Are cross-sectional and longitudinal studies good for establishing causality? Explain
What will be an ideal response?
Cross-sectional studies are good for establishing that "A" and "B" are correlated, for example that sedentary behavior and heart disease are related. Longitudinal studies are good for establishing that "A" precedes "B" in time. For example, that the participants in the study were sedentary before they developed heart disease. Good longitudinal (prospective) observational studies can even statistically rule out other potential "C" variables.
You might also like to view...
Which of the following is a similarity between adolescence and emerging adulthood?
A) Both are associated with the empty-nest syndrome. B) Both are ages of frequently changing educational direction. C) Both are ages of complete independence from parental influences. D) Both are ages of feeling in-between.
Positive feelings, such as pride, happiness, and superiority in one's individual accomplishments, would be emphasized most often in
a. Japan. b. Eastern cultures. c. North America. d. all of these.
Jenny, a 19-year-old college student, is playing online blackjack and tells her friends that she just "gets a feeling" and bets accordingly, and so far she has won. Since her hunches have been really on target lately, she plans to bet a little more money. Jenny is exhibiting which of the cognitive distortions that lead to a gambling addiction?
a. luck as a trait b. the gambler's fallacy c. overinterpretation of cues d. selective memory
In cultures where babies are held or carried around much of the day, _____
a. prolonged episodes of crying are common b. prolonged episodes of crying are rare c. they cry because infants need time alone d. they cry because they sense that their mothers are frustrated with them