Then ask the parents and teachers to complete the

then ask the parents and teachers to complete the same measures they
actually did use in their study. This would have been faster as well, because
they wouldn’t have had to wait 4 months to get the follow-up data. So the
question is, why go to all that time, trouble, and expense? There’s a very
good reason. Let’s say they did the easier study and just compared kids who
already had a PSII to the kids without one. Do you think there might be any
important differences between families who had a PSII and ones that didn’t?

PSY 250 MPW
How might those families be different (besides having a PSII or not)?
Do you think those things might affect how well the kids do in
school? If so, we would call those differences in the families confounds . We’ll
get into this topic in a future Module. 2 points I do think there would have
been differences. Some have different environments at home so
going into the depths of the study that Weis and Cerankosky did to
understand the boys themselves was a great step in collecting the
right data.
6. Check out this news story about this article:
-
schoolwork-of.html . The very first sentence in the story is this: “Researchers
are trying to tell parents something about what kinds of video games children
should be playing and how much time they should spend doing it.” Can you
find any place in the Weis and Cerankoski article where they actually
tell parents how much time they should let their kids play video
games? Another example of the dangers of having the press write about
research! 1 point page 469 but it’s not specific on time just limiting
time on video games
7. What is your reading difficulty estimate for this article , on a 1 = easy
to 5 = very difficult scale? 1 point 3
8. How long did it take you to read the article (approximately)? 1 point
around 45 minutes