I used to say "quasi-independent variables" in the
few years when I taught stats. It seemed to me to
embrace non-organismic variables in what are
sometimes called quasi-experiments (e.g., the QIV ==
school 1 vs. school 2 in a study of educational
practices).
I'm not sure why a new name might be needed for
_dependent_ variables. Maybe Dennis will elucidate.
-David
Dennis Goff, Stuart McKelvie, et alia have discussed:
>names for the "independent" variable
>when it is not truly experimentally manipulated?
Stuart's suggestions being
>"non-manipulated independent variables." .... not entirely
>satisfactory to me. I would prefer to call them something like "organismic"
>(watch your spelling here) or "subject" variables. My preference for this
>label relates to another post I saw this morning (I can't remember who wrote
>it). Variables like age and gender are stand in variables and reflect the
>effects of a number of other things like experience, genes and their
>combinations. IMHO the latter label makes this point more clearly.
===========================================================
David G. Likely, Department of Psychology,
University of New Brunswick
Bag service #45444
Fredericton, N. B., E3B 5A3 Canada
History of Psychology:
http://www.unb.ca/psychology/likely/psyc4053.htm
===========================================================
