is that you can eliminate much of the uncertainty about your results. If you couldn't control each variable, you might end up with a confusing outcome.

For example, if you planted different types of seeds in each of the pots, trying to determine if soil type affected germination, you might find some types of seeds germinate faster than others. You wouldn't be able to say, with any degree of certainty, that the rate of germination was due to the type of soil. It might as well have been due to the type of seeds.

Or, if you had placed some pots in a sunny window and some in the shade or watered some pots more than others, you could get mixed results. The value of a controlled experiment is that it yields a high degree of confidence in the outcome. You know which variable caused or did not cause a change.

Are All Experiments Controlled?

No, they are not. It's still possible to obtain useful data from uncontrolled experiments, but it's harder to draw conclusions based on the data.

An example of an area where controlled experiments are difficult is human testing. Say you want to know if a new diet pill helps with weight loss. You can collect a sample of people, give each of them the pill, and measure their weight. You can try to control as many variables as possible, such as how much exercise they get or how many calories they eat.

However, you will have several uncontrolled variables, which may include age, gender, genetic predisposition toward a high or low metabolism, how overweight they were before starting the test, whether they inadvertently eat something that interacts with the drug, etc.

Scientists try to record as much data as possible when conducting uncontrolled experiments, so they can see additional factors that may be affecting their results. Although it is harder to draw conclusions from uncontrolled experiments, new patterns often emerge that would not have been observable in a controlled experiment.

For example, you may notice the diet drug seems to work for female subjects, but not for male subjects, and this may lead to further experimentation and a possible breakthrough. If you had only been able to perform a controlled experiment, perhaps on male clones alone, you would have missed this connection.

• Box, George E. P., et al.  Statistics for Experimenters: Design, Innovation, and Discovery . Wiley-Interscience, a John Wiley & Soncs, Inc., Publication, 2005. 
• Creswell, John W.  Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research . Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall, 2008.
• Pronzato, L. "Optimal experimental design and some related control problems". Automatica . 2008.
• Robbins, H. "Some Aspects of the Sequential Design of Experiments". Bulletin of the American Mathematical Society . 1952.
• Understanding Simple vs Controlled Experiments
• What Is the Difference Between a Control Variable and Control Group?
• The Role of a Controlled Variable in an Experiment
• Scientific Variable
• DRY MIX Experiment Variables Acronym
• Six Steps of the Scientific Method
• Scientific Method Vocabulary Terms
• What Are the Elements of a Good Hypothesis?
• Scientific Method Flow Chart
• What Are Examples of a Hypothesis?
• What Is an Experimental Constant?
• Scientific Hypothesis Examples
• What Is a Hypothesis? (Science)
• Null Hypothesis Examples
• What Is a Testable Hypothesis?
• Random Error vs. Systematic Error

• COVID-19 Tracker
• Biochemistry
• Anatomy & Physiology
• Microbiology
• Neuroscience
• Animal Kingdom
• NGSS High School
• Latest News
• Editors’ Picks
• Weekly Digest
• Quotes about Biology

Controlled Experiment

Reviewed by: BD Editors

Controlled Experiment Definition

A controlled experiment is a scientific test that is directly manipulated by a scientist, in order to test a single variable at a time. The variable being tested is the independent variable , and is adjusted to see the effects on the system being studied. The controlled variables are held constant to minimize or stabilize their effects on the subject. In biology, a controlled experiment often includes restricting the environment of the organism being studied. This is necessary to minimize the random effects of the environment and the many variables that exist in the wild.

In a controlled experiment, the study population is often divided into two groups. One group receives a change in a certain variable, while the other group receives a standard environment and conditions. This group is referred to as the control group , and allows for comparison with the other group, known as the experimental group . Many types of controls exist in various experiments, which are designed to ensure that the experiment worked, and to have a basis for comparison. In science, results are only accepted if it can be shown that they are statistically significant . Statisticians can use the difference between the control group and experimental group and the expected difference to determine if the experiment supports the hypothesis , or if the data was simply created by chance.

Examples of Controlled Experiment

Music preference in dogs.

Do dogs have a taste in music? You might have considered this, and science has too. Believe it or not, researchers have actually tested dog’s reactions to various music genres. To set up a controlled experiment like this, scientists had to consider the many variables that affect each dog during testing. The environment the dog is in when listening to music, the volume of the music, the presence of humans, and even the temperature were all variables that the researches had to consider.

In this case, the genre of the music was the independent variable. In other words, to see if dog’s change their behavior in response to different kinds of music, a controlled experiment had to limit the interaction of the other variables on the dogs. Usually, an experiment like this is carried out in the same location, with the same lighting, furniture, and conditions every time. This ensures that the dogs are not changing their behavior in response to the room. To make sure the dogs don’t react to humans or simply the noise of the music, no one else can be in the room and the music must be played at the same volume for each genre. Scientist will develop protocols for their experiment, which will ensure that many other variables are controlled.

This experiment could also split the dogs into two groups, only testing music on one group. The control group would be used to set a baseline behavior, and see how dogs behaved without music. The other group could then be observed and the differences in the group’s behavior could be analyzed. By rating behaviors on a quantitative scale, statistics can be used to analyze the difference in behavior, and see if it was large enough to be considered significant. This basic experiment was carried out on a large number of dogs, analyzing their behavior with a variety of different music genres. It was found that dogs do show more relaxed and calm behaviors when a specific type of music plays. Come to find out, dogs enjoy reggae the most.

Scurvy in Sailors

In the early 1700s, the world was a rapidly expanding place. Ships were being built and sent all over the world, carrying thousands and thousands of sailors. These sailors were mostly fed the cheapest diets possible, not only because it decreased the costs of goods, but also because fresh food is very hard to keep at sea. Today, we understand that lack of essential vitamins and nutrients can lead to severe deficiencies that manifest as disease. One of these diseases is scurvy.

Scurvy is caused by a simple vitamin C deficiency, but the effects can be brutal. Although early symptoms just include general feeling of weakness, the continued lack of vitamin C will lead to a breakdown of the blood cells and vessels that carry the blood. This results in blood leaking from the vessels. Eventually, people bleed to death internally and die. Before controlled experiments were commonplace, a simple physician decided to tackle the problem of scurvy. James Lind, of the Royal Navy, came up with a simple controlled experiment to find the best cure for scurvy.

He separated sailors with scurvy into various groups. He subjected them to the same controlled condition and gave them the same diet, except one item. Each group was subjected to a different treatment or remedy, taken with their food. Some of these remedies included barley water, cider and a regiment of oranges and lemons. This created the first clinical trial , or test of the effectiveness of certain treatments in a controlled experiment. Lind found that the oranges and lemons helped the sailors recover fast, and within a few years the Royal Navy had developed protocols for growing small leafy greens that contained high amounts of vitamin C to feed their sailors.

Related Biology Terms

• Field Experiment – An experiment conducted in nature, outside the bounds of total control.
• Independent Variable – The thing in an experiment being changed or manipulated by the experimenter to see effects on the subject.
• Controlled Variable – A thing that is normalized or standardized across an experiment, to remove it from having an effect on the subject being studied.
• Control Group – A group of subjects in an experiment that receive no independent variable, or a normalized amount, to provide comparison.

Cite This Article

Subscribe to our newsletter, privacy policy, terms of service, scholarship, latest posts, white blood cell, t cell immunity, satellite cells, embryonic stem cells, popular topics, photosynthesis, cellular respiration, hydrochloric acid, animal cell, water cycle, amino acids, scientific method.

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Methodology
• Controlled Experiments | Methods & Examples of Control

Controlled Experiments | Methods & Examples of Control

Published on 19 April 2022 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on 10 October 2022.

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 randomisation (e.g., using a random order of tasks)

Table of contents

Why does control matter in experiments, methods of control, problems with controlled experiments, 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.

• Your independent variable is the colour 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

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

You can control some variables by standardising your data collection procedures. All participants should be tested in the same environment with identical materials. Only the independent variable (e.g., advert colour) 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 colour 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 groups

Controlled experiments require control groups . Control groups allow you to test a comparable treatment, no treatment, or a fake treatment, 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.

• 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 assignment

To avoid systematic differences 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.

Sometimes, researchers may unintentionally encourage participants to behave in ways that support their hypotheses. In other cases, cues in the study environment may signal the goal of the experiment to participants and influence their responses.

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.

Although controlled experiments are the strongest way to test causal relationships, they also involve some challenges.

Difficult to control all variables

Especially 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 validity

Controlled experiments have disadvantages when it comes to external validity – the extent to which your results can be generalised 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 prioritise control or generalisability in your experiment.

Experimental designs are a set of procedures that you plan in order to examine the relationship between variables that interest you.

To design a successful experiment, first identify:

• A testable hypothesis
• One or more independent variables that you will manipulate
• One or more dependent variables that you will measure

When designing the experiment, first decide:

• How your variable(s) will be manipulated
• How you will control for any potential confounding or lurking variables
• How many subjects you will include
• How you will assign treatments to your subjects

Cite this Scribbr article

If 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 Reference Generator.

Bhandari, P. (2022, October 10). Controlled Experiments | Methods & Examples of Control. Scribbr. Retrieved 12 August 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/controlled-experiments/

Is this article helpful?

Pritha Bhandari

Microbe Notes

Controlled Experiments: Definition, Steps, Results, Uses

Controlled experiments ensure valid and reliable results by minimizing biases and controlling variables effectively.

Rigorous planning, ethical considerations, and precise data analysis are vital for successful experiment execution and meaningful conclusions.

Real-world applications demonstrate the practical impact of controlled experiments, guiding informed decision-making in diverse domains.

Controlled experiments are the systematic research method where variables are intentionally manipulated and controlled to observe the effects of a particular phenomenon. It aims to isolate and measure the impact of specific variables, ensuring a more accurate causality assessment.

Table of Contents

Interesting Science Videos

Importance of controlled experiments in various fields

Controlled experiments are significant across diverse fields, including science, psychology, economics, healthcare, and technology.

They provide a systematic approach to test hypotheses, establish cause-and-effect relationships, and validate the effectiveness of interventions or solutions.

Why Controlled Experiments Matter? 

Validity and reliability of results.

Controlled experiments uphold the gold standard for scientific validity and reliability. By meticulously controlling variables and conditions, researchers can attribute observed outcomes accurately to the independent variable being tested. This precision ensures that the findings can be replicated and are trustworthy.

Minimizing Biases and Confounding Variables

One of the core benefits of controlled experiments lies in their ability to minimize biases and confounding variables. Extraneous factors that could distort results are mitigated through careful control and randomization. This enables researchers to isolate the effects of the independent variable, leading to a more accurate understanding of causality.

Achieving Causal Inference

Controlled experiments provide a strong foundation for establishing causal relationships between variables. Researchers can confidently infer causation by manipulating specific variables and observing resulting changes. The capability informs decision-making, policy formulation, and advancements across various fields.

Planning a Controlled Experiment

Formulating research questions and hypotheses.

Formulating clear research questions and hypotheses is paramount at the outset of a controlled experiment. These inquiries guide the direction of the study, defining the variables of interest and setting the stage for structured experimentation.

Well-defined questions and hypotheses contribute to focused research and facilitate meaningful data collection.

Identifying Variables and Control Groups

Identifying and defining independent, dependent, and control variables is fundamental to experimental planning. 

Precise identification ensures that the experiment is designed to isolate the effect of the independent variable while controlling for other influential factors. Establishing control groups allows for meaningful comparisons and robust analysis of the experimental outcomes.

Designing Experimental Procedures and Protocols

Careful design of experimental procedures and protocols is essential for a successful controlled experiment. The step involves outlining the methodology, data collection techniques, and the sequence of activities in the experiment. 

A well-designed experiment is structured to maintain consistency, control, and accuracy throughout the study, thereby enhancing the validity and credibility of the results.

Conducting a Controlled Experiment

Randomization and participant selection.

Randomization is a critical step in ensuring the fairness and validity of a controlled experiment. It involves assigning participants to different experimental conditions in a random and unbiased manner. 

The selection of participants should accurately represent the target population, enhancing the results’ generalizability.

Data Collection Methods and Instruments

Selecting appropriate data collection methods and instruments is pivotal in gathering accurate and relevant data. Researchers often employ surveys, observations, interviews, or specialized tools to record and measure the variables of interest. 

The chosen methods should align with the experiment’s objectives and provide reliable data for analysis.

Monitoring and Maintaining Experimental Conditions

Maintaining consistent and controlled experimental conditions throughout the study is essential. Regular monitoring helps ensure that variables remain constant and uncontaminated, reducing the risk of confounding factors. 

Rigorous monitoring protocols and timely adjustments are crucial for the accuracy and reliability of the experiment.

Analysing Results and Drawing Conclusions

Data analysis techniques.

Data analysis involves employing appropriate statistical and analytical techniques to process the collected data. This step helps derive meaningful insights, identify patterns, and draw valid conclusions. 

Common techniques include regression analysis, t-tests , ANOVA , and more, tailored to the research design and data type .

Interpretation of Results

Interpreting the results entails understanding the statistical outcomes and their implications for the research objectives. 

Researchers analyze patterns, trends, and relationships revealed by the data analysis to infer the experiment’s impact on the variables under study. Clear and accurate interpretation is crucial for deriving actionable insights.

Implications and Potential Applications

Identifying the broader implications and potential applications of the experiment’s results is fundamental. Researchers consider how the findings can inform decision-making, policy development, or further research. 

Understanding the practical implications helps bridge the gap between theoretical insights and real-world application.

Common Challenges and Solutions

Addressing ethical considerations.

Ethical challenges in controlled experiments include ensuring informed consent, protecting participants’ privacy, and minimizing harm. 

Solutions involve thorough ethics reviews, transparent communication with participants, and implementing safeguards to uphold ethical standards throughout the experiment.

Dealing with Sample Size and Statistical Power

The sample size is crucial for achieving statistically significant results. Adequate sample sizes enhance the experiment’s power to detect meaningful effects accurately. 

Statistical power analysis guides researchers in determining the optimal sample size for the experiment, minimizing the risk of type I and II errors .

Mitigating Unforeseen Variables

Unforeseen variables can introduce bias and affect the experiment’s validity. Researchers employ meticulous planning and robust control measures to minimize the impact of unforeseen variables. 

Pre-testing and pilot studies help identify potential confounders, allowing researchers to adapt the experiment accordingly.

A controlled experiment involves meticulous planning, precise execution, and insightful analysis. Adhering to ethical standards, optimizing sample size, and adapting to unforeseen variables are key challenges that require thoughtful solutions. 

Real-world applications showcase the transformative potential of controlled experiments across varied domains, emphasizing their indispensable role in evidence-based decision-making and progress.

• https://www.khanacademy.org/science/biology/intro-to-biology/science-of-biology/a/experiments-and-observations
• https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/controlled-experiment/
• https://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-1-4899-7687-1_891
• http://ai.stanford.edu/~ronnyk/GuideControlledExperiments.pdf
• https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6776925/
• https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4017459/
• https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/controlled%20experiment

About Author

Krisha Karki

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

In order to continue enjoying our site, we ask that you confirm your identity as a human. Thank you very much for your cooperation.

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.20(10); 2019 Oct 4

Why control an experiment?

John s torday.

1 Department of Pediatrics, Harbor‐UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, CA, USA

František Baluška

2 IZMB, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany

Empirical research is based on observation and experimentation. Yet, experimental controls are essential for overcoming our sensory limits and generating reliable, unbiased and objective results.

We made a deliberate decision to become scientists and not philosophers, because science offers the opportunity to test ideas using the scientific method. And once we began our formal training as scientists, the greatest challenge beyond formulating a testable or refutable hypothesis was designing appropriate controls for an experiment. In theory, this seems trivial, but in practice, it is often difficult. But where and when did this concept of controlling an experiment start? It is largely attributed to Roger Bacon, who emphasized the use of artificial experiments to provide additional evidence for observations in his Novum Organum Scientiarum in 1620. Other philosophers took up the concept of empirical research: in 1877, Charles Peirce redefined the scientific method in The Fixation of Belief as the most efficient and reliable way to prove a hypothesis. In the 1930s, Karl Popper emphasized the necessity of refuting hypotheses in The Logic of Scientific Discoveries . While these influential works do not explicitly discuss controls as an integral part of experiments, their importance for generating solid and reliable results is nonetheless implicit.

… once we began our formal training as scientists, the greatest challenge beyond formulating a testable or refutable hypothesis was designing appropriate controls for an experiment.

But the scientific method based on experimentation and observation has come under criticism of late in light of the ever more complex problems faced in physics and biology. Chris Anderson, the editor of Wired Magazine, proposed that we should turn to statistical analysis, machine learning, and pattern recognition instead of creating and testing hypotheses, based on the Informatics credo that if you cannot answer the question, you need more data. However, this attitude subsumes that we already have enough data and that we just cannot make sense of it. This assumption is in direct conflict with David Bohm's thesis that there are two “Orders”, the Explicate and Implicate 1 . The Explicate Order is the way in which our subjective sensory systems perceive the world 2 . In contrast, Bohm's Implicate Order would represent the objective reality beyond our perception. This view—that we have only a subjective understanding of reality—dates back to Galileo Galilei who, in 1623, criticized the Aristotelian concept of absolute and objective qualities of our sensory perceptions 3 and to Plato's cave allegory that reality is only what our senses allow us to see.

The only way for systematically overcoming the limits of our sensory apparatus and to get a glimpse of the Implicate Order is through the scientific method, through hypothesis‐testing, controlled experimentation. Beyond the methodology, controlling an experiment is critically important to ensure that the observed results are not just random events; they help scientists to distinguish between the “signal” and the background “noise” that are inherent in natural and living systems. For example, the detection method for the recent discovery of gravitational waves used four‐dimensional reference points to factor out the background noise of the Cosmos. Controls also help to account for errors and variability in the experimental setup and measuring tools: The negative control of an enzyme assay, for instance, tests for any unrelated background signals from the assay or measurement. In short, controls are essential for the unbiased, objective observation and measurement of the dependent variable in response to the experimental setup.

The only way for systematically overcoming the limits of our sensory apparatus […] is through the Scientific Method, through hypothesis‐testing, controlled experimentation.

Nominally, both positive and negative controls are material and procedural; that is, they control for variability of the experimental materials and the procedure itself. But beyond the practical issues to avoid procedural and material artifacts, there is an underlying philosophical question. The need for experimental controls is a subliminal recognition of the relative and subjective nature of the Explicate Order. It requires controls as “reference points” in order to transcend it, and to approximate the Implicate Order.

This is similar to Peter Rowlands’ 4 dictum that everything in the Universe adds up to zero, the universal attractor in mathematics. Prior to the introduction of zero, mathematics lacked an absolute reference point similar to a negative or positive control in an experiment. The same is true of biology, where the cell is the reference point owing to its negative entropy: It appears as an attractor for the energy of its environment. Hence, there is a need for careful controls in biology: The homeostatic balance that is inherent to life varies during the course of an experiment and therefore must be precisely controlled to distinguish noise from signal and approximate the Implicate Order of life.

P  < 0.05 tacitly acknowledges the explicate order

Another example of the “subjectivity” of our perception is the level of accuracy we accept for differences between groups. For example, when we use statistical methods to determine if an observed difference between control and experimental groups is a random occurrence or a specific effect, we conventionally consider a p value of less than or equal to 5% as statistically significant; that is, there is a less than 0.05 probability that the effect is random. The efficacy of this arbitrary convention has been debated for decades; suffice to say that despite questioning the validity of that convention, a P value of < 0.05 reflects our acceptance of the subjectivity of our perception of reality.

… controls are essential for the unbiased, objective observation and measurement of the dependent variable in response to the experimental setup.

Thus, if we do away with hypothesis‐testing science in favor of informatics based on data and statistics—referring to Anderson's suggestion—it reflects our acceptance of the noise in the system. However, mere data analysis without any underlying hypothesis is tantamount to “garbage in‐garbage out”, in contrast to well‐controlled imaginative experiments to separate the wheat from the chaff. Albert Einstein was quoted as saying that imagination was more important than knowledge.

The ultimate purpose of the scientific method is to understand ourselves and our place in Nature. Conventionally, we subscribe to the Anthropic Principle, that we are “in” this Universe, whereas the Endosymbiosis Theory, advocated by Lynn Margulis, stipulates that we are “of” this Universe as a result of the assimilation of the physical environment. According to this theory, the organism endogenizes external factors to make them physiologically “useful”, such as iron as the core of the hemoglobin molecule, or ancient bacteria as mitochondria.

… there is a fundamental difference between knowing via believing and knowing based on empirical research.

By applying the developmental mechanism of cell–cell communication to phylogeny, we have revealed the interrelationships between cells and explained evolution from its origin as the unicellular state to multicellularity via cell–cell communication. The ultimate outcome of this research is that consciousness is the product of cellular processes and cell–cell communication in order to react to the environment and better anticipate future events 5 , 6 . Consciousness is an essential prerequisite for transcending the Explicate Order toward the Implicate Order via cellular sensory and cognitive systems that feed an ever‐expanding organismal knowledge about both the environment and itself.

It is here where the empirical approach to understanding nature comes in with its emphasis that knowledge comes only from sensual experience rather than innate ideas or traditions. In the context of the cell or higher systems, knowledge about the environment can only be gained by sensing and analyzing the environment. Empiricism is similar to an equation in which the variables and terms form a product, or a chemical reaction, or a biological process where the substrates, aka sensory data, form products, that is, knowledge. However, it requires another step—imagination, according to Albert Einstein—to transcend the Explicate Order in order to gain insight into the Implicate Order. Take for instance, Dmitri Ivanovich Mendeleev's Periodic Table of Elements: his brilliant insight was not just to use Atomic Number to organize it, but also to consider the chemical reactivities of the Elements by sorting them into columns. By introducing chemical reactivity to the Periodic Table, Mendeleev provided something like the “fourth wall” in Drama, which gives the audience an omniscient, god‐like perspective on what is happening on stage.

The capacity to transcend the subjective Explicate Order to approximate the objective Implicate Order is not unlike Eastern philosophies like Buddhism or Taoism, which were practiced long before the scientific method. An Indian philosopher once pointed out that the Hindus have known for 30,000 years that the Earth revolves around the sun, while the Europeans only realized this a few hundred years ago based on the work of Copernicus, Brahe, and Galileo. However, there is a fundamental difference between knowing via believing and knowing based on empirical research. A similar example is Aristotle's refusal to test whether a large stone would fall faster than a small one, as he knew the answer already 7 . Galileo eventually performed the experiment from the Leaning Tower in Pisa to demonstrate that the fall time of two objects is independent of their mass—which disproved Aristotle's theory of gravity that stipulated that objects fall at a speed proportional to their mass. Again, it demonstrates the power of empiricism and experimentation as formulated by Francis Bacon, John Locke, and others, over intuition and rationalizing.

Even if our scientific instruments provide us with objective data, we still need to apply our consciousness to evaluate and interpret such data.

Following the evolution from the unicellular state to multicellular organisms—and reverse‐engineering it to a minimal‐cell state—reveals that biologic diversity is an artifact of the Explicate Order. Indeed, the unicell seems to be the primary level of selection in the Implicate Order, as it remains proximate to the First Principles of Physiology, namely negative entropy (negentropy), chemiosmosis, and homeostasis. The first two principles are necessary for growth and proliferation, whereas the last reflects Newton's Third Law of Motion that every action has an equal and opposite reaction so as to maintain homeostasis.

All organisms interact with their surroundings and assimilate their experience as epigenetic marks. Such marks extend to the DNA of germ cells and thus change the phenotypic expression of the offspring. The offspring, in turn, interacts with the environment in response to such epigenetic modifications, giving rise to the concept of the phenotype as an agent that actively and purposefully interacts with its environment in order to adapt and survive. This concept of phenotype based on agency linked to the Explicate Order fundamentally differs from its conventional description as a mere set of biologic characteristics. Organisms’ capacities to anticipate future stress situations from past memories are obvious in simple animals such as nematodes, as well as in plants and bacteria 8 , suggesting that the subjective Explicate Order controls both organismal behavior and trans‐generational evolution.

That perspective offers insight to the nature of consciousness: not as a “mind” that is separate from a “body”, but as an endogenization of physical matter, which complies with the Laws of Nature. In other words, consciousness is the physiologic manifestation of endogenized physical surroundings, compartmentalized, and made essential for all organisms by forming the basis for their physiology. Endocytosis and endocytic/synaptic vesicles contribute to endogenization of cellular surroundings, allowing eukaryotic organisms to gain knowledge about the environment. This is true not only for neurons in brains, but also for all eukaryotic cells 5 .

Such a view of consciousness offers insight to our awareness of our physical surroundings as the basis for self‐referential self‐organization. But this is predicated on our capacity to “experiment” with our environment. The burgeoning idea that we are entering the Anthropocene, a man‐made world founded on subjective senses instead of Natural Laws, is a dangerous step away from our innate evolutionary arc. Relying on just our senses and emotions, without experimentation and controls to understand the Implicate Order behind reality, is not just an abandonment of the principles of the Enlightenment, but also endangers the planet and its diversity of life.

Further reading

Anderson C (2008) The End of Theory: the data deluge makes the scientific method obsolete. Wired (December 23, 2008)

Bacon F (1620, 2011) Novum Organum Scientiarum. Nabu Press

Baluška F, Gagliano M, Witzany G (2018) Memory and Learning in Plants. Springer Nature

Charlesworth AG, Seroussi U, Claycomb JM (2019) Next‐Gen learning: the C. elegans approach. Cell 177: 1674–1676

Eliezer Y, Deshe N, Hoch L, Iwanir S, Pritz CO, Zaslaver A (2019) A memory circuit for coping with impending adversity. Curr Biol 29: 1573–1583

Gagliano M, Renton M, Depczynski M, Mancuso S (2014) Experience teaches plants to learn faster and forget slower in environments where it matters. Oecologia 175: 63–72

Gagliano M, Vyazovskiy VV, Borbély AA, Grimonprez M, Depczynski M (2016) Learning by association in plants. Sci Rep 6: 38427

Katz M, Shaham S (2019) Learning and memory: mind over matter in C. elegans . Curr Biol 29: R365‐R367

Kováč L (2007) Information and knowledge in biology – time for reappraisal. Plant Signal Behav 2: 65–73

Kováč L (2008) Bioenergetics – a key to brain and mind. Commun Integr Biol 1: 114–122

Koshland DE Jr (1980) Bacterial chemotaxis in relation to neurobiology. Annu Rev Neurosci 3: 43–75

Lyon P (2015) The cognitive cell: bacterial behavior reconsidered. Front Microbiol 6: 264

Margulis L (2001) The conscious cell. Ann NY Acad Sci 929: 55–70

Maximillian N (2018) The Metaphysics of Science and Aim‐Oriented Empiricism. Springer: New York

Mazzocchi F (2015) Could Big Data be the end of theory in science? EMBO Rep 16: 1250–1255

Moore RS, Kaletsky R, Murphy CT (2019) Piwi/PRG‐1 argonaute and TGF‐β mediate transgenerational learned pathogenic avoidance. Cell 177: 1827–1841

Peirce CS (1877) The Fixation of Belief. Popular Science Monthly 12: 1–15

Pigliucci M (2009) The end of theory in science? EMBO Rep 10: 534

Popper K (1959) The Logic of Scientific Discovery. Routledge: London

Posner R, Toker IA, Antonova O, Star E, Anava S, Azmon E, Hendricks M, Bracha S, Gingold H, Rechavi O (2019) Neuronal small RNAs control behavior transgenerationally. Cell 177: 1814–1826

Russell B (1912) The Problems of Philosophy. Henry Holt and Company: New York

Scerri E (2006) The Periodic Table: It's Story and Significance. Oxford University Press, Oxford

Shapiro JA (2007) Bacteria are small but not stupid: cognition, natural genetic engineering and socio‐bacteriology. Stud Hist Philos Biol Biomed Sci 38: 807–818

Torday JS, Miller WB Jr (2016) Biologic relativity: who is the observer and what is observed? Prog Biophys Mol Biol 121: 29–34

Torday JS, Rehan VK (2017) Evolution, the Logic of Biology. Wiley: Hoboken

Torday JS, Miller WB Jr (2016) Phenotype as agent for epigenetic inheritance. Biology (Basel) 5: 30

Wasserstein RL, Lazar NA (2016) The ASA's statement on p‐values: context, process and purpose. Am Statist 70: 129–133

Yamada T, Yang Y, Valnegri P, Juric I, Abnousi A, Markwalter KH, Guthrie AN, Godec A, Oldenborg A, Hu M, Holy TE, Bonni A (2019) Sensory experience remodels genome architecture in neural circuit to drive motor learning. Nature 569: 708–713

Ladislav Kováč discussed the advantages and drawbacks of the inductive method for science and the logic of scientific discoveries 9 . Obviously, technological advances have enabled scientists to expand the borders of knowledge, and informatics allows us to objectively analyze ever larger data‐sets. It was the telescope that enabled Tycho Brahe, Johannes Kepler, and Galileo Galilei to make accurate observations and infer the motion of the planets. The microscope provided Robert Koch and Louis Pasteur insights into the microbial world and determines the nature of infectious diseases. Particle colliders now give us a glimpse into the birth of the Universe, while DNA sequencing and bioinformatics have enormously advanced biology's goal to understand the molecular basis of life.

However, Kováč also reminds us that Bayesian inferences and reasoning have serious drawbacks, as documented in the instructive example of Bertrand Russell's “inductivist turkey”, which collected large amounts of reproducible data each morning about feeding time. Based on these observations, the turkey correctly predicted the feeding time for the next morning—until Christmas Eve when the turkey's throat was cut 9 . In order to avoid the fate of the “inductivist turkey”, mankind should also rely on Popperian deductive science, namely formulating theories, concepts, and hypotheses, which are either confirmed or refuted via stringent experimentation and proper controls. Even if our scientific instruments provide us with objective data, we still need to apply our consciousness to evaluate and interpret such data. Moreover, before we start using our scientific instruments, we need to pose scientific questions. Therefore, as suggested by Albert Szent‐Györgyi, we need both Dionysian and Apollonian types of scientists 10 . Unfortunately, as was the case in Szent‐Györgyi's times, the Dionysians are still struggling to get proper support.

There have been pleas for reconciling philosophy and science, which parted ways owing to the rise of empiricism. This essay recognizes the centrality experiments and their controls for the advancement of scientific thought, and the attendant advance in philosophy needed to cope with many extant and emerging issues in science and society. We need a common “will” to do so. The rationale is provided herein, if only.

Acknowledgements

John Torday has been a recipient of NIH Grant HL055268. František Baluška is thankful to numerous colleagues for very stimulating discussions on topics analyzed in this article.

EMBO Reports (2019) 20 : e49110 [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]

Contributor Information

John S Torday, Email: ude.alcu@yadrotj .

František Baluška, Email: ed.nnob-inu@aksulab .

• Science Notes Posts
• Contact Science Notes
• Todd Helmenstine Biography
• Anne Helmenstine Biography
• Free Printable Periodic Tables (PDF and PNG)
• Periodic Table Wallpapers
• Interactive Periodic Table
• Periodic Table Posters
• Science Experiments for Kids
• How to Grow Crystals
• Chemistry Projects
• Fire and Flames Projects
• Holiday Science
• Chemistry Problems With Answers
• Physics Problems
• Unit Conversion Example Problems
• Chemistry Worksheets
• Biology Worksheets
• Periodic Table Worksheets
• Physical Science Worksheets
• Science Lab Worksheets
• My Amazon Books

Control Group Definition and Examples

The control group is the set of subjects that does not receive the treatment in a study. In other words, it is the group where the independent variable is held constant. This is important because the control group is a baseline for measuring the effects of a treatment in an experiment or study. A controlled experiment is one which includes one or more control groups.

• The experimental group experiences a treatment or change in the independent variable. In contrast, the independent variable is constant in the control group.
• A control group is important because it allows meaningful comparison. The researcher compares the experimental group to it to assess whether or not there is a relationship between the independent and dependent variable and the magnitude of the effect.
• There are different types of control groups. A controlled experiment has one more control group.

Control Group vs Experimental Group

The only difference between the control group and experimental group is that subjects in the experimental group receive the treatment being studied, while participants in the control group do not. Otherwise, all other variables between the two groups are the same.

Control Group vs Control Variable

A control group is not the same thing as a control variable. A control variable or controlled variable is any factor that is held constant during an experiment. Examples of common control variables include temperature, duration, and sample size. The control variables are the same for both the control and experimental groups.

Types of Control Groups

There are different types of control groups:

• Placebo group : A placebo group receives a placebo , which is a fake treatment that resembles the treatment in every respect except for the active ingredient. Both the placebo and treatment may contain inactive ingredients that produce side effects. Without a placebo group, these effects might be attributed to the treatment.
• Positive control group : A positive control group has conditions that guarantee a positive test result. The positive control group demonstrates an experiment is capable of producing a positive result. Positive controls help researchers identify problems with an experiment.
• Negative control group : A negative control group consists of subjects that are not exposed to a treatment. For example, in an experiment looking at the effect of fertilizer on plant growth, the negative control group receives no fertilizer.
• Natural control group : A natural control group usually is a set of subjects who naturally differ from the experimental group. For example, if you compare the effects of a treatment on women who have had children, the natural control group includes women who have not had children. Non-smokers are a natural control group in comparison to smokers.
• Randomized control group : The subjects in a randomized control group are randomly selected from a larger pool of subjects. Often, subjects are randomly assigned to either the control or experimental group. Randomization reduces bias in an experiment. There are different methods of randomly assigning test subjects.

Control Group Examples

Here are some examples of different control groups in action:

Negative Control and Placebo Group

For example, consider a study of a new cancer drug. The experimental group receives the drug. The placebo group receives a placebo, which contains the same ingredients as the drug formulation, minus the active ingredient. The negative control group receives no treatment. The reason for including the negative group is because the placebo group experiences some level of placebo effect, which is a response to experiencing some form of false treatment.

Positive and Negative Controls

For example, consider an experiment looking at whether a new drug kills bacteria. The experimental group exposes bacterial cultures to the drug. If the group survives, the drug is ineffective. If the group dies, the drug is effective.

The positive control group has a culture of bacteria that carry a drug resistance gene. If the bacteria survive drug exposure (as intended), then it shows the growth medium and conditions allow bacterial growth. If the positive control group dies, it indicates a problem with the experimental conditions. A negative control group of bacteria lacking drug resistance should die. If the negative control group survives, something is wrong with the experimental conditions.

• Bailey, R. A. (2008).  Design of Comparative Experiments . Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-68357-9.
• Chaplin, S. (2006). “The placebo response: an important part of treatment”.  Prescriber . 17 (5): 16–22. doi: 10.1002/psb.344
• Hinkelmann, Klaus; Kempthorne, Oscar (2008).  Design and Analysis of Experiments, Volume I: Introduction to Experimental Design  (2nd ed.). Wiley. ISBN 978-0-471-72756-9.
• Pithon, M.M. (2013). “Importance of the control group in scientific research.” Dental Press J Orthod . 18 (6):13-14. doi: 10.1590/s2176-94512013000600003
• Stigler, Stephen M. (1992). “A Historical View of Statistical Concepts in Psychology and Educational Research”. American Journal of Education . 101 (1): 60–70. doi: 10.1086/444032

Related Posts

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, generate accurate citations for free.

• Knowledge Base

Methodology

• Control Groups and Treatment Groups | Uses & Examples

Control Groups and Treatment Groups | Uses & Examples

Published on July 3, 2020 by Lauren Thomas . Revised on June 22, 2023.

In a scientific study, a control group is used to establish causality by isolating the effect of an independent variable .

Here, researchers change the independent variable in the treatment group and keep it constant in the control group. Then they compare the results of these groups.

Using a control group means that any change in the dependent variable can be attributed to the independent variable. This helps avoid extraneous variables or confounding variables from impacting your work, as well as a few types of research bias , like omitted variable bias .

Table of contents

Control groups in experiments, control groups in non-experimental research, importance of control groups, other interesting articles, frequently asked questions about control groups.

Control groups are essential to experimental design . When researchers are interested in the impact of a new treatment, they randomly divide their study participants into at least two groups:

• The treatment group (also called the experimental group ) receives the treatment whose effect the researcher is interested in.
• The control group receives either no treatment, a standard treatment whose effect is already known, or a placebo (a fake treatment to control for placebo effect ).

The treatment is any independent variable manipulated by the experimenters, and its exact form depends on the type of research being performed. In a medical trial, it might be a new drug or therapy. In public policy studies, it could be a new social policy that some receive and not others.

In a well-designed experiment, all variables apart from the treatment should be kept constant between the two groups. This means researchers can correctly measure the entire effect of the treatment without interference from confounding variables .

• You pay the students in the treatment group for achieving high grades.
• Students in the control group do not receive any money.

Studies can also include more than one treatment or control group. Researchers might want to examine the impact of multiple treatments at once, or compare a new treatment to several alternatives currently available.

• The treatment group gets the new pill.
• Control group 1 gets an identical-looking sugar pill (a placebo)
• Control group 2 gets a pill already approved to treat high blood pressure

Since the only variable that differs between the three groups is the type of pill, any differences in average blood pressure between the three groups can be credited to the type of pill they received.

• The difference between the treatment group and control group 1 demonstrates the effectiveness of the pill as compared to no treatment.
• The difference between the treatment group and control group 2 shows whether the new pill improves on treatments already available on the market.

Prevent plagiarism. Run a free check.

Although control groups are more common in experimental research, they can be used in other types of research too. Researchers generally rely on non-experimental control groups in two cases: quasi-experimental or matching design.

Control groups in quasi-experimental design

While true experiments rely on random assignment to the treatment or control groups, quasi-experimental design uses some criterion other than randomization to assign people.

Often, these assignments are not controlled by researchers, but are pre-existing groups that have received different treatments. For example, researchers could study the effects of a new teaching method that was applied in some classes in a school but not others, or study the impact of a new policy that is implemented in one state but not in the neighboring state.

In these cases, the classes that did not use the new teaching method, or the state that did not implement the new policy, is the control group.

Control groups in matching design

In correlational research , matching represents a potential alternate option when you cannot use either true or quasi-experimental designs.

In matching designs, the researcher matches individuals who received the “treatment”, or independent variable under study, to others who did not–the control group.

Each member of the treatment group thus has a counterpart in the control group identical in every way possible outside of the treatment. This ensures that the treatment is the only source of potential differences in outcomes between the two groups.

Control groups help ensure the internal validity of your research. You might see a difference over time in your dependent variable in your treatment group. However, without a control group, it is difficult to know whether the change has arisen from the treatment. It is possible that the change is due to some other variables.

If you use a control group that is identical in every other way to the treatment group, you know that the treatment–the only difference between the two groups–must be what has caused the change.

For example, people often recover from illnesses or injuries over time regardless of whether they’ve received effective treatment or not. Thus, without a control group, it’s difficult to determine whether improvements in medical conditions come from a treatment or just the natural progression of time.

Risks from invalid control groups

If your control group differs from the treatment group in ways that you haven’t accounted for, your results may reflect the interference of confounding variables instead of your independent variable.

Minimizing this risk

A few methods can aid you in minimizing the risk from invalid control groups.

• Ensure that all potential confounding variables are accounted for , preferably through an experimental design if possible, since it is difficult to control for all the possible confounders outside of an experimental environment.
• Use double-blinding . This will prevent the members of each group from modifying their behavior based on whether they were placed in the treatment or control group, which could then lead to biased outcomes.
• Randomly assign your subjects into control and treatment groups. This method will allow you to not only minimize the differences between the two groups on confounding variables that you can directly observe, but also those you cannot.

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

Here's why students love Scribbr's proofreading services

Discover proofreading & editing

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.

A true experiment (a.k.a. a controlled experiment) always includes at least one control group that doesn’t receive the experimental treatment.

However, some experiments use a within-subjects design to test treatments without a control group. In these designs, you usually compare one group’s outcomes before and after a treatment (instead of comparing outcomes between different groups).

For strong internal validity , it’s usually best to include a control group if possible. Without a control group, it’s harder to be certain that the outcome was caused by the experimental treatment and not by other variables.

A confounding variable , also called a confounder or confounding factor, is a third variable in a study examining a potential cause-and-effect relationship.

A confounding variable is related to both the supposed cause and the supposed effect of the study. It can be difficult to separate the true effect of the independent variable from the effect of the confounding variable.

In your research design , it’s important to identify potential confounding variables and plan how you will reduce their impact.

There are several methods you can use to decrease the impact of confounding variables on your research: restriction, matching, statistical control and randomization.

In restriction , you restrict your sample by only including certain subjects that have the same values of potential confounding variables.

In matching , you match each of the subjects in your treatment group with a counterpart in the comparison group. The matched subjects have the same values on any potential confounding variables, and only differ in the independent variable .

In statistical control , you include potential confounders as variables in your regression .

In randomization , you randomly assign the treatment (or independent variable) in your study to a sufficiently large number of subjects, which allows you to control for all potential confounding variables.

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 article

If 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.

Thomas, L. (2023, June 22). Control Groups and Treatment Groups | Uses & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved August 12, 2024, from https://www.scribbr.com/methodology/control-group/

Is this article helpful?

Lauren Thomas

Other students also liked, what is a controlled experiment | definitions & examples, random assignment in experiments | introduction & examples, single, double, & triple blind study | definition & examples, "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”

• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• Games & Quizzes
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• When did science begin?
• Where was science invented?

control group

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Verywell Mind - What Is a Control Group?
• National Center for Biotechnology Information - PubMed Central - Control Group Design: Enhancing Rigor in Research of Mind-Body Therapies for Depression

control group , the standard to which comparisons are made in an experiment. Many experiments are designed to include a control group and one or more experimental groups; in fact, some scholars reserve the term experiment for study designs that include a control group. Ideally, the control group and the experimental groups are identical in every way except that the experimental groups are subjected to treatments or interventions believed to have an effect on the outcome of interest while the control group is not. Inclusion of a control group greatly strengthens researchers’ ability to draw conclusions from a study. Indeed, only in the presence of a control group can a researcher determine whether a treatment under investigation truly has a significant effect on an experimental group, and the possibility of making an erroneous conclusion is reduced. See also scientific method .

A typical use of a control group is in an experiment in which the effect of a treatment is unknown and comparisons between the control group and the experimental group are used to measure the effect of the treatment. For instance, in a pharmaceutical study to determine the effectiveness of a new drug on the treatment of migraines , the experimental group will be administered the new drug and the control group will be administered a placebo (a drug that is inert, or assumed to have no effect). Each group is then given the same questionnaire and asked to rate the effectiveness of the drug in relieving symptoms . If the new drug is effective, the experimental group is expected to have a significantly better response to it than the control group. Another possible design is to include several experimental groups, each of which is given a different dosage of the new drug, plus one control group. In this design, the analyst will compare results from each of the experimental groups to the control group. This type of experiment allows the researcher to determine not only if the drug is effective but also the effectiveness of different dosages. In the absence of a control group, the researcher’s ability to draw conclusions about the new drug is greatly weakened, due to the placebo effect and other threats to validity. Comparisons between the experimental groups with different dosages can be made without including a control group, but there is no way to know if any of the dosages of the new drug are more or less effective than the placebo.

It is important that every aspect of the experimental environment be as alike as possible for all subjects in the experiment. If conditions are different for the experimental and control groups, it is impossible to know whether differences between groups are actually due to the difference in treatments or to the difference in environment. For example, in the new migraine drug study, it would be a poor study design to administer the questionnaire to the experimental group in a hospital setting while asking the control group to complete it at home. Such a study could lead to a misleading conclusion, because differences in responses between the experimental and control groups could have been due to the effect of the drug or could have been due to the conditions under which the data were collected. For instance, perhaps the experimental group received better instructions or was more motivated by being in the hospital setting to give accurate responses than the control group.

In non-laboratory and nonclinical experiments, such as field experiments in ecology or economics , even well-designed experiments are subject to numerous and complex variables that cannot always be managed across the control group and experimental groups. Randomization, in which individuals or groups of individuals are randomly assigned to the treatment and control groups, is an important tool to eliminate selection bias and can aid in disentangling the effects of the experimental treatment from other confounding factors. Appropriate sample sizes are also important.

A control group study can be managed in two different ways. In a single-blind study, the researcher will know whether a particular subject is in the control group, but the subject will not know. In a double-blind study , neither the subject nor the researcher will know which treatment the subject is receiving. In many cases, a double-blind study is preferable to a single-blind study, since the researcher cannot inadvertently affect the results or their interpretation by treating a control subject differently from an experimental subject.

Look up a word, learn it forever.

Control experiment.

Other forms: control experiments

• noun an experiment designed to control for variables affecting the results of another experiment see more see less type of: experiment , experimentation the act of conducting a controlled test or investigation

Sign up now (it’s free!)

Whether you’re a teacher or a learner, vocabulary.com can put you or your class on the path to systematic vocabulary improvement..

• Daily Crossword
• Word Puzzle
• Word Finder
• Word of the Day
• Synonym of the Day
• Word of the Year
• Language stories
• All featured
• Gender and sexuality
• All pop culture
• Writing hub
• Grammar essentials
• Commonly confused
• All writing tips
• Pop culture
• Writing tips

Advertisement

controlled experiment

• an experiment or trial that uses controls, usually separating the subjects into one or more control groups and experimental groups.

Word History and Origins

Origin of controlled experiment 1

Example Sentences

In examining whether a school education improves the mental health of children, for example, no economist can design and run a controlled experiment.

Lysenko never undertook any controlled experiments on increased crop yield or the inheritance of acquired characteristics.

So, through a series of controlled experiments, the team nudged participants toward the minus sign.

While our controlled experiments showed DyRET could adapt its body successfully to surfaces it had walked on before, the real world is a much more variable and unpredictable place.

That is, the study wasn’t a randomized or controlled experiment.

A country of 300 million people is a permanent floating controlled experiment.

• To save this word, you'll need to log in. Log In

controlled experiment

Definition of controlled experiment

Word history.

1893, in the meaning defined above

Dictionary Entries Near controlled experiment

controlled school

Cite this Entry

“Controlled experiment.” Merriam-Webster.com Dictionary , Merriam-Webster, https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/controlled%20experiment. Accessed 14 Aug. 2024.

Kids Definition

Kids definition of controlled experiment.

Subscribe to America's largest dictionary and get thousands more definitions and advanced search—ad free!

Can you solve 4 words at once?

Word of the day.

See Definitions and Examples »

Get Word of the Day daily email!

Popular in Grammar & Usage

Plural and possessive names: a guide, commonly misspelled words, how to use em dashes (—), en dashes (–) , and hyphens (-), absent letters that are heard anyway, how to use accents and diacritical marks, popular in wordplay, 8 words for lesser-known musical instruments, it's a scorcher words for the summer heat, 7 shakespearean insults to make life more interesting, 10 words from taylor swift songs (merriam's version), 9 superb owl words, games & quizzes.

Information

• Author Services

Initiatives

You 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 Viewer

When games influence words: gaming addiction among college students increases verbal aggression through risk-biased drifting in decision-making.

1. Introduction

1.1. game addiction and game violence, 1.2. verbal aggression, 1.3. inhibitory control, 1.4. risk preference, 1.5. mediation model, 1.6. the present study, 2.1. participants, 2.2. research instruments, 2.2.1. questionnaires, 2.2.2. antisaccade task, 2.2.3. go/no-go task, 2.2.4. the cup task, 2.3. procedure, 2.4. statistical analysis, 2.4.1. validity analysis, 2.4.2. the hierarchical drift diffusion model, 2.4.3. mediation model, 3.1. correlational analysis and the cut-off point for gaming addiction, 3.2. validity analysis, 3.3. hierarchical drift diffusion model, 3.4. mediation model, 4. discussion, 4.1. mediation model, 4.2. risk preference, 4.3. inhibitory control, 4.4. contribution of the present study, 4.5. limitations, 5. conclusions, supplementary materials, author contributions, institutional review board statement, informed consent statement, data availability statement, conflicts of interest.

• Statista. Number of Video Gamers Worldwide in 2021, by Region. 2022. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/293304/number-video-gamers/#:~:text=Figures%20in%202020%20showed%20that,across%20the%20globe%20in%202020 (accessed on 23 October 2023).
• Statista. Number of Video Gamers in the United States in 2022, by Engagement Level. 2022. Available online: https://www.statista.com/statistics/300942/number-core-gamers-usa/ (accessed on 23 October 2023).
• Bickham, D.S. Current Research and Viewpoints on Internet Addiction in Adolescents. Curr. Pediatr. Rep. 2021 , 9 , 1–10. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Chen, Y.-Y.; Yim, H.; Lee, T.-H. Negative Impact of Daily Screen Use on Inhibitory Control Network in Preadolescence: A Two-Year Follow-up Study. Dev. Cogn. Neurosci. 2023 , 60 , 101218. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Lin, H.-P.; Chen, K.-L.; Chou, W.; Yuan, K.-S.; Yen, S.-Y.; Chen, Y.-S.; Chow, J.C. Prolonged Touch Screen Device Usage Is Associated with Emotional and Behavioral Problems, but Not Language Delay, in Toddlers. Infant Behav. Dev. 2020 , 58 , 101424. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Wiederhold, B.K. Kids Will Find a Way: The Benefits of Social Video Games. Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw. 2021 , 24 , 213–214. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Sokolov, A.A.; Collignon, A.; Bieler-Aeschlimann, M. Serious Video Games and Virtual Reality for Prevention and Neurorehabilitation of Cognitive Decline Because of Aging and Neurodegeneration. Curr. Opin. Neurol. 2020 , 33 , 239–248. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Anderson, C.A.; Bushman, B.J. Human Aggression. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2001 , 52 , 27–51. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Buckley, K.E.; Anderson, C.A. A Theoretical Model of the Effects and Consequences of Playing Video Games. In Playing Video Games: Motives, Responses, and Consequences ; Vorderer, P., Bryant, J., Eds.; Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers: Mahwah, NJ, USA, 2006; pp. 363–378. [ Google Scholar ]
• Drummond, A.; Sauer, J.D.; Ferguson, C.J. Do Longitudinal Studies Support Long-Term Relationships between Aggressive Game Play and Youth Aggressive Behaviour? A Meta-Analytic Examination. R. Soc. Open Sci. 2020 , 7 , 200373. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mariano, T.E.; Gouveia, V.V.; Pimentel, C.E. The Effect of Video Games on Positive and Negative Cognitions. RPI 2020 , 12 , 7. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Shoshani, A.; Braverman, S.; Meirow, G. Video Games and Close Relations: Attachment and Empathy as Predictors of Children’s and Adolescents’ Video Game Social Play and Socio-Emotional Functioning. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2021 , 114 , 106578. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Tian, Y.; Gao, M.; Wang, P.; Gao, F. The Effects of Violent Video Games and Shyness on Individuals’ Aggressive Behaviors. Aggress. Behav. 2020 , 46 , 16–24. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lee, E.-J.; Kim, H.S.; Choi, S. Violent Video Games and Aggression: Stimulation or Catharsis or Both? Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw. 2021 , 24 , 41–47. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Weber, R.; Behr, K.M.; Fisher, J.T.; Lonergan, C.; Quebral, C. Video Game Violence and Interactivity: Effect or Equivalence? J. Commun. 2020 , 70 , 219–244. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Li, S.; Wu, Z.; Zhang, Y.; Xu, M.; Wang, X.; Ma, X. Internet Gaming Disorder and Aggression: A Meta-Analysis of Teenagers and Young Adults. Front. Public Health 2023 , 11 , 1111889. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Zhang, Q.; Cao, Y.; Tian, J. Effects of violent video games on players’ and observers’ aggressive cognitions and aggressive behaviors. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 2021 , 203 , 105005. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Khoo, S.S.; Yang, H. Smartphone Addiction and Checking Behaviors Predict Aggression: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach. IJERPH 2021 , 18 , 13020. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Addo, P.C.; Fang, J.; Kulbo, N.B.; Gumah, B.; Dagadu, J.C.; Li, L. Violent Video Games and Aggression Among Young Adults: The Moderating Effects of Adverse Environmental Factors. Cyberpsychology Behav. Soc. Netw. 2021 , 24 , 17–23. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Peng, C.; Guo, T.; Cheng, J.; Wang, M.; Rong, F.; Zhang, S.; Tan, Y.; Ding, H.; Wang, Y.; Yu, Y. Sex Differences in Association between Internet Addiction and Aggression among Adolescents Aged 12 to 18 in Mainland of China. J. Affect. Disord. 2022 , 312 , 198–207. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders , 5th ed.; American Psychiatric Publishing: Arlington, VA, USA, 2013. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Anderson, C.A.; Bushman, B.J.; Bartholow, B.D.; Cantor, J.; Christakis, D.; Coyne, S.M.; Donnerstein, E.; Brockmyer, J.F.; Gentile, D.A.; Green, C.S.; et al. Screen Violence and Youth Behavior. Pediatrics 2017 , 140 (Suppl. 2), S142–S147. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Király, O.; Sleczka, P.; Pontes, H.M.; Urbán, R.; Griffiths, M.D.; Demetrovics, Z. Validation of the Ten-Item Internet Gaming Disorder Test (IGDT-10) and evaluation of the nine DSM-5 Internet Gaming Disorder criteria. Addict. Behav. 2017 , 64 , 253–260. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mohammad, S.; Jan, R.A.; Alsaedi, S.L. Symptoms, Mechanisms, and Treatments of Video Game Addiction. Cureus 2023 , 15 , e36957. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Mihara, S.; Higuchi, S. Cross-sectional and longitudinal epidemiological studies of Internet gaming disorder: A systematic review of the literature. Psychiatry Clin. Neurosci. 2017 , 71 , 425–444. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Adachi, P.J.; Willoughby, T. The Longitudinal Association between Competitive Video Game Play and Aggression among Adolescents and Young Adults. Child Dev. 2016 , 87 , 1877–1892. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Wang, L.; Yang, G.; Zheng, Y.; Li, Z.; Qi, Y.; Li, Q.; Liu, X. Enhanced neural responses in specific phases of reward processing in individuals with Internet gaming disorder. J. Behav. Addict. 2021 , 10 , 99–111. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Fuji, K.; Yoshida, F. The influences of interaction during online gaming on sociability and aggression in real life. Shinrigaku Kenkyu Jpn. J. Psychol. 2010 , 80 , 494–503. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Ducharme, P.; Kahn, J.; Vaudreuil, C.; Gusman, M.; Waber, D.; Ross, A.; Rotenberg, A.; Rober, A.; Kimball, K.; Peechatka, A.L.; et al. A “Proof of Concept” Randomized Controlled Trial of a Video Game Requiring Emotional Regulation to Augment Anger Control Training. Front. Psychiatry 2021 , 12 , 591906. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Chen, S.; Wei, M.; Wang, X.; Liao, J.; Li, J.; Liu, Y. Competitive Video Game Exposure Increases Aggression through Impulsivity in Chinese Adolescents: Evidence from a Multi-Method Study. J. Youth Adolesc. 2024; advance online publication . [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Wei, L.; Zhang, S.; Turel, O.; Bechara, A.; He, Q. A Tripartite Neurocognitive Model of Internet Gaming Disorder. Front. Psychiatry 2017 , 8 , 285. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Gong, Y.; Li, Q.; Li, J.; Wang, X.; Jiang, W.; Zhao, W. Does Early Adversity Predict Aggression Among Chinese Male Violent Juvenile Offenders? The Mediating Role of Life History Strategy and the Moderating Role of Meaning in Life. BMC Psychol. 2023 , 11 , 382. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Glascock, J. Contribution of Verbally Aggressive TV Exposure and Perceived Reality to Trait Verbal Aggression. Commun. Rep. 2021 , 34 , 151–164. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• McCarthy, B.; Boland, A.; Murphy, S.; Cooney, C. Vocally Disruptive Behavior: A Case Report and Literature Review. Ir. J. Psychol. Med. 2022 , 39 , 97–102. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Poling, D.V.; Smith, S.W. Perceptions about Verbal Aggression: Survey of Secondary Students with Emotional and Behavioral Disorders. J. Emot. Behav. Disord. 2023 , 31 , 14–26. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Infante, D.A.; Chandler, T.A.; Rudd, J.E. Test of an Argumentative Skill Deficiency Model of Interpersonal Violence. Commun. Monogr. 1989 , 56 , 163–177. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Joshi, A.; Sharma, K.; Sigdel, D.; Thapa, T.; Mehta, R. Internet Gaming Disorder and Aggression among Students on School Closure during COVID-19 Pandemic. J. Nepal Health Res. Counc. 2022 , 20 , 41–46. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Columb, D.; Wong, M.C.; O’Mahony, V.; Harrington, C.; Griffiths, M.D.; O’Gara, C. Gambling Advertising during Live Televised Male Sporting Events in Ireland: A Descriptive Study. Ir. J. Psychol. Med. 2023 , 40 , 134–142. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• McNamee, P.; Mendolia, S.; Yerokhin, O. Social Media Use and Emotional and Behavioural Outcomes in Adolescence: Evidence from British Longitudinal Data. Econ. Hum. Biol. 2021 , 41 , 100992. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Parrish, K.H.; Smith, M.R.; Moran, L.; Ruberry, E.J.; Lengua, L.J. Tests of Bidirectional Relations of TV Exposure and Effortful Control as Predictors of Adjustment in Early Childhood in the Context of Family Risk Factors. Infant Child Dev. 2022 , 31 , e2314. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Limtrakul, N.; Louthrenoo, O.; Narkpongphun, A.; Boonchooduang, N.; Chonchaiya, W. Media Use and Psychosocial Adjustment in Children and Adolescents. J. Paediatr. Child Health 2018 , 54 , 296–301. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Varghese, N.E.; Santoro, E.; Lugo, A.; Madrid-Valero, J.J.; Ghislandi, S.; Torbica, A.; Gallus, S. The Role of Technology and Social Media Use in Sleep-Onset Difficulties among Italian Adolescents: Cross-sectional Study. J. Med. Internet Res. 2021 , 23 , e20319. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Brand, M.; Wegmann, E.; Stark, R.; Müller, A.; Wölfling, K.; Robbins, T.W.; Potenza, M.N. The Interaction of Person-Affect-Cognition-Execution (I-PACE) Model for Addictive Behaviors: Update, Generalization to Addictive Behaviors beyond Internet-Use Disorders, and Specification of the Process Character of Addictive Behaviors. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2019 , 104 , 1–10. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Argyriou, E.; Davison, C.B.; Lee, T.T.C. Response Inhibition and Internet Gaming Disorder: A Meta-analysis. Addict. Behav. 2017 , 71 , 54–60. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Bounoua, N.; Spielberg, J.M.; Sadeh, N. Clarifying the Synergistic Effects of Emotion Dysregulation and Inhibitory Control on Physical Aggression. Hum. Brain Mapp. 2022 , 43 , 5358–5369. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dong, G.-H.; Potenza, M.N. Considering Gender Differences in the Study and Treatment of Internet Gaming Disorder. J. Psychiatr. Res. 2022 , 153 , 25–29. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Qiu, B.; Chen, Y.; He, X.; Liu, T.; Wang, S.; Zhang, W. Short-Term Touch-Screen Video Game Playing Improves the Inhibition Ability. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021 , 18 , 6884. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Goldstein, R.; Volkow, N. Dysfunction of the prefrontal cortex in addiction: Neuroimaging findings and clinical implications. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 2011 , 12 , 652–669. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Everitt, B.J.; Robbins, T.W. Drug Addiction: Updating Actions to Habits to Compulsions Ten Years On. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2016 , 67 , 23–50. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Amlung, M.; Vedelago, L.; Acker, J.; Balodis, I.; MacKillop, J. Steep delay discounting and addictive behavior: A meta-analysis of continuous associations. Addiction 2017 , 112 , 51–62. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Turel, O.; He, Q.; Brevers, D.; Bechara, A. Delay discounting mediates the association between posterior insular cortex volume and social media addiction symptoms. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 2018 , 18 , 694–704. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Verdejo-Garcia, A.; Pérez-García, M.; Bechara, A. Emotion, decision-making and substance dependence: A somatic-marker model of addiction. Curr. Neuropharmacol. 2006 , 4 , 17–31. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Noh, D.; Shim, M.S. Factors influencing smartphone overdependence among adolescents. Sci. Rep. 2024 , 14 , 7725. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Wang, H.; Xu, S.; Wang, S.; Wang, Y.; Chen, R. Using decision tree to predict non-suicidal self-injury among young adults: The role of depression, childhood maltreatment and recent bullying victimization. Eur. J. Psychotraumatol. 2024 , 15 , 2322390. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Dooren, M.M.M.V.; Visch, V.T.; Spijkerman, R. The Design and Application of Game Rewards in Youth Addiction Care. Information 2019 , 10 , 126. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Zheng, Y.; He, J.; Fan, L.; Qiu, Y. Reduction of Symptom after a Combined Behavioral Intervention for Reward Sensitivity and Rash Impulsiveness in Internet Gaming Disorder: A Comparative Study. J. Psychiatr. Res. 2022 , 153 , 159–166. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Dell’Osso, B.; Di Bernardo, I.; Vismara, M.; Piccoli, E.; Giorgetti, F.; Molteni, L.; Fineberg, N.A.; Virzì, C.; Bowden-Jones, H.; Truzoli, R.; et al. Managing Problematic Usage of the Internet and Related Disorders in an Era of Diagnostic Transition: An Updated Review. CPEMH 2021 , 17 , 61–74. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Müller, S.M.; Antons, S.; Wegmann, E.; Ioannidis, K.; King, D.L.; Potenza, M.N.; Chamberlain, S.R.; Brand, M. A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Risky Decision-making in Specific Domains of Problematic Use of the Internet: Evidence across Different Decision-making Tasks. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2023 , 152 , 105271. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Kim, Y.-J.; Lim, J.A.; Lee, J.Y.; Oh, S.; Kim, S.N.; Kim, D.J.; Ha, J.E.; Kwon, J.S.; Choi, J.-S. Impulsivity and Compulsivity in Internet Gaming Disorder: A Comparison with Obsessive–Compulsive Disorder and Alcohol Use Disorder. J. Behav. Addict. 2017 , 6 , 545–553. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Kräplin, A.; Scherbaum, S.; Kraft, E.-M.; Rehbein, F.; Bühringer, G.; Goschke, T.; Mößle, T. The Role of Inhibitory Control and Decision-making in the Course of Internet Gaming Disorder. J. Behav. Addict. 2021 , 9 , 990–1001. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Vega, A.; Cabello, R.; Megías-Robles, A.; Gómez-Leal, R.; Fernández-Berrocal, P. Emotional Intelligence and Aggressive Behaviors in Adolescents: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Trauma Violence Abus. 2022 , 23 , 1173–1183. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Yan, W.S.; Chen, R.T.; Liu, M.M.; Zheng, D.H. Monetary Reward Discounting, Inhibitory Control, and Trait Impulsivity in Young Adults with Internet Gaming Disorder and Nicotine Dependence. Front. Psychiatry 2021 , 12 , 628933. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Noël, X.; Brevers, D.; Bechara, A. A neurocognitive approach to understanding the neurobiology of addiction. Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 2013 , 23 , 632–638. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lin, Y.; Feng, T. Lateralization of self-control over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in decision-making: A systematic review and meta-analytic evidence from noninvasive brain stimulation. Cogn. Affect. Behav. Neurosci. 2024 , 24 , 19–41. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Laino Chiavegatti, G.; Floresco, S.B. Acute stress differentially alters reward-related decision making and inhibitory control under threat of punishment. Neurobiol. Stress 2024 , 30 , 100633. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Pontes, H.M.; Király, O.; Demetrovics, Z.; Griffiths, M.D. The Conceptualisation and Measurement of DSM-5 Internet Gaming Disorder: The Development of the IGD-20 Test. PLoS ONE 2014 , 9 , e110137. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Carlo, G.; Randall, B.A. The Development of a Measure of Prosocial Behaviors for Late Adolescents. J. Youth Adolesc. 2002 , 31 , 31–44. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Buss, A.H.; Perry, M. Personality Processes and Individual Differences. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1992 , 63 , 452–459. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Miyake, A.; Friedman, N.P.; Emerson, M.J.; Witzki, A.H.; Howerter, A.; Wager, T.D. The Unity and Diversity of Executive Functions and Their Contributions to Complex “Frontal Lobe” Tasks: A Latent Variable Analysis. Cogn. Psychol. 2000 , 41 , 49–100. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Nosek, B.A.; Greenwald, A.G.; Banaji, M.R. Understanding and Using the Implicit Association Test: II. Method Variables and Construct Validity. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 2005 , 31 , 166–180. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Levin, I.P.; Hart, S.S. Risk Preferences in Young Children: Early Evidence of Individual Differences in Reaction to Potential Gains and Losses. J. Behav. Decis. Mak. 2003 , 16 , 397–413. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gelman, A.; Rubin, D.B. Markov Chain Monte Carlo Methods in Biostatistics. Stat. Methods Med. Res. 1996 , 5 , 339–355. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Saleh, Y.; Jarratt-Barnham, I.; Petitet, P.; Fernandez-Egea, E.; Manohar, S.G.; Husain, M. Negative symptoms and cognitive impairment are associated with distinct motivational deficits in treatment resistant schizophrenia. Mol. Psychiatry 2023 , 28 , 4831–4841. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Jun, W. A Study on the Cause Analysis of Cyberbullying in Korean Adolescents. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2020 , 17 , 4648. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• She, Y.; Yang, Z.; Xu, L.; Li, L. The Association between Violent Video Game Exposure and Sub-Types of School Bullying in Chinese Adolescents. Front. Psychiatry 2022 , 13 , 1026625. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Johnson, E.P.; Samp, J.A. Stoicism and Verbal Aggression in Serial Arguments: The Roles of Perceived Power, Perceived Resolvability, and Frequency of Arguments. J. Interpers. Violence 2022 , 37 , NP11836–NP11856. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Dong, G.; Huang, J.; Du, X. Enhanced reward sensitivity and decreased loss sensitivity in Internet addicts: An fMRI study during a guessing task. J. Psychiatr. Res. 2011 , 45 , 1525–1529. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Byrd, A.L.; Hawes, S.W.; Waller, R.; Delgado, M.R.; Sutherland, M.T.; Dick, A.S.; Trucco, E.M.; Riedel, M.C.; Pacheco-Colón, I.; Laird, A.R.; et al. Neural response to monetary loss among youth with disruptive behavior disorders and callous-unemotional traits in the ABCD study. NeuroImage Clin. 2021 , 32 , 102810. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Wang, L.; Tian, M.; Zheng, Y.; Li, Q.; Liu, X. Reduced Loss Aversion and Inhibitory Control in Adolescents with Internet Gaming Disorder. Psychol. Addict. Behav. 2020 , 34 , 484–496. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Bediou, B.; Adams, D.M.; Mayer, R.E.; Tipton, E.; Green, C.S.; Bavelier, D. Meta-Analysis of Action Video Game Impact on Perceptual, Attentional, and Cognitive Skills. Psychol. Bull. 2018 , 144 , 77–110. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Pichon, S.; Bediou, B.; Antico, L.; Jack, R.; Garrod, O.; Sims, C.; Green, C.S.; Schyns, P.; Bavelier, D. Emotion perception in habitual players of action video games. Emotion 2021 , 21 , 1324–1339. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Foland-Ross, L.C.; Buckingam, B.; Mauras, N.; Arbelaez, A.M.; Tamborlane, W.V.; Tsalikian, E.; Cato, A.; Tong, G.; Englert, K.; Mazaika, P.K.; et al. Diabetes Research in Children Network (DirecNet). Executive task-based brain function in children with type 1 diabetes: An observational study. PLoS Med. 2019 , 16 , e1002979. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Lamp, G.; Sola Molina, R.M.; Hugrass, L.; Beaton, R.; Crewther, D.; Crewther, S.G. Kinematic Studies of the Go/No-Go Task as a Dynamic Sensorimotor Inhibition Task for Assessment of Motor and Executive Function in Stroke Patients: An Exploratory Study in a Neurotypical Sample. Brain Sci. 2022 , 12 , 1581. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Cabedo-Peris, J.; González-Sala, F.; Merino-Soto, C.; Pablo, J.Á.C.; Toledano-Toledano, F. Decision Making in Addictive Behaviors Based on Prospect Theory: A Systematic Review. Healthcare 2022 , 10 , 1659. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Schiebener, J.; Zamarian, L.; Delazer, M.; Brand, M. Executive functions, categorization of probabilities, and learning from feedback: What does really matter for decision making under explicit risk conditions? J. Clin. Exp. Neuropsychol. 2011 , 33 , 1025–1039. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Toplak, M.E.; Sorge, G.B.; Benoit, A.; West, R.F.; Stanovich, K.E. Decision-making and cognitive abilities: A review of associations between Iowa Gambling Task performance, executive functions, and intelligence. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 2010 , 30 , 562–581. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Stover, A.D.; Shulkin, J.; Lac, A.; Rapp, T. A meta-analysis of cognitive reappraisal and personal resilience. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 2024 , 110 , 102428. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Etxandi, M.; Baenas, I.; Mora-Maltas, B.; Granero, R.; Fernández-Aranda, F.; Tovar, S.; Solé-Morata, N.; Lucas, I.; Casado, S.; Gómez-Peña, M.; et al. Are Signals Regulating Energy Homeostasis Related to Neuropsychological and Clinical Features of Gambling Disorder? A Case-Control Study. Nutrients 2022 , 14 , 5084. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Riek, H.C.; Brien, D.C.; Coe, B.C.; Huang, J.; Perkins, J.E.; Yep, R.; McLaughlin, P.M.; Orange, J.B.; Peltsch, A.J.; Roberts, A.C.; et al. Cognitive correlates of antisaccade behaviour across multiple neurodegenerative diseases. Brain Commun. 2023 , 5 , fcad049. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Johansson, M.E.; Cameron, I.G.M.; Van der Kolk, N.M.; de Vries, N.M.; Klimars, E.; Toni, I.; Bloem, B.R.; Helmich, R.C. Aerobic Exercise Alters Brain Function and Structure in Parkinson’s Disease: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Ann. Neurol. 2022 , 91 , 203–216. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Magee, K.E.; McClaine, R.; Laurianti, V.; Connell, A.M. Effects of binge drinking and depression on cognitive-control processes during an emotional Go/No-Go task in emerging adults. J. Psychiatr. Res. 2023 , 162 , 161–169. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Reed, P. Impact of Social Media Use on Executive Function. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2023 , 141 , 107598. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Gao, Q.; Jia, G.; Zhao, J.; Zhang, D. Inhibitory Control in Excessive Social Networking Users: Evidence From an Event-Related Potential-Based Go-Nogo Task. Front. Psychol. 2019 , 10 , 1810. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Casey, B.J.; Jones, R.M.; Hare, T.A. The Adolescent Brain. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 2008 , 1124 , 111–126. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Galvan, A.; Hare, T.A.; Parra, C.E.; Penn, J.; Voss, H.; Glover, G.; Casey, B.J. Earlier Development of the Accumbens Relative to Orbitofrontal Cortex Might Underlie Risk-Taking Behavior in Adolescents. J. Neurosci. 2006 , 26 , 6885–6892. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Galvan, A.; Hare, T.; Voss, H.; Glover, G.; Casey, B. Risk-Taking and the Adolescent Brain: Who Is at Risk? Dev. Sci. 2007 , 10 , F8–F14. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Grace, A.A.; Floresco, S.B.; Goto, Y.; Lodge, D.J. Regulation of Firing of Dopaminergic Neurons and Control of Goal-Directed Behaviors. Trends Neurosci. 2007 , 30 , 220–227. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Larche, C.J.; Chini, K.; Lee, C.; Dixon, M.J. To Pay or Just Play? Examining Individual Differences Between Purchasers and Earners of Loot Boxes in Overwatch. J. Gambl. Stud. 2023 , 39 , 625–643. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Zendle, D.; Flick, C.; Halgarth, D.; Ballou, N.; Cutting, J.; Drachen, A. The Relationship Between Lockdowns and Video Game Playtime: Multilevel Time-Series Analysis Using Massive-Scale Data Telemetry. J. Med. Internet Res. 2023 , 25 , e40190. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Lindenberg, K.; Holtmann, M. Einzug der Computerspielstörung als Verhaltenssucht in die ICD-11. Z. Kinder-Jugendpsychiatr. Psychother. 2022 , 50 , 1–7. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Lindenberg, K.; Kindt, S.; Szász-Janocha, C. Effectiveness of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy–Based Intervention in Preventing Gaming Disorder and Unspecified Internet Use Disorder in Adolescents: A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Netw. Open 2022 , 5 , e2148995. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ] [ PubMed ]
• Zack, M.; St. George, R.; Clark, L. Dopaminergic signaling of uncertainty and the aetiology of gambling addiction. Prog. Neuro-Psychopharmacol. Biol. Psychiatry 2020 , 99 , 109853. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Dong, G.H.; Dai, J.; Potenza, M.N. Ten years of research on the treatments of internet gaming disorder: A scoping review and directions for future research. J. Behav. Addict. 2024 , 13 , 51–65. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Qin, L.; Liu, Q.; Luo, T. Reliability and Validity of the Chinese Version of the Internet Gaming Disorder Scale among College Students. Chin. J. Clin. Psychol. 2020 , 28 , 33–36. [ Google Scholar ] [ CrossRef ]
• Kou, Y.; Hong, H.; Tan, C.; Li, L. Revision of the Prosocial Tendency Scale for Adolescents. Psychol. Dev. Educ. 2007 , 1 , 112–117. [ Google Scholar ]
• Li, X.; Fei, L.; Zhang, Y.; Niu, Y.; Tong, Y.; Yang, S. Revision and Reliability and Validity of the Chinese Version of the Buss and Perry Aggression Questionnaire. Chin. J. Neurol. Psychiatr. 2011 , 10 , 607–613. [ Google Scholar ]

Click here to enlarge figure

Share and Cite

Teng, H.; Zhu, L.; Zhang, X.; Qiu, B. When Games Influence Words: Gaming Addiction among College Students Increases Verbal Aggression through Risk-Biased Drifting in Decision-Making. Behav. Sci. 2024 , 14 , 699. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14080699

Teng H, Zhu L, Zhang X, Qiu B. When Games Influence Words: Gaming Addiction among College Students Increases Verbal Aggression through Risk-Biased Drifting in Decision-Making. Behavioral Sciences . 2024; 14(8):699. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14080699

Teng, Huina, Lixin Zhu, Xuanyu Zhang, and Boyu Qiu. 2024. "When Games Influence Words: Gaming Addiction among College Students Increases Verbal Aggression through Risk-Biased Drifting in Decision-Making" Behavioral Sciences 14, no. 8: 699. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs14080699

Article Metrics

Article access statistics, supplementary material.

ZIP-Document (ZIP, 106 KiB)

Further Information

Mdpi initiatives, follow mdpi.

Subscribe to receive issue release notifications and newsletters from MDPI journals