nursingstudyhelp.com logo

Our Services

Get 15% Discount on your First Order

Assignment #7 – Identify the Possible Threat to Internal Validity Using “MR SMITH ID” 5 Points Possible (Spring –

Assignment #7 – Identify the Possible Threat to Internal Validity Using “MR SMITH ID”

5 Points Possible
(Spring – 2023)

Instructions: Below is a description of a study that focuses on teaching children to avoid being abducted. Read over the study description in Part One. In Part Two, read over some additional information about the study and determine which MR SMITH ID threat is present (Hint: There is one validity threat present in each question and one where these is no threat at all!).

PART ONE: Study Description

Research has shown that child abduction is a major problem in our society, the vast majority of young children are susceptible, and that abductions may be prevented by teaching children to resist enticements. The goal in this study was to teach children, upon being enticed by stranger, to say “No, I have to go ask my teacher” and then to quickly run away. The experimenter wanted to evaluate the effectiveness of a 20-minute interactive videotape program that was specially designed to teach children these behaviors in a school setting. She selected for subjects students in first grade classes at an elementary school, all of whom participated with parental consent.

In the Experimental condition, children viewed the interactive video; in the Control condition, children viewed a cartoon of equal duration having nothing to do with child abduction.

A Generalization Probe tested what each child would do in a potential abduction situation. While the children were silently working on their math homework, a new student teacher removed the children from class, individually, under the pretense of participating in sports. The student teacher pretended to forget something and left the child alone in the school yard. A stranger approached the child, made small talk, and then attempted to lure the child into his car by promising treats. When the stranger walked away (with or without child), the student teacher called out the child’s name and the stranger moved quickly out of sight. The child was then returned to class. The roles of student teacher and stranger were played by graduate students of the experimenter.

For purposes of data analysis, a score of zero was given if a child went with the abductor, a score of one if the child stayed nearby with no refusal, a score of two if the child stayed nearby but verbally refused, a score of three if the child ran away with no refusal, and a score of four if the child ran away and verbally refused

Identify which internal validity threat is most likely at work in each of the following Part Two statements. You will receive .5 points for each correct response. Note that each threat should be used only once, with one statement of the ten statements not having a threat. Also keep in mind internal validity threats may overlap – in these instances, choose the BEST threat for the scenario.
Also note that the question order and answer order might differ in Canvas, so make sure to focus on the CONTENT of the question and answer rather than their order.


PART TWO: Spot the Internal Validity Threat: Use the key below to match the study validity description with the specific validity threat

a. Maturation

b. Regression to the mean

c. Selection

d. Mortality

e. Instrumentation

f. Testing

g. History

h. Interactions

i. Diffusion

j. No Threat

1. During a class early in the school year, the children viewed the 20-minute cartoon (Control condition). Two days later, the Generalization Probe was conducted. The experimenter fell ill soon afterwards, and so it wasn’t until a class late in the school year that the children viewed the 20-minute interactive video (Experimental condition). Two days after that, a second Generalization Probe was conducted. The mean score for the children on the first Generalization Probe was 1.2 and their mean score on the second Generalization Probe was 3.4. We conclude that the 20-minute interactive video improved the children’s self-protection skills in a potential abduction situation.

a. Maturation

b. Regression to the mean

c. Selection

d. Mortality

e. Instrumentation

f. Testing

g. History

h. Interactions

i. Diffusion

j. No Threat

2. The name of each child in the classes was written on a separate slip of paper. All the slips were put in a bowl and mixed up thoroughly. Students were assigned to the Experimental Group and to the Control Group alternately as their names were pulled out of the bowl one at a time. One day at school, the children in the Control Group were told to go to one room and children in the Experimental Group to another room, where they were exposed to their respective conditions. Two days later, the Generalization Probe was conducted. For ease of record keeping, all Control Group children were tested first, then all the Experimental Group children. The student teacher scored children’s responses to the confederate’s lures. In the beginning, he hid indoors and strained to see and hear through an open window; later on, he discovered he could see and hear better by hiding outside and peeking around a corner. The mean score for children in the Control Group was 1.2 and the mean score for children in the Experimental Group was 3.4. We conclude that the 20-minute interactive video improved the children’s self-protection skills in a potential abduction situation.

a. Maturation

b. Regression to the mean

c. Selection

d. Mortality

e. Instrumentation

f. Testing

g. History

h. Interactions

i. Diffusion

j. No Threat

3. Due to time constraints, the experiment was run over four consecutive days. On Day 1, children viewed the 20-minute cartoon (Control condition). On Day 2, the Generalization Probe was conducted. On Day 3, the children were exposed to the 20-minute interactive video (Experimental condition). Finally, on Day 4, a second Generalization Probe was conducted. The mean score for children on the first Generalization Probe was 1.2 and their mean score on the second Generalization Probe was 3.4. We conclude that the 20-minute interactive video improved the children’s self-protection skills in a potential abduction situation.

a. Maturation

b. Regression to the mean

c. Selection

d. Mortality

e. Instrumentation

f. Testing

g. History

h. Interactions

i. Diffusion

j. No Threat

4. One day at school, the children viewed the 20-minute cartoon (Control condition). Two days later, the Generalization Probe was conducted. Then, in a class the following week, the children viewed the 20-minute interactive video (Experimental condition). The plan was to administer a second Generalization Probe two days after that. However, at this point, the experimenter realized that she had insufficient funding to complete the study and would only be able to retest ten children. She selected the ten poorest performing children on the first Generalization Probe, the mean score of which was 1. Their mean score on the second Generalization Probe was 2.5. We conclude that the 20-minute interactive video improved the children’s self-protection skills in a potential abduction situation.

a. Maturation

b. Regression to the mean

c. Selection

d. Mortality

e. Instrumentation

f. Testing

g. History

h. Interactions

i. Diffusion

j. No Threat

5. The name of each child in the classes was written on a separate slip of paper. All the slips were put in a bowl and mixed up thoroughly. Students were assigned to the Experimental Group and to the Control Group alternately as their names were pulled out of the bowl one at a time. One day at school, the children in the Control Group were told to go to one room and children in the Experimental Group to another room, where they were exposed to their respective conditions. Some of the children in the Control Group appeared bored by the interactive video, became disruptive, and were removed from the room. Two days later, the Generalization Probe was conducted. The mean score for children in the Control Group was 1.2 and the mean score for the remaining children in the Experimental Group was 3.4. We conclude that the 20-minute interactive video improved the children’s self-protection skills in a potential abduction situation.

a. Maturation

b. Regression to the mean

c. Selection

d. Mortality

e. Instrumentation

f. Testing

g. History

h. Interactions

i. Diffusion

j. No Threat

6. It so happened that there were an equal number of boys and girls, so for convenience the boys were assigned to the Control Group and the girls to the Experimental Group. During a class early in the school year, a Generalization Probe was conducted for all children. The experimenter fell ill soon afterwards, and so it wasn’t until a class late in the school year that the children in the comparison groups were separated, with the Control Group children viewing the 20-minute cartoon and the Experimental Group children viewing the 20-minute interactive video. Two days after that, a second Generalization Probe was conducted. The 20-minute interactive video improved the children’s self-protection skills in a potential abduction situation.

a. Maturation

b. Regression to the mean

c. Selection

d. Mortality

e. Instrumentation

f. Testing

g. History

h. Interactions

i. Diffusion

j. No Threat

7. The name of each child in the classes was written on a separate slip of paper. All the slips were put in a bowl and mixed up thoroughly. Students were assigned to the Experimental Group and to the Control Group alternately as their names were pulled out of the bowl one at a time. One day at school, the children in the Control Group were told to go to one room and the children in the Experimental Group to another room, where they were exposed to their respective conditions. Two days later, the Generalization Probe was conducted. The mean score for children in the Control Group was 1.2 and the mean score for children in the Experimental Group was 3.4. We conclude that the 20-minute interactive video improved the children’s self-protection skills in a potential abduction situation.

a. Maturation

b. Regression to the mean

c. Selection

d. Mortality

e. Instrumentation

f. Testing

g. History

h. Interactions

i. Diffusion

j. No Threat

8. The name of each child in the classes was written on a separate slip of paper. All the slips were put in a bowl and mixed up thoroughly. Students were assigned to the Experimental Group and to the Control Group alternately as their names were pulled out of the bowl one at a time. One day at school, the children in the Control Group were told to go to one room and the children in the Experimental Group to another room, where they were exposed to their respective conditions. Immediately afterwards, while walking back to their regular classroom, all the children in the Control Group saw a man laughing and joking with their school principal. Two days later, the Generalization Probe was conducted, during which many of the Control Group children recognized the stranger as the man who made their principal laugh. The mean score for children in the Control Group was 1.2 and the mean score for children in the Experimental Group was 3.4. We conclude that the 20-minute interactive video improved the children’s self-protection skills in a potential abduction situation.

a. Maturation

b. Regression to the mean

c. Selection

d. Mortality

e. Instrumentation

f. Testing

g. History

h. Interactions

i. Diffusion

j. No Threat

9. The name of each child in the classes was written on a separate slip of paper. All the slips were put in a bowl and mixed up thoroughly. Students were assigned to the Experimental Group and to the Control Group alternately as their names were pulled out of the bowl one at a time. One day at school, the children in the Control Group were told to go to one room and the children in the Experimental Group to another room, where they were exposed to their respective conditions. The rooms were adjacent to each other, and, when the special class was over, the two groups left their rooms at exactly the same time. Immediately afterwards, while walking back to their regular room, students from the experimental group told students from the control group about the interactive video they just saw. The mean score for children in the Control Group was 3.3 and the mean score for children in the Experimental Group was 3.4. We conclude that the 20-minute interactive video did not improve the children’s self-protection skills in a potential abduction situation.

a. Maturation

b. Regression to the mean

c. Selection

d. Mortality

e. Instrumentation

f. Testing

g. History

h. Interactions

i. Diffusion

j. No Threat

10. It so happened that there were an equal number of boys and girls in the classes, so for convenience the boys were assigned to the Control Group and the girls to the Experimental Group. One day at school, the boys were told to go to one room and the girls to another room, where they were exposed to their respective conditions. Two days later, the Generalization Probe was conducted. The mean score for children in the Control Group was 1.2 and the mean score for children in the Experimental Group was 3.4. We conclude that the 20-minute interactive video improved the children’s self-protection skills in a potential abduction situation.

a. Maturation

b. Regression to the mean

c. Selection

d. Mortality

e. Instrumentation

f. Testing

g. History

h. Interactions

i. Diffusion

j. No Threat

Share This Post

Email
WhatsApp
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Pinterest
Reddit

Order a Similar Paper and get 15% Discount on your First Order

Related Questions

Mini-Literature Review – Pt 1 Read the introduction of low-carbon development opportunities using the abatement cost approach – Marginal Abatement Cost Curve

Mini-Literature Review – Pt 1 Read the introduction of low-carbon development opportunities using the abatement cost approach – Marginal Abatement Cost Curve (MACC): Then, find five additional articles (i.e., peer-reviewed journal articles) related to your proposed topic.  (my proposed topic is to qualify or quantify the low-carbon development opportunities using

 What is the difference between hate crimes and terrorist acts?  What is domestic terrorism?  Explain the legal difference between extremism and domestic

 What is the difference between hate crimes and terrorist acts?  What is domestic terrorism?  Explain the legal difference between extremism and domestic terrorism.  Do you believe that domestic terrorism is still a threat in the United States? Why or why not? Which do you believe is more dangerous to the American public, domestic terrorism