Research methods for

business
Fourth Edition
Chapter 7
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGNS

MANIPULATION OF THE
INDEPENDENT VARIABLE

Manipulation simply means that we create

different level of the independent variable
to asses the impact on the dependent
variable

CONTROLING THE
CONTAMINATING EXOGENOUS
OR NUISANCE VARIABLES
Matching group one way of controlling the
contaminating or nuisance variables is to match
the various group by picking the confounding
characteristic and deliberately spreading them
across group
Randomization Another way controlling the
contaminating variables is to assign the 60
members randomly ( i.e., with no
predetermination ) the four groups . That is , every
member would have a known and equal chance of
being to any of these four group .

 Advantage of randomization
The difference between matching and
randomization is that in the former case individual
are deliberately and consciously matched to
control the differences among group members ,
whereas in the later case we expect that the
process of randomization would distribute the
inequalities among the group based on the jaws of
normal distribution . Thus we need not be
particularly concerned about any known or
unknown confounding factor .

INTERNAL VALIDITY

internal validity refers to the confidence

we place in the cause and effect
relation-ship .

EXTERNAL VALIDITY OR
GENERALIZABILITY OF LAB
EXPEREIMENTS

The field experiment a field experiment ,

as the name implies , is an experiment
done in the natural environment in which
work goes on as usual , but treatment are
given to one or more groups .

 External validity , external validity refers

to the extent of generalizability of the
result of a casual study to other setting ,
people , or events and internal validity
refers to degree of our confidence in the
causal effect ( i.e., that variable X causes
variable Y )

FACTOR AFFECTING INTERNAL

VALIDITY

Even the best designed lab studies could

be influenced by factor that might affect
the internal validity of the lab experiment
These possible confounding factor pose a
threat to internal validity .

 History Effects certain events or factors that would

have an impact on the independent variable
dependent variable relationship might unexpectedly
occur while the experiment is progress , and this
history of events would confound the cause and
effect relationship between the two variables , thus
affecting the internal validity
Maturation Effect cause and effect inferences
can also be contaminated by the effect of the
passage of time another uncontrollable variable .
Testing Effect frequently , to test the effect of a
treatment , subject are given what is called a pretest
( say , a short questionnaire eliciting their feeling
and attitudes ) . That is , and first a measure of the
dependent variable is taken ( pretest ) , then the
treatment given , and after that a second test ,
called the postest

 Instrument Effects instrumentation effect

are yet another source of threat to internal
validity . These might arise because of a
change in the measuring instrument between
pretest and posttest , and not because of the
treatments differential impact at the end
( cook & Campbell , 1979a
Selection Bias Effect the threat to internal
validity could also come from improper or
unmatched selection of subject for
experimental and control groups
Statistical regression the effect of statiscial
regression are brought about when chosen for
the experimental group have extreme scores
on the dependent variable to begin with

 Mortality another confounding factor on the

cause- and effect relationship is the mortality
or attrition of members in the experimental or
control group or both , as the experiment
progresses .

IDENTIFYING THREATS TO
INTERNAL VALIDITY
History effects the action of the two members in the participative group
by way of unexpectedly moving around in an exited manner and remarking
that participative leadership is great and the performance is bound to high
in this group might have boosted the morale of all the members in the
group .
Maturation it is doubtful that maturation will have any effect on morale in
this situation
Testing the pretest are likely to have sensitized the respondents to the
posttest
Instrumentation since the same questionnaire has measured morale both
before and after the treatment for all members , we do not expect
instrumentation bias
Selection bias since members have been randomly assigned to all group ,
we do not expect selection bias to exist
Statistical Regression though not specifically stated , we can assume
that all the member participacing in the experiment were selected randomly
from a normally distributed population
Mortality since members dropped out of two experimental group , the
effectts of morality could affect internal validity

INTERNAL VALIDITY IN CASE

STUDIES
If there are several threats to internal
validity even in a tightly controlled lab
experiment, it should become quite clear
why we cannot draw conclusions about
causal relationships from case studies that
describe the events that occurred during a
particular time.

FACTOR AFFECTING EXTERNAL

VALIDITY

Whereas internal validity raises questions

about whether it is the treatment alone or
some additional extraneous factor that
causes the effect , external validity raises
issues about the generalizability of
findings to other setting .

TYPES OF EXPERIMENTAL
DESIGNS AND INTERNAL
VALIDITY
Quasi-experimental Designs
Pretest and posttest Experimental group
design
Posttests only whit Experimental and
control groups

True experimental designs

Experimental designs , which include both

the treatment and control groups and
record information both before and after
the experimental group is exposed to the
treatment , are known as exposed to the
pretest and post test

 The design can be visual depicted as

figure 7.5 . Two groups one experimental
and the other control are both exposed
the pretest and post test .

 Solomon four Group Design to gain

more confidence in internal validity in
experimental designs , it is advisable to
set up two experimental groups and two
control groups for the experiment.one
experimental group and one control group
can be given both the pretest and
postest , as shown in figure 7.6

Double blind studies

When extreme care and rigor are needed

in experimental designs as in the case of
discovery of new medicines that could
impact on human lives, blind studies are
conducted to avoid any bias that might
creep in.

Ex Post Facto design

Cause-and-effect relationships are
sometimes established through what is
called the ex post facto design. Here,
there is no manipulation of the
independent variable in the lab or field
setting, but subjects who have already
been exposed to a stimulus and those not
so exposed are studied.

SIMULATION
An alternative to lab and field experimentation currently being
used in business research is simulation. Simulation uses a
model-building technique to determine the effects of changes,
and computer-based simulations are becoming popular in
business research.
A simulation can be thought of as an experiment conducted in a
specially created setting that very closely represents the natural
environment in which activities are usually carried on. In that
sense, the simulation lies somewhere between a lab and a field
experiment, insofar as the environment is artificially created but
not far different from reality. Participants are exposed to realworld experiences over a period of time, lasting anywhere from
several hours to several weeks, and they can be randomly
assigned to different treatment groups.

ETHICAL ISSUES IN EXPERIMENTAL

DESIGN RESEARCH
The following practices are considered unethical:
Putting pressure on individuals to participate in experiments through
coercion, or applying social pressure. Giving menial tasks and asking
demeaning questions that diminish their selfrespect.
Deceiving subjects by deliberately misleading them as to the true purpose
of the research.
Exposing participants to physical or mental stress.
Not allowing subjects to withdraw from the research when they want to.
Using the research results to disadvantage the participants, or for purposes
not to their liking.
Not explaining the procedures to be followed in the experiment.
Exposing respondents to hazardous and unsafe environments as we saw
earlier in the case of Johns Hopkins University.
Not debriefing participants fully and accurately after the experiment is over.
Not preserving the privacy and confidentiality of the information given by
the participants.
Withholding benefits from control groups.

MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS

Before using experimental designs in research

studies, it is essential to consider whether they
are necessary at all, and if so, at what level of
sophistication. This is because experimental
designs call for special efforts and varying
degrees of interference with the natural flow of
activities.

Some questions that need to be addressed in

making these decisions, are the following:

1. Is it really necessary to identify causal relationships, or would it

suffice if the correlates that account for the variance in the dependent
variable were known?
2. If it is important to trace the causal relationships, which of the two,
internal validity or external validity, is needed more, or are both
needed? If only internal validity is important, a carefully designed lab
experiment would be the answer; if generalizability is the more
important criterion, then a field experiment would be called for; if
both are equally important, then a lab study should be first
undertaken, followed by a field experiment, if the results of the
former warrant the latter.
3. Is cost an important factor in the study? If so, would a less rather
than more sophisticated experimental design do?

FURTHER EXPERMENTAL DESIGNS

It would be useful to understand some terms before describing the

various designs.
The term factor is used to denote an independent variablefor
example, price.
The term level is used to denote various gradations of the factor
for example, high price, medium price, low pricewhile making it
clear as to what these gradations signify (e.g., high price is anything
over $2 per piece; medium is $1$2 per piece; low price is anything
less than $1 per piece).
Treatment refers to the various levels of the factors
A blocking factor is a preexisting variable in a given situation that
might have an effect on the dependent variable in addition to the
treatment, the impact of which would be important to assess