Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 21 views

    Experiments vs. Observational Studies Experiments vs. Observational Studies (Cont.)

    Uploaded by

    Gigih Rizqi Adhi
    Experiments involve applying treatments to experimental units and observing the effects, while observational studies observe subjects without assigning treatments. In experiments, treatments are randomly assigned to control for confounding variables, while observational studies do not control treatment assignment. For example, a smoking study could be conducted as either an experiment, where subjects are randomly assigned to smoke or not smoke, or an observational study, where smoking status is observed but not assigned.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Experiments vs. Observational Studies Experiments vs. Observational Studies (Cont.)

    Uploaded by

    Gigih Rizqi Adhi
    21 views2 pages
    Experiments involve applying treatments to experimental units and observing the effects, while observational studies observe subjects without assigning treatments. In experiments, treatments are randomly assigned to control for confounding variables, while observational studies do not control treatment assignment. For example, a smoking study could be conducted as either an experiment, where subjects are randomly assigned to smoke or not smoke, or an observational study, where smoking status is observed but not assigned.

    Original Description:

    experimental

    Original Title

    nexpvsobs

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Experiments involve applying treatments to experimental units and observing the effects, while observational studies observe subjects without assigning treatments. In experiments, treatments are randomly assigned to control for confounding variables, while observational studies do not control treatment assignment. For example, a smoking study could be conducted as either an experiment, where subjects are randomly assigned to smoke or not smoke, or an observational study, where smoking status is observed but not assigned.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    21 views2 pages

    Experiments vs. Observational Studies Experiments vs. Observational Studies (Cont.)

    Uploaded by

    Gigih Rizqi Adhi
    Experiments involve applying treatments to experimental units and observing the effects, while observational studies observe subjects without assigning treatments. In experiments, treatments are randomly assigned to control for confounding variables, while observational studies do not control treatment assignment. For example, a smoking study could be conducted as either an experiment, where subjects are randomly assigned to smoke or not smoke, or an observational study, where smoking status is observed but not assigned.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 2

    Experiments vs.

    Observational Studies
    In an experiment investigators apply
    treatments to experimental units (people,
    animals, plots of land, etc.) and then
    proceed to observe the effect of the
    treatments on the experimental units.

    Experiments vs. Observational


    Studies (cont.)
    In an observational study investigators
    observe subjects and measure variables
    of interest without assigning treatments to
    the subjects. The treatment that each
    subject receives is determined beyond the
    control of the investigator.

    In a randomized experiment investigators


    control the assignment of treatments to
    experimental units using a chance
    mechanism (like the flip of a coin or a
    computer's random number generator).

    For example, suppose we want to study the


    effect of smoking on lung capacity in women.
    1

    Experiment

    Observational Study

    Find 100 women age 20 who do not currently


    smoke.

    Find 100 women age 30 of which 50 have


    been smoking a pack a day for 10 years
    while the other 50 have been smoke free
    for 10 years.

    Randomly assign 50 of the 100 women to the


    smoking treatment and the other 50 to the no
    smoking treatment.
    Those in the smoking group smoke a pack a day
    for 10 years while those in the control group remain
    smoke free for 10 years.
    Measure lung capacity for each of the 100 women.
    Analyze, interpret, and draw conclusions from data.
    3

    Measure lung capacity for each of the 100


    women.
    Analyze, interpret, and draw conclusions
    from data.
    4

    Fishers Hypothesis

    Fishers Hypothesis (cont.)

    Suppose there is a gene that causes smoking to


    appear to be a very pleasurable experience.
    Suppose the same gene also causes
    emphysema, lung cancer, throat cancer, etc.
    People who have the gene will be more likely to
    smoke than people who do not have the gene.
    People who have the gene will be more likely to
    get emphysema, lung cancer, throat cancer, etc.

    So is it really smoking that causes health


    problems? Maybe it is just the gene?
    A confounding variable is related both to
    group membership and to the outcome of
    interest. Its presence makes it hard to
    establish the outcome as being a direct
    consequence of group membership.

    Always Randomize if Possible


    Consider a field experiment intended to
    compare the yield of two corn varieties
    (A and B).
    Suppose the field is divided into 20 plots that
    run from one end of the field to the other.
    Is there anything wrong with the following
    assignment of varieties to field plots?
    ABABABABABABABABABAB
    7

    You might also like