Study sets, textbooks, questions
Upgrade to remove ads
302 exam 3
Terms in this set (50)
validities with correlational research
construct, statistical (effect size, statistical significance, outliers, restriction of range), external, and internal
how well was each variable measured
are the correlation coefficients, graphs, etc. good?
the strength of a relationship between two or more variables.
-how close r is to 1 or -1
-larger effect sizes give more accurate predictions
-larger effect sizes are usually more important
how likely is to get a correlation of that size just by chance, there is no correlation in actuality?
extreme scores; may exert disproportionate influence
restriction of range
if there is not a full range of scores on one of the variable in the association; can make relationships look weaker than they are
is a seemingly zero correlation actually curvilinear
sometimes a zero correlation, could be curvilinear; correlations can only determine LINEAR relationships
can the association generalize to other people, places and times?
-does it use a random sample?
-does it need to?
can we make a causal inference from an association?
-no, not when testing an association claim
what does r and p represent
r: correlation coefficient
effect sizes of r
-small or weak: .10 or -.10
-medium or moderate: .30 or -.30
-large or strong: .50 or -.50
three things necessary to determine causality
-two variables must covary (or be associated)
-temporal precedence (directionality problem)
-internal validity (third variable problem)
how to get closer with temporal precedence?
how to get closer to internal validity?
third variables by using what?
if there's a correlation, sometimes it is difficult to know which variable is causing which
-the causal relation could occur in either direction
-A-> B or B-> A
establishing temporal precedence with longitudinal design
measure the same variables in the same people at several points in time
third variable problem
because correlational research does not attempt to control extraneous variables directly, these variables might provide the explanation for the existing correlation
problems that prevent us from determining causality? how to remedy these problems?
-measure other variables that might be potential third variables
-then, conduct statistical analyses that "control for" these other variables
-if the relationship between the main variables is eliminated when controlling for the other variables, the third variable is a reason for the relationship
-if the relationship between the main variables is still significant when controlling for the other variables, there might be another third variable, or the relationship might be causal
multiple regression involves three or more variables
dependent variable, outcome variable
phrases that suggest a multiple regression has been used
-"controlled for" "controlling for"
-"taking into account"
-"correcting for" "adjusting for"
are two variables measured at the same point in time correlated?
correlations of one variable with itself, measured on two different occasions
show whether the earlier measure of one variable is associated with the later measure of the other variable
what are the researchers' not primary interest
cross-sectional and autocorrelations
mediators vs. moderators
-why does a relationship exist?
-mediator, or mediating variable= explanation for a causal relationship
WHY are two variables linked?
are these variables linked the same way for everyone, or in every situation?
independent variable (manipulated)
conditions= levels of an independent variable
measured, outcome variable
any variable that an experimenter holds constant
independent variables answer
compared to what
provide alternative explanations for the results
-threaten internal validity
a threat to internal validity that occurs in an independent-groups design when the kinds or participants at one level of the independent variable are systematically different from those at the other level
an experimental design technique in which participants who are similar on some measured variable are grouped into sets; the members of each matched set are then randomly assigned to different experimental conditions. also called matching
types of independent groups designs
an experiment design in which different groups of participants are exposed to different levels of the independent variable, such that each participant experiences only one level of the independent variable
-between subjects design or between groups design
participants are randomly assigned to independent variable groups and are tested on the dependent variable once
participants are randomly assigned to at least two different groups and are tested on the key dependent variable twice- once before and once after exposure to the independent variable
types of within-groups designs
an experimental design in which each participant is presented with all levels if the independent variable
-also called within-subjects design
participants are exposed to all the levels of an independent variable at roughly the same time, and a single attitudinal or behavioral preference is the dependent
participants are measured on a dependent variable more than once, after exposure to each level of the independent variable
when being exposed to one condition affects how participants respond to other conditions
advantages within-group designs
-participants in your groups are equivalent because they are the same participants and serve as their own controls
-gives researchers more power to notice difference between conditions
-requires fewer participants
disadvantages to within-group designs
-potential for order effects
-might not be practical or possible
-experiencing all levels of the IV changes the way participants act (demand characteristics)
researchers present the levels of the independent variable to participants in different sequences. with counterbalancing, any order effects should cancel each other out when all the data are collected
an extra dependent variable that researchers can insert into an experiment to convince them that their experimental manipulation worked
a simple study, using a separate group of participants, that is completed before (or sometimes after) conducting the study of primary interest
Sets with similar terms
PSY-260 Exam 3
Research Methods in Psychology: Chapter 10
Research Methods in Psychology, Chapter 10
Research Methods in Psychology, Chapter 10
Other sets by this creator
exam 3 psych 333
exam 1 psych 333
chapter 1 470
nutrition ch 13, 14, 15 notes
Other Quizlet sets
Professional Selling Exam 1
Intro to Management Exam 1 - Hamilton, Rutgers
Chem Final Study
Exam 1 BioChem