Math 151 , Fall 2008 Monday Day 22, Oct. 20 Hit reload....After class.
HW: Finish Chapter 8. Optional: p. 200 (Other
designs) . Read Chapter 9, first to p. 224. Check p.
228: 9.16,
17, 18, 20 (obs/expt, factors:)
: then 21 (choosing
groups). Then read ahead p. 224 on (other designs), then Check 9.19,
22, 23, 25.
Hand in Friday: Google
Bradley effect and "spiral of silence"
1) What phenomena do they describe?
2) How is this relevant to presidential polling right now?
& & & & & & & & & & & &
&
Hand in Wednesday
p. 205, 8.16, Ask more people
p. 212, 8.50, Polling Hispanics
Chapter 9 ------ ------ -----
p. 229 9.25, 9.26 obsn/expt
p. 215, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3 treatments, factors, response, etc.
p. 216, 9.4 unemployment (confounding)
- - - Postpone the rest-
- - - - - -
p. 229 9.27 wine, beer, spirits , diagram design.
p. 230 9.32 a only headache prevention design
p. 231 9.33 fabric finishing, design
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~ ~
p. 230, 9.28 marijuana Use the Simple Random Sample Applet, see below
for details, to find who to put in the two groups. Also: pick
just the first 3 people for the "weak" group using Table B at line 131.
p230, 9.30 TV ads Use the Simple Random Sample Applet, see below
for details.
p. 234, 9.48 Randomization avoids bias
p. 222, 9.8 conserving energy
p. 223, 9.9 exercise/heart
p. 233, 9.45 a,b,c,e antioxidants (review)
DO p. 243 #7 anonymity or confidentiality? (read pp.
237-8)
& & & & & & & & & & &
Hand in Monday:
Hand in answers to these questions on the "Placebo Effect" articles
(outside my door/on reserve now):
a) Give two examples of the placebo effect (from the article!)
b) What do researchers believe causes the placebo effect?
c) In the separate article: "Pill will make you feel better...,"
what country was surveyed?
|
Read, to discuss
p. 212, 8.49 Canada healthcare
--- Postpone the rest---
p. 233, 9.43 quick randomizing
p. 234, 9.47 explaining medical research
p.233 9.41 prayer & meditation
(Clarification:
they help the person praying.
Careful experiments to see if they help a
person prayed for have not shown positive results.)
|
Optional
p. 209, 8.35 Use table
B (more practice)
p. 209, 8.34 seat belt use
------ Postpone ------
Think about
this one...
p. 230, 9.29 red wine.
This is a complex experiment with different amounts of polyphenols in
different kinds of liquids.
Doesn't fall neatly into our Factors-value structures?
Think about it a bit...
|
Assigned last time: p. 199 8.10 Minority
Managers Use the Simple
Random Sample Applet, and choose a sample of size 6. Give your
answer by listing their names. (I believe that everyone will get
different samples.) Five of the 28 managers have East Asian
surnames: Huang, Kim, Liao, Shen, Wang. How many of these
are in your sample? If you did
it, write how many were in your sample next to your name on the signin
sheet.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
= = = = = = = =
= = = = = = =
Recap: Sampling
(see Details day 20, recap Day 21)
>>Population: Entire group that we want information
about.
>>Sample: The part of the population we actually
examine.
Hope: Sample will be
representative
of the population.
>> Sampling design: Describes exactly how sample is
to be chosen from population.
(SAMPLING) BIAS: The design of a study is biased
if
it systematically favors certain outcomes.
Non-probability samples (sampling badly): Voluntary
response sample , Convenience
sample
Our main sampling design:
Simple Random Sample (SRS)
of size
n: n
individuals
chosen in such a way that every possible set of n
individuals has an equal chance of being chosen.
Using Random
Number Table. See Day 20 for
details.
(Simple
Random Sample Applet, is easier. Enter population size,
sample size, hit Reset, then Sample.)
See
Day 20 for rest of details on Ch. 8:
Some more sources of bias:
**Undercoverage: One possible
source of undercoverage: Sampling
frame excludes some.
** Nonresponse
**Response bias
**Wording of questions
HW Questions? Day
21
Start here today: A probability
sample (p.200) is from a design where
impersonal
chance is used to pick the individuals. SRS is the most
straightforward. More sophisticated methods are often used,
but they're optional this term. (More
info)
+ + + + + + + +
We want to use the sample to make an inference about the
population. A sample will never exactly represent the
population, but larger (RANDOM) samples give more accurate results
than smaller random samples.
(almost always. Quantify "more accurate" and "almost always" in
chapter 14.)
(Not in text: Surprisingly (?), this isn't usually
because
you have more of the population. A tablespoon of soup
gives a
pretty good sample, whether it's from a quart of soup or a 10-gallon
vat (as long as it's well-stirred). A toothpickful does not.
More discussion of terms used in
sampling
Large sample surveys, Presidential election: (There are
several other good polling org's)
Gallup (tends to bias to the left about one percentage point)
http://www.gallup.com/poll/election2008.aspx
Who won debate? (http://www.gallup.com/poll/111256/Obama-Viewed-Winner-Third-Debate.aspx)
(vote.com: 7412 voters, McCain 71%, Obama 29%)
Scroll down to end to see methodology. Note
alternating order of asking names. Note cell phone calling!
Presidential results (as of Sunday): http://www.gallup.com/poll/111232/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Retains-Significant-Lead.aspx
Note 3 versions: Registered
voters: 52 to 42. (10 pt. spread)
Likely Voters (Traditional)--current intention + past behavior: 49 to
46 (3 pt. spread)
Likely Voters (Expanded)--current intention (includes new
voters): 51 to 44. (7 pt. spread)
Rasmussen (tends to bias to the right about one percentage point)
Sunday: 51 to 45
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/about_us/methodology
(You can link from there to their actual poll results)
Note they use weighting to try to overcome
biases of sex, age, race, party, etc... Recorded poll eliminates
pollster-pollee interaction. Question order, other things are
changed to avoid bias. Random digit phone calling, process
that "insures appropriate geographical representation."
Ch.
9
Designing Experiments
Observational
Study
vs. Experiment day 20
Different jargon; different traditions.
Do something to:
"Experimental Units" = "Subjects"
= individuals.
Treatment: Specific experimental condition we impose
on one or more subjects.
Factor: Explanatory Variable we manipulate.
There will be Specific values of a
factor that
we set.
(Sometimes called "levels")
Response variable(s) Results that we measure.
E.g. Corn planting (HW
day 15(?), p. 110, 4.28) 1
factor = planting rate. 5 different values (levels). 16
individuals (plots of ground). Response: yield per acre.
E.g. 2 headache medications, in combination?
A two-factor experiment, each with 3 values (levels).
9 possible treatments.
Factor A: Aspirin: values: None, 500 mg,
1000 mg
Factor B: Caffeine: values: None, 50 mg, 100 mg
Response variable: reported pain relief
|
|
|
Aspirin |
|
|
|
None |
500 mg |
1000 mg |
|
None |
Treatment 1 |
Treatment 2 |
Treatment 3 |
| Caffeine |
50 mg |
Treatment 4 |
Treatment 5 |
Treatment 6 |
|
100 mg |
Treatment 7 |
Treatment 8 |
Treatment 9
|
Lurking variables:
Control--how?
Nothing except experimental treatment should differentially affect response.
Compare responses
under several treatments, look at differences.
Placebo effect: a positive response to a "sham" medical treatment--if
you believe it will work, it very likely will. (Tinkerbell?)
A medical treatment must be shown to be better than a placebo
(at least) to be approved by the FDA.
placebo="I shall please"
(Latin)
To control for the placebo effect, All treatments should "look alike".
Treatment 1 above should be a pill with no medicine--a "placebo". (Some
experiments even try to duplicate side effects of actual medication.)
"Control group" Group that gets the "baseline"--"null"--
"none" or "placebo" value of the factor. Should be "just like"
the
group(s) that get the "treatment" ("real" values of the factor).
So Treatment 1 above will go to the "control group", the other 8 will
go
to "experimental" or "treatment groups."
Murky language here: "Experimental vs. control" or "Treatment
vs. control" is different usage from "Treatments", one of which is the
"control"="none"/"placebo".
*Sometimes the Control is the current
"best practice" treatment, rather than none.
Sometimes (especially in bio, physics, chem experiments)
there is no "control group" --no baseline--just a sequence of
different values (like corn planting experiment.) Moore
says "uncontrolled" --which doesn't mean "out of control" :-)
In these environments also, we make everything else "the same"
to try to eliminate confounding/lurking variable effects.
.Start about HERE Wed..
How to get groups "just like" one another? Randomize who goes into which
group. (Usually our batch of experimental units is not
a random sample from the population of all individuals--volunteers,
etc.)
Randomized comparative experiment : Diagrams
of design, Moore pp. 218-19: shows where randomizing happens, how
many to each treatment, what the treatments are.
Completely randomized: all exp. units allocated at random among the treatments.
E.g. does acupuncture work for Backache?? Response: report of
symptoms.
One factor, 3 values: None (music??(but
might work...!). "Usual treatment"), Acupuncture (wrong
places), Acupuncture (right places). 3 treatments.
(control(s)?)
30 subjects with Backache:
Randomize, 10 each treatment. Administer treatments.
Compare symptoms. (Do diagram)
(I'm not making this up.... Backache(1)
(2) Sept. 2007)
"In a study of 1,162 adults with chronic lower back pain, 48
percent
of those in a group who underwent between 10 and 15 treatments with
traditional Chinese "verum" acupuncture reported at least one-third
less pain and an improvement in functional ability, with lasting
benefits. ...
That compared to 27 percent of those reporting relief in the group
undergoing drug and exercise therapy.
A third group of patients underwent so-called sham
acupuncture,
where needles are inserted randomly and less deeply around the painful
area while avoiding the medians. Of these, 44 percent reported relief
from their back pain -- more patients than conventional therapy and
only slightly fewer than traditional acupuncture."
Picking groups with random number
table: Table B. Pick "sample" of
size 10 from the 30 for first treatment group. Pick another
"sample" of size 10 for 2nd treatment group, from the remainder.
The 10 remaining get the 3rd treatment.
Easier with Simple
Random Sample Applet. Enter total number of subjects in
"Population size", enter size of first group in "sample size", hit
Reset, then Sample. Write down the numbers for this sample, it's
group 1. Hit Sample again (DON'T reset) to choose the second
group. Write down the numbers, continue...
Why 10 each, not just 1 each? Use enough subjects for each treatment so
that you can
"average out" (and measure) chance variation in the subjects.
Principles of designing an experiment (p. 221) See above
- Control effects of lurking
and confounding
variables, by comparing treatments, where values of explanatory
variables=factors
are controlled, and all other conditions are controlled to be the same.
- Randomize the assignment of
individuals to
treatments: reduces possibility of confounding characteristics of
individuals with the treatments.
- Use enough subjects for
each treatment to reduce the chance of unrepresentative results. (see
above)
More problems, cautions:
Placebo and biasing effects can result from expectations
of medical or experimental staff. "Blind" means subject
doesn't
know who's getting "real" treatment. "Double blind" means
neither subject, nor staff administering treatment, nor people
recording
response variables know who's getting which treatment. (Nobody
who could influence results in any way.) Most convincing for
cause/effect.
(Treatments are coded. Only people who analyze final results have
access to the codes. )
Did you forget to measure something that might be a lurking
variable?? Back to the acupuncture/backache experiment.
NY
Times Tuesday Science News, p. 10. "While nearly as many
patients receiving a sham form of acupuncture also reported relief, 34%
of them needed extra pain pills, compared with just 15% of patients
receiving legitimate acupuncture."[and 59% of the control group.]
(Other blog-suggested lurking variables: Perhaps sham spots were
"trigger points"--relieved by needling.
Acupuncture works holistically and "wrong" may still regulate the Qi.
The German usual treatment may be inferior to American usual treatment.)
Lack of realism: Do sociology, psychology
experiments
generalize to "real life?"
--Subjects are not a random sample from the population. (Most
psychology "facts" were based on studies of Ivy League males, before
1970's.)
--Ethical questions...Milgram. Whole section BPS4e, pp.
235-242
This page belongs to Sally Sievers who is solely
responsible
for its content. Please see our statement
of responsibility.