Chapter 9
Answers to
Study Questions
9.1. What is an experiment,
and what are the significant components of this definition?
The experiment is a
situation in which a researcher attempts to objectively observe phenomena which
are made to occur in a strictly controlled situation where one or more
variables are varied and the others are held constant.
·
The
definition says that we should attempt to make impartial and unbiased
observations in the experimental situation. In short, objectivity is the
ideal to which experimenters strive even though perfect objectivity is
impossible to achieve.
·
In
experiments phenomena are made to occur. The phenomena are observable
events; they are the conditions presented to the participants. Specifically,
these phenomena or conditions are the levels of the independent variable that
are made to occur (e.g., one group is given a pill and another group is given a
placebo). This is the idea of active manipulation. The idea is that an
experimental researcher does something and then observes the outcome.
(Manipulation is the key defining characteristic of an experiment, as you
learned in chapter 2.)
·
The
observations in the laboratory experiment are made under conditions set up and
controlled by the researcher; if the experiment has multiple groups then the
researcher attempts standardize the conditions for all groups with the only
difference being that the different groups get different levels of the
independent variable. The key idea is that the researcher tries to set up a
situation where the ONLY systematic difference between the groups to be that
they got different levels of the independent variable.
·
The
researcher attempts to hold all variables other than the independent
variable constant. This is best done by first, randomly assigning
participants to the groups (which will “equate” the groups on all known and
unknown variables at the beginning of the study), and second, by standardizing
the conditions as much as possible so that the only difference that occurs
during the experiment is the administration of the levels of the independent
variable.
Here is some additional
information: Experiments, like any other approach that hopes to deal with
causality, must meet the three necessary conditions for establishing
cause and effect: 1) establish a relationship, 2) check for proper time order,
and 3) make sure there are no plausible alternative explanations. The “strong”
experimental designs discussed in this chapter are the best arrangement we have
for isolating causal effects and providing evidence of cause and effect. If you
have a comparison group and random assignment, for example, then you will be
able to see if there is a relationship between the independent and dependent
variables (just check to see if the group means become different after the
treatment), you will be able to establish proper time order (because you can
observe the dependent variable after the independent variable is administered),
and you have ruled out any alternative explanation that suggests that the
difference between the groups at the end of the experiment is due to
differences in the initial composition of the groups (because when you randomly
assign participants to groups, the groups will, on average, be equivalent).
Remember that random assignment (if present) equates the groups (in a
probabilistic way) on all extraneous variables at the beginning of the
experiment. That’s the “secret ingredient” of the strongest experimental
designs. It’s the secret condition that you should always try to use if
possible.
Hers is some more
terminology that is important: an independent variable is a variable
that is presumed to cause a change in another variable, and in experimental
research, the independent variable is the variable that is manipulated by the
researcher. The dependent variable is a variable that is presumed to be
influenced by one or more independent variables. The basic aim of an
experiment is to show that changes in the manipulated IV cause changes to occur
in the DV.
9.2. What are the different
ways a researcher can use to manipulate an independent variable?
Figure 9.1 shows three ways
the IV can be manipulated. First, the IV can be manipulated by presenting a
condition or treatment to one group and withholding the condition or treatment
from another group (the presence or absence technique). For example, the
researcher may give a new drug to one group and a placebo (a pill with no
active ingredient) to the control group.
Second, the IV can be manipulated by varying the amount of a condition
or variable (the amount technique). For example, the researcher may
provide three levels of instruction to the participants in three groups (none,
one hour, and five hours). Third, the IV can be manipulated by varying the type
of the condition or treatment administered (the type technique). For
example, the researcher may provide client-centered counseling to one group of
depressed patients and provide rational-emotive therapy to the other group of
depressed patients.
9.3. What is meant by the
term experimental control, and how is experimental control related to differential
influence within the experiment?
Experimental control refers to the researcher’s
attempt to eliminate any differential influence of extraneous variables. In
multi-group designs, the key is to eliminate the problem of differential
influence of any and all extraneous variables; this is done by making the
groups similar on any important extraneous variables at the start of the
experiment and during the experiment (i.e., it is done by achieving
experimental control). In other words, you want the extraneous variables (the
bad variables that can confound or confuse your conclusions) to have a constant
effect on the DV (i.e., you want to eliminate the problem of differential
influence).
For example, if IQ is related to the DV, you want make
sure that the different groups are composed of people with similar IQ levels so
that the groups will not differ on the extraneous IQ variable. Also, during the
conduct of the experiment it is important to treat all groups the same (except
for administration of the IV). (In the next chapter we will talk about how to
obtain some control for extraneous variables in single-group and single-case
experimental designs.) In multi-group designs (designs with two or more
comparison groups) the goal is to make the groups the same on all extraneous
variables which might have an influence on the DV through the operation of
differential influence. Then we systematically vary the levels of the IV.
Finally, if we did this, we will be able to conclude that the group differences
that emerge are due to the IV rather than due to some extraneous variable. In
short, we will be able to conclude that the IV affected the DV, and that what
we observed was not due to some other variable. We will have established the
causal link between the IV and DV (which is the goal of experimental research).
In summary, differential influence is bad and we want
to eliminate it. We eliminate it through experimental control, which is good.
9.4. What is random assignment,
and what is the difference between random assignment and random selection?
Random assignment is the strongest of all of
the experimental control techniques; by randomly forming groups, the groups
will be probabilistically equated on all known and unknown variables at the
start of the experiment. As you can see, this is very powerful. Random
selection is very different from random assignment. The purpose of random
selection is to generate a sample that represents a larger population. The
purpose of random assignment is to take a sample (usually a convenience
sample) and randomly divide it into two or more groups that represent each
other. Using a mirror metaphor, in random sampling, we want to sample to
mirror the population, but in random assignment we simply want the
different groups to mirror one another. By the way, in experimental research,
random assignment is much more important than random selection; that’s because
the purpose of an experiment to establish cause and effect relationships.
9.5. How does random assignment accomplish the goal of controlling
for the influenced of extraneous or confounding variables?
Random assignment starts
with a group of research participants. Then using the process of random
assignment, these participants are randomly assigned to two or more groups.
Random assignment means that the researcher is taken out of the loop of making
decisions about who goes into the different groups. Instead, the mathematical
theory of probability is used to conduct random assignment.
Because random assignment is
so important, here is a little more about it...Random assignment
“equates the groups” on all known and unknown extraneous variables at the start
of the experiment. This makes it very plausible that any significant observed
difference between the groups on the DV after the administration of the IV can
be attributed to the effect of the IV. Even when you use another control
technique (e.g., matching or analysis of covariance) the experimental research
design is dramatically improved if random assignment is also used. Random
assignment is what I (Johnson) call the “secret ingredient” of a strong
experimental design. If you can include that ingredient in your research
design, then include it!
Here is one way you can
carry out random assignment (it was included in the first edition of this
book):


Another way is to simply go
to this website and use the computer assignment generator: http://www.graphpad.com/quickcalcs/randomize1.cfm
Check it out to see how it works.
9.6. How would you implement the control technique of matching, and
how does this technique control for the influence of confounding variables?
In matching you have
to decide on the specific variable or variables that you want to use to equate
the groups on. For example, let’s say that you decide to equate your two groups
(treatment and control group) on IQ. What you would do is to rank order all of
the participants on IQ. Then select the first two (i.e., the two people with
the two highest IQs) and put one in the experimental treatment group and the
other in the control group (The best way to do this is to use random assignment
to make these assignments. If you do this then you have actually merged two
control techniques: matching and random assignment). Then take the next two
highest IQ participants and assign one to the experimental group and one to the
control group. Then just continue this process until you assign one of the
lowest IQ participants to one group and the other lowest IQ participant to the
other group. Once you have completed this, your two groups will be matched on
IQ! If you use matching without random assignment, you run into the problem
that although you know that your groups are matched on IQ you have not matched
them on other potentially important variables.
9.7. How would you use the control technique of holding the
extraneous variable constant?
In this technique, you
decide on the variable you want to hold constant such as gender. Then you only
use one gender in the study (e.g., you decide to use only females or only
males). Since all the people in the different groups are of the same gender,
differential influence is impossible. Note that a big problem with this control
technique is that it is hard to generalize after you have systematically
excluded an important group of people. You have improved your status on
internal validity, but your have hurt your status on external validity. In some
studies, e.g., studies on breast cancer or prostrate cancer, this is not a
problem because generalization is only appropriate for one group anyway.
9.8. When would you want to build the extraneous variable into the
research design?
When you want to control for
it and also want to study how it is related to the outcome variable (DV). By
including the extraneous variable, you can check for its main effect as
well as its interaction effect (see pages 286-287 for explanation of
these two terms). Basically, when you include the extraneous variable, you
learn more about it and you are able to control for the problems that it might
have otherwise caused.
9.9. What is counterbalancing, and when would you use it?
Counterbalancing is only
used for a certain type of design: repeated measures designs or mixed
designs (i.e., designs that have a repeated measures variable). In the repeated
measures design, all participants receive all levels of the independent
variable (which is different from all of the other designs we have been talking
about where the groups are composed of different people). When all participants
receive all treatments you should be concerned that the sequencing of the
treatments may also have an impact. The two specific sequencing effects
(biasing effects that can occur because each participant must participate in
more than one treatment condition) that may occur are order effects
(participants perform differently because of the order in which they receive
the treatment) and carryover effects (participants’ performance in a
later treatment is different because of a treatment that occurred prior to it).
To help minimize the impact of sequencing effects, your would use the control
technique called counterbalancing. What this means is the you administer
the experimental treatment conditions to a the people but you do it in
different orders for different sets of people. For example if the IV were
teaching method and it included two teaching methods for comparison you could
counterbalance by giving half of your participants this order Method1 followed
by Method 2 and by giving the other half of your participants this order Method
2 followed by Method 1. In education, counterbalancing typically will need to
be used whenever you use a repeated measures design. Note that when
counterbalancing is used for the repeated measures design, it becomes a strong
design (in Table 9.2 you can see that the question marks turn into plus signs
when counterbalancing is used).
9.10. What is the difference between a carryover effect and an order
effect?
I answered that in the
previous question.
9.11. What is analysis of covariance, and when would you use it?
Analysis of covariance is a
statistical control method that is used with multi-group designs. In
particular, it is used to statistically equate groups that differ on a pretest
or on any other extraneous variable that you are worried about and you can
measure.
9.12. What is a research design, and what are the elements that go into
developing a research design?
A research design is
the outline, plan, or strategy that is used to answer a research question. You
can see three weak experimental designs in Table 9.1 and five strong
experimental designs in Table 9.2. The primary elements going into these
designs are decisions about whether to use pretests, control groups, how many
pretests and posttests to use, whether to randomly assign or use some other
control technique, how you are going to collect your data (i.e., how you are
going to measure your variables). The designs shown in Tables 9.1 and 9.2 (and
the quasi and single case designs discussed in the next chapter) all have
slightly different combinations of groups and testing and use of control
techniques. In fact, if you are creative, you can construct your own design
from these components, but first you need to think about the designs we
discuss.
For your convenience, here
are Tables 9.1 and 9.2.


9.13. When would the one-group posttest-only design be used, and what
are the problems encountered in using this design?
This design is so poor that
I would recommend never using it. The biggest problem is that you have little
evidence that what is observed at the posttest is due to the treatment because
you have no pretest to use as a baseline measure (i.e., you don’t know where
they started out). This is the weakest of all experimental designs. The only
possible situation I can think of where this design might be of some use would
be where the posttest measures something that you are pretty sure they all knew
nothing about previously so that you can assume that if a pretest had been
given then they all would have scored very low. Occasionally in some training
situations this assumption might be made. Still, you can very much improve this
design by adding a pretest (i.e., transforming it into the one-group
pretest-posttest design). The key threats to this design (in addition to the
problems I just mentioned) are history and maturation.
9.14. When would you use the one-group posttest-only design, and what
are the potential rival hypotheses that can operate in this design?
You can use this design when
you don’t need real strong evidence about cause and effect and when you want to
measure whether people change over time due to a treatment. For example, if you
want to train the workforce in your organization to understand their retirement
system, you could pretest them, give the training, and then posttest them and
look for an increase in knowledge about the retirement system. The key threats
to internal validity for this design are history, maturation, testing,
instrumentation, and regression artifacts.
9.15. When would you use the posttest-only design with nonequivalent
groups, and what are the potential rival hypotheses that can operate in this
design?
This design would be used
when you are not able to do pretesting but you can get a comparison or control
group. A serious limitation with this design is that because you do not have
random assignment to the groups you cannot assume that the groups are similar
on any variables, and therefore, it is highly risky to conclude that any
difference observed on the posttest is the result of the treatments. The key
threats to the internal validity of this design (in addition to the problem I
just mentioned) are differential selection, differential attrition, and additive
and interactive effects.
9.16. What makes a design a strong experimental design?
In most cases, that key is
RANDOM ASSIGNMENT to the groups, which equates the groups on all known and
unknown extraneous variables. When you are confident that the groups are
composed of similar kinds of people, many threats to internal validity
disappear.
We have listed five designs
as being “strong” designs: pretest-posttest control-group design, posttest-only
control-group design, factorial design, repeated-measures design,
and the factorial design based on a mixed model. The key ingredient of
all of these designs except the repeated-measures design is that random
assignment is present (which equates the groups on all known and unknown
extraneous variables). The repeated measures design and the factorial design
based on a mixed model are considered strong only if counterbalancing is used
to eliminate or minimize order and carryover effects.
You can see the dramatic
change in the threats for the strong designs by comparing Table 9.1 and 9.2
shown above. Note How there are no minus signs for the standard threats to
internal validity for the strong designs shown in Table 9.2!
9.17. What is the difference between an experimental and a control
group?
An experimental group receives
the experimental treatment. A control group does not receive the experimental
treatment condition. The standard in experimental research is to compare an
experimental group with a control group. However, sometimes two experimental or
comparison groups are compared with each other. You can also have a design
where you compare different treatments and have a control group.
9.18. What functions are served by including a control group into a
research design?
A control group gives a
point of comparison. For example, if one group receives a pill you also need to
know what would have happened in the absence of receiving a pill, and the group
receiving a placebo (a pill with no active ingredient) serves this purpose. It
is essential, however, that the control group be similar to the experimental
group on all important characteristics (this is where random assignment helps
out things). As an aside, some researchers call the point of comparison the counterfactual
(which is the pretest level in a one-group design with a pretest measure and
the control or comparison group performance in a multi-group design).
·
It
is perhaps easiest to see the effect of including a control group by comparing
the one-group pretest-posttest design and the posttest-only design with
nonequivalent groups design shown above in Table 9.1.
·
Notice
that these threats disappeared when the control group was added: history,
maturation, testing, instrumentation, and regression artifacts.
·
However,
notice that new potential threats occurred when the control group was added;
now (because you have two or more groups) you have to worry about differential
selection, differential attrition, and additive and interactive effects.
9.19. What potentially confounding extraneous variables are controlled
in the pretest-posttest control-group design?
All of the standard threats
to internal validity are controlled in this design. It is because of one
important factor included as part of this design: RANDOM ASSIGNMENT!
9.20. What potentially confounding extraneous variables are controlled
in the posttest-only control-group design, and how does the design control for
them?
This design is similar to
the pretest-posttest control-group design. All of the standard internal
validity threats are ruled out because this design has RANDOM ASSIGNMENT. As
you can see, you don’t really have to have a pretest if you have random
assignment. Random assignment really is a powerful technique of control.
9.21. What is a factorial design, and what is the advantage of this
design over the two-group posttest-only design (e.g., the posttest-only
control-group design with two groups)?
The posttest-only control
group design has only one independent variable. The factorial design has at
least two independent variables and random assignment to the groups (or cells),
which enables you to determine whether the single independent variables have
effects (called main effects) and, importantly, whether there is an interaction
effects (i.e., do the two independent variables interact in some way that
would make knowledge only of main effects misleading?) All you can determine in
the posttest-only control group design is whether there is a main effect, and
sometimes this limitation can cause a problem if a moderator variable has been
excluded. In short, the factorial design is a superior design.
9.22. What is a main effect?
A main effect is the effect
of one independent variable.
9.23. What is an interaction effect, and what is the difference between
an ordinal and a disordinal interaction?
An interaction effect
is what occurs when the effect of one independent variable (on the DV) depends
on the level of another independent variable. For example, perhaps one teaching
method works better than another teaching method depending upon the students’
learning styles. Note that in Chapter 2, in Table 2.2 we use the term moderator
variable to refer to an independent variable that determines how another IV and
the DV are related. In other words, when you have an interaction effect, you
also have a moderator variable present. Interactions are helpful because them
help use to better understand form whom or under what conditions various
treatments will work.
Here is an example where
there is no interaction (note that the lines are parallel which means
that the effect of instruction type does NOT depend on anxiety):

Note: There is an interaction
effect present when the effect of one independent variable on the dependent
variable changes or varies at the different levels of another independent
variable. If you have to say that the your conclusion about the relationship
between an IV and a DV “depends” on the level of another IV, then you have an
interaction effect. For example, perhaps the relationship between teaching
technique and student learning depends
on the type of student being taught. (By the way, technically speaking, I am
talking about what is called a two-way interaction effect here.)
·
Now
I will show two cases where there is an interaction effect.
First, here is an example of
a disordinal interaction (not only are the lines nonparallel, they also
cross): Notice that the type of instruction to be recommended depends on the
moderator variable of anxiety.

Second, here is an example
of an ordinal interaction (the lines are nonparallel but do not cross in
the range examined in the research study): Notice that the type of instruction
to be recommended depends on the moderator variable of anxiety.

9.24. What is the difference between a factorial and a repeated
measures-design?
A factorial design has two
or more independent variables of the type that different people are placed in
the different levels of the independent variables. In contrast, in the
repeated-measures design, all participants participate in all levels of the
independent variable.
9.25. What are the advantages and disadvantages of factorial and
repeated-measures designs?
The advantages of the
factorial design are that you can examine main effects and interaction effects.
The main advantage of the repeated measures design is that you can get by with
fewer participants because you use your participants in all of the groups
rather than having to have different participants in the different groups.
9.26. What is a factorial
design based on a mixed model, and when would it be used?
This designs is a mix
between the factorial design and the repeated measures design. It has one
regular independent variable (where different people are randomly assigned to
the different levels), and it has one repeated measures variable (i.e., a variable
in which all participants receive all the treatments).
Here is a depiction of the
factorial design based on a mixed model.
