Observational vs. Experimental Study: A Comprehensive Guide
Explore the fundamental disparities between experimental and observational studies in this comprehensive guide by Santos Research Center, Corp. Uncover concepts such as control group, random sample, cohort studies, response variable, and explanatory variable that shape the foundation of these methodologies. Discover the significance of randomized controlled trials and case control studies, examining causal relationships and the role of dependent variables and independent variables in research designs.
This enlightening exploration also delves into the meticulous scientific study process, involving survey members, systematic reviews, and statistical analyses. Investigate the careful balance of control group and treatment group dynamics, highlighting how researchers meticulously assign variables and analyze statistical patterns to discern meaningful insights. From dissecting issues like lung cancer to understanding sleep patterns, this guide emphasizes the precision of controlled experiments and controlled trials, where variables are isolated and scrutinized, paving the way for a deeper comprehension of the world through empirical research.
Introduction to Observational and Experimental Studies
These two studies are the cornerstones of scientific inquiry, each offering a distinct approach to unraveling the mysteries of the natural world.
Observational studies allow us to observe, document, and gather data without direct intervention. They provide a means to explore real-world scenarios and trends, making them valuable when manipulating variables is not feasible or ethical. From surveys to meticulous observations, these studies shed light on existing conditions and relationships.
Experimental studies , in contrast, put researchers in the driver's seat. They involve the deliberate manipulation of variables to understand their impact on specific outcomes. By controlling the conditions, experimental studies establish causal relationships, answering questions of causality with precision. This approach is pivotal for hypothesis testing and informed decision-making.
At Santos Research Center, Corp., we recognize the importance of both observational and experimental studies. We employ these methodologies in our diverse research projects to ensure the highest quality of scientific investigation and to answer a wide range of research questions.
Observational Studies: A Closer Look
In our exploration of research methodologies, let's zoom in on observational research studies—an essential facet of scientific inquiry that we at Santos Research Center, Corp., expertly employ in our diverse research projects.
What is an Observational Study?
Observational research studies involve the passive observation of subjects without any intervention or manipulation by researchers. These studies are designed to scrutinize the relationships between variables and test subjects, uncover patterns, and draw conclusions grounded in real-world data.
Researchers refrain from interfering with the natural course of events in controlled experiment. Instead, they meticulously gather data by keenly observing and documenting information about the test subjects and their surroundings. This approach permits the examination of variables that cannot be ethically or feasibly manipulated, making it particularly valuable in certain research scenarios.
Types of Observational Studies
Now, let's delve into the various forms that observational studies can take, each with its distinct characteristics and applications.
Cohort Studies: A cohort study is a type of observational study that entails tracking one group of individuals over an extended period. Its primary goal is to identify potential causes or risk factors for specific outcomes or treatment group. Cohort studies provide valuable insights into the development of conditions or diseases and the factors that influence them.
Case-Control Studies: Case-control studies, on the other hand, involve the comparison of individuals with a particular condition or outcome to those without it (the control group). These studies aim to discern potential causal factors or associations that may have contributed to the development of the condition under investigation.
Cross-Sectional Studies: Cross-sectional studies take a snapshot of a diverse group of individuals at a single point in time. By collecting data from this snapshot, researchers gain insights into the prevalence of a specific condition or the relationships between variables at that precise moment. Cross-sectional studies are often used to assess the health status of the different groups within a population or explore the interplay between various factors.
Advantages and Limitations of Observational Studies
Observational studies, as we've explored, are a vital pillar of scientific research, offering unique insights into real-world phenomena. In this section, we will dissect the advantages and limitations that characterize these studies, shedding light on the intricacies that researchers grapple with when employing this methodology.
Advantages: One of the paramount advantages of observational studies lies in their utilization of real-world data. Unlike controlled experiments that operate in artificial settings, observational studies embrace the complexities of the natural world. This approach enables researchers to capture genuine behaviors, patterns, and occurrences as they unfold. As a result, the data collected reflects the intricacies of real-life scenarios, making it highly relevant and applicable to diverse settings and populations.
Moreover, in a randomized controlled trial, researchers looked to randomly assign participants to a group. Observational studies excel in their capacity to examine long-term trends. By observing one group of subjects over extended periods, research scientists gain the ability to track developments, trends, and shifts in behavior or outcomes. This longitudinal perspective is invaluable when studying phenomena that evolve gradually, such as chronic diseases, societal changes, or environmental shifts. It allows for the detection of subtle nuances that may be missed in shorter-term investigations.
Limitations: However, like any research methodology, observational studies are not without their limitations. One significant challenge of statistical study lies in the potential for biases. Since researchers do not intervene in the subjects' experiences, various biases can creep into the data collection process. These biases may arise from participant self-reporting, observer bias, or selection bias in random sample, among others. Careful design and rigorous data analysis are crucial for mitigating these biases.
Another limitation is the presence of confounding variables. In observational studies, it can be challenging to isolate the effect of a specific variable from the myriad of other factors at play. These confounding variables can obscure the true relationship between the variables of interest, making it difficult to establish causation definitively. Research scientists must employ statistical techniques to control for or adjust these confounding variables.
Additionally, observational studies face constraints in their ability to establish causation. While they can identify associations and correlations between variables, they cannot prove causality or causal relationship. Establishing causation typically requires controlled experiments where researchers can manipulate independent variables systematically. In observational studies, researchers can only infer potential causation based on the observed associations.
Experimental Studies: Delving Deeper
In the intricate landscape of scientific research, we now turn our gaze toward experimental studies—a dynamic and powerful method that Santos Research Center, Corp. skillfully employs in our pursuit of knowledge.
What is an Experimental Study?
While some studies observe and gather data passively, experimental studies take a more proactive approach. Here, researchers actively introduce an intervention or treatment to an experiment group study its effects on one or more variables. This methodology empowers researchers to manipulate independent variables deliberately and examine their direct impact on dependent variables.
Experimental research are distinguished by their exceptional ability to establish cause-and-effect relationships. This invaluable characteristic allows researchers to unlock the mysteries of how one variable influences another, offering profound insights into the scientific questions at hand. Within the controlled environment of an experimental study, researchers can systematically test hypotheses, shedding light on complex phenomena.
Key Features of Experimental Studies
Central to statistical analysis, the rigor and reliability of experimental studies are several key features that ensure the validity of their findings.
Randomized Controlled Trials: Randomization is a critical element in experimental studies, as it ensures that subjects are assigned to groups in a random assignment. This randomly assigned allocation minimizes the risk of unintentional biases and confounding variables, strengthening the credibility of the study's outcomes.
Control Groups: Control groups play a pivotal role in experimental studies by serving as a baseline for comparison. They enable researchers to assess the true impact of the intervention being studied. By comparing the outcomes of the intervention group to those of survey members of the control group, researchers can discern whether the intervention caused the observed changes.
Blinding: Both single-blind and double-blind techniques are employed in experimental studies to prevent biases from influencing the study or controlled trial's outcomes. Single-blind studies keep either the subjects or the researchers unaware of certain aspects of the study, while double-blind studies extend this blindness to both parties, enhancing the objectivity of the study.
These key features work in concert to uphold the integrity and trustworthiness of the results generated through experimental studies.
Advantages and Limitations of Experimental Studies
As with any research methodology, this one comes with its unique set of advantages and limitations.
Advantages: These studies offer the distinct advantage of establishing causal relationships between two or more variables together. The controlled environment allows researchers to exert authority over variables, ensuring that changes in the dependent variable can be attributed to the independent variable. This meticulous control results in high-quality, reliable data that can significantly contribute to scientific knowledge.
Limitations: However, experimental ones are not without their challenges. They may raise ethical concerns, particularly when the interventions involve potential risks to subjects. Additionally, their controlled nature can limit their real-world applicability, as the conditions in experiments may not accurately mirror those in the natural world. Moreover, executing an experimental study in randomized controlled, often demands substantial resources, with other variables including time, funding, and personnel.
Observational vs Experimental: A Side-by-Side Comparison
Having previously examined observational and experimental studies individually, we now embark on a side-by-side comparison to illuminate the key distinctions and commonalities between these foundational research approaches.
Key Differences and Notable Similarities
Methodologies
- Observational Studies : Characterized by passive observation, where researchers collect data without direct intervention, allowing the natural course of events to unfold.
- Experimental Studies : Involve active intervention, where researchers deliberately manipulate variables to discern their impact on specific outcomes, ensuring control over the experimental conditions.
- Observational Studies : Designed to identify patterns, correlations, and associations within existing data, shedding light on relationships within real-world settings.
- Experimental Studies : Geared toward establishing causality by determining the cause-and-effect relationships between variables, often in controlled laboratory environments.
- Observational Studies : Yield real-world data, reflecting the complexities and nuances of natural phenomena.
- Experimental Studies : Generate controlled data, allowing for precise analysis and the establishment of clear causal connections.
Observational studies excel at exploring associations and uncovering patterns within the intricacies of real-world settings, while experimental studies shine as the gold standard for discerning cause-and-effect relationships through meticulous control and manipulation in controlled environments. Understanding these differences and similarities empowers researchers to choose the most appropriate method for their specific research objectives.
When to Use Which: Practical Applications
The decision to employ either observational or experimental studies hinges on the research objectives at hand and the available resources. Observational studies prove invaluable when variable manipulation is impractical or ethically challenging, making them ideal for delving into long-term trends and uncovering intricate associations between certain variables (response variable or explanatory variable). On the other hand, experimental studies emerge as indispensable tools when the aim is to definitively establish causation and methodically control variables.
At Santos Research Center, Corp., our approach to both scientific study and methodology is characterized by meticulous consideration of the specific research goals. We recognize that the quality of outcomes hinges on selecting the most appropriate method of research study. Our unwavering commitment to employing both observational and experimental research studies further underscores our dedication to advancing scientific knowledge across diverse domains.
Conclusion: The Synergy of Experimental and Observational Studies in Research
In conclusion, both observational and experimental studies are integral to scientific research, offering complementary approaches with unique strengths and limitations. At Santos Research Center, Corp., we leverage these methodologies to contribute meaningfully to the scientific community.
Explore our projects and initiatives at Santos Research Center, Corp. by visiting our website or contacting us at (813) 249-9100, where our unwavering commitment to rigorous research practices and advancing scientific knowledge awaits.
Recent Posts
Join an Alzheimer's clinical trial at Santos Research Center. Discover treatment options, receive expert care, and help advance research. Apply for our paid trial today!
Discover the causes and health risks of obesity, plus explore new clinical trials at Santos Research Center offering innovative treatment options.
Learn about Bipolar I Disorder symptoms, treatments, and clinical trials at Santos Research Center. Explore new treatment options - join our trial today!
At Santos Research Center, a medical research facility dedicated to advancing TBI treatments, we emphasize the importance of tailored rehabilitation...
Learn about COVID-19 rebound after Paxlovid, its symptoms, causes, and management strategies. Join our study at Santos Research Center. Apply now!
Learn everything about Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV), from symptoms and diagnosis to treatment and prevention. Stay informed and protect your health with...
Discover key insights on Alzheimer's disease, including symptoms, stages, and care tips. Learn how to manage the condition and find out how you can...
Santos Research Center, Corp. is a research facility conducting paid clinical trials, in partnership with major pharmaceutical companies & CROs. We work with patients from across the Tampa Bay area.
Contact Details
Navigation menu.
Emma's Research and Television Blog
I <3 science and t.v., observational studies, surveys, quasi-experiments, and experiments.
Across the sciences, researchers use a spectrum of tools or “instruments” to collect information and then make inferences about human preferences and behavior. These tools vary in the degree of control the researcher traditionally has had over the conditions of data collection. Surveys are an instance of such an instrument. Though widely used across social science, business, and even in computer science as user studies, surveys are known to have bugs. Although there are many tools for designing web surveys, few address known problems in survey design.
They have also traditionally varied in their media and the conditions under which they are administered. Some tools we consider are:
Observational studies
Allowing no control over how data are gathered, observational studies are analogous to data mining — if the information is not readily available, the researcher simply cannot get it.
The next best approach is to run a survey. Surveys have similar intent as observational studies, in that they are not meant to have an impact on the subject(s) being studied. However, surveys are known to have flaws that bias results. These flaws are typically related to the language of individual survey questions and the structure and control flow of the survey instrument itself.
True Experiments
If a research is in the position of having a high degree of control over all variables of the experiment, they can randomly assign treatments and perform what is known as a “true experiment”. These experiments require little modeling, since the researcher can simply using hypothesis testing to distinguish between effect and noise.
Quasi-Experiments
Quasi-experiments are similar to true experiments, except they relax some of the requirements of true experiments and are typically concerned with understanding causality.
In the past, there has been little fluidity between these four approaches to data collection, since the media used to implement each was dramatically different. However, with the proliferation of data on the web and the ease of issuing questionnaires on such platforms as facebook, SurveyMonkey, and Mechanical Turk, the implementation of these studies of human preferences and behavior have come to share many core features.
Despite similarities between these tools, quality control techniques for experiments have been largely absent from the design and deployment of surveys. There has been an outpouring of web tools and services for designing and hosting web surveys, aimed at non-programmers. While there are some tools and services available for experiments, they tend to be domain-specific and targeted to niche populations of researchers. The robust statistical approaches used in experimental design should inform survey design, and the general, programmatic approaches to web survey design should be available for experimental design.
3 thoughts on “ Observational Studies, Surveys, Quasi-Experiments, and Experiments ”
This is good, I just got confused on the observational part. I guess by observational you mean what in linguistics we call a corpus study – you just search and analyze information that’s already “out there”, which may involve gathering what’s out there in some systematic way first, and possibly annotating it. But there’s no control over the frequencies of the situations, which leads to sparsity in some areas. The upsides, though, are that things are more naturalistic, you lack task effects (there’s that phrase you wanted to look up), and you can get way more data. With sophisticated statistics (I think data mining is a synonym of that?), you can account for the uncontrolled distribution at least to a point. And when you control your distribution, you run the risk of introducing sampling bias. I don’t know if you want to go into observational studies very much since that’s not what SurveyMan is about, but some of these ideas might help. Also, I don’t know what a quasi-experiment is.
I think you’re right about all the synonyms for observational studies — I think unifying techniques and terminology should be a goal of data science, since many disciplines are doing the same thing, but in slightly different ways.
Regarding what SurveyMan has to offer, it really isn’t focused on observational studies/data mining. There was a picture I drew on the white board for Molly that illustrated how previously experiments and quasi-experiments were grouped together because they were conducted in highly controlled environments (i.e. a lab), whereas surveys and observational studies were conducted in the wild, where you have very little control over the environment. Surveys have traditionally aspired to be like observational studies, but inherently suffer from the “probe effect”. We’re shifting surveys over to the (quasi-)?experiments category, since we’re exercising a higher degree of control than we had before. What’s interesting to me is that this is quite clearly a product of being able to deploy surveys on the web. While this new technology has made surveys more robust, using the same platforms has actually degraded the integrity of experiments — where before they were conducted in a lab, now you have no idea what the conditions are under which the person is taking them. The assumption here is that you’ll drown out the noise caused by these uncontrolled environments by gathering significantly more data from a significantly broader population than before.
re : quasi-experiments. They’re used either when you cannot randomly assign a variable (e.g. it’s hard to reassign sex), or when you hold other variables constant on purpose in order to determine causality. This is something Emery’s quite keen on right now.
tiger shop, https://tigersccshop.bz ,
Leave a Reply Cancel reply
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Experimental Studies and Observational Studies
- Reference work entry
- First Online: 01 January 2022
- pp 1748–1756
- Cite this reference work entry
- Martin Pinquart 3
959 Accesses
1 Citations
Experimental studies: Experiments, Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) ; Observational studies: Non-experimental studies, Non-manipulation studies, Naturalistic studies
Definitions
The experimental study is a powerful methodology for testing causal relations between one or more explanatory variables (i.e., independent variables) and one or more outcome variables (i.e., dependent variable). In order to accomplish this goal, experiments have to meet three basic criteria: (a) experimental manipulation (variation) of the independent variable(s), (b) randomization – the participants are randomly assigned to one of the experimental conditions, and (c) experimental control for the effect of third variables by eliminating them or keeping them constant.
In observational studies, investigators observe or assess individuals without manipulation or intervention. Observational studies are used for assessing the mean levels, the natural variation, and the structure of variables, as well as...
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Subscribe and save.
- Get 10 units per month
- Download Article/Chapter or eBook
- 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
- Cancel anytime
- Available as PDF
- Read on any device
- Instant download
- Own it forever
- Available as EPUB and PDF
- Durable hardcover edition
- Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
- Free shipping worldwide - see info
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Institutional subscriptions
Atalay K, Barrett GF (2015) The impact of age pension eligibility age on retirement and program dependence: evidence from an Australian experiment. Rev Econ Stat 97:71–87. https://doi.org/10.1162/REST_a_00443
Article Google Scholar
Bergeman L, Boker SM (eds) (2016) Methodological issues in aging research. Psychology Press, Hove
Google Scholar
Byrkes CR, Bielak AMA (under review) Evaluation of publication bias and statistical power in gerontological psychology. Manuscript submitted for publication
Campbell DT, Stanley JC (1966) Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Rand-McNally, Chicago
Carpenter D (2010) Reputation and power: organizational image and pharmaceutical regulation at the FDA. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Cavanaugh JC, Blanchard-Fields F (2019) Adult development and aging, 8th edn. Cengage, Boston
Fölster M, Hess U, Hühnel I et al (2015) Age-related response bias in the decoding of sad facial expressions. Behav Sci 5:443–460. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs5040443
Freund AM, Isaacowitz DM (2013) Beyond age comparisons: a plea for the use of a modified Brunswikian approach to experimental designs in the study of adult development and aging. Hum Dev 56:351–371. https://doi.org/10.1159/000357177
Haslam C, Morton TA, Haslam A et al (2012) “When the age is in, the wit is out”: age-related self-categorization and deficit expectations reduce performance on clinical tests used in dementia assessment. Psychol Aging 27:778–784. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0027754
Institute for Social Research (2018) The health and retirement study. Aging in the 21st century: Challenges and opportunities for americans. Survey Research Center, University of Michigan
Jung J (1971) The experimenter’s dilemma. Harper & Row, New York
Leary MR (2001) Introduction to behavioral research methods, 3rd edn. Allyn & Bacon, Boston
Lindenberger U, Scherer H, Baltes PB (2001) The strong connection between sensory and cognitive performance in old age: not due to sensory acuity reductions operating during cognitive assessment. Psychol Aging 16:196–205. https://doi.org/10.1037//0882-7974.16.2.196
Löckenhoff CE, Carstensen LL (2004) Socioemotional selectivity theory, aging, and health: the increasingly delicate balance between regulating emotions and making tough choices. J Pers 72:1395–1424. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.2004.00301.x
Maxwell SE (2015) Is psychology suffering from a replication crisis? What does “failure to replicate” really mean? Am Psychol 70:487–498. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0039400
Menard S (2002) Longitudinal research (2nd ed.). Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA
Mitchell SJ, Scheibye-Knudsen M, Longo DL et al (2015) Animal models of aging research: implications for human aging and age-related diseases. Ann Rev Anim Biosci 3:283–303. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-animal-022114-110829
Moher D (1998) CONSORT: an evolving tool to help improve the quality of reports of randomized controlled trials. JAMA 279:1489–1491. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.279.18.1489
Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine (2011) OCEBM levels of evidence working group. The Oxford Levels of Evidence 2. Available at: https://www.cebm.net/category/ebm-resources/loe/ . Retrieved 2018-12-12
Patten ML, Newhart M (2018) Understanding research methods: an overview of the essentials, 10th edn. Routledge, New York
Piccinin AM, Muniz G, Sparks C et al (2011) An evaluation of analytical approaches for understanding change in cognition in the context of aging and health. J Geront 66B(S1):i36–i49. https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbr038
Pinquart M, Silbereisen RK (2006) Socioemotional selectivity in cancer patients. Psychol Aging 21:419–423. https://doi.org/10.1037/0882-7974.21.2.419
Redman LM, Ravussin E (2011) Caloric restriction in humans: impact on physiological, psychological, and behavioral outcomes. Antioxid Redox Signal 14:275–287. https://doi.org/10.1089/ars.2010.3253
Rutter M (2007) Proceeding from observed correlation to causal inference: the use of natural experiments. Perspect Psychol Sci 2:377–395. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2007.00050.x
Schaie W, Caskle CI (2005) Methodological issues in aging research. In: Teti D (ed) Handbook of research methods in developmental science. Blackwell, Malden, pp 21–39
Shadish WR, Cook TD, Campbell DT (2002) Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Houghton Mifflin, Boston
Sonnega A, Faul JD, Ofstedal MB et al (2014) Cohort profile: the health and retirement study (HRS). Int J Epidemiol 43:576–585. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyu067
Weil J (2017) Research design in aging and social gerontology: quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Routledge, New York
Download references
Author information
Authors and affiliations.
Psychology, Philipps University, Marburg, Germany
Martin Pinquart
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Corresponding author
Correspondence to Martin Pinquart .
Editor information
Editors and affiliations.
Population Division, Department of Economics and Social Affairs, United Nations, New York, NY, USA
Department of Population Health Sciences, Department of Sociology, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
Matthew E. Dupre
Section Editor information
Department of Sociology and Center for Population Health and Aging, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
Kenneth C. Land
Department of Sociology, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY, USA
Anthony R. Bardo
Rights and permissions
Reprints and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this entry
Cite this entry.
Pinquart, M. (2021). Experimental Studies and Observational Studies. In: Gu, D., Dupre, M.E. (eds) Encyclopedia of Gerontology and Population Aging. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22009-9_573
Download citation
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-22009-9_573
Published : 24 May 2022
Publisher Name : Springer, Cham
Print ISBN : 978-3-030-22008-2
Online ISBN : 978-3-030-22009-9
eBook Packages : Social Sciences Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences
Share this entry
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
- Publish with us
Policies and ethics
- Find a journal
- Track your research
Section 1.2: Observational Studies versus Designed Experiments
- 1.1 Introduction to the Practice of Statistics
- 1.2 Observational Studies versus Designed Experiments
- 1.3 Random Sampling
- 1.4 Bias in Sampling
- 1.5 The Design of Experiments
By the end of this lesson, you will be able to...
- distinguish between an observational study and a designed experiment
- identify possible lurking variables
- explain the various types of observational studies
For a quick overview of this section, watch this short video summary:
To begin, we're going to discuss some of the ways to collect data. In general, there are a few standards:
- existing sources
- survey sampling
- designed experiments
Most of us associate the word census with the U.S. Census, but it actually has a broader definition. Here's typical definition:
A census is a list of all individuals in a population along with certain characteristics of each individual.
The nice part about a census is that it gives us all the information we want. Of course, it's usually impossible to get - imagine trying to interview every single ECC student . That'd be over 10,000 interviews!
So if we can't get a census, what do we do? A great source of data is other studies that have already been completed. If you're trying to answer a particular question, look to see if someone else has already collected data about that population. The moral of the story is this: Don't collect data that have already been collected!
Observational Studies versus Designed Experiments
Now to one of the main objectives for this section. Two other very common sources of data are observational studies and designed experiments . We're going to take some time here to describe them and distinguish between them - you'll be expected to be able to do the same in homework and on your first exam.
The easiest examples of observational studies are surveys. No attempt is made to influence anything - just ask questions and record the responses. By definition,
An observational study measures the characteristics of a population by studying individuals in a sample, but does not attempt to manipulate or influence the variables of interest.
For a good example, try visiting the Pew Research Center . Just click on any article and you'll see an example of an observational study. They just sample a particular group and ask them questions.
In contrast, designed experiments explicitly do attempt to influence results. They try to determine what affect a particular treatment has on an outcome.
A designed experiment applies a treatment to individuals (referred to as experimental units or subjects ) and attempts to isolate the effects of the treatment on a response variable .
For a nice example of a designed experiment, check out this article from National Public Radio about the effect of exercise on fitness.
So let's look at a couple examples.
Visit this link from Science Daily , from July 8th, 2008. It talks about the relationship between Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) and heart disease. After reading the article carefully, try to decide whether it was an observational study or a designed experiment
What was it?
This was a tricky one. It was actually an observational study . The key is that the researchers didn't force the veterans to have PTSD, they simply observed the rate of heart disease for those soldiers who have PTSD and the rate for those who do not.
Visit this link from the Gallup Organization , from June 17th, 2008. It looks at what Americans' top concerns were at that point. Read carefully and think of the how the data were collected. Do you think this was an observational study or a designed experiment? Why?
Think carefully about which you think it was, and just as important - why? When you're ready, click the link below.
If you were thinking that this was an observational study , you were right!The key here is that the individuals sampled were just asked what was important to them. The study didn't try to impose certain conditions on people for a set amount of time and see if those conditions affected their responses.
This last example is regarding the "low-carb" Atkins diet, and how it compares with other diets. Read through this summary of a report in the New England Journal of Medicine and see if you can figure out whether it's an observational study or a designed experiment.
As expected, this was a designed experiment , but do you know why? The key here is they forced individuals to maintain a certain diet, and then compared the participants' health at the end.
Probably the biggest difference between observational studies and designed experiments is the issue of association versus causation . Since observational studies don't control any variables, the results can only be associations . Because variables are controlled in a designed experiment, we can have conclusions of causation .
Look back over the three examples linked above and see if all three reported their results correctly. You'll often find articles in newspapers or online claiming one variable caused a certain response in another, when really all they had was an association from doing an observational study.
The discussion of the differences between observational studies and designed experiments may bring up an interesting question - why are we worried so much about the difference?
We already mentioned the key at the end of the previous page, but it bears repeating here:
Observational studies only allow us to claim association ,not causation .
The primary reason behind this is something called a lurking variable (sometimes also termed a confounding factor , among other similar terms).
A lurking variable is a variable that affects both of the variables of interest, but is either not known or is not acknowledged.
Consider the following example, from The Washington Post:
Coffee may have health benefits and may not pose health risks for many people
By Carolyn Butler Tuesday, December 22, 2009
Of all the relationships in my life, by far the most on-again, off-again has been with coffee: From that initial, tentative dalliance in college to a serious commitment during my first real reporting job to breaking up altogether when I got pregnant, only to fail miserably at quitting my daily latte the second time I was expecting. More recently the relationship has turned into full-blown obsession and, ironically, I often fall asleep at night dreaming of the delicious, satisfying cup of joe that awaits, come morning.
[...] Rest assured: Not only has current research shown that moderate coffee consumption isn't likely to hurt you, it may actually have significant health benefits. "Coffee is generally associated with a less health-conscious lifestyle -- people who don't sleep much, drink coffee, smoke, drink alcohol," explains Rob van Dam, an assistant professor in the departments of nutrition and epidemiology at the Harvard School of Public Health. He points out that early studies failed to account for such issues and thus found a link between drinking coffee and such conditions as heart disease and cancer, a link that has contributed to java's lingering bad rep. "But as more studies have been conducted-- larger and better studies that controlled for healthy lifestyle issues --the totality of efforts suggests that coffee is a good beverage choice."
Source: Washington Post
What is this article telling us? If you look at the parts in bold, you can see that Professor van Dam is describing a lurking variable: lifestyle. In past studies, this variable wasn't accounted for. Researchers in the past saw the relationship between coffee and heart disease, and came to the conclusion that the coffee was causing the heart disease.
But since those were only observational studies, the researchers could only claim an association . In that example, the lifestyle choices of individuals was affecting both their coffee use and other risks leading to heart disease. So "lifestyle" would be an example of a lurking variable in that example.
For more on lurking variables, check out this link from The Math Forum and this one from The Psychology Wiki . Both give further examples and illustrations.
With all the problems of lurking variables, there are many good reasons to do an observational study. For one, a designed experiment may be impractical or even unethical (imagine a designed experiment regarding the risks of smoking). Observational studies also tend to cost much less than designed experiments, and it's often possible to obtain a much larger data set than you would with a designed experiment. Still, it's always important to remember the difference in what we can claim as a result of observational studies versus designed experiments.
Types of Observational Studies
There are three major types of observational studies, and they're listed in your text: cross-sectional studies, case-control studies, and cohort studies.
Cross-sectional Studies
This first type of observational study involves collecting data about individuals at a certain point in time. A researcher concerned about the effect of working with asbestos might compare the cancer rate of those who work with asbestos versus those who do not.
Cross-sectional studies are cheap and easy to do, but they don't give very strong results. In our quick example, we can't be sure that those working with asbestos who don't report cancer won't eventually develop it. This type of study only gives a bit of the picture, so it is rarely used by itself. Researchers tend to use a cross-sectional study to first determine if their might be a link, and then later do another study (like one of the following) to further investigate.
Case-control Studies
Case-control studies are frequently used in the medical community to compare individuals with a particular characteristic (this group is the case )with individuals who do not have that characteristic (this group is the control ). Researchers attempt to select homogeneous groups, so that on average, all other characteristics of the individuals will be similar, with only the characteristic in question differing.
One of the most famous examples of this type of study is the early research on the link between smoking and lung cancer in the United Kingdom by Richard Doll and A. Bradford Hill. In the 1950's, almost 80% of adults in the UK were smokers, and the connection between smoking and lung cancer had not yet been established. Doll and Hill interviewed about 700 lung cancer patients to try to determine a possible cause.
This type of study is retrospective ,because it asks the individuals to look back and describe their habits(regarding smoking, in this case). There are clear weaknesses in a study like this, because it expects individuals to not only have an accurate memory, but also to respond honestly. (Think about a study concerning drug use and cognitive impairment.) Not only that, we discussed previously that such a study may prove association , but it cannot prove causation .
Cohort Studies
A cohort describes a group of individuals, and so a cohort study is one in which a group of individuals is selected to participate in a study. The group is then observed over a period of time to determine if particular characteristics affect a response variable.
Based on their earlier research, Doll and Hill began one of the largest cohort studies in 1951. The study was again regarding the link between smoking and lung cancer. The study began with 34,439 male British doctors, and followed them for over 50 years. Doll and Hill first reported findings in 1954 in the British Medical Journal , and then continued to report their findings periodically afterward. Their last report was in 2004,again published in the British Medical Journal . This last report reflected on 50 years of observational data from the cohort.
This last type of study is called prospective , because it begins with the group and then collects data over time. Cohort studies are definitely the most powerful of the observational studies,particularly with the quantity and quality of data in a study like the previous one.
Let's look at some examples.
A recent article in the BBC News Health section described a study concerning dementia and "mid-life ills". According to the article, researches followed more than 11,000 people over a period of 12-14 years. They found that smoking, diabetes, and high blood pressure were all factors in the onset of dementia.
What type of observational study was this? Cross-sectional, case-control,or cohort?
Because the researchers tracked the 11,000 participants, this is a cohort study .
In 1993, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences funded a study in Iowa regarding the possible relationship between radon levels and the incidence of cancer. The study gathered information from 413 participants who had developed lung cancer and compared those results with 614 participants who did not have lung cancer.
What type of study was this?
This study was retrospective - gathering information about the group of interest (those with cancer) and comparing them with a control group(those without cancer). This is an example of a case-control study .
Thought his may seem similar to a cross-sectional study, it differs in that the individuals are "matched" (with cancer vs. without cancer)and the individuals are expected to look back in time and describe their time spent in the home to determine their radon exposure.
In 2004, researchers published an article in the New England Journal of Medicine regarding the relationship between the mental health of soldiers exposed to combat stress. The study collected information from soldiers in four combat infantry units either before their deployment to Iraq or three to four months after their return from combat duty.
Since this was simply a survey given over a short period of time to try to examine the effect of combat duty, this was a cross-sectional study. Unlike the previous example, it did not ask the participants to delve into their history, nor did it explicitly "match" soldiers with a particular characteristic.
<< previous section | next section >>
Experiment vs Observational Study: Similarities & Differences
Chris Drew (PhD)
Dr. Chris Drew is the founder of the Helpful Professor. He holds a PhD in education and has published over 20 articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. [Image Descriptor: Photo of Chris]
Learn about our Editorial Process
An experiment involves the deliberate manipulation of variables to observe their effect, while an observational study involves collecting data without interfering with the subjects or variables under study.
This article will explore both, but let’s start with some quick explanations:
- Experimental Study : An experiment is a research design wherein an investigator manipulates one or more variables to establish a cause-effect relationship (Tan, 2022). For example, a pharmaceutical company may conduct an experiment to find out if a new medicine for diabetes is effective by administering it to a selected group (experimental group), while not administering it to another group (control group).
- Observational Study : An observational study is a type of research wherein the researcher observes characteristics and measures variables of interest in a subset of a population, but does not manipulate or intervene (Atkinson et al., 2021). An example may be a sociologist who conducts a cross-sectional survey of the population to determine health disparities across different income groups.
Experiment vs Observational Study
1. experiment.
An experiment is a research method characterized by a high degree of experimental control exerted by the researcher. In the context of academia, it allows for the testing of causal hypotheses (Privitera, 2022).
When conducting an experiment, the researcher first formulates a hypothesis , which is a predictive statement about the potential relationship between at least two variables.
For instance, a psychologist may want to test the hypothesis that participation in physical exercise ( independent variable ) improves the cognitive abilities (dependent variable) of the elderly.
In an experiment, the researcher manipulates the independent variable(s) and then observes the effects on the dependent variable(s). This method of research involves two or more comparison groups—an experimental group that is subjected to the variable being tested and a control group that is not (Sampselle, 2012).
For instance, in the physical exercise study noted above, the psychologist would administer a physical exercise regime to an experimental group of elderly people, while a control group would continue with their usual lifestyle activities .
One of the unique features of an experiment is random assignment . Participants are randomly allocated to either the experimental or control groups to ensure that every participant has an equal chance of being in either group. This reduces the risk of confounding variables and increases the likelihood that the results are attributable to the independent variable rather than another factor (Eich, 2014).
For instance, in the physical exercise example, the psychologist would randomly assign participants to the experimental or control group to reduce the potential impact of external variables such as diet or sleep patterns.
1. Impacts of Films on Happiness: A psychologist might create an experimental study where she shows participants either a happy, sad, or neutral film (independent variable) then measures their mood afterward (dependent variable). Participants would be randomly assigned to one of the three film conditions.
2. Impacts of Exercise on Weight Loss: In a fitness study, a trainer could investigate the impact of a high-intensity interval training (HIIT) program on weight loss. Half of the participants in the study are randomly selected to follow the HIIT program (experimental group), while the others follow a standard exercise routine (control group).
3. Impacts of Veganism on Cholesterol Levels: A nutritional experimenter could study the effects of a particular diet, such as veganism, on cholesterol levels. The chosen population gets assigned either to adopt a vegan diet (experimental group) or stick to their usual diet (control group) for a specific period, after which cholesterol levels are measured.
Read More: Examples of Random Assignment
Strengths and Weaknesses
Read More: Experimental Research Examples
2. Observational Study
Observational research is a non-experimental research method in which the researcher merely observes the subjects and notes behaviors or responses that occur (Ary et al., 2018).
This approach is unintrusive in that there is no manipulation or control exerted by the researcher. For instance, a researcher could study the relationships between traffic congestion and road rage by just observing and recording behaviors at a set of busy traffic lights, without applying any control or altering any variables.
In observational studies, the researcher distinguishes variables and measures their values as they naturally occur. The goal is to capture naturally occurring behaviors , conditions, or events (Ary et al., 2018).
For example, a sociologist might sit in a cafe to observe and record interactions between staff and customers in order to examine social and occupational roles .
There is a significant advantage of observational research in that it provides a high level of ecological validity – the extent to which the data collected reflects real-world situations – as the behaviors and responses are observed in a natural setting without experimenter interference (Holleman et al., 2020)
However, the inability to control various factors that might influence the observations may expose these studies to potential confounding bias , a consideration researchers must take into account (Schober & Vetter, 2020).
1. Behavior of Animals in the Wild: Zoologists often use observational studies to understand the behaviors and interactions of animals in their natural habitats. For instance, a researcher could document the social structure and mating behaviors of a wolf pack over a period of time.
2. Impact of Office Layout on Productivity: A researcher in organizational psychology might observe how different office layouts affect staff productivity and collaboration. This involves the observation and recording of staff interactions and work output without altering the office setting.
3. Foot Traffic and Retail Sales: A market researcher might conduct an observational study on how foot traffic (the number of people passing by a store) impacts retail sales. This could involve observing and documenting the number of walk-ins, time spent in-store, and purchase behaviors.
Read More: Observational Research Examples
Experimental and Observational Study Similarities and Differences
Experimental and observational research both have their place – one is right for one situation, another for the next.
Experimental research is best employed when the aim of the study is to establish cause-and-effect relationships between variables – that is, when there is a need to determine the impact of specific changes on the outcome (Walker & Myrick, 2016).
One of the standout features of experimental research is the control it gives to the researcher, who dictates how variables should be changed and assigns participants to different conditions (Privitera, 2022). This makes it an excellent choice for medical or pharmaceutical studies, behavioral interventions, and any research where hypotheses concerning influence and change need to be tested.
For example, a company might use experimental research to understand the effects of staff training on job satisfaction and productivity.
Observational research , on the other hand, serves best when it’s vital to capture the phenomena in their natural state, without intervention, or when ethical or practical considerations prevent the researcher from manipulating the variables of interest (Creswell & Poth, 2018).
It is the method of choice when the interest of the research lies in describing what is, rather than altering a situation to see what could be (Atkinson et al., 2021).
This approach might be utilized in studies that aim to describe patterns of social interaction, daily routines, user experiences, and so on. A real-world example of observational research could be a study examining the interactions and learning behaviors of students in a classroom setting.
I’ve demonstrated their similarities and differences a little more in the table below:
Experimental and observational research each have their place, depending upon the study. Importantly, when selecting your approach, you need to reflect upon your research goals and objectives, and select from the vast range of research methodologies , which you can read up on in my next article, the 15 types of research designs .
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Irvine, C. K. S., & Walker, D. (2018). Introduction to research in education . London: Cengage Learning.
Atkinson, P., Delamont, S., Cernat, A., Sakshaug, J. W., & Williams, R. A. (2021). SAGE research methods foundations . New York: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Creswell, J.W., and Poth, C.N. (2018). Qualitative Inquiry and Research Design: Choosing among Five Approaches . New York: Sage Publications.
Eich, E. (2014). Business Research Methods: A Radically Open Approach . Frontiers Media SA.
Holleman, G. A., Hooge, I. T., Kemner, C., & Hessels, R. S. (2020). The ‘real-world approach’and its problems: A critique of the term ecological validity. Frontiers in Psychology , 11 , 721. doi: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00721
Privitera, G. J. (2022). Research methods for the behavioral sciences . Sage Publications.
Sampselle, C. M. (2012). The Science and Art of Nursing Research . South University Online Press.
Schober, P., & Vetter, T. R. (2020). Confounding in observational research. Anesthesia & Analgesia , 130 (3), 635.
Tan, W. C. K. (2022). Research methods: A practical guide for students and researchers . World Scientific.
Walker, D., and Myrick, F. (2016). Grounded Theory: An Exploration of Process and Procedure . New York: Qualitative Health Research.
- Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 10 Reasons you’re Perpetually Single
- Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 20 Montessori Toddler Bedrooms (Design Inspiration)
- Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 21 Montessori Homeschool Setups
- Chris Drew (PhD) https://helpfulprofessor.com/author/chris-drew-phd-2/ 101 Hidden Talents Examples
Leave a Comment Cancel Reply
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
- Skip to main content
- Skip to primary sidebar
- Skip to footer
- QuestionPro
- Solutions Industries Gaming Automotive Sports and events Education Government Travel & Hospitality Financial Services Healthcare Cannabis Technology Use Case AskWhy Communities Audience Contactless surveys Mobile LivePolls Member Experience GDPR Positive People Science 360 Feedback Surveys
- Resources Blog eBooks Survey Templates Case Studies Training Help center
Home Market Research
Experimental vs Observational Studies: Differences & Examples
Understanding the differences between experimental vs observational studies is crucial for interpreting findings and drawing valid conclusions. Both methodologies are used extensively in various fields, including medicine, social sciences, and environmental studies.
Researchers often use observational and experimental studies to gather comprehensive data and draw robust conclusions about their investigating phenomena.
This blog post will explore what makes these two types of studies unique, their fundamental differences, and examples to illustrate their applications.
What is an Experimental Study?
An experimental study is a research design in which the investigator actively manipulates one or more variables to observe their effect on another variable. This type of study often takes place in a controlled environment, which allows researchers to establish cause-and-effect relationships.
Key Characteristics of Experimental Studies:
- Manipulation: Researchers manipulate the independent variable(s).
- Control: Other variables are kept constant to isolate the effect of the independent variable.
- Randomization: Subjects are randomly assigned to different groups to minimize bias.
- Replication: The study can be replicated to verify results.
Types of Experimental Study
- Laboratory Experiments: Conducted in a controlled environment where variables can be precisely controlled.
- Field Research : These are conducted in a natural setting but still involve manipulation and control of variables.
- Clinical Trials: Used in medical research and the healthcare industry to test the efficacy of new treatments or drugs.
Example of an Experimental Study:
Imagine a study to test the effectiveness of a new drug for reducing blood pressure. Researchers would:
- Randomly assign participants to two groups: receiving the drug and receiving a placebo.
- Ensure that participants do not know their group (double-blind procedure).
- Measure blood pressure before and after the intervention.
- Compare the changes in blood pressure between the two groups to determine the drug’s effectiveness.
What is an Observational Study?
An observational study is a research design in which the investigator observes subjects and measures variables without intervening or manipulating the study environment. This type of study is often used when manipulating impractical or unethical variables.
Key Characteristics of Observational Studies:
- No Manipulation: Researchers do not manipulate the independent variable.
- Natural Setting: Observations are made in a natural environment.
- Causation Limitations: It is difficult to establish cause-and-effect relationships due to the need for more control over variables.
- Descriptive: Often used to describe characteristics or outcomes.
Types of Observational Studies:
- Cohort Studies : Follow a control group of people over time to observe the development of outcomes.
- Case-Control Studies: Compare individuals with a specific outcome (cases) to those without (controls) to identify factors that might contribute to the outcome.
- Cross-Sectional Studies : Collect data from a population at a single point to analyze the prevalence of an outcome or characteristic.
Example of an Observational Study:
Consider a study examining the relationship between smoking and lung cancer. Researchers would:
- Identify a cohort of smokers and non-smokers.
- Follow both groups over time to record incidences of lung cancer.
- Analyze the data to observe any differences in cancer rates between smokers and non-smokers.
Difference Between Experimental vs Observational Studies
Choosing between experimental and observational studies.
The researchers relied on statistical analysis to interpret the results of randomized controlled trials, building upon the foundations established by prior research.
Use Experimental Studies When:
- Causality is Important: If determining a cause-and-effect relationship is crucial, experimental studies are the way to go.
- Variables Can Be Controlled: When you can manipulate and control the variables in a lab or controlled setting, experimental studies are suitable.
- Randomization is Possible: When random assignment of subjects is feasible and ethical, experimental designs are appropriate.
Use Observational Studies When:
- Ethical Concerns Exist: If manipulating variables is unethical, such as exposing individuals to harmful substances, observational studies are necessary.
- Practical Constraints Apply: When experimental studies are impractical due to cost or logistics, observational studies can be a viable alternative.
- Natural Settings Are Required: If studying phenomena in their natural environment is essential, observational studies are the right choice.
Strengths and Limitations
Experimental studies.
- Establish Causality: Experimental studies can establish causal relationships between variables by controlling and using randomization.
- Control Over Confounding Variables: The controlled environment allows researchers to minimize the influence of external variables that might skew results.
- Repeatability: Experiments can often be repeated to verify results and ensure consistency.
Limitations:
- Ethical Concerns: Manipulating variables may be unethical in certain situations, such as exposing individuals to harmful conditions.
- Artificial Environment: The controlled setting may not reflect real-world conditions, potentially affecting the generalizability of results.
- Cost and Complexity: Experimental studies can be costly and logistically complex, especially with large sample sizes.
Observational Studies
- Real-World Insights: Observational studies provide valuable insights into how variables interact in natural settings.
- Ethical and Practical: These studies avoid ethical concerns associated with manipulation and can be more practical regarding cost and time.
- Diverse Applications: Observational studies can be used in various fields and situations where experiments are not feasible.
- Lack of Causality: It’s easier to establish causation with manipulation, and results are limited to identifying correlations.
- Potential for Confounding: Uncontrolled external variables may influence the results, leading to biased conclusions.
- Observer Bias: Researchers may unintentionally influence outcomes through their expectations or interpretations of data.
Examples in Various Fields
- Experimental Study: Clinical trials testing the effectiveness of a new drug against a placebo to determine its impact on patient recovery.
- Observational Study: Studying the dietary habits of different populations to identify potential links between nutrition and disease prevalence.
- Experimental Study: Conducting a lab experiment to test the effect of sleep deprivation on cognitive performance by controlling sleep hours and measuring test scores.
- Observational Study: Observing social interactions in a public setting to explore natural communication patterns without intervention.
Environmental Science
- Experimental Study: Testing the impact of a specific pollutant on plant growth in a controlled greenhouse setting.
- Observational Study: Monitoring wildlife populations in a natural habitat to assess the effects of climate change on species distribution.
How QuestionPro Research Can Help in Experimental vs Observational Studies
Choosing between experimental and observational studies is a critical decision that can significantly impact the outcomes and interpretations of a study. QuestionPro Research offers powerful tools and features that can enhance both types of studies, giving researchers the flexibility and capability to gather, analyze, and interpret data effectively.
Enhancing Experimental Studies with QuestionPro
Experimental studies require a high degree of control over variables, randomization, and, often, repeated trials to establish causal relationships. QuestionPro excels in facilitating these requirements through several key features:
- Survey Design and Distribution: With QuestionPro, researchers can design intricate surveys tailored to their experimental needs. The platform supports random assignment of participants to different groups, ensuring unbiased distribution and enhancing the study’s validity.
- Data Collection and Management: Real-time data collection and management tools allow researchers to monitor responses as they come in. This is crucial for experimental studies where data collection timing and sequence can impact the results.
- Advanced Analytics: QuestionPro offers robust analytical tools that can handle complex data sets, enabling researchers to conduct in-depth statistical analyses to determine the effects of the experimental interventions.
Supporting Observational Studies with QuestionPro
Observational studies involve gathering data without manipulating variables, focusing on natural settings and real-world scenarios. QuestionPro’s capabilities are well-suited for these studies as well:
- Customizable Surveys: Researchers can create detailed surveys to capture a wide range of observational data. QuestionPro’s customizable templates and question types allow for flexibility in capturing nuanced information.
- Mobile Data Collection: For field research, QuestionPro’s mobile app enables data collection on the go, making it easier to conduct studies in diverse settings without internet connectivity.
- Longitudinal Data Tracking: Observational studies often require data collection over extended periods. QuestionPro’s platform supports longitudinal studies, allowing researchers to track changes and trends.
Experimental and observational studies are essential tools in the researcher’s toolkit. Each serves a unique purpose and offers distinct advantages and limitations. By understanding their differences, researchers can choose the most appropriate study design for their specific objectives, ensuring their findings are valid and applicable to real-world situations.
Whether establishing causality through experimental studies or exploring correlations with observational research designs, the insights gained from these methodologies continue to shape our understanding of the world around us.
Whether conducting experimental or observational studies, QuestionPro Research provides a comprehensive suite of tools that enhance research efficiency, accuracy, and depth. By leveraging its advanced features, researchers can ensure that their studies are well-designed, their data is robustly analyzed, and their conclusions are reliable and impactful.
MORE LIKE THIS
Maximize Employee Feedback with QuestionPro Workforce’s Slack Integration
Nov 6, 2024
2024 Presidential Election Polls: Harris vs. Trump
Nov 5, 2024
Your First Question Should Be Anything But, “Is The Car Okay?” — Tuesday CX Thoughts
QuestionPro vs. Qualtrics: Who Offers the Best 360-Degree Feedback Platform for Your Needs?
Nov 4, 2024
Other categories
- Academic Research
- Artificial Intelligence
- Assessments
- Brand Awareness
- Case Studies
- Communities
- Consumer Insights
- Customer effort score
- Customer Engagement
- Customer Experience
- Customer Loyalty
- Customer Research
- Customer Satisfaction
- Employee Benefits
- Employee Engagement
- Employee Retention
- Friday Five
- General Data Protection Regulation
- Insights Hub
- Life@QuestionPro
- Market Research
- Mobile diaries
- Mobile Surveys
- New Features
- Online Communities
- Question Types
- Questionnaire
- QuestionPro Products
- Release Notes
- Research Tools and Apps
- Revenue at Risk
- Survey Templates
- Training Tips
- Tuesday CX Thoughts (TCXT)
- Uncategorized
- What’s Coming Up
- Workforce Intelligence
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Observational Study - In an observational study, the sample population being studied is measured, or surveyed, as it is. The researcher observes the subjects and measures variables, but does not influence the population in any way or attempt to intervene in the study. There is no manipulation by the researcher.
Revised on June 22, 2023. An observational study is used to answer a research question based purely on what the researcher observes. There is no interference or manipulation of the research subjects, and no control and treatment groups. These studies are often qualitative in nature and can be used for both exploratory and explanatory research ...
For example, studying the long-term effects of smoking requires an observational approach because we can’t ethically assign people to smoke or abstain from smoking. Cost-Effective: Observational studies are generally less expensive and time-consuming than experiments. Longitudinal Research: They are well-suited for long-term studies or those ...
Observational research studies involve the passive observation of subjects without any intervention or manipulation by researchers. These studies are designed to scrutinize the relationships between variables and test subjects, uncover patterns, and draw conclusions grounded in real-world data. Researchers refrain from interfering with the ...
Surveys have similar intent as observational studies, in that they are not meant to have an impact on the subject(s) being studied. However, surveys are known to have flaws that bias results. These flaws are typically related to the language of individual survey questions and the structure and control flow of the survey instrument itself.
Observational Studies. In observational (non-experimental) studies, investigators observe individuals without experimental manipulation or intervention. There is an inadequacy about the term “observational study” because the outcome variable of an experiment could also be observed. Observational studies can be further categorized into ...
A recent article in the BBC News Health section described a study concerning dementia and "mid-life ills". According to the article, researches followed more than 11,000 people over a period of 12-14 years. They found that smoking, diabetes, and high blood pressure were all factors in the onset of dementia.
Observational Study Definition. In an observational study, the researchers only observe the subjects and do not interfere or try to influence the outcomes. In other words, the researchers do not control the treatments or assign subjects to experimental groups. Instead, they observe and measure variables of interest and look for relationships ...
Observational Study: An observational study is a type of research wherein the researcher observes characteristics and measures variables of interest in a subset of a population, but does not manipulate or intervene (Atkinson et al., 2021). An example may be a sociologist who conducts a cross-sectional survey of the population to determine ...
Psychology. Experimental Study: Conducting a lab experiment to test the effect of sleep deprivation on cognitive performance by controlling sleep hours and measuring test scores. Observational Study: Observing social interactions in a public setting to explore natural communication patterns without intervention.