Short Answer

A clinical psychologist evaluates a new therapy by comparing an existing therapy group at Clinic X to an existing control group at Clinic Y. If the psychologist finds a significant reduction in symptoms at Clinic X, how should they write a brief statement for their research paper's discussion section that accurately reflects the causal limitations of this design?

Question: A clinical psychologist evaluates a new therapy by comparing an existing therapy group at Clinic X to an existing control group at Clinic Y. If the psychologist finds a significant reduction in symptoms at Clinic X, how should they write a brief statement for their research paper's discussion section that accurately reflects the causal limitations of this design?

Sample answer: Although the therapy was introduced before measuring symptom reduction, this quasi-experimental design lacked random assignment or counterbalancing. Consequently, we cannot rule out confounding variables—such as pre-existing differences between patients at Clinic X and Clinic Y—as the true cause of the outcomes, meaning a definitive cause-and-effect relationship cannot be established.

Key points:

  • Identifies lack of random assignment/counterbalancing between Clinic X and Clinic Y
  • Frames the limitation around inability to rule out confounding variables (pre-existing differences)
  • Appropriately qualifies the conclusion to state that cause-and-effect cannot be definitively established

Rubric: The answer should be one to three sentences and must: 1. Acknowledge that the study is quasi-experimental or lacks random assignment/counterbalancing. 2. Mention that pre-existing differences (confounding variables) between the clinics cannot be ruled out. 3. Conclude that a definitive cause-and-effect relationship cannot be claimed.

0

1

Updated 2026-05-26

Contributors are:

Who are from:

Tags

KPU

Research Methods in Psychology - 4th American Edition @ KPU

Related