0% found this document useful (0 votes)
4 views29 pages

Web vs. Lab: Research Method Comparison

Uploaded by

s12.abdelmajeed
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
0% found this document useful (0 votes)
4 views29 pages

Web vs. Lab: Research Method Comparison

Uploaded by

s12.abdelmajeed
Copyright
© All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Web vs.

Lab

John H. Krantz
Hanover College
Approach

 Not focus on technology


 Focus on the research question
 What is best way to answer question
Approach
 Web is a tool
 to use in determining best way to ask question
 Much as field experiments have become a
tool:
 e.g. Milgram, S. , Bickman, L., & Berkowitz, L.
(1969). Note on the drawing power of crowds of
different sizes. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 13(2), 79-82.
 While this example is trivia it shows an example of
a study not possible in the laboratory
Approach

 What this implies:


 For some questions web is a superior method to
lab
 May depend on your situation as we all use what
we have available
Characteristics of Web vs.
Lab
 Web  Lab
 Distributed  Confined
 User or remotely  Experimenter controlled
controlled environment environment or at least
and location and some determinable
factors are unknowable  Accidental sampling
 Accidental sampling of generally but random
large population sampling of restricted
 Potentially anonymous population is possible
 Requires computer
 Experimenter is known to
be present or near
 May not have computer
Characteristics of Web vs.
Lab
 Similarities
 A certain act of belief is needed to accept self-
report responses
 Cannot control state and previous state or events
of participant
 This is an issue in control
 Random assignment is possible
Reasons for Use – Musch & Reips
(2000)
 In descending order (7 very important – 1 not
important)
 Large N 5.5
 High statistical power 4.5
 Speed data collection/participants
from other countries 3.6
 External validity 3.4
 Low cost 3.2
Reasons for Use

 Possible responses not possible on paper


 Dynamic and interactive (but any computer would
do)
 Access to special populations
 More precise replication
 Reduction of experimenter effects
 Comparability to local sample
 New set of variables to study
Reasons for Concern

 Ethical issues
 Informed consent/debriefing
 Data security
 Data validity
 Subject falsification/collaboration
 Loss of experimental control
 Equipment/environment Variation
Reasons for Concern

 Computers are necessary


 Lack of ability to clarify instructions and
informed consent
 New class of variables that may impact
responses
 Does this last one sound familiar?
Importance of Problems
Faced
 Musch & Reips (2000)
 In descending order
 Lack of control of behavior 3.6
 Lack of control of motivation 3.4
 Inability to ask questions 3.3
 No control over hardware 2.9
 Nonrepresentative sample 2.8
 Ethical problems 1.5
Issues regarding the sample

 Web is stated to be not representative


 Questions
 How many labs have representative sample?
 Do we know what person variables are significant
or do we control out of the assumption of a
possible effect?
 The greater diversity of samples (Krantz & Dalal,
2000 and “College Sophomores”) may allow this
to become a research question instead of
assumption
The Web Study In Context

 Relevant Dimensions
 Methodological Issues
 Subject-Related Issues
 Ethical Issues
 A Decision Guide
Relevant Dimensions –
Method
 Statistical Power
 Refers to noisy data
 Not in all cases will noise be better on Web
 Ruppertsberg et al (2000).
 Web, n = 151, s = 12.5, SE = 1.02
 Control, n = 14, s = 7.4, SE = 1.9
 Effect Size or Robustness of the Effect
 Basically is it easy to obtain the result
Relevant Dimensions –
Method
 Sample Bias
 Is the effect sensitive to the characteristics of the
sample?
 External Validity
 Does this effect or relationship happen outside of
laboratory
 Does this effect or relationship happen away from
a computer
Relevant Dimensions –
Method
 Need for Control
 Stimulus
 Problematic Dimensions
 Color
 Luminance
 Temporal
 If can keep on one page

 Relative spatial dimensions are fine


Example Study: Column
Taper
 Description:
 Doric columns appear to lean when vertical
 Apparently due to taper of column width
 Method
 Three columns. Adjust so out two same position
as inner (vertical or horizontal)
 Validation
 Results
Manipulation Validation
6
y = 0.99x
5

4
Measured Angle

0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Target Angle
Vertical Results 250
Tilt at Perceived Vertical (arcmin)

200

150
y = 386.88x - 3.36
r2 = 0.87
100
Web Vert
50
Lab Vert
0 Linear (Web Vert)
-0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 Linear (Lab Vert)
-50

-100 y = 325.75x - 11.72


r2 = 0.99
-150

-200
Log Column Proportion
Relevant Dimensions –
Method
 Need for Control
 Measurement
 Need will be sensitive to type of measurement
 Think of all question order effects
 Now type of response objects
 Environment
 Effect of Web Known
 Has the method been examined on Web
 Time for data collection
 Response time for results
Relevant Dimensions –
Subject
 Special Populations
 Ethnic groups
 Age
 Education
 Other targeted populations (Buchanan, 2000)
 Self-Monitoring: found groups predicted high and low on
scale to validate response
Relevant Dimensions –
Subject
 Interaction with Subjects
 Need for Clarification
 As part of research design
 Demand Characteristics
 Web removes us, but our design might still
provide some hints
Relevant Dimensions – Ethics

 Sensitivity of Ethical Issues


 Deception
 Potential for harm
 Effects of Fraud by Participants on Data
 Faking responses
 Participant Collaboration
A Decision Guide - Method
Sensitivity of Study to/Need:

Low High

Statistical Power Either Web


Effect Size Depends1 Either
Sample bias Either Usually Lab2
Ecological Either Depends3
Validity
Decision Guide – Method

Low High

Control Either Lab

Known Valid on Lab at least as Web


Web check
Time for Data Web Either
Decision Guide – Subject
Low High
Special Either Web, in most
Populations cases
Subjects from Either Web
other countries
Interaction with Either Lab
subjects
Demand Either Web
Possibility
Decision Guide – Ethics

Low High

Sensitivity to Either Lab


Ethics
Effects of Fraud Either Lab
Factors not Included in Decision
Guide
 Did not include ease or cost
 Also not important factor in early researchers,
Musch & Reips, 2000
 These factors should not drive design criteria.
Conclusions

 Web and lab distinct environments


 Each method has strengths
 Match method to research question
 Still useful to examine methods
 Study locally as well as globally
 Differences do not necessarily imply web is less
valid than lab
 Differences could be meaningful
 Differences could imply problem in lab envirnment

You might also like