An educational psychologist decides to test the hypothesis that intelligence and motivation are the principal determinants of success in school. Would his research most likely be experimental or ex post facto, why?
The research conducted by the educational psychologist to test the hypothesis that "intelligence and motivation are the principal determinants of success in school" would most likely be classified as ex post facto research — not experimental.
Here’s Why:
1. No Manipulation of Independent Variables
· Intelligence and motivation are inherent psychological traits that cannot be ethically or practically manipulated.
· You cannot assign students to have high or low intelligence or motivation — they are naturally occurring characteristics.
2. Variables Are Measured, Not Assigned
· The psychologist would measure intelligence and motivation using standardized tests or rating scales.
· School success (e.g., grades, performance scores) would also be measured, and relationships would be analyzed statistically.
Why It's Not Experimental:
Feature |
Ex Post Facto Research |
Experimental Research |
Manipulation of Variables |
No (measures existing traits) |
Yes (manipulates independent variable) |
Random Assignment |
Not possible |
Required |
Example Fit |
Measures intelligence/motivation and observes impact
on academic success |
Assigns students to groups with different motivation
levels (not feasible or ethical) |
Conclusion:
The study is ex post facto because:
· It examines the effects of naturally occurring traits (intelligence, motivation),
· Does not involve random assignment or manipulation,
· Analyzes relationships between variables using correlation or regression, rather than experimental intervention.
This type of research helps in understanding associations and making predictions, though it does not establish causation with the same confidence as experimental designs.
Comments
Post a Comment