Comm 211 Test 1

Front 1

error model

Back 1

researcher's job is to identify and then remove/reduce sources of potential error so that findings can be trusted

Front 2

external criteria

Back 2

those based on comparisons of what is in the article with what is already known about the topic

Front 3

internal criteria

Back 3

those which are relatively independent of the specific subject matter and are mainly concerned with the adequacy of the methods used in the study itself

Front 4

empirically verifiable

Back 4

can be observed and described in such a way that if done the same way, more than one person can get the same results and come to the same conclusion

Front 5

concept

Back 5

imprecise and vague idea; a conceptual variable

Front 6

operational definition

Back 6

a specification of how something will be measured

Front 7

conceptual hypothesis

Back 7

the causal relationship between concepts

Front 8

operational hypothesis

Back 8

the relationship between measures of those concepts; indicates the predicted direction or magnitude of relationship

Front 9

variable

Back 9

any concept that has different values; is not a constant

Front 10

constant

Back 10

always has the same value; doesn't vary

Front 11

independent variable

Back 11

explanatory variable; the one doing the causing

Front 12

dependent variable

Back 12

variable being explained; one being affected

Front 13

conditional/moderating variable

Back 13

affects relationship between x and y

Front 14

intervening/mediating variable

Back 14

comes between x and y in a causal change

Front 15

3 criteria for establishing causality

Back 15

covariation, temporal order, elimination of rival hypotheses

Front 16

unit of analysis

Back 16

what or who you are analyzing in your study

Front 17

ecological fallacy

Back 17

making a conclusion about an individual based on a group

Front 18

reductionist fallacy

Back 18

making a conclusion about a group based on an individual

Front 19

random errors

Back 19

due to chance fluctuations and average to zero

Front 20

systematic errors

Back 20

have a direction of "bias"

Front 21

reliability

Back 21

refers to how consistent or precise the measurement it

Front 22

double-blind investigations

Back 22

neither the research assistant nor the people being studied know enough to bias the outcome

Front 23

covariation

Back 23

there is a relationship

Front 24

temporal order

Back 24

independent variable preceds dependent variable

Front 25

type I error

Back 25

false positive

Front 26

type II error

Back 26

false negative

Front 27

nominal measurement

Back 27

classification into categories

Front 28

ordinal measurement

Back 28

relative rankings from less to more

Front 29

interval measurement

Back 29

equal intervals between categories, arbitrary 0

Front 30

ratio measurement

Back 30

equal intervals and non-arbitrary 0

Front 31

intercoder agreement

Back 31

for judges or coders; reliability

Front 32

test-retest reliability/stability

Back 32

over time; reliability

Front 33

inter-item correlations

Back 33

different items on the same test measuring aspects of a concept should be related; reliability

Front 34

item-total correlations

Back 34

like inter-item but using subsets of items instead of all of the items; reliability

Front 35

split half correlations

Back 35

internal consistency; reliability

Front 36

face validity

Back 36

subjective evaluation of how a concept is measured; validity

Front 37

content validity

Back 37

are any aspects of a concept left out?; validity

Front 38

Convergent validity

Back 38

correlates with previously validated measure

Front 39

Discriminant validity

Back 39

it shouldn’t correlate w/some measures

Front 40

Concurrent validity

Back 40

correlates with another variable/concept occurring at the same time

Front 41

Predictive validity

Back 41

correlates w/ another variable/concept occurring later in time