15.11
Procedimientos Doble Ciego
Ideally, the people who observe and record the children’s behavior are unaware of who was assigned to the experimental or control group, in order to c…
Las personas pueden participar en estudios con sesgos que sesgan los resultados, retratando un tratamiento como más eficaz de lo que realmente es.
Por ejemplo, durante un estudio sobre el insomnio, un investigador puede colocar una pastilla de somnífero o placebo en una taza y dispersar las cápsulas a los participantes. Mientras el científico anota quién recibió qué tipo de píldora, los sujetos no se dan cuenta.
Aquí, el investigador sigue siendo parcial, anticipando que la ayuda para dormir funcionará. Así, durante la observación, puede notar que los que recibieron el fármaco se durmieron más rápido, mientras que en realidad no hay diferencia entre los grupos.
Sin embargo, se eliminan los sesgos de los participantes. Dado que los sujetos no saben si tragaron el somnífero, carecen de expectativas con respecto a la eficacia de la píldora. En consecuencia, declararán con precisión cómo se vio afectado su insomnio.
Este método, en el que solo los investigadores o los participantes saben quién recibió el tratamiento, se denomina estudio simple ciego. Sin embargo, este procedimiento puede dar lugar a que un grupo, en este caso, el científico, permanezca sesgado.
Para evitar esto, se realizan estudios doble ciego, en los que tanto los participantes como los investigadores que recopilan los datos son "ciegos". En este caso, el científico puede dar el placebo y el somnífero a un colega, quien vuelve a etiquetar las píldoras como "Tipo Y" y "Tipo Z" antes de dispersarlas.
Este sistema de codificación elimina las expectativas de la investigadora durante la evaluación: no sabe qué participantes recibieron la medicación y no puede suponer quién debería dormir mejor. En consecuencia, grabará si alguien parece inquieto.
Al igual que antes, los sujetos también describirán con precisión su experiencia de sueño. Es solo después del análisis de datos que todos saben a quién se le administró el somnífero o el placebo.
En general, los procedimientos ciegos ayudan a minimizar los sesgos y producen resultados precisos, que se pueden utilizar para evaluar la eficacia de la medicación y otros tratamientos.
View the full transcript and gain access to JoVE Core videos
Q1: What is experimenter bias and how does it affect research results?
Experimenter bias occurs when a researcher's expectations skew study results. For example, a scientist expecting a sleep-aid to work may note that medicated participants fell asleep faster, even when no actual difference exists. The researcher's anticipation influences how they observe and record data, potentially portraying treatments as more effective than they truly are. Blind procedures help minimize this bias.
Q2: How does a single-blind study control for participant bias?
In a single-blind study, participants remain unaware of whether they received treatment or a placebo, while researchers know group assignments. Since subjects don't know what they received, they lack expectations about efficacy and report their experiences accurately. However, the researcher remains biased during observation and data collection, potentially influencing results through their own expectations.
Q3: What is the placebo effect and why does it matter in research?
The placebo effect occurs when people's expectations or beliefs influence their actual experience. For instance, a participant expecting a pill to improve mood may feel better simply because they took it, not due to any active drug. This expectation-driven response can confound research results, making it difficult to determine whether treatment effects are real or caused by participant expectations alone.
Q4: How does a double-blind study eliminate both researcher and participant bias?
In a double-blind study, neither researchers nor participants know group assignments. A colleague relabels pills as Type Y or Type Z before distribution, preventing the researcher from knowing who received treatment. This coding system eliminates researcher expectations during data collection. Participants also remain blind, preventing placebo effects. Only after analysis does everyone learn actual group assignments.
Q5: Why is blinding important when testing medication effectiveness?
Blinding ensures that observed differences between treatment and control groups reflect actual drug effects rather than bias or expectations. Without blinding, researchers might unconsciously favor treated participants, and participants might experience placebo effects. By keeping both groups blind to assignments, researchers can confidently attribute mood improvements or other outcomes to the medication itself, not to experimenter bias or participant expectations.
Q6: What happens to data collection when researchers know which participants received treatment?
When researchers know treatment assignments, their expectations can bias observations. They may pay more attention to treated participants, interpret ambiguous behaviors favorably for the treatment group, or unconsciously record data differently. This selective attention and interpretation skew results, making treatments appear more effective than they actually are. Blinding the researcher prevents these unconscious influences on data recording.
Q7: How do blind procedures improve the reliability and validity of research findings?
Blind procedures minimize both experimenter and participant biases, producing more accurate results. By preventing researchers from knowing assignments, observations remain objective. By keeping participants unaware, placebo effects are controlled. These protections ensure that measured differences reflect true treatment effects rather than expectations or biases. Consequently, blind procedures strengthen the reliability and validity of conclusions about medication and treatment efficacy.