Learn Before
Based on the definition of internal validity, explain why the researcher cannot confidently conclude that the digital attention exercise (X) caused the improvement in focus scores (Y). Identify at least two specific threats to internal validity present in this scenario and describe how they act as alternative explanations.
Case context: A psychologist conducts a study to investigate if a new digital attention exercise (influence X) improves focus in elementary school students (outcome Y). The study takes place over the course of a school year. During this time, the students naturally mature, get accustomed to taking focus tests, and the school introduces a new nutrition program. At the end of the year, the researcher finds a systematic increase in the students' focus scores.
Question: Based on the definition of internal validity, explain why the researcher cannot confidently conclude that the digital attention exercise (X) caused the improvement in focus scores (Y). Identify at least two specific threats to internal validity present in this scenario and describe how they act as alternative explanations.
Sample answer: The researcher cannot confidently claim high internal validity because the systematic changes in focus scores (Y) are not clearly and wholly due to the digital attention exercise (X). Over the course of the school year, maturation (students naturally growing older) and history (the introduction of the nutrition program) occurred. These external factors serve as alternative explanations for the improvement in focus scores, confounding the results.
Key points:
- Explain that internal validity is low because changes in outcome Y are not wholly due to influence X.
- Identify at least two specific threats in the scenario (maturation, history, or testing).
- Describe how these threats provide alternative explanations for the change in outcome Y.
Rubric: The answer should explain that the lack of internal validity is due to the inability to attribute changes in outcome Y solely to influence X. The student must identify at least two threats from the scenario (e.g., maturation from growing older, testing from repeated assessment, or history from the nutrition program) and describe how they could explain the changes in focus scores independently of the attention exercise.
0
1
Tags
KPU
Research Methods in Psychology - 4th American Edition @ KPU
Related
History as a Threat to Internal Validity
Maturation as a Threat to Internal Validity
Testing as a Threat to Internal Validity
Instrumentation as a Threat to Internal Validity
Spontaneous Remission
Confounding Variable
What is the primary focus of internal validity in an experiment?
In a study comparing two different teaching methods, if the group receiving Method A also happens to be more naturally motivated than the group receiving Method B, the study would be described as having high internal validity.
A researcher is investigating whether a new 'Mindfulness App' reduces stress. Match each of the researcher's design decisions to the specific way it protects the study's internal validity.
A researcher finds that a 'Brain Training' app improves memory scores. However, the app group was paid $50, while the control group was paid $0. Arrange the following steps to reflect a logical analysis of the study's internal validity.
A researcher reports that a new meditation program reduces anxiety by more than a control group. However, an external reviewer discovers that the meditation group also attended weekly support meetings that the control group did not. The reviewer concludes that the study's findings are compromised because this lack of control over extraneous variables directly undermines the study's ______ validity.
The degree to which an experiment ensures that any systematic changes in the outcome () are wholly due to the manipulation of the influence factor () is known as ______ validity.
In psychological research, internal validity is considered 'high' only when the researcher can confidently conclude that:
A researcher conducts an experiment to test if a new memory technique (influence ) improves test scores (outcome ). If the experiment is designed such that any systematic changes in test scores are wholly due to the new memory technique, the study would be applied as having high internal validity.
Match each component of an experimental design with the appropriate description to analyze how it relates to the study's internal validity.
Arrange the following steps in a logical sequence to evaluate whether a study's claims of causality are supported by its internal validity.
In the context of psychological research, defining and protecting internal validity is crucial for establishing cause-and-effect relationships. Explain the core requirement for an experiment to have high internal validity, and list at least four specific threats to internal validity that can prevent a researcher from confidently concluding that influence X caused outcome Y.
Based on the definition of internal validity, explain why the researcher cannot confidently conclude that the digital attention exercise (X) caused the improvement in focus scores (Y). Identify at least two specific threats to internal validity present in this scenario and describe how they act as alternative explanations.
A clinical researcher wants to test whether a new therapy technique (influence X) reduces clinical depression symptoms (outcome Y). Apply the concept of internal validity to propose one concrete design decision that would ensure that any systematic changes in depression symptoms are wholly due to the therapy (influence X) rather than the natural improvement of participants over time (spontaneous remission).