2. In the anti-abortion commercial experiment just described, suppose the respondents had been selected by convenience rather than randomly. What type of design would result?
3. Identify the type of experiment being conducted in the following situations. Represent them with symbols. And briefly comment on the internal and external validity of the experimental design in each case a. A major distributor of office equipment is considering a new sales presentation program for its salespeople. The largest sales territory is selected, the new program is implemented, and the effect on sales is measured. One Shot case study X O1 Internal Validity – Poor, given now there is no random assignment. Not clear how the results will be evaluated (given there is no comparison group). External Validity – Fine. Given the experiment is done in the field (ie. Actual business setting). b. Procter & Gamble wants to determine if a new package design for Tide detergent is more effective than the current design, Twelve supermarkets are randomly selected in Denver. In six of them randomly selected, Tide is sold in the new packaging. In the other six, the detergent is sold in the old package. Sales for both groups of supermarkets are monitored for 3 months Pottest – only control group design EG: R X O1 CG: R O2 Internal validity – good because it is form of true experimental design (with random assignment of groups) External validity – Fine. Given the experiment is done in the field (ie. Actual business setting).
- Two '16
- Randomness, external validity, internal validity, b. Procter & Gamble