1 / 6

ASSIGNING PARTICIPANTS TO CONDITIONS

ASSIGNING PARTICIPANTS TO CONDITIONS. Between-Subject designs Different people at each level of the IV X A : P 1 , P 2 , P 3 X B : P 4 , P 5 , P 6 Advantage Exposure to one level can’t contaminate performance on the other(s) Disadvantage

river
Download Presentation

ASSIGNING PARTICIPANTS TO CONDITIONS

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. ASSIGNING PARTICIPANTSTO CONDITIONS • Between-Subject designs • Different people at each level of the IVXA: P1, P2, P3XB: P4, P5, P6 • Advantage • Exposure to one level can’t contaminate performance on the other(s) • Disadvantage • Groups may not be equivalent, even with “random” assignment

  2. Within-Subject designs • Same people receive each level of the IVXA: P1, P2, P3XB: P1, P2, P3 • Advantages • More efficient • Each S serves as their “own control” • Eliminates subject variance from stats • Disadvantages • Exposure to one condition may influence performance in others • Order and carryover effects

  3. Counterbalancing • Blocked designs • Order of conditions is varied over participants • Complete counterbalancing: Subgroup 2 IV levels 3 IV levels etc. 1 AB ABC2 BA ACB 3 BAC 4 BCA 5 CAB5 CBA

  4. Complete counterbalancing (contd) • Advantages • Controls for order effects; each level appears at each order same amount • Allows for order effects to be assessed • Disadvantages • Back to multiple “groups” and inefficiency • Doesn’t control for “asymmetric transfer”

  5. Latin Square Designs • Put each level in each position, counterbalancing order and sequenceSubgroup 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 1 A B C D 2 B D A C 3 D C B A 4 C A D B • Advantage • Much more efficient than complete counterbalancing • Disadvantages: • May miss complex order effects • Still doesn’t control for asymmetric transfer

  6. Counterbalancing • Repeated Block Designs • Each participant gets two (or more) blocks of each condition, intermixed • ABBA designs • ABBA / BAAB designs • Completely randomized block designs • AABABCCBABAAB….. • May be effects of random vs. blocked

More Related