1 / 20

Experimental Design

Experimental Design. Experiment: A type of research study that tests the idea that one variable causes an effect on another variable. Anatomy of an Experiment. Example Memory Cues No Memory Cues N 1 = 10 N 2 = 10 M 1 = 16.2 M 2 = 9.9

wattersj
Download Presentation

Experimental Design

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Experimental Design • Experiment: A type of research study that tests the idea that one variable causes an effect on another variable.

  2. Anatomy of an Experiment Example Memory Cues No Memory Cues N1 = 10 N2 = 10 M1 = 16.2 M2 = 9.9 S1 = 2.49 S2 = 2.33 Independent variable = Memory Training Group Dependent variable = Memory for personal history

  3. Anatomy of an Experiment Example Experimental Control Group Group Memory Cues No Memory Cues N1 = 10 N2 = 10 M1 = 16.2 M2 = 9.9 S1 = 2.49 S2 = 2.33

  4. Internal Validity • The study allows the researcher to determine that on variable causes an effect on another variable.

  5. Conditions to establish internal validity • Time-Order relationship Cause  Effect I.V.  D.V.

  6. Conditions to establish internal validity • No alternative explanations • The difference between the means is due only to the independent variable. • Anything else represents a threat to the internal validity of the study

  7. Threats to internal validity • Non-equivalent control group • Confound: A way in which the groups differ from each other, other than the independent variable. • Controlling for confounds • 1. Random assignment to groups • 2. Matching

  8. Threats to internal validity • Floor or Ceiling effects • The independent variable has made the groups different from each other, but the dependent variable is unable to detect it. • Floor effect: The test is so difficult that everyone gets a very low score. • Ceiling effect: The test is so easy that everyone gets a high score. • They make the means closer together than they should be.

  9. Threats to internal validity • Experimenter effect • The experimenter gives an indication of what they want or expect the subject to do in a particular condition. • Participant effect • The participant changes their behavior to fit what they think the researcher is studying.

  10. Ways to address experimenter and participant effects • Single-blind study: The participant doesn’t know which condition they’re in. • Example: a placebo-controlled condition. • Double-blind design: Neither the participants or the researcher knows which condition the subject is in.

  11. External Validity • The results of the study are generalizable • Generalization to different samples • Get the same results if repeat the same study with a different sample (from the same population) • Replication

  12. External Validity 2. Generalization to different populations • Get the same results if repeat the same study with a sample from a different population • Generalization to different settings • Get the same results under different conditions • The effect is observed in more than one setting • Example: The effect is observed in real life, not just in the laboratory

  13. Independent Samples T-Test • Tests the difference between two sample means Memory Cues No Memory Cues N1 = 10 N2 = 10 M1 = 16.2 M2 = 9.9 S1 = 2.49 S2 = 2.33 Prediction of the researcher: The mean of the Memory Cues Group will be significantly higher than the mean of the No Memory Cues Group.

  14. Independent Samples T-Test Prediction of the researcher: The mean of the Memory Cues Group will be significantly higher than the mean of the No Memory Cues Group. • Example of a one-tailed test • One-tailed test: One mean is predicted to be higher or lower than the other one. • Two-tailed test: One mean is predicted to be different from the other one.

  15. Independent Samples T-Test Prediction of the researcher: The mean of the Memory Cues Group will be significantly higher than the mean of the No Memory Cues Group. • Example of a one-tailed test • Alternative hypothesis: The mean of the Memory Cues Group is significantly higher than the mean of the No Memory Cues Group. • Null hypothesis: The mean of the Memory Cues Group is not significantly higher than the mean of the No Memory Cues Group.

  16. Independent Samples T-Test • No way to know for sure which hypothesis is true. • We can know the odds that the null hypothesis is true. • We can decide how unlikely the null hypothesis would have to be before we can’t believe it anymore. That’s the Alpha Level of the test. • “α = .05” means “Reject the null hypothesis if the odds are less than 5% that it’s true”

  17. Independent Samples T-Test An independent samples t-test tells you if the odds are less than 5% that the null hypothesis is true. • Find the number we’re making our decision about • It’s the difference between the two group means • M1 – M2 = 16.2 – 9.9 = +6.3 • We’re comparing this number to a difference of zero. • Convert that number to a standard score • In SPSS, t = +5.85 • The difference between the two sample means is 5.85 standard deviations above a difference of zero.

  18. Independent Samples T-Test 3. Find how far from zero that number needs to be to be significant  Critical Value for t • We predicted that this difference would be in the positive direction, so it’s a one-tailed test. • α = .05 • Degrees of freedom = N1 + N2 – 2  10 + 10 – 2 = 18 • Critical value = +1.73 • Decision rule: If t ≥ +1.73, reject the null hypothesis.

  19. Independent Samples T-Test Conclusion: The mean of the Memory Cues Group is significantly higher than the mean of the No Memory Cues Group, t (18) = 5.85, p < .05.

More Related