Math 151 , Spring 2008 Wed. Day 23, Mar. 26 Hit reload....after class.

HW:  Read Chapter 9, first to p. 224.  Check p. 228: 9.16, 17, 18, 20 (obs/expt, factors:: then 21 (choosing groups), then read p. 224 on, then Check 9.19, 22, 23, 25. Read Data Ethics, pp. 235-242.
Hand in  Monday

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)
- -Postpone significance- - - - - - - -  - -
p. 233, 9.45 d antioxidants, significance (review) 
 
p. 222 9.10 significance on Monday
- - - - - - - - - -
Hand in Monday Separate paper:
Hand in answers to these questions on the "Placebo Effect" articles (outside my door/on reserve): 
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?
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Postpone these !.

p. 226, 9.13 hand strength, MP
p. 231, 9.35 forest CO2 , CR/MP

p. 226, 9.15 teaching techn.  Why might I call this a  matched pairs rather than a general block design?   Don't actually do the randomization, but think about what ought to be done; we'll talk about it.
p. 232, 9.40 TV ads, block design.  Use the  Applet, to assign your subjects.  Number your Women and your Men, and show their numbers as well as the group they're in. 
p. 229, 232, 9.27 and 9.39 wine, beer, spirits two ways
Read, to discuss 

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.)

.Postpone.
p. 232, 9.38  spine fractures block design. You lack the information to make a complete design (i.e. how many women at each hospital.)  Sketch in what you can.
Optional
 
.Postpone, .
p. 226, 9.14 matched and not, more practice
 

Exams returned before break:   Comments & more   Solutions  Get yours after class if you weren't here.
 Friday, Activism Symposium "Anatomy of Change" No formal class; review and help with me--sign up today or email me;  or alternative assignment.     http://aurora.wells.edu/~symposium/    
Assigned Day 21: 
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.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
HW Questions?  Day 22

Ch. 9 Designing Experiments

Review+new
    
     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 14(?), 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.

..
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)
Got to here Monday...
(I'm not making this up.... Backache(1)  (2) )

"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

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"--relived by needling. 
Acupuncture works holistically and "wrong" may still regulate the Qi.
The German usual treatment is 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
 Start here Monday
Statistical Significance p.221: An observed effect so large that it would rarely occur by chance (assuming no real difference in treatments) is called "statistically significant".   "So large", "rarely", "by chance" will be defined and quantified in Ch. 6.
Example:  Suppose 95% of the subjects  had their headaches cured by treatment 9 and only 25%  by treatment 1 (placebo).  IF the medicine in fact did "no good" that would be a very unlikely outcome (at least if we have "enough" people in each treatment).  So we will say the difference in headache cures between treatment 1 and treatment 9 is "statistically significant" and be inclined to believe the medicine "works".
= = = = =.= . = = = = = = =
Fancier Experimental designs (not "completely randomized") Control extraneous variability by pre-sorting individuals into  homogeneous groups.  (BPS4e pp. 224-226)
Matched pairs: To compare Control and experimental treatments (i.e. 2 levels)
   Sort experimental units into "matching" pairs.   One member of pair gets control, other gets experimental.
                Randomize which.
        Compare within pair, then summarize all comparisons.
  Common: Do the control and experiment to same individual (matched with self = "self-paired"). (Randomize order)
        Are right feet bigger than left feet? (not an experiment)      Sunburn salve experiment?
    Aside:  Sampling data, "longitudinal study" following same people through time.
            Works like matched pair to control variability.
Block design:  Sort experimental units into "Blocks" = groups homogeneous on potentially confounding variables
     e.g. M/F, age, income, weight, fruitflies wild or curly-winged.  (No randomization here.)
    Within each block, randomize the treatments. Compare results  within each block, then summarize all results.
    (Matched pairs is a special case of block design--each pair is a "block".)  Diagram p. 226


Sievers home   Math151-Sp08/Days23.htm  3pm 3/26/08
This page belongs to Sally Sievers who is solely responsible for its content. Please see our statement of responsibility.