332 Final

Front 1

Belmont Principles (5)

Back 1

TRIBJ
1)trust
2)respect for persons
3)integrity
4)beneficence
5)justice

Front 2

to help solve the problem of carryover effect, use...

Back 2

counterbalancing

Front 3

respect for persons

Back 3

voluntary participation, informed consent

Front 4

beneficence

Back 4

benefits outweigh the risks

Front 5

justice

Back 5

selection process is fair; use science for things that benefit society

Front 6

trust

Back 6

debriefing, deception, confidentiality, anonymity

Front 7

internal analysis

Back 7

an analysis of the effects of nonmanipulated variables-like looking at the effects of subject variables or the effects of subject variables and treatments on the dv

Front 8

Cross-lagged Panel Technique

Back 8

collect correlational data on 2 or more separate occasions (with the idea that causes precede effects)

Front 9

what correlational design provides a partial solution to the problem of direction of causality?

Back 9

Cross-lagged Panel Technique

Front 10

one-group pretest-posttest design

Back 10

a pseudoexperimental design where one group of subjects is pretested, receives a treatment, and is then posttested

Front 11

one-shot case study (posttest-only design)

Back 11

a single group is observed after a treatment (no comparison)

Front 12

history, maturation, testing, instrumentation, and mortality are all...

Back 12

types of threats to internal validity

Front 13

threats to internal validity

Back 13

variables that are beyond the control of the researcher and prevent him from determining that the treatment was the sole cause of the outcome

Front 14

history

Back 14

events that occur (other than the treatment) between the treatment and measurement of outcome that may have an effect on the outcome

Front 15

maturation

Back 15

the effects of internal processes that unfold within subjects as a function of time (getting tired, bored, hungry, etc.)

Front 16

testing

Back 16

effects of subjects knowing they're being tested on the outcome; effects of observation on outcome rather than effects of treatment

Front 17

instrumentation

Back 17

effects of changes in the observer/researcher (grow tired, hungry, etc.)

Front 18

mortality

Back 18

loss of subjects; this could make a difference in the results since those who left the study may have had different results than those who stayed for some reason

Front 19

threats to internal validity occur in...

Back 19

one-group pretest-posttest design

Front 20

in the one-shot case study design, the only comparisons researchers can kind of make to the group after treatment is ...

Back 20

remembered impressions of other groups or assumptions of what the group might have been like without the treatment

Front 21

one-group pretest-posttest design

Back 21

measure the group before and after the treatment

Front 22

pseudoexperiment

Back 22

don't have good methods for comparison

Front 23

threat to internal validity for static-group comparison design

Back 23

selection effects

Front 24

selection effects (as a threat to internal validity for a Static-group comparison desigh)

Back 24

the effects of initial differences between the two groups not caused by the treatment

Front 25

Static-group comparison design

Back 25

a pseudoexperimental design which uses 2 groups of subjects, only one of which receives a treatment before the results are measured

Front 26

main difference b/w experiments and quasi-experiments

Back 26

in quasi-experiments, subjects are not randomly assigned to experimental groups whereas they are in experiments

Front 27

2 kinds of quasi-experiments

Back 27

interrupted time series design, and nonequivalent control group design

Front 28

interrupted time series design

Back 28

(uses a within-subjects design); the effect of the IV is assessed by comparing multiple observations of the same group of people-either b4 and after administration of one level of treatment or after the administration of different levels of treatment

Front 29

nonequivalent control group design

Back 29

(uses a b/w-subjects design); the effect of the IV is assessed by comparing 2 or more groups of subjects-subjects who are not assigned at random to their groups

Front 30

2 fatal mistakes of the 1936 Literary Digest Poll

Back 30

1)only mailed to telephone and car-owners so it was biased
2)voluntary response

Front 31

stratified random sampling

Back 31

the population is first divided into a number of parts or 'strata' according to some characteristic, chosen to be related to the major variables being studied

Front 32

double-barrel questions

Back 32

asks about two different items

Front 33

ceiling effect

Back 33

when test questions are too easy and most people get high scores so their scores won't change much with the treatment(high scores=ceiling)

Front 34

floor effect

Back 34

when test questions are too hard and most people get low scores-scores won't change much (low scores=floor)

Front 35

Time-Series Experiment

Back 35

a single administration of a treatment is embedded within a series of observations; like having the subjects come over every night and one night giving them alcohol and observing them that night and every other night w/out alcohol

Front 36

what is the major threat to internal validity for a time-series experiment design?

Back 36

history: other events happen in the subjects' lives between the various observations

Front 37

Equivalent Time-Samples Design

Back 37

administer the treatment more than once during the series of observations (the same as time-series experiment but administer treatment more than once)

Front 38

role-playing studies

Back 38

alternatives to deception experiments in which subjects are asked to behave as if they were in a particular situation; subjects collaborate with experimenters and play the role of someone who is not in an experiment setting or who does not know the true purpose of the research