Give two examples where a within subjects design would not work. Explain why in each case.
What will be an ideal response?
Ans: There are many times when a within subjects design will not work, even with counterbalancing or one of the other designs meant to take care of context effects. For example, studies where effects may not be reversible cannot be conducted with a within subjects design. For example, if researchers are testing the effect of a drug, and the drug turns out to be a cure, conducting a within subjects design is a bad idea because we cannot give participants the drug and then go back to baseline. This is a good thing as far as the participants are concerned, but it means we cannot really show the effects are due to the drug. Another example of where a within subjects design would not work is in stages of learning where practice is not a focus. This is one reason a regular longitudinal design does not really work with studying intelligence changes with age. In these cases, participants have to take the same intelligence tests again and again so their scores can be compared. However, if you take the same test again and again, you naturally improve. This can be helped by long gaps in time between testing, but then participants drop out. In this case, a within subjects design is necessary, but is best paired with a cross-sectional to assess the effects of practice.
You might also like to view...
Which example most accurately reflects a current trend in employment?
a. In 1970, 20 out of 60 employees at Trask, Inc were women; in 2018, 8 out of 65 employees were women. b. In 1970, 15 out of 50 employees at Jamison, Inc were women; in 2018, 14 out of 50 employees were women. c. In 1970, 5 out of 100 employees at DGK, Inc were women; in 2018, 50 out of 120 employees were women. d. In 1970, 25 out of 200 employees at GoGetter, Inc were women; in 2018, 29 out of 210 employees were women.
Who among the following is generally NOT considered a public figure?
a. Elected officials. b. School superintendents. c. School board members. d. Teachers.
Level 2 of implementing integrated curricula requires
A) consultation among teachers to agree on a common theme B) students to work together to form a list of common themes C) a teacher to use a thematic approach to relate content and material from various content areas D) students to construct dilemmas, issues, and problems within a theme.
Developmentally, this student responder is characterized by a willingness to explore response options and to increase engagement in reading. Responses are lengthier, genuinely spontaneous, and more deeply emotional
a. Novice responder b. Self-directed responder c. Emergent responder d. Maturing responder