# CHFD 5110 Exam 1

The flashcards below were created by user jacquiroxx on FreezingBlue Flashcards.

1. Theoretical
• Concerned with developing, exploring, or testing theories
• Needed to tie our ideas to a bigger body of research
2. Empirical
Based on direct observations and measurements of reality
3. Probabilistic
Inferences based on probabilities
4. Probability
Chance of something happening
5. Causal
Interested in what leads to what (cause & effect)
6. Descriptive Study
• Designed to document what's going on or what exists
• What is the opinion/attitude of a group of people?
• Ex: What are the traits of a happy marriage?
7. Relational Study
• Looks at the relationships between one or two variables
• How is the person's opinion/attitude related to other factors?
• Ex: gender and voting preferences
8. Causal Study
• What factors affect ("cause") their opinions?
• Ex: How do you find out if x drug works?
9. Cross-Sectional Research
• Takes place at a single point in time
• Pro's: Fast, less expensive, less dropouts
• Con's: Not comparing apples to apples
10. Longitudinal Research
• A study that takes place over time
• Measurement occurs on at least 2 separate occasions
• Pro's: Comparing the same ppl
• Con's: Takes long, more expensive, people can drop out
• Ex: Keep track of the same ppl over time to see how their marriage goes
11. Variable
• Any observation that can take different values
• Ex: Sex/gender, Height
• Something in the population that you want to study
12. Attribute
• A specific value on the variable
• Ex: If the variable is gender, the attribute is male or female
13. Correlation does not equal _________
Causation
14. Independent Variable
• Leads to or causes something else
• Ex: Gender (leading to the cause of the views of the president)
15. Dependent Variable
• Is affected by other variable(s)
• Ex: Views on the president (affected by gender)
16. No Relationship
• Ex: Your lifeline and GPA
17. Positive Relationship
• As one goes up, the other does too
18. Negative Relationship
• As one goes down, the other goes up
• Ex: Paranoia level & self-esteem
19. Curvilinear Relationship
• Ex: Time spent with your partner & marital satisfaction
20. Hypothesis
A specific statement of prediction
21. Null Versus Alternative
• The alternative is the one you want to support
• Don't prove your hypothesis, just disprove the opposite
22. One-Tailed Hypothesis
• If you discredit the left side, you prove the right side
23. Two-Tailed Hypothesis
• Don't know what it will do, so you test both sides
• Any change against no change
24. Quantitative Data
Anything you can put a number on
25. Qualitative Data
Anything else (besides what you can put a number on)
26. Deductive Thinking
• Works to confirm to disconfirm a theory**
• Helps to provide assumptions
• Gives us a guide
• Helps us talk about it
• Theory -> Hypothesis -> Observation -> Confirmation
• Ex: Drug trials, Are they keeping off the weight they lost?
27. Inductive Thinking
• The idea is to create a theory
• Building understanding**
• Observation -> Pattern -> Tentative Hypothesis -> Theory
• Ex: What's it like to...? What are the effects of...?
28. Research Fallacy
An error in reasoning, usually based on mistaken assumptions
29. Ecological Fallacy
• Mistaken conclusion about an individual based on an analysis of a group
• Ex: All babies start to walk between 9-12 months and if mine doesn't it's a huge problem
30. Exception Fallacy
• Reaching a group conclusion on the basic of exceptional cases (ie- racism)
• "I see ___ happen, so everyone that's like that does this"
• Ex: My child walked before they crawled, so all children should walk before they crawl
• Another Ex: That woman is a bad driver, so all women are bad drivers
31. Validity of Research
• The gap between Truth and truth
• Conclustions reached about the quality of different parts of the research methodology
32. External Validity
• The degree to which the conclusions in your study would hold for other persons in other places and at other times
• Can you generalize the results? Who does this apply to?
• Threats: People, places, time
• Problem: By the time you get to the sample, it's not very random
• Two approaches: Sampling model & Proximal similarity model
33. Construct Validity
• Take a big idea and make it measureable
• Ex: Do a questionnaire to measure trust v. mistrust
34. Conclusion Validity
• Is there a relationship between the 2 variables?
• Ex: Is there a relationship between using the workbook and course knowledge?
35. Internal Validity
• Assuming there's a relationship, is it a causal one?
• Just because there's a relationship doesn't mean it's a causal one
36. Voluntary Participation
Not forced to participate
37. Informed Consent
The know exactly what's going to happen (risks & benefits) before participation
38. Confidentiality
• The researcher can identify the participants but isn't going to share
• Most studies are confidential (as opposed to anonymous)
39. Anonymity
The researcher cannot identify the participants and cannot link their response back to them
40. Right to Service
• Have to provide service if something is working/not working
• Ex: Find that one group is doing really well with this treatment, so you have to give it to the other group too
41. Institutional Review Board (IRB)
Makes sure you're being respectful and honouring peoples' rights
42. Yellow Fever Experiments
• Consent form makrs a point of change
• Indicates that ethical concern goes hand-in-hand with research on humans
43. Nuremberg Code
• A guide, not a law
• Increased protection of human subjects
• Voluntary, informed consent
• Animals must be tested before humans
• Only scientific professionals can conduct research
• Subject can withdraw at any time
• Researchers should be prepared to stop at any time
44. IRB Criterion
• Risks reasonable in relation to benefits
• Risks kept at the minimum necessary
• Equitable selection
• Informed consent
• Privacy & confidentiality
• Continuous monitoring of data
45. Sampling Model for External Validity
Model for generalizing in which you identify your population, draw a fair sample, conduct your research, and then generalize your population to other groups
46. Proximal Similarity Model for External Validity
Model for generalizing from your study to another context based on the degree to which the other context is similar to yours
47. Population
The group to whom you wish to generalize
48. Theoretical Population
• Who do you want to generalize to?
• Not always easy to get
• Ex: People who live in Athens
49. Accessible Population
• Ex: You don't have access to every single person who lives in Athens, but you do have access to the people in the census, those who are registered at the DMV, etc.
50. Sampling Frame
The listing of accessible people in your population
51. The Sample
52. Statistic
• The results of the study
• Ex: The average self-esteem of so-and-so-group is 3.72
53. Parameter
• What the number actually is in the population
• Ex: Study says the average self-esteem is 3.72 but it's actually 3.91
• Usually theoretical unless it's a very narrow population
• Calculated based on probability theory
54. Sampling Distribution
• How you get from a sample statistic to an estimate of the population parameter
• The distribution of an infinite number of samples of the same size as the sample of your study
55. Probability Sampling
• Utilizes some form of random selection
• All units in the population have an equal probability of being chosen
56. Simple Random Sampling
• Probability sampling
• Everyone has an equal chance of being chosen
• Use a table of random numbers generated by computer
• Use anytime*
• Pros: Easy to do, Easy to explain*
• Cons: Requires a sample list from which to select, Generalizable, but may not be representative of subgroups (could leave someone out in your sample)*
57. Stratified Random Sampling
• Probability sampling
• Divide your population into subgroups that are homogenous and then use a simple random sample for each subgroup
• Use: When concerned ab. underrepresenting smaller groups*
• Pros: Allows you to oversample minority groups to assure enough for subgroup analyses*
• Cons: Requires a sample list from which to select, Doesn't generalize as well as simple random sampling*
58. Systematic Random Sampling
• Probability sampling
• If you have a list of 100 people and want 20, you roll a dice and roll a 2. You start with the second person and then every 5th person down*
• Pros: Don't have to cont thru all the elements in the list to find the ones randomly selected*
• Cons: If the order of elements is nonrandom, could be systematic bias*
59. Cluster Random Sampling
• Do a simple random sample of clusters & then randomly select clusters. You need to measure everyone within a sampled cluster
• Usually geographical, but doesn't have to be*
• Pros: More efficient when surveying a geographical area*
• Cons: Usually not used alone*
60. Multistage Sampling
• Probability sampling
• Combine any of the sampling techniques to create a more efficient or more effective sample than the use of any one sampling type can achieve on its own
• Use: Anytime*
• Pros: Combines sophistication with efficiency*
• Cons: Can be complex and hard to explain*
61. Nonprobability Sampling
• Doesn't involve random selection
• May be representative but can't depend on the rationale of probability theory
• Used when it's not feasible, practical, or theoretically sensible to do random sampling (don't want to randomly select a person who doesn't apply)
62. Accidental, Haphazard, or Convenience Sampling
• Nonprobability sampling
• One of the most common methods of sampling
• "Man on the street"
• Volunteers or subjects who are "conveniently" available" (like college students)
• Use: Anytime*
• Pros: Very easy*
• Cons: Very hard to generalize, Likely to be biased*
63. Purposive Sampling
• Nonprobability sampling
• Sampling with a "purpose" in mind
• Useful in reaching a targeted sample quickly
• Target population is reached with over-representation of subgroups that are more readily accessible
64. Modal Instance
• Nonprobability sampling - Purposive
• Sampling the most frequent or typical case
• Difficult to determine what a "typical case" is
• Useful for informal sampling contexts
• Use: When you only want to measure a typical respondent*
• Pros: Easily understood*
• Cons: Generalizeable
65. Expert Sampling
• Nonprobability sampling - Purposive
• Assembling of a sample of persons with known or demonstrable expertise in some area
• "Panel of experts"
• May be useful for providing evidence as to the validity of another sampling approach you have chosen
• Use: With other sampling strategies*
• Pros: Experts opinions support research conclusions*
• Cons: Likely to be biased, Limited external validity
66. Quota Sampling
• Nonprobability sampling - Purposive
• Sample selected nonrandomly according to some fixed quota
• Proportional quota sampling used to represent the major characteristics of the population of interest by sampling a proportional amount of each
• Nonproportional quota sampling used to supply a minimum number of units in each category but not concerned with proportions
• Use: When you want to represent subgroups*
• Pros: Broader sample, Will match what you want it to, There will never be outliers*
• Cons: You could potentially not get the ppl you're looking for, Limits your range (could be missing info that could be valuable), Allows you to be biased*
67. Heterogeneity
• Nonprobability sampling - Purposive
• Used to provide a sample that will include "all" the views or opinions without regard to proportional representation
• Use: Sampling for diversity*
• Pros: Easy to use and explain, Better when you're interested in samily for variety*
• Cons: Won't represent population views proportionately*
68. Snowball Sampling
• Ppl meeting the criteria for inclusion in the sample are identified and then they recommend others they know who meet the criteria
• Use: With hard-to-reach populations*
• Pros: Can be used when there is no sampling frame*
• Cons: Low external validity*
 Author: jacquiroxx ID: 64789 Card Set: CHFD 5110 Exam 1 Updated: 2011-02-08 01:17:36 Tags: Research Folders: Description: CHFD 5110 Exam 1 Show Answers: