Use LEFT and RIGHT arrow keys to navigate between flashcards;
Use UP and DOWN arrow keys to flip the card;
H to show hint;
A reads text to speech;
61 Cards in this Set
- Front
- Back
Experimental Method |
explicit (deliberate)manipulation of somevariable (IV); causal |
|
Non-Experimental(Descriptive orObservational) Method |
no explicit manipulation of avariable; correlational notcausal |
|
Possible Interpretationsfrom Non-ExperimentalApproach |
x caused y; y caused x; andz caused both x and y(e.g., TV violence andaggression) |
|
Operational Definition |
define variable or constructin terms of the operation(s)used to measure (orproduce) it |
|
Confound / ConfoundingVariables |
something else besides IVwhich systematically variesacross groups |
|
Internal Validity |
the IV (and nothing else)was responsible fordifferences/changes in theDV; is a studymethodologically sound? |
|
Three Features of TrueExperiments |
manipulation, comparison,and control |
|
Manipulation |
experimenter determineswhat treatment eachindividual participantreceives and when |
|
Comparison |
treatment of interestcompared to “reference”group or condition (e.g.,control group); sometimes aseparate group &sometimes within-subjects |
|
Control (Feature of TrueExperiments) |
unwanted (extraneousvariables) sources ofvariability minimized oreliminated |
|
Experimental Method:Favorable Attributes |
directly manipulatesuspected cause (IV) andeliminate/control for otherextraneous variables |
|
Extraneous Variable |
something you are not reallyinterested in; confound |
|
Types of IndependentVariables |
situational, task, andinstructional |
|
Situational IndependentVariable |
different environmentalconditions (e.g., delayed vs.immediate reinforcers) |
|
Task Independent Variable |
different problems orassigned pieces of work(e.g., easy tasks vs. morecomplex tasks) |
|
Instructional IndependentVariable |
different directions for sametask (e.g., listen to meaningor sound or physical featureof letters in word list) |
|
Features of TrueExperiments |
manipulation, comparison,and control |
|
Two Parts of Control(Feature of TrueExperiment) |
hold extraneous variablesconstant or balance/equatethem across conditions &random assignment ofparticipants to conditions |
|
Threats to Internal Validity |
maturation, history,regression to the mean,selection bias,attrition/mortality, testing,and reactivity |
|
Maturation |
participants get older (inlong-term/longitudinalstudies) |
|
History |
other, extraneous variablesoperating with treatment;only those occurring once IVhas begun and operatingprior to assessment (DV) |
|
Regression to the Mean |
extreme scores on an initialtest become less extremeon a second test |
|
Selection Bias |
AKA selection effects;effects that are found aredue to initial groupdifferences (prior to study) |
|
Attrition/Mortality |
difference because moreparticipants drop out of onegroup than another(e.g., 10 drop out of Group 1but 40 drop out of Group 2) |
|
Testing |
repeated measurement(testing) causes observedchange in performance |
|
Reactivity |
difference due to participantaware of beingmeasured/observed |
|
Pre- / Quasi-Experiments |
post-test only design andpretest-posttest (prepost/before-after)design |
|
Post-Test Only Design |
subjects measured once,after the treatment(e.g., therapy and thenrating test); includesmanipulation |
|
Pretest-Posttest(Pre-Post/Before-After)Design |
subjects measured beforeand after the treatment(e.g., rating test, therapy,and a second rating test);includes manipulation andcomparison |
|
Pretest-Posttest withNonequivalent ControlGroup |
participants not randomlyassigned to groups; Group 2(control) does not get thetreatment/intervention; bothgroups measured beforeGroup 1’s intervention andafter |
|
One Type of Simplest “True”Experiment |
random assignment forparticipants; one group getstreatment but the othergroup does not; DVmeasured for both afterGroup 1’s treatment |
|
Other Type of Simplest“True” Experiment |
random assignment forparticipants; groups getdifferent levels of treatment(e.g., more of a drug vs.less); DV measured for bothafter treatment |
|
Factor |
Independent Variable |
|
Experimental Designswithout an IV |
posttest only and pre-postdesigns |
|
In Order to Be an IV |
there must be at least twolevels; it must vary |
|
Minimum Number of FactorsNeeded for a TrueExperiment |
1 |
|
Minimum Number of LevelsNeeded for an IV |
2 |
|
Validity In Measurement |
does a particular measureactually measure what it’ssupposed to? |
|
Validity In Research |
does a study provide someunderstanding of behavior? |
|
Statistical ConclusionValidity |
are proper statistics used?are the conclusionsappropriate given the resultsfrom the statisticalanalyses? |
|
Construct Validity |
are the operationaldefinitions adequate? |
|
External Validity |
do data generalize to “realworld”? how well do thefindings generalize beyondthe research environment? |
|
Criticisms Related toExternal Validity |
subjects not representativeof the general population;laboratory conditions“artificial” |
|
Subject/ParticipantRepresentativeness |
subjects not randomlyselected from population |
|
Subject/ParticipantRepresentativeness Not aConcern for MostPsychological Research |
because it testsgeneralizations rather thanmakes them; has adeductive rather than aninductive emphasis |
|
Use Non-Human Animals inBehavioral Research |
limited pre-experimentalhistories that are easilycontrolled; fewer confounds;all aspects duringexperiment easily controlled |
|
Setting Representativeness/Ecological Validity |
how well does the researchsetting reproduce the “realworld”? |
|
Issues with SettingRepresentativeness/Ecological Validity |
mundane realism andgeneralizability |
|
Mundane Realism |
how similar is the lab settingto real-world settings? |
|
Generalizability |
How well research resultsreflect real-worldprocesses? |
|
Artificiality |
deliberate; eliminates “realworld” confounds; and theseso is strength not weakness |
|
Single-Factor Designs |
both between-subjects andwithin-subjects designs |
|
Between-Subjects Design |
each subject receives onlyone level of IV; comparegroups of subjects |
|
Within-Subjects Design |
each subject receives everylevel of IV (at differenttimes); compare eachsubject to oneself |
|
Use a Between-SubjectsDesign if |
one level of the IV haspermanent (irreversible)effect on the DV |
|
Drawbacks of BetweenSubjectsDesigns |
can require a lot of subjectsand can’t be certain of“equal” groups |
|
Matched-Group Design |
special type of betweensubjectsdesign in whichsubjects equated(“matched”) on relevantvariable prior to randomassignment |
|
Advantages of WithinSubjectsDesigns |
minimizes total number ofsubjects needed andequates all subject variablesacross conditions |
|
Level |
condition in an experiment |
|
Sequence (Order) Effects |
experiencing one conditionin a study affectsperformance in asubsequent condition;occurs in within-subjectsdesigns |
|
Two Types of Sequence(Order) Effects |
progressive and carryover |