Homework Help is Here – Start Your Trial Now!
Social Science
Psychology
Using the images attached of a study, answer the following question: 1.What was the independent variable(s) in this study? Explain how you know.

Using the images attached of a study, answer the following question: 1.What was the independent variable(s) in this study? Explain how you know.

Ciccarelli: Psychology_5 (5th Edition)
Ciccarelli: Psychology_5 (5th Edition)
5th Edition
ISBN:9780134477961
Author:Saundra K. Ciccarelli, J. Noland White
Publisher:Saundra K. Ciccarelli, J. Noland White
Chapter1: The Science Of Psychology
Section: Chapter Questions
Problem 1TY
See similar textbooks
icon
Related questions
Question
100%

Using the images attached of a study, answer the following question:

1.What was the independent variable(s) in this study? Explain how you know.

Student evaluations of courses and instructors are commonplace at American universities. These evalu- ations are an important source of information for in- structors seeking to improve their teaching methods, for academic departments that wish to evaluate instruc- tors' teaching effectiveness, and for students making decisions about enrolling in a course. The influence of student evaluations raises one obvious question: Are they a reliable and valid source of information about course quality and instructor effectiveness? Compared to other proposed rating systems (e.g., peer review), student evaluations might have supe- rior reliability and external validity (Cashin, 1995). Nevertheless, evaluations can be systematically biased by a number of factors. We delineate these into two main sources of influence, internal and external factors. Much of the interest in the reliability and validity of student evaluations has centered on internal factors, factors that are more or less inherent to a course. For example, prior work has found that student evalua- tions are related to grading leniency (Greenwald & Gilmore, 1997) and the gender of the instructor (Ba- sow & Silberg, 1987). Other internal factors might include the relative difficulty of the course, the avail- ability of course materials, the presentation of course materials, and so on. Because internal factors appear to be inextricably linked to an individual course, it is quite difficult to standardize them across courses. It is also possible that external factors, factors that are entirely independent of the course, also influence student evaluations. Such factors are particular to the evaluation context and could include the timing, for- mat, and distribution of the evaluations, to name a few. Although the influence of external factors might seem intuitive (e.g., many instructors would not want to be evaluated after passing back an exam where students performed poorly), there is little experimental evidence about their effects. This lack of evidence is somewhat surprising, because, compared to internal factors, ex- ternal ones are far easier to control and manipulate. In this study, we address the effects of a single but potentially widespread external influence on students' evaluations: whether students are offered candy before completing their evaluations. We selected this exter- nal factor because it is both easily manipulated and because, based on an informal polling of colleagues, it is a fairly common practice when collecting eval- uations. In an attempt to control for potentially in- fluential internal factors, this study included students who were enrolled in the same lecture section of a course, but who attended separate discussion sections. These sections met weekly on the same day and were led by the same teaching assistant. We also attempted to control for confounding external variables: Each discussion section had a maximum enrollment of 20 students, each section met on Friday mornings, all stu- dents received the same amount of time to complete their evaluations, and the same experimenter adminis- tered all evaluations. The experimental manipulation involved offering students in half of the discussion sec- tions a piece of chocolate prior to completing their evaluations. The students in the other sections were not offered chocolate. If this positive external event affects students' evaluations, then students who are
Transcribed Image Text:Student evaluations of courses and instructors are commonplace at American universities. These evalu- ations are an important source of information for in- structors seeking to improve their teaching methods, for academic departments that wish to evaluate instruc- tors' teaching effectiveness, and for students making decisions about enrolling in a course. The influence of student evaluations raises one obvious question: Are they a reliable and valid source of information about course quality and instructor effectiveness? Compared to other proposed rating systems (e.g., peer review), student evaluations might have supe- rior reliability and external validity (Cashin, 1995). Nevertheless, evaluations can be systematically biased by a number of factors. We delineate these into two main sources of influence, internal and external factors. Much of the interest in the reliability and validity of student evaluations has centered on internal factors, factors that are more or less inherent to a course. For example, prior work has found that student evalua- tions are related to grading leniency (Greenwald & Gilmore, 1997) and the gender of the instructor (Ba- sow & Silberg, 1987). Other internal factors might include the relative difficulty of the course, the avail- ability of course materials, the presentation of course materials, and so on. Because internal factors appear to be inextricably linked to an individual course, it is quite difficult to standardize them across courses. It is also possible that external factors, factors that are entirely independent of the course, also influence student evaluations. Such factors are particular to the evaluation context and could include the timing, for- mat, and distribution of the evaluations, to name a few. Although the influence of external factors might seem intuitive (e.g., many instructors would not want to be evaluated after passing back an exam where students performed poorly), there is little experimental evidence about their effects. This lack of evidence is somewhat surprising, because, compared to internal factors, ex- ternal ones are far easier to control and manipulate. In this study, we address the effects of a single but potentially widespread external influence on students' evaluations: whether students are offered candy before completing their evaluations. We selected this exter- nal factor because it is both easily manipulated and because, based on an informal polling of colleagues, it is a fairly common practice when collecting eval- uations. In an attempt to control for potentially in- fluential internal factors, this study included students who were enrolled in the same lecture section of a course, but who attended separate discussion sections. These sections met weekly on the same day and were led by the same teaching assistant. We also attempted to control for confounding external variables: Each discussion section had a maximum enrollment of 20 students, each section met on Friday mornings, all stu- dents received the same amount of time to complete their evaluations, and the same experimenter adminis- tered all evaluations. The experimental manipulation involved offering students in half of the discussion sec- tions a piece of chocolate prior to completing their evaluations. The students in the other sections were not offered chocolate. If this positive external event affects students' evaluations, then students who are
offered chocolate might rate the course and its instruc- tor more favorably. Method Participants The participants were 98 undergraduates from the University of Illinois at Chicago from three different classes, two statistics classes (n = 34 and 29) and one research methods class (n = 35). The same instructor taught all three classes. Each class required students to enroll in one of two Friday discussion sections of approximately equal size. The same teaching assistant led sections for each class (with different teaching as- sistants serving each of the three classes). Procedure During the ninth week of instruction, all partici- pants completed an informal midsemester evaluation about the lecture section of their course (the discussion sections were not evaluated at this time). An experi- menter who was not involved with the course adminis- tered the evaluations at the beginning of class. Students required approximately 10 min to complete evalua- tions. All students received the same nine-question form (see Table 1). For each question, the student provided a rating from 1 (very poor) to 5 (excellent). The questions pertained to various dimensions of the course and instructor and were adapted from questions appearing in the standard end-of-semester evaluation form used by the University of Illinois at Chicago. The experimental manipulation involved the treat- ment of students prior to their completion of the eval- uation forms. In half of the sections, students had the opportunity to take a small bar of chocolate from a bag passed around by the experimenter before the evalu- ations began. Importantly, the experimenter told par- ticipants in these sections that he had chocolate left from another function that he "just wanted to get rid of' and that the students were welcome to take a piece. The fact that the chocolate was the property of the ex- perimenter was emphasized so participants would not misattribute the chocolate as a gift from their instruc- tor or teaching assistant. Across the three courses, we randomly assigned which discussion section (the first or second of the day) would be in the chocolate or control conditions. Results The results were analyzed in a 2 (condition: chocolate vs. control) x 3 (class: statistics 1 vs. statistics 2 vs. research methods) × 9 (evaluation form question: 1 to 9) ANOVA, with condition and class as between-subject variables and evaluation form question as a within-subjects variable. This analysis revealed a main effect of class, F(2, 92) 5.60, p < .05; a main effect of question, F(8, 92) 16.02, p < .05; and an interaction between class and question, F(2, 92) = 2.19, p <.05. These effects are tangential to the main question of this study and are not discussed further. The question of main interest is whether the participants offered chocolate before =
Transcribed Image Text:offered chocolate might rate the course and its instruc- tor more favorably. Method Participants The participants were 98 undergraduates from the University of Illinois at Chicago from three different classes, two statistics classes (n = 34 and 29) and one research methods class (n = 35). The same instructor taught all three classes. Each class required students to enroll in one of two Friday discussion sections of approximately equal size. The same teaching assistant led sections for each class (with different teaching as- sistants serving each of the three classes). Procedure During the ninth week of instruction, all partici- pants completed an informal midsemester evaluation about the lecture section of their course (the discussion sections were not evaluated at this time). An experi- menter who was not involved with the course adminis- tered the evaluations at the beginning of class. Students required approximately 10 min to complete evalua- tions. All students received the same nine-question form (see Table 1). For each question, the student provided a rating from 1 (very poor) to 5 (excellent). The questions pertained to various dimensions of the course and instructor and were adapted from questions appearing in the standard end-of-semester evaluation form used by the University of Illinois at Chicago. The experimental manipulation involved the treat- ment of students prior to their completion of the eval- uation forms. In half of the sections, students had the opportunity to take a small bar of chocolate from a bag passed around by the experimenter before the evalu- ations began. Importantly, the experimenter told par- ticipants in these sections that he had chocolate left from another function that he "just wanted to get rid of' and that the students were welcome to take a piece. The fact that the chocolate was the property of the ex- perimenter was emphasized so participants would not misattribute the chocolate as a gift from their instruc- tor or teaching assistant. Across the three courses, we randomly assigned which discussion section (the first or second of the day) would be in the chocolate or control conditions. Results The results were analyzed in a 2 (condition: chocolate vs. control) x 3 (class: statistics 1 vs. statistics 2 vs. research methods) × 9 (evaluation form question: 1 to 9) ANOVA, with condition and class as between-subject variables and evaluation form question as a within-subjects variable. This analysis revealed a main effect of class, F(2, 92) 5.60, p < .05; a main effect of question, F(8, 92) 16.02, p < .05; and an interaction between class and question, F(2, 92) = 2.19, p <.05. These effects are tangential to the main question of this study and are not discussed further. The question of main interest is whether the participants offered chocolate before =
Expert Solution
trending now

Trending now

This is a popular solution!

steps

Step by step

Solved in 3 steps

SEE SOLUTIONCheck out a sample Q&A here
Blurred answer
Recommended textbooks for you
Ciccarelli: Psychology_5 (5th Edition)
Ciccarelli: Psychology_5 (5th Edition)
Psychology
ISBN:
9780134477961
Author:
Saundra K. Ciccarelli, J. Noland White
Publisher:
PEARSON
Cognitive Psychology
Cognitive Psychology
Psychology
ISBN:
9781337408271
Author:
Goldstein, E. Bruce.
Publisher:
Cengage Learning,
Introduction to Psychology: Gateways to Mind and …
Introduction to Psychology: Gateways to Mind and …
Psychology
ISBN:
9781337565691
Author:
Dennis Coon, John O. Mitterer, Tanya S. Martini
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Psychology in Your Life (Second Edition)
Psychology in Your Life (Second Edition)
Psychology
ISBN:
9780393265156
Author:
Sarah Grison, Michael Gazzaniga
Publisher:
W. W. Norton & Company
Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Research a…
Cognitive Psychology: Connecting Mind, Research a…
Psychology
ISBN:
9781285763880
Author:
E. Bruce Goldstein
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Theories of Personality (MindTap Course List)
Theories of Personality (MindTap Course List)
Psychology
ISBN:
9781305652958
Author:
Duane P. Schultz, Sydney Ellen Schultz
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
SEE MORE TEXTBOOKS