Casual Comparative-Research Essay Sample
-Causal-comparative research is sometimes treated as a type of descriptive research since it describes conditions that already be.
• -Causal comparative research efforts to find grounds. or causes. for the bing status • -In causal-comparative or. ex-post facto. research the research worker efforts to find the cause. or ground. for preexisting differences in groups of persons o -Such research is referred to as ex station facto ( Latin for “after the fact” ) since both the consequence and the alleged cause have already occurred and must be studied in retrospect • -The basic causal-comparative attack involves get downing with an consequence and seeking possible causes -The basic attack starts with cause and investigates its effects on some variable • -The basic attack is sometimes referred to as retrospective causal-comparative research ( since it starts with effects and investigates causes ) • -The fluctuation as prospective causal-comparative research ( since it starts with causes and investigates effects ) • -Retrospective causal-comparative surveies are far more common in educational research • -Causal-comparative surveies attempt to place cause-effect relationships ; correlational surveies do non • -Causal-comparative surveies typically involve two ( or more ) groups and one independent variable. whereas correlational surveies typically involve two or more variables and one group
• -Causal-comparative surveies involve comparing. correlational surveies involve relationship -Neither method provides research workers with true experimental informations • -Causal-comparative and experimental research both effort to set up cause-effect relationships and both involve comparings. • -Experimental survey the research worker selects a random sample and so indiscriminately divides the sample into two or more groups -Groups are assigned to the interventions and the survey is carried out • -Individuals are non indiscriminately assigned to intervention groups because they already were selected into groups before the research began • -Experimental research the independent variable is manipulated by the research worker. whereas in causal-comparative research. the groups are already formed and already different on the independent variable • -Independent variables in causal-comparative can non be manipulated. should non be manipulated. or merely are non manipulated but could be • -Not possible to pull strings organismal variables such as age or gender
• -Ethical considerations frequently prevent use of a variable that could be manipulated but should non be -If the nature of the independent variable is such that it may do physical or mental injury to participants. the moralss of research dictate that it should non be manipulated -Figure 12. 1 shows independent variables used to compare two or more degrees of a given variable -Students with high anxiousness could be compared to pupils with low anxiousness on attending span. or the difference in accomplishment between first graders who attended preschool and first graders who did non could be examined. -Experimental surveies are dearly-won in more ways than one and should merely be conducted when there is good ground to believe the attempt will be fruitful • -Causal comparative surveies help to place variables worthy of experimental probe • -Despite many cardinal advantages. causal comparative research does hold some serious restrictions that should besides be kept in head -Since the independent variable has already occurred. the same sorts of controls can non be exercised as in an experimental survey • -Caution must be applied in construing consequences
• -The alleged cause of an ascertained consequence may in fact be the consequence itself. or there may be a 3rd variable -For illustration. a research worker hypothesized that self-concept is a determiner of reading achievement -Identify two groups: one group with high self-concepts and one group with low self-concepts -The dependent variable would be reading achievement
-If the high self-concept group did so demo higher reading accomplishment. the enticement would be to reason that self-concept influences high reading accomplishment. • -This decision would non be warranted because it is non possible to set up whether self-concept precedes accomplishment or frailty versa. • -Both the independent and dependent variables would hold already occurred. it would non be possible to find which came foremost. -It would be possible that some 3rd variable. such as parental attitude might be the chief influence on self-concept and accomplishment. • -Caution must be exercised in imputing cause-effect relationships based on causal-comparative research. • -Only in experimental research is the grade of control sufficient to set up cause-effect relationships. -Only in experimental research does the research worker indiscriminately assign participants to intervention groups. -In causal-comparative research the research worker can non delegate participants to intervention groups because they are already in those groups. • -Causal-comparative surveies do allow probe of variables that can non or should non be investigated by experimentation. facilitate determination devising. supply counsel for experimental surveies. and are less dearly-won on all dimensions.
Conducting A CAUSAL-COMPARATIVE Survey
• -Although the independent variable is non manipulated. there are control processs that can be exercised to better reading of consequences. Design & A ; Procedure
-The research worker selects two groups of participants. the experimental and control groups. but more accurately referred to as comparing groups. -Groups may differ in two ways.
• -One group possesses a characteristic that the other does non. • -Each group has the characteristic. but to differing grades or sums. -Definition and choice of the comparing groups are really of import parts of the causal-comparative process. • -The independent variable distinguishing the groups must be clearly and operationally defined. since each group represents a different population. • -In causal-comparative research the random sample is selected from two already bing populations. non from a individual population as in experimental research. • -As in experimental surveies. the end is to hold groups that are every bit similar as possible on all relevant variables except the independent variable. -The more similar the two groups are on such variables. the more homogenous they are on everything but the independent variable.
Control PROCEDURES
-Lack of randomisation. use. and control are all beginnings of failing in a causal-comparative survey. -Random assignment is likely the individual best manner to seek to guarantee equality of the groups. -A job is the possibility that the groups are different on some other of import variable ( e. g. gender. experience. or age ) besides the identified independent variable.
MATCHING
• -Matching is another control technique.
• -If a research worker has identified a variable likely to act upon public presentation on the dependant variable. the research worker may command for that variable by pair-wise matching of participants. • -For each participant in one group. the research worker finds a participant in the other group with the same or really similar mark on the control variable. • -If a participant in either group does non hold a suited lucifer. the participant is eliminated from the survey. • -The ensuing matched groups are indistinguishable or really similar with regard to the identified immaterial variable. • -The job becomes serious when the research worker efforts to at the same time fit participants on two or more variables.
Comparison HOMOGENEOUS GROUPS OR SUBGROUPS
• -To control immaterial variables. comparison groups that are homogenous with regard to the immaterial variable. • -This process may take down the figure of participants and limits the generalizability of the findings. • -A similar but more satisfactory attack is to organize subgroups within each group that represent all degrees of the control variable. • -Each group might be divided into high. norm. and low IQ subgroups. • -The being of comparable subgroups in each group controls for IQ. • -In add-on to commanding for the variable. this attack besides permits the research worker to find whether the independent variable affects the dependant variable otherwise at different degrees of the control variable. • -The best attack is to construct the control variable right into the research design and analyse the consequences in a statistical technique called factorial analysis of discrepancy. • -A factorial analysis allows the research worker to find the consequence of the independent variable and the control variable on the dependant variable both individually and in combination. • -It licenses finding of whether there is interaction between the independent variable and the control variable such that the independent variable operates otherwise at different degrees of the control variable.
Analysis OF COVARIANCE
• -Is used to set initial group differences on variables used in causal-comparative and experimental research surveies. • -Analysis of covariance adjusts scores on a dependent variable for initial differences on some other variable related to public presentation on the dependant. • -Suppose we were making a survey to compare two methods. Ten and Y. of learning 5th graders to work out math jobs. • -Covariate analysis statistically adjusts the tonss of method Y to take the initial advantage so that the consequences at the terminal of the survey can be reasonably compared as if the two groups started every bit.
DATA ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
• -Analysis of informations involves a assortment of descriptive and illative statistics. -The most normally used descriptive statistics are
( a ) the mean. which indicates the mean public presentation of a group on some step of a variable. and ( B ) the standard divergence. which indicates how dispersed out a set of tonss is around the mean. that is. whether the tonss are comparatively homogenous or heterogenous around the mean. -The most normally used illative statistics are
( a ) the t trial. used to find whether the agencies of two groups are statistically different from one another ; ( B ) analysis of discrepancy. used to find if there is important difference among the agencies of three or more groups ; and ( degree Celsius ) qi square. used to compare group frequences. or to see if an event occurs more often in one group than another. -Lack of randomisation. use. and control factors make it hard to set up cause-effect relationships with any grade of assurance. • -However. reversed causality is more plausible and should be investigated. • -It is every bit plausible that achievement affects self-concept. as it is that self-concept affects accomplishment. -The manner to find the right order of causality-which variable caused which- is to find which one occurred foremost. • -The possibility of a 3rd. common account in causal-comparative research is plausible in many state of affairss. • -One manner to command for a possible common cause is to compare groups on that variable. • -To investigate or control for alternate hypotheses. the research worker must be cognizant of them and must show grounds that they are non in fact the true account for the behavioural differences being investigated.
