-
matched pairs design
- a between-subjects design
- subjects randomly assigned as pairs after being matched on potentially confounding variables (the two groups have same set of characteristics)
- to control for subject variability
-
advantages/disadvantages of matched pairs
- advantages - no practice/fatigue effects across conditions - no carryover effects
- disadvantages - larger sample needed, need to know what variables need to be matched
-
within subjects design
- ultimate matched-pair design (each subject matched with themselves)
- Also called repeated measures design
- controls for subject-related variability
- use paired t-tests
- BUT carry-over effects are possible
-
advantages/disadvantages of within-subjects
- advantages - controls for subject variability, more power, fewer subjects required (in principle)
- disadvantages - practice/fatigue effects, awareness of changes across conditions, order effects (can be subject to task demands - know what is being manipulated)
-
how to deal with order effects
- vary sequences of conditions
- randomization
- counterbalancing
- to vary the order systematically so that the order effects was out
-
counterbalancing
- create sequences so that
- 1. every conditions appears in every possible position in the order the same # of times
- 2. every condition precedes every other condition as many times as it follows that condition
- then randomly assign participants to sequences
-
advantages/disadvantages of counterbalancing
- advantages - balance order, any differences due to fatigue/practice or subject variability should was out
- disadvantages - requires more subjects, analysis is more difficult
-
types of counterbalancing
- 1 - each subject gets all possible orders (reverse counterbalancing, block randomization)
- 2 - each subject gets only one possible order, but across subjects all orders accounted for (complete counterbalancing)
-
reverse counterbalancing
- A-B, B-A
- particular individual does each order
- present different orders - one is just reverse order
-
block randomization
- order randomized within blocks - subjects receive all blocks
- ABC, BAC, CBA, ACB
- would be a really long experiment!
-
complete counterbalancing
- = N! orders
- each subject gets one order - but across all subjects all orders are accounted for
-
Simple Latin Square
- partial counterbalancing
- each condition appears in each position in the sequence
- DOES NOT fulfill "every condition precedes every other condition as many times as it follows that condition"
-
balanced latin square
- full counterbalancing
- only works for even # of conditions (2x2, 4x2)
- fulfills both counterbalancing conditions
-
mixed designs
- at least one between subject IV and one within-subject IV
- Still do ANOVA - same general test for factorial!
-
Descriptive Statistics
- summarizing a set of empirical data
- central tendency (mean, median, mode)
- variability (the spread, SD)
-
inferential statistics
- drawing conclusions about the broader population
- - infer what your sample means about the larger population
- - if you aren't interested in the broader population - inferetial not necessary!
-
variability and 3 sources
- represents background "noise"through which we have to detect the experimental "signal"
- NEED to reduce extraneous variability
- sources: within groups (different individuals contribute to the data), between groups (because of IV's), between groups (because of extraneous variables - DO NOT WANT)
do we have enough confidence that between groups variability is larger than variability within groups
-
statistical inference
how likely is it that the IVs had an effect over and above the variability due to random sampling?
- based on probabilities!
- "inferences under uncertainty" - we make statements about how probable it is that the population means are different
-
hypothesis testing
- start with a hypotehsis that is opposite of what we are looking for (null) and see if data is improbable given that hypothesis
- null vs. alternative hypothesis - any differences due to treatments
-
sampling distribution
- any given sample is just one of many
- b/c of the many different samples that could be made with the population - their actual distributions will be different because of noise variability
- if you average all possible samples - end up on average with distribution that looks like population
-
alpha = .05
- the probability that teh difference you are observing in your data is from a different population
- reasonable doubt = 5%!
-
Type I error
- null is true, but we reject null and assume that there is an effect
- nothing there but we think there is!!
- equal to alpha
-
Type II error
- we failed to reject the null - but there truly is an effect!
- something there but we don't think there is!
- equal to Beta
-
Power
- 1-Beta (1-probability of type II error)
- ability of independent manipulation to detect an effect! - to reject null when should reject it!
-
causal inference
how your independent variable caused some change in the dependent variable
-
ANOVA
- analysis of variance
- when there are more than two groups!
-
Between-subjects design
rely on random assignment/random sampling to make sure the groups don't differ in ability
-
external validity
- can we generalize from results
- results then must be internally valid and replicable! - a
-
generalizations
- 1. to different samples - are your conclusions not limited to your specific sample?
- 2. to different procedures/operationalizations? - how does your research mesh with others?
- 3. to the world at large
-
how would you increase external validity?
- aggregations - multiple subjects, trials, vary the stimuli, measure it in different ways
- multivariate measurement (multiple dependent variables and see hwo they pattern together)
- nonreactive studies - non-experimental
- naturalistic and field studies - non-experimental - people more likely to act normally
more you increase external though, you may decrease internal!
-
Power - depends on...?
- N (sample size)
- small N = higher probability of type 2 error
- which would be a higher power!??
-
Qualitative vs. Quantitative Research
- Both involve observations of behavior!
- Quantitative - more control, less open-ended, reactivity, manipulation, inferential, numbers
- Qualitative - less control, more open-ended, naturalistic, spontaneous, descriptive, categories
-
Why do survey research?
- to assess how people feel abotu an issue
- to examine relationships across responses
- to dispel myths
- to gather scientific information
-
what kinds of problems do you want to avoid in survey research?
- want one issue per item
- want to avoid bias/leading questions
-
how to construct surveys
- make alternatives clear (mutually exclusive and exhaustive)
- beware of social desirability - use neutral statements!
- beware of acquiescence/response bias - when respondents tend to agree to any statement
- think about item format/sequencing (but beware of context effects!)
-
sampling bias
- representativeness - does sample exhibit same distribution of characteristics as the intended population to be studied?
- randomness - does each individual in population have equal likelihood to survey
-
Different kinds of sampling
- probability sampling (simple random, stratified, cluster)
- non-probability sampling (non equal probability) - convenience/haphazard, quota sampling (consider population characteristics)
-
survey administration
- mail surveys
- one-on-one interviews
- telephone interviews
- internet surveys
-
correlational research
- examines degree of relationship between 2 behaviors/events
- changes in one are associated with changes in other (multivariate)
- measures the extent of co-variation between two (or more) dependent variables
- typically reported in terms of "r"
-
types of coreelational studies
- observational research
- survey research
- archival research
-
correlation can be misleading
- Restrictive range (by restrict range of the data = different interpretation)
- outliers (can make it look stronger or weaker)
- nonlinear - a U-shaped relation or a hump (correlations assume simple lines!)
-
correlation vs causation
- correlation is necessary for determining causation but is not sufficient
- X --> Y
- Y --> X
- or a third variable problem (Z could cause X and Y)
|
|