Example: Factorial design applied in optimisation technique.
To meet the ethical considerations, you need to ensure that.
Collect the data by using suitable data collection according to your experiment’s requirement, such as observations, case studies , surveys , interviews , questionnaires, etc. Analyse the obtained information.
Write the report of your research. Present, conclude, and explain the outcomes of your study .
What is the first step in conducting an experimental research.
The first step in conducting experimental research is to define your research question or hypothesis. Clearly outline the purpose and expectations of your experiment to guide the entire research process.
What are the different research strategies you can use in your dissertation? Here are some guidelines to help you choose a research strategy that would make your research more credible.
Statistical significance is described as the measure of the null hypothesis being plausible as compared to the acceptable level of vagueness regarding the true answer.
Statistical tests are used for testing the hypothesis to determine the relaltionship between variables but which statistical test you should use?
USEFUL LINKS
LEARNING RESOURCES
COMPANY DETAILS
Content preview.
Arcu felis bibendum ut tristique et egestas quis:
1.3 - steps for planning, conducting and analyzing an experiment.
The practical steps needed for planning and conducting an experiment include: recognizing the goal of the experiment, choice of factors, choice of response, choice of the design, analysis and then drawing conclusions. This pretty much covers the steps involved in the scientific method.
What this course will deal with primarily is the choice of the design. This focus includes all the related issues about how we handle these factors in conducting our experiments.
We usually talk about "treatment" factors, which are the factors of primary interest to you. In addition to treatment factors, there are nuisance factors which are not your primary focus, but you have to deal with them. Sometimes these are called blocking factors, mainly because we will try to block on these factors to prevent them from influencing the results.
There are other ways that we can categorize factors:
Saul McLeod, PhD
Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology
BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester
Saul McLeod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.
Learn about our Editorial Process
Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc
Associate Editor for Simply Psychology
BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education
Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.
On This Page:
Experimental design refers to how participants are allocated to different groups in an experiment. Types of design include repeated measures, independent groups, and matched pairs designs.
Probably the most common way to design an experiment in psychology is to divide the participants into two groups, the experimental group and the control group, and then introduce a change to the experimental group, not the control group.
The researcher must decide how he/she will allocate their sample to the different experimental groups. For example, if there are 10 participants, will all 10 participants participate in both groups (e.g., repeated measures), or will the participants be split in half and take part in only one group each?
Three types of experimental designs are commonly used:
Independent measures design, also known as between-groups , is an experimental design where different participants are used in each condition of the independent variable. This means that each condition of the experiment includes a different group of participants.
This should be done by random allocation, ensuring that each participant has an equal chance of being assigned to one group.
Independent measures involve using two separate groups of participants, one in each condition. For example:
Repeated Measures design is an experimental design where the same participants participate in each independent variable condition. This means that each experiment condition includes the same group of participants.
Repeated Measures design is also known as within-groups or within-subjects design .
Suppose we used a repeated measures design in which all of the participants first learned words in “loud noise” and then learned them in “no noise.”
We expect the participants to learn better in “no noise” because of order effects, such as practice. However, a researcher can control for order effects using counterbalancing.
The sample would be split into two groups: experimental (A) and control (B). For example, group 1 does ‘A’ then ‘B,’ and group 2 does ‘B’ then ‘A.’ This is to eliminate order effects.
Although order effects occur for each participant, they balance each other out in the results because they occur equally in both groups.
A matched pairs design is an experimental design where pairs of participants are matched in terms of key variables, such as age or socioeconomic status. One member of each pair is then placed into the experimental group and the other member into the control group .
One member of each matched pair must be randomly assigned to the experimental group and the other to the control group.
Experimental design refers to how participants are allocated to an experiment’s different conditions (or IV levels). There are three types:
1. Independent measures / between-groups : Different participants are used in each condition of the independent variable.
2. Repeated measures /within groups : The same participants take part in each condition of the independent variable.
3. Matched pairs : Each condition uses different participants, but they are matched in terms of important characteristics, e.g., gender, age, intelligence, etc.
Read about each of the experiments below. For each experiment, identify (1) which experimental design was used; and (2) why the researcher might have used that design.
1 . To compare the effectiveness of two different types of therapy for depression, depressed patients were assigned to receive either cognitive therapy or behavior therapy for a 12-week period.
The researchers attempted to ensure that the patients in the two groups had similar severity of depressed symptoms by administering a standardized test of depression to each participant, then pairing them according to the severity of their symptoms.
2 . To assess the difference in reading comprehension between 7 and 9-year-olds, a researcher recruited each group from a local primary school. They were given the same passage of text to read and then asked a series of questions to assess their understanding.
3 . To assess the effectiveness of two different ways of teaching reading, a group of 5-year-olds was recruited from a primary school. Their level of reading ability was assessed, and then they were taught using scheme one for 20 weeks.
At the end of this period, their reading was reassessed, and a reading improvement score was calculated. They were then taught using scheme two for a further 20 weeks, and another reading improvement score for this period was calculated. The reading improvement scores for each child were then compared.
4 . To assess the effect of the organization on recall, a researcher randomly assigned student volunteers to two conditions.
Condition one attempted to recall a list of words that were organized into meaningful categories; condition two attempted to recall the same words, randomly grouped on the page.
Ecological validity.
The degree to which an investigation represents real-life experiences.
These are the ways that the experimenter can accidentally influence the participant through their appearance or behavior.
The clues in an experiment lead the participants to think they know what the researcher is looking for (e.g., the experimenter’s body language).
The variable the experimenter manipulates (i.e., changes) is assumed to have a direct effect on the dependent variable.
Variable the experimenter measures. This is the outcome (i.e., the result) of a study.
All variables which are not independent variables but could affect the results (DV) of the experiment. Extraneous variables should be controlled where possible.
Variable(s) that have affected the results (DV), apart from the IV. A confounding variable could be an extraneous variable that has not been controlled.
Randomly allocating participants to independent variable conditions means that all participants should have an equal chance of taking part in each condition.
The principle of random allocation is to avoid bias in how the experiment is carried out and limit the effects of participant variables.
Changes in participants’ performance due to their repeating the same or similar test more than once. Examples of order effects include:
(i) practice effect: an improvement in performance on a task due to repetition, for example, because of familiarity with the task;
(ii) fatigue effect: a decrease in performance of a task due to repetition, for example, because of boredom or tiredness.
Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.
Chapter 6: Experimental Research
Learning Objectives
The information presented so far in this chapter is enough to design a basic experiment. When it comes time to conduct that experiment, however, several additional practical issues arise. In this section, we consider some of these issues and how to deal with them. Much of this information applies to nonexperimental studies as well as experimental ones.
Of course, at the start of any research project you should be thinking about how you will obtain your participants. Unless you have access to people with schizophrenia or incarcerated juvenile offenders, for example, then there is no point designing a study that focuses on these populations. But even if you plan to use a convenience sample, you will have to recruit participants for your study.
There are several approaches to recruiting participants. One is to use participants from a formal subject pool —an established group of people who have agreed to be contacted about participating in research studies. For example, at many colleges and universities, there is a subject pool consisting of students enrolled in introductory psychology courses who must participate in a certain number of studies to meet a course requirement. Researchers post descriptions of their studies and students sign up to participate, usually via an online system. Participants who are not in subject pools can also be recruited by posting or publishing advertisements or making personal appeals to groups that represent the population of interest. For example, a researcher interested in studying older adults could arrange to speak at a meeting of the residents at a retirement community to explain the study and ask for volunteers.
The Volunteer Subject
Even if the participants in a study receive compensation in the form of course credit, a small amount of money, or a chance at being treated for a psychological problem, they are still essentially volunteers. This is worth considering because people who volunteer to participate in psychological research have been shown to differ in predictable ways from those who do not volunteer. Specifically, there is good evidence that on average, volunteers have the following characteristics compared with nonvolunteers (Rosenthal & Rosnow, 1976) [1] :
This difference can be an issue of external validity if there is reason to believe that participants with these characteristics are likely to behave differently than the general population. For example, in testing different methods of persuading people, a rational argument might work better on volunteers than it does on the general population because of their generally higher educational level and IQ.
In many field experiments, the task is not recruiting participants but selecting them. For example, researchers Nicolas Guéguen and Marie-Agnès de Gail conducted a field experiment on the effect of being smiled at on helping, in which the participants were shoppers at a supermarket. A confederate walking down a stairway gazed directly at a shopper walking up the stairway and either smiled or did not smile. Shortly afterward, the shopper encountered another confederate, who dropped some computer diskettes on the ground. The dependent variable was whether or not the shopper stopped to help pick up the diskettes (Guéguen & de Gail, 2003) [2] . Notice that these participants were not “recruited,” but the researchers still had to select them from among all the shoppers taking the stairs that day. It is extremely important that this kind of selection be done according to a well-defined set of rules that is established before the data collection begins and can be explained clearly afterward. In this case, with each trip down the stairs, the confederate was instructed to gaze at the first person he encountered who appeared to be between the ages of 20 and 50. Only if the person gazed back did he or she become a participant in the study. The point of having a well-defined selection rule is to avoid bias in the selection of participants. For example, if the confederate was free to choose which shoppers he would gaze at, he might choose friendly-looking shoppers when he was set to smile and unfriendly-looking ones when he was not set to smile. As we will see shortly, such biases can be entirely unintentional.
It is surprisingly easy to introduce extraneous variables during the procedure. For example, the same experimenter might give clear instructions to one participant but vague instructions to another. Or one experimenter might greet participants warmly while another barely makes eye contact with them. To the extent that such variables affect participants’ behaviour, they add noise to the data and make the effect of the independent variable more difficult to detect. If they vary across conditions, they become confounding variables and provide alternative explanations for the results. For example, if participants in a treatment group are tested by a warm and friendly experimenter and participants in a control group are tested by a cold and unfriendly one, then what appears to be an effect of the treatment might actually be an effect of experimenter demeanor. When there are multiple experimenters, the possibility for introducing extraneous variables is even greater, but is often necessary for practical reasons.
Experimenter’s Sex as an Extraneous Variable
It is well known that whether research participants are male or female can affect the results of a study. But what about whether the experimenter is male or female? There is plenty of evidence that this matters too. Male and female experimenters have slightly different ways of interacting with their participants, and of course participants also respond differently to male and female experimenters (Rosenthal, 1976) [3] .
For example, in a recent study on pain perception, participants immersed their hands in icy water for as long as they could (Ibolya, Brake, & Voss, 2004) [4] . Male participants tolerated the pain longer when the experimenter was a woman, and female participants tolerated it longer when the experimenter was a man.
Researcher Robert Rosenthal has spent much of his career showing that this kind of unintended variation in the procedure does, in fact, affect participants’ behaviour. Furthermore, one important source of such variation is the experimenter’s expectations about how participants “should” behave in the experiment. This outcome is referred to as an experimenter expectancy effect (Rosenthal, 1976) [5] . For example, if an experimenter expects participants in a treatment group to perform better on a task than participants in a control group, then he or she might unintentionally give the treatment group participants clearer instructions or more encouragement or allow them more time to complete the task. In a striking example, Rosenthal and Kermit Fode had several students in a laboratory course in psychology train rats to run through a maze. Although the rats were genetically similar, some of the students were told that they were working with “maze-bright” rats that had been bred to be good learners, and other students were told that they were working with “maze-dull” rats that had been bred to be poor learners. Sure enough, over five days of training, the “maze-bright” rats made more correct responses, made the correct response more quickly, and improved more steadily than the “maze-dull” rats (Rosenthal & Fode, 1963) [6] . Clearly it had to have been the students’ expectations about how the rats would perform that made the difference. But how? Some clues come from data gathered at the end of the study, which showed that students who expected their rats to learn quickly felt more positively about their animals and reported behaving toward them in a more friendly manner (e.g., handling them more).
The way to minimize unintended variation in the procedure is to standardize it as much as possible so that it is carried out in the same way for all participants regardless of the condition they are in. Here are several ways to do this:
Another good practice is to arrange for the experimenters to be “blind” to the research question or to the condition that each participant is tested in. The idea is to minimize experimenter expectancy effects by minimizing the experimenters’ expectations. For example, in a drug study in which each participant receives the drug or a placebo, it is often the case that neither the participants nor the experimenter who interacts with the participants know which condition he or she has been assigned to. Because both the participants and the experimenters are blind to the condition, this technique is referred to as a double-blind study . (A single-blind study is one in which the participant, but not the experimenter, is blind to the condition.) Of course, there are many times this blinding is not possible. For example, if you are both the investigator and the only experimenter, it is not possible for you to remain blind to the research question. Also, in many studies the experimenter must know the condition because he or she must carry out the procedure in a different way in the different conditions.
It is essential to keep good records when you conduct an experiment. As discussed earlier, it is typical for experimenters to generate a written sequence of conditions before the study begins and then to test each new participant in the next condition in the sequence. As you test them, it is a good idea to add to this list basic demographic information; the date, time, and place of testing; and the name of the experimenter who did the testing. It is also a good idea to have a place for the experimenter to write down comments about unusual occurrences (e.g., a confused or uncooperative participant) or questions that come up. This kind of information can be useful later if you decide to analy z e sex differences or effects of different experimenters, or if a question arises about a particular participant or testing session.
It can also be useful to assign an identification number to each participant as you test them. Simply numbering them consecutively beginning with 1 is usually sufficient. This number can then also be written on any response sheets or questionnaires that participants generate, making it easier to keep them together.
It is always a good idea to conduct a pilot test of your experiment. A pilot test is a small-scale study conducted to make sure that a new procedure works as planned. In a pilot test, you can recruit participants formally (e.g., from an established participant pool) or you can recruit them informally from among family, friends, classmates, and so on. The number of participants can be small, but it should be enough to give you confidence that your procedure works as planned. There are several important questions that you can answer by conducting a pilot test:
Of course, to answer some of these questions you will need to observe participants carefully during the procedure and talk with them about it afterward. Participants are often hesitant to criticize a study in front of the researcher, so be sure they understand that their participation is part of a pilot test and you are genuinely interested in feedback that will help you improve the procedure. If the procedure works as planned, then you can proceed with the actual study. If there are problems to be solved, you can solve them, pilot test the new procedure, and continue with this process until you are ready to proceed.
Key Takeaways
A comic of two stick figures talking.
Person 1: Some researchers are starting to figure out the mechanism behind the placebo effect. We’ve used their work to create a new drug: A placebo effect blocker. Now we just need to run a trial. We’ll get two groups, give them both placebos, then give one the REAL placebo blocker, and the other a…. wait.
[The two people scratch their heads]
Person 2: My head hurts.
Person 1: Mine too. Here, want a sugar pill?
[Return to Image]
An established group of people who have agreed to be contacted about participating in research studies.
A source of variation in which the experimenter’s expectations about how participants “should” be have in the experiment.
An experiment in which both the participants and the experimenters are blind to which condition the participants have been assigned to.
A small-scale study conducted to make sure that a new procedure works as planned.
Research Methods in Psychology - 2nd Canadian Edition Copyright © 2015 by Paul C. Price, Rajiv Jhangiani, & I-Chant A. Chiang is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
If you want to conduct a science experiment, first come up with a question you want to answer, then devise a way to test that question. Make sure you have a control, or an untested component to your experiment.
The Basis of Conducting an Experiment. With an experiment, the researcher is trying to learn something new about the world, an explanation of 'why' something happens. The experiment must maintain internal and external validity, or the results will be useless.
A good experimental design requires a strong understanding of the system you are studying. There are five key steps in designing an experiment: Consider your variables and how they are related. Write a specific, testable hypothesis. Design experimental treatments to manipulate your independent variable.
An experiment is a procedure designed to test a hypothesis as part of the scientific method. The two key variables in any experiment are the independent and dependent variables. The independent variable is controlled or changed to test its effects on the dependent variable.
Your experiment tests whether your prediction is accurate and thus your hypothesis is supported or not. It is important for your experiment to be a fair test. You conduct a fair test by making sure that you change only one factor at a time while keeping all other conditions the same.
Experimental research refers to the experiments conducted in the laboratory or observation under controlled conditions. Researchers try to find out the cause-and-effect relationship between two or more variables. The subjects/participants in the experiment are selected and observed.
1.3 - Steps for Planning, Conducting and Analyzing an Experiment. The practical steps needed for planning and conducting an experiment include: recognizing the goal of the experiment, choice of factors, choice of response, choice of the design, analysis and then drawing conclusions.
Key Info. If you haven't already, obtain a notebook to record all of your observations during your experiment. Before starting your experiment, prepare a data table so you can quickly write down your measurements as you observe them. Follow your experimental procedure exactly.
Experiment Terminology. Experimental design refers to how participants are allocated to different groups in an experiment. Types of design include repeated measures, independent groups, and matched pairs designs.
Conducting Experiments. Learning Objectives. Describe several strategies for recruiting participants for an experiment. Explain why it is important to standardize the procedure of an experiment and several ways to do this. Explain what pilot testing is and why it is important.