Quantitative Research: Group Design

Question 1

Group Design

Answer 1

Quantitative data, obtained through a group of subjects, determine cause-effect relationship or descriptive association between variables use 1) within subject, 2) between subject, and 3) mixed design.

Question 2

Group Design- broad classification

Answer 2

1 or more groups of subjects, exposed to 1 or more levels of IV, driven by research question, choose in regards to a certain criteria

Question 3

Single-subject design- broad classification

Answer 3

Focus on behavior of individual subjects, sometimes more than 1 subject examined, summarize individual performance on dependent variable.

Question 4

Between-subjects design

Answer 4

performances of seperate groups measured, groups exposed to diff treatments/levels of IV, performance of DV compared with groups.

Question 5

control group

Answer 5

does not receive tx, gives ability for researchers to compare results, helps most with COMPARISON

Question 6

experimental group

Answer 6

IV is implemented (experimental tx implemented)

Question 7

bivalent

Answer 7

2 groups (1 exp and 1 control)

Question 8

multivalent

Answer 8

more than 1 exp group (diff. IV or diff. levels of IV) class example- freq of treatment and length of session.

Question 9

Group equivalence

Answer 9

ensuring difference between EG and CG is effect of IV and not due to difference btw subjects in both groups

Question 10

Randomization and Matching

Answer 10

Randomization: each particpant equal chance/probability of being assigned to one group or the other (best option because no research bias, balanced, but need a lot of people, 2 groups may not always be equivalent but research bias is reduced)
Matching: purposefully match members of 2 groups on all extraneous variables, 2 groups equivalent with respect to extraneous variables

Question 11

Within-subject design

Answer 11

only 1 group, performance of same subjects on different conditions/levels of IV, repeated measures, subject serves as his/her control- evaluating effect of condition, requires less participants, all subjects are exposed to all levels of the IV (ex. longitudinal developmental studies. EQUIVALENCE is not a concern but there are 3…

Question 12

3 concerns for within-subject design

Answer 12

sequencing effect, order effect, and carryover effect,

Question 13

Sequencing Effect

Answer 13

several levels of the IV, performance in an earlier condition may influence performance on a subsequent level

Question 14

Order Effect

Answer 14

performance +/- occur btw the beginning and end of the experiment, familiarity with tasks may influence performance

Question 15

Carryover Effect

Answer 15

result of 1 condition may carry over to the next condition (because completed 1 task, could do better on others)

Question 16

Counterbalancing

Answer 16

Experimenter arranged all possible sequences of condition and randomly assigns participants. (EPD, EDP, PED, PDE, DEP, DPE,)

Question 17

Longitudinal Study

Answer 17

following same participants for period of time

Question 18

Correlational Study

Answer 18

Diff measure obtained from same group of participants, determine relationship btw variables

Question 19

Mixed Design

Answer 19

Both types of comparisons in same study- both WSD and BSD. design driven by research question

Question 20

Single-group Design

Answer 20

presence of a single group, in two or more conditions, sometimes weak- no control group usually, ex- WSD

Question 21

2-group design

Answer 21

observations of 2 groups of participants, usually assigned different levels of the IV (Tx A and Tx B)
Parallel design- 2 groups, participants are assigned to 1 of 2 groups, can be control or experimental or both tx.
cross-over design- 2 groups, participants alternate btw tx/control. each participant is their own control (more economical, less # of participants, risk of attrition)

Question 22

Experimental Design

Answer 22

control group and randomization

Question 23

Quasi Experimental Design

Answer 23

naturally occuring, no randomization but match them instead,

Question 24

Internal Validity

Answer 24

Accounting for and controlling factors- (does this research answer posed questions? or provide credible evidence)
degree tp which relationship btw IV and DV is observed without the influence of extraneous variables,
control of randibility
confounding/extraneous variable (other factor which can influence extra factor)

Question 25

External Validity

Answer 25

how much can we generalize this results? extend to other stroke patients with dysphagia?
the ability of study to extend conclusions from specific environment to other individuals with similar conditions.

Question 26

Threats to internal validity

Answer 26

history, maturation, reactive pretest, instrumentation, differential subject selection, attrition, statistical regression, Researcher bias

Question 27

History

Answer 27

events occuring btw 1st and 2nd measurement in addition to experimental variable

Question 28

Maturation

Answer 28

changes in subjects- can’t be controlled by experimentor, account for neurological development, cognitive changes that could have accounted for language performance

Question 29

Reactive Pretest

Answer 29

practice, familiarity, reduction of test anxiety, counterbalance tests, time to account for change,

Question 30

Instrumentation

Answer 30

faulty, inadequate, calibration of equipment, assessed- method section, tools- rating scales, standardized language tests, adequacy of the survey instrument, detailed description of instrumentation- calibration techniques employed,

Question 31

Differential Subject Selection

Answer 31

differences in subjects between groups, subject randomization, matching,

Question 32

Attrition

Answer 32

experimental mortality (start with 5 to 10 more particpants than needed)
differenctial loss of subjects,
very common in survey research

Question 33

Statistical Regression

Answer 33

participants selected on basis of atypical low or high scores, incorrect conclusion - tx produced change but really just regression, scores seems somewhat better or poorer than original, error of measurement, one should have good mix towards means,

Question 34

Researcher Bias

Answer 34

subjectivity and bias, member checks, summary of points, triangulation (not just using one type of method)

Question 35

External Validity

Answer 35

ability to generalize results to bigger population with similar condition results from sample can be extended to the population.

Question 36

Threats to external validity

Answer 36

subject selection- characteristics of participants, representative of population to which researchers would like to generalize
independent variable- describe IV- describe levels as well, ensure replication, experimenter effects,
measurement of dependent variable- operational definition, clear definition (what do I mean by dysphagia? what are the characteristics?)

Question 37

Pilot Research

Answer 37

small # of participants, trial run to ensure feasibility of methods, discover flaws, ensure no major surprises, details