No argument here!  It is unfortunate that many research methods texts are
organized in such a way to suggest experimental designs are superior to all
others.  Start with those flawed observational methods, improve some in the
area of prediction with correlational methods, then show the power of true
experiments.  And oh, by the way, we can have some optional chapters at the
end on quasi-experimental designs, single-subject designs and, oh yeah,
ethics.

*************************************************
Michael T. Scoles, Ph.D.
Director, Arkansas Charter School Resource Center
Associate Professor of Psychology & Counseling
University of Central Arkansas
Conway, AR 72035
voice:  (501) 450-5418
fax:    (501) 450-5424
*************************************************


>-----Original Message-----
>From: jim clark [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 11:56 AM
>To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences
>Subject: RE: We've got it all wrong
>
>
>Non-experimental designs can also provide information as useful
>as (or more useful than) marginal or poorly designed experiments.
>Many students appear to believe (wrongly, I think) that an
>experiment necessarily means causal inferences are warranted,
>whereas in fact only well-designed experiments permit strong
>causal inferences.


---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to