2. variables
3. variables
4. variables
5. variables
6. variables
7. variables
8. variables
The simplest way to understand a variable is as any characteristic or attribute that can experience change or vary over time or context – hence the name “variable”. For example, the dosage of a particular medicine could be classified as a variable, as the amount can vary (i.e., a higher dose or a lower dose). Similarly, gender, age or ethnicity could be considered demographic variables, because each person varies in these respects.
Within research, especially scientific research, variables form the foundation of studies, as researchers are often interested in how one variable impacts another, and the relationships between different variables. For example:
As you can see, variables are often used to explain relationships between different elements and phenomena. In scientific studies, especially experimental studies, the objective is often to understand the causal relationships between variables. In other words, the role of cause and effect between variables. This is achieved by manipulating certain variables while controlling others – and then observing the outcome. But, we’ll get into that a little later…
Variables can be a little intimidating for new researchers because there are a wide variety of variables, and oftentimes, there are multiple labels for the same thing. To lay a firm foundation, we’ll first look at the three main types of variables, namely:
Simply put, the independent variable is the “ cause ” in the relationship between two (or more) variables. In other words, when the independent variable changes, it has an impact on another variable.
For example:
It’s useful to know that independent variables can go by a few different names, including, explanatory variables (because they explain an event or outcome) and predictor variables (because they predict the value of another variable). Terminology aside though, the most important takeaway is that independent variables are assumed to be the “cause” in any cause-effect relationship. As you can imagine, these types of variables are of major interest to researchers, as many studies seek to understand the causal factors behind a phenomenon.
While the independent variable is the “ cause ”, the dependent variable is the “ effect ” – or rather, the affected variable . In other words, the dependent variable is the variable that is assumed to change as a result of a change in the independent variable.
Keeping with the previous example, let’s look at some dependent variables in action:
In scientific studies, researchers will typically pay very close attention to the dependent variable (or variables), carefully measuring any changes in response to hypothesised independent variables. This can be tricky in practice, as it’s not always easy to reliably measure specific phenomena or outcomes – or to be certain that the actual cause of the change is in fact the independent variable.
As the adage goes, correlation is not causation . In other words, just because two variables have a relationship doesn’t mean that it’s a causal relationship – they may just happen to vary together. For example, you could find a correlation between the number of people who own a certain brand of car and the number of people who have a certain type of job. Just because the number of people who own that brand of car and the number of people who have that type of job is correlated, it doesn’t mean that owning that brand of car causes someone to have that type of job or vice versa. The correlation could, for example, be caused by another factor such as income level or age group, which would affect both car ownership and job type.
To confidently establish a causal relationship between an independent variable and a dependent variable (i.e., X causes Y), you’ll typically need an experimental design , where you have complete control over the environmen t and the variables of interest. But even so, this doesn’t always translate into the “real world”. Simply put, what happens in the lab sometimes stays in the lab!
As an alternative to pure experimental research, correlational or “ quasi-experimental ” research (where the researcher cannot manipulate or change variables) can be done on a much larger scale more easily, allowing one to understand specific relationships in the real world. These types of studies also assume some causality between independent and dependent variables, but it’s not always clear. So, if you go this route, you need to be cautious in terms of how you describe the impact and causality between variables and be sure to acknowledge any limitations in your own research.
In an experimental design, a control variable (or controlled variable) is a variable that is intentionally held constant to ensure it doesn’t have an influence on any other variables. As a result, this variable remains unchanged throughout the course of the study. In other words, it’s a variable that’s not allowed to vary – tough life 🙂
As we mentioned earlier, one of the major challenges in identifying and measuring causal relationships is that it’s difficult to isolate the impact of variables other than the independent variable. Simply put, there’s always a risk that there are factors beyond the ones you’re specifically looking at that might be impacting the results of your study. So, to minimise the risk of this, researchers will attempt (as best possible) to hold other variables constant . These factors are then considered control variables.
Some examples of variables that you may need to control include:
Which specific variables need to be controlled for will vary tremendously depending on the research project at hand, so there’s no generic list of control variables to consult. As a researcher, you’ll need to think carefully about all the factors that could vary within your research context and then consider how you’ll go about controlling them. A good starting point is to look at previous studies similar to yours and pay close attention to which variables they controlled for.
Of course, you won’t always be able to control every possible variable, and so, in many cases, you’ll just have to acknowledge their potential impact and account for them in the conclusions you draw. Every study has its limitations , so don’t get fixated or discouraged by troublesome variables. Nevertheless, always think carefully about the factors beyond what you’re focusing on – don’t make assumptions!
As we mentioned, independent, dependent and control variables are the most common variables you’ll come across in your research, but they’re certainly not the only ones you need to be aware of. Next, we’ll look at a few “secondary” variables that you need to keep in mind as you design your research.
Let’s jump into it…
A moderating variable is a variable that influences the strength or direction of the relationship between an independent variable and a dependent variable. In other words, moderating variables affect how much (or how little) the IV affects the DV, or whether the IV has a positive or negative relationship with the DV (i.e., moves in the same or opposite direction).
For example, in a study about the effects of sleep deprivation on academic performance, gender could be used as a moderating variable to see if there are any differences in how men and women respond to a lack of sleep. In such a case, one may find that gender has an influence on how much students’ scores suffer when they’re deprived of sleep.
It’s important to note that while moderators can have an influence on outcomes , they don’t necessarily cause them ; rather they modify or “moderate” existing relationships between other variables. This means that it’s possible for two different groups with similar characteristics, but different levels of moderation, to experience very different results from the same experiment or study design.
Mediating variables are often used to explain the relationship between the independent and dependent variable (s). For example, if you were researching the effects of age on job satisfaction, then education level could be considered a mediating variable, as it may explain why older people have higher job satisfaction than younger people – they may have more experience or better qualifications, which lead to greater job satisfaction.
Mediating variables also help researchers understand how different factors interact with each other to influence outcomes. For instance, if you wanted to study the effect of stress on academic performance, then coping strategies might act as a mediating factor by influencing both stress levels and academic performance simultaneously. For example, students who use effective coping strategies might be less stressed but also perform better academically due to their improved mental state.
In addition, mediating variables can provide insight into causal relationships between two variables by helping researchers determine whether changes in one factor directly cause changes in another – or whether there is an indirect relationship between them mediated by some third factor(s). For instance, if you wanted to investigate the impact of parental involvement on student achievement, you would need to consider family dynamics as a potential mediator, since it could influence both parental involvement and student achievement simultaneously.
A confounding variable (also known as a third variable or lurking variable ) is an extraneous factor that can influence the relationship between two variables being studied. Specifically, for a variable to be considered a confounding variable, it needs to meet two criteria:
Some common examples of confounding variables include demographic factors such as gender, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, age, education level, and health status. In addition to these, there are also environmental factors to consider. For example, air pollution could confound the impact of the variables of interest in a study investigating health outcomes.
Naturally, it’s important to identify as many confounding variables as possible when conducting your research, as they can heavily distort the results and lead you to draw incorrect conclusions . So, always think carefully about what factors may have a confounding effect on your variables of interest and try to manage these as best you can.
Latent variables are unobservable factors that can influence the behaviour of individuals and explain certain outcomes within a study. They’re also known as hidden or underlying variables , and what makes them rather tricky is that they can’t be directly observed or measured . Instead, latent variables must be inferred from other observable data points such as responses to surveys or experiments.
For example, in a study of mental health, the variable “resilience” could be considered a latent variable. It can’t be directly measured , but it can be inferred from measures of mental health symptoms, stress, and coping mechanisms. The same applies to a lot of concepts we encounter every day – for example:
One way in which we overcome the challenge of measuring the immeasurable is latent variable models (LVMs). An LVM is a type of statistical model that describes a relationship between observed variables and one or more unobserved (latent) variables. These models allow researchers to uncover patterns in their data which may not have been visible before, thanks to their complexity and interrelatedness with other variables. Those patterns can then inform hypotheses about cause-and-effect relationships among those same variables which were previously unknown prior to running the LVM. Powerful stuff, we say!
In the world of scientific research, there’s no shortage of variable types, some of which have multiple names and some of which overlap with each other. In this post, we’ve covered some of the popular ones, but remember that this is not an exhaustive list .
To recap, we’ve explored:
If you’re still feeling a bit lost and need a helping hand with your research project, check out our 1-on-1 coaching service , where we guide you through each step of the research journey. Also, be sure to check out our free dissertation writing course and our collection of free, fully-editable chapter templates .
This post was based on one of our popular Research Bootcamps . If you're working on a research project, you'll definitely want to check this out ...
Very informative, concise and helpful. Thank you
Helping information.Thanks
practical and well-demonstrated
Very helpful and insightful
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
This chapter describes what are the dependent and independent variables for conducting research experiments. It introduces the readers to the different conditions to the use of the two types of variables (dependent and independent) in scientific research and hypothesis testing. The differences between the two variables and examples of each use case scenario are provided in this chapter. The relationship between the independent (IV) and dependent (DV) variables is the key foundation of most statistical data analysis or scientific tests. The authors note that an easy way to identify the independent or dependent variable in an experiment is: independent variables (IV) are what the researchers change or changes on its own , whereas dependent variables (DV) are what changes as a result of the change in the independent variable (IV). Thus, independent variables (IV) otherwise known as the “predictor variable” are the cause while dependent variables (DV) or the “response variable” are the effect .
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Subscribe and save.
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Institutional subscriptions
Agravante, M. (2018). What Is the Meaning of Variables in Research? https://sciencing.com/meaning-variables-research-6164255.html.
Boyd, H. H. (2008). Independent Variable In: Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods . https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412963947.
Cao, X. (2008). Dependent Variable In: Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods . https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412963947 .
Cherry, K. (2019). Dependent Variable in Experiments . https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-a-dependent-variable-2795099.
Dul, J. (2016). Necessary Condition Analysis (NCA): Logic and Methodology of “Necessary but Not Sufficient” Causality , 19 (1), 10–52. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428115584005.
McLeod, S. (2019). What are Independent and Dependent Variables? Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/variables.html.
Okoye, K., Tawil, A. R. H., Naeem, U., Bashroush, R., & Lamine, E. (2014). A semantic rule-based approach supported by process mining for personalised adaptive learning. Procedia Computer Science . https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2014.08.031
Article Google Scholar
Sarikas, C. (2020). Independent and Dependent Variables: Which Is Which? https://blog.prepscholar.com/independent-and-dependent-variables.
Shuttleworth, Martyn, & Wilson, L. T. (2008). Dependent Variable . https://explorable.com/dependent-variable
Shuttleworth, M., & Wilson, L. T. (2008). Independent Variable . https://explorable.com/independent-variable .
Stone-Romero, E. F. (2002). The relative validity and usefulness of various empirical research designs. In Handbook of research methods in industrial and organizational psychology. (pp. 77–98). Blackwell Publishing.
Google Scholar
Tynan, M. C., Credé, M., & Harms, P. D. (2020). Are individual characteristics and behaviors necessary-but-not-sufficient conditions for academic success ?: A demonstration of Dul ’ s ( 2016 ) necessary condition analysis. Learning and Individual Differences , 77 (December 2019), 101815. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2019.101815.
Download references
Authors and affiliations.
Department of Computer Science, School of Engineering and Sciences, and Institute for the Future of Education, Tecnológico de Monterrey, Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, 64849, Mexico
Kingsley Okoye
School of Engineering and Sciences, and Institute for the Future of Education, Tecnológico de Monterrey, Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, 64849, Mexico
Samira Hosseini
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
Correspondence to Kingsley Okoye .
Reprints and permissions
© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
Okoye, K., Hosseini, S. (2024). Understanding Dependent and Independent Variables in Research Experiments and Hypothesis Testing. In: R Programming. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-3385-9_5
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-3385-9_5
Published : 08 July 2024
Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN : 978-981-97-3384-2
Online ISBN : 978-981-97-3385-9
eBook Packages : Computer Science Computer Science (R0)
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
Policies and ethics
Run a free plagiarism check in 10 minutes, automatically generate references for free.
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:
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.
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.
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.
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.
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 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.
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.
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:
When designing the experiment, first decide:
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 2 September 2024, from https://www.scribbr.co.uk/research-methods/controlled-experiments/
To view these resources with no ads, please login or subscribe to help support our content development. school subscriptions can access more than 175 downloadable unit bundles in our store for free (a value of $1,500). district subscriptions provide huge group discounts for their schools. email for a quote: [email protected] ..
Scientific experiments are meant to show cause and effect of a phenomena (relationships in nature). The “ variables ” are any factor, trait, or condition that can be changed in the experiment and that can have an effect on the outcome of the experiment.
An experiment can have three kinds of variables: i ndependent, dependent, and controlled .
For example, let’s design an experiment with two plants sitting in the sun side by side. The controlled variables (or constants) are that at the beginning of the experiment, the plants are the same size, get the same amount of sunlight, experience the same ambient temperature and are in the same amount and consistency of soil (the weight of the soil and container should be measured before the plants are added). The independent variable is that one plant is getting watered (1 cup of water) every day and one plant is getting watered (1 cup of water) once a week. The dependent variables are the changes in the two plants that the scientist observes over time.
Can you describe the dependent variable that may result from this experiment? After four weeks, the dependent variable may be that one plant is taller, heavier and more developed than the other. These results can be recorded and graphed by measuring and comparing both plants’ height, weight (removing the weight of the soil and container recorded beforehand) and a comparison of observable foliage.
Using What You Learned: Design another experiment using the two plants, but change the independent variable. Can you describe the dependent variable that may result from this new experiment?
Think of another simple experiment and name the independent, dependent, and controlled variables. Use the graphic organizer included in the PDF below to organize your experiment's variables.
Please Login or Subscribe to access downloadable content.
When you research information you must cite the reference. Citing for websites is different from citing from books, magazines and periodicals. The style of citing shown here is from the MLA Style Citations (Modern Language Association).
When citing a WEBSITE the general format is as follows. Author Last Name, First Name(s). "Title: Subtitle of Part of Web Page, if appropriate." Title: Subtitle: Section of Page if appropriate. Sponsoring/Publishing Agency, If Given. Additional significant descriptive information. Date of Electronic Publication or other Date, such as Last Updated. Day Month Year of access < URL >.
Amsel, Sheri. "Experimental Design - Independent, Dependent, and Controlled Variables" Exploring Nature Educational Resource ©2005-2024. March 25, 2024 < http://www.exploringnature.org/db/view/Experimental-Design-Independent-Dependent-and-Controlled-Variables >
6.1 experiment basics, learning objectives.
As we saw earlier in the book, an experiment is a type of study designed specifically to answer the question of whether there is a causal relationship between two variables. Do changes in an independent variable cause changes in a dependent variable? Experiments have two fundamental features. The first is that the researchers manipulate, or systematically vary, the level of the independent variable. The different levels of the independent variable are called conditions. For example, in Darley and Latané’s experiment, the independent variable was the number of witnesses that participants believed to be present. The researchers manipulated this independent variable by telling participants that there were either one, two, or five other students involved in the discussion, thereby creating three conditions. The second fundamental feature of an experiment is that the researcher controls, or minimizes the variability in, variables other than the independent and dependent variable. These other variables are called extraneous variables. Darley and Latané tested all their participants in the same room, exposed them to the same emergency situation, and so on. They also randomly assigned their participants to conditions so that the three groups would be similar to each other to begin with. Notice that although the words manipulation and control have similar meanings in everyday language, researchers make a clear distinction between them. They manipulate the independent variable by systematically changing its levels and control other variables by holding them constant.
Internal validity.
Recall that the fact that two variables are statistically related does not necessarily mean that one causes the other. “Correlation does not imply causation.” For example, if it were the case that people who exercise regularly are happier than people who do not exercise regularly, this would not necessarily mean that exercising increases people’s happiness. It could mean instead that greater happiness causes people to exercise (the directionality problem) or that something like better physical health causes people to exercise and be happier (the third-variable problem).
The purpose of an experiment, however, is to show that two variables are statistically related and to do so in a way that supports the conclusion that the independent variable caused any observed differences in the dependent variable. The basic logic is this: If the researcher creates two or more highly similar conditions and then manipulates the independent variable to produce just one difference between them, then any later difference between the conditions must have been caused by the independent variable. For example, because the only difference between Darley and Latané’s conditions was the number of students that participants believed to be involved in the discussion, this must have been responsible for differences in helping between the conditions.
An empirical study is said to be high in internal validity if the way it was conducted supports the conclusion that the independent variable caused any observed differences in the dependent variable. Thus experiments are high in internal validity because the way they are conducted—with the manipulation of the independent variable and the control of extraneous variables—provides strong support for causal conclusions.
At the same time, the way that experiments are conducted sometimes leads to a different kind of criticism. Specifically, the need to manipulate the independent variable and control extraneous variables means that experiments are often conducted under conditions that seem artificial or unlike “real life” (Stanovich, 2010). In many psychology experiments, the participants are all college undergraduates and come to a classroom or laboratory to fill out a series of paper-and-pencil questionnaires or to perform a carefully designed computerized task. Consider, for example, an experiment in which researcher Barbara Fredrickson and her colleagues had college students come to a laboratory on campus and complete a math test while wearing a swimsuit (Fredrickson, Roberts, Noll, Quinn, & Twenge, 1998). At first, this might seem silly. When will college students ever have to complete math tests in their swimsuits outside of this experiment?
The issue we are confronting is that of external validity. An empirical study is high in external validity if the way it was conducted supports generalizing the results to people and situations beyond those actually studied. As a general rule, studies are higher in external validity when the participants and the situation studied are similar to those that the researchers want to generalize to. Imagine, for example, that a group of researchers is interested in how shoppers in large grocery stores are affected by whether breakfast cereal is packaged in yellow or purple boxes. Their study would be high in external validity if they studied the decisions of ordinary people doing their weekly shopping in a real grocery store. If the shoppers bought much more cereal in purple boxes, the researchers would be fairly confident that this would be true for other shoppers in other stores. Their study would be relatively low in external validity, however, if they studied a sample of college students in a laboratory at a selective college who merely judged the appeal of various colors presented on a computer screen. If the students judged purple to be more appealing than yellow, the researchers would not be very confident that this is relevant to grocery shoppers’ cereal-buying decisions.
We should be careful, however, not to draw the blanket conclusion that experiments are low in external validity. One reason is that experiments need not seem artificial. Consider that Darley and Latané’s experiment provided a reasonably good simulation of a real emergency situation. Or consider field experiments that are conducted entirely outside the laboratory. In one such experiment, Robert Cialdini and his colleagues studied whether hotel guests choose to reuse their towels for a second day as opposed to having them washed as a way of conserving water and energy (Cialdini, 2005). These researchers manipulated the message on a card left in a large sample of hotel rooms. One version of the message emphasized showing respect for the environment, another emphasized that the hotel would donate a portion of their savings to an environmental cause, and a third emphasized that most hotel guests choose to reuse their towels. The result was that guests who received the message that most hotel guests choose to reuse their towels reused their own towels substantially more often than guests receiving either of the other two messages. Given the way they conducted their study, it seems very likely that their result would hold true for other guests in other hotels.
A second reason not to draw the blanket conclusion that experiments are low in external validity is that they are often conducted to learn about psychological processes that are likely to operate in a variety of people and situations. Let us return to the experiment by Fredrickson and colleagues. They found that the women in their study, but not the men, performed worse on the math test when they were wearing swimsuits. They argued that this was due to women’s greater tendency to objectify themselves—to think about themselves from the perspective of an outside observer—which diverts their attention away from other tasks. They argued, furthermore, that this process of self-objectification and its effect on attention is likely to operate in a variety of women and situations—even if none of them ever finds herself taking a math test in her swimsuit.
Again, to manipulate an independent variable means to change its level systematically so that different groups of participants are exposed to different levels of that variable, or the same group of participants is exposed to different levels at different times. For example, to see whether expressive writing affects people’s health, a researcher might instruct some participants to write about traumatic experiences and others to write about neutral experiences. The different levels of the independent variable are referred to as conditions , and researchers often give the conditions short descriptive names to make it easy to talk and write about them. In this case, the conditions might be called the “traumatic condition” and the “neutral condition.”
Notice that the manipulation of an independent variable must involve the active intervention of the researcher. Comparing groups of people who differ on the independent variable before the study begins is not the same as manipulating that variable. For example, a researcher who compares the health of people who already keep a journal with the health of people who do not keep a journal has not manipulated this variable and therefore not conducted an experiment. This is important because groups that already differ in one way at the beginning of a study are likely to differ in other ways too. For example, people who choose to keep journals might also be more conscientious, more introverted, or less stressed than people who do not. Therefore, any observed difference between the two groups in terms of their health might have been caused by whether or not they keep a journal, or it might have been caused by any of the other differences between people who do and do not keep journals. Thus the active manipulation of the independent variable is crucial for eliminating the third-variable problem.
Of course, there are many situations in which the independent variable cannot be manipulated for practical or ethical reasons and therefore an experiment is not possible. For example, whether or not people have a significant early illness experience cannot be manipulated, making it impossible to do an experiment on the effect of early illness experiences on the development of hypochondriasis. This does not mean it is impossible to study the relationship between early illness experiences and hypochondriasis—only that it must be done using nonexperimental approaches. We will discuss this in detail later in the book.
In many experiments, the independent variable is a construct that can only be manipulated indirectly. For example, a researcher might try to manipulate participants’ stress levels indirectly by telling some of them that they have five minutes to prepare a short speech that they will then have to give to an audience of other participants. In such situations, researchers often include a manipulation check in their procedure. A manipulation check is a separate measure of the construct the researcher is trying to manipulate. For example, researchers trying to manipulate participants’ stress levels might give them a paper-and-pencil stress questionnaire or take their blood pressure—perhaps right after the manipulation or at the end of the procedure—to verify that they successfully manipulated this variable.
An extraneous variable is anything that varies in the context of a study other than the independent and dependent variables. In an experiment on the effect of expressive writing on health, for example, extraneous variables would include participant variables (individual differences) such as their writing ability, their diet, and their shoe size. They would also include situation or task variables such as the time of day when participants write, whether they write by hand or on a computer, and the weather. Extraneous variables pose a problem because many of them are likely to have some effect on the dependent variable. For example, participants’ health will be affected by many things other than whether or not they engage in expressive writing. This can make it difficult to separate the effect of the independent variable from the effects of the extraneous variables, which is why it is important to control extraneous variables by holding them constant.
Extraneous variables make it difficult to detect the effect of the independent variable in two ways. One is by adding variability or “noise” to the data. Imagine a simple experiment on the effect of mood (happy vs. sad) on the number of happy childhood events people are able to recall. Participants are put into a negative or positive mood (by showing them a happy or sad video clip) and then asked to recall as many happy childhood events as they can. The two leftmost columns of Table 6.1 “Hypothetical Noiseless Data and Realistic Noisy Data” show what the data might look like if there were no extraneous variables and the number of happy childhood events participants recalled was affected only by their moods. Every participant in the happy mood condition recalled exactly four happy childhood events, and every participant in the sad mood condition recalled exactly three. The effect of mood here is quite obvious. In reality, however, the data would probably look more like those in the two rightmost columns of Table 6.1 “Hypothetical Noiseless Data and Realistic Noisy Data” . Even in the happy mood condition, some participants would recall fewer happy memories because they have fewer to draw on, use less effective strategies, or are less motivated. And even in the sad mood condition, some participants would recall more happy childhood memories because they have more happy memories to draw on, they use more effective recall strategies, or they are more motivated. Although the mean difference between the two groups is the same as in the idealized data, this difference is much less obvious in the context of the greater variability in the data. Thus one reason researchers try to control extraneous variables is so their data look more like the idealized data in Table 6.1 “Hypothetical Noiseless Data and Realistic Noisy Data” , which makes the effect of the independent variable is easier to detect (although real data never look quite that good).
Table 6.1 Hypothetical Noiseless Data and Realistic Noisy Data
Idealized “noiseless” data | Realistic “noisy” data | ||
---|---|---|---|
4 | 3 | 3 | 1 |
4 | 3 | 6 | 3 |
4 | 3 | 2 | 4 |
4 | 3 | 4 | 0 |
4 | 3 | 5 | 5 |
4 | 3 | 2 | 7 |
4 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
4 | 3 | 1 | 5 |
4 | 3 | 6 | 1 |
4 | 3 | 8 | 2 |
= 4 | = 3 | = 4 | = 3 |
One way to control extraneous variables is to hold them constant. This can mean holding situation or task variables constant by testing all participants in the same location, giving them identical instructions, treating them in the same way, and so on. It can also mean holding participant variables constant. For example, many studies of language limit participants to right-handed people, who generally have their language areas isolated in their left cerebral hemispheres. Left-handed people are more likely to have their language areas isolated in their right cerebral hemispheres or distributed across both hemispheres, which can change the way they process language and thereby add noise to the data.
In principle, researchers can control extraneous variables by limiting participants to one very specific category of person, such as 20-year-old, straight, female, right-handed, sophomore psychology majors. The obvious downside to this approach is that it would lower the external validity of the study—in particular, the extent to which the results can be generalized beyond the people actually studied. For example, it might be unclear whether results obtained with a sample of younger straight women would apply to older gay men. In many situations, the advantages of a diverse sample outweigh the reduction in noise achieved by a homogeneous one.
The second way that extraneous variables can make it difficult to detect the effect of the independent variable is by becoming confounding variables. A confounding variable is an extraneous variable that differs on average across levels of the independent variable. For example, in almost all experiments, participants’ intelligence quotients (IQs) will be an extraneous variable. But as long as there are participants with lower and higher IQs at each level of the independent variable so that the average IQ is roughly equal, then this variation is probably acceptable (and may even be desirable). What would be bad, however, would be for participants at one level of the independent variable to have substantially lower IQs on average and participants at another level to have substantially higher IQs on average. In this case, IQ would be a confounding variable.
To confound means to confuse, and this is exactly what confounding variables do. Because they differ across conditions—just like the independent variable—they provide an alternative explanation for any observed difference in the dependent variable. Figure 6.1 “Hypothetical Results From a Study on the Effect of Mood on Memory” shows the results of a hypothetical study, in which participants in a positive mood condition scored higher on a memory task than participants in a negative mood condition. But if IQ is a confounding variable—with participants in the positive mood condition having higher IQs on average than participants in the negative mood condition—then it is unclear whether it was the positive moods or the higher IQs that caused participants in the first condition to score higher. One way to avoid confounding variables is by holding extraneous variables constant. For example, one could prevent IQ from becoming a confounding variable by limiting participants only to those with IQs of exactly 100. But this approach is not always desirable for reasons we have already discussed. A second and much more general approach—random assignment to conditions—will be discussed in detail shortly.
Figure 6.1 Hypothetical Results From a Study on the Effect of Mood on Memory
Because IQ also differs across conditions, it is a confounding variable.
Practice: For each of the following topics, decide whether that topic could be studied using an experimental research design and explain why or why not.
Cialdini, R. (2005, April). Don’t throw in the towel: Use social influence research. APS Observer . Retrieved from http://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/getArticle.cfm?id=1762 .
Fredrickson, B. L., Roberts, T.-A., Noll, S. M., Quinn, D. M., & Twenge, J. M. (1998). The swimsuit becomes you: Sex differences in self-objectification, restrained eating, and math performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75 , 269–284.
Stanovich, K. E. (2010). How to think straight about psychology (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Privacy Policy
Last updated
4 March 2023
Reviewed by
Miroslav Damyanov
Admit it. The mere mention of the term "dependent variables" evokes vague memories of your math and science classes back in high school. If you're a science buff, you likely enjoyed those classes a lot.
Fast forward to today, and that knowledge could've come in handy—except you don't remember the nitty-gritty of it all. Fret not; we've got you covered.
At the heart of every scientific experiment lies the dependent variable, and we cannot overstate its importance in understanding cause-and-effect relationships.
In this definitive guide, we'll look at dependent variables, how they differ from their independent counterparts, how to choose one, examples, and everything in between.
Dovetail streamlines research to help you uncover and share actionable insights
A variable is an entity that can assume different values. In the simplest of terms, we can consider anything that can vary as a variable.
For instance, height is a variable because we can assign a person's height a value. Other variables include income, age, country of birth, test scores, and so on.
Now, back to our topic of the day. A dependent variable varies when other factors influence it. Specifically, it changes as a result of the independent variable's influence.
In an experimental study, the dependent variable is typically the one you're interested in measuring or monitoring to determine whether or not other variables affect it.
In statistics, dependent variables use a few other names, including:
Outcome variables because you observe and measure them by changing independent variables
Response variables because they respond to changes in other variables
Left-hand-side variables because they appear on the left side of the equals sign in a regression equation
Y-variables because 'Y' usually represents them on a graph
Is it possible to define dependent variables in the context of cause-and-effect relationships? Absolutely! That's precisely why this phenomenon exists in the first place.
While the independent variable is the "cause," the dependent variable is the "effect"—the affected variable.
Naturally, you're itching to learn the difference between dependent and independent variables. Luckily for you, that's next.
Let's first understand what an independent variable is. True to its name, an independent variable stands alone, and other variables don’t change or affect it.
If the value of an independent variable changes at any time, that change happens at the researcher's discretion, not because of other variables.
Typically, the researcher determines the independent variable. Its value is clear and well-known right at the beginning of the experiment, unlike the dependent variable. Those values only become clear after the experiment's conclusion.
Comprehending the difference between dependent and independent variables is vital for any research. Thankfully, getting it right the first time isn't difficult.
The quickest way is to place both variables in the sentence below in a logical way:
"The IV causes changes to the DV. It is not possible that DV could cause any changes to IV."
Here's how that would reflect in our above example:
"Sleeping causes changes to test results. It is not possible that test results could cause any changes to sleeping."
When altering the independent variable during an experiment, your goal is to track and measure the changes it causes to dependent variables. Remember that changes in the dependent variable can only occur due to independent variable manipulation.
To better understand the nuanced differences between dependent and independent variables, let's explore a few examples:
Independent variable: The amount of green tea consumed
Dependent variable: Blood pressure
Independent variable: Hours spent doing productive work
Dependent variable: Business growth
Independent variable: Individual changes in the economy
Dependent variable: Customer behavior
On a broader level, here's what makes dependent and independent variables fundamentally different:
Dependent variables:
Depend on other variables
May change due to other variables
Are always the ones you’re measuring
Independent variables:
Stand on their own
Never change due to other variables
Undergo manipulation
Pinpointing a good dependent variable is more complex than it sounds. You're often contending with several above-par variables, leaving you spoilt for choice. Other times, the research context is way too complex and gives nothing away.
Fortunately for you, we've formulated a set of questions to streamline your selection process.
A dependent variable is only half as good as the stability and consistency of its output. A high-quality variable yields the same outcome irrespective of how often you repeat the experiment.
To arrive at accurate conclusions, you must maintain the same conditions, experimental manipulations, and participants from start to finish.
Choosing a dependent variable without first considering the complexity of your study is a recipe for failure. Some studies require more than just a single variable of either type.
You must do your due diligence early in the process to ensure your final results are accurate and conclusive.
You might also have a situation where you want to find out how changes in one independent variable impact a couple of dependent variables. In that case, it's crucial to pinpoint all of them correctly from the get-go.
For instance, say you want to investigate how low employee morale affects productivity.
Obviously, the dependent variable here is productivity, while low employee morale is the independent variable. Upon further scrutiny, you'll realize there's an opportunity to test for a few more dependent variables, including employee turnover and profitability.
So, it all boils down to how complex you want your study to be.
In research, operationalization refers to the ability to measure a variable. A dependent variable is only good enough if you can measure it easily, accurately, and without hiccups.
In measuring individual test results, you may use the standard error of measurement (SEm).
If measuring blood pressure, you could use a digital blood pressure monitor. SEm will tell you how much the repeated measures of the same person on the same digital pressure monitor tend to be spread around the person’s “true” score.
We hate to break it to you, but dependent and independent variables aren't the only variables that may influence the outcome of your experiment. Several others can, too.
Here are a few to be aware of:
You can’t account for a confounding variable in a scientific experiment. It acts as an external force that can quickly change the effect of dependent and independent research variables, often yielding outcomes that differ completely from reality.
For example, a confounding variable may be responsible for the correlation between weight loss and weight loss. We’d expect that the more you exercise, the more likely you will lose weight.
However, a confounding variable may be eating habits: The more people eat, the more weight they gain, regardless of exercise.
It's best to account for confounding variables before your study starts to prevent them from wreaking havoc. Matching, restriction, and randomization are all reliable methods for keeping these wayward variables in check.
Sometimes, it's impossible to control a confounding variable. When that happens, it automatically becomes an extraneous variable .
One way to control extraneous variables is through elimination. Control by elimination means removing potential extraneous variables by holding them constant in all experimental conditions. Otherwise, you may draw inaccurate conclusions about the relationships between the independent and dependent variables.
We've already highlighted several tangible examples of dependent variables. For clarity's sake, let's go a step further.
Here are additional dependent variables examples you might find helpful.
A business wants to find out how the color of the office decor affects worker productivity.
In this case, worker productivity would be the dependent variable, and the color of the office would be the independent variable. The business could also alter the independent variable by instead evaluating how work hours or low morale influence worker productivity.
A researcher wants to determine if giving workers more control over their extra shifts leads to increased job satisfaction.
In an experiment, one group of employees gets to pick up shifts freely and without restriction, while the other group enjoys little freedom. Job satisfaction is the dependent variable in this example.
A researcher intends to investigate the effects of alcohol on the brain.
Here, the dependent variable could be the scores on the PHQ-9 assessment tool, which provisionally diagnoses depression. The independent variable might be the amount of alcohol a participant ingests.
Of course, dependent variable examples abound. We couldn't possibly exhaust all of them. But with the information and slew of examples in this piece, you should be well-positioned to make your next experiment a resounding success.
The role of dependent variables in shaping and grounding modern-day research experiments is undeniably important.
Alongside independent variables, dependent variables make it easy for researchers and organizations to uncover the true impact of events. This speeds up the formulation of real and tangible solutions.
An experimental study has three types of variables:
Independent variable
Dependent variable
Controlled variable
A dependent variable is the one a researcher tests to get its values.
An independent variable is what the researcher changes to test the dependent variable.
The variable that the scientist intentionally holds constant throughout the research is a controlled variable. While it may not be part of the experiment, it's important because it can affect the results.
No. The control group serves as the standard of comparison in a specific experiment. In other words, this group isn't part of the actual experiment.
The opposite of a control group is an experimental group.
Meanwhile, the dependent variable is the factor that may change as a result of independent variable manipulation.
The quickest way to identify a dependent variable is to ask yourself these three questions:
Does it depend on another variable in the experiment?
Does it change due to other variables?
Is it the one you’re measuring?
If your answer to all these questions is yes, that's a dependent variable.
If not, reexamine the above criteria to see if it’s an independent variable instead.
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
Last updated: 18 April 2023
Last updated: 27 February 2023
Last updated: 22 August 2024
Last updated: 5 February 2023
Last updated: 16 August 2024
Last updated: 9 March 2023
Last updated: 30 April 2024
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
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, log in or sign up.
Get started for free
What are independent and dependent variables.
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:
Defining your variables, and deciding how you will manipulate and measure them, is an important part of experimental design .
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.
You need to assess both in order to demonstrate construct validity. Neither one alone is sufficient for establishing construct validity.
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:
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.
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.
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:
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:
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:
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:
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:
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:
The four most common types of interviews are:
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 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:
But triangulation can also pose problems:
There are four main types of triangulation :
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:
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 :
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 :
Quantitative research designs can be divided into two main categories:
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:
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 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.
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.
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:
In a controlled experiment , all extraneous variables are held constant so that they can’t influence the results. Controlled experiments require:
Depending on your study topic, there are various other methods of controlling variables .
There are 4 main types of extraneous variables :
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:
Disadvantages:
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 .
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 :
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 :
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.
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.
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.
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.
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:
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 :
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:
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 .
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.
Longitudinal study | Cross-sectional study |
---|---|
observations | Observations at a in time |
Observes the multiple times | Observes (a “cross-section”) in the population |
Follows in participants over time | Provides of society at a given point |
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 .
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 :
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 .
Experimental design means planning a set of procedures to investigate a relationship between variables . To design a controlled experiment, you need:
When designing the experiment, you decide:
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:
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.
Want to contact us directly? No problem. We are always here for you.
Our team helps students graduate by offering:
Scribbr specializes in editing study-related documents . We proofread:
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 .
Transcription Service for Your Academic Paper
Start Transcription now
Editing & Proofreading for Your Research Paper
Get it proofread now
Online Printing & Binding with Free Express Delivery
Configure binding now
Transcription Service for Your Paper
Printing & Binding with 3D Live Preview
How do you like this article cancel reply.
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
In a controlled experiment, the researcher manipulates one variable, the independent variable, while keeping all other variables constant to observe the effect on the dependent variable. This careful control forms the core of this methodology , eliminating the possibility of external factors influencing the outcome and thus allowing the researcher to draw stronger conclusions about cause-and-effect relationships.
Inhaltsverzeichnis
Experiments in research entail manipulating or changing an independent variable and assessing its effect on the dependent variable or outcome. All the variables except the independent variable are held constant in a controlled experiment. Researchers begin by defining the variables present to ensure objective measurement of the essential variables.
The variables held constant are known as control variables. Researchers can control variables by:
A controlled experiment ensures internal validity, essential for establishing cause and effect through experimentation.
You want to study the effects of music on productivity. You want to see if music improves people’s productivity.
Many factors can influence productivity. A controlled experiment is ideal to test whether listening to music affects productivity.
Extraneous variables – These are factors that you don’t measure but which may affect the dependent variable. You should eliminate the effects of these variables to create strong internal validity . Extraneous variables in this example include:
In an uncontrolled experiment, these variables may affect a worker’s productivity, which makes it hard to assess the true impact of music on productivity.
Researchers use standard data collection practices to control variables in a study. The same tools should be used in a shared environment to test all the participants. A systematic approach is applied to change only the independent variable, for instance, the type of music.
Sampling methods can be used to manage other extraneous variables. You should select the most representative sample based on a criterion that considers all the essential characteristics, for example, using participants from a specific job description rather than short participants. Noting the extraneous variables in your study can help in further analysis.
Once the participants have been identified, they are grouped to test individual independent variables. The identifiable groups guide the implementation of controls in the experiment.
A controlled experiment uses control groups . Researchers use control groups to test the effect of a given variable by comparing the control group with an experimental group. The control group is isolated from the experimental group to ensure the independent variable does not affect the control group.
In the music experiment, the participants can be placed in identical rooms for the duration of the study. The participants can be placed in one of two groups to determine the effect of music on productivity:
The only difference between these groups is the type of music. All other characteristics are identical.
A random assignment prevents systematic differences between an experimental group and the control group. It involves placing the research subjects into random groups. Every participant has an equal opportunity to be placed in the experimental group.
Randomization is necessary for “true experiments”, as opposed to quasi-experiments, where the subjects are chosen based on a criterion.
The workers in our previous example can be assigned random numbers. Odd and even numbers can be grouped together to form experimental and control groups.
Random assignment ensures the two groups can be compared based on age, role, gender, and other observable traits. This enables comparison between the groups.
Masking in a controlled experiment involves hiding some variables from the researchers and the subjects. Researchers often intentionally conceal the presence of certain variables in a study to prevent bias that may arise due to the participants’ awareness. Masking ensures strong internal validity by ensuring the participants behave naturally.
Researchers may unknowingly influence the behavior of participants. Other environmental cues may also nudge participants to behave in a particular way. Masking guarantees that no undue biases can affect the result of the study.
For the music study, a researcher can introduce other cues such as art or snack in the workplace. By disguising the experiment’s true purpose, the participants are unaware of the variable that the researcher is interested in.
Controlled experiments may be an effective research tool. However, there are some challenges associated with its methodology
Every research participant behaves in a certain way based on their beliefs, personality, attitudes, and other factors. This poses a problem for researchers attempting to hold the extraneous variables constant because there are too many variables. However, a researcher may limit the extraneous variables to manage their influence on the outcome.
Many controlled experiments do not apply to other contexts outside the experiment. A highly controlled experiment may lack real-world relevance as it considers a limited list of variables. Researchers need to consider the objectives of their experimental studies to prioritize control or applicability.
A control experiment is a method of experimental research where only the independent variable is changed. The dependent variables are held constant in a controlled environment to isolate the effect of one variable.
The control group in a controlled experiment is the group that doesn’t receive a variable. Experimental programs such as clinical trials use control groups in testing new drugs by comparing those who receive treatment and those who don’t.
Sometimes, researchers may be concerned about the effect of a subject’s awareness on the findings of a research project. Masking is a deliberate action by researchers to hide some variables in a study as a measure to build strong internal validity .
Controlled experiments are commonly used in healthcare research. New treatment methods are tested on groups of patients to test the efficacy and other variables that may affect their effectiveness.
They did such an excellent job printing my dissertation! I got it fast and...
We use cookies on our website. Some of them are essential, while others help us to improve this website and your experience.
Individual Privacy Preferences
Cookie Details Privacy Policy Imprint
Here you will find an overview of all cookies used. You can give your consent to whole categories or display further information and select certain cookies.
Accept all Save
Essential cookies enable basic functions and are necessary for the proper function of the website.
Show Cookie Information Hide Cookie Information
Name | |
---|---|
Anbieter | Eigentümer dieser Website, |
Zweck | Speichert die Einstellungen der Besucher, die in der Cookie Box von Borlabs Cookie ausgewählt wurden. |
Cookie Name | borlabs-cookie |
Cookie Laufzeit | 1 Jahr |
Name | |
---|---|
Anbieter | Bachelorprint |
Zweck | Erkennt das Herkunftsland und leitet zur entsprechenden Sprachversion um. |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Host(s) | ip-api.com |
Cookie Name | georedirect |
Cookie Laufzeit | 1 Jahr |
Name | |
---|---|
Anbieter | Playcanvas |
Zweck | Display our 3D product animations |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Host(s) | playcanv.as, playcanvas.as, playcanvas.com |
Cookie Laufzeit | 1 Jahr |
Statistics cookies collect information anonymously. This information helps us to understand how our visitors use our website.
Akzeptieren | |
---|---|
Name | |
Anbieter | Google Ireland Limited, Gordon House, Barrow Street, Dublin 4, Ireland |
Zweck | Cookie von Google zur Steuerung der erweiterten Script- und Ereignisbehandlung. |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Cookie Name | _ga,_gat,_gid |
Cookie Laufzeit | 2 Jahre |
Content from video platforms and social media platforms is blocked by default. If External Media cookies are accepted, access to those contents no longer requires manual consent.
Akzeptieren | |
---|---|
Name | |
Anbieter | Meta Platforms Ireland Limited, 4 Grand Canal Square, Dublin 2, Ireland |
Zweck | Wird verwendet, um Facebook-Inhalte zu entsperren. |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Host(s) | .facebook.com |
Akzeptieren | |
---|---|
Name | |
Anbieter | Google Ireland Limited, Gordon House, Barrow Street, Dublin 4, Ireland |
Zweck | Wird zum Entsperren von Google Maps-Inhalten verwendet. |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Host(s) | .google.com |
Cookie Name | NID |
Cookie Laufzeit | 6 Monate |
Akzeptieren | |
---|---|
Name | |
Anbieter | Meta Platforms Ireland Limited, 4 Grand Canal Square, Dublin 2, Ireland |
Zweck | Wird verwendet, um Instagram-Inhalte zu entsperren. |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Host(s) | .instagram.com |
Cookie Name | pigeon_state |
Cookie Laufzeit | Sitzung |
Akzeptieren | |
---|---|
Name | |
Anbieter | Openstreetmap Foundation, St John’s Innovation Centre, Cowley Road, Cambridge CB4 0WS, United Kingdom |
Zweck | Wird verwendet, um OpenStreetMap-Inhalte zu entsperren. |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Host(s) | .openstreetmap.org |
Cookie Name | _osm_location, _osm_session, _osm_totp_token, _osm_welcome, _pk_id., _pk_ref., _pk_ses., qos_token |
Cookie Laufzeit | 1-10 Jahre |
Akzeptieren | |
---|---|
Name | |
Anbieter | Twitter International Company, One Cumberland Place, Fenian Street, Dublin 2, D02 AX07, Ireland |
Zweck | Wird verwendet, um Twitter-Inhalte zu entsperren. |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Host(s) | .twimg.com, .twitter.com |
Cookie Name | __widgetsettings, local_storage_support_test |
Cookie Laufzeit | Unbegrenzt |
Akzeptieren | |
---|---|
Name | |
Anbieter | Vimeo Inc., 555 West 18th Street, New York, New York 10011, USA |
Zweck | Wird verwendet, um Vimeo-Inhalte zu entsperren. |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Host(s) | player.vimeo.com |
Cookie Name | vuid |
Cookie Laufzeit | 2 Jahre |
Akzeptieren | |
---|---|
Name | |
Anbieter | Google Ireland Limited, Gordon House, Barrow Street, Dublin 4, Ireland |
Zweck | Wird verwendet, um YouTube-Inhalte zu entsperren. |
Datenschutzerklärung | |
Host(s) | google.com |
Cookie Name | NID |
Cookie Laufzeit | 6 Monate |
Privacy Policy Imprint
Scientific experiments often include two groups: the experimental group and the control group . Here's a closer look at the experimental group and how to distinguish it from the experimental group.
An experimental group in a scientific experiment is the group on which the experimental procedure is performed. The independent variable is changed for the group and the response or change in the dependent variable is recorded. In contrast, the group that does not receive the treatment or in which the independent variable is held constant is called the control group .
The purpose of having experimental and control groups is to have sufficient data to be reasonably sure the relationship between the independent and dependent variable is not due to chance. If you perform an experiment on only one subject (with and without treatment) or on one experimental subject and one control subject you have limited confidence in the outcome. The larger the sample size, the more probable the results represent a real correlation .
You may be asked to identify the experimental group in an experiment as well as the control group. Here's an example of an experiment and how to tell these two key groups apart .
Let's say you want to see whether a nutritional supplement helps people lose weight. You want to design an experiment to test the effect. A poor experiment would be to take a supplement and see whether or not you lose weight. Why is it bad? You only have one data point! If you lose weight, it could be due to some other factor. A better experiment (though still pretty bad) would be to take the supplement, see if you lose weight, stop taking the supplement and see if the weight loss stops, then take it again and see if weight loss resumes. In this "experiment" you are the control group when you are not taking the supplement and the experimental group when you are taking it.
It's a terrible experiment for a number of reasons. One problem is that the same subject is being used as both the control group and the experimental group. You don't know, when you stop taking treatment, that is doesn't have a lasting effect. A solution is to design an experiment with truly separate control and experimental groups.
If you have a group of people who take the supplement and a group of people who do not, the ones exposed to the treatment (taking the supplement) are the experimental group. The ones not-taking it are the control group.
In an ideal situation, every factor that affects a member of both the control group and experimental group is exactly the same except for one -- the independent variable . In a basic experiment, this could be whether something is present or not. Present = experimental; absent = control.
Sometimes, it's more complicated and the control is "normal" and the experimental group is "not normal". For example, if you want to see whether or not darkness has an effect on plant growth. Your control group might be plants grown under ordinary day/night conditions. You could have a couple of experimental groups. One set of plants might be exposed to perpetual daylight, while another might be exposed to perpetual darkness. Here, any group where the variable is changed from normal is an experimental group. Both the all-light and all-dark groups are types of experimental groups.
Bailey, R.A. (2008). Design of Comparative Experiments . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. ISBN 9780521683579.
Hinkelmann, Klaus and Kempthorne, Oscar (2008). Design and Analysis of Experiments, Volume I: Introduction to Experimental Design (Second ed.). Wiley. ISBN 978-0-471-72756-9.
Sciencing_icons_biology biology, sciencing_icons_cells cells, sciencing_icons_molecular molecular, sciencing_icons_microorganisms microorganisms, sciencing_icons_genetics genetics, sciencing_icons_human body human body, sciencing_icons_ecology ecology, sciencing_icons_chemistry chemistry, sciencing_icons_atomic & molecular structure atomic & molecular structure, sciencing_icons_bonds bonds, sciencing_icons_reactions reactions, sciencing_icons_stoichiometry stoichiometry, sciencing_icons_solutions solutions, sciencing_icons_acids & bases acids & bases, sciencing_icons_thermodynamics thermodynamics, sciencing_icons_organic chemistry organic chemistry, sciencing_icons_physics physics, sciencing_icons_fundamentals-physics fundamentals, sciencing_icons_electronics electronics, sciencing_icons_waves waves, sciencing_icons_energy energy, sciencing_icons_fluid fluid, sciencing_icons_astronomy astronomy, sciencing_icons_geology geology, sciencing_icons_fundamentals-geology fundamentals, sciencing_icons_minerals & rocks minerals & rocks, sciencing_icons_earth scructure earth structure, sciencing_icons_fossils fossils, sciencing_icons_natural disasters natural disasters, sciencing_icons_nature nature, sciencing_icons_ecosystems ecosystems, sciencing_icons_environment environment, sciencing_icons_insects insects, sciencing_icons_plants & mushrooms plants & mushrooms, sciencing_icons_animals animals, sciencing_icons_math math, sciencing_icons_arithmetic arithmetic, sciencing_icons_addition & subtraction addition & subtraction, sciencing_icons_multiplication & division multiplication & division, sciencing_icons_decimals decimals, sciencing_icons_fractions fractions, sciencing_icons_conversions conversions, sciencing_icons_algebra algebra, sciencing_icons_working with units working with units, sciencing_icons_equations & expressions equations & expressions, sciencing_icons_ratios & proportions ratios & proportions, sciencing_icons_inequalities inequalities, sciencing_icons_exponents & logarithms exponents & logarithms, sciencing_icons_factorization factorization, sciencing_icons_functions functions, sciencing_icons_linear equations linear equations, sciencing_icons_graphs graphs, sciencing_icons_quadratics quadratics, sciencing_icons_polynomials polynomials, sciencing_icons_geometry geometry, sciencing_icons_fundamentals-geometry fundamentals, sciencing_icons_cartesian cartesian, sciencing_icons_circles circles, sciencing_icons_solids solids, sciencing_icons_trigonometry trigonometry, sciencing_icons_probability-statistics probability & statistics, sciencing_icons_mean-median-mode mean/median/mode, sciencing_icons_independent-dependent variables independent/dependent variables, sciencing_icons_deviation deviation, sciencing_icons_correlation correlation, sciencing_icons_sampling sampling, sciencing_icons_distributions distributions, sciencing_icons_probability probability, sciencing_icons_calculus calculus, sciencing_icons_differentiation-integration differentiation/integration, sciencing_icons_application application, sciencing_icons_projects projects, sciencing_icons_news news.
The scientific method involves asking a question, doing research, forming a hypothesis and testing the hypothesis via an experiment, so that the results can be analyzed. Every successful science experiment must include specific types of variables. There must be an independent variable, which changes throughout the course of an experiment; a dependent variable, which is observed and measured; and a controlled variable, also known as the "constant" variable, which must remain consistent and unchanging throughout the experiment. Even though the controlled or constant variable in an experiment does not change, it is every bit as important to the success of a science experiment as the other variables.
TL;DR: In a science experiment, the controlled or constant variable is a variable that does not change. For example, in an experiment to test the effect of different lights on plants, other factors that affect plant growth and health, such as soil quality and watering, would need to remain constant.
Let's say that a scientist is performing an experiment to test the effect of different lighting on houseplants. In this case, the lighting itself would be the independent variable, because it is the variable that the scientist is actively changing, over the course of the experiment. Whether the scientist is using different bulbs or altering the amount of light given to the plants, the light is the variable being altered, and is therefore the independent variable.
Dependent variables are the traits that a scientist observes, in relation to the independent variable. In other words, the dependent variable changes depending on the alterations made to the independent variable. In the houseplant experiment, the dependent variables would be the properties of the plants themselves, which the scientist is observing in relation to the changing light. These properties might include the plants' color, height and general health.
A controlled or constant variable does not change throughout the course of an experiment. It is vitally important that every scientific experiment include a controlled variable; otherwise, the conclusions of an experiment are impossible to understand. For example, in the houseplant experiment, controlled variables might be things such as the the quality of soil and the amount of water given to the plants. If these factors were not constant, and certain plants received more water or better soil than others, then there would be no way for the scientist to be sure that the plants weren't changing based on those factors instead of the different kinds of light. A plant might be healthy and green because of the amount of light it received, or it could be because it was given more water than the other plants. In this case, it would be impossible to draw proper conclusions based on the experiment.
However, if all plants are given the same amount of water and the same quality of soil, then the scientist can be sure that any changes from one plant to another are due to changes made to the independent variable: the light. Even though the controlled variable did not change and was not the variable actually being tested, it allowed the scientist to observe the cause-and-effect relationship between plant health and different types of lighting. In other words, it allowed for a successful scientific experiment.
Difference between manipulative & responding variable, what is a responding variable in science projects, definitions of control, constant, independent and dependent..., what is a constant in a science fair project, what are dependent, independent & controlled variables, what type of plants are best for science projects, how to collect data from a science project, what are independent & dependent variables in science..., can a science experiment have two manipulated variables, what is a constant in the scientific method, what is an independent variable in quantitative research, what is the difference between a control & a controlled..., what is the meaning of variables in research, what is a scientist who studies plants called, science fair project for testing different soils with..., why should you only test for one variable at a time..., what are the independent variables for a moldy bread..., what is the role of carotenoids in photosynthesis.
About the Author
Maria Cook is a freelance and fiction writer from Indianapolis, Indiana. She holds an MFA in Creative Writing from Butler University in Indianapolis. She has written about science as it relates to eco-friendly practices, conservation and the environment for Green Matters.
In any experiment, the object is to gather information about some event, in order to increase one's knowledge about it. In order to design an experiment, it is necessary to know or make an educated guess about cause and effect relationships between what you change in the experiment and what you are measuring. In order to do this, scientists use established theories to come up with a hypothesis before experimenting.
A hypothesis is a conjecture, based on knowledge obtained while formulating the question, that may explain any given behavior. The hypothesis might be very specific or it might be broad. "DNA makes RNA make protein" or "Unknown species of life dwell in the ocean," are two examples of valid hypothesis.
When formulating a hypothesis in the context of a controlled experiment, it will typically take the form a prediction of how changing one variable effects another, bring a variable any aspect, or collection, open to measurable change. The variable(s) that you alter intentionally in function of the experiment are called independent variables , while the variables that do not change by intended direct action are called dependent variables .
A hypothesis says something to the effect of:
Changing independent variable X should do something to dependent variable Y.
For example, suppose you wanted to measure the effects of temperature on the solubility of table sugar (sucrose). Knowing that dissolving sugar doesn't release or absorb much heat, it may seem intuitive to guess that the solubility does not depend on the temperature. Therefore our hypothesis may be:
Increasing or decreasing the temperature of a solution of water does not affect the solubility of sugar.
When determining what independent variables to change in an experiment, it is very important that you isolate the effects of each independent variable. You do not want to change more than one variable at once, for if you do it becomes more difficult to analyze the effects of each change on the dependent variable.
This is why experiments have to be designed very carefully. For example, performing the above tests on tap water may have different results from performing them on spring water, due to differences in salt content. Also, performing them on different days may cause variation due to pressure differences, or performing them with different brands of sugar may yield different results if different companies use different additives.
It is valid to test the effects of each of these things, if one desires, but if one does not have an infinite amount of money to experiment with all of the things that could go wrong (to see what happens if they do), a better alternative is to design the experiment to avoid potential pitfalls such as these.
A corollary to this warning is that when designing the experiment, you should choose a set of conditions that maximizes your power to analyze the effects of changes in variables. For example, if you wanted to measure the effects of temperature and of water volume, you should start with a basis (say, 20oC and 4 fluid ounces of water) which is easy to replicate, and then, keeping one of the variables constant, changing the other one. Then, do the opposite. You may end up with an experimental scheme like this one:
Once the data is gathered, you would analyze tests number 1, 4, and 5 to get an idea of the effect of temperature, and tests number 1, 2, and 3 to get an idea of volume effects. You would not analyze all 5 data points at once.
General Education
Independent and dependent variables are important for both math and science. If you don't understand what these two variables are and how they differ, you'll struggle to analyze an experiment or plot equations. Fortunately, we make learning these concepts easy!
In this guide, we break down what independent and dependent variables are , give examples of the variables in actual experiments, explain how to properly graph them, provide a quiz to test your skills, and discuss the one other important variable you need to know.
A variable is something you're trying to measure. It can be practically anything, such as objects, amounts of time, feelings, events, or ideas. If you're studying how people feel about different television shows, the variables in that experiment are television shows and feelings. If you're studying how different types of fertilizer affect how tall plants grow, the variables are type of fertilizer and plant height.
There are two key variables in every experiment: the independent variable and the dependent variable.
Independent variable: What the scientist changes or what changes on its own.
Dependent variable: What is being studied/measured.
The independent variable (sometimes known as the manipulated variable) is the variable whose change isn't affected by any other variable in the experiment. Either the scientist has to change the independent variable herself or it changes on its own; nothing else in the experiment affects or changes it. Two examples of common independent variables are age and time. There's nothing you or anything else can do to speed up or slow down time or increase or decrease age. They're independent of everything else.
The dependent variable (sometimes known as the responding variable) is what is being studied and measured in the experiment. It's what changes as a result of the changes to the independent variable. An example of a dependent variable is how tall you are at different ages. The dependent variable (height) depends on the independent variable (age).
An easy way to think of independent and dependent variables is, when you're conducting an experiment, the independent variable is what you change, and the dependent variable is what changes because of that. You can also think of the independent variable as the cause and the dependent variable as the effect.
It can be a lot easier to understand the differences between these two variables with examples, so let's look at some sample experiments below.
Below are overviews of three experiments, each with their independent and dependent variables identified.
Experiment 1: You want to figure out which brand of microwave popcorn pops the most kernels so you can get the most value for your money. You test different brands of popcorn to see which bag pops the most popcorn kernels.
Experiment 2 : You want to see which type of fertilizer helps plants grow fastest, so you add a different brand of fertilizer to each plant and see how tall they grow.
Experiment 3: You're interested in how rising sea temperatures impact algae life, so you design an experiment that measures the number of algae in a sample of water taken from a specific ocean site under varying temperatures.
For each of the independent variables above, it's clear that they can't be changed by other variables in the experiment. You have to be the one to change the popcorn and fertilizer brands in Experiments 1 and 2, and the ocean temperature in Experiment 3 cannot be significantly changed by other factors. Changes to each of these independent variables cause the dependent variables to change in the experiments.
Independent and dependent variables always go on the same places in a graph. This makes it easy for you to quickly see which variable is independent and which is dependent when looking at a graph or chart. The independent variable always goes on the x-axis, or the horizontal axis. The dependent variable goes on the y-axis, or vertical axis.
Here's an example:
As you can see, this is a graph showing how the number of hours a student studies affects the score she got on an exam. From the graph, it looks like studying up to six hours helped her raise her score, but as she studied more than that her score dropped slightly.
The amount of time studied is the independent variable, because it's what she changed, so it's on the x-axis. The score she got on the exam is the dependent variable, because it's what changed as a result of the independent variable, and it's on the y-axis. It's common to put the units in parentheses next to the axis titles, which this graph does.
There are different ways to title a graph, but a common way is "[Independent Variable] vs. [Dependent Variable]" like this graph. Using a standard title like that also makes it easy for others to see what your independent and dependent variables are.
Independent and dependent variables are the two most important variables to know and understand when conducting or studying an experiment, but there is one other type of variable that you should be aware of: constant variables.
Constant variables (also known as "constants") are simple to understand: they're what stay the same during the experiment. Most experiments usually only have one independent variable and one dependent variable, but they will all have multiple constant variables.
For example, in Experiment 2 above, some of the constant variables would be the type of plant being grown, the amount of fertilizer each plant is given, the amount of water each plant is given, when each plant is given fertilizer and water, the amount of sunlight the plants receive, the size of the container each plant is grown in, and more. The scientist is changing the type of fertilizer each plant gets which in turn changes how much each plant grows, but every other part of the experiment stays the same.
In experiments, you have to test one independent variable at a time in order to accurately understand how it impacts the dependent variable. Constant variables are important because they ensure that the dependent variable is changing because, and only because, of the independent variable so you can accurately measure the relationship between the dependent and independent variables.
If you didn't have any constant variables, you wouldn't be able to tell if the independent variable was what was really affecting the dependent variable. For example, in the example above, if there were no constants and you used different amounts of water, different types of plants, different amounts of fertilizer and put the plants in windows that got different amounts of sun, you wouldn't be able to say how fertilizer type affected plant growth because there would be so many other factors potentially affecting how the plants grew.
If you're still having a hard time understanding the relationship between independent and dependent variable, it might help to see them in action. Here are three experiments you can try at home.
One simple way to explore independent and dependent variables is to construct a biology experiment with seeds. Try growing some sunflowers and see how different factors affect their growth. For example, say you have ten sunflower seedlings, and you decide to give each a different amount of water each day to see if that affects their growth. The independent variable here would be the amount of water you give the plants, and the dependent variable is how tall the sunflowers grow.
Explore a wide range of chemical reactions with this chemistry kit . It includes 100+ ideas for experiments—pick one that interests you and analyze what the different variables are in the experiment!
Build and test a range of simple and complex machines with this K'nex kit . How does increasing a vehicle's mass affect its velocity? Can you lift more with a fixed or movable pulley? Remember, the independent variable is what you control/change, and the dependent variable is what changes because of that.
Can you identify the independent and dependent variables for each of the four scenarios below? The answers are at the bottom of the guide for you to check your work.
Scenario 1: You buy your dog multiple brands of food to see which one is her favorite.
Scenario 2: Your friends invite you to a party, and you decide to attend, but you're worried that staying out too long will affect how well you do on your geometry test tomorrow morning.
Scenario 3: Your dentist appointment will take 30 minutes from start to finish, but that doesn't include waiting in the lounge before you're called in. The total amount of time you spend in the dentist's office is the amount of time you wait before your appointment, plus the 30 minutes of the actual appointment
Scenario 4: You regularly babysit your little cousin who always throws a tantrum when he's asked to eat his vegetables. Over the course of the week, you ask him to eat vegetables four times.
Knowing the independent variable definition and dependent variable definition is key to understanding how experiments work. The independent variable is what you change, and the dependent variable is what changes as a result of that. You can also think of the independent variable as the cause and the dependent variable as the effect.
When graphing these variables, the independent variable should go on the x-axis (the horizontal axis), and the dependent variable goes on the y-axis (vertical axis).
Constant variables are also important to understand. They are what stay the same throughout the experiment so you can accurately measure the impact of the independent variable on the dependent variable.
Independent and dependent variables are commonly taught in high school science classes. Read our guide to learn which science classes high school students should be taking.
Scoring well on standardized tests is an important part of having a strong college application. Check out our guides on the best study tips for the SAT and ACT.
Interested in science? Science Olympiad is a great extracurricular to include on your college applications, and it can help you win big scholarships. Check out our complete guide to winning Science Olympiad competitions.
Quiz Answers
1: Independent: dog food brands; Dependent: how much you dog eats
2: Independent: how long you spend at the party; Dependent: your exam score
3: Independent: Amount of time you spend waiting; Dependent: Total time you're at the dentist (the 30 minutes of appointment time is the constant)
4: Independent: Number of times your cousin is asked to eat vegetables; Dependent: number of tantrums
These recommendations are based solely on our knowledge and experience. If you purchase an item through one of our links, PrepScholar may receive a commission.
How to Get Into Harvard and the Ivy League
How to Get a Perfect 4.0 GPA
How to Write an Amazing College Essay
What Exactly Are Colleges Looking For?
ACT vs. SAT: Which Test Should You Take?
When should you take the SAT or ACT?
Get Your Free
Find Your Target SAT Score
Free Complete Official SAT Practice Tests
Score 800 on SAT Math
Score 800 on SAT Reading and Writing
Score 600 on SAT Math
Score 600 on SAT Reading and Writing
Find Your Target ACT Score
Complete Official Free ACT Practice Tests
Get a 36 on ACT English
Get a 36 on ACT Math
Get a 36 on ACT Reading
Get a 36 on ACT Science
Get a 24 on ACT English
Get a 24 on ACT Math
Get a 24 on ACT Reading
Get a 24 on ACT Science
Stay Informed
Get the latest articles and test prep tips!
Christine graduated from Michigan State University with degrees in Environmental Biology and Geography and received her Master's from Duke University. In high school she scored in the 99th percentile on the SAT and was named a National Merit Finalist. She has taught English and biology in several countries.
Have any questions about this article or other topics? Ask below and we'll reply!
Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.
Learning objectives.
As we saw earlier in the book, an experiment is a type of study designed specifically to answer the question of whether there is a causal relationship between two variables. Do changes in an independent variable cause changes in a dependent variable? Experiments have two fundamental features. The first is that the researchers manipulate, or systematically vary, the level of the independent variable. The different levels of the independent variable are called conditions. For example, in Darley and Latané’s experiment, the independent variable was the number of witnesses that participants believed to be present. The researchers manipulated this independent variable by telling participants that there were either one, two, or five other students involved in the discussion, thereby creating three conditions. The second fundamental feature of an experiment is that the researcher controls, or minimizes the variability in, variables other than the independent and dependent variable. These other variables are called extraneous variables. Darley and Latané tested all their participants in the same room, exposed them to the same emergency situation, and so on. They also randomly assigned their participants to conditions so that the three groups would be similar to each other to begin with. Notice that although the words manipulation and control have similar meanings in everyday language, researchers make a clear distinction between them. They manipulate the independent variable by systematically changing its levels and control other variables by holding them constant.
Internal validity.
Recall that the fact that two variables are statistically related does not necessarily mean that one causes the other. “Correlation does not imply causation.” For example, if it were the case that people who exercise regularly are happier than people who do not exercise regularly, this would not necessarily mean that exercising increases people’s happiness. It could mean instead that greater happiness causes people to exercise (the directionality problem) or that something like better physical health causes people to exercise and be happier (the third-variable problem).
The purpose of an experiment, however, is to show that two variables are statistically related and to do so in a way that supports the conclusion that the independent variable caused any observed differences in the dependent variable. The basic logic is this: If the researcher creates two or more highly similar conditions and then manipulates the independent variable to produce just one difference between them, then any later difference between the conditions must have been caused by the independent variable. For example, because the only difference between Darley and Latané’s conditions was the number of students that participants believed to be involved in the discussion, this must have been responsible for differences in helping between the conditions.
An empirical study is said to be high in internal validity if the way it was conducted supports the conclusion that the independent variable caused any observed differences in the dependent variable. Thus experiments are high in internal validity because the way they are conducted—with the manipulation of the independent variable and the control of extraneous variables—provides strong support for causal conclusions.
At the same time, the way that experiments are conducted sometimes leads to a different kind of criticism. Specifically, the need to manipulate the independent variable and control extraneous variables means that experiments are often conducted under conditions that seem artificial or unlike “real life” (Stanovich, 2010). In many psychology experiments, the participants are all college undergraduates and come to a classroom or laboratory to fill out a series of paper-and-pencil questionnaires or to perform a carefully designed computerized task. Consider, for example, an experiment in which researcher Barbara Fredrickson and her colleagues had college students come to a laboratory on campus and complete a math test while wearing a swimsuit (Fredrickson, Roberts, Noll, Quinn, & Twenge, 1998). At first, this might seem silly. When will college students ever have to complete math tests in their swimsuits outside of this experiment?
The issue we are confronting is that of external validity. An empirical study is high in external validity if the way it was conducted supports generalizing the results to people and situations beyond those actually studied. As a general rule, studies are higher in external validity when the participants and the situation studied are similar to those that the researchers want to generalize to. Imagine, for example, that a group of researchers is interested in how shoppers in large grocery stores are affected by whether breakfast cereal is packaged in yellow or purple boxes. Their study would be high in external validity if they studied the decisions of ordinary people doing their weekly shopping in a real grocery store. If the shoppers bought much more cereal in purple boxes, the researchers would be fairly confident that this would be true for other shoppers in other stores. Their study would be relatively low in external validity, however, if they studied a sample of college students in a laboratory at a selective college who merely judged the appeal of various colors presented on a computer screen. If the students judged purple to be more appealing than yellow, the researchers would not be very confident that this is relevant to grocery shoppers’ cereal-buying decisions.
We should be careful, however, not to draw the blanket conclusion that experiments are low in external validity. One reason is that experiments need not seem artificial. Consider that Darley and Latané’s experiment provided a reasonably good simulation of a real emergency situation. Or consider field experiments that are conducted entirely outside the laboratory. In one such experiment, Robert Cialdini and his colleagues studied whether hotel guests choose to reuse their towels for a second day as opposed to having them washed as a way of conserving water and energy (Cialdini, 2005). These researchers manipulated the message on a card left in a large sample of hotel rooms. One version of the message emphasized showing respect for the environment, another emphasized that the hotel would donate a portion of their savings to an environmental cause, and a third emphasized that most hotel guests choose to reuse their towels. The result was that guests who received the message that most hotel guests choose to reuse their towels reused their own towels substantially more often than guests receiving either of the other two messages. Given the way they conducted their study, it seems very likely that their result would hold true for other guests in other hotels.
A second reason not to draw the blanket conclusion that experiments are low in external validity is that they are often conducted to learn about psychological processes that are likely to operate in a variety of people and situations. Let us return to the experiment by Fredrickson and colleagues. They found that the women in their study, but not the men, performed worse on the math test when they were wearing swimsuits. They argued that this was due to women’s greater tendency to objectify themselves—to think about themselves from the perspective of an outside observer—which diverts their attention away from other tasks. They argued, furthermore, that this process of self-objectification and its effect on attention is likely to operate in a variety of women and situations—even if none of them ever finds herself taking a math test in her swimsuit.
Again, to manipulate an independent variable means to change its level systematically so that different groups of participants are exposed to different levels of that variable, or the same group of participants is exposed to different levels at different times. For example, to see whether expressive writing affects people’s health, a researcher might instruct some participants to write about traumatic experiences and others to write about neutral experiences. The different levels of the independent variable are referred to as conditions , and researchers often give the conditions short descriptive names to make it easy to talk and write about them. In this case, the conditions might be called the “traumatic condition” and the “neutral condition.”
Notice that the manipulation of an independent variable must involve the active intervention of the researcher. Comparing groups of people who differ on the independent variable before the study begins is not the same as manipulating that variable. For example, a researcher who compares the health of people who already keep a journal with the health of people who do not keep a journal has not manipulated this variable and therefore not conducted an experiment. This is important because groups that already differ in one way at the beginning of a study are likely to differ in other ways too. For example, people who choose to keep journals might also be more conscientious, more introverted, or less stressed than people who do not. Therefore, any observed difference between the two groups in terms of their health might have been caused by whether or not they keep a journal, or it might have been caused by any of the other differences between people who do and do not keep journals. Thus the active manipulation of the independent variable is crucial for eliminating the third-variable problem.
Of course, there are many situations in which the independent variable cannot be manipulated for practical or ethical reasons and therefore an experiment is not possible. For example, whether or not people have a significant early illness experience cannot be manipulated, making it impossible to do an experiment on the effect of early illness experiences on the development of hypochondriasis. This does not mean it is impossible to study the relationship between early illness experiences and hypochondriasis—only that it must be done using nonexperimental approaches. We will discuss this in detail later in the book.
In many experiments, the independent variable is a construct that can only be manipulated indirectly. For example, a researcher might try to manipulate participants’ stress levels indirectly by telling some of them that they have five minutes to prepare a short speech that they will then have to give to an audience of other participants. In such situations, researchers often include a manipulation check in their procedure. A manipulation check is a separate measure of the construct the researcher is trying to manipulate. For example, researchers trying to manipulate participants’ stress levels might give them a paper-and-pencil stress questionnaire or take their blood pressure—perhaps right after the manipulation or at the end of the procedure—to verify that they successfully manipulated this variable.
An extraneous variable is anything that varies in the context of a study other than the independent and dependent variables. In an experiment on the effect of expressive writing on health, for example, extraneous variables would include participant variables (individual differences) such as their writing ability, their diet, and their shoe size. They would also include situation or task variables such as the time of day when participants write, whether they write by hand or on a computer, and the weather. Extraneous variables pose a problem because many of them are likely to have some effect on the dependent variable. For example, participants’ health will be affected by many things other than whether or not they engage in expressive writing. This can make it difficult to separate the effect of the independent variable from the effects of the extraneous variables, which is why it is important to control extraneous variables by holding them constant.
Extraneous variables make it difficult to detect the effect of the independent variable in two ways. One is by adding variability or “noise” to the data. Imagine a simple experiment on the effect of mood (happy vs. sad) on the number of happy childhood events people are able to recall. Participants are put into a negative or positive mood (by showing them a happy or sad video clip) and then asked to recall as many happy childhood events as they can. The two leftmost columns of Table 6.1 “Hypothetical Noiseless Data and Realistic Noisy Data” show what the data might look like if there were no extraneous variables and the number of happy childhood events participants recalled was affected only by their moods. Every participant in the happy mood condition recalled exactly four happy childhood events, and every participant in the sad mood condition recalled exactly three. The effect of mood here is quite obvious. In reality, however, the data would probably look more like those in the two rightmost columns of Table 6.1 “Hypothetical Noiseless Data and Realistic Noisy Data” . Even in the happy mood condition, some participants would recall fewer happy memories because they have fewer to draw on, use less effective strategies, or are less motivated. And even in the sad mood condition, some participants would recall more happy childhood memories because they have more happy memories to draw on, they use more effective recall strategies, or they are more motivated. Although the mean difference between the two groups is the same as in the idealized data, this difference is much less obvious in the context of the greater variability in the data. Thus one reason researchers try to control extraneous variables is so their data look more like the idealized data in Table 6.1 “Hypothetical Noiseless Data and Realistic Noisy Data” , which makes the effect of the independent variable is easier to detect (although real data never look quite that good).
Table 6.1 Hypothetical Noiseless Data and Realistic Noisy Data
Idealized “noiseless” data | Realistic “noisy” data | ||
---|---|---|---|
4 | 3 | 3 | 1 |
4 | 3 | 6 | 3 |
4 | 3 | 2 | 4 |
4 | 3 | 4 | 0 |
4 | 3 | 5 | 5 |
4 | 3 | 2 | 7 |
4 | 3 | 3 | 2 |
4 | 3 | 1 | 5 |
4 | 3 | 6 | 1 |
4 | 3 | 8 | 2 |
= 4 | = 3 | = 4 | = 3 |
One way to control extraneous variables is to hold them constant. This can mean holding situation or task variables constant by testing all participants in the same location, giving them identical instructions, treating them in the same way, and so on. It can also mean holding participant variables constant. For example, many studies of language limit participants to right-handed people, who generally have their language areas isolated in their left cerebral hemispheres. Left-handed people are more likely to have their language areas isolated in their right cerebral hemispheres or distributed across both hemispheres, which can change the way they process language and thereby add noise to the data.
In principle, researchers can control extraneous variables by limiting participants to one very specific category of person, such as 20-year-old, straight, female, right-handed, sophomore psychology majors. The obvious downside to this approach is that it would lower the external validity of the study—in particular, the extent to which the results can be generalized beyond the people actually studied. For example, it might be unclear whether results obtained with a sample of younger straight women would apply to older gay men. In many situations, the advantages of a diverse sample outweigh the reduction in noise achieved by a homogeneous one.
The second way that extraneous variables can make it difficult to detect the effect of the independent variable is by becoming confounding variables. A confounding variable is an extraneous variable that differs on average across levels of the independent variable. For example, in almost all experiments, participants’ intelligence quotients (IQs) will be an extraneous variable. But as long as there are participants with lower and higher IQs at each level of the independent variable so that the average IQ is roughly equal, then this variation is probably acceptable (and may even be desirable). What would be bad, however, would be for participants at one level of the independent variable to have substantially lower IQs on average and participants at another level to have substantially higher IQs on average. In this case, IQ would be a confounding variable.
To confound means to confuse, and this is exactly what confounding variables do. Because they differ across conditions—just like the independent variable—they provide an alternative explanation for any observed difference in the dependent variable. Figure 6.1 “Hypothetical Results From a Study on the Effect of Mood on Memory” shows the results of a hypothetical study, in which participants in a positive mood condition scored higher on a memory task than participants in a negative mood condition. But if IQ is a confounding variable—with participants in the positive mood condition having higher IQs on average than participants in the negative mood condition—then it is unclear whether it was the positive moods or the higher IQs that caused participants in the first condition to score higher. One way to avoid confounding variables is by holding extraneous variables constant. For example, one could prevent IQ from becoming a confounding variable by limiting participants only to those with IQs of exactly 100. But this approach is not always desirable for reasons we have already discussed. A second and much more general approach—random assignment to conditions—will be discussed in detail shortly.
Figure 6.1 Hypothetical Results From a Study on the Effect of Mood on Memory
Because IQ also differs across conditions, it is a confounding variable.
Practice: For each of the following topics, decide whether that topic could be studied using an experimental research design and explain why or why not.
Cialdini, R. (2005, April). Don’t throw in the towel: Use social influence research. APS Observer . Retrieved from http://www.psychologicalscience.org/observer/getArticle.cfm?id=1762 .
Fredrickson, B. L., Roberts, T.-A., Noll, S. M., Quinn, D. M., & Twenge, J. M. (1998). The swimsuit becomes you: Sex differences in self-objectification, restrained eating, and math performance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75 , 269–284.
Stanovich, K. E. (2010). How to think straight about psychology (9th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Research Methods in Psychology Copyright © 2016 by University of Minnesota is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
The scientific method includes three main types of variables: constants, independent, and dependent variables. In a science experiment, each of these variables define a different measured or constrained aspect of the system. ... Sometimes also called a controlled variable. A constant is a variable that could change, but that the experimenter ...
By systematically changing some variables in an experiment and measuring what happens as a result, researchers are able to learn more about cause-and-effect relationships. The two main types of variables in psychology are the independent variable and the dependent variable. Both variables are important in the process of collecting data about ...
A control variable is anything that is held constant or limited in a research study. It's a variable that is not of interest to the study's objectives, but is controlled because it could influence the outcomes. Variables may be controlled directly by holding them constant throughout a study (e.g., by controlling the room temperature in an ...
Revised on June 22, 2023. 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:
Definition: Control variable, also known as a "constant variable," is a variable that is held constant or fixed during an experiment or study to prevent it from affecting the outcome. In other words, a control variable is a variable that is kept the same or held constant to isolate the effects of the independent variable on the dependent ...
An experiment is a type of empirical study that features the manipulation of an independent variable, the measurement of a dependent variable, and control of extraneous variables. An extraneous variable is any variable other than the independent and dependent variables. A confound is an extraneous variable that varies systematically with the ...
Learn about the most popular variables in scientific research, including independent, dependent, control, moderating and mediating variables. ... Changing a teaching method (Variable A) ... In an experimental design, a control variable (or controlled variable) is a variable that is intentionally held constant to ensure it doesn't have an ...
This is a variable that is held constant or controlled by the researcher to ensure that it does not affect the relationship between the independent variable and the dependent variable. ... There are different methods to analyze variables in research, including: ... Regression analysis can be used to predict the value of the dependent variable ...
In principle, when we consider the graph (Fig. 5.1) which shows a linear relationship between x and y, the value of y is represented as a function of x "f(x)".Meaning that y, the dependent variable (see: Sect. 5.1.1.2) is dependent upon the value of x.Consequentially, the final outcome or result of the formula can be interpreted as: y depends on the x value (i.e., the independent variable ...
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:
The dependent variable is the factor that changes as a result of the change to the independent variable. The controlled variables (or constant variables) are factors that the scientist wants to remain constant if the experiment is to show accurate results. To be able to measure results, each of the variables must be able to be measured.
Control of Extraneous Variables. An extraneous variable is anything that varies in the context of a study other than the independent and dependent variables. In an experiment on the effect of expressive writing on health, for example, extraneous variables would include participant variables (individual differences) such as their writing ability, their diet, and their shoe size.
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.
This is different from the "control variable," which is variable that is held constant so it won't influence the outcome of the ... Plot or graph independent and dependent variables using the standard method. The independent variable is the x-axis, while the dependent variable is the y-axis. ... The Practice of Social Research (12th ed ...
The role of dependent variables in shaping and grounding modern-day research experiments is undeniably important. Alongside independent variables, dependent variables make it easy for researchers and organizations to uncover the true impact of events. This speeds up the formulation of real and tangible solutions.
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 ...
Definition: Controlled experiment. Experiments in research entail manipulating or changing an independent variable and assessing its effect on the dependent variable or outcome. All the variables except the independent variable are held constant in a controlled experiment. Researchers begin by defining the variables present to ensure objective ...
An experimental group in a scientific experiment is the group on which the experimental procedure is performed. The independent variable is changed for the group and the response or change in the dependent variable is recorded. In contrast, the group that does not receive the treatment or in which the independent variable is held constant is ...
TL;DR: In a science experiment, the controlled or constant variable is a variable that does not change. For example, in an experiment to test the effect of different lights on plants, other factors that affect plant growth and health, such as soil quality and watering, would need to remain constant.
Isolation of Effects. When determining what independent variables to change in an experiment, it is very important that you isolate the effects of each independent variable. You do not want to change more than one variable at once, for if you do it becomes more difficult to analyze the effects of each change on the dependent variable.
The dependent variable (sometimes known as the responding variable) is what is being studied and measured in the experiment. It's what changes as a result of the changes to the independent variable. An example of a dependent variable is how tall you are at different ages. The dependent variable (height) depends on the independent variable (age).
Experiments have two fundamental features. The first is that the researchers manipulate, or systematically vary, the level of the independent variable. The different levels of the independent variable are called conditions. For example, in Darley and Latané's experiment, the independent variable was the number of witnesses that participants ...