资料来源: 实验室的加里 · 斯基、 戴夫 Strohmetz 和娜塔莉 Ciarocco — — 蒙茅斯大学
多组的设计是有 3 个或更多条件/组相同的独立变量的实验设计。该视频演示了多组实验,考察不同种族意识形态 (多元文化主义和色盲) 影响多样性以及对行动和群体成员的感想。在提供概览的调研人员如何进行多组实验,该视频演示了观众如何区分变量,常见类型的条件/组使用 (包括安慰剂和空条件-对照) 进行研究,结果的集合和审议其所涉问题的过程中的水平。
1.介绍课题的研究问题
2.关键变量
3.定义变量
4.建立条件
5.混淆
6.测量因变量 (对非成员的态度)
物品的椅子上 | 空椅子 | 空椅子 | 空椅子 | 空椅子 | 空椅子 | 空椅子 | 空椅子 |
7 点 | 6 点 | 5 分 | 4 点 | 3 点 | 2 点 | 1 点 |
表 1。点分布基于座位的选择。选择在非成员物品附近的椅子给更多的积分。
7.进行研究
选择正确的实验设计是必须回答手上的具体的科学问题。
在实验中,研究人员感到关切的是变量 — — 什么样的变化。例如,研究者操纵自变量检测参与者之间可能存在的差异。
独立变量可以有不同的层次,也被称为条件,可能会导致不同的结果 — — 研究员作为因变量的措施。
如果一个独立的变量有三个或更多条件,实验分为多个组设计。这是一个简单的实验设计,其中包含两个层次,实验组与对照组对比。
每个设计用来回答不同的问题;两组设计告诉你独立变量是否有任何影响,而多个组设计告诉你多少的每种状态有影响。
使用多组的方法,该视频演示了如何设计水平的变量和进行研究,以及如何分析数据和解释复杂的族群互动关系的参加者态度。
在这多组实验中,参与者随机分配到四个条件之一: 色盲,多元文化、 控件或空对照组。
两个小组,Colorblind 和多元文化,被视为主要的实验条件下,与会者都在不知不觉中暴露不同的观点,通过侧重于共享的相似或欣赏不同的单词搜索任务。
相比之下,对照组的参与者受到缺乏任何角度来看,平凡词搜索任务而空对照组的参与者不暴露的任务。这后一种情况提供基线响应的参与者没有经过任何处理的行为。
单词搜索任务,参与者给出涉及到他们指定的条件的态度的词语。例如,色盲的词包括: 平等、 团结、 雷同、 相似,、 双目失明;多元文化的词包括: 文化、 品种、 差异、 多样性与多;和控制字包括: 实用、 轻松、 逻辑、 创造力和友谊。
此外,所有的单词搜索包含相同的五个牵张器字: 鲜花,星星,艺术,世界和音乐。干扰项是包括防止参与者猜测这项研究的真正性质什么 — — 概念被称为假设猜测。
以下词搜索工作,所有参与者都被都递的人他们认为将会帮助他们完成其他任务,当他们返回时的照片。在现实中,这张照片表示与谁不确定参与者的社会组的成员 — — 非成员。
因变量 — — 对非成员的与会者的态度 — — 然后量化由如何接近他们选择坐在靠近假定的对方的财物。请注意非成员从未使一个物理的外观。
在这种情况下,选择坐离代表与坐远非成员更积极的态度。
然后,它被假设那些接触到多元文化视角下将显示非成员时相比,那些暴露的色盲的角度更加有利态度。
要进行这项研究,创建包含五个字与色盲、 多元文化、 或世俗态度相关联的三个不同的单词搜索。请确保每个搜索包括同样的五个牵张器字。
随机组织内部数据包,从而确保参与者的分配完全基于机会和没有任何先入为主的假设有关参与者的单词搜索。请注意,空对照组包的确是空。
在隔壁的房间里,成立了八把椅子。将非成员的物品放在最左边的椅子上,给参与者七座位可供选择。
若要开始这项试验,满足参与者在实验室。每个参与者提供知情同意,包括研究和程序,及潜在风险的简要说明和参加的益处。
分配条件,携手所有参与者词搜索数据包,除了那些分配给空控件组。
完成单词搜索后,护送到隔壁的房间里的参与者。同样的照片,另一人的手每个参与者 — — 非成员 — — 并告诉他们他们会与此人现在工作,这是对附加词搜索任务返港。
向参与者自己的伴侣有已经到达,但不得不跑到他们的车去的事情进一步解释。告诉他们能有个座位。
参与者选择他们的位子后,走到不同的房间,请注意每个座位选择。
在实验结束时,听取汇报,就告诉他们这项研究的性质的参与者。
解释欺骗有必要捕获参与者的自然反应,如事先泄露的这项研究的真正意图可能会影响他们的行为来满足感知的期望。
分析如何不同观点影响参与者的态度,平均每个组中的座位选择分数并绘制手段穿过的四个条件。要确定是否发现组之间的差异,请执行方差分析比较四个组。
注意那些在多元文化组到非成员,转化为更高的态度得分坐得紧一些。因此,多元文化的思想暴露导致比所有其他条件最有利的态度。
既然你已经熟悉多种组设计,让我们看看其他的研究人员是如何操纵最大化实验控制的条件。
例如,若要确定时间关系花了睡眠和运动性能,需要多个组。这种方式,可以确定最佳的睡眠时间,最终时间最长的睡眠时间可能帮不上忙,但宁愿伤害,行使性能。
同样,多个组设计将有必要确定达到所期望的结果,且无副作用的药物的最佳剂量。
多组的设计也有利于测试是否参与舞蹈课堂缓解抑郁症状。在这种情况下,添加组暴露社会互动不能跳舞的一个潜在的混杂变量的控制 — — 从类派生的无意中的社会互动。
你刚看了多组实验设计的朱庇特的简介。现在你应该明白如何通过包括独立变量的不同水平设计多组实验。
视频使用一个具体的例子,展示了如何进行多组实验中,以及如何评价结果。最后,通过讨论的应用程序时,您应该具备良好的理解如何多组实验设计可以用来满足特定研究的需要。
谢谢观赏 !
收集数据后从 88 人,执行单向方差分析 (ANOVA) 比较四个条件/组 (多元文化,色盲,控制和空控件),看看他们是如何影响对非成员的态度。如图 1所示,那些多元文化组中有的最有利的态度相比,所有其他条件。
图 1。平均的态度由种族意识形态条件外群成员。的态度基于平均值的座位的选择。
这项研究的结果复制以前的研究表明了一个多元文化的视角的好处。本研究通过展示它如何可以在非显式的方式操纵和可以影响公开的行为,如选择在哪里坐将添加到现有的文献。
考虑到潜在的效益的看到别人的差异,很容易看到如何这可能适用于各种环境下对性少数群体的态度等反欺凌的努力,在学校,离婚调解,甚至也许是在国际关系中。它还建议更多的一般需要认识和理解的差异而不是忽视或回避。
Choosing the correct experimental design is essential to answer the specific scientific question at hand.
In an experiment, researchers are concerned with variables—what changes. For instance, the researcher manipulates the independent variable to detect possible differences amongst participants.
The independent variable can have different levels, also known as conditions, which may result in different outcomes—what the researcher measures as the dependent variable.
If an independent variable has three or more conditions, the experiment consists of a multiple-group design. This is in contrast to a simple experimental design, which contains two levels, the experimental and control groups.
Each design is used to answer different questions; a two-group design tells you whether the independent variable has any effect, whereas a multiple-group design tells you how much of an effect each condition has.
Using a multi-group approach, this video demonstrates how to design levels of variables and conduct the study, as well as how to analyze data and interpret participants’ attitudes towards complex ethnic interactions.
In this multi-group experiment, participants are randomly assigned to one of four conditions: Colorblind, Multicultural, Control, or an Empty-Control group.
Two of the groups, Colorblind and Multicultural, are considered main experimental conditions, in which participants are unknowingly exposed to diverse perspectives through a word search task that focuses on shared similarities or appreciative differences.
In contrast, participants in the Control group are exposed to a mundane word search task that lacks any perspective, whereas participants in the Empty-Control group are not exposed to the task. This latter condition provides a baseline response of how participants act without any treatment.
For the word search task, participants are given words that relate to the attitudes of their assigned conditions. For example, colorblind words include: equality, unity, sameness, similarity, and blind; multicultural words include: culture, variety, difference, diversity, and multi; and control words include: practical, relaxed, logic, creativity, and friendship.
In addition, all of the word searches contain the same five distractor words: flowers, stars, artistic, world, and music. The distractors are included to prevent participants from guessing what the true nature of the study is—a concept referred to as hypothesis guessing.
Following the word search task, all participants are handed a photograph of someone they think will help them complete additional tasks when they return. In reality, the photograph represents a member of a social group with whom the participant does not identify—the outgroup member.
The dependent variable—the participants’ attitudes toward the outgroup member—is then quantified by how close they choose to sit near their supposed partner’s belongings. Note that the outgroup member never makes a physical appearance.
In this case, choosing to sit closer represents a more positive attitude towards the outgroup member versus sitting farther away.
It is hypothesized then that those who are exposed to the multicultural perspective will display more favorable attitudes toward an outgroup member when compared to those who are exposed to the colorblind perspective.
To conduct the study, create three different word searches that consist of five words associated with colorblind, multicultural, or mundane attitudes. Make sure that each search includes the same five distractor words.
Randomly organize the word searches inside packets to ensure that participants’ assignments are entirely based on chance and not any preconceived assumptions about the participant. Note that the packet for the Empty-Control group is indeed empty.
In an adjoining room, set up eight chairs. Place the outgroup member’s belongings on the far left chair, giving the participant seven seats to choose from.
To begin the experiment, meet the participant at the lab. Provide each participant with informed consent, which consists of a brief description of the research and procedures, and the potential risks and benefits of participating.
To assign the conditions, hand all participants a word search packet, except for those assigned to the Empty-Control group.
Once the word search is finished, escort the participant to an adjoining room. Hand each participant the same photograph of another person—the outgroup member—and tell them that they will now work together with this person on additional word search tasks upon their return.
Further explain to the participant that their partner has already arrived, but had to run out to their car to get something. Tell them to have a seat.
After participants choose their seat, walk to a different part of the room and note each one’s seat selection.
At the conclusion of the experiment, debrief participants by telling them the nature of the study.
Explain that deception was necessary to capture the participants’ natural reactions, as divulging the true intentions of the study beforehand could have influenced their behavior to meet perceived expectations.
To analyze how different perspectives influence participants’ attitudes, average the seat choice scores in each group and plot the means across the four conditions. To determine if group differences were found, perform an analysis of variance comparing the four groups.
Note that those in the multicultural group sat closer to the outgroup member, which translates to a higher attitude score. Thus, the exposure to the multicultural ideology led to the most favorable attitude as compared to all other conditions.
Now that you are familiar with multiple group designs, let’s take a look at how other researchers manipulate conditions to maximize experimental control.
For example, to determine the relationship between time spent sleeping and exercise performance, multiple groups are needed. That way, an optimal amount of sleep can be determined, where ultimately the longest amount of sleep may not help, but rather hurt, exercise performance.
Similarly, a multiple group design would be necessary to determine the optimal dose of a medication that achieves the desired outcome without side effects.
A multi-group design is also beneficial to test whether participation in a dance class relieves depression symptoms. In this case, adding a group exposed to social interaction without dancing controls for a potentially confounding variable—the inadvertent social interaction derived from the class.
You’ve just watched JoVE’s introduction to multi-group experimental design. Now you should understand how to design a multi-group experiment by including different levels of the independent variable.
Using a specific example, the video demonstrated how to conduct a multi-group experiment, as well as how to evaluate the results. Finally, through a discussion of applications, you should have a good understanding of how multi-group experimental design can be used to meet specific research needs.
Thanks for watching!
Related Videos
Experimental Psychology
18.2K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
29.1K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
8.2K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
5.6K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
10.3K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
13.0K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
72.2K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
22.7K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
22.9K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
73.1K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
11.8K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
8.4K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
11.6K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
8.5K 浏览
Experimental Psychology
17.8K 浏览