Psychology, asked by komaldhasal, 1 year ago

discuss the advantages and disadvantages of quasi experimental design

Answers

Answered by RDEEP90
3

Benefits and Advantages:

Quasi-experimental research may be more feasible because it often does not have the time and logistical constraints associated with many true experimental designs.

True experimental designs are sometimes impractical or impossible because the research can only effectively be carried out in natural settings. Experimental research can create artificial situations that do not always represent real-life situations. This is largely due to fact that all other variables are tightly controlled which may not create a fully realistic situation. For this reason, external validity is increased quasi-experimental research.

Reactions of test subjects are more likely to be genuine because it not an artificial research environment.

It can be very useful in identifying general trends from the results, especially in social science disciplines.

It reduces the difficulty and ethical concerns that may surround the pre-selection and random assignment of test subjects. For example, if examining the effects of cigarette smoking by pregnant women on the fetus, it would be unethical to randomly assign pregnant women to groups.

Matching procedures may be used to help create a reasonable control group, making generalization more feasible. For example, if one group of migraine suffers received a new treatment and a second group did not receive the treatment, the difference in the pain levels may be attributed to the treatment if the control group is an appropriate comparison group.

The results generated can often be used to reinforce the findings of case studies by conducting research that may lend itself to statistical analysis.

Quasi-experimental approaches may reduce the time and resources required because extensive pre-screenin

mark me please


RDEEP90: mark me komal
RDEEP90: hello komal
RDEEP90: thanks
RDEEP90: komal
Answered by phenomenal143
3

Advantages - Since quasi-experimental designs are used when randomization is impractical and/or unethical, they are typically easier to set up than true experimental designs, which require[9] random assignment of subjects. Additionally, utilizing quasi-experimental designs minimizes threats to ecological validity as natural environments do not suffer the same problems of artificiality as compared to a well-controlled laboratory setting.[10] Since quasi-experiments are natural experiments, findings in one may be applied to other subjects and settings, allowing for some generalizations to be made about population. Also, this experimentation method is efficient in longitudinal research that involves longer time periods which can be followed up in different environments.

Disadvantages - Quasi-experimental estimates of impact are subject to contamination by confounding variables.[1] In the example above, a variation in the children's response to spanking is plausibly influenced by factors that cannot be easily measured and controlled, for example the child's intrinsic wildness or the parent's irritability. The lack of random assignment in the quasi-experimental design method may allow studies to be more feasible, but this also poses many challenges for the investigator in terms of internal validity. This deficiency in randomization makes it harder to rule out confounding variables and introduces new threats to internal validity.[11] Because randomization is absent, some knowledge about the data can be approximated, but conclusions of causal relationships are difficult to determine due to a variety of extraneous and confounding variables that exist in a social environment.

Similar questions