UNIT I

SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH: EXPERIMENTAL AND EX-POST FACTO RESEARCH

Experimental:

Experimental research differs from the other research approaches through its greater control over the
objects of its study. The researcher strives to isolate and control every relevant condition that determines the
events investigated, so as to observe the effects when the conditions are manipulated. Chemical experiments in
a laboratory represent one of the purest forms of this research type. At its simplest, an experiment involves
making a change in the value of one variable called the independent variable and observing the effect of that
change on another variable called the dependent variable (Cohen and Manion, 1994, p. 164). Thus, the most
important characteristic of the experimental approach is that it deals with the phenomenon of cause and effect.

However, the actual experiment is only a part of the research process. There are several planned stages
in experimental research. When the researcher has established that the study is amenable to experimental
methods, a prediction (technically called a hypothesis) of the likely cause and effect patterns of the phenomenon
has to be made. This allows decisions to be made as to what variables are to be tested and how they are to be
controlled and measured. This stage, called the design of the experiment, must also include the choice of
relevant types of test and methods of research and the research Problem 15 analysing the results of the
experiments (usually by statistical analysis). Pre-tests are then usually carried out to detect any problems in the
experimental procedure. Only after this is the experiment proper carried out. The procedures decided upon
must be rigorously adhered to and the observations meticulously recorded and checked. Following the
successful completion of the experiment, the important task the whole point of the research exercise is to
process and analyse the data and to formulate an interpretation of the experimental findings.

Not all experimental research has to, or even can, take place in a laboratory Not all experimental research has
to, or even can, take place in a laboratory. The experimental methods used must take account of how much it is
possible to control the variables. Writers of textbooks on research have classified experimental designs in
different ways. As an example, Campbell and Stanley (1966) make their categorization into four classes as
shown in Box 1.9, which can be regarded as a useful starting point for discussing their different characteristics.

Types/Classes of experiments

Pre-experimental designs are unreliable and primitive experimental methods in which assumptions are
made despite the lack of essential control of variables. An example of this is the supposition that, faced with the
same stimulus, all samples will behave identically to the one tested, despite possible differences between the
samples.

True experimental designs are those that rigorously check the identical nature of the groups before
testing the influence of a variable on a sample of them in controlled circumstances. Parallel tests are made on
identical samples (control samples) which are not subjected to the variable.

In quasi-experimental designs, not all of the conditions of true experimental design can be fulfilled. The
nature of the shortcomings is however recognized, and steps are taken to minimize them or predict a level of
reliability of the results. The most common case is when a group is tested for the influence of a variable and
compared with a non-identical group with known differences (control group) which has not been subjected to
the variable. Another, in the absence of a control group, is repeated testing over time of one group, with and
without the variable (i.e. the same group acts as its own control at different times).

Correlation design looks for cause and effect relationships between two sets of data, while ex post facto
designs turn experimentation into reverse, and attempt to interpret the nature of the cause of a phenomenon by
the observed effects. Both of these forms of research result in conclusions which are difficult to prove and they
rely heavily on logic and inference.

Ex-Post Facto

Ex post facto study or after-the-fact research is a category of research design in which the investigation
starts after the fact has occurred without interference from the researcher. Ex post facto research is ideal for
conducting social research when is not possible or acceptable to manipulate the characteristics of human
participants. It is a substitute for true experimental research and can be used to test hypotheses about cause-
and-effect or correlational relationships, where it is not practical or ethical to apply a true experimental, or even a
quasi-experimental, design.

Despite studying facts that have already occurred, ex post facto research shares with experimental research
design some of its basic logic of inquiry. For example, attempts are made to: explain a consequence based on
antecedent conditions; determine the influence of a variable on another variable, and test a claim using statistical
hypothesis testing techniques. Kerlinger and Rint (1986) explained that in the context of social science research an
ex post facto investigation seeks to reveal possible relationships by observing an existing condition or state of
affairs and searching back in time for plausible contributi ng factors.

Ex post facto research uses data already collected, but not necessarily amassed for research purposes. Ex
post facto literally means from what is done afterwards. Ex post facto research can be viewed as an experimental
research in reverse. Cohen, Manion, and Morison (2000) noted that instead of taking groups that are equivalent and
subjecting them to different treatments to determine differences in the dependent variables, an ex post facto
experiment begins with groups that are already different in some respect and searches in retrospect for factors that
brought about those differences. In this way, ex post facto research can transform a non-experimental research
design into a pseudo-experimental study. Ex post facto research, then, is a method of teasing out possible
antecedents of events that have happened but cannot, be manipulated by the investigator.

As an example, an ex post facto study could be conducted to determine, why one town in the mid-west has a
higher incident of cancer than its neighboring towns. If an investigation reveals that the majority of homes in this
town have wood-burning stoves and fireplaces, the investigator could hypothesize that exposure to wood smoke is
a factor in the increase incidence of cancer. By identifying possible causes retrospectively, the expert adopts an ex
post facto approach to test this hypothesis. The researcher is thus examining, retrospectively, the effects of a
naturally occurring event on a subsequent outcome with a view of establishing a causal or correlational link
between them.

For those considering an ex post facto design, keep in mind some of the limitations associated with ex post
facto research:

1. There is no random assignment to treatment so there could be inherent confounds in the variables
studied.

2. The sample cannot be considered random, so generalization is limited.

3. There is often little information about any dropouts from the treatment.

Some major advantages of conducting an ex post facto study are that the data are already collected,
obtaining permission to conduct the study is less involved than enrolling participants, and less time is involved in
conducting the study than by creating new data.

References

Kerlinger, F.N. (1986). Foundations of behavioral research (3rd. Ed.). Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart, and
Winston.

Kerlinger, F.N., & Rint, N. (1986) Foundations of Behaviour Research. London: Winston Inc.

Cohen, L ., Manion, L. & Morison, K. (2000). Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge Falmer.
 ETHICAL ISSUES IN PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH

Ethical standards: Researchers follow the standards identified in the APA Ethics Code to protect

the rights and welfare of research participants.

Institutional Review Boards: Before research can begin, an IRB reviews the ethics of a research project. (IRBs)

Risk/benefit ratio: Investigators may conduct a research project if the benefits are greater thanthe risks.

Minimal risk: Minimal risk means that the harm or discomfort in a research project is not greater than what
may be experienced in everyday life.

Confidentiality: Participants risk of social injury (e.g., personal information becoming public) is protected by
making their responses anonymous or confidential (i.e., by using no identifying information).

Informed consent: Before agreeing to participate in research, individuals learn about the nature of the research
task, any risks, and the ways in which their rights will be protected.

Privacy Research participants have the right to decide how their personal information is communicated to
others.

Deception Some projects may require investigators to withhold information or misinform participants about
aspects of the research.

Debriefing: After completing the study, researchers inform participants about the research, remove any harmful
effects or misconceptions, and explain any deception.

Use of Animals Researchers must treat animal subjects humanely and protect their welfare.

Publication credit: Individuals who have made significant contributions to a research project are identified as
authors when the findings are communicated.

Plagiarism: Plagiarism occurs when individuals present substantial elements of anothers work or ideas as their
own.

ETHICAL STANDARDS

The American Psychological Association (APA) developed its Ethics Code for individuals who conduct
research, teach, conduct therapy, or serve as administrators (American Psychological Association, 1992). 1 The
Ethics Code presents standards to guide ethical behavior. For example, Section 6.09 of the APA Ethics Code
describes how researchers must seek approval before beginning their research:

Psychologists obtain from host institutions or organizations appropriate approval prior to conducting
research, and they provide accurate information about their research proposals. They conduct the research
in accordance with the approved research protocol.

This standard inform researchers how to conduct their research in an ethical manner. In addition to the
standards for research procedures, the Ethics Code deals with issues such as sexual harassment, fees for
psychological services, test construction, classroom teaching, and expert witnesses.

Psychologists are expected to act ethically and to encourage others to act ethically. Psychology students
also need to make this commitment, and should become familiar with the Ethics Code and make every effort to
live up to its ideals and standards of behavior. The ethical standards in the APAs Ethics Code tend to be
general, and specific situational factors help determine how the standards are applied. Often, more than one
ethical standard can be applied to a research situation, and at times the ethical standards may even appear to
contradict one another. For example, ethical research requires that human participants be protected from
physical injury. However, even ethical research involving drugs or other treatments may potentially harm
participants. The Ethics Code also states that the welfare of animal subjects should be protected; however,
certain kinds of research involve inflicting pain or other suffering on an animal. Solving these ethical dilemmas
is not easy. Thus, researchers must become familiar with the ethical standards and consult with others to solve
ethical problems.

In some situations, it is a legal requirement that research plans be reviewed by a committee of persons
not involved in the research before the research can begin (review Section 6.09 above). The 1974 National
Research Act requires that institutions, such as colleges and hospitals, form committees to review research
sponsored by those institutions. Such committees, referred to as Institutional Review Boards (IRBs), review
psychological research in order to protect the rights and welfare of human participants (see Table 3.2). An IRB
has the authority to approve, disapprove, or require modifications in a research study. Once IRB approval is
obtained, the proposed research may begin.
 Similarly, in 1985, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Public Health Service formulated new
guidelines for the care of laboratory animals (Holden, 1987). Every institution doing research with animal
subjects is required to have an Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) to protect the welfare of
animal subjects. In addition to reviewing research procedures, IACUCs review how researchers maintain
appropriate animal living quarters and how researchers train personnel who work directly with the animals.

Nearly every college and university requires that all research conducted at the institution be reviewed by
an independent committee. Violation of federal regulations regarding the review of research can stop all research
at an institution, lead to the loss of federal funds, and result in large fines (Holden, 1987; Smith, 1977).
Therefore, any individual who wants to do research should consult with the proper authorities, prior to starting
research, about the appropriate procedure for institutional review.

PROBLEM AND HYPOTHESIS: ORIGIN, SOURCES AND CHARACTERISTICS

Problem: Generally, the topic for the study is commonly known as called problems. At the very beginning of the
research problem, a researcher must identify the problem he wants, to study. A research problem is one for
which a researcher wants to know out to find out the best the best solution of it.

Some guidelines for selecting a problem.

1. The problem should be such in which the researcher may be deeply interested.

2. The problem should be significant. The stray problem, if selected, becomes difficult to coordinated and
do not add to whole scale development of the theory.

3. The problem selected should not be necessarily a new one. It may be an old problem or one in which
work has already been alone, verification of an old problem may be equally useful.

4. The problem should be within manageable limits.

5. The problem should preferably possess some direct utility.

6. The problem that was made during the research problem are feasible,e in terms of money, as well as
time, and other resources available in one hand and in another hand such that it can be dealt with
existing technique.

Criteria of the good problem.

Kerlinger says a good problem is an interrogative sentence/statement that asks what relation exist between
two or more variable. Some of the criteria of a good problem are as follows.

1. It should express a relationship between two or more variable.

2. The problems should be ended and express clearly and unambiguously. Also, the problem should
always be expressed in the form of a direct question, because a question has the virtue of posting the
problem directly.

3. The problem should itself simply the possibility of empirical testing the relation between the variable.

4. It should be clearly stated.

5. The statement of the problem should be such to imply possibilities of empirical testing.

6. It should be new, interesting and feasible.

7. It should be economical and able to be conducted within a certain time.

Research objective.

The expected solution of the problem is the objective of a problem or a study. If the problem is stated in negative
sentences, then their counter statement i.e. the positive sentence is the objective of the study.

The general objectives of the research study may be:

- To understand the human behaviour and its interaction with nature.
- To acquire the new knowledge.
- To understand the social life.
- To try out tools of analysis.
There are two types of objectives of the research. They are
1. Broad objectives.
It is stated in one or more paragraphs outline the broad perspective of the study.It is the general statement
about the solution of the problem of research.
2. Specific objective.
The specific objective is stated to specify the specific observation to be made in the study.-They are stated in
number preferably in sequential order. Specific objective consists of a number of specific points of an
achievement which the research aim is to fulfill.

Hypothesis
A hypothesis is a tentative generalisation, the validity of which remains to be tested. In its elementary
stage, a hypothesis may become the basis for action or investigation.According to Goode and Hatt, a hypothesis
is a proposition which can be put to test for determining the validity.Kerlinger states hypothesis as a conjectural
statement of the relationship between two or more variables.A hypothesis is stated in declarative form and they
always relate either generally or especially variable.

Some example includes as below.

Topic-What is the relationship both poverty and Crime?
Hypothesis-Poverty and Crime are independent.
Topic-What is the cause of child labour in Nepal?
Hypothesis-Illiteracy and poverty are two major cause of child labour in Nepal.

Two basic criteria used in the statement of a good hypothesis are.

1. Statement about the relation between variable.

2. Statement carrying clear implication for testing of stated relations.

Hypothesis testing.

At first , a null hypothesis is stated. Then against this hypothesis, Alternative hypothesis are also stated.
The hypothesis must be so constructed that if one hypothesis is accepted, the other is rejected and as vice
verse.

1. Null hypothesis.

It is the statement about unknown valve of the parameter of a variable attribute in a population under
investigation or no differences in the values of the same parameter of the same variable in which population or
two sample. The parameter is the statical characteristics of the variable under investigation.Most commonly
used parameter are mean and standard deviation of the variable such as height, income, effect etc.

Suppose a new brand of sleeping tablet claims its effect as 7 hours sleeps.This claims is a null hypothesis and
stated as H0:mu=7 where mu is the mean effect of the tablet.

2. Alternative hypothesis.

It states that there is the significant difference between the two variable.Now suppose the null hypothesis is
rejected and then another hypothesis must be accepted which is called as the alternative hypothesis. If the
alternative hypothesis is stated without pointing to a definite direction of the differences, it is called two tails.If it
points only one direction it is called one tail.

The importance of hypothesis.

- The importance of the hypothesis is as listed as below points.
- It determines the method of verification as well as the procedure of enquiry.
- It adequately explains all the facts connected with the research.
- It helps in deciding the direction in which to proceed.
- It suggests experiments and observation.
- It leads to the discovery of lens.
- It helps to draw the specific conclusion.

Sources of a hypothesis (Sources of Research Problems as pawh ziah theih) .

1. General culture.

Culture has a great influence or the thinking process of people and hypothesis may be formed to test
one or more of the culture ideas.
2. Scientific theory.

A theory gives a basic idea of what has been found correct.The knowledge of theory leads us to form
culture generalisation. These generalisations form a part of a hypothesis. A hypothesis is formed from analogy
.Previously establishing knowledge can be used in a hypothesis. A similarity between the phenomenon is
observed at a circumstance of hypothesis then formed the test whether two phenomena are similar in other
circumstance as well.

3. Personal experience.

Personal experience is an important source of the hypothesis. We can formulate a hypothesis according to the
happening and changes are seen around us. Sometimes the fact are there but only a right individual see it in
the right perspective and formulate a hypothesis.

Characteristics of the hypothesis.

1. The most important condition for a valid hypothesis is that it should be empirically verified. A hypothesis ultimately
has to confirm or refuge, otherwise, it will remain more supposition I,e it must be capable empirically tested under the
condition of available technique.
2. The hypothesis should state the relationship between variable.
3. The hypothesis should be limited clear, definite and non-ambiguous.
4. The hypothesis should be stated as far as possible in most simple language so that someone easily understands by
all concern.
5. It is desirable that hypothesis is selected must be in continuation with the theory already involved I,e the
hypothesis selected should be related to the body of a theory.

Qualities of a workable hypothesis.

In order to be the workable hypothesis, it must have following qualities.

Specific

The hypothesis should not be too vague or general. A grand and general hypothesis may only serve as the
indicator of an area of study rather than serving as a hypothesis.

Conceptual clear.

The hypothesis should be properly expressed. Firstly the definition and terms used in the hypothesis should be
those which are commonly accepted terms and not researchers own creations.Secondarily if a new term has
term have to be used their definitions and meaning in terms of already existing concepts should be made clear.

Related to a body of a theory.

It is described to formulate the hypothesis that helps in furtherance of an already formulating then if a various
hypothesis is selected random that cannot be developed as a broader theory.

Related to available technique.

Since in most cases, a hypothesis formulated has to be tested. And verified it has to be stated in such a way
that it is easily tested or verified by an available technique.A hypothesis that cannot test by an available
technique is a useless hypothesis.

Capable of empirical test.

The hypothesis should be such one that it can be put to empirical test. It should not be the moral judgement
Empirical test is necessary to achieve the objectivity.

Simple.

The hypothesis should be simple and to the point.In forming a hypothesis neither more or less onerous causes
are to be assumed than are necessary to account for the phenomenon. The insight of the phenomenon is
essential for simplicity.

Reference.

1. Kerlinger, F.N. Foundation of Behavioural Research. New Delhi: Surjeet Publication, 2000.
2. Kothari, C.R. Research Methodology. India: Vishwa Prakashan, 1990.
3. Singh, M.L. and J.M Singh. Understanding Research Methodology. 1998.
4. Singh, Mrigendra Lal. Understanding Research Methodology. Nepal: National Book centre, 2013