These questions were asked couple of days ago. Can you work on it for me too and wanting to make sure it is not a match with the other person that you are intending to give answers to. Another question that I have to ask, can you make sure your writing is not plagiarized and want it a quality work. Thanks
Note: There is a second part to the questions that was not added but I have added it.
1. Describe the advantages and disadvantages of quasi-experiments?
What is the fundamental weakness of a quasi-experimental design? Why is
it a weakness? Does its weakness always matter?
2. If you
randomly assign participants to groups, can you assume the groups are
equivalent at the beginning of the study? At the end? Why or why not? If
you cannot assume equivalence at either end, what can you do? Please
3. Explain and give examples of how the particular
outcomes of a study can suggest if a particular threat is likely to have
4. Describe each of the following types of
designs, explain its logic, and why the design does or does not address
the selection threats discussed in Chapter 7 of Trochim and Donnelly
a. Non-equivalent control group pretest only
b. Non-equivalent control group pretest/posttest
5. Why are quasi-experimental designs used more often than experimental designs?
One conclusion you might reach (hint) after completing the readings for
this assignment is that there are no bad designs, only bad design
choices (and implementations). State a research question for which a
single-group post-test only design can yield relatively unambiguous
Part II - Answer the following questions:
1. What research question(s) does the study address?
2. What is Goldberg�s rationale for the study? Was the study designed to contribute to theory? Do the results of the study contribute to theory? For both questions: If so, how? If not, why not?
3. What constructs does the study address? How are they operationalized?
4. What are the independent and dependent variables in the study?
5. Name the type of design the researchers used.
6. What internal and external validity threats did the researchers address in their design? How did they address them? Are there threats they did not address? If so how does the failure to address the threats affect the researchers� interpretations of their findings? Are Goldberg�s conclusions convincing? Why or why not?