1 / 19

Research Design in Clinical Psychology

Research Design in Clinical Psychology. Lecture 2 Reliability, Validity, and Artifact/Bias (Chapters 2-4 in Kazdin). Internal Validity. To what extent can the intervention, and not other factors, account for study results History Maturation Testing (Practice) Instrumentation

lita
Download Presentation

Research Design in Clinical Psychology

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. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Research Design in Clinical Psychology Lecture 2 Reliability, Validity, and Artifact/Bias (Chapters 2-4 in Kazdin)

  2. Internal Validity • To what extent can the intervention, and not other factors, account for study results • History • Maturation • Testing (Practice) • Instrumentation • Statistical Regression • Selection Bias • Attrition • these can occur across all groups or only to select groups • Diffusion/Imitation of treatment • Special treatment/reaction of controls

  3. External Validity • To what extent can the study results be generalized to other samples with different characteristics than the study sample

  4. External Validity: Examples 1 • Sample characteristics • Differences b/n study sample and other samples • Include age, gender, culture, education • Stimulus characteristics and settings • Extension across characteristics of the study • Includes setting, experimenter, materials/apparatus • Ecological validity? • Reactivity of experimental arrangements • Awareness of being in a study may affect behavior • Are responses relevant to those who are not in a study • Multiple-treatment interference • Subjects receives multiple interventions • Relevant to those who did not receive other interventions?

  5. External Validity: Examples 1 • Novelty • Is effect due to newness • Reactivity of assessment • Similar to experimental arrangements, but focuses on awareness of what the measures are tapping • Test sensitization • Does pre-testing or the test itself (in the case of post-test sensitization) alter subject experience and responses • Timing of Measurement • When assessments are given could alter results

  6. Parsimony • Least complex explanations first • Frequently, a threat to internal validity is most parsimonious • When considering limitations in both internal and external validity, however, parsimony suggests that “findings are the best statement of a relationship, unless there are clear reasons to think otherwise.

  7. Why internal validity precedes external validity • Can’t have ExtVal, without IntVal • It would be like asking, “gee can we generalize these results we have no confidence in to a wide variety of individuals?” • One can still have important findings that elucidate basic principles without much ExtVal. • A lack of generalization of a finding across samples may be very important and can span other research

  8. Construct Validity • What is the causal agent and conceptual basis underlying an effect (what is the intervention and why did it lead to change?) • In clinical research methods, CV is different from in test construction where CV is the extent that a measure captures a construct of interest.

  9. Threats to construct validity • Contact time • Placebo effects • Nonblind (single and double) designs • Single operations and narrow stimulus sampling • Is the effect due to the selected IV • Does other aspects of the intervention have an effect beyond the aspect identified by the experimenter • Expectancies • Cues and Demand characteristics • Others exist based on conceptual relevance

  10. Statistical Conclusion ValidityAKA Data Evaluation Validity • Refers to the facets of the quantitative evaluation that influence the conclusions reached about experimental conditions and effects (to what extent are “real” effects demonstrated and interpreted) • Does one understand the stats used • Has one done stats correctly

  11. Rejecting the Null Hypothesis I • Alpha = probability of rejecting the null when you shouldn’t (Type 1 error) • Saying groups are different when in reality are same • Beta = probability of accepting the null when you shouldn’t (Type 2 error) • Saying groups are same when in reality are different • Power = probability of correctly accepting or rejecting the null

  12. Rejecting the Null Hypothesis II • Standard deviation = variability around mean • sqrt [(each observation – mean)2 / (N -1)] • SS/df • Effect size = Beyond significance, it is the magnitude of difference b/n groups • Expressed in terms of SD units • ES = (M1 – M2) / SD

  13. Threats to statistical conclusion validity • Low power • Inability to detect real differences • Variability in the procedures • Subjects in same group get different treatment • Subject heterogeneity • Subjects in same group differ on potentially confounding variables • Unreliability of measures • Multiple comparisons/error rates • Experiment-wise error

  14. Experimental Precision • Controlling vs holding constant • Tradeoffs

  15. Sources of Artifacts and Bias

  16. Rationale, scripts, & procedures • Imprecision in carrying out procedures • Experimenter may not have clear a protocol • Loose protocol effect • Experimenter may ignore protocol • Strategies for overcoming include • developing a clear protocol • actually testing the protocol out ahead of time • Get feedback from participants • Train experimenters together • Document all deviations

  17. Experimenter Expectancy • Experimenters’ knowledge of study hypotheses may bias study implementation • Strategies for overcoming include • Keep experimenters naïve to purpose • Double blind procedures for group assignment • Success of these strategies can be empirically reviewed

  18. Sample selection • Convenience samples and Volunteers • Do these sample differ in ways that affect the results or their generalizability • May select certain types of convenience or volunteer samples to answer particular questions • Attrition • Difference in # of dropouts across groups could have huge effect on results • Reminders and Commitment tactics (backloading $$$) • Select those unlikely to drop-out? • Plan ahead from past research

  19. Other sources • Experimenter characteristics • Situational and context cues • Demand characteristics – clues on how to respond • Subject roles (pg 95 in book) • Data recording and analysis

More Related