UNIT 04

EXPERIMENTAL RESEARCH DESIGN

Research design as a variance control:
In research design, controlling for variance is crucial to ensure the validity and reliability of study
findings. Variance control refers to the efforts made by researchers to minimize the impact of
extraneous variables or sources of variability that could affect the dependent variable in a study.
By controlling for variance, researchers can enhance the internal validity of their research,
making it more likely that any observed effects are due to the manipulated independent variable
and not influenced by other factors.
Max- min- con principle
1. Maximize Systemic Variance: Maximizing systemic variance refers to enhancing the
variability in the independent variable(s) or factor(s) that the researcher is investigating.
When systemic variance is high, it becomes easier to detect meaningful patterns,
relationships, or differences between groups. To maximize systemic variance, researchers
can:
 Carefully design experimental conditions: Create experimental conditions that
maximize the differences between groups. This can involve manipulating variables
in a way that clearly represents the range of real-world scenarios or situations.
 Use diverse and representative samples: Ensure that the sample under study is
diverse and representative of the population of interest. This diversity can increase
the likelihood of capturing the true variability inherent in the population.
 Utilize appropriate measurement instruments: Choose measurement tools that
are sensitive to the variations in the variables being studied. A well-designed
instrument can capture subtle differences between participants or groups.
2. Minimize Error Variance: Error variance, also known as random error or residual
variance, represents the variability in the dependent variable that cannot be attributed to
the independent variable(s) being studied. Minimizing error variance is essential because it
allows researchers to increase the precision of their measurements and findings. To
minimize error variance, researchers can:
 Use reliable measurement instruments: Employ measurement tools that yield
consistent results over time and across different raters. Reliable measurements
reduce measurement error.
 Standardize data collection procedures: Ensure that data are collected under
consistent conditions and protocols. Standardization minimizes variability
introduced by different experimenters or data collectors.
 Increase sample size: Larger sample sizes can help average out random
fluctuations, reducing the impact of random variability on the results.
3. Control Extraneous Variance: Extraneous variance refers to variability in the dependent
variable that is not of primary interest but can still affect the results. Controlling
 extraneous variance involves minimizing the influence of variables other than the
independent variable(s) being studied. Researchers can control extraneous variance by:
 Randomization: Randomly assigning participants to different experimental
conditions can help distribute extraneous variables equally across groups,
minimizing their impact on the dependent variable.
 Matching: Match participants based on specific characteristics that might influence
the dependent variable. By ensuring that equivalent groups are compared,
researchers can control for the influence of matched variables.
 Statistical control: Use statistical techniques, such as analysis of covariance
(ANCOVA), to statistically control for the influence of specific extraneous
variables while examining the relationship between the independent and dependent
variables.

By maximizing systemic variance, minimizing error variance, and controlling extraneous

variance, researchers can improve the quality of their research, leading to more accurate and
meaningful conclusions about the phenomena under investigation.

Experimental research design is a scientific approach to investigating cause-and-effect

relationships between variables. In experimental studies, researchers manipulate one or more
independent variables to observe their effect on a dependent variable, while controlling for
extraneous variables. Experimental designs are highly rigorous and allow researchers to draw
conclusions about causality.

Factors affecting internal validity:

1. History:

Historical events occurring during the course of an experiment can influence the dependent
variable, making it difficult to determine if changes are due to the experimental treatment or
external events. To control for history, researchers can use a control group and ensure that any
historical events affect both groups equally.

2. Maturation:

Participants naturally change over time due to factors like aging or development. Maturation
effects can confound the results if changes in the dependent variable are due to natural processes
rather than the experimental treatment. To address maturation, researchers can match or randomly
assign participants, ensuring that maturation effects are balanced across groups.

3. Testing (Main Testing and Reactive Testing):

The act of taking a test can influence participants' responses in subsequent testing sessions (main
testing effect). Additionally, participants might become aware of the study's purpose (reactive
testing effect) and alter their behavior. Counterbalancing, where the order of conditions is varied,
can help control for testing effects.

4. Instrumentation:

Changes in the calibration of measurement tools or differences in observers over time can
introduce errors. To minimize instrumentation effects, researchers should ensure consistency in
measurements, use reliable instruments, and train observers thoroughly.

5. Statistical Regression:

Statistical regression occurs when extreme scores tend to move closer to the mean upon retesting.
This phenomenon can make it appear as if an extreme score was due to the experimental
treatment when it was simply due to chance. To control for regression effects, researchers can use
statistical techniques like analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) to adjust for initial differences in
groups.

6. Selection Bias:

Selection bias occurs when participants in different groups are not equivalent at the beginning of
the study. This can happen if participants are not randomly assigned to groups. Random
assignment helps in ensuring that participants' characteristics are equally distributed among
groups, minimizing selection bias.

7. Test Unit Mortality:

Test unit mortality refers to the loss of participants from the study over time. If participants drop
out of the study in a non-random manner, it can lead to biased results. Researchers should track
and report participant attrition and consider intention-to-treat analysis to handle missing data.

Factors affecting external validity:

1. The Environment at the Time of Test: The setting or environment in which the study is
conducted may not be representative of the real-world context where the findings are to be
applied. Findings from a controlled laboratory setting may not generalize to natural
settings. Researchers should consider the ecological validity of the study's environment
and its relevance to the target population.
2. Population Differences: If the sample used in the study is not representative of the
broader population of interest, the generalizability of the findings can be limited. Sampling
biases, such as convenience sampling, may result in a sample that is not reflective of the
population, affecting external validity. Researchers should aim to use representative
samples when possible.
3. Time Gap: The timing of data collection can influence external validity. Short-term
studies may not capture the long-term effects of an intervention or phenomenon, and vice
 versa. Researchers should consider the time frame of their study and acknowledge any
limitations regarding the duration of the observed effects.
4. Treatment Differences: When the experimental treatment differs significantly from the
actual treatment or conditions experienced in the real world, external validity can be
compromised. The treatment in the experiment should closely resemble real-world
conditions to enhance the generalizability of findings. However, this may not always be
feasible in controlled experimental settings.

Pre-experimental designs are research designs that lack randomization or control groups. These
designs are considered less rigorous than true experimental designs due to the absence of random
assignment to groups. Researchers often use pre-experimental designs when conducting
preliminary research or when randomization is not feasible or ethical.
1. One-Shot Case Study:
 Description: In this design, a single group is exposed to a treatment or intervention,
and then the behavior of that group is measured afterward.
 Characteristics: There is no baseline measurement before the treatment, making it
challenging to establish a cause-and-effect relationship.
 Use: Typically used for preliminary observations or in situations where conducting
a full experiment is not possible.
2. One-Group Pretest-Posttest Design:
 Description: In this design, a single group is tested before and after exposure to an
intervention.
 Characteristics: It includes a pretest to measure the baseline, followed by a
posttest after the intervention. Changes in the group can be observed, but without a
control group, it's difficult to attribute these changes solely to the intervention.
 Use: Often used in educational settings or program evaluations to assess changes
within a group over time.
3. Static-Group Comparison:
 Description: In this design, two separate groups are compared, one that has been
exposed to the treatment and one that has not.
 Characteristics: There is a treated group and a control group, but participants were
not randomly assigned, leading to potential biases.
 Use: Commonly used in real-world settings where randomization is not possible,
such as comparing the performance of students from different schools.
4. Two Treatment Groups:
 Description: In this design, two separate groups are exposed to different treatments
or interventions.
 Characteristics: Unlike the static-group comparison, both groups receive some
form of treatment, but the lack of randomization can introduce biases.
  Use: Useful when comparing the effectiveness of two interventions, but the absence
of random assignment limits the ability to draw strong causal conclusions.

It's important to note that while these pre-experimental designs are easier to implement, they are
generally weaker in terms of establishing causality compared to experimental designs with
randomization and control groups. Researchers using these designs should be cautious about
drawing strong causal conclusions from their results.

Quasi-Experimental Design:

 Description: Quasi-experimental designs resemble experimental designs but lack full

randomization of participants into groups. Researchers utilize pre-existing groups or
naturally occurring variations to study the effects of an intervention.
 Characteristics: While lacking randomization, quasi-experimental designs often include a
control or comparison group. These designs are valuable when random assignment is not
feasible due to ethical, practical, or logistical constraints.
 Use: Commonly employed in educational research, social sciences, and in situations where
random assignment is challenging.

Time Series Design:

 Description: Time series design involves the collection of data points at multiple time
intervals before, during, and after an intervention. It allows researchers to study trends and
patterns over time and assess the impact of an intervention.
 Characteristics: Time series data provide insights into the behavior of a variable or
phenomenon over time, enabling researchers to analyze changes and fluctuations
systematically.
 Use: Widely used in economics, epidemiology, and social sciences to analyze long-term
trends, evaluate policy changes, and forecast future patterns.

Multiple Time Series Design:

 Description: Multiple time series design involves studying the effects of multiple
interventions across different groups or settings over time. It allows researchers to
compare the impact of interventions in diverse contexts.
 Characteristics: Researchers collect time series data from multiple groups, enabling them
to compare the effects of interventions, policies, or treatments across different conditions.
 Use: Valuable in fields such as public health, education, and economics where researchers
need to assess the effectiveness of interventions across various populations or locations.
Quasi-experimental designs, time series designs, and multiple time series designs offer valuable
insights in situations where full experimental control is challenging or impossible. Researchers
must carefully consider the limitations and potential biases associated with these designs when
interpreting results and drawing conclusions.

True Experimental Design:

 Description: True experimental design is the gold standard in research, featuring random
assignment of participants to experimental and control groups. This design includes a
manipulation of an independent variable to observe its effect on a dependent variable,
while controlling for extraneous variables.
 Characteristics: Randomization ensures that the groups are equivalent at the beginning of
the study, allowing researchers to draw causal conclusions about the relationship between
the independent and dependent variables.
 Use: Widely used in scientific research to establish cause-and-effect relationships between
variables by eliminating or controlling for potential confounding factors.

Pre-Test-Post-Test Control Group Design:

 Description: Participants are randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. Both
groups are pre-tested before the experimental group receives the intervention. After the
intervention, both groups are post-tested to measure the effect of the treatment.
 Characteristics: Pre-tests ensure that both groups are equivalent at the start of the study,
and post-tests help assess the impact of the intervention, allowing for a comparison
between groups.
 Use: Useful for measuring the change in participants' behavior or attitudes due to an
intervention, while accounting for pre-existing differences between groups.

Post-Test-Only Control Group Design:

 Description: Participants are randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. The
experimental group receives the intervention, while the control group does not. Both
groups are post-tested to compare the outcomes and assess the effect of the intervention.
 Characteristics: This design eliminates potential biases from pre-testing and allows
researchers to focus solely on the differences between groups after the intervention.
 Use: Suitable for assessing the immediate impact of an intervention or treatment,
providing a clear understanding of the treatment's effectiveness.

Solomon Four Group Design:

  Description: This design combines elements of both pre-test-post-test control group
design and post-test-only control group design. It includes two experimental groups (one
with pre-testing and one without) and two control groups (one with pre-testing and one
without).
 Characteristics: By including pre-tests in some groups and omitting them in others,
researchers can assess the impact of pre-testing on the experimental results, providing a
more robust analysis of the intervention's effects.
 Use: Valuable for addressing potential biases introduced by pre-testing, allowing
researchers to draw more nuanced conclusions about the intervention's effectiveness and
the influence of pre-testing on participants' behavior.

These experimental designs are essential in scientific research, enabling researchers to establish
causal relationships and draw meaningful conclusions about the effects of interventions,
treatments, or manipulations on different variables.

Ex post facto research design, also known as causal-comparative research, is a type of research
design that examines the relationship between an independent variable (or variables) and a
dependent variable after the fact. Unlike experimental research where the researcher manipulates
the independent variable(s) and observes the effects on the dependent variable, ex post facto
research design involves the study of naturally occurring situations without any intervention or
manipulation by the researcher.

In this type of research, the researcher analyzes the effects or differences that already exist among
groups of subjects. These differences are not manipulated by the researcher; instead, the
researcher observes and analyzes them retrospectively.