12.01.2015 Views

RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok

RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok

RESEARCH METHOD COHEN ok

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

274 EXPERIMENTS AND META-ANALYSIS<br />

Frequently in learning experiments in classroom<br />

settings, the independent variable is a stimulus<br />

of some kind, a new method in arithmetical<br />

computation for example, and the dependent<br />

variable is a response, the time taken to do<br />

twenty sums using the new method. Most empirical<br />

studies in educational settings, however, are quasiexperimental<br />

rather than experimental. The single<br />

most important difference between the quasiexperiment<br />

and the true experiment is that<br />

in the former case, the researcher undertakes<br />

his study with groups that are intact, that is<br />

to say, the groups have been constituted by<br />

means other than random selection. In this<br />

chapter we identify the essential features of true<br />

experimental and quasi-experimental designs, our<br />

intention being to introduce the reader to the<br />

meaning and purpose of control in educational<br />

experimentation.<br />

In experiments, researchers can remain relatively<br />

aloof from the participants, bringing a degree<br />

of objectivity to the research (Robson 2002: 98).<br />

Observer effects can distort the experiment, for<br />

example researchers may record inconsistently, or<br />

inaccurately, or selectively, or, less consciously,<br />

they may be having an effect on the experiment.<br />

Further, participant effects might distort the experiment<br />

(see the discussion of the Hawthorne<br />

effect in Chapter 6); the fact of simply being<br />

in an experiment, rather than what the experiment<br />

is doing, might be sufficient to alter<br />

participants’ behaviour.<br />

In medical experiments these twin concerns<br />

are addressed by giving placebos to certain<br />

participants, to monitor any changes, and<br />

experiments are blind or double blind. In blind<br />

experiments, participants are not told whether<br />

they are in a control group or an experimental<br />

group, though which they are is known to the<br />

researcher. In a double blind experiment not<br />

even the researcher knows whether a participant<br />

is in the control of experimental group – that<br />

knowledge resides with a third party. These<br />

are intended to reduce the subtle effects of<br />

participants knowing whether they are in a control<br />

or experimental group. In educational research it<br />

is easier to conduct a blind experiment rather<br />

than a double blind experiment, and it is even<br />

possible not to tell participants that they are<br />

in an experiment at all, or to tell them that<br />

the experiment is about X when, in fact, it<br />

is about Y, i.e. to ‘put them off the scent’.<br />

This form of deception needs to be justified;<br />

a common justification is that it enables the<br />

experiment to be conducted under more natural<br />

conditions, without participants altering their<br />

everyday behaviour.<br />

Designs in educational experimentation<br />

There are several different kinds of experimental<br />

design, for example:<br />

<br />

<br />

<br />

the controlled experiment in laboratory conditions<br />

(the ‘true’ experiment): two or more<br />

groups<br />

the field or quasi-experiment in the natural<br />

setting rather than the laboratory, but<br />

where variables are isolated, controlled and<br />

manipulated.<br />

the natural experiment in which it is not possible<br />

to isolate and control variables.<br />

We consider these in this chapter (see http://<br />

www.routledge.com/textbo<strong>ok</strong>s/9780415368780 –<br />

Chapter 13, file 13.1. ppt). The laboratory experiment<br />

(the classic true experiment) is conducted<br />

in a specially contrived, artificial environment, so<br />

that variables can be isolated, controlled and manipulated<br />

(as in the example of the wheat seeds<br />

above). The field experiment is similar to the laboratory<br />

experiment in that variables are isolated,<br />

controlled and manipulated, but the setting is the<br />

real world rather than the artificially constructed<br />

world of the laboratory.<br />

Sometimes it is not possible, desirable or<br />

ethical to set up a laboratory or field experiment.<br />

For example, let us imagine that we wanted<br />

to investigate the trauma effects on people in<br />

road traffic accidents. We could not require a<br />

participant to run under a bus, or another to stand<br />

in the way of a moving lorry, or another to be<br />

hit by a motorcycle, and so on. Instead we might<br />

examine hospital records to see the trauma effects<br />

of victims of bus accidents, lorry accidents and

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!