Experimental Design in Research

Causation allows the researcher to make casual interpretation regarding the connection between dependent and independent variables. The control aspect offers the researcher a platform to rule out any alternative explanations that may come to play due to the influence of extraneous variables (Babbie, 2016, P227-228). Reducing variability within treatment conditions helps the researcher to detect any eminent differences in the treatment results. The benefit of having experimental and control group during experimental designs The control and experimental groups are both identical, only that a researcher exposes one group to treatment and not the other. The experimental group receives the treatment while the control group does not receive any treatment. The Hawthorne effect and how it might affect experimental design The Hawthorne effect occurs when participants in a study alter their behaviors because they are aware they are being observed as opposed to a reaction caused by intervention.

The term came to play in the 1930’s when the Hawthorne works plant in Chicago engaged in a researcher to establish the effect of lighting on staff productivity (Babbie, 2016, P. It became apparent that workers self-acknowledgment that they were under observation influenced how they reacted in the context of the experiment. The sole intention of an experimental design researcher is to make a conclusion based on the participant's response to changes in the independent variable. Therefore, it follows that, when the participants became aware that they are been observed and change their behaviors to align to the anticipated results, this would affect the validity and accuracy of the casual inference (Friedman, 2014). For instance, when a researcher interview subjects affected by housing affordability and some of the subject’s income levels change in course of the experiment, the outcome would be impacted by such changes (Babbie, 2016, p.

Therefore, the history aspect would lead to a wrong conclusion, Maturation is the second source and it implies the element of an individual growing older during the term of the experiment or growing tired. A case in point is where a participant gets tired during an interview session thus affecting his ability to respond to the experiment (Babbie, 2016. P. The effect is that the participant would offer answers that lead to substandard results. Interaction of factors may culminate to wrong results due to their influence on one another. This would cause erroneous measurements. Demoralization can hinder the validity of the research design in the sense that participants especially in the control group may dropout. In any case where being part of control group results to negative outcome, participants may harbor resentful feelings.

A drop out in the control group would impact on overall results of the research design. For instance, when experimenting with the issue of house affordability at Charlotte, North Carolina it would be imperative to consider a large sample size if at all the results are to be generalizable. The report on the issue under investigation would gain impetus and national attention to different stakeholders when it is generalizable. What researchers can do to increase generalizability Improving study generalizability calls for the researcher to increase the sample size for the results to be generalizable (Babbie 2016, P. For example, it would be important to ensure, the research to determine the issue of house affordability at Charlotte is carried out o a wider population as opposed to small numbers.

According to Babbie (2016), researchers can improve generalizability by employing Solomon four-group design that offers a platform for variations among the pretest, stimulus and posttest measurements. On the other side, when a person gets stigmatized in the society due to unethical acts such as stealing, they feel the pinch to a point where they decide to change and this makes others learn from such a person to a level where they cannot indulge in the same behavior. This is a form of social control that emphasizes the element of “who we think we are” is a function of how others see and treat us (Babbie, 2016 P. References Babbie, E. The practice of social research. Cengage Learning. Retrieved from https://www. okstate. edu/ag/agedcm4h/academic/aged5980a/5980/newpage2.