Objective 5: Describe the differences between correlational and experimental research especially with respect to causality and prediction.

Correlation and experimental research are both ways to study the effects of the various variables in our lives. Correlation research looks at the variables, but does not manipulate them as in experimental research. For example, in experiments, a researcher may manipulate, or change, the amount of time a student spends studying for a test. The researcher may have a couple students not study, some study for half an hour, and some study for an hour. The researcher will then measure the changed independent variable, the amount of time studying, and observe their respective test scores. In correlation research, the independent variable, the amount of time studied, is not manipulated or changed, but measured and compared with the dependent variable to see how closely the two correlate, or how closely they are related. Correlation research is used as a tool for prediction. Seeing how closely things are related helps us to predict the likelihood that they influence each other. common

correlation example is that of children who are abused who later become abusers them selves. Statistically speaking, children who are abused are more likely to become abusers than children who were not abused as children, so we would say that being abused and becoming abusive are correlated. lbeit the correlation is weak, it is still there, which

may cause misinterpretation. Some people believe that correlation creates causation, but that is a generali!ation. Correlation does not create causation" it only helps predict the relationship between two variables. If correlation did cause causation,

then every abused child would then in turn be an abuser themselves, which we know could not be farther from the truth. #xperimental research is used to isolate independent variables in an attempt to measure the causation of its effect on the dependent variable. #xperiments must be able to be replicated and able to garner the same results over and over again to determine their causality. For example, if the Spit! pill, which does not exist, made the user score perfectly on every psychology test that he took, an experiment would then be set up to determine the causality of this pill. Taking the pill, the independent variable, would be isolated and manipulated to see if it had any effects on the dependent variable, the outcome variable. If it was found that any user who took the Spit! pill scored perfect on every psychology test that was taken, and the experiment was replicated repeatedly with different participants and garnered the same results every time, it can be determined that the Spit! pill does indeed cause a perfect psychology test score. In an effort to support that fact, the researchers would have an experimental group, one who receives treatment, and a control group, the group that does not, and they would measure the effect of the independent variable, the pill, on their results. To ensure the legitimacy of the experiment, the participants in both groups would be randomly assigned. If each randomly assigned person in the control group did not score perfect on the psychology test, but the experimental group who received the Spit! pill scored perfectly without fail, it can be even greater supported that the Spit! pill does cause perfect test scores" if only such a pill existed. http$%%www.psychwiki.com%wiki%&ow'is'correlational'research'different'than'experim ental'research()F

I used the website above to expound on my knowledge of correlational research and the difference in experimental research. http$%%*.bp.blogspot.com%+kx,l-#.xcc%/0r1Cd2t34I% Ce5%6n37&8eki 3-%s7.55%correlation.png I used this source for my comic. It shows the humor to how correlational research can never e9ual causation$ his class couldn:t cause him to understand it better.