Test 3 Flashcards
Experiment
allows for inferences of causality *only method that can, mechanisms, and explanation
conditions for causality
- temporal precedence
- consistency, regularity
- contingency - if theres no cause, theres no effect
experimental method
- manipulate the variable (independent)
- control other factors
- measure some result (dependent)
* hard to achieve these goals
Independent variable
- factor of interest
- the potential cause
simplest manipulation
presence and absence
- can compare amount/ levels
- need control of condition of absence cause
ideally manipulation changes only ….
factor of interest
___ should be very similar, which is ___ and impacts ability to _____
control, tough, infer causality
difference between experimental and control conditions =
the factor of interest
IV strengths
control and learn causality. great for things that can be easily changed in the lab
IV weaknesses
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
- generalizability
- making someone do something
- no longer naturally occurring
- participant reactivity
- is the manipulation realistic/ real world
- does the behaviour change when its being manipulated
extraneous variables
variables not of interest must be controlled. can be done through random assignment.
confound
an EV that covaries with the IV and could provide an alternative explanation. fatal flaw, EV not of interest, only appears when IV is there.
ex. getting a coffee before a test or not getting one (confound). is it getting a coffee or getting a gift?
manipulation check
did you manipulate the IV/cause? strength of association. important for interpreting the results of experiments
between subjects studies
different people in each condition
within subjects studies
same people do the experiment and control
fewer people needed, no possible confound of individual differences, *more powerful, more sensitive/ability to notice differences
between subjects info
1.
2.
3.
- IV id subject variable (age, personality, culture)
- need uninformed people in all conditions (deception)
- participation in one study would affect being apart of the other
between subjects problems
must avoid confound from non-equivalent groups
- use random assignment and larger sample sizes
dependent variable
outcome measures
ceiling effect =
floor effect =
everyone does well
everyone does poorly
*low variability and restriction of range
internal validity =
external validity =
how sound is the study design?
do the results generalize to the real world?
Internal validity
1.
2.
3.
4.
- free of confounds
- influence of task order (fatigue, practice)
- help by counterbalancing - half get control 1st and half get control 2nd
- add a filter task between conditions
IValidity demand characteristics
there may be clues on what is being studied which can affect behaviours
IValidity construct validity
measuring properly