Introduction
A researcher can determine a causal relationship between two or more elements by conducting an experiment. Such an approach represents a carefully regulated procedure, with some manipulated factors potentially influencing other parameters and the scientific method being engaged to obtain knowledge from empirical investigation (King, 2017).
One article that can be utilized to explore the specific elements of experimental research (ER) is the study about negative body talk, specifically fat talk (FT), by Katrevich et al. (2014). The report about FT demonstrates how ER allows scientists to make causal statements based on hypotheses made, variables employed, and participants separated into groups.
Hypothesis
ER begins by making assumptions about a topic that should be analyzed. Katrevich et al. (2014) have examined how FT affects students attending a Historically Black University, and the researchers have constructed three hypotheses. Notably, such a concept refers to a testable prediction that is generated based on a theory, with every proven presumption contributing to the theory’s credibility (King, 2017).
In other words, a hypothesis is a speculation that should be investigated to verify something. Among the assumptions offered in the FT article, one of particular interest proposes that participants exposed to FT are likely to exhibit greater eating pathology than those not involved in FT (Katrevich et al., 2014). Accordingly, the initial part of ER is its hypothesis or a combination of them.
Independent and Dependent Variables
The following aspects of ER are its independent (IV) and dependent (DV) variables. IV refers to an experimental factor that the researcher is changing to determine its effects, whereas DV is the component that can be transformed in response to IV (King, 2017). Consequently, IV can be viewed as a cause, while DV is its outcome. In the above-mentioned hypothesis regarding FT, IV is implemented as the interaction with FT.
The study’s authors presented some participants with written dialogue about FT and others with a neutral discussion about shoes. DV is measured as eating pathology reflected through symptoms of anorexia and bulimia as a reaction to IV (Katrevich et al., 2014). Therefore, essential elements of ER are its IV and DV, which should be assessed to identify a connection between the factors.
Random Assignment
A crucial characteristic of ER is that IV and DV are associated with random assignment. An operational definition for such a procedure is that participants are allocated to distinct groups by chance and not some predetermined feature. The incidental appointment to a specific IV and some presumed DV is necessary to guarantee that the only systemic difference between those undergoing the experiment is the manipulated variable rather than pre-existing dissimilarities (King, 2017).
The participants were all college students for the selected hypothesis concerning FT, but they were arbitrarily distributed to a group regardless of their prior experience with FT or eating pathology (Katrevich et al., 2014). Accordingly, random assignment is essential in ER to ensure that some prior distinctions will not affect the results.
Experimental and Control Groups
Furthermore, another significant component of ER is the experimental group (EG) and the controlled group (CG). The concept of ER encompasses participants who interact with the factors that concern the researcher. At the same time, CG comprises individuals similar to those in the ER but not involved with the central element. CG is necessary to provide a comparison against which the effects of IV are examined (King, 2017).
In other words, EG presents the results of engaging with something of interest, whereas CG allows for analogizing the findings. In the above-chosen hypothesis, EG consisted of 54 people exposed to a discussion about FT, and CG involved 55 participants who read a neutral dialogue about shoes. Upon completing the main task, the two groups were measured on eating pathology, with the outcomes analyzed to prove the initial assumption (Katrevich et al., 2014). ER must involve EG and CG to determine a proper cause-and-effect connection.
Ethical Considerations in Research and Publication in a Peer-Reviewed Journal
In addition to the discussed elements, ER should address specific ethical considerations and be published in a peer-reviewed journal. The first concept refers to concerns that must be resolved for a study to be moral. For instance, participants should provide informed consent demonstrating that they have been instructed about potential risks, while researchers must keep individual data confidential (King, 2017).
For example, the above-assessed article does not mention obtaining or not obtaining consent. Still, it does not reveal details about a specific person, only their average characteristics (Katrevich et al., 2014)—the aspect of being peer-reviewed means that experts in a specific field have scrutinized a study. As a result, a report is being published due to the approval of professionals based on the research’s scientific merit (King, 2017). Consequently, a reputable and reliable ER should correspond with several ethical considerations and be inspected by the author’s peers.
Conclusion
To conclude, ER allows scientists to make causal statements since its components, which include hypotheses, variables, and participants divided into groups, demonstrate case-and-effect associations between various factors. The examined article about FT depicts how the listed ER parts interact with one another. For instance, the participants are assigned to EG and CG to compare the outcomes generated in response to a manipulated variable. Therefore, ER is an insightful method for determining certain elements’ relationships.
References
Katrevich, A. V., Register, J. D., & Aruguete, M. S. (2014). The effects of negative body talk in an ethnically diverse sample of college students. North American Journal of Psychology, 16(1), 43-52.
King, L. (2017). Experience psychology (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.