Custom papers academic service


Research proposal experimental and quasi experimental research

Citation Information You approach a stainless-steel wall, separated vertically along its middle where two halves meet. After looking to the left, you see two buttons on the wall to the right.

You press the top button and it lights up. A soft tone sounds and the two halves of the wall slide apart to reveal a small room. You step into the room. Looking to the left, then to the right, you see a panel of more buttons. You know that you seek a room marked with the numbers 1-0-1-2, so you press the button marked "10. Soon, the soft tone sounds again. The door opens again. On the far wall, a sign silently proclaims, "10th floor.

A ride in an elevator may not seem like an experiment, but it, and each step taken towards its ultimate outcome, are common examples of a search for a causal relationship-which is what experimentation is all about. You started with the hypothesis that this is in fact an elevator. You proved that you were correct. You then hypothesized that the button to summon the elevator was on the left, which was incorrect, so then you hypothesized it was on the right, and you were correct.

Please turn JavaScript on and reload the page.

You hypothesized that pressing the button marked with the up arrow would not only bring an elevator to you, but that it would be an elevator heading in the up direction. Basic Concepts of Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Research Discovering causal relationships is the key to experimental research. In abstract terms, this means the relationship between a certain action, X, which alone creates the effect Y.

For example, turning the volume knob on your stereo clockwise causes the sound to get louder. In addition, you could observe that turning the knob clockwise alone, and nothing else, caused the sound level to increase. You could further conclude that a causal relationship exists between turning the knob clockwise and an increase in volume; not simply because one caused the other, but because you are certain that nothing else caused the effect.

Independent and Dependent Variables Beyond discovering causal relationships, experimental research further seeks out how much cause will produce how much effect; in technical terms, how the independent variable will affect the dependent variable. You know that turning the knob clockwise will produce a louder noise, but by varying research proposal experimental and quasi experimental research much you turn it, you see how much sound is produced.

On the other hand, you might find that although you turn the knob a great deal, sound doesn't increase dramatically. Or, you might find that turning the knob just a little adds more sound than expected. The amount that you turned the knob is the independent variable, the variable that the researcher controls, and the amount of sound that resulted from turning it is the dependent variable, the change that is caused by the independent variable.

Experimental research also looks into the effects of removing something. For example, if you remove a loud noise from the room, will the person next to you be able to hear you?

Or how much noise needs to be removed before that person can hear you? Treatment and Hypothesis The term treatment refers to either removing or adding a stimulus in order to measure an effect such as turning the knob a little or a lot, or reducing the noise level a little or a lot.

Experimental researchers want to know how varying levels of treatment will affect what they are studying. As such, researchers often have an idea, or hypothesis, about what effect will occur when they cause something. Few experiments are performed where there is no idea of what will happen.

From past experiences in life or from the knowledge we possess in our specific field of study, we know how some actions cause other reactions.

Experiments confirm or reconfirm this fact. Causality Experimentation becomes more complex when the causal relationships they seek aren't as clear as in the stereo knob-turning examples.

Questions like "Will olestra cause cancer? For example, any number of things could affect the growth rate of a plant-the temperature, how much water or sun it receives, or how much carbon dioxide is in the air. These variables can affect an experiment's results.

To do this, as many of these variables as possible must be controlled. Since the goal of the experiment is to prove a causal relationship in which a single variable is responsible for the effect produced, the experiment would produce stronger proof if the results were replicated in larger treatment and control groups. Selecting groups entails assigning subjects in the groups of an experiment in such a way that treatment and control groups are comparable in all respects except the application of the treatment.

Groups can be created in two ways: In the MegaGro experiment discussed below, the plants might be matched according to characteristics such as age, weight and whether they are blooming.

  • This will determine how simple or complex the experiment will be;
  • It is nearly impossible to be as rigorous as the natural sciences model dictates;
  • Provide a review of the literature in the specific area of study to show what work has been done.

This involves distributing these plants so that each plant in one group exactly matches characteristics of plants in the other groups. In other words, you may have flowers for your MegaGro experiment that you matched and distributed among groups, but other variables are unaccounted for. It would be difficult to have equal groupings. Randomization, then, is preferred to matching.

This method is based on the statistical principle of normal distribution. Theoretically, any arbitrarily selected group of adequate size will reflect normal distribution. Differences between groups will average out and become more comparable. The principle of normal distribution states that in a population most individuals will fall within the middle range of values for a given characteristic, with increasingly fewer toward either extreme graphically represented as the ubiquitous "bell curve".

Differences between Quasi-Experimental and Experimental Research Research proposal experimental and quasi experimental research far, we have explained that for experimental research we need: But what if we don't have all of those? Do we still have an experiment? Not a true experiment in the strictest scientific sense of the term, but we can have a quasi-experiment, an attempt to uncover a causal relationship, even though the researcher cannot control all the factors that might affect the outcome.

The independent variable may not be manipulated by the researcher, treatment and control groups may not be randomized or matched, or there may be no control group. The researcher is limited in what he or she can say conclusively. The significant element of both experiments and quasi-experiments is the measure of the dependent variable, which it allows for comparison.

Some data is quite straightforward, but other measures, such as level of self-confidence in writing ability, increase in creativity or in reading comprehension are inescapably subjective. In such cases, quasi-experimentation often involves a number of strategies to compare subjectivity, such as rating data, testing, surveying, and content analysis.

Rating essentially is developing a rating scale to evaluate data. Since we're mentioning the subject of statistics, note that experimental or quasi-experimental research cannot state beyond a shadow of a doubt that a single cause will always produce any one effect. They can do no more than show a probability that one thing causes another.

The probability that a result is the due to random chance is an important measure of statistical analysis and in experimental research. Causality Let's say you want to determine that your new fertilizer, MegaGro, will increase the research proposal experimental and quasi experimental research rate of plants.

You begin by getting a plant to go with your fertilizer. Since the experiment is concerned with proving that MegaGro works, you need another plant, using no fertilizer at all on it, to compare how much change your fertilized plant displays. This is what is known as a control group. Set up with a control group, which will receive no treatment, and an experimental group, which will get MegaGro, you must then address those variables that could invalidate your experiment.

Research skills

This can be an extensive and exhaustive process. You must ensure that you use the same plant; that both groups are put in the same kind of soil; that they receive equal amounts of water and sun; that they receive the same amount of exposure to carbon-dioxide-exhaling researchers, and so on. In short, any other variable that might affect the growth of those plants, other than the fertilizer, must be the same for both plants. Otherwise, you can't prove absolutely that MegaGro is the only explanation for the increased growth of one of those plants.

  • Other qualitative methods such as case study, ethnography, observational research and interviews can function as preconditions for experimentation or conducted simultaneously to add validity to a study;
  • Often, students self-select into certain sections of a course on the basis of their own agendas and scheduling needs.

Such an experiment can be done on more than two groups. You may not only want to show that MegaGro is an effective fertilizer, but that it is better than its competitor brand of fertilizer, Plant! All you need to do, then, is have one experimental group receiving MegaGro, one receiving Plant!

Those are the only variables that can be different between the three groups; all other variables must be the same for the experiment to be valid. Controlling variables allows the researcher to identify conditions that may affect the experiment's outcome.

In the MegaGro experiment, you may be concerned with how fertile the soil is, but not with the plants'; relative position in the window, as you don't think that the amount of shade they get will affect their growth rate. But what if it did? You would have to go about eliminating variables in order to determine which is the key factor. What if one receives more shade than the other and the MegaGro plant, which received more shade, died? This might prompt you to formulate a plausible alternative explanation, which is a way of accounting for a result that differs from what you expected.

Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Research

You would then want to redo the study with equal amounts of sunlight. Five Steps Experimental research can be roughly divided into five phases: Identifying a research problem The process starts by clearly identifying the problem you want to study and considering what possible methods will affect a solution. Then you choose the method you want to test, and formulate a hypothesis to predict the outcome of the test. For example, you may want to improve student essays, but you don't believe that teacher feedback is enough.

You hypothesize that some possible methods for writing improvement include peer workshopping, or reading more example essays. Favoring the former, your experiment would try to determine if peer workshopping improves writing in high school seniors. You state your hypothesis: Planning an experimental research study The next step is to devise an experiment to test your hypothesis. In doing so, you must consider several factors. For example, how generalizable do you want your end results to be?

Do you want to generalize about the entire population of high school seniors everywhere, or just the particular population of seniors at your specific school? This will determine how simple or complex the experiment will be. The amount of time funding you have will also determine the size of your experiment. Continuing the example from step one, you may want research proposal experimental and quasi experimental research small study at one school involving three teachers, each teaching two sections of the same course.

The treatment in this experiment is peer workshopping.