This is an excellent reason for administering a web study. Sometimes practicality must trump other concerns.
Publications/presentations before/during/after grad school?
- Thread starter futureapppsy2
- Start date
This is an excellent reason for administering a web study. Sometimes practicality must trump other concerns.
I don't disagree that randomization is ideal for the reasons you stated. I just disagree that the strict definition of "experiment" requires randomization. I don't believe it does - there are many different kinds of experiments - some are good, some are bad. One can run a terrible experiment with lots of confounding variables that destroy the ability to interpret the IV. Its bad research design, but still technically an experiment. If you have a source that says otherwise I'd appreciate you pointing me in that direction but as far as I know, randomization is perhaps the "hallmark" of good experimenting but isn't necessary by definition.
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2007
- Messages
- 789
- Reaction score
- 80
Actually, a true experiment must have random assignment to conditions or it's not a true experiment.
Here's a link with the info... I know because we learned this in undergrad AND I had to drill this into my undergrads' heads last term when I TAed an intro to research methods course. That was painful.
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/SommerB/sommerdemo/experiment/types.htm
Of course, the colloquial term 'experiment' (even in science circles) is used differently on occasion.
Here's a link with the info... I know because we learned this in undergrad AND I had to drill this into my undergrads' heads last term when I TAed an intro to research methods course. That was painful.
http://psychology.ucdavis.edu/SommerB/sommerdemo/experiment/types.htm
Of course, the colloquial term 'experiment' (even in science circles) is used differently on occasion.
But Olie, if you don't randomize then its a quasi-experiment. Quasi-experiments are not necessarily "bad" experiments. They are sometimes the ONLY possible way to study a phenomena. I am advocating choosing the best design. In fact sometimes experiments may not be the best design.
If you truly are interested in the effect of the independent variable (and I mean really, truly interested in the independent variable) you have to take steps to ensure groups are equal. Randomization is accepted way to doing this. If you cannot guarantee randomization, that's fine, but then you have not conducted an experimental design, but a quasi-experimental design because the differences you are seeing in your group cannot be solely attributed to manipulating the variable. That makes it a quasi- design.
The question then, is whether you are comfortable accepting that the results may have error. All experiments do and in psychology that is especially the case.
Just manipulating a variable is not enough to consider it an experiment. Some variables- like gender differences, cannot be manipulated for purposes of comparison. At least they can't be manipulated ethically!
Well I stand corrected then. I'd always read that experiment referred to the IV manipulation and that randomization was just a way to assure quality. "True" may be the key word here, because I don't think the term experiment is used the same way in other areas of science.
Edit: To Manko - I wasn't saying quasi-experiments were bad. My thesis is actually a hybrid so I recognize the necessity of it depending on the question (in my case Addicts vs. Non-Addicts with the Addicts randomized to withdrawal or non-withdrawal). I was just trying to make the point that experiment referred to manipulation, rather than randomization. Apparently I was wrong, though in my defense I'd wager that at least half the articles I've read in top tier journals are also wrong🙂
However, I still maintain my original point - that online studies can certainly be quasi-experiments and even true experiments. Randomization is possible, and control over whether or not they are wearing underwear on their head is a concern (for a variety of reasons, not just methodology😉 ), but doesn't automatically preclude the possibility of it being a true experiment.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2009
- Messages
- 107
- Reaction score
- 0
No worries. I was just stating what I have observed over the years. I personally do not conduct web-based studies. I did hear good things about it, especially accessibility is a concern. In fact, even when you are participating in an experiment in a lab, there are many things you can't control. That is why experiments always call for very careful design. For example, you need to consider what to do to make sure participants are paying attention. If they are not, you need to have some ways to partial out those "errors," at least statistically, I would think.
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2009
- Messages
- 107
- Reaction score
- 0
Indeed! Depending on the nature of the study and the variables involved, you may be able to "randomize" people into different groups even in an online survey type study.
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2009
- Messages
- 263
- Reaction score
- 0
Does anyone have any suggestions for a manual or "guidebook" for first-author publishing that they think is helpful/worth buying? Other than the APA format/style guide 🙂
- Joined
- Jan 15, 2005
- Messages
- 312
- Reaction score
- 2
I like Sternberg's "Guide to publishing in psychology journals"
http://www.amazon.com/Publishing-Ps...=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259499720&sr=1-4
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2007
- Messages
- 1,810
- Reaction score
- 9
I have a few questions about this.
1. How are you able to get supervision for this? I carried a 6-client load in my second year and my 2-hour supervision sessions were packed.
2. Does this site pay you for this (I hope so!).
3. Does the site profit off your work, regardless of (2)?
4. Given that prac hours don't count for license, and given that after hitting a minimum number of hours (500ish) many sites put more emphasis on breadth and depth of training rather than raw clinical hours, how is this quantity of clinical work advantageous to your training, particularly as it factors into the three above points?
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2009
- Messages
- 263
- Reaction score
- 0
I'll do my best to answer your questions. Sorry if I over-answer anything, I'm not sure how practicum works at other schools.
1. I have a direct supervisor at my practicum. As part of the contract between practicum sites and my school, supervisors are required to do certain things like meet with us for a certain amount of time depending on how much we're there, etc. At the practicum I'll be starting in 2010, I know they have 30 minutes pre rounds, where it's myself, one other student, and the supervisor going over things before the start of the day. There is also 30 minutes at the end of the work day to go over things as needed. My supervisor is also usually a few rooms away if I need her during the day. If additional supervision time is needed, she's more than happy to schedule extra time.
2. No, we don't get paid. There are a few paid practicums that students can get but none of them are in the areas that I'm interested in.
3. I guess it depends what your idea of "profit" is. I mean, we work with them/for them and don't get paid. Free employees could be considered a type of profit, could it not? If you're referring to research and publication(s) that somehow shed light on the practicum site done as a result of me being there, that could also be seen as some kind of profit, right?
4. My school requires/puts the emphasis on the number of hours, not the practicum site. Therefore, the practicum site does not put emphasis on raw clinical hours. The practicum sites I have been to put a tremendous amount of emphasis on the breadth and depth of clinician training. Many supervisors are alum of the school, or remember what it was like to be students themselves and try to give students the best training/experience that they can. Being there more provides the opportunity to be exposed to more things, obtain training in more things, etc. I haven't started the new practicum yet, so I guess we'll see how advantageous it is to me in the long run.
Hope I answered your questions.
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2009
- Messages
- 263
- Reaction score
- 0
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2007
- Messages
- 1,810
- Reaction score
- 9
Thanks!
That still seems really light on supervision to me--the most growth I had first year was from my supervisor pushing me to develop my skills. But, sounds like it equals out to a fair bit if it's an hour each day. I'm also no sure why your program would put such an emphasis on getting *so* many clinical hours in each year, since it doesn't seem to me to help in the long-run (i.e., I think some of that time might be better spent in supervision rather than more client contact hours). Maybe it's just that I come from a program with a 150-hour yearly minimum, but that doesn't seem like a good time trade-off to me...
This does concern me a bit though--that's an awful lot to be working without getting paid. As far as profit, I meant, do the clients you see pay to see you? If so, none of that money goes to you? That doesn't seem fair.
That still seems really light on supervision to me--the most growth I had first year was from my supervisor pushing me to develop my skills. But, sounds like it equals out to a fair bit if it's an hour each day. I'm also no sure why your program would put such an emphasis on getting *so* many clinical hours in each year, since it doesn't seem to me to help in the long-run (i.e., I think some of that time might be better spent in supervision rather than more client contact hours). Maybe it's just that I come from a program with a 150-hour yearly minimum, but that doesn't seem like a good time trade-off to me...
This does concern me a bit though--that's an awful lot to be working without getting paid. As far as profit, I meant, do the clients you see pay to see you? If so, none of that money goes to you? That doesn't seem fair.
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2009
- Messages
- 263
- Reaction score
- 0
You're welcome.
Students at my school don't get practicum their first year. The school likes to make sure the student has a grasp on basic assessment/clinical skills before they are put into a practicum site. So, maybe that is one of the reasons that after the first year the hour requirement is high. Honestly, I'm a total hands-on person so I never looked at the hour requirement as being a bad thing. I rather enjoy spending a good amount of time at practicum.
As far as the whole profit issue, is it common for grad students at your school to get paid at practicum sites?
Figured out why I was confused earlier. When I was thinking of these designs I was thinking of giving two different groups of individuals an IAT, as mentioned earlier. That is the type of study I was thinking of that I typically see referred to as an experimental design in the literature (not the IAT, but similar behavioral measures compared between disordered and controls). I think something like the IAT would still be considered randomization since the IAT consists of multiple conditions, it is just a within-subjects manipulation and the order is randomized rather than the group - I was thinking of it as a "measure" rather than a manipulation. You were absolutely right that with just the single factor, it would have to be quasi-experimental.
I think in the literature "experimental" is typically used if there is randomization on any factor. So for example, studies that compare individuals with depression with non-depressed individuals on the IAT is referred to as experimental research, though I'm actually leaning in the other direction now and thinking that might be incorrect.
Anyways, largely semantics but an interesting discussion none the less🙂
Edit: Tenacious - I think very few schools start people on practicums in Year 1 - or if they do I'd hope they at least start slowly! As far as payment goes, students can do unpaid practicums (externships) if they choose but these are typically 5-10 hours a week. We call a full 20 hour week practicum a "placement" and they are paid and typically involve either a tuition waiver, or they just up the salary by a roughly equivalent amount and pay tuition yourself. The externships began when budget cuts started limiting the number of placements. The school is pretty strict about where students can do outside practica - they are open to students finding opportunities but sites and supervisors get a substantive review and places that aren't providing quality supervision or using treatments that aren't supported by evidence are removed from the pool.
I think that requirement is extremely high, regardless of the cuts. I believe the average number of total face to face hours when people apply to internships is 750ish. I guess quantity doesn't speak to quality but if it is good experience I'm happy to hear it - I'm glad at least some schools are actually increasing the clinical training...the APPIC data seems to suggest that on average, PsyD students were getting LESS clinical training than PhD students prior to internship despite the claim that it was more focused on clinical training.
Edit x2: Just realized you said prof school, not PsyD. Are you in a PhD or PsyD program?
I think in the literature "experimental" is typically used if there is randomization on any factor. So for example, studies that compare individuals with depression with non-depressed individuals on the IAT is referred to as experimental research, though I'm actually leaning in the other direction now and thinking that might be incorrect.
Anyways, largely semantics but an interesting discussion none the less🙂
Edit: Tenacious - I think very few schools start people on practicums in Year 1 - or if they do I'd hope they at least start slowly! As far as payment goes, students can do unpaid practicums (externships) if they choose but these are typically 5-10 hours a week. We call a full 20 hour week practicum a "placement" and they are paid and typically involve either a tuition waiver, or they just up the salary by a roughly equivalent amount and pay tuition yourself. The externships began when budget cuts started limiting the number of placements. The school is pretty strict about where students can do outside practica - they are open to students finding opportunities but sites and supervisors get a substantive review and places that aren't providing quality supervision or using treatments that aren't supported by evidence are removed from the pool.
I think that requirement is extremely high, regardless of the cuts. I believe the average number of total face to face hours when people apply to internships is 750ish. I guess quantity doesn't speak to quality but if it is good experience I'm happy to hear it - I'm glad at least some schools are actually increasing the clinical training...the APPIC data seems to suggest that on average, PsyD students were getting LESS clinical training than PhD students prior to internship despite the claim that it was more focused on clinical training.
Edit x2: Just realized you said prof school, not PsyD. Are you in a PhD or PsyD program?
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2007
- Messages
- 1,810
- Reaction score
- 9
The independent prac sites (forensic practices, some evaluation places) that see profit from things a prac student does all pay prac students something, even if its just a cut of assessment fees. Places that don't involve direct fees or that don't charge clients (rape crisis center, community mental health, student counseling center) typically don't pay (though some do), but don't see direct profit from the activities of the students. It's really the number of hours combined with not getting paid that raises flags for me. Really seems unfair.
- Joined
- Apr 10, 2009
- Messages
- 263
- Reaction score
- 0
It might seem a bit unfair, but from my understanding it's kind of rare for practicum students to be paid. I got my undergrad in speech-language pathology and I know that the grad program at the state university where I went has their second year SLP students working 9-5 at practicum and then going to class from 6-9, 5 days a week, and they aren't paid. Maybe it's the area I'm in or the state I live in, but it's kind of the "norm" not to be paid.
