How Does Experimental Psychology Differ From The Other Subfields?

How Does Experimental Psychology Differ From The Other Subfields
Experimental psychology differs from other subfields of psychology in that the emphasis is not on working directly with people, but on emphasizing experimentation and testing and on providing information that is further used in psychology.

Contents

How does experimental psychology differ from other subfields list several subfields?

Experimental psychology differs from other subfields of psychology because the emphasis is on experimentation. In a true experiment, subjects are randomly assigned to be in different groups.

What makes experimental psychology unique?

Experimental Psychology Applied – Experimental psychologists use scientific methods to collect data and perform research. Often, their work builds, one study at a time, to a larger finding or conclusion. Some researchers have devoted their entire career to answering one complex research question.

These psychologists work in a variety of settings, including universities, research centers, government agencies and private businesses. The focus of their research is as varied as the settings in which they work. Often, personal interest and educational background will influence the research questions they choose to explore.

In a sense, all psychologists can be considered experimental psychologists since research is the foundation of the discipline, and many psychologists split their professional focus among research, patient care, teaching or program administration. Experimental psychologists, however, often devote their full attention to research — its design, execution, analysis and dissemination.

Those focusing their careers specifically on experimental psychology contribute work across subfields, For example, they use scientific research to provide insights that improve teaching and learning, create safer workplaces and transportation systems, improve substance abuse treatment programs and promote healthy child development.

Date created: 2014

How do experimental psychologists differ from other psychologists?

All About Experimental Psychology – Why do we behave in certain ways? What influences our behavior? How can our behavior shape our experiences throughout our lives? These are just a few examples of the types of questions that experimental psychologists seek to answer through basic and applied research.

In a sense, all psychologists are experimental psychologists because of the discipline’s focus on a research base for all their work. However, experimental psychologists often devote their full-time professional lives to conducting and publishing research — often spending years on a specific research question.

These psychologists have a passion for solving problems and exploring theoretical questions. They study a wide range of behavioral topics among humans and animals, including sensation, perception, attention, memory, cognition, emotion and more.

What is the experimental subfield of psychology?

Experimental Psychology – Experimental psychology is the psychological area that utilizes scientific methods to research the brain and behavior. Many of these techniques are also used in other psychology areas to study everything from childhood development to social issues.

How does experimental psychology differ from the other subfields quizlet?

Experimental psychology differs from other subfields of psychology in that the emphasis is not on working directly with people, but on emphasizing experimentation and testing and on providing information that is further used in psychology.

What distinguishes an experimental research from other types of studies?

The major feature that distinguishes experimental research from other types of research is that the researcher manipulates the independent variable. There are a number of experimental group designs in experimental research. Some of these qualify as experimental research, others do not.

  • In true experimental research, the researcher not only manipulates the independent variable, he or she also randomly assigned individuals to the various treatment categories (i.e., control and treatment).
  • In quasi experimental research, the researcher does not randomly assign subjects to treatment and control groups. In other words, the treatment is not distributed among participants randomly. In some cases, a researcher may randomly assigns one whole group to treatment and one whole group to control. In this case, quasi-experimental research involves using intact groups in an experiment, rather than assigning individuals at random to research conditions. (some researchers define this latter situation differently. For our course, we will allow this definition).
  • In causal comparative ( ex post facto ) research, the groups are already formed. It does not meet the standards of an experiment because the independent variable in not manipulated.

The statistics by themselves have no meaning. They only take on meaning within the design of your study. If we just examine stats, bread can be deadly, The term validity is used three ways in research

  1. I n the sampling unit, we learn about external validity (generalizability).
  2. I n the survey unit, we learn about instrument validity,
  3. In this unit, we learn about internal validity and external validity, Internal validity means that the differences that we were found between groups on the dependent variable in an experiment were directly related to what the researcher did to the independent variable, and not due to some other unintended variable (confounding variable). Simply stated, the question addressed by internal validity is “Was the study done well?” Once the researcher is satisfied that the study was done well and the independent variable caused the dependent variable (internal validity), then the research examines external validity (under what conditions and with whom can these results be replicated ). If a study is not internally valid, then considering external validity is a moot point (If the independent did not cause the dependent, then there is no point in applying the results to other situations.). Interestingly, as one tightens a study to control for treats to internal validity, one decreases the generalizability of the study (to whom and under what conditions one can generalize the results).

There are several common threats to internal validity in experimental research. They are described in our text. I have review each below (this material is also included in the PowerPoint Presentation on Experimental Research for this unit):

  • Subject Characteristics (Selection Bias/Differential Selection) — The groups may have been different from the start. If you were testing instructional strategies to improve reading and one group enjoyed reading more than the other group, they may improve more in their reading because they enjoy it, rather than the instructional strategy you used.
  • Loss of Subjects ( Mortality ) — All of the high or low scoring subject may have dropped out or were missing from one of the groups. If we collected posttest data on a day when the honor society was on field trip at the treatment school, the mean for the treatment group would probably be much lower than it really should have been.
  • Location — Perhaps one group was at a disadvantage because of their location. The city may have been demolishing a building next to one of the schools in our study and there are constant distractions which interferes with our treatment.
  • Instrumentation Instrument Decay — The testing instruments may not be scores similarly. Perhaps the person grading the posttest is fatigued and pays less attention to the last set of papers reviewed. It may be that those papers are from one of our groups and will received different scores than the earlier group’s papers
  • Data Collector Characteristics — The subjects of one group may react differently to the data collector than the other group. A male interviewing males and females about their attitudes toward a type of math instruction may not receive the same responses from females as a female interviewing females would.
  • Data Collector Bias — The person collecting data my favors one group, or some characteristic some subject possess, over another. A principal who favors strict classroom management may rate students’ attention under different teaching conditions with a bias toward one of the teaching conditions.
  • Testing — The act of taking a pretest or posttest may influence the results of the experiment. Suppose we were conducting a unit to increase student sensitivity to prejudice. As a pretest we have the control and treatment groups watch Shindler’s List and write a reaction essay. The pretest may have actually increased both groups’ sensitivity and we find that our treatment groups didn’t score any higher on a posttest given later than the control group did. If we hadn’t given the pretest, we might have seen differences in the groups at the end of the study.
  • History — Something may happen at one site during our study that influences the results. Perhaps a classmate dies in a car accident at the control site for a study teaching children bike safety. The control group may actually demonstrate more concern about bike safety than the treatment group.
  • Maturation –There may be natural changes in the subjects that can account for the changes found in a study. A critical thinking unit may appear more effective if it taught during a time when children are developing abstract reasoning.
  • Hawthorne Effect — The subjects may respond differently just because they are being studied. The name comes from a classic study in which researchers were studying the effect of lighting on worker productivity. As the intensity of the factor lights increased, so did the work productivity. One researcher suggested that they reverse the treatment and lower the lights. The productivity of the workers continued to increase. It appears that being observed by the researchers was increasing productivity, not the intensity of the lights.
  • John Henry Effect — One group may view that it is competition with the other group and may work harder than than they would under normal circumstances. This generally is applied to the control group “taking on” the treatment group. The terms refers to the classic story of John Henry laying railroad track.
  • Resentful Demoralization of the Control Group — The control group may become discouraged because it is not receiving the special attention that is given to the treatment group. They may perform lower than usual because of this.
  • Regression ( Statistical Regression) — A class that scores particularly low can be expected to score slightly higher just by chance. Likewise, a class that scores particularly high, will have a tendency to score slightly lower by chance. The change in these scores may have nothing to do with the treatment.
  • Implementation –The treatment may not be implemented as intended. A study where teachers are asked to use student modeling techniques may not show positive results, not because modeling techniques don’t work, but because the teacher didn’t implement them or didn’t implement them as they were designed.
  • Compensatory Equalization of Treatmen t — Someone may feel sorry for the control group because they are not receiving much attention and give them special treatment. For example, a researcher could be studying the effect of laptop computers on students’ attitudes toward math. The teacher feels sorry for the class that doesn’t have computers and sponsors a popcorn party during math class. The control group begins to develop a more positive attitude about mathematics.
  • Experimental Treatment Diffusion — Sometimes the control group actually implements the treatment. If two different techniques are being tested in two different third grades in the same building, the teachers may share what they are doing. Unconsciously, the control may use of the techniques she or he learned from the treatment teacher.

When planning a study, it is important to consider the threats to interval validity as we finalize the study design. After we complete our study, we should reconsider each of the threats to internal validity as we review our data and draw conclusions. Del Siegle, Ph.D. Neag School of Education – University of Connecticut [email protected] www.delsiegle.com

What is the unique advantage of the experimental method?

Chapter 10 Experimental Research Experimental research, often considered to be the “gold standard” in research designs, is one of the most rigorous of all research designs. In this design, one or more independent variables are manipulated by the researcher (as treatments), subjects are randomly assigned to different treatment levels (random assignment), and the results of the treatments on outcomes (dependent variables) are observed.

The unique strength of experimental research is its internal validity (causality) due to its ability to link cause and effect through treatment manipulation, while controlling for the spurious effect of extraneous variable. Experimental research is best suited for explanatory research (rather than for descriptive or exploratory research), where the goal of the study is to examine cause-effect relationships.

It also works well for research that involves a relatively limited and well-defined set of independent variables that can either be manipulated or controlled. Experimental research can be conducted in laboratory or field settings. Laboratory experiments, conducted in laboratory (artificial) settings, tend to be high in internal validity, but this comes at the cost of low external validity (generalizability), because the artificial (laboratory) setting in which the study is conducted may not reflect the real world.

  1. Field experiments, conducted in field settings such as in a real organization, and high in both internal and external validity.
  2. But such experiments are relatively rare, because of the difficulties associated with manipulating treatments and controlling for extraneous effects in a field setting.
  3. Experimental research can be grouped into two broad categories: true experimental designs and quasi-experimental designs.
You might be interested:  Why Should The History Of Psychology Be Studied?

Both designs require treatment manipulation, but while true experiments also require random assignment, quasi-experiments do not. Sometimes, we also refer to non-experimental research, which is not really a research design, but an all-inclusive term that includes all types of research that do not employ treatment manipulation or random assignment, such as survey research, observational research, and correlational studies.

Why experimental method is the best in psychology?

1 Experiments The experimental method is often preferred in research on behavior because a properly designed experiment can allow cause and effect conclusions to be made. Many studies in social psychology are experiments. These types of studies can be done in a laboratory setting or in a natural setting.

  1. The major components of an experiment are the following.
  2. First, one or more variables will be manipulated by the experimenters.
  3. Any variable that we manipulate is called an independent variable.
  4. A variable (or factor) has at least two different conditions.
  5. To be a true experiment, participants must be randomly assigned to the conditions.

Second, there is at least one response or outcome that we are measuring. The response we measure is called the dependent variable. For example, if we wanted to test whether or not noise makes people behave aggressively, we need at least two levels of noise.

  1. One level of the noise variable could be the absence of the noise, or could be a presumably pleasant noise, such as quiet music.
  2. Another level would be a loud or annoying noise.
  3. These are the elements of a basic experiment.
  4. Use the noise study example to complete the diagram of a basic experiment.
  5. Drag the elements of the study to their correct location in the diagram.

This example also introduces an issue that applies to all types of methods. We have to define or operationalize the variables we use in any study. Noise can be defined in many different ways. The researcher needs to show why the particular definition of noise is appropriate.

What are the advantages and disadvantages of experimental psychology?

What Are the Disadvantages of Experimental Research? – 1. Results are highly subjective due to the possibility of human error. Because experimental research requires specific levels of variable control, it is at a high risk of experiencing human error at some point during the research.

Any error, whether it is systemic or random, can reveal information about the other variables and that would eliminate the validity of the experiment and research being conducted.2. Experimental research can create situations that are not realistic. The variables of a product, theory, or idea are under such tight controls that the data being produced can be corrupted or inaccurate, but still seem like it is authentic.

This can work in two negative ways for the researcher. First, the variables can be controlled in such a way that it skews the data toward a favorable or desired result. Secondly, the data can be corrupted to seem like it is positive, but because the real-life environment is so different from the controlled environment, the positive results could never be achieved outside of the experimental research.3.

It is a time-consuming process. For it to be done properly, experimental research must isolate each variable and conduct testing on it. Then combinations of variables must also be considered. This process can be lengthy and require a large amount of financial and personnel resources. Those costs may never be offset by consumer sales if the product or idea never makes it to market.

If what is being tested is a theory, it can lead to a false sense of validity that may change how others approach their own research.4. There may be ethical or practical problems with variable control. It might seem like a good idea to test new pharmaceuticals on animals before humans to see if they will work, but what happens if the animal dies because of the experimental research? Or what about human trials that fail and cause injury or death? Experimental research might be effective, but sometimes the approach has ethical or practical complications that cannot be ignored.

Sometimes there are variables that cannot be manipulated as it should be so that results can be obtained.5. Experimental research does not provide an actual explanation. Experimental research is an opportunity to answer a Yes or No question. It will either show you that it will work or it will not work as intended.

One could argue that partial results could be achieved, but that would still fit into the “No” category because the desired results were not fully achieved. The answer is nice to have, but there is no explanation as to how you got to that answer. Experimental research is unable to answer the question of “Why” when looking at outcomes.6.

  1. Extraneous variables cannot always be controlled.
  2. Although laboratory settings can control extraneous variables, natural environments provide certain challenges.
  3. Some studies need to be completed in a natural setting to be accurate.
  4. It may not always be possible to control the extraneous variables because of the unpredictability of Mother Nature.

Even if the variables are controlled, the outcome may ensure internal validity, but do so at the expense of external validity. Either way, applying the results to the general population can be quite challenging in either scenario.7. Participants can be influenced by their current situation.

  • Human error isn’t just confined to the researchers.
  • Participants in an experimental research study can also be influenced by extraneous variables.
  • There could be something in the environment, such an allergy, that creates a distraction.
  • In a conversation with a researcher, there may be a physical attraction that changes the responses of the participant.

Even internal triggers, such as a fear of enclosed spaces, could influence the results that are obtained. It is also very common for participants to “go along” with what they think a researcher wants to see instead of providing an honest response.8. Manipulating variables isn’t necessarily an objective standpoint.

For research to be effective, it must be objective. Being able to manipulate variables reduces that objectivity. Although there are benefits to observing the consequences of such manipulation, those benefits may not provide realistic results that can be used in the future. Taking a sample is reflective of that sample and the results may not translate over to the general population.9.

Human responses in experimental research can be difficult to measure. There are many pressures that can be placed on people, from political to personal, and everything in-between. Different life experiences can cause people to react to the same situation in different ways.

  1. Not only does this mean that groups may not be comparable in experimental research, but it also makes it difficult to measure the human responses that are obtained or observed.
  2. The advantages and disadvantages of experimental research show that it is a useful system to use, but it must be tightly controlled in order to be beneficial.

It produces results that can be replicated, but it can also be easily influenced by internal or external influences that may alter the outcomes being achieved. By taking these key points into account, it will become possible to see if this research process is appropriate for your next product, theory, or idea.

  • Blog Post Author Credentials Louise Gaille is the author of this post.
  • She received her B.A.
  • In Economics from the University of Washington.
  • In addition to being a seasoned writer, Louise has almost a decade of experience in Banking and Finance.
  • If you have any suggestions on how to make this post better, then go here to,

: 16 Advantages and Disadvantages of Experimental Research

What are the main differences between experimental and clinical psychology in general?

Experimental psychology tests psychological hypotheses using various techniques and the results are then used in clinical psychology. Experimental psychology is to gaining knowledge as clinical psychology is to using knowledge.

What is the difference between experimental and non experimental psychology?

What Are The Differences Between Experimental and Non-Experimental Research? –

Definitions

Experimental research is the type of research that uses a scientific approach towards manipulating one or more control variables and measuring their defect on the dependent variables, while non-experimental research is the type of research that does not involve the manipulation of control variables.

Examples

Examples of experimental research are laboratory experiments that involve mixing different chemical elements together to see the effect of one element on the other while non-experimental research examples are investigations into the characteristics of different chemical elements.

Types

There are 3 types of experimental research, namely; experimental research, quasi-experimental research, and true experimental research. Although also 3 in number, non-experimental research can be classified into cross-sectional research, correlational research, and observational research.

Characteristics

Experimental research is usually quantitative, controlled, and multivariable. Non-experimental research can be both quantitative and qualitative, has an uncontrolled variable, and also a cross-sectional research problem. The characteristics of experimental research are the direct opposite of that of non-experimental research.

The most distinct characteristic element is the ability to control or manipulate independent variables in experimental research and not in non-experimental research. In experimental research, a level of control is usually exerted on extraneous variables, therefore tampering with the natural research setting.

Experimental research settings are usually more natural with no tampering with the extraneous variables.

Data Collection/Tools

The data used during experimental research is collected through observational study, simulations, and surveys while non-experimental data is collected through observations, surveys, and case studies. The main distinction between these data collection tools is case studies and simulations.

Even at that, similar tools are used differently. For example, an observational study may be used during a laboratory experiment that tests how the effect of a control variable manifests over a period of time in experimental research. However, when used in non-experimental research, data is collected based on the researcher’s discretion and not through a clear scientific reaction.

In this case, we see a difference in the level of objectivity.

Goal

The goal of experimental research is to measure the causes and effects of variables present in research, while non-experimental research provides very little to no information about causal agents. Experimental research answers the question of why something is happening.

Uses

Experimental research is mostly used to make scientific innovations and find major solutions to problems while non-experimental research is used to define subject characteristics, measure data trends, compare situations and validate existing conditions. For example, if experimental research results in an innovative discovery or solution, non-experimental research will be conducted to validate this discovery. This research is done for a period of time in order to properly study the subject of research.

Advantage

Experimental research process is usually well structured and as such produces results with very little to no errors, while non-experimental research helps to create real-life related experiments. There are a lot more advantages of experimental and non-experimental research, with the absence of each of these advantages in the other leaving it at a disadvantage.

Disadvantage

Experimental research is highly prone to human error while the major disadvantage of non-experimental research is that the results obtained cannot be absolutely clear and error-free. In the long run, the error obtained due to human error may affect the results of the experimental research.

Variables

In experimental research, researchers can control and manipulate control variables, while in non-experimental research, researchers cannot manipulate these variables. This cannot be done due to ethical reasons. For example, when promoting employees due to how well they did in their annual performance review, it will be unethical to manipulate the results of the performance review (independent variable).

Setting

Experimental research is carried out in an unnatural setting because most of the factors that influence the setting are controlled while the non-experimental research setting remains natural and uncontrolled. One of the things usually tampered with during research is extraneous variables.

  1. In a bid to get a perfect and well-structured research process and results, researchers sometimes eliminate extraneous variables.
  2. Although sometimes seen as insignificant, the elimination of these variables may affect the research results.
  3. Consider the optimization problem whose aim is to minimize the cost of production of a car, with the constraints being the number of workers and the number of hours they spend working per day.

In this problem, extraneous variables like machine failure rates or accidents are eliminated. In the long run, these things may occur and may invalidate the result.

Cause-Effect Relationship

The relationship between cause and effect is established in experimental research while it cannot be established in non-experimental research. Rather than establish a cause-effect relationship, non-experimental research focuses on providing descriptive results.

Comparison

Experimental research does not compare variables while non-experimental research does. It compares 2 variables and describes the relationship between them. The relationship between these variables can be positively correlated, negatively correlated or not correlated at all.

You might be interested:  In What Way Are The Diverse Subfields Of Psychology Related?

For example, consider a case whereby the subject of research is a drum, and the control or independent variable is the drumstick. Experimental research will measure the effect of hitting the drumstick on the drum, where the result of this research will be sound. That is, when you hit a drumstick on a drum, it makes a sound.

Non-experimental research, on the other hand, will investigate the correlation between how hard the drum is hit and the loudness of the sound that comes out. That is, if the sound will be higher with a harder bang, lower with a harder bang, or will remain the same no matter how hard we hit the drum.

Quantitativeness

Experimental research is a quantitative research method while non-experimental research can be both quantitative and qualitative depending on the time and the situation where it is been used. An example of a non-experimental quantitative research method is correlational research,

  1. Researchers use it to correlate two or more variables using mathematical analysis methods.
  2. The original patterns, relationships, and trends between variables are observed, then the impact of one of these variables on the other is recorded along with how it changes the relationship between the two variables.

Observational research is an example of non-experimental research, which is classified as a qualitative research method.

Cross-section

Experimental research is usually single-sectional while non-experimental research is cross-sectional. That is, when evaluating the research subjects in experimental research, each group is evaluated as an entity. For example, let us consider a medical research process investigating the prevalence of breast cancer in a certain community.

In this community, we will find people of different ages, ethnicities, and social backgrounds. If a significant amount of women from a particular age are found to be more prone to have the disease, the researcher can conduct further studies to understand the reason behind it. A further study into this will be experimental and the subject won’t be a cross-sectional group.



What is the role of experimental psychology?

Home » Clinical Psychology » Experimental Psychology Learn about human behavior with a degree in experimental psychology. How Does Experimental Psychology Differ From The Other Subfields Specialists who work in experimental psychology use a methodological approach to conduct experiments in controlled situations in order to examine human behavior. These psychologists take nothing for granted as they scrutinize human responses to sensation, perception, motivation, memory, learning and physiological psychology. Experimental Psychologists may perform the following duties:

Run experiments to study human behaviorism and mental phenomena Study behavior processes in animals Use findings to inform diagnoses and treatments for various social, behavioral and emotional disorders

What are the strengths of an experiment?

Chapter 20 Answers Chapter 20. Experiments 1. Under what conditions is experimental research most appropriate? Experiments begin with random assignment to conditions, which produces equivalent groups. One group is subjected to the changed conditions and the other isn’t.

  1. The other two necessary components of experiments are isolation and manipulation of an independent variable (causal factor), and subsequent measurement of a dependent variable (the effect).
  2. While this strategy may produce less natural or “realistic” results than those produced by other research approaches, it can be used to identify causal relationship, something that is at best difficult to do with other methods.

If you want to identify causal relationships, your first choice of research approaches would be the experimental method.2. What can you do with experiments that you cannot do with other approaches to research? Experiments can be used to identify causal relationship, something that is difficult or impossible to do with other methods.3.

Why are control groups used in experiments? What do they do for you? The logic of the experimental method is to begin with two identical or equivalent groups of individuals and to do something to the members of one group. Since the groups were the same to begin with, any differences you see between the groups afterwards must be due to whatever it was that you did to the members of one of the groups.

The experiment is the most highly controlled of the research designs. An important source of this control comes from the way experiments are set up, with various groups being subjected to different conditions. The division of subjects into conditions allows a number of comparisons to be drawn, each of which gives the researcher information about a facet of the research situation, such as the experimental stimulus, the pre-test, or the passage of time.

For each factor you want to assess, you would have one group that is subjected to the factor and one that is not. The groups that are not subjected to the various factors are control groups.4. Why is random assignment to groups used in experiments? What does it do for you? In order to determine what effect something has on people, you subject some people to that “something” and then you compare them with people who were not subjected to the “something.” If you know that the groups of people were the same to begin with, you can assume that any differences you see between them afterwards must be due to the one way in which they differ, which is whether or not they were subjected to the “something.” In the same way that random selection makes your sample representative and eliminates bias, randomly assigning subjects to conditions automatically matches the.

Random assignment controls for all possible kinds of differences between people. Random assignment to conditions gives you groups that do not differ from one another in any systematic way.5. What are the main strengths and weaknesses of experiments? Strengths: The experimental method makes it possible to determine whether changes in the independent variable cause subsequent changes in the dependent variable.

While other types of research make it possible to determine whether or not there is a correlation between a pair of variables, only the experiment can tell whether there is a causal relationship. Experiments, by their very nature, require a particular sequence of events to take place in a particular temporal order.

They focus on change over time, while survey methods are much better at identifying static correlational patterns. Weaknesses: The main weakness of the experimental method is their dependence on what many see as an “artificial” environment. People may behave differently in the experimental setting than they would under more ordinary conditions.

While the artificial environment of the experiment allows the unpredictable complexities of ordinary life to be “controlled,” it tends to remove the participants from the ordinary context in which they live and place them instead in an artificial environment that has little or no resemblance to the “real world.” Researchers generally want to see changes in their dependent variables.

They want to see differences between their experimental and control groups. Because of this, the apparent changes seen in the dependent variable may be caused by the experimenter’s subtle cues and not by the independent variable. Due to the costs involved or the structure of the experimental situation, it is often difficult to obtain experimental samples large enough to obtain results that are stable enough to allow generalizations to larger populations.

Experimental methods require the researcher to identify and control all relevant variables that might distort the apparent relation between independent and dependent variables. In the natural sciences where all the complexities of the social world do not have to be considered, this may be accomplished.

But in the social sciences where the subject of inquiry is a social situation that takes place in a social context, it may not be possible to identify all relevant variables or potential “disturbances.” This is one of the reasons that very few social experiments are considered conclusive.6. Diagrams for the two-group pretest-posttest design and the two-group posttest only design are shown above. You can see that three additional comparisons of groups are possible with the pretest-posttest design; three comparisons that are not possible with the posttest-only design.

Having pretest measures allows you to determine whether or not the random assignment produced two equivalent groups (Comparison 3). Comparisons 2 and 4 show how the two groups changed over the time spanned by the experiment. With the pretest-only design, you don’t have any measures of change at all. You can only assume that any difference you see in the one comparison that is possible is due to the stimulus and not to other factors.

With the pretest-posttest design, you can look at comparison 4 to see if there is any difference over time for the control group. If there is a difference here, it is not due to the experimental stimulus, since the members of this group do not receive the stimulus. The Solomon four group design adds two more control groups. The posttest of Group C is compared to the posttest of Group A in comparison 7 to see what effect the pretest has in combination with the stimulus. If the posttest measures of Groups A and C differ, you know the pretest either influences the posttest directly or it influences the effect of the stimulus.

In either case, you will be concerned. The posttest of Group C is also compared to the posttest of Group D in comparison 5. You should see the same difference here as you see with comparison 1 for Groups A and B. If the C-D difference is not the same as the A-B difference, you know the pretest is having an influence; it is probably interacting with the stimulus.

Group D is used in comparison 8 to test the effect of the pretest. You hope this comparison shows that there is little or no difference between the posttests of Groups B and D. If there is a difference, you will suspect the pretest has an influence on the posttest and that the time between the pretest and the posttest for Group B is having an effect on the posttest.

Group D is also used in comparison 6 to determine whether external events have acted as another stimulus and influenced the measurement of Group D. Examples would be if the pretests were all given in the early afternoon and the posttests in the evening or if the pretest and posttest are separated by a longer period of time (weeks, months) and some political event has altered the way people feel or think about events or ideas related to the issue your study is investigating.8.

How can you determine whether the pretest is influencing the way people respond to the experimental stimulus? Comparison 7 in the Solomon four group design shown in the answer for Question 6 does this.9. How can you determine whether the pretest is influencing the way people respond to the posttest? Comparisons 7 and 8 in the Solomon four group design shown in the answer for Question 6 does this.10.

How can you check the validity of the random assignment to conditions? Comparison 3 in the two-group pretest-posttest design and in the Solomon four group design does this. Both of these comparisons look at two pretest measurements taken at one point in time. If the pretest shows that groups are different, you know that there is a problem with the random assignment procedure.

: Chapter 20 Answers

What are two subfields of experimental psychology?

experimental psychology, a method of studying psychological phenomena and processes. The experimental method in psychology attempts to account for the activities of animals (including humans) and the functional organization of mental processes by manipulating variables that may give rise to behaviour; it is primarily concerned with discovering laws that describe manipulable relationships.

The term generally connotes all areas of psychology that use the experimental method. These areas include the study of sensation and perception, learning and memory, motivation, and biological psychology, There are experimental branches in many other areas, however, including child psychology, clinical psychology, educational psychology, and social psychology,

Usually the experimental psychologist deals with normal, intact organisms; in biological psychology, however, studies are often conducted with organisms modified by surgery, radiation, drug treatment, or long-standing deprivations of various kinds or with organisms that naturally present organic abnormalities or emotional disorders. More From Britannica transfer of training: Experimental analysis of transfer of training

How is the science of clinical psychology different from the science of other types of psychology?

General Psychology Vs. Clinical Psychology – Do not get confused – general psychology is not another newly discovered subset of psychology, it is in fact another term used to identify the field of psychology in general. The difference between general psychology and clinical psychology is that general psychology is the study of mental behaviors and psychological functions.

Whereas clinical psychology is not merely a scientific study, but a step further and deals with the assessment and then treatment of mental illnesses. Now let us expand on each discipline. Psychologists attempt to understand the human mind – how it functions, how it responds, how it can be improved and how it can be kept stable.

Psychologists study concepts such as human perception, emotion, personality, behavior, relationships, attention, motivation, cognition and so on. Hundreds of thousands of people across the globe look to psychologists for their mental and emotional problems.

In simple terms, the application of the principles and concepts of psychology is known as clinical psychology. The purpose of clinical psychologists is to use scientific methods and principles of psychology to treat those who are suffering from psychological issues or problems. Clinical psychologists have the experience and background to conduct psychological tests, research, consultation and treatment.

The objective of most clinical psychologists is to suggest a correction course of action or treatment to improve the mental well-being of their patients.

You might be interested:  Do People Tell The Truth When They Are Drunk Psychology?

What is the difference between research and experimental psychology?

What Is Experimental Psychology? – Experimental psychology seeks to explore and better understand behavior through empirical research methods. This work allows findings to be employed (applied psychology) in real-world applications across fields such as clinical psychology, educational psychology, forensic psychology, sports psychology, and social psychology.

  • This area of psychology is able to shed light on people’s personalities and life experiences by examining what the way people behave and how behavior is shaped throughout life, along with other theoretical questions.
  • The field looks at a wide range of behavioral topics that includes sensation, perception, attention, memory, cognition, and emotion, according to the American Psychological Association (APA).

Research is the focus of experimental psychology. Using scientific methods to collect data and perform research, experimental psychology focuses on certain questions, and, one study at a time, reveals information that contributions to larger findings or a conclusion.

What is the main difference between a study and an experiment?

The key difference between observational studies and experimental designs is that a well-done observational study does not influence the responses of participants, while experiments do have some sort of treatment condition applied to at least some participants by random assignment.

What are 2 differences between an experimental study and an observational study?

We do studies to gather information and draw conclusions. The type of conclusion we draw depends on the study method used:

In an observational study, we measure or survey members of a sample without trying to affect them.In a controlled experiment, we assign people or things to groups and apply some treatment to one of the groups, while the other group does not receive the treatment.

What are two subfields of experimental psychology?

experimental psychology, a method of studying psychological phenomena and processes. The experimental method in psychology attempts to account for the activities of animals (including humans) and the functional organization of mental processes by manipulating variables that may give rise to behaviour; it is primarily concerned with discovering laws that describe manipulable relationships.

The term generally connotes all areas of psychology that use the experimental method. These areas include the study of sensation and perception, learning and memory, motivation, and biological psychology, There are experimental branches in many other areas, however, including child psychology, clinical psychology, educational psychology, and social psychology,

Usually the experimental psychologist deals with normal, intact organisms; in biological psychology, however, studies are often conducted with organisms modified by surgery, radiation, drug treatment, or long-standing deprivations of various kinds or with organisms that naturally present organic abnormalities or emotional disorders. More From Britannica transfer of training: Experimental analysis of transfer of training

What are the main differences between experimental and clinical psychology in general?

Experimental psychology tests psychological hypotheses using various techniques and the results are then used in clinical psychology. Experimental psychology is to gaining knowledge as clinical psychology is to using knowledge.

What is the difference between experimental and non experimental psychology?

What Are The Differences Between Experimental and Non-Experimental Research? –

Definitions

Experimental research is the type of research that uses a scientific approach towards manipulating one or more control variables and measuring their defect on the dependent variables, while non-experimental research is the type of research that does not involve the manipulation of control variables.

Examples

Examples of experimental research are laboratory experiments that involve mixing different chemical elements together to see the effect of one element on the other while non-experimental research examples are investigations into the characteristics of different chemical elements.

Types

There are 3 types of experimental research, namely; experimental research, quasi-experimental research, and true experimental research. Although also 3 in number, non-experimental research can be classified into cross-sectional research, correlational research, and observational research.

Characteristics

Experimental research is usually quantitative, controlled, and multivariable. Non-experimental research can be both quantitative and qualitative, has an uncontrolled variable, and also a cross-sectional research problem. The characteristics of experimental research are the direct opposite of that of non-experimental research.

  • The most distinct characteristic element is the ability to control or manipulate independent variables in experimental research and not in non-experimental research.
  • In experimental research, a level of control is usually exerted on extraneous variables, therefore tampering with the natural research setting.

Experimental research settings are usually more natural with no tampering with the extraneous variables.

Data Collection/Tools

The data used during experimental research is collected through observational study, simulations, and surveys while non-experimental data is collected through observations, surveys, and case studies. The main distinction between these data collection tools is case studies and simulations.

  • Even at that, similar tools are used differently.
  • For example, an observational study may be used during a laboratory experiment that tests how the effect of a control variable manifests over a period of time in experimental research.
  • However, when used in non-experimental research, data is collected based on the researcher’s discretion and not through a clear scientific reaction.

In this case, we see a difference in the level of objectivity.

Goal

The goal of experimental research is to measure the causes and effects of variables present in research, while non-experimental research provides very little to no information about causal agents. Experimental research answers the question of why something is happening.

Uses

Experimental research is mostly used to make scientific innovations and find major solutions to problems while non-experimental research is used to define subject characteristics, measure data trends, compare situations and validate existing conditions. For example, if experimental research results in an innovative discovery or solution, non-experimental research will be conducted to validate this discovery. This research is done for a period of time in order to properly study the subject of research.

Advantage

Experimental research process is usually well structured and as such produces results with very little to no errors, while non-experimental research helps to create real-life related experiments. There are a lot more advantages of experimental and non-experimental research, with the absence of each of these advantages in the other leaving it at a disadvantage.

Disadvantage

Experimental research is highly prone to human error while the major disadvantage of non-experimental research is that the results obtained cannot be absolutely clear and error-free. In the long run, the error obtained due to human error may affect the results of the experimental research.

Variables

In experimental research, researchers can control and manipulate control variables, while in non-experimental research, researchers cannot manipulate these variables. This cannot be done due to ethical reasons. For example, when promoting employees due to how well they did in their annual performance review, it will be unethical to manipulate the results of the performance review (independent variable).

Setting

Experimental research is carried out in an unnatural setting because most of the factors that influence the setting are controlled while the non-experimental research setting remains natural and uncontrolled. One of the things usually tampered with during research is extraneous variables.

  1. In a bid to get a perfect and well-structured research process and results, researchers sometimes eliminate extraneous variables.
  2. Although sometimes seen as insignificant, the elimination of these variables may affect the research results.
  3. Consider the optimization problem whose aim is to minimize the cost of production of a car, with the constraints being the number of workers and the number of hours they spend working per day.

In this problem, extraneous variables like machine failure rates or accidents are eliminated. In the long run, these things may occur and may invalidate the result.

Cause-Effect Relationship

The relationship between cause and effect is established in experimental research while it cannot be established in non-experimental research. Rather than establish a cause-effect relationship, non-experimental research focuses on providing descriptive results.

Comparison

Experimental research does not compare variables while non-experimental research does. It compares 2 variables and describes the relationship between them. The relationship between these variables can be positively correlated, negatively correlated or not correlated at all.

  • For example, consider a case whereby the subject of research is a drum, and the control or independent variable is the drumstick.
  • Experimental research will measure the effect of hitting the drumstick on the drum, where the result of this research will be sound.
  • That is, when you hit a drumstick on a drum, it makes a sound.

Non-experimental research, on the other hand, will investigate the correlation between how hard the drum is hit and the loudness of the sound that comes out. That is, if the sound will be higher with a harder bang, lower with a harder bang, or will remain the same no matter how hard we hit the drum.

Quantitativeness

Experimental research is a quantitative research method while non-experimental research can be both quantitative and qualitative depending on the time and the situation where it is been used. An example of a non-experimental quantitative research method is correlational research,

Researchers use it to correlate two or more variables using mathematical analysis methods. The original patterns, relationships, and trends between variables are observed, then the impact of one of these variables on the other is recorded along with how it changes the relationship between the two variables.

Observational research is an example of non-experimental research, which is classified as a qualitative research method.

Cross-section

Experimental research is usually single-sectional while non-experimental research is cross-sectional. That is, when evaluating the research subjects in experimental research, each group is evaluated as an entity. For example, let us consider a medical research process investigating the prevalence of breast cancer in a certain community.

  • In this community, we will find people of different ages, ethnicities, and social backgrounds.
  • If a significant amount of women from a particular age are found to be more prone to have the disease, the researcher can conduct further studies to understand the reason behind it.
  • A further study into this will be experimental and the subject won’t be a cross-sectional group.



What are the different subfields in psychology?

With So Many Subfields of Psychology, Where Do I Fit? – There are many subfields of psychology and, for prospective students; it can be difficult to determine which subfield is “the best fit.” While researching the various available subfields and graduate programs in psychology, students are often confronted with contradictory information between pop-culture definitions and specific graduate student program definitions of the same subfield(s) of psychology.

This often leaves students wondering if they really understand the differences between the subfields of psychology; and, more importantly, the various available definitions and descriptions of subfields often leaves prospective students wondering which type of psychology best fits their interests and future career plans.

Within the field of psychology, there is a division between “professional” (or practice-oriented) psychology and non-practice-oriented psychology. The term “professional psychology” is somewhat misleading. While there are professionals who practice in all subfields of psychology, the term “professional psychology” is often used to refer specifically to those psychologists who practice psychology by providing psychotherapy and psychological testing services.

  1. The three subfields of professional psychology are: Clinical Psychology, Counseling Psychology, and School Psychology.
  2. In general, there is significant overlap among the training received by students in all three professional psychology subfields.
  3. For example, regardless of whether a student enters a Clinical, Counseling, or School Psychology program, he or she will be required to learn basic research methods, intelligence and personality assessment, and therapy interventions.

How these skills are applied, however, may vary considerably. Broad descriptions can be helpful in understanding the differences among the practice-oriented subfields of psychology. The American Psychological Association (APA), the largest professional association of psychologists in the U.S., offers brief descriptions of 14 various subfields of psychology here,

Clinical Psychologists are “interested in the diagnosis, causes, and treatment of mental disorders (such as depression, personality disorders, or schizophrenia).” Counseling Psychologists are “interested in the treatment of mental disorders. The main difference between is that Counseling Psychologists are concerned primarily with ‘normal’ problems of adjustment or challenge, such as choosing a career, experiencing academic stress, or coping with marital problems.” School Psychologists are “interested in the emotional or learning problems of students.” School Psychologists often engage in psychoeducational testing to diagnose learning disorders and develop educational interventions to assist schools and teachers to help students learn.

While these descriptions are helpful in understanding the differences among the various subfields in psychology, these descriptions are really generalizations. Prospective students are encouraged to learn more about specific programs in deciding which program best fits their needs and interests.

For example, while multicultural and diversity issues are often most salient in Counseling Psychology programs and personality assessment is generally associated with Clinical Psychology training (Price, 2009), not all Counseling Psychology programs provide in depth training in multicultural and diversity issues and not all Clinical Psychology programs emphasize personality assessment.

While broad descriptions are helpful, they are not absolute. What may be more important than the actual program is the quality of the training students receive and how well the training aligns with a student’s career plans and interests. So, those interested in pursuing advanced training in psychology are best advised to learn about the philosophy and culture of the training programs in which he or she is interested. By: Dustin K. Shepler, PhD, Core Faculty at MSP References Price, M. (2009). Counseling vs. clinical programs: Similarities abound. gradPSYCH. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/gradpsych/2009/03/similarities.aspx