SCI 105'020 Scientific Inquiry - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 11
About This Presentation
Title:

SCI 105'020 Scientific Inquiry

Description:

A jar of marbles. Causation vs. Correlation-differences ... There is a clear temporal order between the cause and effect variables: you ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:44
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 12
Provided by: scie279
Category:
Tags: sci | ajar | inquiry | scientific

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: SCI 105'020 Scientific Inquiry


1
SCI 105.020 Scientific Inquiry
  • Evaluating Causal Hypotheses

2
Causation vs. Correlation-similarities
  • Relationships between two variables
  • Associations in sample statistics can be observed
    and analyzed in the same way
  • Direction
  • Strength
  • Margin of error (ME)

Red Green
x-group k-group
Small Large
Not E E
A random experiment
A jar of marbles
3
Causation vs. Correlation-differences
  • Correlation is a symmetric relationship, whereas
    causation is not
  • In a causal relationship
  • There is a clear temporal order between the cause
    and effect variables you cannot cause something
    happen in the past
  • Causes produce their effects in the causal
    production

Red Green
Large Small
Use ashtray
correlation
45/60 (or 75)Large
45/55 (or 82)Red
causation
Lung cancer
Smoking
10/40 (or 25) Large
15/45 (or 33) Red
causation
Being Large is positively correlated to being
Red, and vise versa.
4
Differences In Hypothesis Evaluation
  • Evaluating correlation
  • The real-world population
  • Population sampled vs. population of interest
  • The sample data
  • Sample sizes and observed frequencies
  • The statistical model
  • Random sampling
  • Representativeness and possible biases
  • Evaluating the hypothesis
  • Strength of correlation
  • Summary
  • Evaluating causation
  • The real-world population causal hypothesis
  • Identify C E variables and state the hypothesis
  • The sample data
  • Design of the experiment
  • Random/prospective/ retrospective
  • Random sampling
  • Evaluating the hypothesis
  • Effectiveness of the causal factor
  • Summary

5
The Ideal Case
  • Ideally, wed like to divide the real-world
    population into two disjoin group
  • Subjects exposed to the cause variable
  • Subject not exposed to the cause variable

x-group k-group
exposed
Not E E
x-group
not exposed
k-group
6
Random Experiment
  • In reality, one can only mimic the ideal
    condition by random sampling

exposed
x-group
x-group k-group
Not E E
population of interest
population sampled
Random sample
k-group
not exposed
Random sampling
7
Principles of Experimental Design
  • The fundamental principle is control
  • The key is to control for possible effects of
    extraneous variables
  • Principles of control include
  • Comparison observe any differences in effect
    variable
  • Randomization impacts of extraneous variables
    can be balanced out
  • These can then be attributed directly to the
    cause variable
  • Blindness further improve the effectiveness of
    the experiment by resolving the placebo effect

8
Prospective Studies
  • Not controlled experiments, inherently not as
    strong
  • Widely used in various medical contexts where a
    real controlled experiment is not applicable
  • Efforts can still be made to minimize the impacts
    from other variables (O)
  • Select only subjects not exposed to O
  • Select only subjects exposed to O and make sure
    there is no interaction between o and the
    suspected cause
  • Matching the subjects according to their values
    in O

9
Prospective Studies-an illustration
  • Starting from a real population in which its
    instances have selected their groups already
  • Random sampling is still achievable in selecting
    subjects from the divided population

C Not C
x-group
population of sampled
k-group
E
E
Random sampling
10
Retrospective Studies
  • Retrospective studies mean to survey the past
  • Just opposite to prospective studies, which look
    into the future
  • Starting from a x-group with subjects that are
    known to have the effect and a k-group which is
    free from the effect
  • Ideally the subjects in the k-group will match up
    with the x-group subjects in all other aspects
  • Efforts are needed to verify it as far as
    possible
  • The result of the study was presented as
    percentages of subjects who had the cause, not
    percentages of those who developed the effect

11
Retrospective Studies vs. Survey Sampling
  • Both employ techniques such as interviewing
  • Both can come up with various frequency values
  • A survey can also select subjects randomly
  • Why should one bother to do a retrospective
    study?
  • The difference is numbers!
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com