I. Jackson (2012), even-numbered chapter exercises, p 360. 2. The recommended design for this type of study is a non-equivalent control group post-test only design. 4. If a study is confounded, the researcher is not absolutely certain that changes in the dependent variable were caused by the manipulation of the independent variable, or some other uncontrolled variable. In a non-equivalent control group post-test only design, any differences observed between the two classes may be due to the non-equivalence of the groups and not to the injection of quizzes. No pre-test measures were given to establish equivalence. Another confound that may impact the results of this study could be the testing effect. Repeated testing may lead to better or worse performance. Changes in performance on the test may be due to prior experience with the test and not to the independent variable. In addition, repeated testing fatigues the subjects, and their performance declines as a result (Jackson, 2012). Because the professor is interested in determining if the implementation of weekly quizzes would improve test scores, an experimenter and/or an instrumentation effect may also affect results. In a single group post-test only design, possible confounds include the lack of a comparison group and the absence of an equivalent control group. Once again, a testing and an experimenter effect could also contribute to changes in test performance. 6. A single-case design is used when: 1. Only one person is measured. 2. The researcher does not want or need to generalize the results to a population. 3. The researcher believes it is unethical to withhold treatment to one group. 8. A multiple-baseline design differs from a reversal design by attempting to control for confounds through the introduction of treatment at differing time intervals to a few different people, to the same person in different situations, or to the same person across different behaviors. Reversal designs attempt to control for confounds by reversing the baseline and treatment conditions one or more times to assess the impact on behavior (Jackson, 2012). 2. Describe the advantages and disadvantages of quasi-experiments? What is the fundamental weakness of a quasi-experimental design? Why is it a weakness? Does its weakness always matter? Quasi-experimental designs are experimental designs that do not provide for the full control of extraneous variables. Primarily, the absence of control in this design is due to the lack of random assignment to groups. Quasi-experimental research designs are used in the study of cause and effect by manipulating the independent variable.
Have you ever thought about the preparation and thought that goes into a research experiment? There are many things to consider when planning a study, such as the questions you are trying to answer, the variety of participants that will be studied, and the different variations in the experiment. An important part of the experiment that can have a significant impact on the results are the variables chosen. In doing this, the researcher can easily tell what factors have an effect on the topic under study.
Some students simply do not test well, others try their hardest and still cannot reach the impracticable standards set for them. The individuals who create these tests do not understand the pressures of being a student, or the struggle to answer thirty-five questions in a compressed time period. One test cannot accurately measure the intelligence of a student.
Going into details of the article, I realized that the necessary information needed to evaluate the experimental procedures were not included. However, when conducting an experiment, the independent and dependent variable are to be studied before giving a final conclusion.
Several factors can affect the actual results of an experiment. Among them are experimental and subject bias. Experimental bias concerns anything that misconstrues the experimenter's comprehension of the relationship between the dependent and independent variable (Feldman, 1999). Subject bias is the tendency of the subject to behave atypically. The double-blind procedure evades experimental and subject bias as the experimenter evaluates results unbiased as the experimenter is uninformed about whether the subject has received the actual treatment or the placebo and the subject will behave normally as they do not know if they have received the actual treatment or the pseudotreatment, the placebo. Therefore, the results and any distinctions among the control and experimental groups are clearly based on the independent variable and has to be the effect of the treatment. For example, in an experiment to evaluate a drug that encourages engagement in conversations, after administering the drugs to the experimental group and the placebo to the control group, the experimenters talk with participants and evaluate the conversation's degree of excellence which are not easy to assess. Thus, the experimenter might be biased and unintentionally give the participants in the experimental group better evaluations because they know that this group has been administered the real drug (Carlson & Buskit, 1997).
Developing studying skills that incorporate testing myself will take the ease of being overwhelmed, as well as help with concentration, and becoming more comfortable and confident. Practicing recalling information over time will help in recalling for an actual assessment, by retaking study guides, and creating at home pre-test. 3The information provided by Karpicke and Roediger can me as an educator and other educators by considering various methods of learning. Using test as an instrument of learning rather than solely an assessment on knowledge can be essential in helping students’ learning effectiveness. Since the experiment showed that the learning conditions where retrieval was repeated caused students to have 80% of the pairs recalled compared to the 33% of where retrieval was not practice shows that testing can be used as a tool of learning. In my classroom I would implement take pre-test for homework and/or extra credit assignments, as well as implement classroom activities such as games where testing occurs in a communal group setting. Retrieval is easier when related pieces of information are stored in close association with one another (Ormord p. 212). Therefore, I would have students get in pairs and test each other on the information as soon as the lesson is over as a form of review and test
Randomized Controlled Trials can be used to in several types of evaluations, including new therapies (i.e. Cognitive behavioral therapy versus emotionally focused therapy when treating couples), community interventions, and diagnostic techniques (O'Brien, 2013). The RCT study design randomly assigns participants into an experimental group or a control group. As the study is conducted, the only expected difference between the control and experimental groups is the outcome variable being studied (O'Brien, 2013).
Although changing criterion has many advantages over many designs, it also have limitations which include it is limited to a small array of behaviors and instructional, therefore the person who is running the research has the responsibility to make sure the criterion change is large enough to be observable, but small enough to be achievable (Gast and Ledford (2014). In addition a display of experimental control depends on how well the participant is willing to play a part in the
Experimental designs are viewed as the most accurate, and most demanding of research designs, requiring strict attention to rules and procedures. Researchers use these research designs to manipulate and control testing procedures as a way to understand a cause and effect relationship. Commonly, independent variables are manipulated to judge or decide their effect on a dependent variable (Trochim & Donnelly, 2008).
According to Cooper & Heron & Heard 92007), the multiple baseline design is the mostly used by behavior analysts and researchers because it allows for the independent variable to be contrived across different settings, subjects, and behaviors, without having to implement a withdrawal procedure that can be detrimental to the client (p.201). Hence this research design allows for the behavior analysts to determine how behaviors may different from client to client (groups or several individuals, setting to setting (i.e. school vs. home), and behaviors (i.e. same behaviors in a group or individuals). To better understand the difference in the multiple baseline design all three of the designs must be examined.
The research design that was employed by Martin for Sarah was a single-subject design. This is also called an A-B design. It simply means that the subject (Sarah) serves as her own control. There is no control group and experimental group in place, the data gathered is only from Sarah. It is a representation of her frequency of SIB (self-injurious behavior) over a four-day period with no intervention. Then an intervention is implemented which in this case a DRO or Differential Reinforcement of Other Behavior was chosen. That also took place over a period of four days and the frequency of her SIB behaviors was again recorded. That data was then compiled into a comprehensive chart to visually show the changes that occurred within that eight-day period.
This research study should be classified as a quasi-experiment, as the independent variable (height and gender) is not manipulated by the researcher but occurs naturally. A true experimental design would have one single group, with a common measured outcome and participants randomly assigned. In this way, individual background variables such as gender do not that satisfy the requirements to be a true experiment since sex cannot purposefully be manipulated in this way. Furthermore, the participants were not randomly picked from the general population; instead all participants were instead first year psychology students from a large European university who participated in exchange for course credit.
Research design, the particular design of this problem is experimental, our text lists three (3) separate types of these: Experimental designs, Quasi-experimental designs, and Preexperimental designs (Hagan, 2010), the An Outcome Evaluation of Pennsylvania’s Boot Camp: Does Rehabilitative Programming within a Disciplinary Setting Reduce
5. What did the authors find? The authors of the article discovered that when values were adjusted solely on baseline tests there were no significant differences in cognitive functions between the groups intervention group and the control group. Furthermore, the test values were adjusted on the basis of baseline values, sex, age and educational years.
The control group was conducted the same way however, there were a couple differences. They were not told the story of being taped and shown to a psychology class and there was not a person videotaping them while they were shooting their second set of free
However, during the post-test, they felt less confident and poorly performed which resulted in little change in their mean score. The control group, however, felt less confident on the pre-test and failed but improved slightly during the post-test and this resulted in an increase in the mean. In this study, the researcher selected the two groups based on their performance. The researcher assumed that the treatment group would perform better during the post-test compared to the pre-test. However, the fact that the treatment group did