![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups U.S. flag](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/coreutils/uswds/img/favicons/favicon-57.png)
An official website of the United States government
The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.
The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.
- Publications
- Account settings
Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .
- Advanced Search
- Journal List
- Clin Orthop Surg
- v.6(1); 2014 Mar
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Logo of clinorsurg](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/corehtml/pmc/pmcgifs/logo-clinorsurg.jpg)
![](http://nandemo.space/777/templates/cheerup1/res/banner1.gif)
How to Do Random Allocation (Randomization)
Jeehyoung kim.
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Seoul Sacred Heart General Hospital, Seoul, Korea.
Wonshik Shin
To explain the concept and procedure of random allocation as used in a randomized controlled study.
We explain the general concept of random allocation and demonstrate how to perform the procedure easily and how to report it in a paper.
Randomized controlled trials (RCT) are known as the best method to prove causality in spite of various limitations. Random allocation is a technique that chooses individuals for treatment groups and control groups entirely by chance with no regard to the will of researchers or patients' condition and preference. This allows researchers to control all known and unknown factors that may affect results in treatment groups and control groups.
Allocation concealment is a technique used to prevent selection bias by concealing the allocation sequence from those assigning participants to intervention groups, until the moment of assignment. Allocation concealment prevents researchers from influencing which participants are assigned to a given intervention group. This process must be included in the experiment for the success of any RCT.
Blinding refers to keeping trial participants, health care providers, assessors or data collectors unaware of the assigned intervention, so that they will not be influenced by that knowledge. This process is conducted to minimize possible bias in implementation, dropouts, measurements, etc. Blinding is not always feasible for RCT but should be implemented if possible.
Randomization, allocation concealment and blinding should be well implemented and should be described in the paper.
On the other hand, many researchers are still unfamiliar with how to do randomization, and it has been shown that there are problems in many studies with the accurate performance of the randomization and that some studies are reporting incorrect results. So, we will introduce the recommended way of using statistical methods for a randomized controlled study and show how to report the results properly.
CATEGORIES OF RANDOMIZATION
Simple randomization.
The easiest method is simple randomization. If you assign subjects into two groups A and B, you assign subjects to each group purely randomly for every assignment. Even though this is the most basic way, if the total number of samples is small, sample numbers are likely to be assigned unequally. For this reason, we recommend you to use this method when the total number of samples is more than 100.
Block Randomization
We can create a block to assign sample numbers equally to each group and assign the block.
If we specify two in one block (the so-called block size is two), we can make two possible sequences of AB and BA. When we randomize them, the same sample numbers can be assigned to each group. If the block size is four, we can make six possible sequences; these are AABB, ABAB, ABBA, BAAB, BABA, BBAA, and we randomize them.
However, there is a disadvantage in that the executer can predict the next assignment. We can easily know the fact that B comes after A if the block size is two and if the block size is four; we can predict what every 4th sample is. This is discordant with the principle of randomization. To solve this problem, the allocator must hide the block size from the executer and use randomly mixed block sizes. For example, the block size can be two, four, and six.
Stratified Randomization
Randomization is important because it is almost the only way to assign all the other variables equally except for the factor (A and B) in which we are interested. However, some very important confounding variables can often be assigned unequally to the two groups. This possibility increases when the number of samples is smaller, and we can stratify the variables and assign the two groups equally in this case.
For example, if the smoking status is very important, what will you do? First, we have two methods of randomization that we learned previously. There are two randomly assigned separate sequences for smokers and non-smokers. Smokers are assigned to the smoker's sequences, and non-smokers are assigned to the non-smoker's sequences. Therefore, both smokers and non-smokers groups will be placed equally with the same numbers.
So we can use 'simple randomization with/without stratification' or 'block randomization with/without stratification.' However, if there are multiple stratified variables, it is difficult to place samples in both groups equally with the same numbers. Usually two or fewer stratified variables are recommended.
EXAMPLES OF RANDOMIZATION
Although there are websites or common programs for randomization, let us use an Excel file. Download the attached file in http://cafe.naver.com/easy2know/6427 . It is in a 'Read-only' state, but there is no limit in function; it is in the 'Read-only' state only to prevent accidental modification.
Due to the nature of Excel, if there is a change, it creates a new random number accordingly. If we input any number instead of '2' in the orange-colored cell and click the 'enter key,' it creates new random sequences ( Fig. 1 ). The sequences are the result of simple randomization. The numbers in the right column show the numbers of the total sample. Basically the numbers are up to 1,000, but if you need to, you can extend the numbers with the AutoFill function in Excel.
![An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is cios-6-103-g001.jpg An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is cios-6-103-g001.jpg](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3942596/bin/cios-6-103-g001.jpg)
Simple randomization sheet.
Fig. 2 shows an example of randomization when the block size is four. Also, there are numbers of the total samples in the right column.
![An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is cios-6-103-g002.jpg An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is cios-6-103-g002.jpg](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3942596/bin/cios-6-103-g002.jpg)
An example of randomization when the block size is four.
Fig. 3 shows an example of block randomization when the block size is two and four. Total eight kinds of blocks inside of the red-dotted line are assigned at random. The left column is for allocation and the right column is for the total sample size.
![An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is cios-6-103-g003.jpg An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is cios-6-103-g003.jpg](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3942596/bin/cios-6-103-g003.jpg)
Block randomization when the block size is two and four. Total eight blocks in the red-dotted line are assigned at random. The left column is for allocation and the right column is for the total sample size.
By the way, www.randomization.com can do block randomization for up to four kinds of block sizes and it is very easy to perform as well. Fig. 4 shows the general features and an example.
![An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is cios-6-103-g004.jpg An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is cios-6-103-g004.jpg](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3942596/bin/cios-6-103-g004.jpg)
www.randomization.com can do block randomization more easily. In this figure, the block size is 2, 4, and 6 when the total samples are 88.
THE REALITY OF THE RANDOMIZATION PROCEDURE
How to implement these techniques can vary by each trial. The following is only one of the examples of how these can be implemented in real trial. You may change the details of the example for your experiment. Figures of randomization and allocation concealment can also be adjusted to your needs ( Fig. 5 ).
![Click on image to zoom An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is cios-6-103-g005.jpg](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3942596/bin/cios-6-103-g005.jpg)
The reality of the randomization procedure.
Random Allocation
An independent researcher makes random allocation cards using computer-generated random numbers. He keeps the original random allocation sequences in an inaccessible third place and works with a copy. Since the executers can get confused with the original coding of A and B later, the allocator should record exactly what these codes mean to avoid further confusion.
When the purpose of the study is a surgical procedure, instead of using A and B, different names that distinguish exactly between the surgical procedures should be used (for example, 'the anterior approach' and 'the posterior approach'). It is convenient to reproduce the contents of the Excel file to a Word file, and enlarge the text font after replacing A with 'the anterior approach' (page break) and B with 'the posterior approach' (page break). Next, you print it out and put each of the sheets one by one into each envelope ( Fig. 6 ).
![An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is cios-6-103-g006.jpg An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is cios-6-103-g006.jpg](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3942596/bin/cios-6-103-g006.jpg)
MS word can replace A and B with a specific treatment name easily.
Here in Fig. 6 , '^m' is a special character for manual page break. After setting it as shown, you click 'all change' and print it out. Then we can get it printed per sheet. The inside of the envelope should not be visible from the outside, and it has to be printed out for each one and put in an envelope after being folded several times. In some papers, even aluminum foil was used to hide the print to prevent it from being read with a flash of light.
There are serial numbers on the outside of the envelopes. Input date, time, patient ID, results after the procedure, etc. usually will be recorded on the envelope or another sheet inside of the envelope, also.
Drug Preparation
An independent nurse (researcher) prepares syringes with "drug A" and "drug B" and puts them into envelopes according to the allocation orders. These syringes cannot be distinguished because they contain the same colored liquid with the same volume. Or pills or tablets with the same color and shape (placebo) will be put into the envelopes according to the allocation orders.
In the case of surgical treatment, an independent researcher prepares the envelopes, including writing the treatment name on a sheet of paper inside it. In the operation room, another independent nurse (researcher) opens the envelope and informs the doctor to do the treatment that is written on the paper in the envelope.
Another independent nurse injects the drug or the doctor performs the operation according to the order. The patient's ID, date, time and other information are recorded on each envelope. The nurse and the patient would not know what drugs are injected (double blinded). The doctor knows the treatment and the patient does not know it (one blinded). The preparer retrieves the envelopes and checks to see if the operation (and injection) was done as planned.
In the case of broken or lost syringes, the preparer figures out what the number of the envelope it is and replaces the envelope with the same drug according to the allocation.
The envelopes should be opened just before the injection or operation. For example, when a patient comes, an envelope is opened; however, if this does not meet the criteria for the performance of the study, this can be cancelled. Also, if the operator finds out before an operation the tool that is to be inserted, it is impossible to get the operation as planned. For example, even though plate A was assigned to be used, if the patient was indicated to have some other surgery because of infection or severe osteoporosis, you will waste an envelope and it will cause confusion as well as violate the randomization. All these cases should be mentioned as inclusion criteria and exclusion criteria in advance. To avoid this, the envelopes should be opened just before the operation or injection if possible.
However, in cases where the operation tool is so big that two tools cannot be prepared at the same time, or the preparation takes a lot of money (robotic surgery, etc.) or time (liver transplantation, etc.), the envelopes can be opened in advance.
Also, although you open an envelope and choose the procedure that you see, other conditions that affect the outcome can occur. For example, the patient could be admitted to the intensive care unit for medical problems after treatment, or may not get enough rehabilitation treatment for some other reasons.
In this case, it is an important issue whether to consider this as a follow-up loss or exclude this case from the study. We can deal with this issue by focusing on intention-to-treat analysis and per-protocol analysis. We will study this later when we get a chance.
Survey Results
After a period of time, another independent researcher measures the patient's outcome. He does not know the allocation. That is another blinding, so triple blinding is recommended if possible.
Another independent researcher who was not involved in any stage of these procedures will do the statistical analysis (sometimes a statistician). He even does not know the treatment name because the treatment name is hidden, as in A and B.
REPORTING OF RANDOMIZATION METHODS
From 1988 to 2000, 72 of 2,468 papers (2.9%) in the Journal of Born and Joint Surgery were RCTs. 1) It has been suggested that in some of the papers, randomization was not completely done or the result was not properly reported. According to the analysis of RCTs using painkillers from the January issue in 1966 to the June issue in 2006, 23.9% of the papers were inadequate in terms of the randomization. 2) It would be helpful to see a CONSORT checklist and examples. The following were used in the actual papers and extracted from examples in the CONSORT ( http://www.consort-statement.org ).
Sequence Generation
"Independent pharmacists dispensed either active or placebo inhalers according to a computer generated randomization list."
"For allocation of the participants, a computer-generated list of random numbers was used."
Type of Randomization
"Randomization sequence was created using Stata 9.0 (StataCorp, College Station, TX, USA) statistical software and was stratified by center with a 1:1 allocation using random block sizes of 2, 4, and 6."
"Participants were randomly assigned following simple randomization procedures (computerized random numbers) to 1 of 2 treatment groups."
We can apply the above examples to our case as follows: Randomization sequence was created using Excel 2007 (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA) with a 1:1 allocation using random block sizes of 2 and 4 by an independent doctor. In this way, sequence generation and type of randomization can be expressed at the same time.
Allocation Concealment Mechanism
"The doxycycline and placebo were in capsule form and identical in appearance. They were pre-packed in bottles and consecutively numbered for each woman according to the randomization schedule. Each woman was assigned an order number and received the capsules in the corresponding pre-packed bottle."
"The allocation sequence was concealed from the researcher (JR) enrolling and assessing participants in sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed and stapled envelopes. Aluminum foil inside the envelope was used to render the envelope impermeable to intense light. To prevent subversion of the allocation sequence, the name and date of birth of the participant was written on the envelope and a video tape made of the sealed envelope with participant details visible. Carbon paper inside the envelope transferred the information onto the allocation card inside the envelope and a second researcher (CC) later viewed video tapes to ensure envelopes were still sealed when participants' names were written on them. Corresponding envelopes were opened only after the enrolled participants completed all baseline assessments and it was time to allocate the intervention."
The second example was described in great detail, and we can guess how important the randomization and concealment were.
Who Generated the Allocation Sequence, Who Enrolled Participants, and Who Assigned Participants to Interventions?
"Determination of whether a patient would be treated by streptomycin and bed-rest (S case) or by bed-rest alone (C case) was made by reference to a statistical series based on random sampling numbers drawn up for each sex at each center by Professor Bradford Hill (this means that the stratification was done by sex and center); the details of the series were unknown to any of the investigators or to the coordinator. After acceptance of a patient by the panel, and before admission to the streptomycin center, the appropriate numbered envelope was opened at the central office; the card inside told, if the patient was to be an S or a C case, and this information was then given to the medical officer of the center."
"Details of the allocated group were given on colored cards contained in sequentially numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes. These were prepared at the NPEU and kept in an agreed location on each ward. Randomization took place at the end of the 2nd stage of labor when the midwife considered a vaginal birth was imminent. To enter a woman into the study, the midwife opened the next consecutively numbered envelope."
"Block randomization was by a computer generated random number list prepared by an investigator with no clinical involvement in the trial. We stratified by admission for an oncology related procedure. After the research nurse had obtained the patient's consent, she telephoned a contact who was independent of the recruitment process for allocation consignment."
If Done, Who Was Blinded after Assignment to Interventions and How
"Whereas patients and physicians allocated to the intervention group were aware of the allocated arm, outcome assessors and data analysts were kept blinded to the allocation."
"Blinding and equipoise were strictly maintained by emphasizing to intervention staff and participants that each diet adheres to healthy principles, and each of them is advocated by certain experts to be superior for long-term weight-loss. Except for the interventionists (dieticians and behavioral psychologists), investigators and staff were kept blind to diet assignment of the participants. The trial adhered to established procedures to maintain separation between staff that take outcome measurements and staff that deliver the intervention. Staffs who obtained outcome measurements were not informed of the diet group assignment. Intervention staffs, dieticians and behavioral psychologists who delivered the intervention did not take outcome measurements. All investigators, staffs, and participants were kept masked to outcome measurements and trial results."
In short, in a paper, we have to report who was kept blinded. In the case of physical therapy or surgery, keeping the surgeon blinded would be difficult or even impossible; however, blinding is possible for the person who measures the outcome. Anyhow, all individuals who were kept blinded must be described in the report.
WEBSITES AND SYSTEMS HELPING THESE PROCEDURES
To help with all the procedures of a fully qualified RCT, the following systems including electronic case report forms (eCRFs) are available for researchers.
iCReaT (clinical research and trial management system) in Korea Centers for Disease Control & Prevention (KCDC; http://icreat.nih.go.kr ): free for pre-educated and qualified researchers; there are regular education programs once a month, and some hospitals (for example, Severance Hospital) have their own educational programs. An English version will be available soon for non-Korean researchers.
MRCC ( https://mrcc.snuh.org ): for Seoul National University Hospital only. It is relatively inexpensive and includes statistical counseling.
Velos ( http://eresearch.ncc.re.kr ): a world-famous system and very expensive; it is available at National Cancer Center in Korea ( http://ncc.re.kr/crcc/ ).
eCRFs are very convenient as well as helpful to improve the quality of research and their advantages are summarized in the table ( Table 1 ).
Comparisons between Paper CRFs and e-CRFs of Web-based Clinical Research Management System
![An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is cios-6-103-i001.jpg An external file that holds a picture, illustration, etc.
Object name is cios-6-103-i001.jpg](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3942596/bin/cios-6-103-i001.jpg)
CRF: case report form.
In RCT, random assignment is important and performing it is easy if you know how to do it. Besides the practice of randomization, correct reporting of the randomization process is also important and it should be done very accurately.
No potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
Random Assignment in Psychology (Definition + 40 Examples)
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups practical psychology logo](https://practicalpie.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/practical-psychology-logo-60x60.jpg)
Have you ever wondered how researchers discover new ways to help people learn, make decisions, or overcome challenges? A hidden hero in this adventure of discovery is a method called random assignment, a cornerstone in psychological research that helps scientists uncover the truths about the human mind and behavior.
Random Assignment is a process used in research where each participant has an equal chance of being placed in any group within the study. This technique is essential in experiments as it helps to eliminate biases, ensuring that the different groups being compared are similar in all important aspects.
By doing so, researchers can be confident that any differences observed are likely due to the variable being tested, rather than other factors.
In this article, we’ll explore the intriguing world of random assignment, diving into its history, principles, real-world examples, and the impact it has had on the field of psychology.
History of Random Assignment
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups two women in different conditions](https://practicalpie.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/two-women-in-different-conditions.png)
Stepping back in time, we delve into the origins of random assignment, which finds its roots in the early 20th century.
The pioneering mind behind this innovative technique was Sir Ronald A. Fisher , a British statistician and biologist. Fisher introduced the concept of random assignment in the 1920s, aiming to improve the quality and reliability of experimental research .
His contributions laid the groundwork for the method's evolution and its widespread adoption in various fields, particularly in psychology.
Fisher’s groundbreaking work on random assignment was motivated by his desire to control for confounding variables – those pesky factors that could muddy the waters of research findings.
By assigning participants to different groups purely by chance, he realized that the influence of these confounding variables could be minimized, paving the way for more accurate and trustworthy results.
Early Studies Utilizing Random Assignment
Following Fisher's initial development, random assignment started to gain traction in the research community. Early studies adopting this methodology focused on a variety of topics, from agriculture (which was Fisher’s primary field of interest) to medicine and psychology.
The approach allowed researchers to draw stronger conclusions from their experiments, bolstering the development of new theories and practices.
One notable early study utilizing random assignment was conducted in the field of educational psychology. Researchers were keen to understand the impact of different teaching methods on student outcomes.
By randomly assigning students to various instructional approaches, they were able to isolate the effects of the teaching methods, leading to valuable insights and recommendations for educators.
Evolution of the Methodology
As the decades rolled on, random assignment continued to evolve and adapt to the changing landscape of research.
Advances in technology introduced new tools and techniques for implementing randomization, such as computerized random number generators, which offered greater precision and ease of use.
The application of random assignment expanded beyond the confines of the laboratory, finding its way into field studies and large-scale surveys.
Researchers across diverse disciplines embraced the methodology, recognizing its potential to enhance the validity of their findings and contribute to the advancement of knowledge.
From its humble beginnings in the early 20th century to its widespread use today, random assignment has proven to be a cornerstone of scientific inquiry.
Its development and evolution have played a pivotal role in shaping the landscape of psychological research, driving discoveries that have improved lives and deepened our understanding of the human experience.
Principles of Random Assignment
Delving into the heart of random assignment, we uncover the theories and principles that form its foundation.
The method is steeped in the basics of probability theory and statistical inference, ensuring that each participant has an equal chance of being placed in any group, thus fostering fair and unbiased results.
Basic Principles of Random Assignment
Understanding the core principles of random assignment is key to grasping its significance in research. There are three principles: equal probability of selection, reduction of bias, and ensuring representativeness.
The first principle, equal probability of selection , ensures that every participant has an identical chance of being assigned to any group in the study. This randomness is crucial as it mitigates the risk of bias and establishes a level playing field.
The second principle focuses on the reduction of bias . Random assignment acts as a safeguard, ensuring that the groups being compared are alike in all essential aspects before the experiment begins.
This similarity between groups allows researchers to attribute any differences observed in the outcomes directly to the independent variable being studied.
Lastly, ensuring representativeness is a vital principle. When participants are assigned randomly, the resulting groups are more likely to be representative of the larger population.
This characteristic is crucial for the generalizability of the study’s findings, allowing researchers to apply their insights broadly.
Theoretical Foundation
The theoretical foundation of random assignment lies in probability theory and statistical inference .
Probability theory deals with the likelihood of different outcomes, providing a mathematical framework for analyzing random phenomena. In the context of random assignment, it helps in ensuring that each participant has an equal chance of being placed in any group.
Statistical inference, on the other hand, allows researchers to draw conclusions about a population based on a sample of data drawn from that population. It is the mechanism through which the results of a study can be generalized to a broader context.
Random assignment enhances the reliability of statistical inferences by reducing biases and ensuring that the sample is representative.
Differentiating Random Assignment from Random Selection
It’s essential to distinguish between random assignment and random selection, as the two terms, while related, have distinct meanings in the realm of research.
Random assignment refers to how participants are placed into different groups in an experiment, aiming to control for confounding variables and help determine causes.
In contrast, random selection pertains to how individuals are chosen to participate in a study. This method is used to ensure that the sample of participants is representative of the larger population, which is vital for the external validity of the research.
While both methods are rooted in randomness and probability, they serve different purposes in the research process.
Understanding the theories, principles, and distinctions of random assignment illuminates its pivotal role in psychological research.
This method, anchored in probability theory and statistical inference, serves as a beacon of reliability, guiding researchers in their quest for knowledge and ensuring that their findings stand the test of validity and applicability.
Methodology of Random Assignment
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups woman sleeping with a brain monitor](https://practicalpie.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/woman-sleeping-with-a-brain-monitor.png)
Implementing random assignment in a study is a meticulous process that involves several crucial steps.
The initial step is participant selection, where individuals are chosen to partake in the study. This stage is critical to ensure that the pool of participants is diverse and representative of the population the study aims to generalize to.
Once the pool of participants has been established, the actual assignment process begins. In this step, each participant is allocated randomly to one of the groups in the study.
Researchers use various tools, such as random number generators or computerized methods, to ensure that this assignment is genuinely random and free from biases.
Monitoring and adjusting form the final step in the implementation of random assignment. Researchers need to continuously observe the groups to ensure that they remain comparable in all essential aspects throughout the study.
If any significant discrepancies arise, adjustments might be necessary to maintain the study’s integrity and validity.
Tools and Techniques Used
The evolution of technology has introduced a variety of tools and techniques to facilitate random assignment.
Random number generators, both manual and computerized, are commonly used to assign participants to different groups. These generators ensure that each individual has an equal chance of being placed in any group, upholding the principle of equal probability of selection.
In addition to random number generators, researchers often use specialized computer software designed for statistical analysis and experimental design.
These software programs offer advanced features that allow for precise and efficient random assignment, minimizing the risk of human error and enhancing the study’s reliability.
Ethical Considerations
The implementation of random assignment is not devoid of ethical considerations. Informed consent is a fundamental ethical principle that researchers must uphold.
Informed consent means that every participant should be fully informed about the nature of the study, the procedures involved, and any potential risks or benefits, ensuring that they voluntarily agree to participate.
Beyond informed consent, researchers must conduct a thorough risk and benefit analysis. The potential benefits of the study should outweigh any risks or harms to the participants.
Safeguarding the well-being of participants is paramount, and any study employing random assignment must adhere to established ethical guidelines and standards.
Conclusion of Methodology
The methodology of random assignment, while seemingly straightforward, is a multifaceted process that demands precision, fairness, and ethical integrity. From participant selection to assignment and monitoring, each step is crucial to ensure the validity of the study’s findings.
The tools and techniques employed, coupled with a steadfast commitment to ethical principles, underscore the significance of random assignment as a cornerstone of robust psychological research.
Benefits of Random Assignment in Psychological Research
The impact and importance of random assignment in psychological research cannot be overstated. It is fundamental for ensuring the study is accurate, allowing the researchers to determine if their study actually caused the results they saw, and making sure the findings can be applied to the real world.
Facilitating Causal Inferences
When participants are randomly assigned to different groups, researchers can be more confident that the observed effects are due to the independent variable being changed, and not other factors.
This ability to determine the cause is called causal inference .
This confidence allows for the drawing of causal relationships, which are foundational for theory development and application in psychology.
Ensuring Internal Validity
One of the foremost impacts of random assignment is its ability to enhance the internal validity of an experiment.
Internal validity refers to the extent to which a researcher can assert that changes in the dependent variable are solely due to manipulations of the independent variable , and not due to confounding variables.
By ensuring that each participant has an equal chance of being in any condition of the experiment, random assignment helps control for participant characteristics that could otherwise complicate the results.
Enhancing Generalizability
Beyond internal validity, random assignment also plays a crucial role in enhancing the generalizability of research findings.
When done correctly, it ensures that the sample groups are representative of the larger population, so can allow researchers to apply their findings more broadly.
This representative nature is essential for the practical application of research, impacting policy, interventions, and psychological therapies.
Limitations of Random Assignment
Potential for implementation issues.
While the principles of random assignment are robust, the method can face implementation issues.
One of the most common problems is logistical constraints. Some studies, due to their nature or the specific population being studied, find it challenging to implement random assignment effectively.
For instance, in educational settings, logistical issues such as class schedules and school policies might stop the random allocation of students to different teaching methods .
Ethical Dilemmas
Random assignment, while methodologically sound, can also present ethical dilemmas.
In some cases, withholding a potentially beneficial treatment from one of the groups of participants can raise serious ethical questions, especially in medical or clinical research where participants' well-being might be directly affected.
Researchers must navigate these ethical waters carefully, balancing the pursuit of knowledge with the well-being of participants.
Generalizability Concerns
Even when implemented correctly, random assignment does not always guarantee generalizable results.
The types of people in the participant pool, the specific context of the study, and the nature of the variables being studied can all influence the extent to which the findings can be applied to the broader population.
Researchers must be cautious in making broad generalizations from studies, even those employing strict random assignment.
Practical and Real-World Limitations
In the real world, many variables cannot be manipulated for ethical or practical reasons, limiting the applicability of random assignment.
For instance, researchers cannot randomly assign individuals to different levels of intelligence, socioeconomic status, or cultural backgrounds.
This limitation necessitates the use of other research designs, such as correlational or observational studies , when exploring relationships involving such variables.
Response to Critiques
In response to these critiques, people in favor of random assignment argue that the method, despite its limitations, remains one of the most reliable ways to establish cause and effect in experimental research.
They acknowledge the challenges and ethical considerations but emphasize the rigorous frameworks in place to address them.
The ongoing discussion around the limitations and critiques of random assignment contributes to the evolution of the method, making sure it is continuously relevant and applicable in psychological research.
While random assignment is a powerful tool in experimental research, it is not without its critiques and limitations. Implementation issues, ethical dilemmas, generalizability concerns, and real-world limitations can pose significant challenges.
However, the continued discourse and refinement around these issues underline the method's enduring significance in the pursuit of knowledge in psychology.
By being careful with how we do things and doing what's right, random assignment stays a really important part of studying how people act and think.
Real-World Applications and Examples
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups man on a treadmill](https://practicalpie.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/man-on-a-treadmill.png)
Random assignment has been employed in many studies across various fields of psychology, leading to significant discoveries and advancements.
Here are some real-world applications and examples illustrating the diversity and impact of this method:
- Medicine and Health Psychology: Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) are the gold standard in medical research. In these studies, participants are randomly assigned to either the treatment or control group to test the efficacy of new medications or interventions.
- Educational Psychology: Studies in this field have used random assignment to explore the effects of different teaching methods, classroom environments, and educational technologies on student learning and outcomes.
- Cognitive Psychology: Researchers have employed random assignment to investigate various aspects of human cognition, including memory, attention, and problem-solving, leading to a deeper understanding of how the mind works.
- Social Psychology: Random assignment has been instrumental in studying social phenomena, such as conformity, aggression, and prosocial behavior, shedding light on the intricate dynamics of human interaction.
Let's get into some specific examples. You'll need to know one term though, and that is "control group." A control group is a set of participants in a study who do not receive the treatment or intervention being tested , serving as a baseline to compare with the group that does, in order to assess the effectiveness of the treatment.
- Smoking Cessation Study: Researchers used random assignment to put participants into two groups. One group received a new anti-smoking program, while the other did not. This helped determine if the program was effective in helping people quit smoking.
- Math Tutoring Program: A study on students used random assignment to place them into two groups. One group received additional math tutoring, while the other continued with regular classes, to see if the extra help improved their grades.
- Exercise and Mental Health: Adults were randomly assigned to either an exercise group or a control group to study the impact of physical activity on mental health and mood.
- Diet and Weight Loss: A study randomly assigned participants to different diet plans to compare their effectiveness in promoting weight loss and improving health markers.
- Sleep and Learning: Researchers randomly assigned students to either a sleep extension group or a regular sleep group to study the impact of sleep on learning and memory.
- Classroom Seating Arrangement: Teachers used random assignment to place students in different seating arrangements to examine the effect on focus and academic performance.
- Music and Productivity: Employees were randomly assigned to listen to music or work in silence to investigate the effect of music on workplace productivity.
- Medication for ADHD: Children with ADHD were randomly assigned to receive either medication, behavioral therapy, or a placebo to compare treatment effectiveness.
- Mindfulness Meditation for Stress: Adults were randomly assigned to a mindfulness meditation group or a waitlist control group to study the impact on stress levels.
- Video Games and Aggression: A study randomly assigned participants to play either violent or non-violent video games and then measured their aggression levels.
- Online Learning Platforms: Students were randomly assigned to use different online learning platforms to evaluate their effectiveness in enhancing learning outcomes.
- Hand Sanitizers in Schools: Schools were randomly assigned to use hand sanitizers or not to study the impact on student illness and absenteeism.
- Caffeine and Alertness: Participants were randomly assigned to consume caffeinated or decaffeinated beverages to measure the effects on alertness and cognitive performance.
- Green Spaces and Well-being: Neighborhoods were randomly assigned to receive green space interventions to study the impact on residents’ well-being and community connections.
- Pet Therapy for Hospital Patients: Patients were randomly assigned to receive pet therapy or standard care to assess the impact on recovery and mood.
- Yoga for Chronic Pain: Individuals with chronic pain were randomly assigned to a yoga intervention group or a control group to study the effect on pain levels and quality of life.
- Flu Vaccines Effectiveness: Different groups of people were randomly assigned to receive either the flu vaccine or a placebo to determine the vaccine’s effectiveness.
- Reading Strategies for Dyslexia: Children with dyslexia were randomly assigned to different reading intervention strategies to compare their effectiveness.
- Physical Environment and Creativity: Participants were randomly assigned to different room setups to study the impact of physical environment on creative thinking.
- Laughter Therapy for Depression: Individuals with depression were randomly assigned to laughter therapy sessions or control groups to assess the impact on mood.
- Financial Incentives for Exercise: Participants were randomly assigned to receive financial incentives for exercising to study the impact on physical activity levels.
- Art Therapy for Anxiety: Individuals with anxiety were randomly assigned to art therapy sessions or a waitlist control group to measure the effect on anxiety levels.
- Natural Light in Offices: Employees were randomly assigned to workspaces with natural or artificial light to study the impact on productivity and job satisfaction.
- School Start Times and Academic Performance: Schools were randomly assigned different start times to study the effect on student academic performance and well-being.
- Horticulture Therapy for Seniors: Older adults were randomly assigned to participate in horticulture therapy or traditional activities to study the impact on cognitive function and life satisfaction.
- Hydration and Cognitive Function: Participants were randomly assigned to different hydration levels to measure the impact on cognitive function and alertness.
- Intergenerational Programs: Seniors and young people were randomly assigned to intergenerational programs to study the effects on well-being and cross-generational understanding.
- Therapeutic Horseback Riding for Autism: Children with autism were randomly assigned to therapeutic horseback riding or traditional therapy to study the impact on social communication skills.
- Active Commuting and Health: Employees were randomly assigned to active commuting (cycling, walking) or passive commuting to study the effect on physical health.
- Mindful Eating for Weight Management: Individuals were randomly assigned to mindful eating workshops or control groups to study the impact on weight management and eating habits.
- Noise Levels and Learning: Students were randomly assigned to classrooms with different noise levels to study the effect on learning and concentration.
- Bilingual Education Methods: Schools were randomly assigned different bilingual education methods to compare their effectiveness in language acquisition.
- Outdoor Play and Child Development: Children were randomly assigned to different amounts of outdoor playtime to study the impact on physical and cognitive development.
- Social Media Detox: Participants were randomly assigned to a social media detox or regular usage to study the impact on mental health and well-being.
- Therapeutic Writing for Trauma Survivors: Individuals who experienced trauma were randomly assigned to therapeutic writing sessions or control groups to study the impact on psychological well-being.
- Mentoring Programs for At-risk Youth: At-risk youth were randomly assigned to mentoring programs or control groups to assess the impact on academic achievement and behavior.
- Dance Therapy for Parkinson’s Disease: Individuals with Parkinson’s disease were randomly assigned to dance therapy or traditional exercise to study the effect on motor function and quality of life.
- Aquaponics in Schools: Schools were randomly assigned to implement aquaponics programs to study the impact on student engagement and environmental awareness.
- Virtual Reality for Phobia Treatment: Individuals with phobias were randomly assigned to virtual reality exposure therapy or traditional therapy to compare effectiveness.
- Gardening and Mental Health: Participants were randomly assigned to engage in gardening or other leisure activities to study the impact on mental health and stress reduction.
Each of these studies exemplifies how random assignment is utilized in various fields and settings, shedding light on the multitude of ways it can be applied to glean valuable insights and knowledge.
Real-world Impact of Random Assignment
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups old lady gardening](https://practicalpie.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/old-lady-gardening.png)
Random assignment is like a key tool in the world of learning about people's minds and behaviors. It’s super important and helps in many different areas of our everyday lives. It helps make better rules, creates new ways to help people, and is used in lots of different fields.
Health and Medicine
In health and medicine, random assignment has helped doctors and scientists make lots of discoveries. It’s a big part of tests that help create new medicines and treatments.
By putting people into different groups by chance, scientists can really see if a medicine works.
This has led to new ways to help people with all sorts of health problems, like diabetes, heart disease, and mental health issues like depression and anxiety.
Schools and education have also learned a lot from random assignment. Researchers have used it to look at different ways of teaching, what kind of classrooms are best, and how technology can help learning.
This knowledge has helped make better school rules, develop what we learn in school, and find the best ways to teach students of all ages and backgrounds.
Workplace and Organizational Behavior
Random assignment helps us understand how people act at work and what makes a workplace good or bad.
Studies have looked at different kinds of workplaces, how bosses should act, and how teams should be put together. This has helped companies make better rules and create places to work that are helpful and make people happy.
Environmental and Social Changes
Random assignment is also used to see how changes in the community and environment affect people. Studies have looked at community projects, changes to the environment, and social programs to see how they help or hurt people’s well-being.
This has led to better community projects, efforts to protect the environment, and programs to help people in society.
Technology and Human Interaction
In our world where technology is always changing, studies with random assignment help us see how tech like social media, virtual reality, and online stuff affect how we act and feel.
This has helped make better and safer technology and rules about using it so that everyone can benefit.
The effects of random assignment go far and wide, way beyond just a science lab. It helps us understand lots of different things, leads to new and improved ways to do things, and really makes a difference in the world around us.
From making healthcare and schools better to creating positive changes in communities and the environment, the real-world impact of random assignment shows just how important it is in helping us learn and make the world a better place.
So, what have we learned? Random assignment is like a super tool in learning about how people think and act. It's like a detective helping us find clues and solve mysteries in many parts of our lives.
From creating new medicines to helping kids learn better in school, and from making workplaces happier to protecting the environment, it’s got a big job!
This method isn’t just something scientists use in labs; it reaches out and touches our everyday lives. It helps make positive changes and teaches us valuable lessons.
Whether we are talking about technology, health, education, or the environment, random assignment is there, working behind the scenes, making things better and safer for all of us.
In the end, the simple act of putting people into groups by chance helps us make big discoveries and improvements. It’s like throwing a small stone into a pond and watching the ripples spread out far and wide.
Thanks to random assignment, we are always learning, growing, and finding new ways to make our world a happier and healthier place for everyone!
Related posts:
- 19+ Experimental Design Examples (Methods + Types)
- Cluster Sampling vs Stratified Sampling
- 41+ White Collar Job Examples (Salary + Path)
- 47+ Blue Collar Job Examples (Salary + Path)
- McDonaldization of Society (Definition + Examples)
Reference this article:
About The Author
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Photo of author](https://practicalpie.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/practical-psychology-logo-400x400.jpg)
Free Personality Test
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Free Personality Quiz](https://practicalpie.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/personality-quiz.png)
Free Memory Test
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Free Memory Test](https://practicalpie.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/memory1-e1652207414995.png)
Free IQ Test
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Free IQ Test](https://practicalpie.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/iq2.png)
PracticalPie.com is a participant in the Amazon Associates Program. As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Follow Us On:
Youtube Facebook Instagram X/Twitter
Psychology Resources
Developmental
Personality
Relationships
Psychologists
Serial Killers
Psychology Tests
Personality Quiz
Memory Test
Depression test
Type A/B Personality Test
© PracticalPsychology. All rights reserved
Privacy Policy | Terms of Use
Experimental Design: Types, Examples & Methods
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:
1. Independent Measures
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:
![Experimental Design: Types, Examples & Methods 1 Independent Measures Design 2](https://www.simplypsychology.org/wp-content/uploads/Independent-Measures-Design-2.jpg)
- Con : More people are needed than with the repeated measures design (i.e., more time-consuming).
- Pro : Avoids order effects (such as practice or fatigue) as people participate in one condition only. If a person is involved in several conditions, they may become bored, tired, and fed up by the time they come to the second condition or become wise to the requirements of the experiment!
- Con : Differences between participants in the groups may affect results, for example, variations in age, gender, or social background. These differences are known as participant variables (i.e., a type of extraneous variable ).
- Control : After the participants have been recruited, they should be randomly assigned to their groups. This should ensure the groups are similar, on average (reducing participant variables).
2. Repeated Measures Design
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 .
- Pro : As the same participants are used in each condition, participant variables (i.e., individual differences) are reduced.
- Con : There may be order effects. Order effects refer to the order of the conditions affecting the participants’ behavior. Performance in the second condition may be better because the participants know what to do (i.e., practice effect). Or their performance might be worse in the second condition because they are tired (i.e., fatigue effect). This limitation can be controlled using counterbalancing.
- Pro : Fewer people are needed as they participate in all conditions (i.e., saves time).
- Control : To combat order effects, the researcher counter-balances the order of the conditions for the participants. Alternating the order in which participants perform in different conditions of an experiment.
Counterbalancing
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.
![Experimental Design: Types, Examples & Methods 2 counter balancing](https://www.simplypsychology.org/wp-content/uploads/counter-balancing.jpg)
3. Matched Pairs Design
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: Types, Examples & Methods 3 matched pairs design](https://www.simplypsychology.org/wp-content/uploads/matched-pairs-design.jpg)
- Con : If one participant drops out, you lose 2 PPs’ data.
- Pro : Reduces participant variables because the researcher has tried to pair up the participants so that each condition has people with similar abilities and characteristics.
- Con : Very time-consuming trying to find closely matched pairs.
- Pro : It avoids order effects, so counterbalancing is not necessary.
- Con : Impossible to match people exactly unless they are identical twins!
- Control : Members of each pair should be randomly assigned to conditions. However, this does not solve all these problems.
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.
Learning Check
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.
Experiment Terminology
Ecological validity.
The degree to which an investigation represents real-life experiences.
Experimenter effects
These are the ways that the experimenter can accidentally influence the participant through their appearance or behavior.
Demand characteristics
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).
Independent variable (IV)
The variable the experimenter manipulates (i.e., changes) is assumed to have a direct effect on the dependent variable.
Dependent variable (DV)
Variable the experimenter measures. This is the outcome (i.e., the result) of a study.
Extraneous variables (EV)
All variables which are not independent variables but could affect the results (DV) of the experiment. Extraneous variables should be controlled where possible.
Confounding variables
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.
Random Allocation
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.
Order effects
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.
![Experimental Design: Types, Examples & Methods 4 Print Friendly, PDF & Email](https://www.simplypsychology.org/wp-content/uploads/three-icons-with-text-light-blue.jpg)
- Skip to secondary menu
- Skip to main content
- Skip to primary sidebar
Statistics By Jim
Making statistics intuitive
Random Assignment in Experiments
By Jim Frost 4 Comments
Random assignment uses chance to assign subjects to the control and treatment groups in an experiment. This process helps ensure that the groups are equivalent at the beginning of the study, which makes it safer to assume the treatments caused any differences between groups that the experimenters observe at the end of the study.
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups photogram of tumbling dice to illustrate a process for random assignment.](https://i0.wp.com/statisticsbyjim.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/random_dice.png?resize=300%2C236&ssl=1)
Huh? That might be a big surprise! At this point, you might be wondering about all of those studies that use statistics to assess the effects of different treatments. There’s a critical separation between significance and causality:
- Statistical procedures determine whether an effect is significant.
- Experimental designs determine how confidently you can assume that a treatment causes the effect.
In this post, learn how using random assignment in experiments can help you identify causal relationships.
Correlation, Causation, and Confounding Variables
Random assignment helps you separate causation from correlation and rule out confounding variables. As a critical component of the scientific method , experiments typically set up contrasts between a control group and one or more treatment groups. The idea is to determine whether the effect, which is the difference between a treatment group and the control group, is statistically significant. If the effect is significant, group assignment correlates with different outcomes.
However, as you have no doubt heard, correlation does not necessarily imply causation. In other words, the experimental groups can have different mean outcomes, but the treatment might not be causing those differences even though the differences are statistically significant.
The difficulty in definitively stating that a treatment caused the difference is due to potential confounding variables or confounders. Confounders are alternative explanations for differences between the experimental groups. Confounding variables correlate with both the experimental groups and the outcome variable. In this situation, confounding variables can be the actual cause for the outcome differences rather than the treatments themselves. As you’ll see, if an experiment does not account for confounding variables, they can bias the results and make them untrustworthy.
Related posts : Understanding Correlation in Statistics , Causation versus Correlation , and Hill’s Criteria for Causation .
Example of Confounding in an Experiment
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups A photograph of vitamin capsules to represent our experiment.](https://i0.wp.com/statisticsbyjim.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/vitamins.jpg?resize=300%2C200&ssl=1)
- Control group: Does not consume vitamin supplements
- Treatment group: Regularly consumes vitamin supplements.
Imagine we measure a specific health outcome. After the experiment is complete, we perform a 2-sample t-test to determine whether the mean outcomes for these two groups are different. Assume the test results indicate that the mean health outcome in the treatment group is significantly better than the control group.
Why can’t we assume that the vitamins improved the health outcomes? After all, only the treatment group took the vitamins.
Related post : Confounding Variables in Regression Analysis
Alternative Explanations for Differences in Outcomes
The answer to that question depends on how we assigned the subjects to the experimental groups. If we let the subjects decide which group to join based on their existing vitamin habits, it opens the door to confounding variables. It’s reasonable to assume that people who take vitamins regularly also tend to have other healthy habits. These habits are confounders because they correlate with both vitamin consumption (experimental group) and the health outcome measure.
Random assignment prevents this self sorting of participants and reduces the likelihood that the groups start with systematic differences.
In fact, studies have found that supplement users are more physically active, have healthier diets, have lower blood pressure, and so on compared to those who don’t take supplements. If subjects who already take vitamins regularly join the treatment group voluntarily, they bring these healthy habits disproportionately to the treatment group. Consequently, these habits will be much more prevalent in the treatment group than the control group.
The healthy habits are the confounding variables—the potential alternative explanations for the difference in our study’s health outcome. It’s entirely possible that these systematic differences between groups at the start of the study might cause the difference in the health outcome at the end of the study—and not the vitamin consumption itself!
If our experiment doesn’t account for these confounding variables, we can’t trust the results. While we obtained statistically significant results with the 2-sample t-test for health outcomes, we don’t know for sure whether the vitamins, the systematic difference in habits, or some combination of the two caused the improvements.
Learn why many randomized clinical experiments use a placebo to control for the Placebo Effect .
Experiments Must Account for Confounding Variables
Your experimental design must account for confounding variables to avoid their problems. Scientific studies commonly use the following methods to handle confounders:
- Use control variables to keep them constant throughout an experiment.
- Statistically control for them in an observational study.
- Use random assignment to reduce the likelihood that systematic differences exist between experimental groups when the study begins.
Let’s take a look at how random assignment works in an experimental design.
Random Assignment Can Reduce the Impact of Confounding Variables
Note that random assignment is different than random sampling. Random sampling is a process for obtaining a sample that accurately represents a population .
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Photo of a coin toss to represent how we can incorporate random assignment in our experiment.](https://i0.wp.com/statisticsbyjim.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/coin_toss.png?resize=300%2C300&ssl=1)
Random assignment uses a chance process to assign subjects to experimental groups. Using random assignment requires that the experimenters can control the group assignment for all study subjects. For our study, we must be able to assign our participants to either the control group or the supplement group. Clearly, if we don’t have the ability to assign subjects to the groups, we can’t use random assignment!
Additionally, the process must have an equal probability of assigning a subject to any of the groups. For example, in our vitamin supplement study, we can use a coin toss to assign each subject to either the control group or supplement group. For more complex experimental designs, we can use a random number generator or even draw names out of a hat.
Random Assignment Distributes Confounders Equally
The random assignment process distributes confounding properties amongst your experimental groups equally. In other words, randomness helps eliminate systematic differences between groups. For our study, flipping the coin tends to equalize the distribution of subjects with healthier habits between the control and treatment group. Consequently, these two groups should start roughly equal for all confounding variables, including healthy habits!
Random assignment is a simple, elegant solution to a complex problem. For any given study area, there can be a long list of confounding variables that you could worry about. However, using random assignment, you don’t need to know what they are, how to detect them, or even measure them. Instead, use random assignment to equalize them across your experimental groups so they’re not a problem.
Because random assignment helps ensure that the groups are comparable when the experiment begins, you can be more confident that the treatments caused the post-study differences. Random assignment helps increase the internal validity of your study.
Comparing the Vitamin Study With and Without Random Assignment
Let’s compare two scenarios involving our hypothetical vitamin study. We’ll assume that the study obtains statistically significant results in both cases.
Scenario 1: We don’t use random assignment and, unbeknownst to us, subjects with healthier habits disproportionately end up in the supplement treatment group. The experimental groups differ by both healthy habits and vitamin consumption. Consequently, we can’t determine whether it was the habits or vitamins that improved the outcomes.
Scenario 2: We use random assignment and, consequently, the treatment and control groups start with roughly equal levels of healthy habits. The intentional introduction of vitamin supplements in the treatment group is the primary difference between the groups. Consequently, we can more confidently assert that the supplements caused an improvement in health outcomes.
For both scenarios, the statistical results could be identical. However, the methodology behind the second scenario makes a stronger case for a causal relationship between vitamin supplement consumption and health outcomes.
How important is it to use the correct methodology? Well, if the relationship between vitamins and health outcomes is not causal, then consuming vitamins won’t cause your health outcomes to improve regardless of what the study indicates. Instead, it’s probably all the other healthy habits!
Learn more about Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) that are the gold standard for identifying causal relationships because they use random assignment.
Drawbacks of Random Assignment
Random assignment helps reduce the chances of systematic differences between the groups at the start of an experiment and, thereby, mitigates the threats of confounding variables and alternative explanations. However, the process does not always equalize all of the confounding variables. Its random nature tends to eliminate systematic differences, but it doesn’t always succeed.
Sometimes random assignment is impossible because the experimenters cannot control the treatment or independent variable. For example, if you want to determine how individuals with and without depression perform on a test, you cannot randomly assign subjects to these groups. The same difficulty occurs when you’re studying differences between genders.
In other cases, there might be ethical issues. For example, in a randomized experiment, the researchers would want to withhold treatment for the control group. However, if the treatments are vaccinations, it might be unethical to withhold the vaccinations.
Other times, random assignment might be possible, but it is very challenging. For example, with vitamin consumption, it’s generally thought that if vitamin supplements cause health improvements, it’s only after very long-term use. It’s hard to enforce random assignment with a strict regimen for usage in one group and non-usage in the other group over the long-run. Or imagine a study about smoking. The researchers would find it difficult to assign subjects to the smoking and non-smoking groups randomly!
Fortunately, if you can’t use random assignment to help reduce the problem of confounding variables, there are different methods available. The other primary approach is to perform an observational study and incorporate the confounders into the statistical model itself. For more information, read my post Observational Studies Explained .
Read About Real Experiments that Used Random Assignment
I’ve written several blog posts about studies that have used random assignment to make causal inferences. Read studies about the following:
- Flu Vaccinations
- COVID-19 Vaccinations
Sullivan L. Random assignment versus random selection . SAGE Glossary of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, SAGE Publications, Inc.; 2009.
Share this:
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups](https://i0.wp.com/assets.pinterest.com/images/pidgets/pinit_fg_en_rect_gray_20.png)
Reader Interactions
November 13, 2019 at 4:59 am
Hi Jim, I have a question of randomly assigning participants to one of two conditions when it is an ongoing study and you are not sure of how many participants there will be. I am using this random assignment tool for factorial experiments. http://methodologymedia.psu.edu/most/rannumgenerator It asks you for the total number of participants but at this point, I am not sure how many there will be. Thanks for any advice you can give me, Floyd
May 28, 2019 at 11:34 am
Jim, can you comment on the validity of using the following approach when we can’t use random assignments. I’m in education, we have an ACT prep course that we offer. We can’t force students to take it and we can’t keep them from taking it either. But we want to know if it’s working. Let’s say that by senior year all students who are going to take the ACT have taken it. Let’s also say that I’m only including students who have taking it twice (so I can show growth between first and second time taking it). What I’ve done to address confounders is to go back to say 8th or 9th grade (prior to anyone taking the ACT or the ACT prep course) and run an analysis showing the two groups are not significantly different to start with. Is this valid? If the ACT prep students were higher achievers in 8th or 9th grade, I could not assume my prep course is effecting greater growth, but if they were not significantly different in 8th or 9th grade, I can assume the significant difference in ACT growth (from first to second testing) is due to the prep course. Yes or no?
May 26, 2019 at 5:37 pm
Nice post! I think the key to understanding scientific research is to understand randomization. And most people don’t get it.
May 27, 2019 at 9:48 pm
Thank you, Anoop!
I think randomness in an experiment is a funny thing. The issue of confounding factors is a serious problem. You might not even know what they are! But, use random assignment and, voila, the problem usually goes away! If you can’t use random assignment, suddenly you have a whole host of issues to worry about, which I’ll be writing about in more detail in my upcoming post about observational experiments!
Comments and Questions Cancel reply
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups helpful professor logo](https://helpfulprofessor.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/05/logo-new-font-323x42.png)
Random Assignment in Psychology (Intro for Students)
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Random Assignment in Psychology (Intro for Students)](https://helpfulprofessor.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Dave.jpg)
Dave Cornell (PhD)
Dr. Cornell has worked in education for more than 20 years. His work has involved designing teacher certification for Trinity College in London and in-service training for state governments in the United States. He has trained kindergarten teachers in 8 countries and helped businessmen and women open baby centers and kindergartens in 3 countries.
Learn about our Editorial Process
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Random Assignment in Psychology (Intro for Students)](https://helpfulprofessor.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Chris-200px.jpg)
Chris Drew (PhD)
This article was peer-reviewed and edited by Chris Drew (PhD). The review process on Helpful Professor involves having a PhD level expert fact check, edit, and contribute to articles. Reviewers ensure all content reflects expert academic consensus and is backed up with reference to academic studies. Dr. Drew has published over 20 academic articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education and holds a PhD in Education from ACU.
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups](https://helpfulprofessor.com/wp-content/plugins/helpfulprofessor-functions/img/certified-check.png)
Random assignment is a research procedure used to randomly assign participants to different experimental conditions (or ‘groups’). This introduces the element of chance, ensuring that each participant has an equal likelihood of being placed in any condition group for the study.
It is absolutely essential that the treatment condition and the control condition are the same in all ways except for the variable being manipulated.
Using random assignment to place participants in different conditions helps to achieve this.
It ensures that those conditions are the same in regards to all potential confounding variables and extraneous factors .
Why Researchers Use Random Assignment
Researchers use random assignment to control for confounds in research.
Confounds refer to unwanted and often unaccounted-for variables that might affect the outcome of a study. These confounding variables can skew the results, rendering the experiment unreliable.
For example, below is a study with two groups. Note how there are more ‘red’ individuals in the first group than the second:
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups a representation of a treatment condition showing 12 red people in the cohort](https://helpfulprofessor.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/image-2-1010x1024.png)
There is likely a confounding variable in this experiment explaining why more red people ended up in the treatment condition and less in the control condition. The red people might have self-selected, for example, leading to a skew of them in one group over the other.
Ideally, we’d want a more even distribution, like below:
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups a representation of a treatment condition showing 4 red people in the cohort](https://helpfulprofessor.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/08/image-4-1018x1024.png)
To achieve better balance in our two conditions, we use randomized sampling.
Fact File: Experiments 101
Random assignment is used in the type of research called the experiment.
An experiment involves manipulating the level of one variable and examining how it affects another variable. These are the independent and dependent variables :
- Independent Variable: The variable manipulated is called the independent variable (IV)
- Dependent Variable: The variable that it is expected to affect is called the dependent variable (DV).
The most basic form of the experiment involves two conditions: the treatment and the control .
- The Treatment Condition: The treatment condition involves the participants being exposed to the IV.
- The Control Condition: The control condition involves the absence of the IV. Therefore, the IV has two levels: zero and some quantity.
Researchers utilize random assignment to determine which participants go into which conditions.
Methods of Random Assignment
There are several procedures that researchers can use to randomly assign participants to different conditions.
1. Random number generator
There are several websites that offer computer-generated random numbers. Simply indicate how many conditions are in the experiment and then click. If there are 4 conditions, the program will randomly generate a number between 1 and 4 each time it is clicked.
2. Flipping a coin
If there are two conditions in an experiment, then the simplest way to implement random assignment is to flip a coin for each participant. Heads means being assigned to the treatment and tails means being assigned to the control (or vice versa).
3. Rolling a die
Rolling a single die is another way to randomly assign participants. If the experiment has three conditions, then numbers 1 and 2 mean being assigned to the control; numbers 3 and 4 mean treatment condition one; and numbers 5 and 6 mean treatment condition two.
4. Condition names in a hat
In some studies, the researcher will write the name of the treatment condition(s) or control on slips of paper and place them in a hat. If there are 4 conditions and 1 control, then there are 5 slips of paper.
The researcher closes their eyes and selects one slip for each participant. That person is then assigned to one of the conditions in the study and that slip of paper is placed back in the hat. Repeat as necessary.
There are other ways of trying to ensure that the groups of participants are equal in all ways with the exception of the IV. However, random assignment is the most often used because it is so effective at reducing confounds.
Read About More Methods and Examples of Random Assignment Here
Potential Confounding Effects
Random assignment is all about minimizing confounding effects.
Here are six types of confounds that can be controlled for using random assignment:
- Individual Differences: Participants in a study will naturally vary in terms of personality, intelligence, mood, prior knowledge, and many other characteristics. If one group happens to have more people with a particular characteristic, this could affect the results. Random assignment ensures that these individual differences are spread out equally among the experimental groups, making it less likely that they will unduly influence the outcome.
- Temporal or Time-Related Confounds: Events or situations that occur at a particular time can influence the outcome of an experiment. For example, a participant might be tested after a stressful event, while another might be tested after a relaxing weekend. Random assignment ensures that such effects are equally distributed among groups, thus controlling for their potential influence.
- Order Effects: If participants are exposed to multiple treatments or tests, the order in which they experience them can influence their responses. Randomly assigning the order of treatments for different participants helps control for this.
- Location or Environmental Confounds: The environment in which the study is conducted can influence the results. One group might be tested in a noisy room, while another might be in a quiet room. Randomly assigning participants to different locations can control for these effects.
- Instrumentation Confounds: These occur when there are variations in the calibration or functioning of measurement instruments across conditions. If one group’s responses are being measured using a slightly different tool or scale, it can introduce a confound. Random assignment can ensure that any such potential inconsistencies in instrumentation are equally distributed among groups.
- Experimenter Effects: Sometimes, the behavior or expectations of the person administering the experiment can unintentionally influence the participants’ behavior or responses. For instance, if an experimenter believes one treatment is superior, they might unconsciously communicate this belief to participants. Randomly assigning experimenters or using a double-blind procedure (where neither the participant nor the experimenter knows the treatment being given) can help control for this.
Random assignment helps balance out these and other potential confounds across groups, ensuring that any observed differences are more likely due to the manipulated independent variable rather than some extraneous factor.
Limitations of the Random Assignment Procedure
Although random assignment is extremely effective at eliminating the presence of participant-related confounds, there are several scenarios in which it cannot be used.
- Ethics: The most obvious scenario is when it would be unethical. For example, if wanting to investigate the effects of emotional abuse on children, it would be unethical to randomly assign children to either received abuse or not. Even if a researcher were to propose such a study, it would not receive approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB) which oversees research by university faculty.
- Practicality: Other scenarios involve matters of practicality. For example, randomly assigning people to specific types of diet over a 10-year period would be interesting, but it would be highly unlikely that participants would be diligent enough to make the study valid. This is why examining these types of subjects has to be carried out through observational studies . The data is correlational, which is informative, but falls short of the scientist’s ultimate goal of identifying causality.
- Small Sample Size: The smaller the sample size being assigned to conditions, the more likely it is that the two groups will be unequal. For example, if you flip a coin many times in a row then you will notice that sometimes there will be a string of heads or tails that come up consecutively. This means that one condition may have a build-up of participants that share the same characteristics. However, if you continue flipping the coin, over the long-term, there will be a balance of heads and tails. Unfortunately, how large a sample size is necessary has been the subject of considerable debate (Bloom, 2006; Shadish et al., 2002).
“It is well known that larger sample sizes reduce the probability that random assignment will result in conditions that are unequal” (Goldberg, 2019, p. 2).
Applications of Random Assignment
The importance of random assignment has been recognized in a wide range of scientific and applied disciplines (Bloom, 2006).
Random assignment began as a tool in agricultural research by Fisher (1925, 1935). After WWII, it became extensively used in medical research to test the effectiveness of new treatments and pharmaceuticals (Marks, 1997).
Today it is widely used in industrial engineering (Box, Hunter, and Hunter, 2005), educational research (Lindquist, 1953; Ong-Dean et al., 2011)), psychology (Myers, 1972), and social policy studies (Boruch, 1998; Orr, 1999).
One of the biggest obstacles to the validity of an experiment is the confound. If the group of participants in the treatment condition are substantially different from the group in the control condition, then it is impossible to determine if the IV has an affect or if the confound has an effect.
Thankfully, random assignment is highly effective at eliminating confounds that are known and unknown. Because each participant has an equal chance of being placed in each condition, they are equally distributed.
There are several ways of implementing random assignment, including flipping a coin or using a random number generator.
Random assignment has become an essential procedure in research in a wide range of subjects such as psychology, education, and social policy.
Alferes, V. R. (2012). Methods of randomization in experimental design . Sage Publications.
Bloom, H. S. (2008). The core analytics of randomized experiments for social research. The SAGE Handbook of Social Research Methods , 115-133.
Boruch, R. F. (1998). Randomized controlled experiments for evaluation and planning. Handbook of applied social research methods , 161-191.
Box, G. E., Hunter, W. G., & Hunter, J. S. (2005). Design of experiments: Statistics for Experimenters: Design, Innovation and Discovery.
Dehue, T. (1997). Deception, efficiency, and random groups: Psychology and the gradual origination of the random group design. Isis , 88 (4), 653-673.
Fisher, R.A. (1925). Statistical methods for research workers (11th ed. rev.). Oliver and Boyd: Edinburgh.
Fisher, R. A. (1935). The Design of Experiments. Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd.
Goldberg, M. H. (2019). How often does random assignment fail? Estimates and recommendations. Journal of Environmental Psychology , 66 , 101351.
Jamison, J. C. (2019). The entry of randomized assignment into the social sciences. Journal of Causal Inference , 7 (1), 20170025.
Lindquist, E. F. (1953). Design and analysis of experiments in psychology and education . Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.
Marks, H. M. (1997). The progress of experiment: Science and therapeutic reform in the United States, 1900-1990 . Cambridge University Press.
Myers, J. L. (1972). Fundamentals of experimental design (2nd ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
Ong-Dean, C., Huie Hofstetter, C., & Strick, B. R. (2011). Challenges and dilemmas in implementing random assignment in educational research. American Journal of Evaluation , 32 (1), 29-49.
Orr, L. L. (1999). Social experiments: Evaluating public programs with experimental methods . Sage.
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Quasi-experiments: interrupted time-series designs. Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference , 171-205.
Stigler, S. M. (1992). A historical view of statistical concepts in psychology and educational research. American Journal of Education , 101 (1), 60-70.
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Dave](https://helpfulprofessor.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/Dave-150x150.jpg)
- Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 23 Achieved Status Examples
- Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 25 Defense Mechanisms Examples
- Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 15 Theory of Planned Behavior Examples
- Dave Cornell (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/dave-cornell-phd/ 18 Adaptive Behavior Examples
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Chris](https://helpfulprofessor.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Chris-200px-150x150.jpg)
- Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 23 Achieved Status Examples
- Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 15 Ableism Examples
- Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 25 Defense Mechanisms Examples
- Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd/ 15 Theory of Planned Behavior Examples
Leave a Comment Cancel Reply
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Frequently asked questions
How do you randomly assign participants to groups.
To implement random assignment , assign a unique number to every member of your study’s sample .
Then, you can use a random number generator or a lottery method to randomly assign each number to a control or experimental group. You can also do so manually, by flipping a coin or rolling a dice to randomly assign participants to groups.
Frequently asked questions: Methodology
Attrition refers to participants leaving a study. It always happens to some extent—for example, in randomized controlled trials for medical research.
Differential attrition occurs when attrition or dropout rates differ systematically between the intervention and the control group . As a result, the characteristics of the participants who drop out differ from the characteristics of those who stay in the study. Because of this, study results may be biased .
Action research is conducted in order to solve a particular issue immediately, while case studies are often conducted over a longer period of time and focus more on observing and analyzing a particular ongoing phenomenon.
Action research is focused on solving a problem or informing individual and community-based knowledge in a way that impacts teaching, learning, and other related processes. It is less focused on contributing theoretical input, instead producing actionable input.
Action research is particularly popular with educators as a form of systematic inquiry because it prioritizes reflection and bridges the gap between theory and practice. Educators are able to simultaneously investigate an issue as they solve it, and the method is very iterative and flexible.
A cycle of inquiry is another name for action research . It is usually visualized in a spiral shape following a series of steps, such as “planning → acting → observing → reflecting.”
To make quantitative observations , you need to use instruments that are capable of measuring the quantity you want to observe. For example, you might use a ruler to measure the length of an object or a thermometer to measure its temperature.
Criterion validity and construct validity are both types of measurement validity . In other words, they both show you how accurately a method measures something.
While construct validity is the degree to which a test or other measurement method measures what it claims to measure, criterion validity is the degree to which a test can predictively (in the future) or concurrently (in the present) measure something.
Construct validity is often considered the overarching type of measurement validity . You need to have face validity , content validity , and criterion validity in order to achieve construct validity.
Convergent validity and discriminant validity are both subtypes of construct validity . Together, they help you evaluate whether a test measures the concept it was designed to measure.
- Convergent validity indicates whether a test that is designed to measure a particular construct correlates with other tests that assess the same or similar construct.
- Discriminant validity indicates whether two tests that should not be highly related to each other are indeed not related. This type of validity is also called divergent validity .
You need to assess both in order to demonstrate construct validity. Neither one alone is sufficient for establishing construct validity.
- Discriminant validity indicates whether two tests that should not be highly related to each other are indeed not related
Content validity shows you how accurately a test or other measurement method taps into the various aspects of the specific construct you are researching.
In other words, it helps you answer the question: “does the test measure all aspects of the construct I want to measure?” If it does, then the test has high content validity.
The higher the content validity, the more accurate the measurement of the construct.
If the test fails to include parts of the construct, or irrelevant parts are included, the validity of the instrument is threatened, which brings your results into question.
Face validity and content validity are similar in that they both evaluate how suitable the content of a test is. The difference is that face validity is subjective, and assesses content at surface level.
When a test has strong face validity, anyone would agree that the test’s questions appear to measure what they are intended to measure.
For example, looking at a 4th grade math test consisting of problems in which students have to add and multiply, most people would agree that it has strong face validity (i.e., it looks like a math test).
On the other hand, content validity evaluates how well a test represents all the aspects of a topic. Assessing content validity is more systematic and relies on expert evaluation. of each question, analyzing whether each one covers the aspects that the test was designed to cover.
A 4th grade math test would have high content validity if it covered all the skills taught in that grade. Experts(in this case, math teachers), would have to evaluate the content validity by comparing the test to the learning objectives.
Snowball sampling is a non-probability sampling method . Unlike probability sampling (which involves some form of random selection ), the initial individuals selected to be studied are the ones who recruit new participants.
Because not every member of the target population has an equal chance of being recruited into the sample, selection in snowball sampling is non-random.
Snowball sampling is a non-probability sampling method , where there is not an equal chance for every member of the population to be included in the sample .
This means that you cannot use inferential statistics and make generalizations —often the goal of quantitative research . As such, a snowball sample is not representative of the target population and is usually a better fit for qualitative research .
Snowball sampling relies on the use of referrals. Here, the researcher recruits one or more initial participants, who then recruit the next ones.
Participants share similar characteristics and/or know each other. Because of this, not every member of the population has an equal chance of being included in the sample, giving rise to sampling bias .
Snowball sampling is best used in the following cases:
- If there is no sampling frame available (e.g., people with a rare disease)
- If the population of interest is hard to access or locate (e.g., people experiencing homelessness)
- If the research focuses on a sensitive topic (e.g., extramarital affairs)
The reproducibility and replicability of a study can be ensured by writing a transparent, detailed method section and using clear, unambiguous language.
Reproducibility and replicability are related terms.
- Reproducing research entails reanalyzing the existing data in the same manner.
- Replicating (or repeating ) the research entails reconducting the entire analysis, including the collection of new data .
- A successful reproduction shows that the data analyses were conducted in a fair and honest manner.
- A successful replication shows that the reliability of the results is high.
Stratified sampling and quota sampling both involve dividing the population into subgroups and selecting units from each subgroup. The purpose in both cases is to select a representative sample and/or to allow comparisons between subgroups.
The main difference is that in stratified sampling, you draw a random sample from each subgroup ( probability sampling ). In quota sampling you select a predetermined number or proportion of units, in a non-random manner ( non-probability sampling ).
Purposive and convenience sampling are both sampling methods that are typically used in qualitative data collection.
A convenience sample is drawn from a source that is conveniently accessible to the researcher. Convenience sampling does not distinguish characteristics among the participants. On the other hand, purposive sampling focuses on selecting participants possessing characteristics associated with the research study.
The findings of studies based on either convenience or purposive sampling can only be generalized to the (sub)population from which the sample is drawn, and not to the entire population.
Random sampling or probability sampling is based on random selection. This means that each unit has an equal chance (i.e., equal probability) of being included in the sample.
On the other hand, convenience sampling involves stopping people at random, which means that not everyone has an equal chance of being selected depending on the place, time, or day you are collecting your data.
Convenience sampling and quota sampling are both non-probability sampling methods. They both use non-random criteria like availability, geographical proximity, or expert knowledge to recruit study participants.
However, in convenience sampling, you continue to sample units or cases until you reach the required sample size.
In quota sampling, you first need to divide your population of interest into subgroups (strata) and estimate their proportions (quota) in the population. Then you can start your data collection, using convenience sampling to recruit participants, until the proportions in each subgroup coincide with the estimated proportions in the population.
A sampling frame is a list of every member in the entire population . It is important that the sampling frame is as complete as possible, so that your sample accurately reflects your population.
Stratified and cluster sampling may look similar, but bear in mind that groups created in cluster sampling are heterogeneous , so the individual characteristics in the cluster vary. In contrast, groups created in stratified sampling are homogeneous , as units share characteristics.
Relatedly, in cluster sampling you randomly select entire groups and include all units of each group in your sample. However, in stratified sampling, you select some units of all groups and include them in your sample. In this way, both methods can ensure that your sample is representative of the target population .
A systematic review is secondary research because it uses existing research. You don’t collect new data yourself.
The key difference between observational studies and experimental designs is that a well-done observational study does not influence the responses of participants, while experiments do have some sort of treatment condition applied to at least some participants by random assignment .
An observational study is a great choice for you if your research question is based purely on observations. If there are ethical, logistical, or practical concerns that prevent you from conducting a traditional experiment , an observational study may be a good choice. In an observational study, there is no interference or manipulation of the research subjects, as well as no control or treatment groups .
It’s often best to ask a variety of people to review your measurements. You can ask experts, such as other researchers, or laypeople, such as potential participants, to judge the face validity of tests.
While experts have a deep understanding of research methods , the people you’re studying can provide you with valuable insights you may have missed otherwise.
Face validity is important because it’s a simple first step to measuring the overall validity of a test or technique. It’s a relatively intuitive, quick, and easy way to start checking whether a new measure seems useful at first glance.
Good face validity means that anyone who reviews your measure says that it seems to be measuring what it’s supposed to. With poor face validity, someone reviewing your measure may be left confused about what you’re measuring and why you’re using this method.
Face validity is about whether a test appears to measure what it’s supposed to measure. This type of validity is concerned with whether a measure seems relevant and appropriate for what it’s assessing only on the surface.
Statistical analyses are often applied to test validity with data from your measures. You test convergent validity and discriminant validity with correlations to see if results from your test are positively or negatively related to those of other established tests.
You can also use regression analyses to assess whether your measure is actually predictive of outcomes that you expect it to predict theoretically. A regression analysis that supports your expectations strengthens your claim of construct validity .
When designing or evaluating a measure, construct validity helps you ensure you’re actually measuring the construct you’re interested in. If you don’t have construct validity, you may inadvertently measure unrelated or distinct constructs and lose precision in your research.
Construct validity is often considered the overarching type of measurement validity , because it covers all of the other types. You need to have face validity , content validity , and criterion validity to achieve construct validity.
Construct validity is about how well a test measures the concept it was designed to evaluate. It’s one of four types of measurement validity , which includes construct validity, face validity , and criterion validity.
There are two subtypes of construct validity.
- Convergent validity : The extent to which your measure corresponds to measures of related constructs
- Discriminant validity : The extent to which your measure is unrelated or negatively related to measures of distinct constructs
Naturalistic observation is a valuable tool because of its flexibility, external validity , and suitability for topics that can’t be studied in a lab setting.
The downsides of naturalistic observation include its lack of scientific control , ethical considerations , and potential for bias from observers and subjects.
Naturalistic observation is a qualitative research method where you record the behaviors of your research subjects in real world settings. You avoid interfering or influencing anything in a naturalistic observation.
You can think of naturalistic observation as “people watching” with a purpose.
A dependent variable is what changes as a result of the independent variable manipulation in experiments . It’s what you’re interested in measuring, and it “depends” on your independent variable.
In statistics, dependent variables are also called:
- Response variables (they respond to a change in another variable)
- Outcome variables (they represent the outcome you want to measure)
- Left-hand-side variables (they appear on the left-hand side of a regression equation)
An independent variable is the variable you manipulate, control, or vary in an experimental study to explore its effects. It’s called “independent” because it’s not influenced by any other variables in the study.
Independent variables are also called:
- Explanatory variables (they explain an event or outcome)
- Predictor variables (they can be used to predict the value of a dependent variable)
- Right-hand-side variables (they appear on the right-hand side of a regression equation).
As a rule of thumb, questions related to thoughts, beliefs, and feelings work well in focus groups. Take your time formulating strong questions, paying special attention to phrasing. Be careful to avoid leading questions , which can bias your responses.
Overall, your focus group questions should be:
- Open-ended and flexible
- Impossible to answer with “yes” or “no” (questions that start with “why” or “how” are often best)
- Unambiguous, getting straight to the point while still stimulating discussion
- Unbiased and neutral
A structured interview is a data collection method that relies on asking questions in a set order to collect data on a topic. They are often quantitative in nature. Structured interviews are best used when:
- You already have a very clear understanding of your topic. Perhaps significant research has already been conducted, or you have done some prior research yourself, but you already possess a baseline for designing strong structured questions.
- You are constrained in terms of time or resources and need to analyze your data quickly and efficiently.
- Your research question depends on strong parity between participants, with environmental conditions held constant.
More flexible interview options include semi-structured interviews , unstructured interviews , and focus groups .
Social desirability bias is the tendency for interview participants to give responses that will be viewed favorably by the interviewer or other participants. It occurs in all types of interviews and surveys , but is most common in semi-structured interviews , unstructured interviews , and focus groups .
Social desirability bias can be mitigated by ensuring participants feel at ease and comfortable sharing their views. Make sure to pay attention to your own body language and any physical or verbal cues, such as nodding or widening your eyes.
This type of bias can also occur in observations if the participants know they’re being observed. They might alter their behavior accordingly.
The interviewer effect is a type of bias that emerges when a characteristic of an interviewer (race, age, gender identity, etc.) influences the responses given by the interviewee.
There is a risk of an interviewer effect in all types of interviews , but it can be mitigated by writing really high-quality interview questions.
A semi-structured interview is a blend of structured and unstructured types of interviews. Semi-structured interviews are best used when:
- You have prior interview experience. Spontaneous questions are deceptively challenging, and it’s easy to accidentally ask a leading question or make a participant uncomfortable.
- Your research question is exploratory in nature. Participant answers can guide future research questions and help you develop a more robust knowledge base for future research.
An unstructured interview is the most flexible type of interview, but it is not always the best fit for your research topic.
Unstructured interviews are best used when:
- You are an experienced interviewer and have a very strong background in your research topic, since it is challenging to ask spontaneous, colloquial questions.
- Your research question is exploratory in nature. While you may have developed hypotheses, you are open to discovering new or shifting viewpoints through the interview process.
- You are seeking descriptive data, and are ready to ask questions that will deepen and contextualize your initial thoughts and hypotheses.
- Your research depends on forming connections with your participants and making them feel comfortable revealing deeper emotions, lived experiences, or thoughts.
The four most common types of interviews are:
- Structured interviews : The questions are predetermined in both topic and order.
- Semi-structured interviews : A few questions are predetermined, but other questions aren’t planned.
- Unstructured interviews : None of the questions are predetermined.
- Focus group interviews : The questions are presented to a group instead of one individual.
Deductive reasoning is commonly used in scientific research, and it’s especially associated with quantitative research .
In research, you might have come across something called the hypothetico-deductive method . It’s the scientific method of testing hypotheses to check whether your predictions are substantiated by real-world data.
Deductive reasoning is a logical approach where you progress from general ideas to specific conclusions. It’s often contrasted with inductive reasoning , where you start with specific observations and form general conclusions.
Deductive reasoning is also called deductive logic.
There are many different types of inductive reasoning that people use formally or informally.
Here are a few common types:
- Inductive generalization : You use observations about a sample to come to a conclusion about the population it came from.
- Statistical generalization: You use specific numbers about samples to make statements about populations.
- Causal reasoning: You make cause-and-effect links between different things.
- Sign reasoning: You make a conclusion about a correlational relationship between different things.
- Analogical reasoning: You make a conclusion about something based on its similarities to something else.
Inductive reasoning is a bottom-up approach, while deductive reasoning is top-down.
Inductive reasoning takes you from the specific to the general, while in deductive reasoning, you make inferences by going from general premises to specific conclusions.
In inductive research , you start by making observations or gathering data. Then, you take a broad scan of your data and search for patterns. Finally, you make general conclusions that you might incorporate into theories.
Inductive reasoning is a method of drawing conclusions by going from the specific to the general. It’s usually contrasted with deductive reasoning, where you proceed from general information to specific conclusions.
Inductive reasoning is also called inductive logic or bottom-up reasoning.
A hypothesis states your predictions about what your research will find. It is a tentative answer to your research question that has not yet been tested. For some research projects, you might have to write several hypotheses that address different aspects of your research question.
A hypothesis is not just a guess — it should be based on existing theories and knowledge. It also has to be testable, which means you can support or refute it through scientific research methods (such as experiments, observations and statistical analysis of data).
Triangulation can help:
- Reduce research bias that comes from using a single method, theory, or investigator
- Enhance validity by approaching the same topic with different tools
- Establish credibility by giving you a complete picture of the research problem
But triangulation can also pose problems:
- It’s time-consuming and labor-intensive, often involving an interdisciplinary team.
- Your results may be inconsistent or even contradictory.
There are four main types of triangulation :
- Data triangulation : Using data from different times, spaces, and people
- Investigator triangulation : Involving multiple researchers in collecting or analyzing data
- Theory triangulation : Using varying theoretical perspectives in your research
- Methodological triangulation : Using different methodologies to approach the same topic
Many academic fields use peer review , largely to determine whether a manuscript is suitable for publication. Peer review enhances the credibility of the published manuscript.
However, peer review is also common in non-academic settings. The United Nations, the European Union, and many individual nations use peer review to evaluate grant applications. It is also widely used in medical and health-related fields as a teaching or quality-of-care measure.
Peer assessment is often used in the classroom as a pedagogical tool. Both receiving feedback and providing it are thought to enhance the learning process, helping students think critically and collaboratively.
Peer review can stop obviously problematic, falsified, or otherwise untrustworthy research from being published. It also represents an excellent opportunity to get feedback from renowned experts in your field. It acts as a first defense, helping you ensure your argument is clear and that there are no gaps, vague terms, or unanswered questions for readers who weren’t involved in the research process.
Peer-reviewed articles are considered a highly credible source due to this stringent process they go through before publication.
In general, the peer review process follows the following steps:
- First, the author submits the manuscript to the editor.
- Reject the manuscript and send it back to author, or
- Send it onward to the selected peer reviewer(s)
- Next, the peer review process occurs. The reviewer provides feedback, addressing any major or minor issues with the manuscript, and gives their advice regarding what edits should be made.
- Lastly, the edited manuscript is sent back to the author. They input the edits, and resubmit it to the editor for publication.
Exploratory research is often used when the issue you’re studying is new or when the data collection process is challenging for some reason.
You can use exploratory research if you have a general idea or a specific question that you want to study but there is no preexisting knowledge or paradigm with which to study it.
Exploratory research is a methodology approach that explores research questions that have not previously been studied in depth. It is often used when the issue you’re studying is new, or the data collection process is challenging in some way.
Explanatory research is used to investigate how or why a phenomenon occurs. Therefore, this type of research is often one of the first stages in the research process , serving as a jumping-off point for future research.
Exploratory research aims to explore the main aspects of an under-researched problem, while explanatory research aims to explain the causes and consequences of a well-defined problem.
Explanatory research is a research method used to investigate how or why something occurs when only a small amount of information is available pertaining to that topic. It can help you increase your understanding of a given topic.
Clean data are valid, accurate, complete, consistent, unique, and uniform. Dirty data include inconsistencies and errors.
Dirty data can come from any part of the research process, including poor research design , inappropriate measurement materials, or flawed data entry.
Data cleaning takes place between data collection and data analyses. But you can use some methods even before collecting data.
For clean data, you should start by designing measures that collect valid data. Data validation at the time of data entry or collection helps you minimize the amount of data cleaning you’ll need to do.
After data collection, you can use data standardization and data transformation to clean your data. You’ll also deal with any missing values, outliers, and duplicate values.
Every dataset requires different techniques to clean dirty data , but you need to address these issues in a systematic way. You focus on finding and resolving data points that don’t agree or fit with the rest of your dataset.
These data might be missing values, outliers, duplicate values, incorrectly formatted, or irrelevant. You’ll start with screening and diagnosing your data. Then, you’ll often standardize and accept or remove data to make your dataset consistent and valid.
Data cleaning is necessary for valid and appropriate analyses. Dirty data contain inconsistencies or errors , but cleaning your data helps you minimize or resolve these.
Without data cleaning, you could end up with a Type I or II error in your conclusion. These types of erroneous conclusions can be practically significant with important consequences, because they lead to misplaced investments or missed opportunities.
Data cleaning involves spotting and resolving potential data inconsistencies or errors to improve your data quality. An error is any value (e.g., recorded weight) that doesn’t reflect the true value (e.g., actual weight) of something that’s being measured.
In this process, you review, analyze, detect, modify, or remove “dirty” data to make your dataset “clean.” Data cleaning is also called data cleansing or data scrubbing.
Research misconduct means making up or falsifying data, manipulating data analyses, or misrepresenting results in research reports. It’s a form of academic fraud.
These actions are committed intentionally and can have serious consequences; research misconduct is not a simple mistake or a point of disagreement but a serious ethical failure.
Anonymity means you don’t know who the participants are, while confidentiality means you know who they are but remove identifying information from your research report. Both are important ethical considerations .
You can only guarantee anonymity by not collecting any personally identifying information—for example, names, phone numbers, email addresses, IP addresses, physical characteristics, photos, or videos.
You can keep data confidential by using aggregate information in your research report, so that you only refer to groups of participants rather than individuals.
Research ethics matter for scientific integrity, human rights and dignity, and collaboration between science and society. These principles make sure that participation in studies is voluntary, informed, and safe.
Ethical considerations in research are a set of principles that guide your research designs and practices. These principles include voluntary participation, informed consent, anonymity, confidentiality, potential for harm, and results communication.
Scientists and researchers must always adhere to a certain code of conduct when collecting data from others .
These considerations protect the rights of research participants, enhance research validity , and maintain scientific integrity.
In multistage sampling , you can use probability or non-probability sampling methods .
For a probability sample, you have to conduct probability sampling at every stage.
You can mix it up by using simple random sampling , systematic sampling , or stratified sampling to select units at different stages, depending on what is applicable and relevant to your study.
Multistage sampling can simplify data collection when you have large, geographically spread samples, and you can obtain a probability sample without a complete sampling frame.
But multistage sampling may not lead to a representative sample, and larger samples are needed for multistage samples to achieve the statistical properties of simple random samples .
These are four of the most common mixed methods designs :
- Convergent parallel: Quantitative and qualitative data are collected at the same time and analyzed separately. After both analyses are complete, compare your results to draw overall conclusions.
- Embedded: Quantitative and qualitative data are collected at the same time, but within a larger quantitative or qualitative design. One type of data is secondary to the other.
- Explanatory sequential: Quantitative data is collected and analyzed first, followed by qualitative data. You can use this design if you think your qualitative data will explain and contextualize your quantitative findings.
- Exploratory sequential: Qualitative data is collected and analyzed first, followed by quantitative data. You can use this design if you think the quantitative data will confirm or validate your qualitative findings.
Triangulation in research means using multiple datasets, methods, theories and/or investigators to address a research question. It’s a research strategy that can help you enhance the validity and credibility of your findings.
Triangulation is mainly used in qualitative research , but it’s also commonly applied in quantitative research . Mixed methods research always uses triangulation.
In multistage sampling , or multistage cluster sampling, you draw a sample from a population using smaller and smaller groups at each stage.
This method is often used to collect data from a large, geographically spread group of people in national surveys, for example. You take advantage of hierarchical groupings (e.g., from state to city to neighborhood) to create a sample that’s less expensive and time-consuming to collect data from.
No, the steepness or slope of the line isn’t related to the correlation coefficient value. The correlation coefficient only tells you how closely your data fit on a line, so two datasets with the same correlation coefficient can have very different slopes.
To find the slope of the line, you’ll need to perform a regression analysis .
Correlation coefficients always range between -1 and 1.
The sign of the coefficient tells you the direction of the relationship: a positive value means the variables change together in the same direction, while a negative value means they change together in opposite directions.
The absolute value of a number is equal to the number without its sign. The absolute value of a correlation coefficient tells you the magnitude of the correlation: the greater the absolute value, the stronger the correlation.
These are the assumptions your data must meet if you want to use Pearson’s r :
- Both variables are on an interval or ratio level of measurement
- Data from both variables follow normal distributions
- Your data have no outliers
- Your data is from a random or representative sample
- You expect a linear relationship between the two variables
Quantitative research designs can be divided into two main categories:
- Correlational and descriptive designs are used to investigate characteristics, averages, trends, and associations between variables.
- Experimental and quasi-experimental designs are used to test causal relationships .
Qualitative research designs tend to be more flexible. Common types of qualitative design include case study , ethnography , and grounded theory designs.
A well-planned research design helps ensure that your methods match your research aims, that you collect high-quality data, and that you use the right kind of analysis to answer your questions, utilizing credible sources . This allows you to draw valid , trustworthy conclusions.
The priorities of a research design can vary depending on the field, but you usually have to specify:
- Your research questions and/or hypotheses
- Your overall approach (e.g., qualitative or quantitative )
- The type of design you’re using (e.g., a survey , experiment , or case study )
- Your sampling methods or criteria for selecting subjects
- Your data collection methods (e.g., questionnaires , observations)
- Your data collection procedures (e.g., operationalization , timing and data management)
- Your data analysis methods (e.g., statistical tests or thematic analysis )
A research design is a strategy for answering your research question . It defines your overall approach and determines how you will collect and analyze data.
Questionnaires can be self-administered or researcher-administered.
Self-administered questionnaires can be delivered online or in paper-and-pen formats, in person or through mail. All questions are standardized so that all respondents receive the same questions with identical wording.
Researcher-administered questionnaires are interviews that take place by phone, in-person, or online between researchers and respondents. You can gain deeper insights by clarifying questions for respondents or asking follow-up questions.
You can organize the questions logically, with a clear progression from simple to complex, or randomly between respondents. A logical flow helps respondents process the questionnaire easier and quicker, but it may lead to bias. Randomization can minimize the bias from order effects.
Closed-ended, or restricted-choice, questions offer respondents a fixed set of choices to select from. These questions are easier to answer quickly.
Open-ended or long-form questions allow respondents to answer in their own words. Because there are no restrictions on their choices, respondents can answer in ways that researchers may not have otherwise considered.
A questionnaire is a data collection tool or instrument, while a survey is an overarching research method that involves collecting and analyzing data from people using questionnaires.
The third variable and directionality problems are two main reasons why correlation isn’t causation .
The third variable problem means that a confounding variable affects both variables to make them seem causally related when they are not.
The directionality problem is when two variables correlate and might actually have a causal relationship, but it’s impossible to conclude which variable causes changes in the other.
Correlation describes an association between variables : when one variable changes, so does the other. A correlation is a statistical indicator of the relationship between variables.
Causation means that changes in one variable brings about changes in the other (i.e., there is a cause-and-effect relationship between variables). The two variables are correlated with each other, and there’s also a causal link between them.
While causation and correlation can exist simultaneously, correlation does not imply causation. In other words, correlation is simply a relationship where A relates to B—but A doesn’t necessarily cause B to happen (or vice versa). Mistaking correlation for causation is a common error and can lead to false cause fallacy .
Controlled experiments establish causality, whereas correlational studies only show associations between variables.
- In an experimental design , you manipulate an independent variable and measure its effect on a dependent variable. Other variables are controlled so they can’t impact the results.
- In a correlational design , you measure variables without manipulating any of them. You can test whether your variables change together, but you can’t be sure that one variable caused a change in another.
In general, correlational research is high in external validity while experimental research is high in internal validity .
A correlation is usually tested for two variables at a time, but you can test correlations between three or more variables.
A correlation coefficient is a single number that describes the strength and direction of the relationship between your variables.
Different types of correlation coefficients might be appropriate for your data based on their levels of measurement and distributions . The Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient (Pearson’s r ) is commonly used to assess a linear relationship between two quantitative variables.
A correlational research design investigates relationships between two variables (or more) without the researcher controlling or manipulating any of them. It’s a non-experimental type of quantitative research .
A correlation reflects the strength and/or direction of the association between two or more variables.
- A positive correlation means that both variables change in the same direction.
- A negative correlation means that the variables change in opposite directions.
- A zero correlation means there’s no relationship between the variables.
Random error is almost always present in scientific studies, even in highly controlled settings. While you can’t eradicate it completely, you can reduce random error by taking repeated measurements, using a large sample, and controlling extraneous variables .
You can avoid systematic error through careful design of your sampling , data collection , and analysis procedures. For example, use triangulation to measure your variables using multiple methods; regularly calibrate instruments or procedures; use random sampling and random assignment ; and apply masking (blinding) where possible.
Systematic error is generally a bigger problem in research.
With random error, multiple measurements will tend to cluster around the true value. When you’re collecting data from a large sample , the errors in different directions will cancel each other out.
Systematic errors are much more problematic because they can skew your data away from the true value. This can lead you to false conclusions ( Type I and II errors ) about the relationship between the variables you’re studying.
Random and systematic error are two types of measurement error.
Random error is a chance difference between the observed and true values of something (e.g., a researcher misreading a weighing scale records an incorrect measurement).
Systematic error is a consistent or proportional difference between the observed and true values of something (e.g., a miscalibrated scale consistently records weights as higher than they actually are).
On graphs, the explanatory variable is conventionally placed on the x-axis, while the response variable is placed on the y-axis.
- If you have quantitative variables , use a scatterplot or a line graph.
- If your response variable is categorical, use a scatterplot or a line graph.
- If your explanatory variable is categorical, use a bar graph.
The term “ explanatory variable ” is sometimes preferred over “ independent variable ” because, in real world contexts, independent variables are often influenced by other variables. This means they aren’t totally independent.
Multiple independent variables may also be correlated with each other, so “explanatory variables” is a more appropriate term.
The difference between explanatory and response variables is simple:
- An explanatory variable is the expected cause, and it explains the results.
- A response variable is the expected effect, and it responds to other variables.
In a controlled experiment , all extraneous variables are held constant so that they can’t influence the results. Controlled experiments require:
- A control group that receives a standard treatment, a fake treatment, or no treatment.
- Random assignment of participants to ensure the groups are equivalent.
Depending on your study topic, there are various other methods of controlling variables .
There are 4 main types of extraneous variables :
- Demand characteristics : environmental cues that encourage participants to conform to researchers’ expectations.
- Experimenter effects : unintentional actions by researchers that influence study outcomes.
- Situational variables : environmental variables that alter participants’ behaviors.
- Participant variables : any characteristic or aspect of a participant’s background that could affect study results.
An extraneous variable is any variable that you’re not investigating that can potentially affect the dependent variable of your research study.
A confounding variable is a type of extraneous variable that not only affects the dependent variable, but is also related to the independent variable.
In a factorial design, multiple independent variables are tested.
If you test two variables, each level of one independent variable is combined with each level of the other independent variable to create different conditions.
Within-subjects designs have many potential threats to internal validity , but they are also very statistically powerful .
Advantages:
- Only requires small samples
- Statistically powerful
- Removes the effects of individual differences on the outcomes
Disadvantages:
- Internal validity threats reduce the likelihood of establishing a direct relationship between variables
- Time-related effects, such as growth, can influence the outcomes
- Carryover effects mean that the specific order of different treatments affect the outcomes
While a between-subjects design has fewer threats to internal validity , it also requires more participants for high statistical power than a within-subjects design .
- Prevents carryover effects of learning and fatigue.
- Shorter study duration.
- Needs larger samples for high power.
- Uses more resources to recruit participants, administer sessions, cover costs, etc.
- Individual differences may be an alternative explanation for results.
Yes. Between-subjects and within-subjects designs can be combined in a single study when you have two or more independent variables (a factorial design). In a mixed factorial design, one variable is altered between subjects and another is altered within subjects.
In a between-subjects design , every participant experiences only one condition, and researchers assess group differences between participants in various conditions.
In a within-subjects design , each participant experiences all conditions, and researchers test the same participants repeatedly for differences between conditions.
The word “between” means that you’re comparing different conditions between groups, while the word “within” means you’re comparing different conditions within the same group.
Random assignment is used in experiments with a between-groups or independent measures design. In this research design, there’s usually a control group and one or more experimental groups. Random assignment helps ensure that the groups are comparable.
In general, you should always use random assignment in this type of experimental design when it is ethically possible and makes sense for your study topic.
Random selection, or random sampling , is a way of selecting members of a population for your study’s sample.
In contrast, random assignment is a way of sorting the sample into control and experimental groups.
Random sampling enhances the external validity or generalizability of your results, while random assignment improves the internal validity of your study.
In experimental research, random assignment is a way of placing participants from your sample into different groups using randomization. With this method, every member of the sample has a known or equal chance of being placed in a control group or an experimental group.
“Controlling for a variable” means measuring extraneous variables and accounting for them statistically to remove their effects on other variables.
Researchers often model control variable data along with independent and dependent variable data in regression analyses and ANCOVAs . That way, you can isolate the control variable’s effects from the relationship between the variables of interest.
Control variables help you establish a correlational or causal relationship between variables by enhancing internal validity .
If you don’t control relevant extraneous variables , they may influence the outcomes of your study, and you may not be able to demonstrate that your results are really an effect of your independent variable .
A control variable is any variable that’s held constant in a research study. It’s not a variable of interest in the study, but it’s controlled because it could influence the outcomes.
Including mediators and moderators in your research helps you go beyond studying a simple relationship between two variables for a fuller picture of the real world. They are important to consider when studying complex correlational or causal relationships.
Mediators are part of the causal pathway of an effect, and they tell you how or why an effect takes place. Moderators usually help you judge the external validity of your study by identifying the limitations of when the relationship between variables holds.
If something is a mediating variable :
- It’s caused by the independent variable .
- It influences the dependent variable
- When it’s taken into account, the statistical correlation between the independent and dependent variables is higher than when it isn’t considered.
A confounder is a third variable that affects variables of interest and makes them seem related when they are not. In contrast, a mediator is the mechanism of a relationship between two variables: it explains the process by which they are related.
A mediator variable explains the process through which two variables are related, while a moderator variable affects the strength and direction of that relationship.
There are three key steps in systematic sampling :
- Define and list your population , ensuring that it is not ordered in a cyclical or periodic order.
- Decide on your sample size and calculate your interval, k , by dividing your population by your target sample size.
- Choose every k th member of the population as your sample.
Systematic sampling is a probability sampling method where researchers select members of the population at a regular interval – for example, by selecting every 15th person on a list of the population. If the population is in a random order, this can imitate the benefits of simple random sampling .
Yes, you can create a stratified sample using multiple characteristics, but you must ensure that every participant in your study belongs to one and only one subgroup. In this case, you multiply the numbers of subgroups for each characteristic to get the total number of groups.
For example, if you were stratifying by location with three subgroups (urban, rural, or suburban) and marital status with five subgroups (single, divorced, widowed, married, or partnered), you would have 3 x 5 = 15 subgroups.
You should use stratified sampling when your sample can be divided into mutually exclusive and exhaustive subgroups that you believe will take on different mean values for the variable that you’re studying.
Using stratified sampling will allow you to obtain more precise (with lower variance ) statistical estimates of whatever you are trying to measure.
For example, say you want to investigate how income differs based on educational attainment, but you know that this relationship can vary based on race. Using stratified sampling, you can ensure you obtain a large enough sample from each racial group, allowing you to draw more precise conclusions.
In stratified sampling , researchers divide subjects into subgroups called strata based on characteristics that they share (e.g., race, gender, educational attainment).
Once divided, each subgroup is randomly sampled using another probability sampling method.
Cluster sampling is more time- and cost-efficient than other probability sampling methods , particularly when it comes to large samples spread across a wide geographical area.
However, it provides less statistical certainty than other methods, such as simple random sampling , because it is difficult to ensure that your clusters properly represent the population as a whole.
There are three types of cluster sampling : single-stage, double-stage and multi-stage clustering. In all three types, you first divide the population into clusters, then randomly select clusters for use in your sample.
- In single-stage sampling , you collect data from every unit within the selected clusters.
- In double-stage sampling , you select a random sample of units from within the clusters.
- In multi-stage sampling , you repeat the procedure of randomly sampling elements from within the clusters until you have reached a manageable sample.
Cluster sampling is a probability sampling method in which you divide a population into clusters, such as districts or schools, and then randomly select some of these clusters as your sample.
The clusters should ideally each be mini-representations of the population as a whole.
If properly implemented, simple random sampling is usually the best sampling method for ensuring both internal and external validity . However, it can sometimes be impractical and expensive to implement, depending on the size of the population to be studied,
If you have a list of every member of the population and the ability to reach whichever members are selected, you can use simple random sampling.
The American Community Survey is an example of simple random sampling . In order to collect detailed data on the population of the US, the Census Bureau officials randomly select 3.5 million households per year and use a variety of methods to convince them to fill out the survey.
Simple random sampling is a type of probability sampling in which the researcher randomly selects a subset of participants from a population . Each member of the population has an equal chance of being selected. Data is then collected from as large a percentage as possible of this random subset.
Quasi-experimental design is most useful in situations where it would be unethical or impractical to run a true experiment .
Quasi-experiments have lower internal validity than true experiments, but they often have higher external validity as they can use real-world interventions instead of artificial laboratory settings.
A quasi-experiment is a type of research design that attempts to establish a cause-and-effect relationship. The main difference with a true experiment is that the groups are not randomly assigned.
Blinding is important to reduce research bias (e.g., observer bias , demand characteristics ) and ensure a study’s internal validity .
If participants know whether they are in a control or treatment group , they may adjust their behavior in ways that affect the outcome that researchers are trying to measure. If the people administering the treatment are aware of group assignment, they may treat participants differently and thus directly or indirectly influence the final results.
- In a single-blind study , only the participants are blinded.
- In a double-blind study , both participants and experimenters are blinded.
- In a triple-blind study , the assignment is hidden not only from participants and experimenters, but also from the researchers analyzing the data.
Blinding means hiding who is assigned to the treatment group and who is assigned to the control group in an experiment .
A true experiment (a.k.a. a controlled experiment) always includes at least one control group that doesn’t receive the experimental treatment.
However, some experiments use a within-subjects design to test treatments without a control group. In these designs, you usually compare one group’s outcomes before and after a treatment (instead of comparing outcomes between different groups).
For strong internal validity , it’s usually best to include a control group if possible. Without a control group, it’s harder to be certain that the outcome was caused by the experimental treatment and not by other variables.
An experimental group, also known as a treatment group, receives the treatment whose effect researchers wish to study, whereas a control group does not. They should be identical in all other ways.
Individual Likert-type questions are generally considered ordinal data , because the items have clear rank order, but don’t have an even distribution.
Overall Likert scale scores are sometimes treated as interval data. These scores are considered to have directionality and even spacing between them.
The type of data determines what statistical tests you should use to analyze your data.
A Likert scale is a rating scale that quantitatively assesses opinions, attitudes, or behaviors. It is made up of 4 or more questions that measure a single attitude or trait when response scores are combined.
To use a Likert scale in a survey , you present participants with Likert-type questions or statements, and a continuum of items, usually with 5 or 7 possible responses, to capture their degree of agreement.
In scientific research, concepts are the abstract ideas or phenomena that are being studied (e.g., educational achievement). Variables are properties or characteristics of the concept (e.g., performance at school), while indicators are ways of measuring or quantifying variables (e.g., yearly grade reports).
The process of turning abstract concepts into measurable variables and indicators is called operationalization .
There are various approaches to qualitative data analysis , but they all share five steps in common:
- Prepare and organize your data.
- Review and explore your data.
- Develop a data coding system.
- Assign codes to the data.
- Identify recurring themes.
The specifics of each step depend on the focus of the analysis. Some common approaches include textual analysis , thematic analysis , and discourse analysis .
There are five common approaches to qualitative research :
- Grounded theory involves collecting data in order to develop new theories.
- Ethnography involves immersing yourself in a group or organization to understand its culture.
- Narrative research involves interpreting stories to understand how people make sense of their experiences and perceptions.
- Phenomenological research involves investigating phenomena through people’s lived experiences.
- Action research links theory and practice in several cycles to drive innovative changes.
Hypothesis testing is a formal procedure for investigating our ideas about the world using statistics. It is used by scientists to test specific predictions, called hypotheses , by calculating how likely it is that a pattern or relationship between variables could have arisen by chance.
Operationalization means turning abstract conceptual ideas into measurable observations.
For example, the concept of social anxiety isn’t directly observable, but it can be operationally defined in terms of self-rating scores, behavioral avoidance of crowded places, or physical anxiety symptoms in social situations.
Before collecting data , it’s important to consider how you will operationalize the variables that you want to measure.
When conducting research, collecting original data has significant advantages:
- You can tailor data collection to your specific research aims (e.g. understanding the needs of your consumers or user testing your website)
- You can control and standardize the process for high reliability and validity (e.g. choosing appropriate measurements and sampling methods )
However, there are also some drawbacks: data collection can be time-consuming, labor-intensive and expensive. In some cases, it’s more efficient to use secondary data that has already been collected by someone else, but the data might be less reliable.
Data collection is the systematic process by which observations or measurements are gathered in research. It is used in many different contexts by academics, governments, businesses, and other organizations.
There are several methods you can use to decrease the impact of confounding variables on your research: restriction, matching, statistical control and randomization.
In restriction , you restrict your sample by only including certain subjects that have the same values of potential confounding variables.
In matching , you match each of the subjects in your treatment group with a counterpart in the comparison group. The matched subjects have the same values on any potential confounding variables, and only differ in the independent variable .
In statistical control , you include potential confounders as variables in your regression .
In randomization , you randomly assign the treatment (or independent variable) in your study to a sufficiently large number of subjects, which allows you to control for all potential confounding variables.
A confounding variable is closely related to both the independent and dependent variables in a study. An independent variable represents the supposed cause , while the dependent variable is the supposed effect . A confounding variable is a third variable that influences both the independent and dependent variables.
Failing to account for confounding variables can cause you to wrongly estimate the relationship between your independent and dependent variables.
To ensure the internal validity of your research, you must consider the impact of confounding variables. If you fail to account for them, you might over- or underestimate the causal relationship between your independent and dependent variables , or even find a causal relationship where none exists.
Yes, but including more than one of either type requires multiple research questions .
For example, if you are interested in the effect of a diet on health, you can use multiple measures of health: blood sugar, blood pressure, weight, pulse, and many more. Each of these is its own dependent variable with its own research question.
You could also choose to look at the effect of exercise levels as well as diet, or even the additional effect of the two combined. Each of these is a separate independent variable .
To ensure the internal validity of an experiment , you should only change one independent variable at a time.
No. The value of a dependent variable depends on an independent variable, so a variable cannot be both independent and dependent at the same time. It must be either the cause or the effect, not both!
You want to find out how blood sugar levels are affected by drinking diet soda and regular soda, so you conduct an experiment .
- The type of soda – diet or regular – is the independent variable .
- The level of blood sugar that you measure is the dependent variable – it changes depending on the type of soda.
Determining cause and effect is one of the most important parts of scientific research. It’s essential to know which is the cause – the independent variable – and which is the effect – the dependent variable.
In non-probability sampling , the sample is selected based on non-random criteria, and not every member of the population has a chance of being included.
Common non-probability sampling methods include convenience sampling , voluntary response sampling, purposive sampling , snowball sampling, and quota sampling .
Probability sampling means that every member of the target population has a known chance of being included in the sample.
Probability sampling methods include simple random sampling , systematic sampling , stratified sampling , and cluster sampling .
Using careful research design and sampling procedures can help you avoid sampling bias . Oversampling can be used to correct undercoverage bias .
Some common types of sampling bias include self-selection bias , nonresponse bias , undercoverage bias , survivorship bias , pre-screening or advertising bias, and healthy user bias.
Sampling bias is a threat to external validity – it limits the generalizability of your findings to a broader group of people.
A sampling error is the difference between a population parameter and a sample statistic .
A statistic refers to measures about the sample , while a parameter refers to measures about the population .
Populations are used when a research question requires data from every member of the population. This is usually only feasible when the population is small and easily accessible.
Samples are used to make inferences about populations . Samples are easier to collect data from because they are practical, cost-effective, convenient, and manageable.
There are seven threats to external validity : selection bias , history, experimenter effect, Hawthorne effect , testing effect, aptitude-treatment and situation effect.
The two types of external validity are population validity (whether you can generalize to other groups of people) and ecological validity (whether you can generalize to other situations and settings).
The external validity of a study is the extent to which you can generalize your findings to different groups of people, situations, and measures.
Cross-sectional studies cannot establish a cause-and-effect relationship or analyze behavior over a period of time. To investigate cause and effect, you need to do a longitudinal study or an experimental study .
Cross-sectional studies are less expensive and time-consuming than many other types of study. They can provide useful insights into a population’s characteristics and identify correlations for further research.
Sometimes only cross-sectional data is available for analysis; other times your research question may only require a cross-sectional study to answer it.
Longitudinal studies can last anywhere from weeks to decades, although they tend to be at least a year long.
The 1970 British Cohort Study , which has collected data on the lives of 17,000 Brits since their births in 1970, is one well-known example of a longitudinal study .
Longitudinal studies are better to establish the correct sequence of events, identify changes over time, and provide insight into cause-and-effect relationships, but they also tend to be more expensive and time-consuming than other types of studies.
Longitudinal studies and cross-sectional studies are two different types of research design . In a cross-sectional study you collect data from a population at a specific point in time; in a longitudinal study you repeatedly collect data from the same sample over an extended period of time.
Longitudinal study | Cross-sectional study |
---|---|
observations | Observations at a in time |
Observes the multiple times | Observes (a “cross-section”) in the population |
Follows in participants over time | Provides of society at a given point |
There are eight threats to internal validity : history, maturation, instrumentation, testing, selection bias , regression to the mean, social interaction and attrition .
Internal validity is the extent to which you can be confident that a cause-and-effect relationship established in a study cannot be explained by other factors.
In mixed methods research , you use both qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods to answer your research question .
The research methods you use depend on the type of data you need to answer your research question .
- If you want to measure something or test a hypothesis , use quantitative methods . If you want to explore ideas, thoughts and meanings, use qualitative methods .
- If you want to analyze a large amount of readily-available data, use secondary data. If you want data specific to your purposes with control over how it is generated, collect primary data.
- If you want to establish cause-and-effect relationships between variables , use experimental methods. If you want to understand the characteristics of a research subject, use descriptive methods.
A confounding variable , also called a confounder or confounding factor, is a third variable in a study examining a potential cause-and-effect relationship.
A confounding variable is related to both the supposed cause and the supposed effect of the study. It can be difficult to separate the true effect of the independent variable from the effect of the confounding variable.
In your research design , it’s important to identify potential confounding variables and plan how you will reduce their impact.
Discrete and continuous variables are two types of quantitative variables :
- Discrete variables represent counts (e.g. the number of objects in a collection).
- Continuous variables represent measurable amounts (e.g. water volume or weight).
Quantitative variables are any variables where the data represent amounts (e.g. height, weight, or age).
Categorical variables are any variables where the data represent groups. This includes rankings (e.g. finishing places in a race), classifications (e.g. brands of cereal), and binary outcomes (e.g. coin flips).
You need to know what type of variables you are working with to choose the right statistical test for your data and interpret your results .
You can think of independent and dependent variables in terms of cause and effect: an independent variable is the variable you think is the cause , while a dependent variable is the effect .
In an experiment, you manipulate the independent variable and measure the outcome in the dependent variable. For example, in an experiment about the effect of nutrients on crop growth:
- The independent variable is the amount of nutrients added to the crop field.
- The dependent variable is the biomass of the crops at harvest time.
Defining your variables, and deciding how you will manipulate and measure them, is an important part of experimental design .
Experimental design means planning a set of procedures to investigate a relationship between variables . To design a controlled experiment, you need:
- A testable hypothesis
- At least one independent variable that can be precisely manipulated
- At least one dependent variable that can be precisely measured
When designing the experiment, you decide:
- How you will manipulate the variable(s)
- How you will control for any potential confounding variables
- How many subjects or samples will be included in the study
- How subjects will be assigned to treatment levels
Experimental design is essential to the internal and external validity of your experiment.
I nternal validity is the degree of confidence that the causal relationship you are testing is not influenced by other factors or variables .
External validity is the extent to which your results can be generalized to other contexts.
The validity of your experiment depends on your experimental design .
Reliability and validity are both about how well a method measures something:
- Reliability refers to the consistency of a measure (whether the results can be reproduced under the same conditions).
- Validity refers to the accuracy of a measure (whether the results really do represent what they are supposed to measure).
If you are doing experimental research, you also have to consider the internal and external validity of your experiment.
A sample is a subset of individuals from a larger population . Sampling means selecting the group that you will actually collect data from in your research. For example, if you are researching the opinions of students in your university, you could survey a sample of 100 students.
In statistics, sampling allows you to test a hypothesis about the characteristics of a population.
Quantitative research deals with numbers and statistics, while qualitative research deals with words and meanings.
Quantitative methods allow you to systematically measure variables and test hypotheses . Qualitative methods allow you to explore concepts and experiences in more detail.
Methodology refers to the overarching strategy and rationale of your research project . It involves studying the methods used in your field and the theories or principles behind them, in order to develop an approach that matches your objectives.
Methods are the specific tools and procedures you use to collect and analyze data (for example, experiments, surveys , and statistical tests ).
In shorter scientific papers, where the aim is to report the findings of a specific study, you might simply describe what you did in a methods section .
In a longer or more complex research project, such as a thesis or dissertation , you will probably include a methodology section , where you explain your approach to answering the research questions and cite relevant sources to support your choice of methods.
Ask our team
Want to contact us directly? No problem. We are always here for you.
- Email [email protected]
- Start live chat
- Call +1 (510) 822-8066
- WhatsApp +31 20 261 6040
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Support team - Nina](https://www.scribbr.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/nina-250x250a.jpg)
Our team helps students graduate by offering:
- A world-class citation generator
- Plagiarism Checker software powered by Turnitin
- Innovative Citation Checker software
- Professional proofreading services
- Over 300 helpful articles about academic writing, citing sources, plagiarism, and more
Scribbr specializes in editing study-related documents . We proofread:
- PhD dissertations
- Research proposals
- Personal statements
- Admission essays
- Motivation letters
- Reflection papers
- Journal articles
- Capstone projects
Scribbr’s Plagiarism Checker is powered by elements of Turnitin’s Similarity Checker , namely the plagiarism detection software and the Internet Archive and Premium Scholarly Publications content databases .
The add-on AI detector is powered by Scribbr’s proprietary software.
The Scribbr Citation Generator is developed using the open-source Citation Style Language (CSL) project and Frank Bennett’s citeproc-js . It’s the same technology used by dozens of other popular citation tools, including Mendeley and Zotero.
You can find all the citation styles and locales used in the Scribbr Citation Generator in our publicly accessible repository on Github .
We're sorry, but some features of Research Randomizer require JavaScript. If you cannot enable JavaScript, we suggest you use an alternative random number generator such as the one available at Random.org .
RESEARCH RANDOMIZER
Random sampling and random assignment made easy.
Research Randomizer is a free resource for researchers and students in need of a quick way to generate random numbers or assign participants to experimental conditions. This site can be used for a variety of purposes, including psychology experiments, medical trials, and survey research.
GENERATE NUMBERS
In some cases, you may wish to generate more than one set of numbers at a time (e.g., when randomly assigning people to experimental conditions in a "blocked" research design). If you wish to generate multiple sets of random numbers, simply enter the number of sets you want, and Research Randomizer will display all sets in the results.
Specify how many numbers you want Research Randomizer to generate in each set. For example, a request for 5 numbers might yield the following set of random numbers: 2, 17, 23, 42, 50.
Specify the lowest and highest value of the numbers you want to generate. For example, a range of 1 up to 50 would only generate random numbers between 1 and 50 (e.g., 2, 17, 23, 42, 50). Enter the lowest number you want in the "From" field and the highest number you want in the "To" field.
Selecting "Yes" means that any particular number will appear only once in a given set (e.g., 2, 17, 23, 42, 50). Selecting "No" means that numbers may repeat within a given set (e.g., 2, 17, 17, 42, 50). Please note: Numbers will remain unique only within a single set, not across multiple sets. If you request multiple sets, any particular number in Set 1 may still show up again in Set 2.
Sorting your numbers can be helpful if you are performing random sampling, but it is not desirable if you are performing random assignment. To learn more about the difference between random sampling and random assignment, please see the Research Randomizer Quick Tutorial.
Place Markers let you know where in the sequence a particular random number falls (by marking it with a small number immediately to the left). Examples: With Place Markers Off, your results will look something like this: Set #1: 2, 17, 23, 42, 50 Set #2: 5, 3, 42, 18, 20 This is the default layout Research Randomizer uses. With Place Markers Within, your results will look something like this: Set #1: p1=2, p2=17, p3=23, p4=42, p5=50 Set #2: p1=5, p2=3, p3=42, p4=18, p5=20 This layout allows you to know instantly that the number 23 is the third number in Set #1, whereas the number 18 is the fourth number in Set #2. Notice that with this option, the Place Markers begin again at p1 in each set. With Place Markers Across, your results will look something like this: Set #1: p1=2, p2=17, p3=23, p4=42, p5=50 Set #2: p6=5, p7=3, p8=42, p9=18, p10=20 This layout allows you to know that 23 is the third number in the sequence, and 18 is the ninth number over both sets. As discussed in the Quick Tutorial, this option is especially helpful for doing random assignment by blocks.
Please note: By using this service, you agree to abide by the SPN User Policy and to hold Research Randomizer and its staff harmless in the event that you experience a problem with the program or its results. Although every effort has been made to develop a useful means of generating random numbers, Research Randomizer and its staff do not guarantee the quality or randomness of numbers generated. Any use to which these numbers are put remains the sole responsibility of the user who generated them.
Note: By using Research Randomizer, you agree to its Terms of Service .
- Privacy Policy
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Research Method](https://researchmethod.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/logo.png)
Home » Experimental Design – Types, Methods, Guide
![](http://nandemo.space/777/templates/cheerup1/res/banner1.gif)
Experimental Design – Types, Methods, Guide
Table of Contents
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Experimental Research Design](https://researchmethod.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Experimental_Research_Design-1024x576.jpg)
Experimental Design
Experimental design is a process of planning and conducting scientific experiments to investigate a hypothesis or research question. It involves carefully designing an experiment that can test the hypothesis, and controlling for other variables that may influence the results.
Experimental design typically includes identifying the variables that will be manipulated or measured, defining the sample or population to be studied, selecting an appropriate method of sampling, choosing a method for data collection and analysis, and determining the appropriate statistical tests to use.
Types of Experimental Design
Here are the different types of experimental design:
Completely Randomized Design
In this design, participants are randomly assigned to one of two or more groups, and each group is exposed to a different treatment or condition.
Randomized Block Design
This design involves dividing participants into blocks based on a specific characteristic, such as age or gender, and then randomly assigning participants within each block to one of two or more treatment groups.
Factorial Design
In a factorial design, participants are randomly assigned to one of several groups, each of which receives a different combination of two or more independent variables.
Repeated Measures Design
In this design, each participant is exposed to all of the different treatments or conditions, either in a random order or in a predetermined order.
Crossover Design
This design involves randomly assigning participants to one of two or more treatment groups, with each group receiving one treatment during the first phase of the study and then switching to a different treatment during the second phase.
Split-plot Design
In this design, the researcher manipulates one or more variables at different levels and uses a randomized block design to control for other variables.
Nested Design
This design involves grouping participants within larger units, such as schools or households, and then randomly assigning these units to different treatment groups.
Laboratory Experiment
Laboratory experiments are conducted under controlled conditions, which allows for greater precision and accuracy. However, because laboratory conditions are not always representative of real-world conditions, the results of these experiments may not be generalizable to the population at large.
Field Experiment
Field experiments are conducted in naturalistic settings and allow for more realistic observations. However, because field experiments are not as controlled as laboratory experiments, they may be subject to more sources of error.
Experimental Design Methods
Experimental design methods refer to the techniques and procedures used to design and conduct experiments in scientific research. Here are some common experimental design methods:
Randomization
This involves randomly assigning participants to different groups or treatments to ensure that any observed differences between groups are due to the treatment and not to other factors.
Control Group
The use of a control group is an important experimental design method that involves having a group of participants that do not receive the treatment or intervention being studied. The control group is used as a baseline to compare the effects of the treatment group.
Blinding involves keeping participants, researchers, or both unaware of which treatment group participants are in, in order to reduce the risk of bias in the results.
Counterbalancing
This involves systematically varying the order in which participants receive treatments or interventions in order to control for order effects.
Replication
Replication involves conducting the same experiment with different samples or under different conditions to increase the reliability and validity of the results.
This experimental design method involves manipulating multiple independent variables simultaneously to investigate their combined effects on the dependent variable.
This involves dividing participants into subgroups or blocks based on specific characteristics, such as age or gender, in order to reduce the risk of confounding variables.
Data Collection Method
Experimental design data collection methods are techniques and procedures used to collect data in experimental research. Here are some common experimental design data collection methods:
Direct Observation
This method involves observing and recording the behavior or phenomenon of interest in real time. It may involve the use of structured or unstructured observation, and may be conducted in a laboratory or naturalistic setting.
Self-report Measures
Self-report measures involve asking participants to report their thoughts, feelings, or behaviors using questionnaires, surveys, or interviews. These measures may be administered in person or online.
Behavioral Measures
Behavioral measures involve measuring participants’ behavior directly, such as through reaction time tasks or performance tests. These measures may be administered using specialized equipment or software.
Physiological Measures
Physiological measures involve measuring participants’ physiological responses, such as heart rate, blood pressure, or brain activity, using specialized equipment. These measures may be invasive or non-invasive, and may be administered in a laboratory or clinical setting.
Archival Data
Archival data involves using existing records or data, such as medical records, administrative records, or historical documents, as a source of information. These data may be collected from public or private sources.
Computerized Measures
Computerized measures involve using software or computer programs to collect data on participants’ behavior or responses. These measures may include reaction time tasks, cognitive tests, or other types of computer-based assessments.
Video Recording
Video recording involves recording participants’ behavior or interactions using cameras or other recording equipment. This method can be used to capture detailed information about participants’ behavior or to analyze social interactions.
Data Analysis Method
Experimental design data analysis methods refer to the statistical techniques and procedures used to analyze data collected in experimental research. Here are some common experimental design data analysis methods:
Descriptive Statistics
Descriptive statistics are used to summarize and describe the data collected in the study. This includes measures such as mean, median, mode, range, and standard deviation.
Inferential Statistics
Inferential statistics are used to make inferences or generalizations about a larger population based on the data collected in the study. This includes hypothesis testing and estimation.
Analysis of Variance (ANOVA)
ANOVA is a statistical technique used to compare means across two or more groups in order to determine whether there are significant differences between the groups. There are several types of ANOVA, including one-way ANOVA, two-way ANOVA, and repeated measures ANOVA.
Regression Analysis
Regression analysis is used to model the relationship between two or more variables in order to determine the strength and direction of the relationship. There are several types of regression analysis, including linear regression, logistic regression, and multiple regression.
Factor Analysis
Factor analysis is used to identify underlying factors or dimensions in a set of variables. This can be used to reduce the complexity of the data and identify patterns in the data.
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM)
SEM is a statistical technique used to model complex relationships between variables. It can be used to test complex theories and models of causality.
Cluster Analysis
Cluster analysis is used to group similar cases or observations together based on similarities or differences in their characteristics.
Time Series Analysis
Time series analysis is used to analyze data collected over time in order to identify trends, patterns, or changes in the data.
Multilevel Modeling
Multilevel modeling is used to analyze data that is nested within multiple levels, such as students nested within schools or employees nested within companies.
Applications of Experimental Design
Experimental design is a versatile research methodology that can be applied in many fields. Here are some applications of experimental design:
- Medical Research: Experimental design is commonly used to test new treatments or medications for various medical conditions. This includes clinical trials to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of new drugs or medical devices.
- Agriculture : Experimental design is used to test new crop varieties, fertilizers, and other agricultural practices. This includes randomized field trials to evaluate the effects of different treatments on crop yield, quality, and pest resistance.
- Environmental science: Experimental design is used to study the effects of environmental factors, such as pollution or climate change, on ecosystems and wildlife. This includes controlled experiments to study the effects of pollutants on plant growth or animal behavior.
- Psychology : Experimental design is used to study human behavior and cognitive processes. This includes experiments to test the effects of different interventions, such as therapy or medication, on mental health outcomes.
- Engineering : Experimental design is used to test new materials, designs, and manufacturing processes in engineering applications. This includes laboratory experiments to test the strength and durability of new materials, or field experiments to test the performance of new technologies.
- Education : Experimental design is used to evaluate the effectiveness of teaching methods, educational interventions, and programs. This includes randomized controlled trials to compare different teaching methods or evaluate the impact of educational programs on student outcomes.
- Marketing : Experimental design is used to test the effectiveness of marketing campaigns, pricing strategies, and product designs. This includes experiments to test the impact of different marketing messages or pricing schemes on consumer behavior.
Examples of Experimental Design
Here are some examples of experimental design in different fields:
- Example in Medical research : A study that investigates the effectiveness of a new drug treatment for a particular condition. Patients are randomly assigned to either a treatment group or a control group, with the treatment group receiving the new drug and the control group receiving a placebo. The outcomes, such as improvement in symptoms or side effects, are measured and compared between the two groups.
- Example in Education research: A study that examines the impact of a new teaching method on student learning outcomes. Students are randomly assigned to either a group that receives the new teaching method or a group that receives the traditional teaching method. Student achievement is measured before and after the intervention, and the results are compared between the two groups.
- Example in Environmental science: A study that tests the effectiveness of a new method for reducing pollution in a river. Two sections of the river are selected, with one section treated with the new method and the other section left untreated. The water quality is measured before and after the intervention, and the results are compared between the two sections.
- Example in Marketing research: A study that investigates the impact of a new advertising campaign on consumer behavior. Participants are randomly assigned to either a group that is exposed to the new campaign or a group that is not. Their behavior, such as purchasing or product awareness, is measured and compared between the two groups.
- Example in Social psychology: A study that examines the effect of a new social intervention on reducing prejudice towards a marginalized group. Participants are randomly assigned to either a group that receives the intervention or a control group that does not. Their attitudes and behavior towards the marginalized group are measured before and after the intervention, and the results are compared between the two groups.
When to use Experimental Research Design
Experimental research design should be used when a researcher wants to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between variables. It is particularly useful when studying the impact of an intervention or treatment on a particular outcome.
Here are some situations where experimental research design may be appropriate:
- When studying the effects of a new drug or medical treatment: Experimental research design is commonly used in medical research to test the effectiveness and safety of new drugs or medical treatments. By randomly assigning patients to treatment and control groups, researchers can determine whether the treatment is effective in improving health outcomes.
- When evaluating the effectiveness of an educational intervention: An experimental research design can be used to evaluate the impact of a new teaching method or educational program on student learning outcomes. By randomly assigning students to treatment and control groups, researchers can determine whether the intervention is effective in improving academic performance.
- When testing the effectiveness of a marketing campaign: An experimental research design can be used to test the effectiveness of different marketing messages or strategies. By randomly assigning participants to treatment and control groups, researchers can determine whether the marketing campaign is effective in changing consumer behavior.
- When studying the effects of an environmental intervention: Experimental research design can be used to study the impact of environmental interventions, such as pollution reduction programs or conservation efforts. By randomly assigning locations or areas to treatment and control groups, researchers can determine whether the intervention is effective in improving environmental outcomes.
- When testing the effects of a new technology: An experimental research design can be used to test the effectiveness and safety of new technologies or engineering designs. By randomly assigning participants or locations to treatment and control groups, researchers can determine whether the new technology is effective in achieving its intended purpose.
How to Conduct Experimental Research
Here are the steps to conduct Experimental Research:
- Identify a Research Question : Start by identifying a research question that you want to answer through the experiment. The question should be clear, specific, and testable.
- Develop a Hypothesis: Based on your research question, develop a hypothesis that predicts the relationship between the independent and dependent variables. The hypothesis should be clear and testable.
- Design the Experiment : Determine the type of experimental design you will use, such as a between-subjects design or a within-subjects design. Also, decide on the experimental conditions, such as the number of independent variables, the levels of the independent variable, and the dependent variable to be measured.
- Select Participants: Select the participants who will take part in the experiment. They should be representative of the population you are interested in studying.
- Randomly Assign Participants to Groups: If you are using a between-subjects design, randomly assign participants to groups to control for individual differences.
- Conduct the Experiment : Conduct the experiment by manipulating the independent variable(s) and measuring the dependent variable(s) across the different conditions.
- Analyze the Data: Analyze the data using appropriate statistical methods to determine if there is a significant effect of the independent variable(s) on the dependent variable(s).
- Draw Conclusions: Based on the data analysis, draw conclusions about the relationship between the independent and dependent variables. If the results support the hypothesis, then it is accepted. If the results do not support the hypothesis, then it is rejected.
- Communicate the Results: Finally, communicate the results of the experiment through a research report or presentation. Include the purpose of the study, the methods used, the results obtained, and the conclusions drawn.
Purpose of Experimental Design
The purpose of experimental design is to control and manipulate one or more independent variables to determine their effect on a dependent variable. Experimental design allows researchers to systematically investigate causal relationships between variables, and to establish cause-and-effect relationships between the independent and dependent variables. Through experimental design, researchers can test hypotheses and make inferences about the population from which the sample was drawn.
Experimental design provides a structured approach to designing and conducting experiments, ensuring that the results are reliable and valid. By carefully controlling for extraneous variables that may affect the outcome of the study, experimental design allows researchers to isolate the effect of the independent variable(s) on the dependent variable(s), and to minimize the influence of other factors that may confound the results.
Experimental design also allows researchers to generalize their findings to the larger population from which the sample was drawn. By randomly selecting participants and using statistical techniques to analyze the data, researchers can make inferences about the larger population with a high degree of confidence.
Overall, the purpose of experimental design is to provide a rigorous, systematic, and scientific method for testing hypotheses and establishing cause-and-effect relationships between variables. Experimental design is a powerful tool for advancing scientific knowledge and informing evidence-based practice in various fields, including psychology, biology, medicine, engineering, and social sciences.
Advantages of Experimental Design
Experimental design offers several advantages in research. Here are some of the main advantages:
- Control over extraneous variables: Experimental design allows researchers to control for extraneous variables that may affect the outcome of the study. By manipulating the independent variable and holding all other variables constant, researchers can isolate the effect of the independent variable on the dependent variable.
- Establishing causality: Experimental design allows researchers to establish causality by manipulating the independent variable and observing its effect on the dependent variable. This allows researchers to determine whether changes in the independent variable cause changes in the dependent variable.
- Replication : Experimental design allows researchers to replicate their experiments to ensure that the findings are consistent and reliable. Replication is important for establishing the validity and generalizability of the findings.
- Random assignment: Experimental design often involves randomly assigning participants to conditions. This helps to ensure that individual differences between participants are evenly distributed across conditions, which increases the internal validity of the study.
- Precision : Experimental design allows researchers to measure variables with precision, which can increase the accuracy and reliability of the data.
- Generalizability : If the study is well-designed, experimental design can increase the generalizability of the findings. By controlling for extraneous variables and using random assignment, researchers can increase the likelihood that the findings will apply to other populations and contexts.
Limitations of Experimental Design
Experimental design has some limitations that researchers should be aware of. Here are some of the main limitations:
- Artificiality : Experimental design often involves creating artificial situations that may not reflect real-world situations. This can limit the external validity of the findings, or the extent to which the findings can be generalized to real-world settings.
- Ethical concerns: Some experimental designs may raise ethical concerns, particularly if they involve manipulating variables that could cause harm to participants or if they involve deception.
- Participant bias : Participants in experimental studies may modify their behavior in response to the experiment, which can lead to participant bias.
- Limited generalizability: The conditions of the experiment may not reflect the complexities of real-world situations. As a result, the findings may not be applicable to all populations and contexts.
- Cost and time : Experimental design can be expensive and time-consuming, particularly if the experiment requires specialized equipment or if the sample size is large.
- Researcher bias : Researchers may unintentionally bias the results of the experiment if they have expectations or preferences for certain outcomes.
- Lack of feasibility : Experimental design may not be feasible in some cases, particularly if the research question involves variables that cannot be manipulated or controlled.
About the author
Muhammad Hassan
Researcher, Academic Writer, Web developer
You may also like
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Correlational Research Design](https://researchmethod.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Correlational_Research_Design-145x100.png)
Correlational Research – Methods, Types and...
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups One-to-One Interview in Research](https://researchmethod.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/One-to-One_Interview_in_Research-145x100.png)
One-to-One Interview – Methods and Guide
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Exploratory Research](https://researchmethod.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Exploratory_Research-145x100.png)
Exploratory Research – Types, Methods and...
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Textual Analysis](https://researchmethod.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Textual_Analysis-145x100.png)
Textual Analysis – Types, Examples and Guide
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Qualitative Research Methods](https://researchmethod.net/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/Qualitative_Research_Methods-145x100.png)
Qualitative Research Methods
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Survey Research](https://researchmethod.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Survey_Research-145x100.png)
Survey Research – Types, Methods, Examples
Have a language expert improve your writing
Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.
- Knowledge Base
- Methodology
- Random Assignment in Experiments | Introduction & Examples
Random Assignment in Experiments | Introduction & Examples
Published on 6 May 2022 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on 13 February 2023.
In experimental research, random assignment is a way of placing participants from your sample into different treatment groups using randomisation.
With simple random assignment, every member of the sample has a known or equal chance of being placed in a control group or an experimental group. Studies that use simple random assignment are also called completely randomised designs .
Random assignment is a key part of experimental design . It helps you ensure that all groups are comparable at the start of a study: any differences between them are due to random factors.
Table of contents
Why does random assignment matter, random sampling vs random assignment, how do you use random assignment, when is random assignment not used, frequently asked questions about random assignment.
Random assignment is an important part of control in experimental research, because it helps strengthen the internal validity of an experiment.
In experiments, researchers manipulate an independent variable to assess its effect on a dependent variable, while controlling for other variables. To do so, they often use different levels of an independent variable for different groups of participants.
This is called a between-groups or independent measures design.
You use three groups of participants that are each given a different level of the independent variable:
- A control group that’s given a placebo (no dosage)
- An experimental group that’s given a low dosage
- A second experimental group that’s given a high dosage
Random assignment to helps you make sure that the treatment groups don’t differ in systematic or biased ways at the start of the experiment.
If you don’t use random assignment, you may not be able to rule out alternative explanations for your results.
- Participants recruited from pubs are placed in the control group
- Participants recruited from local community centres are placed in the low-dosage experimental group
- Participants recruited from gyms are placed in the high-dosage group
With this type of assignment, it’s hard to tell whether the participant characteristics are the same across all groups at the start of the study. Gym users may tend to engage in more healthy behaviours than people who frequent pubs or community centres, and this would introduce a healthy user bias in your study.
Although random assignment helps even out baseline differences between groups, it doesn’t always make them completely equivalent. There may still be extraneous variables that differ between groups, and there will always be some group differences that arise from chance.
Most of the time, the random variation between groups is low, and, therefore, it’s acceptable for further analysis. This is especially true when you have a large sample. In general, you should always use random assignment in experiments when it is ethically possible and makes sense for your study topic.
Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.
Random sampling and random assignment are both important concepts in research, but it’s important to understand the difference between them.
Random sampling (also called probability sampling or random selection) is a way of selecting members of a population to be included in your study. In contrast, random assignment is a way of sorting the sample participants into control and experimental groups.
While random sampling is used in many types of studies, random assignment is only used in between-subjects experimental designs.
Some studies use both random sampling and random assignment, while others use only one or the other.
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Random sample vs random assignment](https://www.scribbr.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/random-sample-vs-random-assignment.webp)
Random sampling enhances the external validity or generalisability of your results, because it helps to ensure that your sample is unbiased and representative of the whole population. This allows you to make stronger statistical inferences .
You use a simple random sample to collect data. Because you have access to the whole population (all employees), you can assign all 8,000 employees a number and use a random number generator to select 300 employees. These 300 employees are your full sample.
Random assignment enhances the internal validity of the study, because it ensures that there are no systematic differences between the participants in each group. This helps you conclude that the outcomes can be attributed to the independent variable .
- A control group that receives no intervention
- An experimental group that has a remote team-building intervention every week for a month
You use random assignment to place participants into the control or experimental group. To do so, you take your list of participants and assign each participant a number. Again, you use a random number generator to place each participant in one of the two groups.
To use simple random assignment, you start by giving every member of the sample a unique number. Then, you can use computer programs or manual methods to randomly assign each participant to a group.
- Random number generator: Use a computer program to generate random numbers from the list for each group.
- Lottery method: Place all numbers individually into a hat or a bucket, and draw numbers at random for each group.
- Flip a coin: When you only have two groups, for each number on the list, flip a coin to decide if they’ll be in the control or the experimental group.
- Use a dice: When you have three groups, for each number on the list, roll a die to decide which of the groups they will be in. For example, assume that rolling 1 or 2 lands them in a control group; 3 or 4 in an experimental group; and 5 or 6 in a second control or experimental group.
This type of random assignment is the most powerful method of placing participants in conditions, because each individual has an equal chance of being placed in any one of your treatment groups.
Random assignment in block designs
In more complicated experimental designs, random assignment is only used after participants are grouped into blocks based on some characteristic (e.g., test score or demographic variable). These groupings mean that you need a larger sample to achieve high statistical power .
For example, a randomised block design involves placing participants into blocks based on a shared characteristic (e.g., college students vs graduates), and then using random assignment within each block to assign participants to every treatment condition. This helps you assess whether the characteristic affects the outcomes of your treatment.
In an experimental matched design , you use blocking and then match up individual participants from each block based on specific characteristics. Within each matched pair or group, you randomly assign each participant to one of the conditions in the experiment and compare their outcomes.
Sometimes, it’s not relevant or ethical to use simple random assignment, so groups are assigned in a different way.
When comparing different groups
Sometimes, differences between participants are the main focus of a study, for example, when comparing children and adults or people with and without health conditions. Participants are not randomly assigned to different groups, but instead assigned based on their characteristics.
In this type of study, the characteristic of interest (e.g., gender) is an independent variable, and the groups differ based on the different levels (e.g., men, women). All participants are tested the same way, and then their group-level outcomes are compared.
When it’s not ethically permissible
When studying unhealthy or dangerous behaviours, it’s not possible to use random assignment. For example, if you’re studying heavy drinkers and social drinkers, it’s unethical to randomly assign participants to one of the two groups and ask them to drink large amounts of alcohol for your experiment.
When you can’t assign participants to groups, you can also conduct a quasi-experimental study . In a quasi-experiment, you study the outcomes of pre-existing groups who receive treatments that you may not have any control over (e.g., heavy drinkers and social drinkers).
These groups aren’t randomly assigned, but may be considered comparable when some other variables (e.g., age or socioeconomic status) are controlled for.
In experimental research, random assignment is a way of placing participants from your sample into different groups using randomisation. With this method, every member of the sample has a known or equal chance of being placed in a control group or an experimental group.
Random selection, or random sampling , is a way of selecting members of a population for your study’s sample.
In contrast, random assignment is a way of sorting the sample into control and experimental groups.
Random sampling enhances the external validity or generalisability of your results, while random assignment improves the internal validity of your study.
Random assignment is used in experiments with a between-groups or independent measures design. In this research design, there’s usually a control group and one or more experimental groups. Random assignment helps ensure that the groups are comparable.
In general, you should always use random assignment in this type of experimental design when it is ethically possible and makes sense for your study topic.
To implement random assignment , assign a unique number to every member of your study’s sample .
Then, you can use a random number generator or a lottery method to randomly assign each number to a control or experimental group. You can also do so manually, by flipping a coin or rolling a die to randomly assign participants to groups.
Cite this Scribbr article
If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.
Bhandari, P. (2023, February 13). Random Assignment in Experiments | Introduction & Examples. Scribbr. Retrieved 3 September 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/random-assignment-experiments/
Is this article helpful?
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Pritha Bhandari](https://www.scribbr.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/pritha-author-pic.jpg)
Pritha Bhandari
Other students also liked, a quick guide to experimental design | 5 steps & examples, controlled experiments | methods & examples of control, control groups and treatment groups | uses & examples.
Chapter 7: Nonexperimental Research
7.3 quasi-experimental research, learning objectives.
- Explain what quasi-experimental research is and distinguish it clearly from both experimental and correlational research.
- Describe three different types of quasi-experimental research designs (nonequivalent groups, pretest-posttest, and interrupted time series) and identify examples of each one.
The prefix quasi means “resembling.” Thus quasi-experimental research is research that resembles experimental research but is not true experimental research. Although the independent variable is manipulated, participants are not randomly assigned to conditions or orders of conditions (Cook & Campbell, 1979). Because the independent variable is manipulated before the dependent variable is measured, quasi-experimental research eliminates the directionality problem. But because participants are not randomly assigned—making it likely that there are other differences between conditions—quasi-experimental research does not eliminate the problem of confounding variables. In terms of internal validity, therefore, quasi-experiments are generally somewhere between correlational studies and true experiments.
Quasi-experiments are most likely to be conducted in field settings in which random assignment is difficult or impossible. They are often conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of a treatment—perhaps a type of psychotherapy or an educational intervention. There are many different kinds of quasi-experiments, but we will discuss just a few of the most common ones here.
Nonequivalent Groups Design
Recall that when participants in a between-subjects experiment are randomly assigned to conditions, the resulting groups are likely to be quite similar. In fact, researchers consider them to be equivalent. When participants are not randomly assigned to conditions, however, the resulting groups are likely to be dissimilar in some ways. For this reason, researchers consider them to be nonequivalent. A nonequivalent groups design , then, is a between-subjects design in which participants have not been randomly assigned to conditions.
Imagine, for example, a researcher who wants to evaluate a new method of teaching fractions to third graders. One way would be to conduct a study with a treatment group consisting of one class of third-grade students and a control group consisting of another class of third-grade students. This would be a nonequivalent groups design because the students are not randomly assigned to classes by the researcher, which means there could be important differences between them. For example, the parents of higher achieving or more motivated students might have been more likely to request that their children be assigned to Ms. Williams’s class. Or the principal might have assigned the “troublemakers” to Mr. Jones’s class because he is a stronger disciplinarian. Of course, the teachers’ styles, and even the classroom environments, might be very different and might cause different levels of achievement or motivation among the students. If at the end of the study there was a difference in the two classes’ knowledge of fractions, it might have been caused by the difference between the teaching methods—but it might have been caused by any of these confounding variables.
Of course, researchers using a nonequivalent groups design can take steps to ensure that their groups are as similar as possible. In the present example, the researcher could try to select two classes at the same school, where the students in the two classes have similar scores on a standardized math test and the teachers are the same sex, are close in age, and have similar teaching styles. Taking such steps would increase the internal validity of the study because it would eliminate some of the most important confounding variables. But without true random assignment of the students to conditions, there remains the possibility of other important confounding variables that the researcher was not able to control.
Pretest-Posttest Design
In a pretest-posttest design , the dependent variable is measured once before the treatment is implemented and once after it is implemented. Imagine, for example, a researcher who is interested in the effectiveness of an antidrug education program on elementary school students’ attitudes toward illegal drugs. The researcher could measure the attitudes of students at a particular elementary school during one week, implement the antidrug program during the next week, and finally, measure their attitudes again the following week. The pretest-posttest design is much like a within-subjects experiment in which each participant is tested first under the control condition and then under the treatment condition. It is unlike a within-subjects experiment, however, in that the order of conditions is not counterbalanced because it typically is not possible for a participant to be tested in the treatment condition first and then in an “untreated” control condition.
If the average posttest score is better than the average pretest score, then it makes sense to conclude that the treatment might be responsible for the improvement. Unfortunately, one often cannot conclude this with a high degree of certainty because there may be other explanations for why the posttest scores are better. One category of alternative explanations goes under the name of history . Other things might have happened between the pretest and the posttest. Perhaps an antidrug program aired on television and many of the students watched it, or perhaps a celebrity died of a drug overdose and many of the students heard about it. Another category of alternative explanations goes under the name of maturation . Participants might have changed between the pretest and the posttest in ways that they were going to anyway because they are growing and learning. If it were a yearlong program, participants might become less impulsive or better reasoners and this might be responsible for the change.
Another alternative explanation for a change in the dependent variable in a pretest-posttest design is regression to the mean . This refers to the statistical fact that an individual who scores extremely on a variable on one occasion will tend to score less extremely on the next occasion. For example, a bowler with a long-term average of 150 who suddenly bowls a 220 will almost certainly score lower in the next game. Her score will “regress” toward her mean score of 150. Regression to the mean can be a problem when participants are selected for further study because of their extreme scores. Imagine, for example, that only students who scored especially low on a test of fractions are given a special training program and then retested. Regression to the mean all but guarantees that their scores will be higher even if the training program has no effect. A closely related concept—and an extremely important one in psychological research—is spontaneous remission . This is the tendency for many medical and psychological problems to improve over time without any form of treatment. The common cold is a good example. If one were to measure symptom severity in 100 common cold sufferers today, give them a bowl of chicken soup every day, and then measure their symptom severity again in a week, they would probably be much improved. This does not mean that the chicken soup was responsible for the improvement, however, because they would have been much improved without any treatment at all. The same is true of many psychological problems. A group of severely depressed people today is likely to be less depressed on average in 6 months. In reviewing the results of several studies of treatments for depression, researchers Michael Posternak and Ivan Miller found that participants in waitlist control conditions improved an average of 10 to 15% before they received any treatment at all (Posternak & Miller, 2001). Thus one must generally be very cautious about inferring causality from pretest-posttest designs.
Does Psychotherapy Work?
Early studies on the effectiveness of psychotherapy tended to use pretest-posttest designs. In a classic 1952 article, researcher Hans Eysenck summarized the results of 24 such studies showing that about two thirds of patients improved between the pretest and the posttest (Eysenck, 1952). But Eysenck also compared these results with archival data from state hospital and insurance company records showing that similar patients recovered at about the same rate without receiving psychotherapy. This suggested to Eysenck that the improvement that patients showed in the pretest-posttest studies might be no more than spontaneous remission. Note that Eysenck did not conclude that psychotherapy was ineffective. He merely concluded that there was no evidence that it was, and he wrote of “the necessity of properly planned and executed experimental studies into this important field” (p. 323). You can read the entire article here:
http://psychclassics.yorku.ca/Eysenck/psychotherapy.htm
Fortunately, many other researchers took up Eysenck’s challenge, and by 1980 hundreds of experiments had been conducted in which participants were randomly assigned to treatment and control conditions, and the results were summarized in a classic book by Mary Lee Smith, Gene Glass, and Thomas Miller (Smith, Glass, & Miller, 1980). They found that overall psychotherapy was quite effective, with about 80% of treatment participants improving more than the average control participant. Subsequent research has focused more on the conditions under which different types of psychotherapy are more or less effective.
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Han Eysenck](https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images/wp-content/uploads/sites/2714/2017/11/16174025/3c5b91dc7566ff92eb1b39afb3b38cdd.jpg)
In a classic 1952 article, researcher Hans Eysenck pointed out the shortcomings of the simple pretest-posttest design for evaluating the effectiveness of psychotherapy.
Wikimedia Commons – CC BY-SA 3.0.
Interrupted Time Series Design
A variant of the pretest-posttest design is the interrupted time-series design . A time series is a set of measurements taken at intervals over a period of time. For example, a manufacturing company might measure its workers’ productivity each week for a year. In an interrupted time series-design, a time series like this is “interrupted” by a treatment. In one classic example, the treatment was the reduction of the work shifts in a factory from 10 hours to 8 hours (Cook & Campbell, 1979). Because productivity increased rather quickly after the shortening of the work shifts, and because it remained elevated for many months afterward, the researcher concluded that the shortening of the shifts caused the increase in productivity. Notice that the interrupted time-series design is like a pretest-posttest design in that it includes measurements of the dependent variable both before and after the treatment. It is unlike the pretest-posttest design, however, in that it includes multiple pretest and posttest measurements.
Figure 7.5 “A Hypothetical Interrupted Time-Series Design” shows data from a hypothetical interrupted time-series study. The dependent variable is the number of student absences per week in a research methods course. The treatment is that the instructor begins publicly taking attendance each day so that students know that the instructor is aware of who is present and who is absent. The top panel of Figure 7.5 “A Hypothetical Interrupted Time-Series Design” shows how the data might look if this treatment worked. There is a consistently high number of absences before the treatment, and there is an immediate and sustained drop in absences after the treatment. The bottom panel of Figure 7.5 “A Hypothetical Interrupted Time-Series Design” shows how the data might look if this treatment did not work. On average, the number of absences after the treatment is about the same as the number before. This figure also illustrates an advantage of the interrupted time-series design over a simpler pretest-posttest design. If there had been only one measurement of absences before the treatment at Week 7 and one afterward at Week 8, then it would have looked as though the treatment were responsible for the reduction. The multiple measurements both before and after the treatment suggest that the reduction between Weeks 7 and 8 is nothing more than normal week-to-week variation.
Figure 7.5 A Hypothetical Interrupted Time-Series Design
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups A Hypothetical Interrupted Time-Series Design - The top panel shows data that suggest that the treatment caused a reduction in absences. The bottom panel shows data that suggest that it did not](https://s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/courses-images/wp-content/uploads/sites/2714/2017/11/16174029/005f570e5d4b313591618c78274e705d.jpg)
The top panel shows data that suggest that the treatment caused a reduction in absences. The bottom panel shows data that suggest that it did not.
Combination Designs
A type of quasi-experimental design that is generally better than either the nonequivalent groups design or the pretest-posttest design is one that combines elements of both. There is a treatment group that is given a pretest, receives a treatment, and then is given a posttest. But at the same time there is a control group that is given a pretest, does not receive the treatment, and then is given a posttest. The question, then, is not simply whether participants who receive the treatment improve but whether they improve more than participants who do not receive the treatment.
Imagine, for example, that students in one school are given a pretest on their attitudes toward drugs, then are exposed to an antidrug program, and finally are given a posttest. Students in a similar school are given the pretest, not exposed to an antidrug program, and finally are given a posttest. Again, if students in the treatment condition become more negative toward drugs, this could be an effect of the treatment, but it could also be a matter of history or maturation. If it really is an effect of the treatment, then students in the treatment condition should become more negative than students in the control condition. But if it is a matter of history (e.g., news of a celebrity drug overdose) or maturation (e.g., improved reasoning), then students in the two conditions would be likely to show similar amounts of change. This type of design does not completely eliminate the possibility of confounding variables, however. Something could occur at one of the schools but not the other (e.g., a student drug overdose), so students at the first school would be affected by it while students at the other school would not.
Finally, if participants in this kind of design are randomly assigned to conditions, it becomes a true experiment rather than a quasi experiment. In fact, it is the kind of experiment that Eysenck called for—and that has now been conducted many times—to demonstrate the effectiveness of psychotherapy.
Key Takeaways
- Quasi-experimental research involves the manipulation of an independent variable without the random assignment of participants to conditions or orders of conditions. Among the important types are nonequivalent groups designs, pretest-posttest, and interrupted time-series designs.
- Quasi-experimental research eliminates the directionality problem because it involves the manipulation of the independent variable. It does not eliminate the problem of confounding variables, however, because it does not involve random assignment to conditions. For these reasons, quasi-experimental research is generally higher in internal validity than correlational studies but lower than true experiments.
- Practice: Imagine that two college professors decide to test the effect of giving daily quizzes on student performance in a statistics course. They decide that Professor A will give quizzes but Professor B will not. They will then compare the performance of students in their two sections on a common final exam. List five other variables that might differ between the two sections that could affect the results.
Discussion: Imagine that a group of obese children is recruited for a study in which their weight is measured, then they participate for 3 months in a program that encourages them to be more active, and finally their weight is measured again. Explain how each of the following might affect the results:
- regression to the mean
- spontaneous remission
Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues in field settings . Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Eysenck, H. J. (1952). The effects of psychotherapy: An evaluation. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 16 , 319–324.
Posternak, M. A., & Miller, I. (2001). Untreated short-term course of major depression: A meta-analysis of studies using outcomes from studies using wait-list control groups. Journal of Affective Disorders, 66 , 139–146.
Smith, M. L., Glass, G. V., & Miller, T. I. (1980). The benefits of psychotherapy . Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
- Research Methods in Psychology. Provided by : University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing. Located at : http://open.lib.umn.edu/psychologyresearchmethods/ . License : CC BY-NC-SA: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Footer Logo Lumen Candela](https://courses.lumenlearning.com/suny-psychologyresearchmethods/wp-content/themes/bombadil/assets/images/FooterLumenCandela.png)
Privacy Policy
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups logo](https://cf.quizizz.com/img/logos/Purple.webp)
Have an account?
Suggestions for you See more
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Quiz image](https://cf.quizizz.com/img/logos/new/logo_placeholder_sm.png)
Independent and Dependent Variables
Intro to stats vocab, 11th - 12th , qualitative and quantitative, 9th - university , 288.1k plays, kg - 1st , intro to statistical studies, data collection methods, multiplying binomials, 8th - 9th .
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups pencil-icon](https://cf.quizizz.com/image/pencil.png)
Types of Statistical Studies
Mathematics.
10 questions
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Player avatar](https://cf.quizizz.com/img/logos/new/logo_placeholder_sm.png)
Introducing new Paper mode
No student devices needed. Know more
A researcher randomly assigned students to two groups . One group was assigned to watch a violent television program while the other group watched a nonviolent program. The student's behavior was then recorded for incidences of aggressive behavior. Which research method is most appropriate?
experimental
sample survey
observational study
Dr. Larson was interested in whether classical music helps students perform better on a test. Dr. Larson randomly assigned half of the study's participants to a group that listened to classical music while taking a test. The other half of the participants did not listen to music while taking a test. Which research method is most appropriate?
Jane Goodall lived among wild chimpanzees intermittently for decades, studying their social and family systems while keeping her interaction with the chimpanzees to a minimum . Which research method is most appropriate?
biased study
A psychologist designed a study to test the effects of cell phone use on driving safety. Participants were randomly assigned either to drive an automobile simulator while talking to a friend on a cell phone or to drive a simulator without talking on a phone.
Which type of research does the scenario describe?
Observational Study
Sample Survey
To test the effects of eating breakfast on test grades. I randomly select half of my students and feed them breakfast while giving the other half nothing to eat. I then give them all a test and compare the test grades of each group.
Is this an experiment or an observational study?
Observational study
Both experiment and observational study.
A hospital wants to open a gym. They ask the night-shift ER staff when they would use the gym. Is this sample biased or unbiased?
Not able to be determined.
Both Biased and Unbiased.
Ghala wanted to know what the most popular book was in the whole school , so she asked everybody in 11th grade what their favorite book was. Which research method is most appropriate?
Hypothesis Test
Osman wanted to know what this weekends favorite movie was among RBHS students so he asked everyone at RBHS and counted the number of movie preferences.
Which research method is most appropriate?
Biased Sample
A researcher stood at a school parking lot entrance to see if the color of a car is related to the driver not wearing a seat belt.
Correlation
Four groups of randomly selected people are assigned a different diet. After six months, the blood pressures of each group are compared.
Explore all questions with a free account
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups Google Logo](https://cf.quizizz.com/img/logos/google-logo-1.png)
Continue with email
Continue with phone
- Open access
- Published: 04 September 2024
Comparison of professional competency and anxiety of nursing students trained based on two internship models: a comparative study
- Roya Dokoohaki 1 ,
- Masoume Rambod ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-7334-9364 1 ,
- Nilofar Pasyar 1 ,
- Ali Mohammad Parviniannasab 2 ,
- Maryam Shaygan 1 ,
- Majid Najafi Kalyani 1 ,
- Zinat Mohebbi 1 &
- Azita Jaberi 1
BMC Medical Education volume 24 , Article number: 968 ( 2024 ) Cite this article
Metrics details
Improving the professional competency of nursing students during the internship is critical. This study aimed to compare the professional competency and anxiety of nursing students trained based on two internship models.
This is a two-group posttest-only quasi-experimental design study. One hundred nursing students who passed internship models A (a previous internship model) and B (an intervention with more educator support and a more planned and programmed process) were randomly enrolled in this study. Internship model groups A and B were conducted for the students in semesters 7 and 8. The outcomes assessed in both groups were “The Competency Inventory for Registered Nurses” and Spielberger “State-Trait Anxiety Inventory”. T-test and MANOVA were used to analyze the data.
The mean scores of competency were 134.56 (SD = 43.23) and 160.19 (SD = 35.81) for the nursing students in the internship model groups A and B, respectively. The mean scores of nursing students’ anxiety were 92.14 (SD = 15.36) and 80.44 (SD = 18.16) in the internship model groups A and B, respectively. MANOVA test showed a significant difference between the groups regarding professional competency (F = 10.34, p = 0.002) and anxiety (F = 11.31, p = 0.001).
Conclusions
The internship model group B could improve the professional competency of nursing students to a great extent and they experienced mild anxiety; it is suggested that this intervention should be done for nursing students. Conducting more studies to evaluate the effect of this model on the nursing students’ competency and anxiety after graduation and as a novice nurse is suggested.
Peer Review reports
Introduction
Increasing clinical setting complexity necessitates further attention to nursing students’ competency [ 1 ]. The 7th and 8th semesters, when students spend more time in clinical environments, are one of the best times for improving nursing students’ competency. The use of clinical models, including internship, may be useful at this time. In the internship period, nursing students are directly supervised by the Nursing Unit Managers (NUMs) and clinical nurses and indirectly by the academic professor as a supervisor [ 2 ].
Internship, as an education model, was beneficial for the students, teachers, and patients. It not only improved health preservation but also increased the nursing students’ skills [ 3 ]. In the internship model, efforts were made to achieve clinical competency [ 2 ]. It improved nursing students’ knowledge, skills, and attitude [ 4 ]. It allows the knowledge acquired during the entire course to be (re) evaluated so that the professional competence is improved. Moreover, the teaching-learning methods are built according to critical pedagogy [ 5 ]. The students practiced self-management and tried to control the situations and stress [ 2 ]. It was mentioned that it improved professional identity and self-efficacy [ 6 ]. This model of education led to nursing students’ interaction with staff nurses and invisible evaluation [ 7 ]. It also reduced the gap between theory and practice [ 8 ] and increased nursing students’ process-based performance [ 9 ]. Moreover, it developed coping strategies for workplace adversities [ 6 ]. A study on the internship of community health nursing showed that service-based learning was effective in improving nursing students’ health education competencies and its subscales including skill, knowledge, community presence, attitude, and professional preparation [ 10 ].
Although this model of education in clinical setting has some advantages, it has some challenges such as lack of support and difficult planning [ 7 ]. Researchers reported that anxiety and low self-confidence in clinical competence settings were the challenges in nursing students’ internship period [ 11 ]. Lack of self-confidence caused anxiety and fear [ 11 ]. During this period, students showed anxiety with symptoms such as nervousness, fear, frequent urination, hand and foot tremors, panic, somatic pain, palpitation, facial flushing, sleep disturbance, etc. [ 11 ].
Considering the effects of the internship program in other countries and Iran, the researchers evaluated the difference between the existing program in Shiraz (nursing students’ internship model A) and other parts of the world. The researchers also raised the question of how to improve the nursing students’ professional competency during the internship and how to reduce their anxiety. In the comparison of the running program (nursing student’s internship model A) with the other countries, there were differences. The first one was the duration of the program that was about 12 weeks. Secondly, the students were not full-time employees in the clinical environment, and they left the ward at 1:00 PM. Next, they were only oriented to general information about the program and did not receive basic nursing trainings. In addition, nursing students were not paid during the course and insured.
Literature review showed that in the nursing students’ internships, exploitation and lack of incentive were the barriers to success in this program [ 12 ]. On the other hand, support, self-efficacy, internship structure, and setting were the factors that affected the students’ adjustment [ 13 ]. Work experience, environment, and critical thinking were the factors effective in development of nursing competence [ 14 ]. Moreover, a supportive internship system using motivation strategies as a helpful method improved nursing students’ performance [ 15 ]. In addition, researchers suggested that all the actors involved in nursing students’ internships should facilitate the efficacy of teaching and learning [ 16 ]. Furthermore, another study recommended that stakeholders should use increased educational preparation for the internship stage to evolve healthcare market supply and need [ 17 ].
In order to solve those limitations and promote the program based on the above-mentioned suggestions at the global level, in addition to solving the above points, changes were made in the model A and it was named “nursing student’s internship model B”. For this purpose, director of the Nursing School of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, their academic teachers, the nursing director of Nemazee hospital, and the director of the provincial nursing office support were considered. More detailed planning was considered to implement and manage the internship model. During the formative evaluation of the model, several meetings between Shiraz Nursing School and the clinical environment were held to identify and resolve deficiencies. Therefore, to improve the evidence-based practice, this study aimed to compare the professional competency and anxiety of nursing students trained based on the two internship models. The following hypotheses were posed:
Nursing student’s internship model B improves the nursing students’ professional competency compared to model A.
Nursing student’s internship model B reduces the nursing students’ anxiety compared to model A.
Study design
This is a comparative study with nonequivalent control group posttest-only quasi-experimental design. In this interventional study with no concurrent controls, a new nursing student’s internship model (B) is proposed. It helps the researchers to select group (B) to be trained using this model and then compare their outcomes to that of a previous nursing student’s internship model group (A). In fact, internship model group (A) was considered as a control group. It should be noted that the students were in two different groups and were selected for each group at two consecutive semesters.
The setting of this study was Nursing and Midwifery School of Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (SUMS). The intervention of nursing student’s internship model group A was carried out routinely from September 2022 to June 2023 and its data were collected in June 2023. The intervention in the nursing student’s internship model group B started from September 2023 and data collection was done in June and July 2024.
Participants
The undergraduate nursing students who were in the seventh and eighth semesters, had passed internship model (A/B) for at least one semester (model A was applied in one semester and model B in the other semester), and were willing to participate were enrolled in this study. Exclusion criteria included a known case of psychiatric disorder confirmed by the doctor according to the student report, incomplete completion of the questionnaires, guest students, and those transferred from another university since the 6th semester because these students might be different from those in the university under study in terms of experience and professional competency. One hundred nursing students participated in this study.
Fifty students were randomly selected among the subjects who passed the internship model (A) Moreover, students who participated in the internship model B were randomly selected to group (B) In order to conduct random sampling for each group, we obtained the list of students in Nursing and Midwifery School of SUMS; based on a random number table, 50 students were selected for each group. For sampling, an individual from outside the team participated.
Sample size
Given that there was no study for comparison on the two groups to evaluate the professional competency and anxiety of nursing students during their internship, the sample size was determined using the study of Liou et al.’s study [ 18 ], which compared the performance competence pre-graduate nursing students and hospital nurses. Based on α = 0.02, β = 0.2, the proportion of subjects that were in the internship model group A = 0.5, proportion of subjects that were in the internship model group B = 0.5, µ 2 - µ 1 of competency = 25.54, SD = 41.35 in Liou et al.’s study and using “Sample Size Calculators for designing clinical research” ( https://sample-size.net/sample-size-means/ ) to compare the mean of a continuous measurement in two samples, the sample size was determined 43 nursing students in each group. Then, considering 15% dropout, it was determined as 50 subjects for each group.
Outcomes and measurements
The outcomes assessed in both groups were professional competency and anxiety. In the demographic form, the gender and age of the nursing students were collected. The professional competency of nursing students was measured using the self-report questionnaire named “The Competency Inventory for Registered Nurses”. It was developed in China by Liu et al. in 2007. Firstly, the inventory had 58 items [ 19 ]. In exploratory factor analysis, three items were deleted and the inventory with 55 items was approved. This inventory consists of the dimensions of clinical care, leadership, interpersonal relation, legal/ethical practice, professional development, teaching/coaching, and critical thinking/research aptitude. Higher scores indicate a higher nursing professional competency. Each item of this inventory was scored using a 5-point Likert scale ranging from score zero (not competent at all) to four (very competent). The total score is 0 to 220 [ 1 ]. A higher score indicates greater competence of the nurse [ 1 , 19 ]. The competence level was placed in three levels of high competence (165–220), medium (110–165) and low (< 110). The reliability of the professional competency inventory was assessed by Liu et al. in 2007, and it was confirmed using Cronbach’s alpha of 0.89 and 0.79–0.86 for the dimensions. The content validity of this checklist was confirmed by Liu et al. and reported as 0.85 [ 1 , 19 ]. Ghasemi et al. assessed the psychometrics of this inventory in the Persian language and the reliability of this checklist using Cronbach’s alpha was 0.90; also, its dimensions were 0.71–0.90 [ 20 ]. As Table 1 shows, in this study, reliability was estimated 0.98 for the professional competency and 0.93–0.95 for its dimensions using Cronbach’s alpha.
The anxiety of nursing students was measured using Spielberger State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI). It was developed by psychologists Charles Spielberger. This inventory has 40 items. Twenty items indicate state anxiety and twenty show trait anxiety. Each item was scored on a four-point Likert scale (not at all = 1, somewhat = 2, moderately so = 3, and very much so = 4). For the total inventory, the minimum score was 40 and maximum score was 160. A lower score means less anxiety and a higher score indicates more anxiety [ 21 ]. The convergent validity and internal consistency of the Persian version of State-Trait Anxiety Inventory were approved [ 22 ]. The normal level of anxiety is shown in Table 2 . In this study, Cronbach’s alpha for total anxiety, state, and trait anxiety was 0.94, 0.91, and 0.89, respectively.
Data collection procedure
Data for this study were collected using the above-mentioned questionnaires. The nursing students of each group were invited to a class in the hospital and clinical setting, the questionnaires were distributed among them, and the students completed them in the presence of the researcher.
Interventions
Internship model a.
As Table 3 shows, in internship model A, at the beginning of semester seven, an introductory meeting was held for the students about the new program. The students in semesters seven and eight were trained in emergency, recovery, operation room, burn, hemodialysis, pediatric departments, neonatal intensive care unit (NICU), intensive care unit (ICU), and Coronary care unit (CCU) by their academic professors. Then, the students passed their internship period after each department/unit. It was in 12 weeks. The nursing students were rotated in critical care, pediatric and medical-surgical units. This period was conducted in the morning shift.
During the internship period, the students were supervised by the ward NUMs or head nurse, and the academic professors randomly followed up and visited the students. The professor talked to the students more about the physical and communication challenges in clinical environment and tried to solve them. In addition, she asked the NUMs and nurses to play a role in the education of students according to their training department and course. The evaluation of students was done by NUMs using evaluation checklists. In addition, if the students had a problem, they informed the head of the department in the faculty.
Internship model B
As Table 3 shows, in the internship model B, at the beginning of semester seven, an introductory meeting was held for the students about the new program. Then, the training classes were held for them, including “how to do drug administration and its nursing care”, “how to handover patients between two shifts”, “how to write the nurse’s note”, “how to perform cardiopulmonary resuscitation”, and “how to work with the DC shock machine”. Moreover, an electronic system was used to register the students’ entry and exit, and the students worked as staff nurses in the department. They were present in a clinical department for a longer period compared to group A. All students were covered by an insurance company for professional services insurance. The following people played an active role in the planning and management of the internship model B:
Manager, vice-chancellors, and the directors of the nursing groups (medical/surgical, critical care, pediatric and community health nursing) in the school of Nursing and Midwifery of SUMS.
Fars provincial nursing office manager and her vice-chancellors.
Nemazee nurse manager and her educational and clinical supervisors.
Vice-chancellors of SUMS.
Firstly, the students were trained in the full-time presence of the academic professors in emergency, burn, hemodialysis and pediatric departments, and operating and recovery rooms. After that, in the internship period, the students spent morning, evening, and night shifts in emergency, pediatric, hemodialysis, medical, and surgical departments. In the eighth academic semester, this program was applied for “maternal and newborn diseases” clinical course, emergency, and “advanced children nursing” departments. During the internship period, the students attended these clinical courses without the direct presence of an academic professor and under the direct supervision of NUMs. As to ICU and CCU, the students spent 12 days with their academic professor and then attended their internship period for 4 weeks. In addition, students spent their morning shifts in the community-based health services department.
During this period, for the first 2 weeks of the shifts, one of the supervising professors, one of the experienced professors, and an expert in diseases and care processes referred to the students’ department and taught the necessary contents based on the patient or patients assigned to the students every day. In the third and fourth weeks, the supervising professors visited the departments 3 times a week and from the 5th week of shifts, two times a week. In these supervisory sessions, in addition to teaching the characteristics of each disease, the patient’s drugs and their specific nursing care, general nursing care such as the principles of dressing, urinary catheterization, tracheostomy suction, prescribing blood products and their complications, and nursing care by the professors, the students were also taught to prescribe high-risk drugs such as KCL, etc.
To consolidate learning, we asked the students to complete assignments related to these trainings and sent them to the professors on social media. Moreover, the supervising professors provided a report on the status and progress of each student on social media and in face-to-face meetings to other professors and those in charge of clinical education that were held monthly in order to facilitate coordination in the education of students. Additionally, the specific patients and their nursing care as “case study” were identified and informed to the head nurse of the clinical education of this course, so that these case studies could be analyzed and presented in the form of clinical and medical grand rounds and workshops. The evaluation of students was done by the academic professors and NUMs using evaluation designed form.
It should be noted that at the end of this study, the contents of training classes were provided for internship model A in the form of MP3 and MP4 files.
Ethical considerations
Research Ethics Committees of Schools of Nursing and Midwifery, Management and Medical Information Science in Shiraz University of Medical Sciences approved this study (IR.SUMS.NUMIMG.REC.1402.027, approval date: 2023-05-28). Participation/non-participation of this study was voluntary. The permission to apply “The Competency Inventory for Registered Nurses” was obtained from Ming Liu by the fourth author of our study. The questionnaires were anonymous. Our study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The study purpose, procedure, probable complications and the ways of compensation and the person responsible for these possible complications in this study were explained in a consent form. The consent to participate was obtained from the nursing students. All of the nursing students signed the consent form. We confirmed that this consent was informed. The results of this study were reported to Nursing and Midwifery School of SUMS.
Data analysis
Data analysis of this study was conducted using SPSS version 24. Mean, standard deviation, frequency, and percentage were reported. The Independent Samples t-test was used to compare the means of two independent groups in order to determine whether there is statistical evidence that the associated population means are significantly different. Moreover, multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) was used for comparing multivariate sample means. As a multivariate procedure, it is used when there are two or more dependent variables, and is often followed by significance tests involving individual dependent variables separately. In this study, to assess how large the effect of the intervention was on the professional competency and anxiety of nursing students, we measured partial eta squared (η2). According to Cohen 1988, an η2 equal to 0.00-0.01, 0.01–0.06, 0.06–0.14, and 0.14-1 means negligible, small, medium, and large, respectively [ 23 ]. p < 0.05 was considered as significant.
50% of the nursing students in both groups were female. The mean age of the students was 23.48 (SD = 1.77) and 23.64 (SD = 2.70) in the internship model groups A and B, respectively. No significant difference was observed between the groups regarding gender (χ 2 = 1.00, p = 0.00) and age (t= -0.34, p = 0.72) of the students who participated in this study.
As Table 1 ; Fig. 1 show, the mean scores of professional competency were 134.56 (SD = 43.23) and 160.19 (SD = 35.81) for the internship model groups A and B, respectively. Based on these mean scores, nursing students in the internship model groups A and B reported a medium level of professional competency. As displayed in Table 1 , independent sample t-test and MANOVA test showed a significant difference between the groups regarding professional competency and its dimensions ( p < 0.05). Based on the professional competency η2 that was 0.1, a medium effect size was reported. The highest and lowest η2 among the dimensions of professional competency were related to clinical care and critical thinking/research aptitude, respectively (Table 1 ). Moreover, as Table 1 shows, all the dimensions of professional competency were significantly higher in the internship model group B compared to group A ( p < 0.05). Moreover, based on the η2 in Table 1 , all professional competency dimensions had medium η2 except for critical thinking/research aptitude that was low.
As Table 4 ; Fig. 1 show, the mean scores of nursing students’ total anxiety were 92.14 (SD = 15.36) and 80.44 (SD = 18.16) in the internship model groups A and B, respectively. Independent sample t-test and MANOVA test showed a significant difference between the groups regarding total anxiety ( p = 0.001). Based on the anxiety η2 that was 0.11, a medium effect size was indicated (Table 4 ).
Moreover, as shown in Table 4 , the mean scores of state anxiety were 47.43 (SD = 7.27) and 41.32 (SD = 8.62) in the internship model groups A and B, respectively. Based on these mean scores, the nursing students experienced moderate and mild state anxiety in the internship models groups A and B, respectively. Independent sample t-test and MANOVA test indicated a significant difference between the groups regarding the mean scores of state anxiety ( p < 0.001). Based on the state anxiety η2 that was 0.12, a medium effect size was found.
In addition, as Table 4 shows, the mean scores of trait anxiety were 44.80 (SD = 9.44) and 39.11 (SD = 10.92) in the internship model groups A and B, respectively. Based on these mean scores, both groups of nursing students experienced mild trait anxiety. However, independent sample t-test and MANOVA test showed that the mean score of trait anxiety was significantly lower in the internship model B compared to model A ( p < 0.05). Based on the trait anxiety η2 that was 0.07, a medium effect size was indicated.
![a researcher randomly assigned students to two groups figure 1](https://media.springernature.com/lw685/springer-static/image/art%3A10.1186%2Fs12909-024-05956-4/MediaObjects/12909_2024_5956_Fig1_HTML.png)
Comparison of the nursing students’ anxiety and professional competency between internship model groups A and B
This study aimed to compare the professional competency and anxiety of nursing students trained based on the two internship models. The nursing students in the internship model group B significantly reported higher mean scores of professional competency and experienced lower mean scores of anxiety compared to the internship model group A.
Our findings revealed that nursing students in the internship model groups A and B reported medium levels of professional competency. A study reported that internship program helped the students achieve clinical competency, and increased academic and professional skills [ 2 ]. Our results indicated that the internship model group B significantly reported higher mean scores of professional competence compared to group A. In a study, it was reported that clinical supervision model in internship nursing students improved the nursing process-based performance [ 9 ]. In the internship model group B, the students had the support of the professor. Their needs were considered by managers, supervisors, professors, etc. The detailed planning of educational and clinical managers reduced the gap between theory and practice and had a positive effect on the internship students. In addition, interactions between professors and students; professors and supervisors, nurses, and patients; students and educational managers; and educational and clinical managers were extensively carried out. The challenges of the students were identified and solved by the team quickly. Possibly, above-mentioned reasons led to improvement of professional competency in the internship group B compared to the internship model A.
Our study showed nursing students in the internship model group B reported higher clinical care and professional development competency compared to the group A. In addition, the group B had higher mean scores of teaching and coaching compared to the group A. Moreover, the highest effect size was related to clinical care competency. A qualitative study reported that the internship program in nursing students improved their clinical skills and “professional self-efficacy”. In addition, these nursing students had professional identity development. They indicated that internship program led to “accepting professional roles” [ 6 ]. In a study on the attitude of nursing students “community-based training and internship”, it was reported that nursing students had a teaching role and provided some of the clients and patients with information regarding lifestyle, mental health, hygiene, etc. [ 3 ]. It seems that in the internship model group B, the full presence of the nursing students in each work shift provided the opportunity to deliver clinical care and educate the patient and colleagues. In addition, because students are still studying, when they encounter new topics, they try to learn them by reading reliable books and Internet sources, asking their peers or supervisors, and providing the nursing staff and the healthcare team with this information. Since there was a lot of emphasis on students’ clinical care in the internship model group B, their supervisors evaluated and taught the skills daily, and the nurses emphasized the students’ education; there was a possibility that this group had better mean scores of clinical care and professional development competency as compared to group A.
This study indicated that interpersonal relations and leadership competency were higher in the internship model group B compared to group A. Researchers believed that in the learning process, interpersonal relationships linked the patients, students, and supervisors to each other [ 24 ]. They suggested that we should respect each other and provide supportive interaction, leading to improvement in learning outcomes [ 24 ]. In clinical setting, interpersonal relationship is crucial for the nurses because it improves the nursing students’ learning and their outcomes [ 25 ]. It seems that better and more frequent interpersonal relations between supervisors, students, and nurses in the internship model group B compared to the group A further improved the nursing students’ competency. In the internship model group B, nursing students worked as staff nurses. They became familiar with facts, documents, etc. Therefore, as they probably knew each other’s strengths and weaknesses and the setting atmosphere and climate, they cooperated better, conducted teamwork, and communicated with other health team members, compared to group A.
Our study showed nursing students in the internship model group B reported higher critical thinking/research aptitude competency compared to group A. However, the smallest difference between the two groups was in this variable. A qualitative study showed the “lack of scientific research training” as a barrier to nursing internship [ 26 ]. A study indicated that critical thinking subscale of performance competence in nursing students’ internship model was in the lowest level [ 18 ]. Therefore, using knowledge and reflecting on it to solve the clinical problems in nursing students needs more attention in both groups.
Our findings showed legal/ethical practice competency had a higher mean score in the internship model group B, compared to group A. Intern nursing students’ moral sensitivity was associated to “ethical decision-making ability” [ 27 ]. It was mentioned that ethical issues would happen in clinical setting among healthcare workers, supervisors, teachers, and patients [ 28 ]. As in the internship model group B, nursing students worked as staff nurses for a long time in a ward/department, it seems that they paid more attention to the security of the patients’ information. Moreover, because they worked as staff nurses, they might have more respect to the patients’ privacy, be more familiar to advocating the rights of the patients, and take more responsibility for their performance compared to group A.
The nursing students experienced moderate and mild state anxiety in the internship models groups A and B, respectively. Moreover, both groups experienced mild trait anxiety. This study indicated that state-trait anxiety was lower in the internship model group B compared to group A. In the same line with the present study, the results of a study in China showed that the anxiety level of nursing students after experiencing the internship program was moderate. Because nursing students are still in the transition phase during internship, their psychological defense mechanisms seem to be incomplete [ 29 ], resulting in experiencing mild to moderate anxiety by them. A study showed that painful experiences during the internship period, feedback and suggestions of trainers, and hard work in the evening and night shifts were the factors that caused anxiety during the internship period [ 11 ]. Of course, researchers believe that moderate anxiety has a protective role and could lead to the improvement of individual ability in response to environmental stimuli [ 11 ]. In group B, holding preparatory workshops for the students before the start of the internship period, close communication between students and academic supervisors, as well as frequent communication and meetings between the hospital nurse managers and educational supervisors with educational and clinical vice-chancellors and academic supervisors probably led to experiencing lower anxiety by nursing students.
This study had some limitations. Since there was no exact control group in this study, it was not possible to compare nursing students who had not experienced these two interventional models and had passed the 7th and 8th semester traditionally, in terms of professional competence and anxiety. Moreover, without a control group, it is impossible to exactly conclude which outcomes were the result of the internship model groups A/B rather than the other variables. Therefore, it is suggested that these interventions should be compared with the control group in other studies and should measure the outcomes before and after the interventions. Given that the study was conducted in only one center (school of Nursing and Midwifery in Shiraz), the generalizability of the findings is not possible. Therefore, it is suggested that the study should be repeated in other schools of nursing in our country and other parts of the world. The fact that the practice was made in different semesters might have an impact on the results; clinical functioning, etc. might be different in that period. There were actually many uncontrollable variables in our study. Therefore, it is suggested to a study in two groups in one semester.
Since the least difference between the two groups was related to the dimension of critical thinking and research aptitude competency, it is suggested that this issue should be given more attention in future internship programs.
This study showed that the nursing students in the internship model group B had a higher mean score of professional competency and lower mean score of anxiety compared to the internship model group A. Given that the internship model group B as a precise and regular program could improve the professional competency of nursing students to a great extent and they experienced mild anxiety during the program, it is suggested that this intervention should be carried out for nursing students and other students who have clinical functions. It is recommended that the internship model group B should be added to the nursing program and curriculum in our country. Since the internship model group B only required detailed planning and we explained it in the intervention section, the model could easily be implemented in different universities.
Data availability
The data of this study would be available by email to Masoume Rambod.
Liu M, Yin L, Ma E, Lo S, Zeng L. Competency inventory for registered nurses in Macao: instrument validation. J Adv Nurs. 2009;65(4):893–900.
Article Google Scholar
Babamohamadi H, Aghaei N, Asgari MR, Dehghan-Nayeri N. Strategies used by Iranian nursing students for adjusting to internship: a qualitative study. BMC Med Educ. 2023;23(1):454.
Fereidouni Z, Hatami M, Jeihooni AK, Kashfi H. Attitudes toward community-based training and internship of nursing students and professors: a qualitative study. Investigación Y educación en enfermería. 2017;35(2):243–51.
Suresh H. Perception of nursing students towards internship. Nurs J India. 2012;103(2):59.
Esteves LS, Cunha IC, Bohomol E, Negri EC. Supervised internship in undergraduate education in nursing: integrative review. Revista Brasileira De Enfermagem. 2018;71:1740–50.
Karimyar Jahromi M, Momennasab M, Yektatalab S, Pasyar N, Rivaz M. Live experience of nursing students with internship program: a phenomenological study. J Educ Health Promotion. 2023;12(1):124.
Google Scholar
Ahmadi S, Abdi A, Nazarianpirdosti M, Rajati F, Rahmati M, Abdi A. Challenges of clinical nursing training through internship approach: a qualitative study. J Multidisciplinary Healthc 2020 Sep 7:891–900.
Nematollahi M, Bagherian B, Mehdipour-Rabori R, Farokhzadian J, Khoshnood Z, Navidi Z. Implementing the internship educational method, a step to reduce the gap between theory and practice, experience of undergraduate nursing students: a qualitative content analysis study. J Qualitative Res Health Sci. 2022;11(4):253–9.
Shahzeydi A, Farzi S, Tarrahi MJ, Sabouhi F, Babaei S, Yazdannik A. The effect of the clinical supervision model on nursing internship students’ nursing process-based performance: an experimental study. BMC Nurs. 2024;23(1):166.
Emrani M, Khoshnood Z, Farokhzadian J, Sadeghi M. The effect of service-based learning on health education competencies of students in community health nursing internships. BMC Nurs. 2024;23(1):138.
Yi QF, Yan J, Zhang CJ, Yang GL, Huang H, Yang Y. The experience of anxiety among Chinese undergraduate nursing students in the later period of their internships: findings from a qualitative study. BMC Nurs. 2022;21(1):70.
Bahari G, Alharbi F, Alharbi O. Facilitators of and barriers to success in nursing internship programs: a qualitative study of interns’ and faculty members’ perspectives. Nurse Educ Today. 2022;109:105257.
Aghaei N, Babamohamadi H, Asgari MR, Dehghan-Nayeri N. Barriers to and facilitators of nursing students’ adjustment to internship: a qualitative content analysis. Nurse Educ Today. 2021;99:104825.
Rizany I, Hariyati RT, Handayani H. Factors that affect the development of nurses’ competencies: a systematic review. Enfermeria Clin. 2018;28:154–7.
El-Sayed AA, Abdelaliem SM. Application of Kano model for optimizing the training system among nursing internship students: a mixed-method Egyptian study. BMC Nurs. 2023;22(1):316.
Leyva-Moral JM, Aguayo‐González M, San Rafael Gutiérrez S, Jiménez Pera M, Mestres‐Soler O. Understanding the expectations of nursing students following the first clinical internship: a qualitative study. Nurs Health Sci. 2022;24(1):93–100.
Nash J, Kamel TC, Sherer J, Nauer K. Implementing a perioperative nursing student summer internship. AORN J. 2018;107(1):83–90.
Liou SR, Liu HC, Tsai SL, Chu TP, Cheng CY. Performance competence of pregraduate nursing students and hospital nurses: a comparison study. J Clin Nurs. 2020;29(13–14):2652–62.
Liu M, Kunaiktikul W, Senaratana W, Tonmukayakul O, Eriksen L. Development of competency inventory for registered nurses in the people’s Republic of China: scale development. Int J Nurs Stud. 2007;44(5):805–13.
Ghasemi E, Janani L, Dehghan NN, Negarandeh R. Psychometric properties of persian version of the competency inventory for registered nurse (CIRN). Iran J Nurs. 2014;27(87):1–13.
Spielberger CD, Sydeman SJ. State-trait anxiety inventory and state-trait anger expression inventory. In: Maruish ME, editor. The use of psychological tests for treatment planning and outcome assessment. Hillsdale, NJ: LEA; 1994. pp. 292–321.
Abdoli N, Farnia V, Salemi S, Davarinejad O, Jouybari TA, Khanegi M, Alikhani M, Behrouz B. Reliability and validity of Persian version of state-trait anxiety inventory among high school students. East Asian Archives Psychiatry. 2020;30(2):44–7.
Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale, N.J: L. Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
Holst H, Ozolins LL, Brunt D, Hörberg U. The learning space—interpersonal interactions between nursing students, patients, and supervisors at developing and learning care units. Int J Qualitative Stud Health Well-being. 2017;12(1):1368337.
Rebeiro G, Foster K, Hercelinskyj GJ, Evans A. Enablers of the interpersonal relationship between registered nurses and students on clinical placement: a phenomenological study. Nurse Educ Pract. 2021;57:103253.
Lin H, Yan M, Fang Y, Wang Y. Barriers to the completion of bachelor thesis for bachelor nursing students during their internship: a qualitative study from dual student and faculty perspectives. Nurse Educ Today. 2024;132:105997.
Luo Z, Tao L, Wang CC, Zheng N, Ma X, Quan Y, Zhou J, Zeng Z, Chen L, Chang Y. Correlations between moral courage, moral sensitivity, and ethical decision-making by nurse interns: a cross-sectional study. BMC Nurs. 2023;22(1):260.
Kont KR, Rannula K, Puura K. Professional ethical aspects in the study and internship environment: research in Tallinn health care college. Acta Paedagogica Vilnensia. 2021;46:148–67.
Dong C, Xia L, Zhao C, Zhang X, He J, Zhang G, Zhang J. Prospective association between perceived stress and anxiety among nursing college students: the moderating roles of career adaptability and professional commitment. BMC Psychiatry. 2023;23(1):388.
Download references
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the personnel who collaborated in the implication of the intervention and nursing students’ education in clinical settings and Shiraz University of Medical Sciences. The authors would like to thank Razieh Rasekh, Hamideh Falah, Laila Hashemizadeh, and Fatemeh Azadi for preparing and managing the intervention. The authors would like to thank Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran, and Center for Development of Clinical Research of Nemazee Hospital and Dr Nasrin Shokrpour for English language editorial assistance. We appreciated Ming Liu who gave us the permission to apply “The Competency Inventory for Registered Nurses” in this study.
This study was financially supported by Shiraz University of Medical Sciences (Grant Number = 28249).
Author information
Authors and affiliations.
Community Based Psychiatric Care Research Center, Nursing and Midwifery School, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
Roya Dokoohaki, Masoume Rambod, Nilofar Pasyar, Maryam Shaygan, Majid Najafi Kalyani, Zinat Mohebbi & Azita Jaberi
Department of Nursing, School of Nursing, Larestan University of Medical Sciences, Larestan, Iran
Ali Mohammad Parviniannasab
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Contributions
MR, NP, RD, AP participated in conceptualization of this study. RD participated in data collection. MR and AP conducted the management the data analysis. MSH, ZM, AZ, and MN participated in the intervention management. All authors participated in writing and approving the original draft of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Correspondence to Masoume Rambod .
Ethics declarations
Ethics approval and consent to participate.
Research Ethics Committees of Schools of Nursing and Midwifery, Management and Medical Information Science-Shiraz University of Medical Sciences approved this study (IR.SUMS.NUMIMG.REC.1402.027, approval date: 2023-05-28). Participation/non-participation of this study was voluntary. The permission to apply “The Competency Inventory for Registered Nurses” was obtained from Ming Liu by the fourth author of our study. The questionnaires were anonymous. Our study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The study purpose, procedure, probable complications and the ways of compensation, and the person responsible for these possible complications in this study were explained in the consent form. The consent to participate was obtained from the nursing students. All of the nursing students signed the consent form. We confirmed that this consent was informed. The results of this study were reported to Nursing and Midwifery School of SUMS.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s note.
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if you modified the licensed material. You do not have permission under this licence to share adapted material derived from this article or parts of it. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ .
Reprints and permissions
About this article
Cite this article.
Dokoohaki, R., Rambod, M., Pasyar, N. et al. Comparison of professional competency and anxiety of nursing students trained based on two internship models: a comparative study. BMC Med Educ 24 , 968 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05956-4
Download citation
Received : 13 May 2024
Accepted : 26 August 2024
Published : 04 September 2024
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05956-4
Share this article
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
- Clinical competence
BMC Medical Education
ISSN: 1472-6920
- General enquiries: [email protected]
![](http://nandemo.space/777/templates/cheerup1/res/banner1.gif)
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
A researcher conducted an experiment on the effect of caffeine on memory in college students in the United States. The researcher randomly assigned each of 100 students to one of two groups. One group received caffeinated coffee followed by a memory test. The second group received decaffeinated coffee followed by a memory test.
A set of flashcards to test your knowledge of basic statistics concepts, such as population, sample, statistic, parameter, and sampling error. The flashcards include ...
Random assignment is the practice of allocating participants to different experimental groups in a study in a completely unbiased way, ensuring each participant has an equal chance of being assigned to any group. It is used in experiments with a between-groups or independent measures design to enhance the internal validity and eliminate systematic differences between groups.
Random assignment is a way of placing participants into different treatment groups using randomization in experimental research. It helps ensure that all groups are comparable at the start of a study and avoid biases. Learn how to use random assignment, when to use it, and how it differs from random sampling.
If you assign subjects into two groups A and B, you assign subjects to each group purely randomly for every assignment. Even though this is the most basic way, if the total number of samples is small, sample numbers are likely to be assigned unequally. ... Random Allocation. An independent researcher makes random allocation cards using computer ...
Random assignment is a method used in research to ensure that each participant has an equal chance of being placed in any group. It helps to eliminate biases, control confounding variables, and enhance the validity and generalizability of the findings. Learn the history, theory, and application of random assignment in psychology.
Learn about the three types of experimental designs: independent measures, repeated measures, and matched pairs. Find out how participants are allocated to different groups in an experiment and what are the advantages and disadvantages of each design.
Random assignment is a process that uses chance to assign subjects to different groups in an experiment. It helps ensure that the groups are equivalent at the start of the study and reduces the impact of confounding variables that could bias the results.
Random assignment is a research procedure that randomly assigns participants to different experimental conditions to control for confounds. Learn why researchers use random assignment, how to implement it, and what are its limitations.
Study with Quizlet and memorize flashcards containing terms like A researcher randomly assigned participants to two groups. Group A received the drug whenever they reported depressive symptoms to the experimenter; group B received no drugs at any point. In this study, group A was the, In a scientific experiment, the variable manipulated or controlled by the experimenter is called the, Assume ...
Learn how to use random assignment, a method of assigning participants to groups in a study, by using a random number generator, a lottery method, or a coin flip. Find out the difference between random assignment and random selection, and when to use control variables in your research.
Research Randomizer is a free resource for researchers and students who need to generate random numbers or assign participants to experimental conditions. You can customize the number of sets, numbers per set, number range, uniqueness, and sorting options.
Learn how to plan and conduct scientific experiments to test hypotheses or research questions. Find out the advantages and disadvantages of different types of experimental design, methods, and data collection and analysis techniques.
Random assignment is a way of placing participants into different treatment groups using randomisation in experimental research. It helps ensure that all groups are comparable at the start of a study and that any differences are due to the independent variable.
Learn how to design and conduct experiments in psychology, including between-subjects and within-subjects approaches, random assignment, control conditions, and counterbalancing. The web page does not address the query about when the researcher purposely assigns participants to groups, but it explains the purpose and methods of random assignment.
Quasi-experimental research is research that resembles experimental research but does not randomly assign participants to conditions. It includes nonequivalent groups, pretest-posttest, and interrupted time series designs. Learn the advantages and disadvantages of each type and see examples.
Study with Quizlet and memorize flashcards containing terms like A researcher randomly assigns 50 student to two groups of 25. Group 1 is given computers and educational software to take home and use, while group 2 is given educational workbooks to take home. Two months later, to researcher gives each group standardized achievement tests. What is the research design?, A researcher wishes to ...
1. Multiple Choice. Edit. 3 minutes. 1 pt. A researcher randomly assigned students to two groups. One group was assigned to watch a violent television program while the other group watched a nonviolent program. The student's behavior was then recorded for incidences of aggressive behavior.
The researcher should then randomly assign each student to either the control group or the experimental group using a random number generator or a computer program that generates random assignments. Once the students have been randomly assigned to the two groups, the researcher should begin implementing the two different teaching methods.
Study with Quizlet and memorise flashcards containing terms like The simplest possible experimental design uses random assignment. has two independent variables. has two conditions. has one condition., social psychologist conducted a study in which she randomly assigned each participant to one of four conditions. This study involved a ________ design. randomized groups pretest-posttest split ...
Question: One group 3. A researcher conducted an experiment on the effect of caffeine on memory in college students in the United States. The researcher randomly assigned each of 100 students to one of two groups. received caffeinated coffee followed by a memory test. The second group received decaffeinated coffee followed by a memory test.
Background Improving the professional competency of nursing students during the internship is critical. This study aimed to compare the professional competency and anxiety of nursing students trained based on two internship models. Methods This is a two-group posttest-only quasi-experimental design study. One hundred nursing students who passed internship models A (a previous internship model ...
5.0 (1 review) Get a hint. Which of the following might be a reason a researcher would use a quasi-experiment? a) quasi-experiments are more internally valid than experiments. b) quasi-experiments are easier to design. c) age is their variable of interest. d) quasi-experiments are more externally valid than experiments.
Practice Quiz 1. Scenario: A researcher randomly assigned boys and girls to each of two groups. One group watched a violent television program while the other group watched a nonviolent program. The children were then observed during a period of free play, and the incidence of aggressive behavior was recorded for each group.