IS 4800 Empirical Research Methods
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 53

IS 4800 Empirical Research Methods for Information Science Class Notes Feb 8, 2012 PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

IS 4800 Empirical Research Methods for Information Science Class Notes Feb 8, 2012. Instructor: Prof. Carole Hafner, 446 WVH [email protected] Tel: 617-373-5116 Course Web site: Outline. Assignment 2: Relational Agents for Patient Education study

Download Presentation

IS 4800 Empirical Research Methods for Information Science Class Notes Feb 8, 2012

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript

Is 4800 empirical research methods for information science class notes feb 8 2012

IS 4800 Empirical Research Methods

for Information Science

Class Notes Feb 8, 2012

Instructor: Prof. Carole Hafner, 446 WVH

[email protected] Tel: 617-373-5116

Course Web site:



  • Assignment 2: Relational Agents for Patient Education study

  • Assignment 3: Descriptive Statistics Report

  • Review for test

  • Team project 1

  • Survey research – (cont.)

    • Questionnaire construction

    • Composite measures

    • Validity and reliability

Assignment 2 points to mention

Assignment 2 Points to mention

  • Respect for persons

    • Subjects can opt out/verbal and written consent obtained

    • Refusal will not impact medical care -- voluntary

    • Study described in detail in recruitment letter -- informed

    • Gives procedures to ensure confidentiality

    • Participants given number to call if they have concerns

  • Beneficence

    • Little or no risk

    • Potential for significant public benefit – what benefits

      • Benefit to all diabetes patients

      • Use of relational agents for educating elderly/minorities/low literacy people

  • Justice

    • Participants may benefit personally (health + $)

    • Minority patients in urban areas have 3X higher low health literacy therefore represent a class that would benefit the most.

Assignment 2 more points to mention

Assignment 2 more points to mention

  • Data safety & monitoring plan

    • Independent oversight ensures plan is followed

    • Provides extra protection for poor/minority patients (justice)

  • Point of Study Subjects section

    • Document inclusion/exclusion criteria

    • Demonstrate there is a sufficient sample size

    • Shows disabled are not over-burdened (justice)

  • HIPPAA issues

    • Use of data to pre-select without consent

    • “Opt-out” initial consent process

    • Use of phone interview to collect more data

Assignment 3

Assignment 3

  • Results were disappointing

    • Frequency tables are only meaningful for categorial measures (gender and job category) unless you create intervals for numeric data.

    • Histograms are meaningful for numeric measures (experience, call time, customer satisfaction)

    • Crosstabs – apparently could not figure out how to get percents

    • Most were able to get the scatter plot

    • About half did the Custom Tables

    • Grade of B for all the requested stats plus a minimal discussion

3 types of questionnaire items

Restricted (close-ended)

Respondents are given a list of alternatives and check the desired alternative


Respondents are asked to answer a question in their own words

Partially Open-Ended

An “Other” alternative is added to a restricted item, allowing the respondent to write in an alternative

3. Types of Questionnaire Items

Types of questionnaire items

Rating Scale

Respondents circle a number on a scale (e.g., 0 to 10) or check a point on a line that best reflects their opinions

Two factors need to be considered

Number of points on the scale

How to label (“anchor”) the scale (e.g., endpoints only or each point)

Ranking question

Types of Questionnaire Items

Types of questionnaire items1

A Likert Scaleis a scale used to assess attitudes

Respondents indicate the degree of agreement or disagreement to a series of statements

I am happy.

Disagree 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Agree

A Semantic Differential Scaleallows participate to provide a rating within a bipolar space

How are you feeling right now?

Sad 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Happy

Types of Questionnaire Items

Sample survey questions http www custominsight com survey question types asp composite measures

Sample Survey Questions Measures

Psychological concepts aka constructs

Constructs are general codifications of experience and observations.

Observe differences in social standing -> concept of social status.

Observe differences in religious commitment -> concept of religiosity

Most psychological constructs have no ultimate definitions

Constructs are ad hoc summaries of experience and observations

Psychological Conceptsaka “Constructs”

Composite measures

Indexes (aka “scales”) provide an ordinal ranking of respondents with respect to a construct of interest (e.g., liking of computers)

Usually assessed through a series of related questions.

Composite Measures

Composite measures1

It is seldom possible to arrive at a single question that adequately represents a complex variable.

Any single item is likely to misrepresent some respondents (e.g., church-going)

A single item may not provide enough variation for your purposes.

Single items give crude assessments; several items give a more comprehensive and accurate assessment.

Composite measures

Example composite measure working alliance inventory 5 of 36 qs

Example Composite MeasureWorking Alliance Inventory (5 of 36 Qs)


The process of specifying empirical observations that are indicators of the concept of interest

Begin by enumerating all the subdimensions (“factors”) of the concept

Review previous research

Use commonsense


Example religiosity


Ritual involvement

E.g., going to church

Ideological involvement

Acceptance of religious beliefs

Intellectual involvement

Extent of knowledge about religion

Experiential involvement

Range of religious experiences

Consequential involvement

Extent to which religion guides social decisions

(there are many others)

Example: religiosity

Discriminant indicators

Also think about related measures which should not be indicators of your construct

In particular if you will be measuring another related variable, make sure none of your indicators include any attributes of it.


Want to study the relationship between religiosity and attitudes towards war => including a question about adherence to “peace on earth” doctrine is not a good idea.

Discriminant indicators

Picking items for a composite

Face validity


All items measure same concept

Should provide variance in responses

Don’t pick items that classify everyone one way.

If you are interested in a binary classification (e.g., liberal vs. conservative), each item should split respondents roughly in half

Negate up to half of the items to avoid response bias.

Picking items for a Composite

Picking items bivariate analysis

Every pair of items should be related, but not too strongly

Scoring high on item A should increase likelihood of scoring high on item B

But, if two items are perfectly correlated (e.g. one logically implies the other), then one can be dropped.

Should also look at combinations of >2 items to ensure that they all provide additional information.

Picking items: bivariate analysis

Scoring a composite measure

Average the item scores

Weight items equally unless you have a compelling reason to do otherwise

Missing data

Omit dataset

Impute average/intermediate score

“Last value forward” for repeated measures

Many other strategies

Scoring a Composite Measure

5 example

“NU Husky Fanatic”

What are some factors?

What are some items per factor?

5. Example

Designing a composite measure

Designing a Composite Measure

Literature Review

Previous measures, theoretical concepts

Brainstorm on Factors

Brainstorm on Items

Preliminary /Validity Reliability testing

Factor analysis

Reliability testing

Validity testing

Validity and reliability

Validity and Reliability

  • Reliability of a measure

  • Validity of a measure

    • Especially composite measures of constructs

  • Validity of claims about association of IV and DV

    • Internal

    • External

Internal validity

INTERNAL VALIDITY is the degree to which your design tests what it was intended to test

In an experiment, internal validity means showing the observed difference in the dependent variable is truly caused by changes in the independent variable

In correlational research, internal validity means that observed difference in the value of the criterion variable are truly related to changes in the predictor variable

Internal validity is threatened by Extraneous and Confounding variables

Internal validity must be considered during the design phase of research

Internal Validity

External validity

EXTERNAL VALIDITY is the degree to which results generalize beyond your sample and research setting

External validity is threatened by the use of a highly controlled laboratory setting, restricted populations, pretests, demand characteristics, experimenter bias, and subject selection bias (such as volunteer bias)

Steps taken to increase internal validity may decrease external validity and vice versa

Internal validity may be more important in basic research; external validity, in applied research

External Validity

Factors affecting external validity

Factors Affecting External Validity

Is 4800 empirical research methods for information science class notes feb 8 2012

Internal vs. External Validity of a study..

  • Internal:

    • appropriate methods (well designed)

    • conducted properly

    • data analyzed correctly

    • correct inference

    • replicability: could someone else conduct your study and get the same result?

  • External:

    • generalize-ability

Extraneous and confounding variables impact on internal validity

Extraneous and Confounding Variables(impact on internal validity)

  • Extraneous variable – influences the DV.

  • Confounding variable – influences BOTH the IV and DV. Ice cream and drowning deaths.

    • The most dangerous type of Extraneous variable

  • Must be considered during design of a study



  • Confounding variable (very difficult to address)

    • A study of the effect of larger vs. smaller monitors on performance. Larger monitors have better speakers. (correlation w/IV). Perhaps the performance difference is due to the speakers.

  • Other extraneous variable (can be addressed by sample restriction, matched group assignment , statistical methods)

    • Task time on 2 word processors: typing skill. Can control by only using subjects with one skill level, matching skills levels among groups, multivariate analysis.

Is 4800 empirical research methods for information science class notes feb 8 2012














Extraneous variables


You want to evaluate a new sensor to detect whether people are happy or not.

You hire actors and randomly assign them to act happy or sad, and test your sensors on them.

What kind of validity (internal/external) might be challenged?



You conduct the “Conversational Agents to Promote Health Literacy” study by assigning the first 30 patients who volunteer to the intervention group, and the next 30 to the control group.

What kind of validity (internal/external) might be challenged?


Research settings

The laboratory setting

Affords greatest control over extraneous variables


Attempt to recreate the real world in the laboratory

Realism is an issue

The field setting

Study conducted in a real world environment

Field experiment: Manipulate variables in the field

High degree of external validity, but internal validity may be low

Research Settings

Validating a composite measure

Validating a Composite Measure

What is a validated measure

Has reliability

Has validity

For psychological measures, these are collectively referred to as a measure’s “psychometrics”.

What is a validated measure?

Measure reliability

A reliable measure produces similar results when repeated measurements are made under identical conditions

Reliability can be established in several ways

Test-retest reliability: Administer the same test twice

Parallel-forms reliability: Alternate forms of the same test used

Split-half reliability: Parallel forms are included on one test and later separated for comparison

Measure Reliability


For surveys, this also encompasses internal consistency:

Do all of the questions address the same underlying construct of interest?

That is, do scores covary?

A standard measure is Cronbach’s alpha

0 = no correlation

1 = scores always covary in the same way

0.7 used as conventional threshold


Increasing the reliability of a questionnaire

Check to be sure the items on your questionnaire are clearly written and appropriate for those who will complete your questionnaire

Increase the number of items on your questionnaire

Standardize the conditions under which the test is administered (e.g., timing procedures, lighting, ventilation, instructions)

Make sure you score your questionnaire carefully, eliminating scoring errors

Increasing the Reliability of a Questionnaire

Is 4800 empirical research methods for information science class notes feb 8 2012

Volunteer Bias

  • How can it affect external validity?

  • Characteristics of volunteers?

  • How do you address volunteer bias?

Is 4800 empirical research methods for information science class notes feb 8 2012

Characteristics of Individuals Who Volunteer for Research

Maximum Confidence

1.tend to be more highly educated than nonvolunteers

2.tend to come from a higher social class than nonvolunteers

3.are of a higher intelligence in general, but not when volunteers for atypical research (such as hypnosis, sex research)

4.have a higher need for approval than nonvolunteers

5.are more social than nonvolunteers

Is 4800 empirical research methods for information science class notes feb 8 2012

Considerable Confidence

Volunteers are more “arousal seeking” than nonvolunteers (especially when the research involves stress)

Individuals who volunteer for sex research are more unconventional than nonvolunteers

Females are more likely to volunteer than males, except when the research involves physical or emotional stress

Volunteers are less authoritarian than nonvolunteers

Jews are more likely to volunteer than Protestants; however, Protestants are more likely to volunteer than Catholics

Volunteers have a tendency to be less conforming than nonvolunteers, except when the volunteers are female and the research is clinically oriented

Source: Adapted from Rosenthal & Rosnow, 1975.

Is 4800 empirical research methods for information science class notes feb 8 2012

Remedies for Volunteer Bias

  • Make your appeal very interesting

  • Make your appeal as nonthreatening as possible

  • Explicitly state the theoretical and practical importance of your research

  • Explicitly state why the target population is relevant to your research

  • Offer a small reward for participation

Is 4800 empirical research methods for information science class notes feb 8 2012

  • Have a high-status person make the appeal for participants

  • Avoid research that is physically or psychologically stressful

  • Have someone known to participants make the appeal

  • Use public or private commitment to volunteering when appropriate

Ecological validity

The degree to which a measure corresponds to what happens in the real world.


Assessing productivity/day in the lab vs.

Assessing productivity/day in the office

Ecological Validity

Concerns with measures


Is a dependent measure sensitive enough to detect behavior change?

An insensitive measure will not detect subtle behaviors

Range Effects

Occur when a dependent measure has an upper or lower limit

Ceiling effect: When a dependent measure has an upper limit

Floor effect: When a dependent measure has a lower limit.

Concerns with Measures


You want to assess the effect of TV viewing on whether people like large computer monitors or not (yes/no).

You run an experiment in which participants are randomized to watch either 2 hrs or 0 hrs of TV per day for a week, then answer your question.

What’s going on?


ParticipantCondition LikesLargeMonitors

1TV Yes

2No TV Yes

3TV Yes

4No TV Yes

Developing a new measure

Say you decide you need a new survey measure, “attitude towards large computer monitors” (ATLCM)

I like big monitors.

Big monitors make me nervous.

I prefer small monitors, even if they cost more.

7-pt Likert scales

How would you validate this measure?

Developing a New Measure


You want to assess the effect of TV viewing on attitude towards large computer monitors (ATLCM).

You run an experiment in which participants are randomized to watch either 2 hrs or 0 hrs of TV per day for a week, then fill out the ATLCM.

What’s going on?


ParticipantCondition ATLCM

1TV 7.0

2No TV 6.7

3TV 6.9

4No TV 7.0

Measure validity

A valid measure measures what you intend it to measure

Very important when using psychological tests (e.g., intelligence, aptitude, (un)favorable attitude)

Validity can be established in a variety of ways

Face validity: Assessment of adequacy of content. Least powerful method

Content validity: How adequately does a variable sample the full range of behavior it is intended to measure?

Measure Validity

Measure validity1

Criterion-related validity: How adequately does a test score match some criterion score? Takes two forms

Concurrent validity: Does test score correlate highly with score from a measure with known validity?

Predictive validity: Does test predict behavior known to be associated with the behavior being measured?

Measure Validity

Measure validity2

Construct validity: Do the results of a test correlate with what is theoretically known about the construct being evaluated?

Convergent validity (subtype): measures of constructs that should be related to each other are

Discriminant validity (subtype): measures of constructs that should not be related are not

Measure Validity





  • Assume we have good evidence for this model of the world..

  • We now propose a new measure for Productivity

    • What would be evidence for convergent validity?

    • What would be evidence for discriminant validity?


Validation summary



Internal consistency










Validation - Summary


You should obtain a representative sample

The sample closely matches the characteristics of the population

A biased sample occurs when your sample characteristics don’t match population characteristics

Biased samples often produce misleading or inaccurate results

Usually stem from inadequate sampling procedures


  • Login