Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The Solomon four-group design is a research method developed by Richard Solomon in 1949. [1] It is sometimes used in social science , psychology and medicine. It can be used if there are concerns that the treatment might be sensitized by the pre-test . [ 2 ]
In the design of experiments, a between-group design is an experiment that has two or more groups of subjects each being tested by a different testing factor simultaneously. This design is usually used in place of, or in some cases in conjunction with, the within-subject design , which applies the same variations of conditions to each subject ...
The use of a sequence of experiments, where the design of each may depend on the results of previous experiments, including the possible decision to stop experimenting, is within the scope of sequential analysis, a field that was pioneered [12] by Abraham Wald in the context of sequential tests of statistical hypotheses. [13]
In statistics, econometrics, political science, epidemiology, and related disciplines, a regression discontinuity design (RDD) is a quasi-experimental pretest–posttest design that aims to determine the causal effects of interventions by assigning a cutoff or threshold above or below which an intervention is assigned.
Huck, S. W. & McLean, R. A. (1975). "Using a repeated measures ANOVA to analyze the data from a pretest-posttest design: A potentially confusing task". Psychological Bulletin, 82, 511–518. Pollatsek, A. & Well, A. D. (1995). "On the use of counterbalanced designs in cognitive research: A suggestion for a better and more powerful analysis".
One way to minimize the influence of artifacts is to use a pretest-posttest control group design. Within this design, "groups of people who are initially equivalent (at the pretest phase) are randomly assigned to receive the experimental treatment or a control condition and then assessed again after this differential experience (posttest phase ...
In clinical practice, post-test probabilities are often just estimated or even guessed. This is usually acceptable in the finding of a pathognomonic sign or symptom, in which case it is almost certain that the target condition is present; or in the absence of finding a sine qua non sign or symptom, in which case it is almost certain that the target condition is absent.
Intervention studies where a group with low scores in the construct is tested, taught the construct, and then re-measured can demonstrate a test's construct validity. If there is a significant difference pre-test and post-test, which are analyzed by statistical tests, then this may demonstrate good construct validity. [23]