Evaluating Causal Claims
Chapter Overview
- Focus on common threats to internal validity in experimental designs.
Common Threats to Internal Validity
- Selection Effects: Systematic differences between groups in a between-subjects design.
- Example: Effectiveness of intensive therapy for Autism can be confounded by caregiver involvement.
- Order Effects: Impact of a prior condition on subsequent conditions in within-person designs.
- Example: In a depression study, participants might recall past answers affecting their current responses.
- Design Confounds: Another variable varies alongside the independent variable (IV), affecting the results.
- Example: In a pasta experiment, bowl size may affect perceived appetiteness rather than actual serving size.
Additional Threats to Internal Validity - Mnemonic** M**RS HRIM PDOS
- Maturation threat: Changes over time that could affect the dependent variable (DV).
- Regression threat: Extremes in initial measurements may regress towards the mean in subsequent measurements.
- Example: Recruiting participants at peak depression may yield skewed results.
- Selection Bias: Non-random selection impacts contrived group differences.
- History Threat: External events affecting all participants between tests.
- Researcher Bias: Influences on data interpretation due to the researcher's expectations.
- Instrumentation Threats: Changes in measurement tools that affect results over time.
- Mortality (Attrition): Participants dropping out can alter study dynamics.
- Placebo Effects: Perceived treatment due to belief in its effectiveness.
- Demand Characteristics: Participants adjusting behavior based on perceived expectations.
- Observer Bias: Observers may record data influenced by their expectations.
- Situation Noise: External distractions affecting the results.
Maturation Threat
- Definition: Changes not due to the experimental manipulation, but natural progression.
- Example: Measuring aggression in individuals at multiple time points.
- Solution: Utilize a comparison group to control for maturation effects.
History Threat
- Definition: External events impacting study participants systematically.
- Example: Mood changes in the U.S. during COVID-19.
- Solution: Ensure groups experience identical conditions aside from the IV.
Regression Threat
- Definition: When extreme scores at the beginning lead to less extreme scores over time (regress to the mean).
- Example: In a depression study, highs may lead to lows in follow-up measures.
- Solution: Use a comparison group and verify patterns of results.
Attrition Threat (Mortality)
- Definition: Participants leaving the study before it concludes could bias results.
- Example: High dropout rates in lengthy or intensive interventions.
- Solution: Check differences between those who drop out versus those who remain.
Testing Threats
- Definition: Changes in participant scores due to prior testing experiences (e.g., practice or fatigue).
- Example: Improved scores on a standardized test due to familiarity.
- Solution: Utilize a post-test only design or alternate testing forms.
Instrumentation Threats
- Definition: Changes in measurement tools can skew results.
- Example: Variability in IQ test scoring criteria over time.
- Solution: Use stable measuring tools and train personnel consistently.
Combined Threats
- Selection-History Threat: An external event affects only one group level of the IV.
- Selection-Attrition Threat: Different attrition rates across experimental groups.
Researcher Bias/Observer Bias
- Definition: Researcher's personal biases affect data interpretation.
- Example: Data trimming or selective perceived outcomes.
- Solution: Double-blind studies that block bias influence.
Demand Characteristics
- Definition: Changes in behavior due to participants speculating the study's hypothesis.
- Solution: Implement double-blind designs where both participants and researchers are unaware of group assignments.
Placebo Effects
- Definition: Individuals experience changes due to belief in treatment efficacy.
- Example: Placebo use in psychiatric studies showing significant effectiveness rates.
- Solution: Conduct double-blind placebo-controlled studies.