-1::1
Simple Hit Counter
Skip to content

Products

Solutions

×
×
Sign In

EN

EN - EnglishCN - 简体中文DE - DeutschES - EspañolKR - 한국어IT - ItalianoFR - FrançaisPT - Português do BrasilPL - PolskiHE - עִבְרִיתRU - РусскийJA - 日本語TR - TürkçeAR - العربية
Sign In Start Free Trial

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal

Peer reviewed scientific video journal

Behavior
Biochemistry
Bioengineering
Biology
Cancer Research
Chemistry
Developmental Biology
View All
JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments

Video encyclopedia of advanced research methods

Biological Techniques
Biology
Cancer Research
Immunology
Neuroscience
Microbiology
JoVE Visualize

Visualizing science through experiment videos

EDUCATION

JoVE Core

Video textbooks for undergraduate courses

Analytical Chemistry
Anatomy and Physiology
Biology
Cell Biology
Chemistry
Civil Engineering
Electrical Engineering
View All
JoVE Science Education

Visual demonstrations of key scientific experiments

Advanced Biology
Basic Biology
Chemistry
View All
JoVE Lab Manual

Videos of experiments for undergraduate lab courses

Biology
Chemistry

BUSINESS

JoVE Business

Video textbooks for business education

Accounting
Finance
Macroeconomics
Marketing
Microeconomics

OTHERS

JoVE Quiz

Interactive video based quizzes for formative assessments

Authors

Teaching Faculty

Librarians

K12 Schools

Products

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal

Peer reviewed scientific video journal

JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments

Video encyclopedia of advanced research methods

JoVE Visualize

Visualizing science through experiment videos

EDUCATION

JoVE Core

Video textbooks for undergraduates

JoVE Science Education

Visual demonstrations of key scientific experiments

JoVE Lab Manual

Videos of experiments for undergraduate lab courses

BUSINESS

JoVE Business

Video textbooks for business education

OTHERS

JoVE Quiz

Interactive video based quizzes for formative assessments

Solutions

Authors
Teaching Faculty
Librarians
K12 Schools

Language

English

EN

English

CN

简体中文

DE

Deutsch

ES

Español

KR

한국어

IT

Italiano

FR

Français

PT

Português do Brasil

PL

Polski

HE

עִבְרִית

RU

Русский

JA

日本語

TR

Türkçe

AR

العربية

    Menu

    JoVE Journal

    Behavior

    Biochemistry

    Bioengineering

    Biology

    Cancer Research

    Chemistry

    Developmental Biology

    Engineering

    Environment

    Genetics

    Immunology and Infection

    Medicine

    Neuroscience

    Menu

    JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments

    Biological Techniques

    Biology

    Cancer Research

    Immunology

    Neuroscience

    Microbiology

    Menu

    JoVE Core

    Analytical Chemistry

    Anatomy and Physiology

    Biology

    Cell Biology

    Chemistry

    Civil Engineering

    Electrical Engineering

    Introduction to Psychology

    Mechanical Engineering

    Medical-Surgical Nursing

    View All

    Menu

    JoVE Science Education

    Advanced Biology

    Basic Biology

    Chemistry

    Clinical Skills

    Engineering

    Environmental Sciences

    Physics

    Psychology

    View All

    Menu

    JoVE Lab Manual

    Biology

    Chemistry

    Menu

    JoVE Business

    Accounting

    Finance

    Macroeconomics

    Marketing

    Microeconomics

Start Free Trial
Loading...
Home
JoVE Science Education
Psychology
Realism in Experimentation
Realism in Experimentation
JoVE Science Education
Experimental Psychology
A subscription to JoVE is required to view this content.  Sign in or start your free trial.
JoVE Science Education Experimental Psychology
Realism in Experimentation

2.3: Realism in Experimentation

8,676 Views
04:49 min
February 4, 2015

Overview

Source: Laboratories of Gary Lewandowski, Dave Strohmetz, and Natalie Ciarocco—Monmouth University

In an ideal world researchers would conduct their studies in real world settings where behaviors naturally happen. For example, if you want to see what influences individuals’ voting behavior, it would be best to watch them vote. However, research in these settings is not always ethical or even practical. Further, a researcher may want more control over the setting to better pinpoint the exact variables that are influencing an outcome.

When researchers need to conduct studies in a lab, they try to optimize mundane realism, which means that they do everything they can to make the lab feel like a real-life experience. This video demonstrates a two-group design that examines how researchers use mundane realism in a lab to determine whether positive restaurant reviews are connected to diners’ level of tipping.

Psychological studies often use higher sample sizes than studies in other sciences. A large number of participants helps to ensure that the population under study is better represented and the margin of error accompanied by studying human behavior is sufficiently accounted for.

In this video, we demonstrate this experiment using just two participants, one for each condition. However, as represented in the results, we used a total of 200 (100 for each condition) participants to reach the experiment’s conclusions.

Procedure

1. Define key variables.

  1. Create an operational definition (i.e., a clear description of exactly what a researcher means by a concept) of online restaurant reviews.
    1. For the purposes of this experiment, online restaurant reviews are reviews provided on a website that offer diners’ insights into the restaurant.
      1. A positive review is one that gives a general rating of 4 stars (out of 5) or higher and also compliments the service.
      2. A negative review is one that gives a general rating of 2 stars (out of 5) or lower and also criticizes the service.
  2. Create an operational definition of tip amount.
    1. For purposes of this experiment, tip amount is defined as the amount of money the participant allocates to the server in paying the bill.

2. Conduct the study.

  1. Welcome participants at the lab door, which is set-up as the “Hawk Villa” restaurant.
    1. Dress and act like a restaurant server (e.g., wear white shirt and black apron, folded at waist).
  2.  Sit participant down at a table.
  3. Provide participant with informed consent, a brief description of the research (influences on spending behavior), a sense of the procedure, an indication of potential risks/benefits, the right of withdrawal at any time, and a manner to get help if they experience discomfort.
  4. Give participant a wallet containing $136.10 (3-$20, 4-$10, 5-$5, 10-$1, and $1.10 in coins).
  5. Independent variable = restaurant review
    1. Say to participant: “Before you dine, to give you a bit more context, I thought you’d like to see the most recent online review of our restaurant.”
    2. Provide participant with the positive review (Figure 1).

    Restaurant review rating card, stars, hours, contact, service detail.
    Figure 1. Positive restaurant review. This review was shown to participants in the positive review group.
  6. Play a video depicting a subpar dining scene.
    1. Instruct the participant to imagine themselves as one of the diners in the video and to imagine that the researcher is the server in the video.
  7. Dependent variable = the bill
    1. Return with the bill (Figure 2) placed in a restaurant billfold and say: “Here is your bill. I’ll take that when you’re ready.”
      Restaurant receipt with item prices and total amount, showing a typical dining transaction.
      Figure 2. Restaurant receipt. This bill was given to all participants at the end of watching the dining scene.
    2. After the participant places money in billfold, return and ask, “do you need any change?”   
      1. Participant responds, “No thanks. Keep the change.”

3. Debrief

  1.  Report the nature of the study.
    1. “Thank you for participating. In this study I was trying to determine if reading an online restaurant review influences how much a person tips. There were two conditions, both of which watched the same video of subpar service. However, one group read a positive online review, while the other read a negative online review. We hypothesized that the group who read the positive online review would be more forgiving of the subpar service and give a higher tip.”
  2. Explain explicitly why the experiment was run this way.
    1. “We want to tell you why we ran this study this way. First, we couldn’t explicitly tell you that we were studying online reviews because it may have affected how you tipped. We also had to run this study in a laboratory setting because, as you can easily imagine, a real restaurant would not want to be part of a study involving subpar service where the key variable was their online reviews (particularly the negative ones).”

4. Conduct sections 2 and 3 with a new participant.

  1. Provide the negative review (Figure 3).
    Restaurant review summary display, includes user ratings, contact info, and operation hours.
    Figure 3. Negative restaurant review. This review was shown to participants in the negative review group.
  2. Everything else should be the same.

5. Data Analysis

  1. Count the money the participant placed in the billfold.
  2. Use a calculator to subtract the bill total ($44.67) from the amount the participant left.
    1. $55.00 in the positive condition = $10.33 tip
    2. $45.00 in the negative condition = $0.33 tip
  3. Calculate tip percentage.
    1. Positive = 23%
    2. Negative = 0.7%

Conducting research in a realistic setting is optimal, but unfortunately, is not always ethical or even practical.

For example, researchers cannot simply march into a voting booth and observe what factors influence individuals’ voting behaviors.

Instead, they can create realism in the laboratory by designing an authentic voting experience, which includes questioning and observing the exact variables that might influence the study’s outcome.

Using a realistic setting, this video will demonstrate how to design, conduct, analyze, and interpret an experiment that investigates whether restaurant reviews are related to a diner’s level of tipping.

In this experiment, a realistic restaurant setting is designed to allow the researcher to manipulate how restaurant reviews—positive and negative— influence participants’ dining behavior.

For the positive review group, participants are asked to read a critique that compliments the service. In contrast, the negative review group is asked to read a critique that condemns the service.

After reading one of the reviews, participants are then shown a video that depicts a dining scenario with subpar service and must imagine themselves as one of the diners and the researcher as the server.

Once the video is over, participants are given a bill for the imagined meal. The dependent variable is the amount of money left as a tip.

Thus, participants who read the positive review are hypothesized to be more forgiving of the subpar service and offer a higher tip than diners who read the negative review.

To begin the study, meet the participant at the lab door and welcome them into the Hawk Villa restaurant. Guide all participants through the consent process and discuss the overall plan for the session.

After the participant consents to the experiment, give them a wallet containing $136.10, divided into specific bill and coin amounts.

Randomly divide participants to one of two experimental groups by handing them either a positive or negative review.

When the participants finish reading the reviews, have them watch a video depicting a dining scene. Instruct the participants to imagine themselves as the diner and the researcher as the server.

After showing the video, return to the table with the bill.

Once the participant places money in the billfold, return to the table and ask if they need any change.

To conclude the experiment, debrief the participant and explain why simulating a restaurant in the lab was necessary for the experiment.

To analyze the data, first count the money each participant placed in the billfold. Subtract the bill total of $44.67 from the amount the participant left to calculate the tip amount. Then, calculate the tip percentage.

To visualize the data, graph the mean tip percentages by group. Notice that participants in the positive review condition tipped higher than those in the negative review condition.

Now that you are familiar with how to optimize realism within a laboratory environment, let’s take a look at how you can apply this approach to other forms of research.

Driving simulators are often used in the laboratory to safely investigate driving ability in individuals with visual deficits or those under the influence of a substance, such as alcohol.

In addition, researchers can study navigational skills in individuals by examining task performance in a simulated real-world environment.

Finally, researchers have adapted dance movements to engage patients who express poor mobility and balance, such as those with Parkinson’s disease, and subsequently monitored changes in motor performance.

You’ve just watched JoVE’s introduction to using realism in laboratory experiments. Now you should have a good understanding of how to design and conduct this type of study, and how to calculate results and apply the phenomenon conducting research using realistic settings.

Thanks for watching! 

Transcript

Conducting research in a realistic setting is optimal, but unfortunately, is not always ethical or even practical.

For example, researchers cannot simply march into a voting booth and observe what factors influence individuals? voting behaviors.

Instead, they can create realism in the laboratory by designing an authentic voting experience, which includes questioning and observing the exact variables that might influence the study?s outcome.

Using a realistic setting, this video will demonstrate how to design, conduct, analyze, and interpret an experiment that investigates whether restaurant reviews are related to a diner?s level of tipping.

In this experiment, a realistic restaurant setting is designed to allow the researcher to manipulate how restaurant reviews?positive and negative? influence participants? dining behavior.

For the positive review group, participants are asked to read a critique that compliments the service. In contrast, the negative review group is asked to read a critique that condemns the service.

After reading one of the reviews, participants are then shown a video that depicts a dining scenario with subpar service and must imagine themselves as one of the diners and the researcher as the server.

Once the video is over, participants are given a bill for the imagined meal. The dependent variable is the amount of money left as a tip.

Thus, participants who read the positive review are hypothesized to be more forgiving of the subpar service and offer a higher tip than diners who read the negative review.

To begin the study, meet the participant at the lab door and welcome them into the Hawk Villa restaurant. Guide all participants through the consent process and discuss the overall plan for the session.

After the participant consents to the experiment, give them a wallet containing $136.10, divided into specific bill and coin amounts.

Randomly divide participants to one of two experimental groups by handing them either a positive or negative review.

When the participants finish reading the reviews, have them watch a video depicting a dining scene. Instruct the participants to imagine themselves as the diner and the researcher as the server.

After showing the video, return to the table with the bill.

Once the participant places money in the billfold, return to the table and ask if they need any change.

To conclude the experiment, debrief the participant and explain why simulating a restaurant in the lab was necessary for the experiment.

To analyze the data, first count the money each participant placed in the billfold. Subtract the bill total of $44.67 from the amount the participant left to calculate the tip amount. Then, calculate the tip percentage.

To visualize the data, graph the mean tip percentages by group. Notice that participants in the positive review condition tipped higher than those in the negative review condition.

Now that you are familiar with how to optimize realism within a laboratory environment, let?s take a look at how you can apply this approach to other forms of research.

Driving simulators are often used in the laboratory to safely investigate driving ability in individuals with visual deficits or those under the influence of a substance, such as alcohol.

In addition, researchers can study navigational skills in individuals by examining task performance in a simulated real-world environment.

Finally, researchers have adapted dance movements to engage patients who express poor mobility and balance, such as those with Parkinson?s disease, and subsequently monitored changes in motor performance.

You?ve just watched JoVE?s introduction to using realism in laboratory experiments. Now you should have a good understanding of how to design and conduct this type of study, and how to calculate results and apply the phenomenon conducting research using realistic settings.

Thanks for watching!?

Explore More Videos

RealismExperimentationResearchRealistic SettingLaboratoryVoting BehaviorsAuthentic Voting ExperienceVariablesRestaurant ReviewsTipping BehaviorPositive Review GroupNegative Review GroupDining BehaviorSubpar ServiceDependent Variable

Related Videos

From Theory to Design: The Role of Creativity in Designing Experiments

06:42

From Theory to Design: The Role of Creativity in Designing Experiments

Experimental Psychology

20.7K Views

Ethics in Psychology Research

07:19

Ethics in Psychology Research

Experimental Psychology

30.1K Views

Realism in Experimentation

04:49

Realism in Experimentation

Experimental Psychology

8.7K Views

Perspectives on Experimental Psychology

05:13

Perspectives on Experimental Psychology

Experimental Psychology

5.9K Views

Pilot Testing

07:17

Pilot Testing

Experimental Psychology

10.7K Views

Observational Research

04:51

Observational Research

Experimental Psychology

15.3K Views

The Simple Experiment: Two-group Design

08:59

The Simple Experiment: Two-group Design

Experimental Psychology

80.0K Views

The Multi-group Experiment

07:35

The Multi-group Experiment

Experimental Psychology

23.3K Views

Within-subjects Repeated-measures Design

07:48

Within-subjects Repeated-measures Design

Experimental Psychology

23.8K Views

The Factorial Experiment

06:58

The Factorial Experiment

Experimental Psychology

74.6K Views

Self-report vs. Behavioral Measures of Recycling

05:59

Self-report vs. Behavioral Measures of Recycling

Experimental Psychology

12.1K Views

Reliability in Psychology Experiments

05:13

Reliability in Psychology Experiments

Experimental Psychology

9.0K Views

Placebos in Research

06:58

Placebos in Research

Experimental Psychology

12.1K Views

Manipulating an Independent Variable through Embodiment

05:08

Manipulating an Independent Variable through Embodiment

Experimental Psychology

8.9K Views

Experimentation using a Confederate

06:12

Experimentation using a Confederate

Experimental Psychology

18.1K Views

JoVE logo
Contact Us Recommend to Library
Research
  • JoVE Journal
  • JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments
  • JoVE Visualize
Business
  • JoVE Business
Education
  • JoVE Core
  • JoVE Science Education
  • JoVE Lab Manual
  • JoVE Quizzes
Solutions
  • Authors
  • Teaching Faculty
  • Librarians
  • K12 Schools
About JoVE
  • Overview
  • Leadership
Others
  • JoVE Newsletters
  • JoVE Help Center
  • Blogs
  • Site Maps
Contact Us Recommend to Library
JoVE logo

Copyright © 2025 MyJoVE Corporation. All rights reserved

Privacy Terms of Use Policies
WeChat QR code