sample research study with experimental and control group

• Science Notes Posts
• Contact Science Notes
• Todd Helmenstine Biography
• Anne Helmenstine Biography
• Free Printable Periodic Tables (PDF and PNG)
• Periodic Table Wallpapers
• Interactive Periodic Table
• Periodic Table Posters
• Science Experiments for Kids
• How to Grow Crystals
• Chemistry Projects
• Fire and Flames Projects
• Holiday Science
• Chemistry Problems With Answers
• Physics Problems
• Unit Conversion Example Problems
• Chemistry Worksheets
• Biology Worksheets
• Periodic Table Worksheets
• Physical Science Worksheets
• Science Lab Worksheets
• My Amazon Books

Control Group Definition and Examples

The control group is the set of subjects that does not receive the treatment in a study. In other words, it is the group where the independent variable is held constant. This is important because the control group is a baseline for measuring the effects of a treatment in an experiment or study. A controlled experiment is one which includes one or more control groups.

• The experimental group experiences a treatment or change in the independent variable. In contrast, the independent variable is constant in the control group.
• A control group is important because it allows meaningful comparison. The researcher compares the experimental group to it to assess whether or not there is a relationship between the independent and dependent variable and the magnitude of the effect.
• There are different types of control groups. A controlled experiment has one more control group.

Control Group vs Experimental Group

The only difference between the control group and experimental group is that subjects in the experimental group receive the treatment being studied, while participants in the control group do not. Otherwise, all other variables between the two groups are the same.

Control Group vs Control Variable

A control group is not the same thing as a control variable. A control variable or controlled variable is any factor that is held constant during an experiment. Examples of common control variables include temperature, duration, and sample size. The control variables are the same for both the control and experimental groups.

Types of Control Groups

There are different types of control groups:

• Placebo group : A placebo group receives a placebo , which is a fake treatment that resembles the treatment in every respect except for the active ingredient. Both the placebo and treatment may contain inactive ingredients that produce side effects. Without a placebo group, these effects might be attributed to the treatment.
• Positive control group : A positive control group has conditions that guarantee a positive test result. The positive control group demonstrates an experiment is capable of producing a positive result. Positive controls help researchers identify problems with an experiment.
• Negative control group : A negative control group consists of subjects that are not exposed to a treatment. For example, in an experiment looking at the effect of fertilizer on plant growth, the negative control group receives no fertilizer.
• Natural control group : A natural control group usually is a set of subjects who naturally differ from the experimental group. For example, if you compare the effects of a treatment on women who have had children, the natural control group includes women who have not had children. Non-smokers are a natural control group in comparison to smokers.
• Randomized control group : The subjects in a randomized control group are randomly selected from a larger pool of subjects. Often, subjects are randomly assigned to either the control or experimental group. Randomization reduces bias in an experiment. There are different methods of randomly assigning test subjects.

Control Group Examples

Here are some examples of different control groups in action:

Negative Control and Placebo Group

For example, consider a study of a new cancer drug. The experimental group receives the drug. The placebo group receives a placebo, which contains the same ingredients as the drug formulation, minus the active ingredient. The negative control group receives no treatment. The reason for including the negative group is because the placebo group experiences some level of placebo effect, which is a response to experiencing some form of false treatment.

Positive and Negative Controls

For example, consider an experiment looking at whether a new drug kills bacteria. The experimental group exposes bacterial cultures to the drug. If the group survives, the drug is ineffective. If the group dies, the drug is effective.

The positive control group has a culture of bacteria that carry a drug resistance gene. If the bacteria survive drug exposure (as intended), then it shows the growth medium and conditions allow bacterial growth. If the positive control group dies, it indicates a problem with the experimental conditions. A negative control group of bacteria lacking drug resistance should die. If the negative control group survives, something is wrong with the experimental conditions.

• Bailey, R. A. (2008).  Design of Comparative Experiments . Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-0-521-68357-9.
• Chaplin, S. (2006). “The placebo response: an important part of treatment”.  Prescriber . 17 (5): 16–22. doi: 10.1002/psb.344
• Hinkelmann, Klaus; Kempthorne, Oscar (2008).  Design and Analysis of Experiments, Volume I: Introduction to Experimental Design  (2nd ed.). Wiley. ISBN 978-0-471-72756-9.
• Pithon, M.M. (2013). “Importance of the control group in scientific research.” Dental Press J Orthod . 18 (6):13-14. doi: 10.1590/s2176-94512013000600003
• Stigler, Stephen M. (1992). “A Historical View of Statistical Concepts in Psychology and Educational Research”. American Journal of Education . 101 (1): 60–70. doi: 10.1086/444032

Related Posts

Study Design 101

• Helpful formulas
• Finding specific study types
• Randomized Controlled Trial
• Meta- Analysis
• Systematic Review
• Practice Guideline
• Cohort Study
• Case Control Study
• Case Reports

A study design that randomly assigns participants into an experimental group or a control group. As the study is conducted, the only expected difference between the control and experimental groups in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) is the outcome variable being studied.

• Good randomization will "wash out" any population bias
• Easier to blind/mask than observational studies
• Results can be analyzed with well known statistical tools
• Populations of participating individuals are clearly identified

Disadvantages

• Expensive in terms of time and money
• Volunteer biases: the population that participates may not be representative of the whole
• Loss to follow-up attributed to treatment

Design pitfalls to look out for

An RCT should be a study of one population only.

Was the randomization actually "random", or are there really two populations being studied?

The variables being studied should be the only variables between the experimental group and the control group.

Are there any confounding variables between the groups?

Fictitious Example

To determine how a new type of short wave UVA-blocking sunscreen affects the general health of skin in comparison to a regular long wave UVA-blocking sunscreen, 40 trial participants were randomly separated into equal groups of 20: an experimental group and a control group. All participants' skin health was then initially evaluated. The experimental group wore the short wave UVA-blocking sunscreen daily, and the control group wore the long wave UVA-blocking sunscreen daily.

After one year, the general health of the skin was measured in both groups and statistically analyzed. In the control group, wearing long wave UVA-blocking sunscreen daily led to improvements in general skin health for 60% of the participants. In the experimental group, wearing short wave UVA-blocking sunscreen daily led to improvements in general skin health for 75% of the participants.

Real-life Examples

van Der Horst, N., Smits, D., Petersen, J., Goedhart, E., & Backx, F. (2015). The preventive effect of the nordic hamstring exercise on hamstring injuries in amateur soccer players: a randomized controlled trial. The American Journal of Sports Medicine, 43 (6), 1316-1323. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546515574057

This article reports on the research investigating whether the Nordic Hamstring Exercise is effective in preventing both the incidence and severity of hamstring injuries in male amateur soccer players. Over the course of a year, there was a statistically significant reduction in the incidence of hamstring injuries in players performing the NHE, but for those injured, there was no difference in severity of injury. There was also a high level of compliance in performing the NHE in that group of players.

Natour, J., Cazotti, L., Ribeiro, L., Baptista, A., & Jones, A. (2015). Pilates improves pain, function and quality of life in patients with chronic low back pain: a randomized controlled trial. Clinical Rehabilitation, 29 (1), 59-68. https://doi.org/10.1177/0269215514538981

This study assessed the effect of adding pilates to a treatment regimen of NSAID use for individuals with chronic low back pain. Individuals who included the pilates method in their therapy took fewer NSAIDs and experienced statistically significant improvements in pain, function, and quality of life.

Related Formulas

• Relative Risk

Related Terms

Blinding/Masking

When the groups that have been randomly selected from a population do not know whether they are in the control group or the experimental group.

Being able to show that an independent variable directly causes the dependent variable. This is generally very difficult to demonstrate in most study designs.

Confounding Variables

Variables that cause/prevent an outcome from occurring outside of or along with the variable being studied. These variables render it difficult or impossible to distinguish the relationship between the variable and outcome being studied).

Correlation

A relationship between two variables, but not necessarily a causation relationship.

Double Blinding/Masking

When the researchers conducting a blinded study do not know which participants are in the control group of the experimental group.

Null Hypothesis

That the relationship between the independent and dependent variables the researchers believe they will prove through conducting a study does not exist. To "reject the null hypothesis" is to say that there is a relationship between the variables.

Population/Cohort

A group that shares the same characteristics among its members (population).

Population Bias/Volunteer Bias

A sample may be skewed by those who are selected or self-selected into a study. If only certain portions of a population are considered in the selection process, the results of a study may have poor validity.

Randomization

Any of a number of mechanisms used to assign participants into different groups with the expectation that these groups will not differ in any significant way other than treatment and outcome.

Research (alternative) Hypothesis

The relationship between the independent and dependent variables that researchers believe they will prove through conducting a study.

Sensitivity

The relationship between what is considered a symptom of an outcome and the outcome itself; or the percent chance of not getting a false positive (see formulas).

Specificity

The relationship between not having a symptom of an outcome and not having the outcome itself; or the percent chance of not getting a false negative (see formulas).

Type 1 error

Rejecting a null hypothesis when it is in fact true. This is also known as an error of commission.

Type 2 error

The failure to reject a null hypothesis when it is in fact false. This is also known as an error of omission.

Now test yourself!

1. Having a volunteer bias in the population group is a good thing because it means the study participants are eager and make the study even stronger.

a) True b) False

2. Why is randomization important to assignment in an RCT?

a) It enables blinding/masking b) So causation may be extrapolated from results c) It balances out individual characteristics between groups. d) a and c e) b and c

← Previous Next →

© 2011-2019, The Himmelfarb Health Sciences Library Questions? Ask us .

• Himmelfarb Intranet
• Privacy Notice
• Terms of Use
• GW is committed to digital accessibility. If you experience a barrier that affects your ability to access content on this page, let us know via the Accessibility Feedback Form .

• Skip to secondary menu
• Skip to main content
• Skip to primary sidebar

Statistics By Jim

Making statistics intuitive

Control Group in an Experiment

By Jim Frost 3 Comments

A control group in an experiment does not receive the treatment. Instead, it serves as a comparison group for the treatments. Researchers compare the results of a treatment group to the control group to determine the effect size, also known as the treatment effect.

Imagine that a treatment group receives a vaccine and it has an infection rate of 10%. By itself, you don’t know if that’s an improvement. However, if you also have an unvaccinated control group with an infection rate of 20%, you know the vaccine improved the outcome by 10 percentage points.

By serving as a basis for comparison, the control group reveals the treatment’s effect.

Related post : Effect Sizes in Statistics

Using Control Groups in Experiments

Most experiments include a control group and at least one treatment group. In an ideal experiment, the subjects in all groups start with the same overall characteristics except that those in the treatment groups receive a treatment. When the groups are otherwise equivalent before treatment begins, you can attribute differences after the experiment to the treatments.

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assign subjects to the treatment and control groups randomly. This process helps ensure the groups are comparable when treatment begins. Consequently, treatment effects are the most likely cause for differences between groups at the end of the study. Statisticians consider RCTs to be the gold standard. To learn more about this process, read my post, Random Assignment in Experiments .

Observational studies either can’t use randomized groups or don’t use them because they’re too costly or problematic. In these studies, the characteristics of the control group might be different from the treatment groups at the start of the study, making it difficult to estimate the treatment effect accurately at the end. Case-Control studies are a specific type of observational study that uses a control group.

For these types of studies, analytical methods and design choices, such as regression analysis and matching, can help statistically mitigate confounding variables. Matching involves selecting participants with similar characteristics. For each participant in the treatment group, the researchers find a subject with comparable traits to include in the control group. To learn more about this type of study and matching, read my post, Observational Studies Explained .

Control groups are key way to increase the internal validity of an experiment. To learn more, read my post about internal and external validity .

Randomized versus non-randomized control groups are just several of the different types you can have. We’ll look at more kinds later!

Related posts : When to Use Regression Analysis

Example of a Control Group

Suppose we want to determine whether regular vitamin consumption affects the risk of dying. Our experiment has the following two experimental groups:

• Control group : Does not consume vitamin supplements
• Treatment group : Regularly consumes vitamin supplements.

In this experiment, we randomly assign subjects to the two groups. Because we use random assignment, the two groups start with similar characteristics, including healthy habits, physical attributes, medical conditions, and other factors affecting the outcome. The intentional introduction of vitamin supplements in the treatment group is the only systematic difference between the groups.

After the experiment is complete, we compare the death risk between the treatment and control groups. Because the groups started roughly equal, we can reasonably attribute differences in death risk at the end of the study to vitamin consumption. By having the control group as the basis of comparison, the effect of vitamin consumption becomes clear!

Types of Control Groups

Researchers can use different types of control groups in their experiments. Earlier, you learned about the random versus non-random kinds, but there are other variations. You can use various types depending on your research goals, constraints, and ethical issues, among other things.

Negative Control Group

The group introduces a condition that the researchers expect won’t have an effect. This group typically receives no treatment. These experiments compare the effectiveness of the experimental treatment to no treatment. For example, in a vaccine study, a negative control group does not get the vaccine.

Positive Control Group

Positive control groups typically receive a standard treatment that science has already proven effective. These groups serve as a benchmark for the performance of a conventional treatment. In this vein, experiments with positive control groups compare the effectiveness of a new treatment to a standard one.

For example, an old blood pressure medicine can be the treatment in a positive control group, while the treatment group receives the new, experimental blood pressure medicine. The researchers want to determine whether the new treatment is better than the previous treatment.

In these studies, subjects can still take the standard medication for their condition, a potentially critical ethics issue.

Placebo Control Group

Placebo control groups introduce a treatment lookalike that will not affect the outcome. Standard examples of placebos are sugar pills and saline solution injections instead of genuine medicine. The key is that the placebo looks like the actual treatment. Researchers use this approach when the recipients’ belief that they’re receiving the treatment might influence their outcomes. By using placebos, the experiment controls for these psychological benefits. The researchers want to determine whether the treatment performs better than the placebo effect.

Learn more about the Placebo Effect .

Blinded Control Groups

If the subject’s awareness of their group assignment might affect their outcomes, the researchers can use a blinded experimental design that does not tell participants their group membership. Typically, blinded control groups will receive placebos, as described above. In a double-blinded control group, both subjects and researchers don’t know group assignments.

Waitlist Control Group

When there is a waitlist to receive a new treatment, those on the waitlist can serve as a control group until they receive treatment. This type of design avoids ethical concerns about withholding a better treatment until the study finishes. This design can be a variation of a positive control group because the subjects might be using conventional medicines while on the waitlist.

Historical Control Group

When historical data for a comparison group exists, it can serve as a control group for an experiment. The group doesn’t exist in the study, but the researchers compare the treatment group to the existing data. For example, the researchers might have infection rate data for unvaccinated individuals to compare to the infection rate among the vaccinated participants in their study. This approach allows everyone in the experiment to receive the new treatment. However, differences in place, time, and other circumstances can reduce the value of these comparisons. In other words, other factors might account for the apparent effects.

Share this:

Reader Interactions

December 19, 2021 at 9:17 am

Thank you very much Jim for your quick and comprehensive feedback. Extremely helpful!! Regards, Arthur

December 17, 2021 at 4:46 pm

Thank you very much Jim, very interesting article.

Can I select a control group at the end of intervention/experiment? Currently I am managing a project in rural Cambodia in five villages, however I did not select any comparison/control site at the beginning. Since I know there are other villages which have not been exposed to any type of intervention, can i select them as a control site during my end-line data collection or it will not be a legitimate control? Thank you very much, Arthur

December 18, 2021 at 1:51 am

You might be able to use that approach, but it’s not ideal. The ideal is to have control groups defined at the beginning of the study. You can use the untreated villages as a type of historical control groups that I talk about in this article. Or, if they’re awaiting to receive the intervention, it might be akin to a waitlist control group.

If you go that route, you’ll need to consider whether there was some systematic reason why these villages have not received any intervention. For example, are the villages in question more remote? And, if there is a systematic reason, would that affect your outcome variable? More generally, are they systematically different? How well do the untreated villages represent your target population?

If you had selected control villages at the beginning, you’d have been better able to ensure there weren’t any systematic differences between the villages receiving interventions and those that didn’t.

If the villages that didn’t receive any interventions are systematically different, you’ll need to incorporate that into your interpretation of the results. Are they different in ways that affect the outcomes you’re measuring? Can those differences account for the difference in outcomes between the treated and untreated villages? Hopefully, you’d be able to measure those differences between untreated/treated villages.

So, yes, you can use that approach. It’s not perfect and there will potentially be more things for you to consider and factor into your conclusions. Despite these drawbacks, it’s possible that using a pseudo control group like that is better than not doing that because at least you can make comparisons to something. Otherwise, you won’t know whether the outcomes in the intervention villages represent an improvement! Just be aware of the extra considerations!

Best of luck with your research!

Comments and Questions Cancel reply

Have a language expert improve your writing

Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.

• Knowledge Base
• Methodology
• Controlled Experiments | Methods & Examples of Control

Controlled Experiments | Methods & Examples of Control

Published on 19 April 2022 by Pritha Bhandari . Revised on 10 October 2022.

In experiments , researchers manipulate independent variables to test their effects on dependent variables. In a controlled experiment , all variables other than the independent variable are controlled or held constant so they don’t influence the dependent variable.

Controlling variables can involve:

• Holding variables at a constant or restricted level (e.g., keeping room temperature fixed)
• Measuring variables to statistically control for them in your analyses
• Balancing variables across your experiment through randomisation (e.g., using a random order of tasks)

Table of contents

Why does control matter in experiments, methods of control, problems with controlled experiments, frequently asked questions about controlled experiments.

Control in experiments is critical for internal validity , which allows you to establish a cause-and-effect relationship between variables.

• Your independent variable is the colour used in advertising.
• Your dependent variable is the price that participants are willing to pay for a standard fast food meal.

Extraneous variables are factors that you’re not interested in studying, but that can still influence the dependent variable. For strong internal validity, you need to remove their effects from your experiment.

• Design and description of the meal
• Study environment (e.g., temperature or lighting)
• Participant’s frequency of buying fast food
• Participant’s familiarity with the specific fast food brand
• Participant’s socioeconomic status

Prevent plagiarism, run a free check.

You can control some variables by standardising your data collection procedures. All participants should be tested in the same environment with identical materials. Only the independent variable (e.g., advert colour) should be systematically changed between groups.

Other extraneous variables can be controlled through your sampling procedures . Ideally, you’ll select a sample that’s representative of your target population by using relevant inclusion and exclusion criteria (e.g., including participants from a specific income bracket, and not including participants with colour blindness).

By measuring extraneous participant variables (e.g., age or gender) that may affect your experimental results, you can also include them in later analyses.

After gathering your participants, you’ll need to place them into groups to test different independent variable treatments. The types of groups and method of assigning participants to groups will help you implement control in your experiment.

Control groups

Controlled experiments require control groups . Control groups allow you to test a comparable treatment, no treatment, or a fake treatment, and compare the outcome with your experimental treatment.

You can assess whether it’s your treatment specifically that caused the outcomes, or whether time or any other treatment might have resulted in the same effects.

• A control group that’s presented with red advertisements for a fast food meal
• An experimental group that’s presented with green advertisements for the same fast food meal

Random assignment

To avoid systematic differences between the participants in your control and treatment groups, you should use random assignment .

This helps ensure that any extraneous participant variables are evenly distributed, allowing for a valid comparison between groups .

Random assignment is a hallmark of a ‘true experiment’ – it differentiates true experiments from quasi-experiments .

Masking (blinding)

Masking in experiments means hiding condition assignment from participants or researchers – or, in a double-blind study , from both. It’s often used in clinical studies that test new treatments or drugs.

Sometimes, researchers may unintentionally encourage participants to behave in ways that support their hypotheses. In other cases, cues in the study environment may signal the goal of the experiment to participants and influence their responses.

Using masking means that participants don’t know whether they’re in the control group or the experimental group. This helps you control biases from participants or researchers that could influence your study results.

Although controlled experiments are the strongest way to test causal relationships, they also involve some challenges.

Difficult to control all variables

Especially in research with human participants, it’s impossible to hold all extraneous variables constant, because every individual has different experiences that may influence their perception, attitudes, or behaviors.

But measuring or restricting extraneous variables allows you to limit their influence or statistically control for them in your study.

Risk of low external validity

Controlled experiments have disadvantages when it comes to external validity – the extent to which your results can be generalised to broad populations and settings.

The more controlled your experiment is, the less it resembles real world contexts. That makes it harder to apply your findings outside of a controlled setting.

There’s always a tradeoff between internal and external validity . It’s important to consider your research aims when deciding whether to prioritise control or generalisability in your experiment.

Experimental designs are a set of procedures that you plan in order to examine the relationship between variables that interest you.

To design a successful experiment, first identify:

• A testable hypothesis
• One or more independent variables that you will manipulate
• One or more dependent variables that you will measure

When designing the experiment, first decide:

• How your variable(s) will be manipulated
• How you will control for any potential confounding or lurking variables
• How many subjects you will include
• How you will assign treatments to your subjects

Cite this Scribbr article

If you want to cite this source, you can copy and paste the citation or click the ‘Cite this Scribbr article’ button to automatically add the citation to our free Reference Generator.

Bhandari, P. (2022, October 10). Controlled Experiments | Methods & Examples of Control. Scribbr. Retrieved 10 July 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/controlled-experiments/

Is this article helpful?

Pritha Bhandari

Control Group: The Key Elements In Experimental Research

Understand the design and interpretation of control group in research experiments for powerful conclusions

The control group constitutes a baseline for comparison, enabling researchers to assess the true effects of independent variables. Researchers can effectively assess the impact of independent variables and discern causation from correlation, by comparing the results of experimental groups to those of control groups. This article will highlight the significance and implementation of control groups in research experiments, and explain their role in ensuring scientific methodology and reliable findings. We will explore the fundamental principles of control groups, examine their types, and discuss their importance in minimizing biases and confounding factors.

What Is A Control Group?

A control group is a fundamental component of scientific experiments designed to compare and evaluate the effects of an intervention or treatment. It serves as a baseline against which the experimental group is measured. The control group consists of individuals or subjects who do not receive the experimental treatment but are otherwise subjected to the same conditions and procedures as the experimental group. Working with a control group, researchers can assess the specific impact of the intervention by comparing the outcomes between the experimental and control groups.

Related article: The Role Of Experimental Groups In Research

The Role Of A Control Group In Scientific Experiments

A control group plays a crucial role in scientific experiments as it enables researchers to establish a valid cause-and-effect relationship between the experimental treatment and the observed outcomes. By comparing the experimental group’s results with those of the control group, researchers can determine whether any observed effects are due to the treatment or other factors. The control group serves as a standard for comparison, helping to isolate the specific influence of the intervention being tested. It provides a baseline against which experimental group outcomes can be evaluated and allows researchers to draw accurate conclusions about the treatment’s efficacy or the impact of other variables being studied.

Why Is A Control Group Necessary?

Including a control group in scientific experiments is essential for ensuring the reliability and validity of the findings. Without a control group, it becomes challenging to determine whether any observed changes or effects are truly attributable to the intervention or simply a result of chance or other factors. The control group allows researchers to differentiate between the effects of the experimental treatment and background noise or confounding variables because it provides a reference point. A well-designed control group is crucial for generating reliable and meaningful results, intensifying the scientific rigor of the study, and supporting evidence-based decision-making in various fields of research.

Types Of Control Groups

In scientific experiments, different types of control groups are used to ensure accurate and meaningful results. These control groups help researchers compare the effects of an intervention or treatment against a reference point. Four common types of control groups are negative controls, positive controls, placebo controls, and randomized control groups.

Negative Controls

Negative controls are an integral part of scientific experiments, serving as a reference to establish the absence of a specific effect. In these control groups, no treatment is administered, allowing researchers to compare the outcomes with the experimental group. Researchers can identify and account for confounding variables and background effects that may influence the results when they include negative control groups. This ensures the specificity of the treatment and enhances the validity of the study. Negative controls can take various forms, such as placebos or control groups receiving no treatment, depending on the research question.

Positive controls

Positive controls are references to validate the reliability and sensitivity of the experimental setup. In these control groups, a known treatment or condition is applied to generate an expected response or outcome. By including positive controls, researchers can assess whether the experimental conditions and methodology are capable of detecting the desired effect. Positive controls act as a benchmark, providing evidence that the experimental system is functioning properly and capable of producing the anticipated results. This helps researchers ensure the validity and accuracy of their findings by confirming that the experimental conditions are conducive to detecting the intended response.

Placebo controls

Placebo controls play a significant role in medical and clinical research by providing a baseline for comparison and evaluating the effectiveness of a new treatment or intervention. In a placebo control group, participants receive an inactive substance or sham procedure that is indistinguishable from the active treatment being tested. The purpose of the placebo control is to assess the specific effects of the treatment by comparing it to the effects observed in the placebo group. By administering a placebo, researchers can account for the psychological and physiological responses that may occur simply due to the participants’ belief in receiving treatment. This helps determine the true efficacy of the active treatment, as any observed improvements in the treatment group can be attributed to the treatment itself, beyond the placebo effect. Placebo controls are essential in clinical trials and other studies to minimize bias, establish the true therapeutic benefits of treatment, and ensure the reliability of the results.

Randomized Control Group

Randomized control groups are an essential component of research studies as they introduce unpredictability to control factors. By randomly assigning participants to either the control or treatment group, researchers ensure that the variables not specifically tested are evenly distributed. This randomization helps eliminate bias and allows for accurate analysis of the independent variable. By using randomized control groups, researchers can draw reliable conclusions about the impact of the variables being studied. 

Quasi-Experimental Designs And Their Role In Social Policy Studies

Quasi-experimental designs in social policy studies often utilize control groups to assess the impact of interventions or policies on a target population. While these designs do not involve random assignment of participants to groups, they still incorporate a control group to establish a baseline for comparison. The control group consists of individuals who do not receive the intervention or policy being studied, allowing researchers to evaluate the effects of the intervention by comparing outcomes between the treatment group and the control group. This helps control for confounding variables and provides insights into a causal relationship between the intervention and the observed outcomes. 

Implementing Control Groups In Experimental Design And Analysis

Control groups serve as a reference point against which the effects of experimental interventions can be measured. They provide a baseline to compare with the treatment group, allowing researchers to determine the true impact of the variables under investigation. This approach helps establish causal relationships and increases the internal validity of the research. 

Randomized Controlled Experiments (RCTs) For Public Policy Studies

Randomized controlled experiments are widely used in public policy studies. RCTs involve randomly assigning participants to either a treatment group or a control group. The treatment group receives the intervention or policy being tested, while the control group does not. RCTs help ensure that any observed differences between the groups are not due to pre-existing factors, increasing the reliability of the study’s findings. RCTs are particularly valuable in evaluating the impact of public policies and interventions on a large scale.

Non-Experimental Research Vs. Actual Experimentation

When determining the baseline for comparison in research, researchers must consider whether to use non-experimental research or actual experimentation. Non-experimental research involves observing and analyzing existing data without manipulating any variables. This approach is helpful in situations where it is not feasible or ethical to conduct an experiment. On the other hand, actual experimentation involves actively manipulating variables and comparing groups with and without the intervention. While actual experimentation provides stronger causal evidence, non-experimental research can still provide valuable insights when experiments are not possible.

Identifying Confounding Variables And Factors

Confounding variables and factors are extraneous variables that can influence the relationship between the independent and dependent variables in a study. Identifying and controlling for confounding variables is crucial to ensure accurate and valid results. Researchers employ various techniques to address confounding variables, such as random assignment of participants to groups, matching participants based on relevant characteristics, or statistical techniques like regression analysis. By accounting for confounding variables, researchers can strengthen the internal validity of their studies and draw more accurate conclusions about the relationship between variables.

The Vital Role Of The Control Group In Scientific Methodology And Analysis

In experimental studies, the control group serves as a standard against which the effects of a particular intervention or treatment are measured. By keeping all variables constant except for the one being studied, researchers can isolate the true impact of the intervention. This helps to establish causality and determine whether the observed effects are indeed due to the intervention or simply a result of other factors.

In addition to experimental studies, control groups are also essential in observational and epidemiological research. They help researchers account for potential biases and confounding factors when analyzing the relationship between variables. By comparing a group exposed to a certain risk factor or condition with a similar group that is not exposed, researchers can better understand the true impact of the risk factor or condition on the outcome of interest.

Overall, the control group serves as a guide in scientific methodology and analysis. It allows researchers to draw valid and reliable conclusions, enhance the internal validity of their studies, and provide more robust evidence for decision-making in various fields, including medicine, psychology, biology, and social sciences.

Mind the Graph Has 200+ Pre-Made Beautiful Templates For Professional Infographics

Mind the Graph is a powerful platform that offers valuable assistance to scientists in their research endeavors. With a collection of over 200 pre-made templates, Mind the Graph enables scientists to effortlessly create professional and visually captivating infographics. These templates are the foundation for conveying complex scientific concepts, data, and research findings in a visually engaging manner. Professionals can simply choose from a wide range of visually appealing templates and customize them with their own data, illustrations, and text to effectively communicate their scientific discoveries. Sign up for free and start your first design now.

Subscribe to our newsletter

Exclusive high quality content about effective visual communication in science.

Content tags

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

What Is a Control Group?

Control Groups vs. Experimental Groups in Psychology Research

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Emily is a board-certified science editor who has worked with top digital publishing brands like Voices for Biodiversity, Study.com, GoodTherapy, Vox, and Verywell.

Doug Corrance/The Image Bank/Getty Images

Control Group vs. Experimental Group

Types of control groups.

In simple terms, the control group comprises participants who do not receive the experimental treatment. When conducting an experiment, these people are randomly assigned to this group. They also closely resemble the participants who are in the experimental group or the individuals who receive the treatment.

Experimenters utilize variables to make comparisons between an experimental group and a control group. A variable is something that researchers can manipulate, measure, and control in an experiment. The independent variable is the aspect of the experiment that the researchers manipulate (or the treatment). The dependent variable is what the researchers measure to see if the independent variable had an effect.

While they do not receive the treatment, the control group does play a vital role in the research process. Experimenters compare the experimental group to the control group to determine if the treatment had an effect.

By serving as a comparison group, researchers can isolate the independent variable and look at the impact it had.

The simplest way to determine the difference between a control group and an experimental group is to determine which group receives the treatment and which does not. To ensure that the results can then be compared accurately, the two groups should be otherwise identical.

Not exposed to the treatment (the independent variable)

Used to provide a baseline to compare results against

May receive a placebo treatment

Exposed to the treatment

Used to measure the effects of the independent variable

Identical to the control group aside from their exposure to the treatment

Why a Control Group Is Important

While the control group does not receive treatment, it does play a critical role in the experimental process. This group serves as a benchmark, allowing researchers to compare the experimental group to the control group to see what sort of impact changes to the independent variable produced.  

Because participants have been randomly assigned to either the control group or the experimental group, it can be assumed that the groups are comparable.

Any differences between the two groups are, therefore, the result of the manipulations of the independent variable. The experimenters carry out the exact same procedures with both groups with the exception of the manipulation of the independent variable in the experimental group.

There are a number of different types of control groups that might be utilized in psychology research. Some of these include:

• Positive control groups : In this case, researchers already know that a treatment is effective but want to learn more about the impact of variations of the treatment. In this case, the control group receives the treatment that is known to work, while the experimental group receives the variation so that researchers can learn more about how it performs and compares to the control.
• Negative control group : In this type of control group, the participants are not given a treatment. The experimental group can then be compared to the group that did not experience any change or results.
• Placebo control group : This type of control group receives a placebo treatment that they believe will have an effect. This control group allows researchers to examine the impact of the placebo effect and how the experimental treatment compared to the placebo treatment.
• Randomized control group : This type of control group involves using random selection to help ensure that the participants in the control group accurately reflect the demographics of the larger population.
• Natural control group : This type of control group is naturally selected, often by situational factors. For example, researchers might compare people who have experienced trauma due to war to people who have not experienced war. The people who have not experienced war-related trauma would be the control group.

Examples of Control Groups

Control groups can be used in a variety of situations. For example, imagine a study in which researchers example how distractions during an exam influence test results. The control group would take an exam in a setting with no distractions, while the experimental groups would be exposed to different distractions. The results of the exam would then be compared to see the effects that distractions had on test scores.

Experiments that look at the effects of medications on certain conditions are also examples of how a control group can be used in research. For example, researchers looking at the effectiveness of a new antidepressant might use a control group that receives a placebo and an experimental group that receives the new medication. At the end of the study, researchers would compare measures of depression for both groups to determine what impact the new medication had.

After the experiment is complete, researchers can then look at the test results and start making comparisons between the control group and the experimental group.

Uses for Control Groups

Researchers utilize control groups to conduct research in a range of different fields. Some common uses include:

• Psychology : Researchers utilize control groups to learn more about mental health, behaviors, and treatments.
• Medicine : Control groups can be used to learn more about certain health conditions, assess how well medications work to treat these conditions, and assess potential side effects that may result.
• Education : Educational researchers utilize control groups to learn more about how different curriculums, programs, or instructional methods impact student outcomes.
• Marketing : Researchers utilize control groups to learn more about how consumers respond to advertising and marketing efforts.

Malay S, Chung KC. The choice of controls for providing validity and evidence in clinical research . Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012 Oct;130(4):959-965. doi:10.1097/PRS.0b013e318262f4c8

National Cancer Institute. Control group.

Pithon MM. Importance of the control group in scientific research . Dental Press J Orthod. 2013;18(6):13-14. doi:10.1590/s2176-94512013000600003

Karlsson P, Bergmark A. Compared with what? An analysis of control-group types in Cochrane and Campbell reviews of psychosocial treatment efficacy with substance use disorders . Addiction . 2015;110(3):420-8. doi:10.1111/add.12799

Myers A, Hansen C. Experimental Psychology . Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning; 2012.

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

In order to continue enjoying our site, we ask that you confirm your identity as a human. Thank you very much for your cooperation.

Understanding Control Groups for Research

Introduction

What are control groups in research, examples of control groups in research, control group vs. experimental group, types of control groups, control groups in non-experimental research.

A control group is typically thought of as the baseline in an experiment. In an experiment, clinical trial, or other sort of controlled study, there are at least two groups whose results are compared against each other.

The experimental group receives some sort of treatment, and their results are compared against those of the control group, which is not given the treatment. This is important to determine whether there is an identifiable causal relationship between the treatment and the resulting effects.

As intuitive as this may sound, there is an entire methodology that is useful to understanding the role of the control group in experimental research and as part of a broader concept in research. This article will examine the particulars of that methodology so you can design your research more rigorously .

Suppose that a friend or colleague of yours has a headache. You give them some over-the-counter medicine to relieve some of the pain. Shortly after they take the medicine, the pain is gone and they feel better. In casual settings, we can assume that it must be the medicine that was the cause of their headache going away.

In scientific research, however, we don't really know if the medicine made a difference or if the headache would have gone away on its own. Maybe in the time it took for the headache to go away, they ate or drank something that might have had an effect. Perhaps they had a quick nap that helped relieve the tension from the headache. Without rigorously exploring this phenomenon , any number of confounding factors exist that can make us question the actual efficacy of any particular treatment.

Experimental research relies on observing differences between the two groups by "controlling" the independent variable , or in the case of our example above, the medicine that is given or not given depending on the group. The dependent variable in this case is the change in how the person suffering the headache feels, and the difference between taking and not taking the medicine is evidence (or lack thereof) that the treatment is effective.

The catch is that, between the control group and other groups (typically called experimental groups), it's important to ensure that all other factors are the same or at least as similar as possible. Things such as age, fitness level, and even occupation can affect the likelihood someone has a headache and whether a certain medication is effective.

Faced with this dynamic, researchers try to make sure that participants in their control group and experimental group are as similar as possible to each other, with the only difference being the treatment they receive.

Experimental research is often associated with scientists in lab coats holding beakers containing liquids with funny colors. Clinical trials that deal with medical treatments rely primarily, if not exclusively, on experimental research designs involving comparisons between control and experimental groups.

However, many studies in the social sciences also employ some sort of experimental design which calls for the use of control groups. This type of research is useful when researchers are trying to confirm or challenge an existing notion or measure the difference in effects.

Workplace efficiency research

How might a company know if an employee training program is effective? They may decide to pilot the program to a small group of their employees before they implement the training to their entire workforce.

If they adopt an experimental design, they could compare results between an experimental group of workers who participate in the training program against a control group who continues as per usual without any additional training.

Qualitative data analysis starts with ATLAS.ti

Turn data into rich insights with our powerful data analysis software. Get started with a free trial.

Mental health research

Music certainly has profound effects on psychology, but what kind of music would be most effective for concentration? Here, a researcher might be interested in having participants in a control group perform a series of tasks in an environment with no background music, and participants in multiple experimental groups perform those same tasks with background music of different genres. The subsequent analysis could determine how well people perform with classical music, jazz music, or no music at all in the background.

Educational research

Suppose that you want to improve reading ability among elementary school students, and there is research on a particular teaching method that is associated with facilitating reading comprehension. How do you measure the effects of that teaching method?

A study could be conducted on two groups of otherwise equally proficient students to measure the difference in test scores. The teacher delivers the same instruction to the control group as they have to previous students, but they teach the experimental group using the new technique. A reading test after a certain amount of instruction could determine the extent of effectiveness of the new teaching method.

As you can see from the three examples above, experimental groups are the counterbalance to control groups. A control group offers an essential point of comparison. For an experimental study to be considered credible, it must establish a baseline against which novel research is conducted.

Researchers can determine the makeup of their experimental and control groups from their literature review . Remember that the objective of a review is to establish what is known about the object of inquiry and what is not known. Where experimental groups explore the unknown aspects of scientific knowledge, a control group is a sort of simulation of what would happen if the treatment or intervention was not administered. As a result, it will benefit researchers to have a foundational knowledge of the existing research to create a credible control group against which experimental results are compared, especially in terms of remaining sensitive to relevant participant characteristics that could confound the effects of your treatment or intervention so that you can appropriately distribute participants between the experimental and control groups.

There are multiple control groups to consider depending on the study you are looking to conduct. All of them are variations of the basic control group used to establish a baseline for experimental conditions.

No-treatment control group

This kind of control group is common when trying to establish the effects of an experimental treatment against the absence of treatment. This is arguably the most straightforward approach to an experimental design as it aims to directly demonstrate how a certain change in conditions produces an effect.

Placebo control group

In this case, the control group receives some sort of treatment under the exact same procedures as those in the experimental group. The only difference in this case is that the treatment in the placebo control group has already been judged to be ineffective, except that the research participants don't know that it is ineffective.

Placebo control groups (or negative control groups) are useful for allowing researchers to account for any psychological or affective factors that might impact the outcomes. The negative control group exists to explicitly eliminate factors other than changes in the independent variable conditions as causes of the effects experienced in the experimental group.

Positive control group

Contrasted with a no-treatment control group, a positive control group employs a treatment against which the treatment in the experimental group is compared. However, unlike in a placebo group, participants in a positive control group receive treatment that is known to have an effect.

If we were to use our first example of headache medicine, a researcher could compare results between medication that is commonly known as effective against the newer medication that the researcher thinks is more effective. Positive control groups are useful for validating experimental results when compared against familiar results.

Historical control group

Rather than study participants in control group conditions, researchers may employ existing data to create historical control groups. This form of control group is useful for examining changing conditions over time, particularly when incorporating past conditions that can't be replicated in the analysis.

Qualitative research more often relies on non-experimental research such as observations and interviews to examine phenomena in their natural environments. This sort of research is more suited for inductive and exploratory inquiries, not confirmatory studies meant to test or measure a phenomenon.

That said, the broader concept of a control group is still present in observational and interview research in the form of a comparison group. Comparison groups are used in qualitative research designs to show differences between phenomena, with the exception being that there is no baseline against which data is analyzed.

Comparison groups are useful when an experimental environment cannot produce results that would be applicable to real-world conditions. Research inquiries examining the social world face challenges of having too many variables to control, making observations and interviews across comparable groups more appropriate for data collection than clinical or sterile environments.

Analyze data and generate rich results with ATLAS.ti

Try out a free trial of ATLAS.ti to see how you can make the most of your qualitative data.

What are Controlled Experiments?

Determining Cause and Effect

skynesher / Getty Images

• Research, Samples, and Statistics
• Key Concepts
• Major Sociologists
• News & Issues
• Recommended Reading
• Archaeology

A controlled experiment is a highly focused way of collecting data and is especially useful for determining patterns of cause and effect. This type of experiment is used in a wide variety of fields, including medical, psychological, and sociological research. Below, we’ll define what controlled experiments are and provide some examples.

Key Takeaways: Controlled Experiments

• A controlled experiment is a research study in which participants are randomly assigned to experimental and control groups.
• A controlled experiment allows researchers to determine cause and effect between variables.
• One drawback of controlled experiments is that they lack external validity (which means their results may not generalize to real-world settings).

Experimental and Control Groups

To conduct a controlled experiment , two groups are needed: an experimental group and a control group . The experimental group is a group of individuals that are exposed to the factor being examined. The control group, on the other hand, is not exposed to the factor. It is imperative that all other external influences are held constant . That is, every other factor or influence in the situation needs to remain exactly the same between the experimental group and the control group. The only thing that is different between the two groups is the factor being researched.

For example, if you were studying the effects of taking naps on test performance, you could assign participants to two groups: participants in one group would be asked to take a nap before their test, and those in the other group would be asked to stay awake. You would want to ensure that everything else about the groups (the demeanor of the study staff, the environment of the testing room, etc.) would be equivalent for each group. Researchers can also develop more complex study designs with more than two groups. For example, they might compare test performance among participants who had a 2-hour nap, participants who had a 20-minute nap, and participants who didn’t nap.

Assigning Participants to Groups

In controlled experiments, researchers use  random assignment (i.e. participants are randomly assigned to be in the experimental group or the control group) in order to minimize potential confounding variables in the study. For example, imagine a study of a new drug in which all of the female participants were assigned to the experimental group and all of the male participants were assigned to the control group. In this case, the researchers couldn’t be sure if the study results were due to the drug being effective or due to gender—in this case, gender would be a confounding variable.

Random assignment is done in order to ensure that participants are not assigned to experimental groups in a way that could bias the study results. A study that compares two groups but does not randomly assign participants to the groups is referred to as quasi-experimental, rather than a true experiment.

Blind and Double-Blind Studies

In a blind experiment, participants don’t know whether they are in the experimental or control group. For example, in a study of a new experimental drug, participants in the control group may be given a pill (known as a placebo ) that has no active ingredients but looks just like the experimental drug. In a double-blind study , neither the participants nor the experimenter knows which group the participant is in (instead, someone else on the research staff is responsible for keeping track of group assignments). Double-blind studies prevent the researcher from inadvertently introducing sources of bias into the data collected.

Example of a Controlled Experiment

If you were interested in studying whether or not violent television programming causes aggressive behavior in children, you could conduct a controlled experiment to investigate. In such a study, the dependent variable would be the children’s behavior, while the independent variable would be exposure to violent programming. To conduct the experiment, you would expose an experimental group of children to a movie containing a lot of violence, such as martial arts or gun fighting. The control group, on the other hand, would watch a movie that contained no violence.

To test the aggressiveness of the children, you would take two measurements : one pre-test measurement made before the movies are shown, and one post-test measurement made after the movies are watched. Pre-test and post-test measurements should be taken of both the control group and the experimental group. You would then use statistical techniques to determine whether the experimental group showed a significantly greater increase in aggression, compared to participants in the control group.

Studies of this sort have been done many times and they usually find that children who watch a violent movie are more aggressive afterward than those who watch a movie containing no violence.

Strengths and Weaknesses

Controlled experiments have both strengths and weaknesses. Among the strengths is the fact that results can establish causation. That is, they can determine cause and effect between variables. In the above example, one could conclude that being exposed to representations of violence causes an increase in aggressive behavior. This kind of experiment can also zero-in on a single independent variable, since all other factors in the experiment are held constant.

On the downside, controlled experiments can be artificial. That is, they are done, for the most part, in a manufactured laboratory setting and therefore tend to eliminate many real-life effects. As a result, analysis of a controlled experiment must include judgments about how much the artificial setting has affected the results. Results from the example given might be different if, say, the children studied had a conversation about the violence they watched with a respected adult authority figure, like a parent or teacher, before their behavior was measured. Because of this, controlled experiments can sometimes have lower external validity (that is, their results might not generalize to real-world settings).

Updated  by Nicki Lisa Cole, Ph.D.

• The Difference Between Control Group and Experimental Group
• Examples of Independent and Dependent Variables
• Difference Between Independent and Dependent Variables
• What Is a Double Blind Experiment?
• Scientific Method Vocabulary Terms
• What Is a Controlled Experiment?
• Understanding Simple vs Controlled Experiments
• Understanding Experimental Groups
• What Is the Difference Between a Control Variable and Control Group?
• Example of a Permutation Test
• What Are Natural Experiments and How Do Economists Use Them?
• What Is an Experiment? Definition and Design
• What Is a Control Group?
• The Milgram Experiment: How Far Will You Go to Obey an Order?
• What Is Deindividuation in Psychology? Definition and Examples
• What Is the Mere Exposure Effect in Psychology?

What is a control group?

Last updated

6 February 2023

Reviewed by

The independent variable is the thing the researchers are testing. They are trying to determine whether it’s responsible for any change that occurs in the experiment. The research control group is key for this as it allows them to isolate the independent variable’s effect on the experiment.

Make research less tedious

Dovetail streamlines research to help you uncover and share actionable insights

• What is a control group in simple terms?

Splitting the audience you’re testing into two identical groups will give you a control group and an experimental group.

Nothing will change for the control group during the research. For example, this group would receive a placebo in pharmaceutical research.

In contrast, one key variable changes for the experimental group. In a pharmaceutical experiment, researchers might administer a different drug. In advertising research, this might involve increasing the experimental group’s exposure to ads.

When evaluating the results, researchers will compare those obtained from the experimental group against the control group. The control group is the baseline.

In research where the two groups are truly identical, seeing different results between the groups suggests they were caused by the independent variable—the only thing that changed.

Control gr oup examples

Examples of control groups in research exist in a wide range of business contexts. For example:

You want to test whether a 15% loyalty discount for repeat purchases would positively impact retention and revenue. So, you send a discount email to 50% of your customers who were randomly selected. The other 50% of customers are your control group.

You want to test whether a personal sales call will increase your chance of a sales conversion. You add this step to your existing nurturing campaign for a randomly selected portion of leads. Those who don’t receive a phone call are your control group.

You want to test whether different product packaging can change brand perceptions. To do this, you change the packaging for a randomly selected portion of customers. Customers who receive the same packaging as before are your control group. Sending a survey to all customers about their brand perceptions before and after the experiment will reveal the impact of the new packaging.

These are just some of the countless examples of control groups. Perhaps the most well-known example is in the medical field, where placebos treatments are used. Control groups receive placebo treatments under the exact same conditions as the experimental group to determine the treatment’s effects.

• The importance of control groups

Control groups matter in research because they act as the benchmark to establish your results’ validity . They enable you to compare the results you see in your experimental group and determine if the variable you changed caused a different outcome. 

Control groups and experimental groups should be identical in their makeup and environment in every possible way. You’ll be able to draw more definitive conclusions as long as the research process is identical for both groups. In other words, working with control groups improves your research’s internal validity .

• Control groups in experiments

Control groups are most common in experimental research, where you’re trying to determine the impact of a variable you’re changing. You split your research group into two groups that are as identical as possible. One receives a placebo, for example, while the other receives a treatment.

In this environment, the identical makeup of the group is essential. The most common way to accomplish this is by randomly splitting the group in two and ensuring that any variables you’re not testing remain the same throughout the research process.

You can also conduct experiments with multiple control groups. For example, when testing new ad messaging, the split between two control groups and one experimental group may be as follows:

Control group 1 receives no advertising

Control group 2 receives the existing advertising

Control group 3 receives the new ad messaging

This more complex type of experiment can test both the overall impact of ads and how much of that impact you could attribute to the new messaging.

• Control groups in non-experimental research

Control groups are less common in non-experimental research but can still be useful. They most commonly occur in the following process designs:

Matching design

In this research process, every person in the experimental group is matched to one other person based on their environmental and demographic similarities.

This is most common when randomly selecting two groups on a broader scale would not result in them being equal. It can help you ensure that the control group or individual continues to act as the baseline for the variable you are studying.

Quasi-experimental design

This is where multiple groups are part of the research, but they are not randomly assigned to test and control conditions.

Quasi-experimental design is most common when the groups you are studying already exist, like customers being shown new ad messaging versus non-customers. The control group in this example is made up of your non-customers, as the variable did not change for them.

• Two common types of control groups

While control groups tend to be similar across research contexts, they generally fall into two categories: negative and positive control groups.

Negative control groups

The independent variable does not change in a negative control group. This group represents the true status quo, and you would test the experimental group against it.

Examples of negative control groups include many of the experiments listed above, like only changing product packaging or only offering a discount for one group of customers.

Positive control groups

In positive control groups, the independent variable is changed where it is already known to have an effect. You would compare this group’s results against those from the experimental group receiving a variation of the same independent variable. This would enable you to determine if the effect changes.

In the example of a multi-control group experiment seen above, control group 1 (receiving no advertising) is a negative control group, while control group 2 (receiving the current level of advertising) is a positive control group.

Should you be using a customer insights hub?

Do you want to discover previous research faster?

Do you share your research findings with others?

Do you analyze research data?

Start for free today, add your research, and get to key insights faster

Editor’s picks

Last updated: 18 April 2023

Last updated: 27 February 2023

Last updated: 6 February 2023

Last updated: 6 October 2023

Last updated: 5 February 2023

Last updated: 16 April 2023

Last updated: 9 March 2023

Last updated: 12 December 2023

Last updated: 11 March 2024

Last updated: 4 July 2024

Last updated: 6 March 2024

Last updated: 5 March 2024

Last updated: 13 May 2024

Latest articles

Related topics, .css-je19u9{-webkit-align-items:flex-end;-webkit-box-align:flex-end;-ms-flex-align:flex-end;align-items:flex-end;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-flex-direction:row;-ms-flex-direction:row;flex-direction:row;-webkit-box-flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-flex-wrap:wrap;-ms-flex-wrap:wrap;flex-wrap:wrap;-webkit-box-pack:center;-ms-flex-pack:center;-webkit-justify-content:center;justify-content:center;row-gap:0;text-align:center;max-width:671px;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}}@media (max-width: 799px){.css-je19u9{max-width:400px;}.css-je19u9>span{white-space:pre;}} decide what to .css-1kiodld{max-height:56px;display:-webkit-box;display:-webkit-flex;display:-ms-flexbox;display:flex;-webkit-align-items:center;-webkit-box-align:center;-ms-flex-align:center;align-items:center;}@media (max-width: 1079px){.css-1kiodld{display:none;}} build next, decide what to build next.

Users report unexpectedly high data usage, especially during streaming sessions.

Users find it hard to navigate from the home page to relevant playlists in the app.

It would be great to have a sleep timer feature, especially for bedtime listening.

I need better filters to find the songs or artists I’m looking for.

Log in or sign up

Get started for free

• Games & Quizzes
• History & Society
• Science & Tech
• Biographies
• Animals & Nature
• Geography & Travel
• Arts & Culture
• On This Day
• One Good Fact
• New Articles
• Lifestyles & Social Issues
• Philosophy & Religion
• Politics, Law & Government
• World History
• Health & Medicine
• Browse Biographies
• Birds, Reptiles & Other Vertebrates
• Bugs, Mollusks & Other Invertebrates
• Environment
• Fossils & Geologic Time
• Entertainment & Pop Culture
• Sports & Recreation
• Visual Arts
• Demystified
• Image Galleries
• Infographics
• Top Questions
• Britannica Kids
• Saving Earth
• Space Next 50
• Student Center
• When did science begin?
• Where was science invented?

control group

Our editors will review what you’ve submitted and determine whether to revise the article.

• Verywell Mind - What Is a Control Group?
• National Center for Biotechnology Information - PubMed Central - Control Group Design: Enhancing Rigor in Research of Mind-Body Therapies for Depression

control group , the standard to which comparisons are made in an experiment. Many experiments are designed to include a control group and one or more experimental groups; in fact, some scholars reserve the term experiment for study designs that include a control group. Ideally, the control group and the experimental groups are identical in every way except that the experimental groups are subjected to treatments or interventions believed to have an effect on the outcome of interest while the control group is not. Inclusion of a control group greatly strengthens researchers’ ability to draw conclusions from a study. Indeed, only in the presence of a control group can a researcher determine whether a treatment under investigation truly has a significant effect on an experimental group, and the possibility of making an erroneous conclusion is reduced. See also scientific method .

A typical use of a control group is in an experiment in which the effect of a treatment is unknown and comparisons between the control group and the experimental group are used to measure the effect of the treatment. For instance, in a pharmaceutical study to determine the effectiveness of a new drug on the treatment of migraines , the experimental group will be administered the new drug and the control group will be administered a placebo (a drug that is inert, or assumed to have no effect). Each group is then given the same questionnaire and asked to rate the effectiveness of the drug in relieving symptoms . If the new drug is effective, the experimental group is expected to have a significantly better response to it than the control group. Another possible design is to include several experimental groups, each of which is given a different dosage of the new drug, plus one control group. In this design, the analyst will compare results from each of the experimental groups to the control group. This type of experiment allows the researcher to determine not only if the drug is effective but also the effectiveness of different dosages. In the absence of a control group, the researcher’s ability to draw conclusions about the new drug is greatly weakened, due to the placebo effect and other threats to validity. Comparisons between the experimental groups with different dosages can be made without including a control group, but there is no way to know if any of the dosages of the new drug are more or less effective than the placebo.

It is important that every aspect of the experimental environment be as alike as possible for all subjects in the experiment. If conditions are different for the experimental and control groups, it is impossible to know whether differences between groups are actually due to the difference in treatments or to the difference in environment. For example, in the new migraine drug study, it would be a poor study design to administer the questionnaire to the experimental group in a hospital setting while asking the control group to complete it at home. Such a study could lead to a misleading conclusion, because differences in responses between the experimental and control groups could have been due to the effect of the drug or could have been due to the conditions under which the data were collected. For instance, perhaps the experimental group received better instructions or was more motivated by being in the hospital setting to give accurate responses than the control group.

In non-laboratory and nonclinical experiments, such as field experiments in ecology or economics , even well-designed experiments are subject to numerous and complex variables that cannot always be managed across the control group and experimental groups. Randomization, in which individuals or groups of individuals are randomly assigned to the treatment and control groups, is an important tool to eliminate selection bias and can aid in disentangling the effects of the experimental treatment from other confounding factors. Appropriate sample sizes are also important.

A control group study can be managed in two different ways. In a single-blind study, the researcher will know whether a particular subject is in the control group, but the subject will not know. In a double-blind study , neither the subject nor the researcher will know which treatment the subject is receiving. In many cases, a double-blind study is preferable to a single-blind study, since the researcher cannot inadvertently affect the results or their interpretation by treating a control subject differently from an experimental subject.

Frequently asked questions

What is the difference between a control group and an experimental group.

An experimental group, also known as a treatment group, receives the treatment whose effect researchers wish to study, whereas a control group does not. They should be identical in all other ways.

Frequently asked questions: Methodology

Attrition refers to participants leaving a study. It always happens to some extent—for example, in randomized controlled trials for medical research.

Differential attrition occurs when attrition or dropout rates differ systematically between the intervention and the control group . As a result, the characteristics of the participants who drop out differ from the characteristics of those who stay in the study. Because of this, study results may be biased .

Action research is conducted in order to solve a particular issue immediately, while case studies are often conducted over a longer period of time and focus more on observing and analyzing a particular ongoing phenomenon.

Action research is focused on solving a problem or informing individual and community-based knowledge in a way that impacts teaching, learning, and other related processes. It is less focused on contributing theoretical input, instead producing actionable input.

Action research is particularly popular with educators as a form of systematic inquiry because it prioritizes reflection and bridges the gap between theory and practice. Educators are able to simultaneously investigate an issue as they solve it, and the method is very iterative and flexible.

A cycle of inquiry is another name for action research . It is usually visualized in a spiral shape following a series of steps, such as “planning → acting → observing → reflecting.”

To make quantitative observations , you need to use instruments that are capable of measuring the quantity you want to observe. For example, you might use a ruler to measure the length of an object or a thermometer to measure its temperature.

Criterion validity and construct validity are both types of measurement validity . In other words, they both show you how accurately a method measures something.

While construct validity is the degree to which a test or other measurement method measures what it claims to measure, criterion validity is the degree to which a test can predictively (in the future) or concurrently (in the present) measure something.

Construct validity is often considered the overarching type of measurement validity . You need to have face validity , content validity , and criterion validity in order to achieve construct validity.

Convergent validity and discriminant validity are both subtypes of construct validity . Together, they help you evaluate whether a test measures the concept it was designed to measure.

• Convergent validity indicates whether a test that is designed to measure a particular construct correlates with other tests that assess the same or similar construct.
• Discriminant validity indicates whether two tests that should not be highly related to each other are indeed not related. This type of validity is also called divergent validity .

You need to assess both in order to demonstrate construct validity. Neither one alone is sufficient for establishing construct validity.

• Discriminant validity indicates whether two tests that should not be highly related to each other are indeed not related

Content validity shows you how accurately a test or other measurement method taps  into the various aspects of the specific construct you are researching.

In other words, it helps you answer the question: “does the test measure all aspects of the construct I want to measure?” If it does, then the test has high content validity.

The higher the content validity, the more accurate the measurement of the construct.

If the test fails to include parts of the construct, or irrelevant parts are included, the validity of the instrument is threatened, which brings your results into question.

Face validity and content validity are similar in that they both evaluate how suitable the content of a test is. The difference is that face validity is subjective, and assesses content at surface level.

When a test has strong face validity, anyone would agree that the test’s questions appear to measure what they are intended to measure.

For example, looking at a 4th grade math test consisting of problems in which students have to add and multiply, most people would agree that it has strong face validity (i.e., it looks like a math test).

On the other hand, content validity evaluates how well a test represents all the aspects of a topic. Assessing content validity is more systematic and relies on expert evaluation. of each question, analyzing whether each one covers the aspects that the test was designed to cover.

A 4th grade math test would have high content validity if it covered all the skills taught in that grade. Experts(in this case, math teachers), would have to evaluate the content validity by comparing the test to the learning objectives.

Snowball sampling is a non-probability sampling method . Unlike probability sampling (which involves some form of random selection ), the initial individuals selected to be studied are the ones who recruit new participants.

Because not every member of the target population has an equal chance of being recruited into the sample, selection in snowball sampling is non-random.

Snowball sampling is a non-probability sampling method , where there is not an equal chance for every member of the population to be included in the sample .

This means that you cannot use inferential statistics and make generalizations —often the goal of quantitative research . As such, a snowball sample is not representative of the target population and is usually a better fit for qualitative research .

Snowball sampling relies on the use of referrals. Here, the researcher recruits one or more initial participants, who then recruit the next ones.

Participants share similar characteristics and/or know each other. Because of this, not every member of the population has an equal chance of being included in the sample, giving rise to sampling bias .

Snowball sampling is best used in the following cases:

• If there is no sampling frame available (e.g., people with a rare disease)
• If the population of interest is hard to access or locate (e.g., people experiencing homelessness)
• If the research focuses on a sensitive topic (e.g., extramarital affairs)

The reproducibility and replicability of a study can be ensured by writing a transparent, detailed method section and using clear, unambiguous language.

Reproducibility and replicability are related terms.

• Reproducing research entails reanalyzing the existing data in the same manner.
• Replicating (or repeating ) the research entails reconducting the entire analysis, including the collection of new data . 
• A successful reproduction shows that the data analyses were conducted in a fair and honest manner.
• A successful replication shows that the reliability of the results is high.

Stratified sampling and quota sampling both involve dividing the population into subgroups and selecting units from each subgroup. The purpose in both cases is to select a representative sample and/or to allow comparisons between subgroups.

The main difference is that in stratified sampling, you draw a random sample from each subgroup ( probability sampling ). In quota sampling you select a predetermined number or proportion of units, in a non-random manner ( non-probability sampling ).

Purposive and convenience sampling are both sampling methods that are typically used in qualitative data collection.

A convenience sample is drawn from a source that is conveniently accessible to the researcher. Convenience sampling does not distinguish characteristics among the participants. On the other hand, purposive sampling focuses on selecting participants possessing characteristics associated with the research study.

The findings of studies based on either convenience or purposive sampling can only be generalized to the (sub)population from which the sample is drawn, and not to the entire population.

Random sampling or probability sampling is based on random selection. This means that each unit has an equal chance (i.e., equal probability) of being included in the sample.

On the other hand, convenience sampling involves stopping people at random, which means that not everyone has an equal chance of being selected depending on the place, time, or day you are collecting your data.

Convenience sampling and quota sampling are both non-probability sampling methods. They both use non-random criteria like availability, geographical proximity, or expert knowledge to recruit study participants.

However, in convenience sampling, you continue to sample units or cases until you reach the required sample size.

In quota sampling, you first need to divide your population of interest into subgroups (strata) and estimate their proportions (quota) in the population. Then you can start your data collection, using convenience sampling to recruit participants, until the proportions in each subgroup coincide with the estimated proportions in the population.

A sampling frame is a list of every member in the entire population . It is important that the sampling frame is as complete as possible, so that your sample accurately reflects your population.

Stratified and cluster sampling may look similar, but bear in mind that groups created in cluster sampling are heterogeneous , so the individual characteristics in the cluster vary. In contrast, groups created in stratified sampling are homogeneous , as units share characteristics.

Relatedly, in cluster sampling you randomly select entire groups and include all units of each group in your sample. However, in stratified sampling, you select some units of all groups and include them in your sample. In this way, both methods can ensure that your sample is representative of the target population .

A systematic review is secondary research because it uses existing research. You don’t collect new data yourself.

The key difference between observational studies and experimental designs is that a well-done observational study does not influence the responses of participants, while experiments do have some sort of treatment condition applied to at least some participants by random assignment .

An observational study is a great choice for you if your research question is based purely on observations. If there are ethical, logistical, or practical concerns that prevent you from conducting a traditional experiment , an observational study may be a good choice. In an observational study, there is no interference or manipulation of the research subjects, as well as no control or treatment groups .

It’s often best to ask a variety of people to review your measurements. You can ask experts, such as other researchers, or laypeople, such as potential participants, to judge the face validity of tests.

While experts have a deep understanding of research methods , the people you’re studying can provide you with valuable insights you may have missed otherwise.

Face validity is important because it’s a simple first step to measuring the overall validity of a test or technique. It’s a relatively intuitive, quick, and easy way to start checking whether a new measure seems useful at first glance.

Good face validity means that anyone who reviews your measure says that it seems to be measuring what it’s supposed to. With poor face validity, someone reviewing your measure may be left confused about what you’re measuring and why you’re using this method.

Face validity is about whether a test appears to measure what it’s supposed to measure. This type of validity is concerned with whether a measure seems relevant and appropriate for what it’s assessing only on the surface.

Statistical analyses are often applied to test validity with data from your measures. You test convergent validity and discriminant validity with correlations to see if results from your test are positively or negatively related to those of other established tests.

You can also use regression analyses to assess whether your measure is actually predictive of outcomes that you expect it to predict theoretically. A regression analysis that supports your expectations strengthens your claim of construct validity .

When designing or evaluating a measure, construct validity helps you ensure you’re actually measuring the construct you’re interested in. If you don’t have construct validity, you may inadvertently measure unrelated or distinct constructs and lose precision in your research.

Construct validity is often considered the overarching type of measurement validity ,  because it covers all of the other types. You need to have face validity , content validity , and criterion validity to achieve construct validity.

Construct validity is about how well a test measures the concept it was designed to evaluate. It’s one of four types of measurement validity , which includes construct validity, face validity , and criterion validity.

There are two subtypes of construct validity.

• Convergent validity : The extent to which your measure corresponds to measures of related constructs
• Discriminant validity : The extent to which your measure is unrelated or negatively related to measures of distinct constructs

Naturalistic observation is a valuable tool because of its flexibility, external validity , and suitability for topics that can’t be studied in a lab setting.

The downsides of naturalistic observation include its lack of scientific control , ethical considerations , and potential for bias from observers and subjects.

Naturalistic observation is a qualitative research method where you record the behaviors of your research subjects in real world settings. You avoid interfering or influencing anything in a naturalistic observation.

You can think of naturalistic observation as “people watching” with a purpose.

A dependent variable is what changes as a result of the independent variable manipulation in experiments . It’s what you’re interested in measuring, and it “depends” on your independent variable.

In statistics, dependent variables are also called:

• Response variables (they respond to a change in another variable)
• Outcome variables (they represent the outcome you want to measure)
• Left-hand-side variables (they appear on the left-hand side of a regression equation)

An independent variable is the variable you manipulate, control, or vary in an experimental study to explore its effects. It’s called “independent” because it’s not influenced by any other variables in the study.

Independent variables are also called:

• Explanatory variables (they explain an event or outcome)
• Predictor variables (they can be used to predict the value of a dependent variable)
• Right-hand-side variables (they appear on the right-hand side of a regression equation).

As a rule of thumb, questions related to thoughts, beliefs, and feelings work well in focus groups. Take your time formulating strong questions, paying special attention to phrasing. Be careful to avoid leading questions , which can bias your responses.

Overall, your focus group questions should be:

• Open-ended and flexible
• Impossible to answer with “yes” or “no” (questions that start with “why” or “how” are often best)
• Unambiguous, getting straight to the point while still stimulating discussion
• Unbiased and neutral

A structured interview is a data collection method that relies on asking questions in a set order to collect data on a topic. They are often quantitative in nature. Structured interviews are best used when: 

• You already have a very clear understanding of your topic. Perhaps significant research has already been conducted, or you have done some prior research yourself, but you already possess a baseline for designing strong structured questions.
• You are constrained in terms of time or resources and need to analyze your data quickly and efficiently.
• Your research question depends on strong parity between participants, with environmental conditions held constant.

More flexible interview options include semi-structured interviews , unstructured interviews , and focus groups .

Social desirability bias is the tendency for interview participants to give responses that will be viewed favorably by the interviewer or other participants. It occurs in all types of interviews and surveys , but is most common in semi-structured interviews , unstructured interviews , and focus groups .

Social desirability bias can be mitigated by ensuring participants feel at ease and comfortable sharing their views. Make sure to pay attention to your own body language and any physical or verbal cues, such as nodding or widening your eyes.

This type of bias can also occur in observations if the participants know they’re being observed. They might alter their behavior accordingly.

The interviewer effect is a type of bias that emerges when a characteristic of an interviewer (race, age, gender identity, etc.) influences the responses given by the interviewee.

There is a risk of an interviewer effect in all types of interviews , but it can be mitigated by writing really high-quality interview questions.

A semi-structured interview is a blend of structured and unstructured types of interviews. Semi-structured interviews are best used when:

• You have prior interview experience. Spontaneous questions are deceptively challenging, and it’s easy to accidentally ask a leading question or make a participant uncomfortable.
• Your research question is exploratory in nature. Participant answers can guide future research questions and help you develop a more robust knowledge base for future research.

An unstructured interview is the most flexible type of interview, but it is not always the best fit for your research topic.

Unstructured interviews are best used when:

• You are an experienced interviewer and have a very strong background in your research topic, since it is challenging to ask spontaneous, colloquial questions.
• Your research question is exploratory in nature. While you may have developed hypotheses, you are open to discovering new or shifting viewpoints through the interview process.
• You are seeking descriptive data, and are ready to ask questions that will deepen and contextualize your initial thoughts and hypotheses.
• Your research depends on forming connections with your participants and making them feel comfortable revealing deeper emotions, lived experiences, or thoughts.

The four most common types of interviews are:

• Structured interviews : The questions are predetermined in both topic and order. 
• Semi-structured interviews : A few questions are predetermined, but other questions aren’t planned.
• Unstructured interviews : None of the questions are predetermined.
• Focus group interviews : The questions are presented to a group instead of one individual.

Deductive reasoning is commonly used in scientific research, and it’s especially associated with quantitative research .

In research, you might have come across something called the hypothetico-deductive method . It’s the scientific method of testing hypotheses to check whether your predictions are substantiated by real-world data.

Deductive reasoning is a logical approach where you progress from general ideas to specific conclusions. It’s often contrasted with inductive reasoning , where you start with specific observations and form general conclusions.

Deductive reasoning is also called deductive logic.

There are many different types of inductive reasoning that people use formally or informally.

Here are a few common types:

• Inductive generalization : You use observations about a sample to come to a conclusion about the population it came from.
• Statistical generalization: You use specific numbers about samples to make statements about populations.
• Causal reasoning: You make cause-and-effect links between different things.
• Sign reasoning: You make a conclusion about a correlational relationship between different things.
• Analogical reasoning: You make a conclusion about something based on its similarities to something else.

Inductive reasoning is a bottom-up approach, while deductive reasoning is top-down.

Inductive reasoning takes you from the specific to the general, while in deductive reasoning, you make inferences by going from general premises to specific conclusions.

In inductive research , you start by making observations or gathering data. Then, you take a broad scan of your data and search for patterns. Finally, you make general conclusions that you might incorporate into theories.

Inductive reasoning is a method of drawing conclusions by going from the specific to the general. It’s usually contrasted with deductive reasoning, where you proceed from general information to specific conclusions.

Inductive reasoning is also called inductive logic or bottom-up reasoning.

A hypothesis states your predictions about what your research will find. It is a tentative answer to your research question that has not yet been tested. For some research projects, you might have to write several hypotheses that address different aspects of your research question.

A hypothesis is not just a guess — it should be based on existing theories and knowledge. It also has to be testable, which means you can support or refute it through scientific research methods (such as experiments, observations and statistical analysis of data).

Triangulation can help:

• Reduce research bias that comes from using a single method, theory, or investigator
• Enhance validity by approaching the same topic with different tools
• Establish credibility by giving you a complete picture of the research problem

But triangulation can also pose problems:

• It’s time-consuming and labor-intensive, often involving an interdisciplinary team.
• Your results may be inconsistent or even contradictory.

There are four main types of triangulation :

• Data triangulation : Using data from different times, spaces, and people
• Investigator triangulation : Involving multiple researchers in collecting or analyzing data
• Theory triangulation : Using varying theoretical perspectives in your research
• Methodological triangulation : Using different methodologies to approach the same topic

Many academic fields use peer review , largely to determine whether a manuscript is suitable for publication. Peer review enhances the credibility of the published manuscript.

However, peer review is also common in non-academic settings. The United Nations, the European Union, and many individual nations use peer review to evaluate grant applications. It is also widely used in medical and health-related fields as a teaching or quality-of-care measure. 

Peer assessment is often used in the classroom as a pedagogical tool. Both receiving feedback and providing it are thought to enhance the learning process, helping students think critically and collaboratively.

Peer review can stop obviously problematic, falsified, or otherwise untrustworthy research from being published. It also represents an excellent opportunity to get feedback from renowned experts in your field. It acts as a first defense, helping you ensure your argument is clear and that there are no gaps, vague terms, or unanswered questions for readers who weren’t involved in the research process.

Peer-reviewed articles are considered a highly credible source due to this stringent process they go through before publication.

In general, the peer review process follows the following steps: 

• First, the author submits the manuscript to the editor.
• Reject the manuscript and send it back to author, or 
• Send it onward to the selected peer reviewer(s) 
• Next, the peer review process occurs. The reviewer provides feedback, addressing any major or minor issues with the manuscript, and gives their advice regarding what edits should be made. 
• Lastly, the edited manuscript is sent back to the author. They input the edits, and resubmit it to the editor for publication.

Exploratory research is often used when the issue you’re studying is new or when the data collection process is challenging for some reason.

You can use exploratory research if you have a general idea or a specific question that you want to study but there is no preexisting knowledge or paradigm with which to study it.

Exploratory research is a methodology approach that explores research questions that have not previously been studied in depth. It is often used when the issue you’re studying is new, or the data collection process is challenging in some way.

Explanatory research is used to investigate how or why a phenomenon occurs. Therefore, this type of research is often one of the first stages in the research process , serving as a jumping-off point for future research.

Exploratory research aims to explore the main aspects of an under-researched problem, while explanatory research aims to explain the causes and consequences of a well-defined problem.

Explanatory research is a research method used to investigate how or why something occurs when only a small amount of information is available pertaining to that topic. It can help you increase your understanding of a given topic.

Clean data are valid, accurate, complete, consistent, unique, and uniform. Dirty data include inconsistencies and errors.

Dirty data can come from any part of the research process, including poor research design , inappropriate measurement materials, or flawed data entry.

Data cleaning takes place between data collection and data analyses. But you can use some methods even before collecting data.

For clean data, you should start by designing measures that collect valid data. Data validation at the time of data entry or collection helps you minimize the amount of data cleaning you’ll need to do.

After data collection, you can use data standardization and data transformation to clean your data. You’ll also deal with any missing values, outliers, and duplicate values.

Every dataset requires different techniques to clean dirty data , but you need to address these issues in a systematic way. You focus on finding and resolving data points that don’t agree or fit with the rest of your dataset.

These data might be missing values, outliers, duplicate values, incorrectly formatted, or irrelevant. You’ll start with screening and diagnosing your data. Then, you’ll often standardize and accept or remove data to make your dataset consistent and valid.

Data cleaning is necessary for valid and appropriate analyses. Dirty data contain inconsistencies or errors , but cleaning your data helps you minimize or resolve these.

Without data cleaning, you could end up with a Type I or II error in your conclusion. These types of erroneous conclusions can be practically significant with important consequences, because they lead to misplaced investments or missed opportunities.

Data cleaning involves spotting and resolving potential data inconsistencies or errors to improve your data quality. An error is any value (e.g., recorded weight) that doesn’t reflect the true value (e.g., actual weight) of something that’s being measured.

In this process, you review, analyze, detect, modify, or remove “dirty” data to make your dataset “clean.” Data cleaning is also called data cleansing or data scrubbing.

Research misconduct means making up or falsifying data, manipulating data analyses, or misrepresenting results in research reports. It’s a form of academic fraud.

These actions are committed intentionally and can have serious consequences; research misconduct is not a simple mistake or a point of disagreement but a serious ethical failure.

Anonymity means you don’t know who the participants are, while confidentiality means you know who they are but remove identifying information from your research report. Both are important ethical considerations .

You can only guarantee anonymity by not collecting any personally identifying information—for example, names, phone numbers, email addresses, IP addresses, physical characteristics, photos, or videos.

You can keep data confidential by using aggregate information in your research report, so that you only refer to groups of participants rather than individuals.

Research ethics matter for scientific integrity, human rights and dignity, and collaboration between science and society. These principles make sure that participation in studies is voluntary, informed, and safe.

Ethical considerations in research are a set of principles that guide your research designs and practices. These principles include voluntary participation, informed consent, anonymity, confidentiality, potential for harm, and results communication.

Scientists and researchers must always adhere to a certain code of conduct when collecting data from others .

These considerations protect the rights of research participants, enhance research validity , and maintain scientific integrity.

In multistage sampling , you can use probability or non-probability sampling methods .

For a probability sample, you have to conduct probability sampling at every stage.

You can mix it up by using simple random sampling , systematic sampling , or stratified sampling to select units at different stages, depending on what is applicable and relevant to your study.

Multistage sampling can simplify data collection when you have large, geographically spread samples, and you can obtain a probability sample without a complete sampling frame.

But multistage sampling may not lead to a representative sample, and larger samples are needed for multistage samples to achieve the statistical properties of simple random samples .

These are four of the most common mixed methods designs :

• Convergent parallel: Quantitative and qualitative data are collected at the same time and analyzed separately. After both analyses are complete, compare your results to draw overall conclusions. 
• Embedded: Quantitative and qualitative data are collected at the same time, but within a larger quantitative or qualitative design. One type of data is secondary to the other.
• Explanatory sequential: Quantitative data is collected and analyzed first, followed by qualitative data. You can use this design if you think your qualitative data will explain and contextualize your quantitative findings.
• Exploratory sequential: Qualitative data is collected and analyzed first, followed by quantitative data. You can use this design if you think the quantitative data will confirm or validate your qualitative findings.

Triangulation in research means using multiple datasets, methods, theories and/or investigators to address a research question. It’s a research strategy that can help you enhance the validity and credibility of your findings.

Triangulation is mainly used in qualitative research , but it’s also commonly applied in quantitative research . Mixed methods research always uses triangulation.

In multistage sampling , or multistage cluster sampling, you draw a sample from a population using smaller and smaller groups at each stage.

This method is often used to collect data from a large, geographically spread group of people in national surveys, for example. You take advantage of hierarchical groupings (e.g., from state to city to neighborhood) to create a sample that’s less expensive and time-consuming to collect data from.

No, the steepness or slope of the line isn’t related to the correlation coefficient value. The correlation coefficient only tells you how closely your data fit on a line, so two datasets with the same correlation coefficient can have very different slopes.

To find the slope of the line, you’ll need to perform a regression analysis .

Correlation coefficients always range between -1 and 1.

The sign of the coefficient tells you the direction of the relationship: a positive value means the variables change together in the same direction, while a negative value means they change together in opposite directions.

The absolute value of a number is equal to the number without its sign. The absolute value of a correlation coefficient tells you the magnitude of the correlation: the greater the absolute value, the stronger the correlation.

These are the assumptions your data must meet if you want to use Pearson’s r :

• Both variables are on an interval or ratio level of measurement
• Data from both variables follow normal distributions
• Your data have no outliers
• Your data is from a random or representative sample
• You expect a linear relationship between the two variables

Quantitative research designs can be divided into two main categories:

• Correlational and descriptive designs are used to investigate characteristics, averages, trends, and associations between variables.
• Experimental and quasi-experimental designs are used to test causal relationships .

Qualitative research designs tend to be more flexible. Common types of qualitative design include case study , ethnography , and grounded theory designs.

A well-planned research design helps ensure that your methods match your research aims, that you collect high-quality data, and that you use the right kind of analysis to answer your questions, utilizing credible sources . This allows you to draw valid , trustworthy conclusions.

The priorities of a research design can vary depending on the field, but you usually have to specify:

• Your research questions and/or hypotheses
• Your overall approach (e.g., qualitative or quantitative )
• The type of design you’re using (e.g., a survey , experiment , or case study )
• Your sampling methods or criteria for selecting subjects
• Your data collection methods (e.g., questionnaires , observations)
• Your data collection procedures (e.g., operationalization , timing and data management)
• Your data analysis methods (e.g., statistical tests  or thematic analysis )

A research design is a strategy for answering your   research question . It defines your overall approach and determines how you will collect and analyze data.

Questionnaires can be self-administered or researcher-administered.

Self-administered questionnaires can be delivered online or in paper-and-pen formats, in person or through mail. All questions are standardized so that all respondents receive the same questions with identical wording.

Researcher-administered questionnaires are interviews that take place by phone, in-person, or online between researchers and respondents. You can gain deeper insights by clarifying questions for respondents or asking follow-up questions.

You can organize the questions logically, with a clear progression from simple to complex, or randomly between respondents. A logical flow helps respondents process the questionnaire easier and quicker, but it may lead to bias. Randomization can minimize the bias from order effects.

Closed-ended, or restricted-choice, questions offer respondents a fixed set of choices to select from. These questions are easier to answer quickly.

Open-ended or long-form questions allow respondents to answer in their own words. Because there are no restrictions on their choices, respondents can answer in ways that researchers may not have otherwise considered.

A questionnaire is a data collection tool or instrument, while a survey is an overarching research method that involves collecting and analyzing data from people using questionnaires.

The third variable and directionality problems are two main reasons why correlation isn’t causation .

The third variable problem means that a confounding variable affects both variables to make them seem causally related when they are not.

The directionality problem is when two variables correlate and might actually have a causal relationship, but it’s impossible to conclude which variable causes changes in the other.

Correlation describes an association between variables : when one variable changes, so does the other. A correlation is a statistical indicator of the relationship between variables.

Causation means that changes in one variable brings about changes in the other (i.e., there is a cause-and-effect relationship between variables). The two variables are correlated with each other, and there’s also a causal link between them.

While causation and correlation can exist simultaneously, correlation does not imply causation. In other words, correlation is simply a relationship where A relates to B—but A doesn’t necessarily cause B to happen (or vice versa). Mistaking correlation for causation is a common error and can lead to false cause fallacy .

Controlled experiments establish causality, whereas correlational studies only show associations between variables.

• In an experimental design , you manipulate an independent variable and measure its effect on a dependent variable. Other variables are controlled so they can’t impact the results.
• In a correlational design , you measure variables without manipulating any of them. You can test whether your variables change together, but you can’t be sure that one variable caused a change in another.

In general, correlational research is high in external validity while experimental research is high in internal validity .

A correlation is usually tested for two variables at a time, but you can test correlations between three or more variables.

A correlation coefficient is a single number that describes the strength and direction of the relationship between your variables.

Different types of correlation coefficients might be appropriate for your data based on their levels of measurement and distributions . The Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient (Pearson’s r ) is commonly used to assess a linear relationship between two quantitative variables.

A correlational research design investigates relationships between two variables (or more) without the researcher controlling or manipulating any of them. It’s a non-experimental type of quantitative research .

A correlation reflects the strength and/or direction of the association between two or more variables.

• A positive correlation means that both variables change in the same direction.
• A negative correlation means that the variables change in opposite directions.
• A zero correlation means there’s no relationship between the variables.

Random error  is almost always present in scientific studies, even in highly controlled settings. While you can’t eradicate it completely, you can reduce random error by taking repeated measurements, using a large sample, and controlling extraneous variables .

You can avoid systematic error through careful design of your sampling , data collection , and analysis procedures. For example, use triangulation to measure your variables using multiple methods; regularly calibrate instruments or procedures; use random sampling and random assignment ; and apply masking (blinding) where possible.

Systematic error is generally a bigger problem in research.

With random error, multiple measurements will tend to cluster around the true value. When you’re collecting data from a large sample , the errors in different directions will cancel each other out.

Systematic errors are much more problematic because they can skew your data away from the true value. This can lead you to false conclusions ( Type I and II errors ) about the relationship between the variables you’re studying.

Random and systematic error are two types of measurement error.

Random error is a chance difference between the observed and true values of something (e.g., a researcher misreading a weighing scale records an incorrect measurement).

Systematic error is a consistent or proportional difference between the observed and true values of something (e.g., a miscalibrated scale consistently records weights as higher than they actually are).

On graphs, the explanatory variable is conventionally placed on the x-axis, while the response variable is placed on the y-axis.

• If you have quantitative variables , use a scatterplot or a line graph.
• If your response variable is categorical, use a scatterplot or a line graph.
• If your explanatory variable is categorical, use a bar graph.

The term “ explanatory variable ” is sometimes preferred over “ independent variable ” because, in real world contexts, independent variables are often influenced by other variables. This means they aren’t totally independent.

Multiple independent variables may also be correlated with each other, so “explanatory variables” is a more appropriate term.

The difference between explanatory and response variables is simple:

• An explanatory variable is the expected cause, and it explains the results.
• A response variable is the expected effect, and it responds to other variables.

In a controlled experiment , all extraneous variables are held constant so that they can’t influence the results. Controlled experiments require:

• A control group that receives a standard treatment, a fake treatment, or no treatment.
• Random assignment of participants to ensure the groups are equivalent.

Depending on your study topic, there are various other methods of controlling variables .

There are 4 main types of extraneous variables :

• Demand characteristics : environmental cues that encourage participants to conform to researchers’ expectations.
• Experimenter effects : unintentional actions by researchers that influence study outcomes.
• Situational variables : environmental variables that alter participants’ behaviors.
• Participant variables : any characteristic or aspect of a participant’s background that could affect study results.

An extraneous variable is any variable that you’re not investigating that can potentially affect the dependent variable of your research study.

A confounding variable is a type of extraneous variable that not only affects the dependent variable, but is also related to the independent variable.

In a factorial design, multiple independent variables are tested.

If you test two variables, each level of one independent variable is combined with each level of the other independent variable to create different conditions.

Within-subjects designs have many potential threats to internal validity , but they are also very statistically powerful .

Advantages:

• Only requires small samples
• Statistically powerful
• Removes the effects of individual differences on the outcomes

Disadvantages:

• Internal validity threats reduce the likelihood of establishing a direct relationship between variables
• Time-related effects, such as growth, can influence the outcomes
• Carryover effects mean that the specific order of different treatments affect the outcomes

While a between-subjects design has fewer threats to internal validity , it also requires more participants for high statistical power than a within-subjects design .

• Prevents carryover effects of learning and fatigue.
• Shorter study duration.
• Needs larger samples for high power.
• Uses more resources to recruit participants, administer sessions, cover costs, etc.
• Individual differences may be an alternative explanation for results.

Yes. Between-subjects and within-subjects designs can be combined in a single study when you have two or more independent variables (a factorial design). In a mixed factorial design, one variable is altered between subjects and another is altered within subjects.

In a between-subjects design , every participant experiences only one condition, and researchers assess group differences between participants in various conditions.

In a within-subjects design , each participant experiences all conditions, and researchers test the same participants repeatedly for differences between conditions.

The word “between” means that you’re comparing different conditions between groups, while the word “within” means you’re comparing different conditions within the same group.

Random assignment is used in experiments with a between-groups or independent measures design. In this research design, there’s usually a control group and one or more experimental groups. Random assignment helps ensure that the groups are comparable.

In general, you should always use random assignment in this type of experimental design when it is ethically possible and makes sense for your study topic.

To implement random assignment , assign a unique number to every member of your study’s sample .

Then, you can use a random number generator or a lottery method to randomly assign each number to a control or experimental group. You can also do so manually, by flipping a coin or rolling a dice to randomly assign participants to groups.

Random selection, or random sampling , is a way of selecting members of a population for your study’s sample.

In contrast, random assignment is a way of sorting the sample into control and experimental groups.

Random sampling enhances the external validity or generalizability of your results, while random assignment improves the internal validity of your study.

In experimental research, random assignment is a way of placing participants from your sample into different groups using randomization. With this method, every member of the sample has a known or equal chance of being placed in a control group or an experimental group.

“Controlling for a variable” means measuring extraneous variables and accounting for them statistically to remove their effects on other variables.

Researchers often model control variable data along with independent and dependent variable data in regression analyses and ANCOVAs . That way, you can isolate the control variable’s effects from the relationship between the variables of interest.

Control variables help you establish a correlational or causal relationship between variables by enhancing internal validity .

If you don’t control relevant extraneous variables , they may influence the outcomes of your study, and you may not be able to demonstrate that your results are really an effect of your independent variable .

A control variable is any variable that’s held constant in a research study. It’s not a variable of interest in the study, but it’s controlled because it could influence the outcomes.

Including mediators and moderators in your research helps you go beyond studying a simple relationship between two variables for a fuller picture of the real world. They are important to consider when studying complex correlational or causal relationships.

Mediators are part of the causal pathway of an effect, and they tell you how or why an effect takes place. Moderators usually help you judge the external validity of your study by identifying the limitations of when the relationship between variables holds.

If something is a mediating variable :

• It’s caused by the independent variable .
• It influences the dependent variable
• When it’s taken into account, the statistical correlation between the independent and dependent variables is higher than when it isn’t considered.

A confounder is a third variable that affects variables of interest and makes them seem related when they are not. In contrast, a mediator is the mechanism of a relationship between two variables: it explains the process by which they are related.

A mediator variable explains the process through which two variables are related, while a moderator variable affects the strength and direction of that relationship.

There are three key steps in systematic sampling :

• Define and list your population , ensuring that it is not ordered in a cyclical or periodic order.
• Decide on your sample size and calculate your interval, k , by dividing your population by your target sample size.
• Choose every k th member of the population as your sample.

Systematic sampling is a probability sampling method where researchers select members of the population at a regular interval – for example, by selecting every 15th person on a list of the population. If the population is in a random order, this can imitate the benefits of simple random sampling .

Yes, you can create a stratified sample using multiple characteristics, but you must ensure that every participant in your study belongs to one and only one subgroup. In this case, you multiply the numbers of subgroups for each characteristic to get the total number of groups.

For example, if you were stratifying by location with three subgroups (urban, rural, or suburban) and marital status with five subgroups (single, divorced, widowed, married, or partnered), you would have 3 x 5 = 15 subgroups.

You should use stratified sampling when your sample can be divided into mutually exclusive and exhaustive subgroups that you believe will take on different mean values for the variable that you’re studying.

Using stratified sampling will allow you to obtain more precise (with lower variance ) statistical estimates of whatever you are trying to measure.

For example, say you want to investigate how income differs based on educational attainment, but you know that this relationship can vary based on race. Using stratified sampling, you can ensure you obtain a large enough sample from each racial group, allowing you to draw more precise conclusions.

In stratified sampling , researchers divide subjects into subgroups called strata based on characteristics that they share (e.g., race, gender, educational attainment).

Once divided, each subgroup is randomly sampled using another probability sampling method.

Cluster sampling is more time- and cost-efficient than other probability sampling methods , particularly when it comes to large samples spread across a wide geographical area.

However, it provides less statistical certainty than other methods, such as simple random sampling , because it is difficult to ensure that your clusters properly represent the population as a whole.

There are three types of cluster sampling : single-stage, double-stage and multi-stage clustering. In all three types, you first divide the population into clusters, then randomly select clusters for use in your sample.

• In single-stage sampling , you collect data from every unit within the selected clusters.
• In double-stage sampling , you select a random sample of units from within the clusters.
• In multi-stage sampling , you repeat the procedure of randomly sampling elements from within the clusters until you have reached a manageable sample.

Cluster sampling is a probability sampling method in which you divide a population into clusters, such as districts or schools, and then randomly select some of these clusters as your sample.

The clusters should ideally each be mini-representations of the population as a whole.

If properly implemented, simple random sampling is usually the best sampling method for ensuring both internal and external validity . However, it can sometimes be impractical and expensive to implement, depending on the size of the population to be studied,

If you have a list of every member of the population and the ability to reach whichever members are selected, you can use simple random sampling.

The American Community Survey  is an example of simple random sampling . In order to collect detailed data on the population of the US, the Census Bureau officials randomly select 3.5 million households per year and use a variety of methods to convince them to fill out the survey.

Simple random sampling is a type of probability sampling in which the researcher randomly selects a subset of participants from a population . Each member of the population has an equal chance of being selected. Data is then collected from as large a percentage as possible of this random subset.

Quasi-experimental design is most useful in situations where it would be unethical or impractical to run a true experiment .

Quasi-experiments have lower internal validity than true experiments, but they often have higher external validity  as they can use real-world interventions instead of artificial laboratory settings.

A quasi-experiment is a type of research design that attempts to establish a cause-and-effect relationship. The main difference with a true experiment is that the groups are not randomly assigned.

Blinding is important to reduce research bias (e.g., observer bias , demand characteristics ) and ensure a study’s internal validity .

If participants know whether they are in a control or treatment group , they may adjust their behavior in ways that affect the outcome that researchers are trying to measure. If the people administering the treatment are aware of group assignment, they may treat participants differently and thus directly or indirectly influence the final results.

• In a single-blind study , only the participants are blinded.
• In a double-blind study , both participants and experimenters are blinded.
• In a triple-blind study , the assignment is hidden not only from participants and experimenters, but also from the researchers analyzing the data.

Blinding means hiding who is assigned to the treatment group and who is assigned to the control group in an experiment .

A true experiment (a.k.a. a controlled experiment) always includes at least one control group that doesn’t receive the experimental treatment.

However, some experiments use a within-subjects design to test treatments without a control group. In these designs, you usually compare one group’s outcomes before and after a treatment (instead of comparing outcomes between different groups).

For strong internal validity , it’s usually best to include a control group if possible. Without a control group, it’s harder to be certain that the outcome was caused by the experimental treatment and not by other variables.

Individual Likert-type questions are generally considered ordinal data , because the items have clear rank order, but don’t have an even distribution.

Overall Likert scale scores are sometimes treated as interval data. These scores are considered to have directionality and even spacing between them.

The type of data determines what statistical tests you should use to analyze your data.

A Likert scale is a rating scale that quantitatively assesses opinions, attitudes, or behaviors. It is made up of 4 or more questions that measure a single attitude or trait when response scores are combined.

To use a Likert scale in a survey , you present participants with Likert-type questions or statements, and a continuum of items, usually with 5 or 7 possible responses, to capture their degree of agreement.

In scientific research, concepts are the abstract ideas or phenomena that are being studied (e.g., educational achievement). Variables are properties or characteristics of the concept (e.g., performance at school), while indicators are ways of measuring or quantifying variables (e.g., yearly grade reports).

The process of turning abstract concepts into measurable variables and indicators is called operationalization .

There are various approaches to qualitative data analysis , but they all share five steps in common:

• Prepare and organize your data.
• Review and explore your data.
• Develop a data coding system.
• Assign codes to the data.
• Identify recurring themes.

The specifics of each step depend on the focus of the analysis. Some common approaches include textual analysis , thematic analysis , and discourse analysis .

There are five common approaches to qualitative research :

• Grounded theory involves collecting data in order to develop new theories.
• Ethnography involves immersing yourself in a group or organization to understand its culture.
• Narrative research involves interpreting stories to understand how people make sense of their experiences and perceptions.
• Phenomenological research involves investigating phenomena through people’s lived experiences.
• Action research links theory and practice in several cycles to drive innovative changes.

Hypothesis testing is a formal procedure for investigating our ideas about the world using statistics. It is used by scientists to test specific predictions, called hypotheses , by calculating how likely it is that a pattern or relationship between variables could have arisen by chance.

Operationalization means turning abstract conceptual ideas into measurable observations.

For example, the concept of social anxiety isn’t directly observable, but it can be operationally defined in terms of self-rating scores, behavioral avoidance of crowded places, or physical anxiety symptoms in social situations.

Before collecting data , it’s important to consider how you will operationalize the variables that you want to measure.

When conducting research, collecting original data has significant advantages:

• You can tailor data collection to your specific research aims (e.g. understanding the needs of your consumers or user testing your website)
• You can control and standardize the process for high reliability and validity (e.g. choosing appropriate measurements and sampling methods )

However, there are also some drawbacks: data collection can be time-consuming, labor-intensive and expensive. In some cases, it’s more efficient to use secondary data that has already been collected by someone else, but the data might be less reliable.

Data collection is the systematic process by which observations or measurements are gathered in research. It is used in many different contexts by academics, governments, businesses, and other organizations.

There are several methods you can use to decrease the impact of confounding variables on your research: restriction, matching, statistical control and randomization.

In restriction , you restrict your sample by only including certain subjects that have the same values of potential confounding variables.

In matching , you match each of the subjects in your treatment group with a counterpart in the comparison group. The matched subjects have the same values on any potential confounding variables, and only differ in the independent variable .

In statistical control , you include potential confounders as variables in your regression .

In randomization , you randomly assign the treatment (or independent variable) in your study to a sufficiently large number of subjects, which allows you to control for all potential confounding variables.

A confounding variable is closely related to both the independent and dependent variables in a study. An independent variable represents the supposed cause , while the dependent variable is the supposed effect . A confounding variable is a third variable that influences both the independent and dependent variables.

Failing to account for confounding variables can cause you to wrongly estimate the relationship between your independent and dependent variables.

To ensure the internal validity of your research, you must consider the impact of confounding variables. If you fail to account for them, you might over- or underestimate the causal relationship between your independent and dependent variables , or even find a causal relationship where none exists.

Yes, but including more than one of either type requires multiple research questions .

For example, if you are interested in the effect of a diet on health, you can use multiple measures of health: blood sugar, blood pressure, weight, pulse, and many more. Each of these is its own dependent variable with its own research question.

You could also choose to look at the effect of exercise levels as well as diet, or even the additional effect of the two combined. Each of these is a separate independent variable .

To ensure the internal validity of an experiment , you should only change one independent variable at a time.

No. The value of a dependent variable depends on an independent variable, so a variable cannot be both independent and dependent at the same time. It must be either the cause or the effect, not both!

You want to find out how blood sugar levels are affected by drinking diet soda and regular soda, so you conduct an experiment .

• The type of soda – diet or regular – is the independent variable .
• The level of blood sugar that you measure is the dependent variable – it changes depending on the type of soda.

Determining cause and effect is one of the most important parts of scientific research. It’s essential to know which is the cause – the independent variable – and which is the effect – the dependent variable.

In non-probability sampling , the sample is selected based on non-random criteria, and not every member of the population has a chance of being included.

Common non-probability sampling methods include convenience sampling , voluntary response sampling, purposive sampling , snowball sampling, and quota sampling .

Probability sampling means that every member of the target population has a known chance of being included in the sample.

Probability sampling methods include simple random sampling , systematic sampling , stratified sampling , and cluster sampling .

Using careful research design and sampling procedures can help you avoid sampling bias . Oversampling can be used to correct undercoverage bias .

Some common types of sampling bias include self-selection bias , nonresponse bias , undercoverage bias , survivorship bias , pre-screening or advertising bias, and healthy user bias.

Sampling bias is a threat to external validity – it limits the generalizability of your findings to a broader group of people.

A sampling error is the difference between a population parameter and a sample statistic .

A statistic refers to measures about the sample , while a parameter refers to measures about the population .

Populations are used when a research question requires data from every member of the population. This is usually only feasible when the population is small and easily accessible.

Samples are used to make inferences about populations . Samples are easier to collect data from because they are practical, cost-effective, convenient, and manageable.

There are seven threats to external validity : selection bias , history, experimenter effect, Hawthorne effect , testing effect, aptitude-treatment and situation effect.

The two types of external validity are population validity (whether you can generalize to other groups of people) and ecological validity (whether you can generalize to other situations and settings).

The external validity of a study is the extent to which you can generalize your findings to different groups of people, situations, and measures.

Cross-sectional studies cannot establish a cause-and-effect relationship or analyze behavior over a period of time. To investigate cause and effect, you need to do a longitudinal study or an experimental study .

Cross-sectional studies are less expensive and time-consuming than many other types of study. They can provide useful insights into a population’s characteristics and identify correlations for further research.

Sometimes only cross-sectional data is available for analysis; other times your research question may only require a cross-sectional study to answer it.

Longitudinal studies can last anywhere from weeks to decades, although they tend to be at least a year long.

The 1970 British Cohort Study , which has collected data on the lives of 17,000 Brits since their births in 1970, is one well-known example of a longitudinal study .

Longitudinal studies are better to establish the correct sequence of events, identify changes over time, and provide insight into cause-and-effect relationships, but they also tend to be more expensive and time-consuming than other types of studies.

Longitudinal studies and cross-sectional studies are two different types of research design . In a cross-sectional study you collect data from a population at a specific point in time; in a longitudinal study you repeatedly collect data from the same sample over an extended period of time.

There are eight threats to internal validity : history, maturation, instrumentation, testing, selection bias , regression to the mean, social interaction and attrition .

Internal validity is the extent to which you can be confident that a cause-and-effect relationship established in a study cannot be explained by other factors.

In mixed methods research , you use both qualitative and quantitative data collection and analysis methods to answer your research question .

The research methods you use depend on the type of data you need to answer your research question .

• If you want to measure something or test a hypothesis , use quantitative methods . If you want to explore ideas, thoughts and meanings, use qualitative methods .
• If you want to analyze a large amount of readily-available data, use secondary data. If you want data specific to your purposes with control over how it is generated, collect primary data.
• If you want to establish cause-and-effect relationships between variables , use experimental methods. If you want to understand the characteristics of a research subject, use descriptive methods.

A confounding variable , also called a confounder or confounding factor, is a third variable in a study examining a potential cause-and-effect relationship.

A confounding variable is related to both the supposed cause and the supposed effect of the study. It can be difficult to separate the true effect of the independent variable from the effect of the confounding variable.

In your research design , it’s important to identify potential confounding variables and plan how you will reduce their impact.

Discrete and continuous variables are two types of quantitative variables :

• Discrete variables represent counts (e.g. the number of objects in a collection).
• Continuous variables represent measurable amounts (e.g. water volume or weight).

Quantitative variables are any variables where the data represent amounts (e.g. height, weight, or age).

Categorical variables are any variables where the data represent groups. This includes rankings (e.g. finishing places in a race), classifications (e.g. brands of cereal), and binary outcomes (e.g. coin flips).

You need to know what type of variables you are working with to choose the right statistical test for your data and interpret your results .

You can think of independent and dependent variables in terms of cause and effect: an independent variable is the variable you think is the cause , while a dependent variable is the effect .

In an experiment, you manipulate the independent variable and measure the outcome in the dependent variable. For example, in an experiment about the effect of nutrients on crop growth:

• The  independent variable  is the amount of nutrients added to the crop field.
• The  dependent variable is the biomass of the crops at harvest time.

Defining your variables, and deciding how you will manipulate and measure them, is an important part of experimental design .

Experimental design means planning a set of procedures to investigate a relationship between variables . To design a controlled experiment, you need:

• A testable hypothesis
• At least one independent variable that can be precisely manipulated
• At least one dependent variable that can be precisely measured

When designing the experiment, you decide:

• How you will manipulate the variable(s)
• How you will control for any potential confounding variables
• How many subjects or samples will be included in the study
• How subjects will be assigned to treatment levels

Experimental design is essential to the internal and external validity of your experiment.

I nternal validity is the degree of confidence that the causal relationship you are testing is not influenced by other factors or variables .

External validity is the extent to which your results can be generalized to other contexts.

The validity of your experiment depends on your experimental design .

Reliability and validity are both about how well a method measures something:

• Reliability refers to the  consistency of a measure (whether the results can be reproduced under the same conditions).
• Validity   refers to the  accuracy of a measure (whether the results really do represent what they are supposed to measure).

If you are doing experimental research, you also have to consider the internal and external validity of your experiment.

A sample is a subset of individuals from a larger population . Sampling means selecting the group that you will actually collect data from in your research. For example, if you are researching the opinions of students in your university, you could survey a sample of 100 students.

In statistics, sampling allows you to test a hypothesis about the characteristics of a population.

Quantitative research deals with numbers and statistics, while qualitative research deals with words and meanings.

Quantitative methods allow you to systematically measure variables and test hypotheses . Qualitative methods allow you to explore concepts and experiences in more detail.

Methodology refers to the overarching strategy and rationale of your research project . It involves studying the methods used in your field and the theories or principles behind them, in order to develop an approach that matches your objectives.

Methods are the specific tools and procedures you use to collect and analyze data (for example, experiments, surveys , and statistical tests ).

In shorter scientific papers, where the aim is to report the findings of a specific study, you might simply describe what you did in a methods section .

In a longer or more complex research project, such as a thesis or dissertation , you will probably include a methodology section , where you explain your approach to answering the research questions and cite relevant sources to support your choice of methods.

Ask our team

Want to contact us directly? No problem.  We  are always here for you.

• Email [email protected]
• Start live chat
• Call +1 (510) 822-8066
• WhatsApp +31 20 261 6040

Our team helps students graduate by offering:

• A world-class citation generator
• Plagiarism Checker software powered by Turnitin
• Innovative Citation Checker software
• Professional proofreading services
• Over 300 helpful articles about academic writing, citing sources, plagiarism, and more

Scribbr specializes in editing study-related documents . We proofread:

• PhD dissertations
• Research proposals
• Personal statements
• Admission essays
• Motivation letters
• Reflection papers
• Journal articles
• Capstone projects

Scribbr’s Plagiarism Checker is powered by elements of Turnitin’s Similarity Checker , namely the plagiarism detection software and the Internet Archive and Premium Scholarly Publications content databases .

The add-on AI detector is powered by Scribbr’s proprietary software.

The Scribbr Citation Generator is developed using the open-source Citation Style Language (CSL) project and Frank Bennett’s citeproc-js . It’s the same technology used by dozens of other popular citation tools, including Mendeley and Zotero.

You can find all the citation styles and locales used in the Scribbr Citation Generator in our publicly accessible repository on Github .

Tablets and Apps for Promoting Nanoliteracy in Early Childhood Education: Results from an Experimental Study

• Published: 09 July 2024

Cite this article

• Pandora Dorouka   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-2267-7592 1 ,
• Michail Kalogiannakis   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0002-9124-2245 2 &
• Ron Blonder   ORCID: orcid.org/0000-0003-4796-4678 3  

25 Accesses

Explore all metrics

Successful integration of digital technologies in the education of young children still needs to be solved. Despite a growing body of research focusing on learning through digital technologies in childhood, there are areas of knowledge where the impact of digital technologies has yet to be explored. A prominent example is nanoscience and nanotechnology (NST), a new interdisciplinary field that promises to solve long-standing global challenges. Considering that NST concerns elements that cannot be observed with the naked eye, their understanding by young children requires appropriate teaching methods. These distinctive aspects of NST align well with the capabilities of smart mobile devices, the critical feature of which is their ability to display interactive simulations and playful visualizations. This study investigates and compares the effect of using tablets and alternative experiential teaching on developing the ability to understand nanoscale elements. To implement the research, we conducted a week-long intervention, including experimental and control groups. Children in the experimental group participated in a nanoteaching session during the school curriculum, using educational software on tablets. The children in the control group participated in a precisely similar instruction but without using technology. To assess the children’s performance, the Nanoscale Elementary Knowledge Comprehension Test (TENANO) created for the needs of this study was used. The sample consisted of 101 s-grade primary school children in Greece. The results showed that teaching with tablets compared to alternative experiential teaching contributed significantly to developing young children’s nanoliteracy level. Moreover, gender and non-verbal cognitive ability did not seem to differentiate the development of children’s ability to understand nanoscale entities.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime

Price includes VAT (Russian Federation)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Rent this article via DeepDyve

Institutional subscriptions

Availability of Data and Materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Akoumianakis, I., & Filippatos, T. (2020). The renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system as a link between obesity and coronavirus disease 2019 severity. Obesity Reviews, 21 (9), e13077.

Article   Google Scholar  

Aladé, F., Lauricella, A. R., Beaudoin-Ryan, L., & Wartella, E. (2016). Measuring with Murray: Touchscreen technology and preschoolers’ STEM learning. Computers in Human Behavior, 62 , 433–441.

Anthony, L., Brown, Q., Nias, J., Tate, B., & Mohan, S. (2012). Interaction and recognition challenges in interpreting children’s touch and gesture input on mobile devices. Proceedings of the 2012 ACM international conference on Interactive tabletops and surfaces (pp. 225–234). Association for Computing Machinery.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Aunio, P., & Niemivirta, M. (2010). Predicting children’s mathematical performance in grade one by early numeracy. Learning and Individual Differences, 20 (5), 427–435.

Aunio, P., Aubrey, C., Godfrey, R., Pan, Y., & Liu, Y. (2008). Children’s early numeracy in England, Finland and People’s Republic of China. International Journal of Early Years Education, 16 (3), 203–221.

Aunola, K., Leskinen, E., Lerkkanen, M., & Nurmi, J. E. (2004). Developmental dynamics of math performance from preschool to grade 2. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96 , 699–713.

Beschorner, B., & Hutchison, A. (2013). iPads as a literacy teaching tool in early childhood. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 1 , 16–24.

Google Scholar  

Blonder, R., & Rap, S. (2013). It’s a small world after all: A nanotechnology activity in a science festival. Journal of Nano Education, 4 , 47–56.

Blonder, R., & Sakhnini, S. (2012). Teaching two basic nanotechnology concepts in secondary school by using a variety of teaching methods. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 13 , 500–516.

Blonder, R., & Yonai, E. (2020). Exposing school students to nanoscience: A review of published programs. In K. D. Sattler (Ed.), 21st century nanoscience – A handbook: Public policy, education, and global trends (1st ed., Vol. 10). Taylor & Francis (CRC Press).

Calder, N. (2015). Apps: Appropriate, applicable, and appealing? In T. Lowrie & R. Jorgensen (Zevenbergen) (Eds.), Digital games and mathematics learning, mathematics education in the digital era (Vol. 4, pp. 233–250). Netherlands: Springer.

Chen, G., Cheng, W., Chang, T. W., Zheng, X., & Huang, R. (2014). A comparison of reading comprehension across paper, computer screens, and tablets: Does tablet familiarity matter? Journal of Computers in Education, 1 (2–3), 213–225.

Chmiliar, L. (2017). Improving learning outcomes: The iPad and preschool children with disabilities. Frontiers in psychology, 8 , 660.

Ciampa, K., & Gallagher, T. L. (2013). Getting in touch: Use of mobile devices in the elementary classroom. Computers in the Schools, 30 (4), 309–328.

Clarke, L., & Abbott, L. (2016). Young pupils’, their teacher’s and classroom assistants’ experiences of iPads in a Northern Ireland school: “Four and five years old, who would have thought they could do that?” British Journal of Educational Technology, 47 (6), 1051–1064.

Clements, D. H. (1999). Playing math with young children. Curriculum Administrator, 35 (4), 25–28.

Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2007). Effects of a preschool mathematics curriculum: Summative research on the Building Blocks project. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 38 , 136–163.

Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2008). Mathematics and technology: Supporting learning for students and teachers. In O. N. Saracho & B. Spodek (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on science and technology in early childhood education (pp. 127–147). Charlotte: Information Age.

Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2013). Rethinking early mathematics: What is research based curriculum for young children? In L. D. English & J. T. Mulligan (Eds.), Reconceptualizing early mathematics learning (pp. 121–147). Springer.

Clements, D. H., Sarama, J., Spitler, M. E., Lange, A. A., & Wolfe, C. B. (2011). Mathematics learned by young children in an intervention based on learning trajectories: A large-scale cluster randomized trial. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 42 (2), 127–166.

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education . Routledge.

Book   Google Scholar  

Cook, D. A., & Artino, A. R., Jr. (2016). Motivation to learn: An overview of contemporary theories. Medical Education, 50 (10), 997–1014.

Couse, L. J., & Chen, D. W. (2010). A Tablet computer for young children? Exploring its viability for early childhood education. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 43 , 75–98.

Crescenzi, L., Jewitt, C., & Price, S. (2014). The role of touch in preschool children’s learning using iPad versus paper interaction. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 37 (2), 86–96.

Delgado, C., Stevens, S. Y., Shin, N., & Krajcik, J. (2015). A middle school instructional unit for size and scale contextualized in nanotechnology. Nanotechnology Reviews, 4 (1), 51–69.

Dorouka, P., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2023). Teaching nanotechnology concepts in early-primary education: an experimental study using digital games. International Journal of Science Education, 1–28.

Dorouka, P., Papadakis, S., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2020a). Tablets and apps for promoting robotics, mathematics, STEM education and literacy in early childhood education. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 14 (2), 255–274.

Dorouka, P., Papadakis, St., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2020b). The influence of digital technology on young children’s “nano-literacy.” In K. Plakitsi, E. Kolokouri, & A.-C. Kornelaki (Eds.), ISCAR (International Society of Cultural-historical Activity Research) Regional Conference ‘Crisis in contexts’, e-proceedings (pp. 308–320). University of Ioannina. 19-24 March 2019.

Dorouka, P., Papadakis, St., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2021a). Nanotechnology and mobile learning: Perspectives and opportunities in young children’s education. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning, 13 (3), 237–252.

Dorouka, P., Papadakis, S., & Kalogiannakis, M. (2021b). The contribution of the health crisis to young children’s nano-literacy through STEAM education. Hellenic Journal of STEM Education, 2 (1), 1–7.

Dwyer, J. (2007). Computer-based learning in a primary school: Differences between the early and later years of primary schooling. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 35 (1), 89–103.

Goodwin, K. (2012). Use of tablet technology in the classroom (pp. 6–93). NSW Department of Education and Communities.

Guernsey, L. (2012). Can your preschooler learn anything from an iPad App? Retrieved on December 20, 2022, from http://goo.gl/en6Bme

Haßler, B., Major, L., & Hennessy, S. (2016). Tablet use in schools: A critical review of the evidence for learning outcomes. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 32 (2), 139–156.

Herodotou, C. (2017). Mobile games and science learning: A comparative study of 4 and 5 years old playing the game Angry Birds. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49 (1), 6–16.

Herodotou, C. (2018). Young children and tablets: A systematic review of effects on learning and development. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 34 (1), 1–9.

Hirsh-Pasek, K., Zosh, J. M., Golinkoff, R. M., Gray, J. H., Robb, M. B., & Kaufman, J. (2015). Putting education in Beducational^ apps: Lessons from the science of learning. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 16 (1), 3–34.

Huber, B., Tarasuik, J., Antoniou, M. N., Garrett, C., Bowe, S. J., & Kaufman, J. (2016). Young children’s transfer of learning from a touchscreen device. Computers in Human Behavior, 56 , 56–64.

Hyde, J. S., & Mertz, J. E. (2009). Gender, culture, and mathematics performance. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 106 , 8801–8807.

İpek, Z., Atik, A. D., Tan, S., & Erkoç, F. (2020). Opinions of biology teachers about nanoscience and nanotechnology education in Turkey. International Journal of Progressive Education, 16 (1), 205–222.

Jayawardena, N. S., Ross, M., Quach, S., Behl, A., & Gupta, M. (2021). Effective online engagement strategies through gamification: A systematic literature review and a future research agenda. Journal of Global Information Management (JGIM), 30 (5), 1–25.

Jones, M. G., Blonder, R., & Kähkönen, A.-L. (2020). Challenges in nanoscience education. In K. D. Sattler (Ed.), 21st century nanoscience – A handbook: Public policy, education, and global trends. (Vol. 10). 10.1201/9780429351631: Taylor & Francis (CRC Press).

Jordan, N. C., Kaplan, D., Nabors Oláh, L., & Locuniak, M. N. (2006). Number sense growth in kindergarten: A longitudinal investigation of children at risk for mathematics difficulties. Child Development, 77 , 153–175.

Judge, S., Floyd, K., & Jeffs, T. (2015). Using mobile media devices and apps to promote young children’s learning. In K. Heider & M. Renck-Jalongo (Eds.), Young children and families in the information age. Educating the young child (pp. 117–131). Netherlands: Springer.

Kabali, H. K., Irigoyen, M. M., Nunez-Davis, R., Budacki, J. G., Mohanty, S. H., Leister, K. P., et al. (2015). Exposure and use of mobile media devices by young children. Pediatrics, 136 , 1044–1050.

Kähkönen, A. L., Laherto, A., Lindell, A., & Tala, S. (2016). Interdisciplinary nature of nanoscience: Implications for education. Global perspectives of nanoscience and engineering education (pp. 35–81). Springer.

Kalogiannakis, M., & Papadakis, S. (2020). The use of developmentally mobile applications for preparing pre-service teachers to promote STEM activities in preschool classrooms. In S. Papadakis & M. Kalogiannakis (Eds.), Mobile Learning applications in early childhood education (pp. 82–100). IGI Global.

Kalogiannakis, M., Papadakis, S., & Zourmpakis, A. I. (2021). Gamification in science education. A systematic review of the literature. Education Sciences, 11 (1), 22.

Kerckaert, St., Vanderlinde, R., & van Braak, J. (2015). The role of ICT in early childhood education: Scale development and research on ICT use and influencing factors. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23 , 183–199.

Kolb, D. (1983). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development .

Kolb, D. A., Boyatzis, R. E., & Mainemelis, C. (2014). Experiential learning theory: Previous research and new directions. Perspectives on thinking, learning, and cognitive styles (pp. 227–247). Routledge.

Liu, N. S. H. (2013). iPad infuse creativity in solid geometry teaching. Turkish Online Journal of Education Technology, 12 , 177–192.

Lubienski, S. T., Robinson, J. P., Crane, C. C., & Ganley, C. M. (2013). Girls’ and boys’ mathematics achievement, affect, and experiences: Findings from ECLS-K. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 44 (4), 634–645.

Magana, A. J., Brophy, S. P., & Bryan, L. A. (2012). An integrated knowledge framework to characterize and scaffold size and scale cognition (FS2C). International Journal of Science Education, 34 (14), 2181–2203.

Mattoon, C., Bates, A., Shifflet, R., Latham, N., & Ennis, S. (2015). Examining computational skills in prekindergarteners: The effects of traditional and digital manipulatives in a prekindergarten classroom. Early Childhood Research and Practice, 17 (1), n1.

McManis, L. F. D., & Gunnewig, S. B. (2012). Finding the education in educational technology with early learners. YC Young Children, 67 , 14–24.

Mehdipour, Y., & Zerehkafi, H. (2013). Mobile learning for education: Benefits and challenges. International Journal of Computational Engineering Research, 3 (6), 93–101.

Miller, D., Robertson, D., Hudson, A., & Shimi, J. (2012). Signature pedagogy in early years education: A role for COTS game-based learning. Computers in the Schools, 29 (1–2), 227–247.

Milman, N. B., Carlson-Bancroft, A., & Boogart, A. V. (2014). Examining differentiation and utilization of iPads across content areas in an independent, preK–4th grade elementary school. Computers in the Schools, 31 (3), 119–133.

Mononen, R., & Aunio, P. (2013). Early mathematical performance in Finnish kindergarten and grade one. LUMAT, 1 (3), 245–261.

Murriello, S., Contier, D., & Knobel, M. (2006). Challenges of an exhibit on nanoscience and nanotechnology. Journal of Science Communication, 5 (4), A01.

Neumann, M. M. (2018). Using tablets and apps to enhance emergent literacy skills in young children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 42 , 239–246.

Neumann, M. M., & Neumann, D. L. (2014). Touch screen tablets and emergent literacy. Early Childhood Education Journal, 42 , 231–239.

NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states . National Academies Press.

Nistor, G. C., & Iacob, A. (2018). The advantages of gamification and game-based learning and their benefits in the development of education. The International Scientific Conference eLearning and Software for Education (Vol. 1, pp. 308–312). “Carol I” National Defence University.

Nolan, J., & McBride, M. (2014). Beyond gamification: Reconceptualizing game-based learning in early childhood environments. Information, Communication & Society, 17 (5), 594–608.

Nunes, T., & Bryant, P. (1996). Children doing mathematics . Wiley-Blackwell.

Oakley, G., Wildy, H., & Berman, Y. E. (2018). Multimodal digital text creation using tablets and open-ended creative apps to improve the literacy learning of children in early childhood classrooms. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy . Online First Article.

Oliemat, E., Ihmeideh, F., & Alkhawaldeh, M. (2018). The use of touch-screen tablets in early childhood: Children’s knowledge, skills, and attitudes towards tablet technology. Children and Youth Services Review, 88 , 591–597.

Panagiotakopoulos, C. T., Sarris, M. E., & Koleza, E. G. (2013). Playing with numbers: Development issues and evaluation results of a computer game for primary school students. In T. Sobh & K. Elleithy (Eds.), Emerging trends in computing, informatics, systems sciences, and engineering (Vol. 151, pp. 263–275). Springer.

Papadakis, S., Kalogiannakis, M., & Zaranis, N. (2016). Comparing tablets and PCs in teaching mathematics: An attempt to improve mathematics competence in early 215 childhood education. Preschool and Primary Education, 4 (2), 241.

Papadakis, S., Kalogiannakis, M., & Zaranis, N. (2017). Improving mathematics teaching in kindergarten with realistic mathematical education. Early Childhood Education Journal, 45 , 369–378.

Papadakis, S., Kalogiannakis, M., & Zaranis, N. (2021). Teaching mathematics with mobile devices and the Realistic Mathematical Education (RME) approach in kindergarten. Advances in Mobile Learning Educational Research, 1 (1), 5–18.

Pasnik, S., & Llorente, C. (2013). Preschool teachers can use a PBS KIDS transmedia curriculum supplement to support young children’s mathematics learning: Results of a randomized controlled trial. Summative evaluation of the CPB-PBS ready to learn initiative . Waltham.

Pegrum, M., Oakley, G., & Faulkner, R. (2013). Schools going mobile: A study of the adoption of mobile handheld technologies in Western Australian independent schools. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 29 , 66–81.

Peikos, G., Spyrtou, A., Pnevmatikos, D., & Papadopoulou, P. (2020). Nanoscale science and technology education: Primary school students’ preconceptions of the lotus effect and the concept of size. Research in Science & Technological Education, 1–18.

Peikos, G., Spyrtou, A., Pnevmatikos, D., & Papadopoulou, P. (2022). A teaching learning sequence on nanoscience and nanotechnology content at primary school level: Evaluation of students’ learning. International Journal of Science Education, 44 (12), 1932–1957.

Peirce, N. (2013). Digital game-based learning for early childhood. A state of the art report . Learnovate Centre.

Penuel, W. R., Pasnik, S., Bates, L., Townsend, E., Gallagher, L. P., Llorente, C., & Hupert, N. (2009). Preschool teachers can use a mediarich curriculum to prepare lowincome children for school success: Results of a randomized controlled trial . Education Development Center Inc, and SRI International.

Plowman, L., Stevenson, O., Stephen, C., & McPake, J. (2012). Preschool children’s learning with technology at home. Computers & Education, 59 (1), 30–37.

Psycharis, S. (2016). The impact of computational experiment and formative assessment in inquiry-based teaching and learning approach in STEM education. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 25 (2), 316–326.

Reich, S. M., Yaw, J. C., & Warschauer, M. (2016). Tablet-based ebooks for young children: What does the research says? Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics, 37 , 585–591.

Rideout, V. J. (2014). Learning at home: Families’ educational media use in America. A report of the families and media project . The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop.

Risconscente, M. (2012). Mobile learning games improves 5th graders’ fraction knowledge and attitudes . Los Angeles, CA: GameDesk Institute.

Roberts, T. A., Vadasy, P. F., & Sanders, E. A. (2018). Preschoolers’ alphabet learning: Letter name and sound instruction, cognitive processes, and English proficiency. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 44 , 257–274.

Rogowsky, B. A., Terwilliger, C. C., Young, C. A., & Kribbs, E. E. (2018). Playful learning with technology: The effect of computer-assisted instruction on literacy and numeracy skills of preschoolers. International Journal of Play, 7 (1), 60–80.

Sakhnini, S., & Blonder, R. (2015). Essential concepts of nanoscale science and technology for high school students based on a Delphi study by the expert community. International Journal of Science Education, 37 (11), 1699–1738.

Schacter, J., & Jo, B. (2017). Improving preschoolers’ mathematics achievement with tablets: A randomized controlled trial. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 29 (3), 313–327.

Schroeder, E. L., & Kirkorian, H. L. (2016). When seeing is better than doing: Preschoolers’ transfer of STEM skills using touchscreen games. Frontiers in Psychology, 7 , 1–12.

Semmelmann, K., Nordt, M., Sommer, K., Röhnke, R., Mount, L., & Prüfer, H.,…& Weigelt, S. (2016). U can touch this: How tablets can be used to study cognitive development. Frontiers in Psychology, 7 , 1021.

Shamir, H., Feehan, K., & Yoder, E. (2017). Effects of personalized learning on kindergarten and first grade students’ early literacy skills. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Computer Supported Education (CSEDU 2017) (Vol. 2, pp. 273–279). Porto.

Sheehan, K. J., & Uttal, D. H. (2016). Children’s learning from touch screens: A dual representation perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 7 , 1220.

Siraj-Blatchford, I., & Siraj-Blatchford, J. (2003). More than computers-information and communication technology in the early years . British Association for Early Childhood Education (Early Education).

Spelke, E. S. (2005). Sex differences in intrinsic attitude for mathematics and science. American Psychology, 60 , 950–958.

Spyrtou, A., Manou, L., Peikos, G., & Papadopoulou, P. (2018). Investigating the Secrets of the Nanoworld . Athens: Gutenberg - Dardanos. In Greek.

Starcic, A., & Bagon, S. (2014). ICT-supported learning for inclusion of people with special needs: Review of seven educational technology journals, 1970–2011. British Journal of Educational Technology, 45 (2), 202–230.

Stevens, S., Sutherland, L. M., & Krajcik, J. S. (2009). The big ideas of nanoscale science and engineering: A guidebook for secondary teachers . NSTA Press.

Tai, L., Zhu, G., Yang, M., Cao, L., Xing, X., Yin, G., & Zhu, Y. (2021). Nanometer-resolution in situ structure of the SARS-CoV-2 postfusion spike protein. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 118 (48), e2112703118.

Ting, Y. L. (2013). Using mobile technologies to create interwoven learning interactions: An intuitive design and its evaluation. Computers and Education, 60 , 1–13.

Tretter, T. R., Jones, M. G., Andre, T., Negishi, A., & Minogue, J. (2006a). Conceptual boundaries and distances: Students’ and experts’ concepts of the scale of scientific phenomena. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43 , 282–319.

Tretter, T. R., Jones, M. G., & Minogue, J. (2006b). Accuracy of scale conceptions in science: Mental maneuverings across many orders of spatial magnitude. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43 (10), 1061–1085.

Vavoula, G., & Karagiannidis, C. (2005). Designing mobile learning experiences. Panhellenic conference on informatics (pp. 534–544). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

Verenikina, I., & Kervin, L. (2011). iPads, digital play and pre-schoolers. He Kupu, 2 , 4–19.

Wang, F., Xie, H., Wang, Y., Hao, Y., & An, J. (2016). Using touchscreen tablets to help young children learn to tell time. Frontiers in Psychology, 7 , 1800.

Watts, C. M., Moyer‐packenham, P. S., Tucker, S. I., Bullock, E. P., Shumway, J. F., Westenskow, A., & Jordan, K. (2016). An examination of children’s learning progression shifts while using touch screen virtual manipulative mathematics apps. Computers in Human Behavior, 64 , 814–828.

Wood, E., Petkovski, M., De Pasquale, D., Gottardo, A., Evans, M. A., & Savage, R. S. (2016). Parent scaffolding of young children when engaged with mobile technology. Frontiers in Psychology, 7 , 690.

Wu, W. H., Jim, Wu., & Y. C., Chen, C. Y., Kao, H. Y., Lin, C. H., & Huang, S. H. (2012). Review of trends from mobile learning studies: A meta-analysis. Computers in Education, 59 (2), 817–827.

Zaranis, N., Kalogiannakis, M., & Papadakis, S. (2013). Using mobile devices for teaching realistic mathematics in kindergarten education. Creative Education, 4 , 1–10.

Zevenbergen, R., & Logan, H. (2008). Computer use by preschool children: Rethinking practice as digital natives come to preschool. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 33 , 37–44.

Zhou, S. (2022). Effect of mobile learning on the optimization of preschool education teaching mode under the epidemic. Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing, 2022 , 2194373.

Download references

The research work was supported by the Hellenic Foundation for Research and Innovation (HFRI) under the 3rd Call for HFRI PhD Fellowships (Fellowship Number 5503).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Preschool Education, University of Crete, 74100, Rethymno, Greece

Pandora Dorouka

Department of Special Education, University of Thessaly, Volos, Greece

Michail Kalogiannakis

Department of Science Teaching, Weizmann Institute of Science, 76100, Rehovot, Israel

Ron Blonder

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

Conceptualization, investigation, drafting, and writing, PD; methodology, validation, review and editing, and visualization, PD; writing—review and editing, and supervision, PD; MK; RB. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pandora Dorouka .

Ethics declarations

Ethical approval.

Requirements regarding informed consent, confidentiality, and data use were carefully adhered to, both verbally and in writing, informing school staff, children, and guardians of the purpose of the study and their rights not to participate. In particular, before starting the first phase of the research, the research protocol was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Department of Preschool Education of the University of Crete (1016/22-11-2021). The approval was approved by the Ethics and Research Ethics Committee of the University of Crete (REC-UOC) (no. 35/24.02.2022, https://www.ehde.uoc.gr/index.php/en ), as well as by the Hellenic Institute of Educational Policy (IEP) (no. 3578/14-–03-2022).

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent to Participate

Consent to participate was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Consent for Publication

All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Statement Regarding Research Involving Human Participants and/or Animals

The research protocol was reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee of the Department of Preschool Education of the University of Crete (1016/22–11-2021). The approval was approved by the Ethics and Research Ethics Committee of the University of Crete (REC-UOC) (no. 35/24.02.2022, https://www.ehde.uoc.gr/index.php/en ), as well as by the Hellenic Institute of Educational Policy (IEP) (no. 3578/14–03-2022).

Additional information

Publisher's note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Dorouka, P., Kalogiannakis, M. & Blonder, R. Tablets and Apps for Promoting Nanoliteracy in Early Childhood Education: Results from an Experimental Study. J Sci Educ Technol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-024-10132-w

Download citation

Accepted : 12 June 2024

Published : 09 July 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-024-10132-w

Share this article

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

• Educational apps
• Early primary education
• Nanoscale elements
• Experimental design
• Find a journal
• Publish with us
• Track your research

Human Subjects Office

Medical terms in lay language.

Please use these descriptions in place of medical jargon in consent documents, recruitment materials and other study documents. Note: These terms are not the only acceptable plain language alternatives for these vocabulary words.

This glossary of terms is derived from a list copyrighted by the University of Kentucky, Office of Research Integrity (1990).

For clinical research-specific definitions, see also the Clinical Research Glossary developed by the Multi-Regional Clinical Trials (MRCT) Center of Brigham and Women’s Hospital and Harvard  and the Clinical Data Interchange Standards Consortium (CDISC) .

Alternative Lay Language for Medical Terms for use in Informed Consent Documents

A   B   C   D   E   F   G   H   I  J  K   L   M   N   O   P   Q   R   S   T   U   V   W  X  Y  Z

ABDOMEN/ABDOMINAL body cavity below diaphragm that contains stomach, intestines, liver and other organs ABSORB take up fluids, take in ACIDOSIS condition when blood contains more acid than normal ACUITY clearness, keenness, esp. of vision and airways ACUTE new, recent, sudden, urgent ADENOPATHY swollen lymph nodes (glands) ADJUVANT helpful, assisting, aiding, supportive ADJUVANT TREATMENT added treatment (usually to a standard treatment) ANTIBIOTIC drug that kills bacteria and other germs ANTIMICROBIAL drug that kills bacteria and other germs ANTIRETROVIRAL drug that works against the growth of certain viruses ADVERSE EFFECT side effect, bad reaction, unwanted response ALLERGIC REACTION rash, hives, swelling, trouble breathing AMBULATE/AMBULATION/AMBULATORY walk, able to walk ANAPHYLAXIS serious, potentially life-threatening allergic reaction ANEMIA decreased red blood cells; low red cell blood count ANESTHETIC a drug or agent used to decrease the feeling of pain, or eliminate the feeling of pain by putting you to sleep ANGINA pain resulting from not enough blood flowing to the heart ANGINA PECTORIS pain resulting from not enough blood flowing to the heart ANOREXIA disorder in which person will not eat; lack of appetite ANTECUBITAL related to the inner side of the forearm ANTIBODY protein made in the body in response to foreign substance ANTICONVULSANT drug used to prevent seizures ANTILIPEMIC a drug that lowers fat levels in the blood ANTITUSSIVE a drug used to relieve coughing ARRHYTHMIA abnormal heartbeat; any change from the normal heartbeat ASPIRATION fluid entering the lungs, such as after vomiting ASSAY lab test ASSESS to learn about, measure, evaluate, look at ASTHMA lung disease associated with tightening of air passages, making breathing difficult ASYMPTOMATIC without symptoms AXILLA armpit

BENIGN not malignant, without serious consequences BID twice a day BINDING/BOUND carried by, to make stick together, transported BIOAVAILABILITY the extent to which a drug or other substance becomes available to the body BLOOD PROFILE series of blood tests BOLUS a large amount given all at once BONE MASS the amount of calcium and other minerals in a given amount of bone BRADYARRHYTHMIAS slow, irregular heartbeats BRADYCARDIA slow heartbeat BRONCHOSPASM breathing distress caused by narrowing of the airways

CARCINOGENIC cancer-causing CARCINOMA type of cancer CARDIAC related to the heart CARDIOVERSION return to normal heartbeat by electric shock CATHETER a tube for withdrawing or giving fluids CATHETER a tube placed near the spinal cord and used for anesthesia (indwelling epidural) during surgery CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM (CNS) brain and spinal cord CEREBRAL TRAUMA damage to the brain CESSATION stopping CHD coronary heart disease CHEMOTHERAPY treatment of disease, usually cancer, by chemical agents CHRONIC continuing for a long time, ongoing CLINICAL pertaining to medical care CLINICAL TRIAL an experiment involving human subjects COMA unconscious state COMPLETE RESPONSE total disappearance of disease CONGENITAL present before birth CONJUNCTIVITIS redness and irritation of the thin membrane that covers the eye CONSOLIDATION PHASE treatment phase intended to make a remission permanent (follows induction phase) CONTROLLED TRIAL research study in which the experimental treatment or procedure is compared to a standard (control) treatment or procedure COOPERATIVE GROUP association of multiple institutions to perform clinical trials CORONARY related to the blood vessels that supply the heart, or to the heart itself CT SCAN (CAT) computerized series of x-rays (computerized tomography) CULTURE test for infection, or for organisms that could cause infection CUMULATIVE added together from the beginning CUTANEOUS relating to the skin CVA stroke (cerebrovascular accident)

DERMATOLOGIC pertaining to the skin DIASTOLIC lower number in a blood pressure reading DISTAL toward the end, away from the center of the body DIURETIC "water pill" or drug that causes increase in urination DOPPLER device using sound waves to diagnose or test DOUBLE BLIND study in which neither investigators nor subjects know what drug or treatment the subject is receiving DYSFUNCTION state of improper function DYSPLASIA abnormal cells

ECHOCARDIOGRAM sound wave test of the heart EDEMA excess fluid collecting in tissue EEG electric brain wave tracing (electroencephalogram) EFFICACY effectiveness ELECTROCARDIOGRAM electrical tracing of the heartbeat (ECG or EKG) ELECTROLYTE IMBALANCE an imbalance of minerals in the blood EMESIS vomiting EMPIRIC based on experience ENDOSCOPIC EXAMINATION viewing an  internal part of the body with a lighted tube  ENTERAL by way of the intestines EPIDURAL outside the spinal cord ERADICATE get rid of (such as disease) Page 2 of 7 EVALUATED, ASSESSED examined for a medical condition EXPEDITED REVIEW rapid review of a protocol by the IRB Chair without full committee approval, permitted with certain low-risk research studies EXTERNAL outside the body EXTRAVASATE to leak outside of a planned area, such as out of a blood vessel

FDA U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the branch of federal government that approves new drugs FIBROUS having many fibers, such as scar tissue FIBRILLATION irregular beat of the heart or other muscle

GENERAL ANESTHESIA pain prevention by giving drugs to cause loss of consciousness, as during surgery GESTATIONAL pertaining to pregnancy

HEMATOCRIT amount of red blood cells in the blood HEMATOMA a bruise, a black and blue mark HEMODYNAMIC MEASURING blood flow HEMOLYSIS breakdown in red blood cells HEPARIN LOCK needle placed in the arm with blood thinner to keep the blood from clotting HEPATOMA cancer or tumor of the liver HERITABLE DISEASE can be transmitted to one’s offspring, resulting in damage to future children HISTOPATHOLOGIC pertaining to the disease status of body tissues or cells HOLTER MONITOR a portable machine for recording heart beats HYPERCALCEMIA high blood calcium level HYPERKALEMIA high blood potassium level HYPERNATREMIA high blood sodium level HYPERTENSION high blood pressure HYPOCALCEMIA low blood calcium level HYPOKALEMIA low blood potassium level HYPONATREMIA low blood sodium level HYPOTENSION low blood pressure HYPOXEMIA a decrease of oxygen in the blood HYPOXIA a decrease of oxygen reaching body tissues HYSTERECTOMY surgical removal of the uterus, ovaries (female sex glands), or both uterus and ovaries

IATROGENIC caused by a physician or by treatment IDE investigational device exemption, the license to test an unapproved new medical device IDIOPATHIC of unknown cause IMMUNITY defense against, protection from IMMUNOGLOBIN a protein that makes antibodies IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE drug which works against the body's immune (protective) response, often used in transplantation and diseases caused by immune system malfunction IMMUNOTHERAPY giving of drugs to help the body's immune (protective) system; usually used to destroy cancer cells IMPAIRED FUNCTION abnormal function IMPLANTED placed in the body IND investigational new drug, the license to test an unapproved new drug INDUCTION PHASE beginning phase or stage of a treatment INDURATION hardening INDWELLING remaining in a given location, such as a catheter INFARCT death of tissue due to lack of blood supply INFECTIOUS DISEASE transmitted from one person to the next INFLAMMATION swelling that is generally painful, red, and warm INFUSION slow injection of a substance into the body, usually into the blood by means of a catheter INGESTION eating; taking by mouth INTERFERON drug which acts against viruses; antiviral agent INTERMITTENT occurring (regularly or irregularly) between two time points; repeatedly stopping, then starting again INTERNAL within the body INTERIOR inside of the body INTRAMUSCULAR into the muscle; within the muscle INTRAPERITONEAL into the abdominal cavity INTRATHECAL into the spinal fluid INTRAVENOUS (IV) through the vein INTRAVESICAL in the bladder INTUBATE the placement of a tube into the airway INVASIVE PROCEDURE puncturing, opening, or cutting the skin INVESTIGATIONAL NEW DRUG (IND) a new drug that has not been approved by the FDA INVESTIGATIONAL METHOD a treatment method which has not been proven to be beneficial or has not been accepted as standard care ISCHEMIA decreased oxygen in a tissue (usually because of decreased blood flow)

LAPAROTOMY surgical procedure in which an incision is made in the abdominal wall to enable a doctor to look at the organs inside LESION wound or injury; a diseased patch of skin LETHARGY sleepiness, tiredness LEUKOPENIA low white blood cell count LIPID fat LIPID CONTENT fat content in the blood LIPID PROFILE (PANEL) fat and cholesterol levels in the blood LOCAL ANESTHESIA creation of insensitivity to pain in a small, local area of the body, usually by injection of numbing drugs LOCALIZED restricted to one area, limited to one area LUMEN the cavity of an organ or tube (e.g., blood vessel) LYMPHANGIOGRAPHY an x-ray of the lymph nodes or tissues after injecting dye into lymph vessels (e.g., in feet) LYMPHOCYTE a type of white blood cell important in immunity (protection) against infection LYMPHOMA a cancer of the lymph nodes (or tissues)

MALAISE a vague feeling of bodily discomfort, feeling badly MALFUNCTION condition in which something is not functioning properly MALIGNANCY cancer or other progressively enlarging and spreading tumor, usually fatal if not successfully treated MEDULLABLASTOMA a type of brain tumor MEGALOBLASTOSIS change in red blood cells METABOLIZE process of breaking down substances in the cells to obtain energy METASTASIS spread of cancer cells from one part of the body to another METRONIDAZOLE drug used to treat infections caused by parasites (invading organisms that take up living in the body) or other causes of anaerobic infection (not requiring oxygen to survive) MI myocardial infarction, heart attack MINIMAL slight MINIMIZE reduce as much as possible Page 4 of 7 MONITOR check on; keep track of; watch carefully MOBILITY ease of movement MORBIDITY undesired result or complication MORTALITY death MOTILITY the ability to move MRI magnetic resonance imaging, diagnostic pictures of the inside of the body, created using magnetic rather than x-ray energy MUCOSA, MUCOUS MEMBRANE moist lining of digestive, respiratory, reproductive, and urinary tracts MYALGIA muscle aches MYOCARDIAL pertaining to the heart muscle MYOCARDIAL INFARCTION heart attack

NASOGASTRIC TUBE placed in the nose, reaching to the stomach NCI the National Cancer Institute NECROSIS death of tissue NEOPLASIA/NEOPLASM tumor, may be benign or malignant NEUROBLASTOMA a cancer of nerve tissue NEUROLOGICAL pertaining to the nervous system NEUTROPENIA decrease in the main part of the white blood cells NIH the National Institutes of Health NONINVASIVE not breaking, cutting, or entering the skin NOSOCOMIAL acquired in the hospital

OCCLUSION closing; blockage; obstruction ONCOLOGY the study of tumors or cancer OPHTHALMIC pertaining to the eye OPTIMAL best, most favorable or desirable ORAL ADMINISTRATION by mouth ORTHOPEDIC pertaining to the bones OSTEOPETROSIS rare bone disorder characterized by dense bone OSTEOPOROSIS softening of the bones OVARIES female sex glands

PARENTERAL given by injection PATENCY condition of being open PATHOGENESIS development of a disease or unhealthy condition PERCUTANEOUS through the skin PERIPHERAL not central PER OS (PO) by mouth PHARMACOKINETICS the study of the way the body absorbs, distributes, and gets rid of a drug PHASE I first phase of study of a new drug in humans to determine action, safety, and proper dosing PHASE II second phase of study of a new drug in humans, intended to gather information about safety and effectiveness of the drug for certain uses PHASE III large-scale studies to confirm and expand information on safety and effectiveness of new drug for certain uses, and to study common side effects PHASE IV studies done after the drug is approved by the FDA, especially to compare it to standard care or to try it for new uses PHLEBITIS irritation or inflammation of the vein PLACEBO an inactive substance; a pill/liquid that contains no medicine PLACEBO EFFECT improvement seen with giving subjects a placebo, though it contains no active drug/treatment PLATELETS small particles in the blood that help with clotting POTENTIAL possible POTENTIATE increase or multiply the effect of a drug or toxin (poison) by giving another drug or toxin at the same time (sometimes an unintentional result) POTENTIATOR an agent that helps another agent work better PRENATAL before birth PROPHYLAXIS a drug given to prevent disease or infection PER OS (PO) by mouth PRN as needed PROGNOSIS outlook, probable outcomes PRONE lying on the stomach PROSPECTIVE STUDY following patients forward in time PROSTHESIS artificial part, most often limbs, such as arms or legs PROTOCOL plan of study PROXIMAL closer to the center of the body, away from the end PULMONARY pertaining to the lungs

QD every day; daily QID four times a day

RADIATION THERAPY x-ray or cobalt treatment RANDOM by chance (like the flip of a coin) RANDOMIZATION chance selection RBC red blood cell RECOMBINANT formation of new combinations of genes RECONSTITUTION putting back together the original parts or elements RECUR happen again REFRACTORY not responding to treatment REGENERATION re-growth of a structure or of lost tissue REGIMEN pattern of giving treatment RELAPSE the return of a disease REMISSION disappearance of evidence of cancer or other disease RENAL pertaining to the kidneys REPLICABLE possible to duplicate RESECT remove or cut out surgically RETROSPECTIVE STUDY looking back over past experience

SARCOMA a type of cancer SEDATIVE a drug to calm or make less anxious SEMINOMA a type of testicular cancer (found in the male sex glands) SEQUENTIALLY in a row, in order SOMNOLENCE sleepiness SPIROMETER an instrument to measure the amount of air taken into and exhaled from the lungs STAGING an evaluation of the extent of the disease STANDARD OF CARE a treatment plan that the majority of the medical community would accept as appropriate STENOSIS narrowing of a duct, tube, or one of the blood vessels in the heart STOMATITIS mouth sores, inflammation of the mouth STRATIFY arrange in groups for analysis of results (e.g., stratify by age, sex, etc.) STUPOR stunned state in which it is difficult to get a response or the attention of the subject SUBCLAVIAN under the collarbone SUBCUTANEOUS under the skin SUPINE lying on the back SUPPORTIVE CARE general medical care aimed at symptoms, not intended to improve or cure underlying disease SYMPTOMATIC having symptoms SYNDROME a condition characterized by a set of symptoms SYSTOLIC top number in blood pressure; pressure during active contraction of the heart

TERATOGENIC capable of causing malformations in a fetus (developing baby still inside the mother’s body) TESTES/TESTICLES male sex glands THROMBOSIS clotting THROMBUS blood clot TID three times a day TITRATION a method for deciding on the strength of a drug or solution; gradually increasing the dose T-LYMPHOCYTES type of white blood cells TOPICAL on the surface TOPICAL ANESTHETIC applied to a certain area of the skin and reducing pain only in the area to which applied TOXICITY side effects or undesirable effects of a drug or treatment TRANSDERMAL through the skin TRANSIENTLY temporarily TRAUMA injury; wound TREADMILL walking machine used to test heart function

UPTAKE absorbing and taking in of a substance by living tissue

VALVULOPLASTY plastic repair of a valve, especially a heart valve VARICES enlarged veins VASOSPASM narrowing of the blood vessels VECTOR a carrier that can transmit disease-causing microorganisms (germs and viruses) VENIPUNCTURE needle stick, blood draw, entering the skin with a needle VERTICAL TRANSMISSION spread of disease

WBC white blood cell