/*! This file is auto-generated */ .wp-block-button__link{color:#fff;background-color:#32373c;border-radius:9999px;box-shadow:none;text-decoration:none;padding:calc(.667em + 2px) calc(1.333em + 2px);font-size:1.125em}.wp-block-file__button{background:#32373c;color:#fff;text-decoration:none} Problem 36 Nicotine Patch Suppose that a ne... [FREE SOLUTION] | 91影视

91影视

Log out

Learning Materials

Features

Discover

Chapter 12: Problem 36

Nicotine Patch Suppose that a new nicotine patch to help people quit smoking was developed and tested. Smokers voluntarily entered the study and were randomly assigned either the nicotine patch or a placebo patch. Suppose that a larger percentage of those using the nicotine patch were able to stop smoking. a. Can we generalize widely to a large group? Why or why not? b. Can we infer causality? Why or why not?

Short Answer

Expert verified
a. It might be challenging to fully generalize the results to a broader group because the participants were voluntary, which could induce some bias. However, the random assignment of the nicotine and placebo patch helps improve the generalizability of the results. b. Given that there was a control group and the participants were randomly assigned to the treatment or control group, it is feasible to infer causality from this study.

Step by step solution

01

Understand Sample and Population Generalizability

For the first part of the exercise, it is important to understand the principle of generalizability in statistics. Generalizability is the extent to which we can apply the findings of a research study from the sample to the larger population. In this case, the partakers of the study represent the sample while the larger group (perhaps all smokers looking to quit) would be considered the population.
02

Examine the Characteristics of the Study

To assess if the results can be generalized, review the characteristics of the study. Notable factors here include the fact that participation was voluntary and that participants were randomly assigned the nicotine or placebo patch. Voluntary participation might mean that the results are biased towards those motivated to quit smoking, thus it might not perfectly represent the entire smoking population. The random assignment does contribute positively towards the generalizability as it ensures that the two groups (nicotine patch users and placebo patch users) should be roughly equivalent apart from the treatment.
03

Evaluate the Ability to Infer Causality

For the second part of the question, it is necessary to understand what it means to infer causality. Inferring causality means to conclude that the observed effect in the sample (quitting smoking) is caused by the treatment (nicotine patch). In many studies, it's hard to infer causality without a control group for comparison, but in this case, there is a control group (those who received the placebo patch). The random assignment helps to ensure that there's no systematic difference between the groups before the study started, which supports the ability to infer causality.

Unlock Step-by-Step Solutions & Ace Your Exams!

  • Full Textbook Solutions

    Get detailed explanations and key concepts

  • Unlimited Al creation

    Al flashcards, explanations, exams and more...

  • Ads-free access

    To over 500 millions flashcards

  • Money-back guarantee

    We refund you if you fail your exam.

Over 30 million students worldwide already upgrade their learning with 91影视!

Key Concepts

These are the key concepts you need to understand to accurately answer the question.

Random Assignment
Random assignment in research is a powerful tool used to eliminate bias and ensure that each participant has an equal chance of being placed in any group, whether it's the treatment group or control. Think of it like a lottery; each participant enters, and luck determines which group they end up in. This can significantly help in balancing both known and unknown variables across the groups.

When applying this to our nicotine patch study, it means participants were randomly assigned to either receive the nicotine patch or a placebo. This procedural fairness ensures that any variations seen between the groups are due to the treatment (i.e., the nicotine patch) rather than preexisting differences.

Benefits of random assignment include:
  • It reduces selection bias, ensuring that groups are comparable at the start.
  • It removes the influence of confounding variables, which might cloud the result.
  • It enhances the validity of the causal conclusions that can be drawn from the study.
In summary, random assignment is essential for making solid, credible inferences from research findings.
Causality in Experiments
Causality is the concept that one event (the cause) directly affects another event (the effect). In experiments, establishing causality is essential because it helps determine if a treatment is truly effective.

In our example, the researchers were investigating whether the nicotine patch caused an increase in smoking cessation. Because of the experiment's design, with participants being randomly assigned to either a nicotine patch or a placebo, researchers can confidently explore causality.

Key points about causality in this context include:
  • The presence of a control group (placebo) allows for a direct comparison.
  • Random assignment ensures no preexisting differences skew the results.
  • Observing a larger percentage of smokers quit in the nicotine patch group strongly suggests causality.
Thus, the results provide compelling evidence that the nicotine patch effectively aids in quitting smoking by demonstrating a causal link between using the patch and quitting.
Control Group in Studies
In scientific studies, a control group is critical for interpreting the results accurately. It acts as a benchmark that allows researchers to see the effects of the treatment by comparing it to when no treatment is applied.

In the nicotine patch study, the placebo group functions as the control. Participants in this group receive a patch with no nicotine, providing a baseline to measure the impact of the actual nicotine patch.

Roles of a control group include:
  • Providing a point of comparison to determine the treatment's actual effect.
  • Helping isolate the treatment's impact by accounting for the placebo effect.
  • Ensuring study results are credible and replicable by allowing for fair comparison.
By using a control group, researchers affirm that differences in quitting smoking rates are due primarily to the effectiveness of the nicotine patch, rather than other external factors.

One App. One Place for Learning.

All the tools & learning materials you need for study success - in one app.

Get started for free

Most popular questions from this chapter

Music and Divergent Thinking In a 2017 study published at PLOS.org, researchers investigated the effect of music on creativity (Ritter and Ferguson 2017). Subjects were recruited for the study using an online research participation system at a university. Four pieces of music were selected with different emotional tones: calm, happy, sad, and anxious. Subjects were randomly assigned to listen to one of these four pieces or to a group that listened to no music (silence). After 15 seconds of music (or silence) subjects were given a task that assessed their creativity and divergent thinking. Read the excerpts from the study abstract and answer the following questions. Results: Our main hypothesis was that listening to happy music, as compared to a silence control condition, facilitates divergent thinking. An independent-samples \(t\) -test was conducted to compare the happy music condition with the silence control condition on overall divergent thinking (ODT). There was a significant difference in \(\mathrm{ODT}\) between the happy music \((\mathrm{M}=93.87, \mathrm{SD}=32.02)\) and silence \((\mathrm{M}=76.10\) \(\mathrm{SD}=32.62\) ) conditions, \(\mathrm{t}(57)=2.110, \mathrm{p}=.039 .\) The results suggest that listening to happy music increases performance on overall divergent thinking. a. Identify the treatment variable and the response variable. b. Was this a controlled experiment or an observational study? Explain. c. Can you conclude from that listening happy music enhances divergent thinking? Why or why not?

Acetaminophen and Asthma Does frequent use of acetaminophen lead to asthma- related complications among children? Excerpts from the abstract of a study published in The New England Journal of Medicine about this are given (Sheehan et al. 2016 ). Read them and then answer the questions that follow. Methods: In a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial, we enrolled 300 children (age range, \(12-59\) months) with mild persistent asthmas and assigned them to receive either acetaminophen or ibuprofen when needed for the alleviation of fever or pain over the course of 48 weeks. The primary outcome was the number of asthma exacerbations that let to treatment with systemic glucocorticoids. Results: The number of asthmas exacerbations did not differ significantly between the two groups, with a mean of \(0.81\) per participant with acetaminophen and \(0.87\) per participant in the ibuprofen group \((p=0.67)\) a. Identify the treatment variable and the response variable. b. Was this a controlled experiment or an observational study? c. How does the p-value support the conclusion of the study? d. Did this study use random sampling, random assignment, or both?

Tea and Divergent Creativity In a 2017 study published in the journal Food Quality and Preference, researchers investigated the effect of drinking tea on divergent creativity (Huang et al. 2017 ). Subjects were recruited from a campus Bulletin Board System and were paid a small stipend for their participation. Subjects were randomly assigned to be served either tea or water during the "greeting period" of the experiment. During the greeting period subjects filled out a background questionnaire so they were unaware that beverage was a key component in the study. Subjects were then told to build the most "attractive" building possible in a limited amount of time using a set of blocks. Independent observers then gave each building a creativity score. Read excerpts from the study results and answer the following questions. Results: A general linear model analysis showed that the creativity scores of the block buildings for the tea group (mean \(=6.54\), \(\mathrm{SD}=0.92\) ) were significantly higher than those for the water group (mean \(=6.03, \mathrm{SD}=0.94\) ) after controlling for gender and volume consumed \((p=0.023)\). a. Identify the treatment variable and the response variable. b. Was this a controlled experiment or an observational study? Explain. c. Can you conclude from that drinking tea leads to improved creativity? Why or why not?

Flu Vaccines and Age Suppose you want to compare the effectiveness of the flu vaccine in preventing the flu using one of two different forms: nasal spray versus injection. Suppose you have 60 subjects available of different ages, and you suspect that age might have an effect on the outcome. Assume there are 20 children aged 2 to 15,20 people aged 16 to 30, and 20 people aged 31 to 49 . a. Identify the treatment variable and the response variable. b. Describe a simple randomized design (no blocking) to test the whether the injection or the nasal spray is more effective. Explain in detail how to assign people to treatment groups. c. Describe a blocked design (blocking by age) to test whether the injection or the nasal spray is more effective. Explain in detail how you will assign people to treatment groups. d. What advantage does the blocked design have?

What Would Batman Do? Researchers have found that psychological distance from our current situation facilitates selfcontrol and allows individuals to transcend urgencies of a situation by taking a more distanced perspective. Executive function refers to higher-order regulatory processes such as inhibition and working memory. In this study published in the journal Developmental Science, researchers investigated the relationship between psychological distance and executive function in pre-school children (White and Carlson 2015). Read the following excerpts from the study abstract and evaluate the study using the given questions. Method: Three-year old \((n=48)\) and 5 -year old \((n=48)\) children were randomly assigned to one of four manipulations of distance from self and asked to perform several tasks that assessed executive function (EF). The four groups were: 1 ) self-immersed, in which children were told to focus on what they are thinking and how they feel when the task got hard, 2) Third person, in which children were told to talk to themselves using their own name when the task got hard, 3 ) Exemplar, in which children were told to pretend they were someone else who would be really good at the task, like Batman, Dora the Explorer, Bob the Builder, or Rapunzel, and the children put on costume props before completing the task, and 4) a control group, in which children were given no instruction regarding distance from self before performing the task. Results: Five-year-olds benefited from taking a self-distanced perspective on an executive function task through third person self-talk as well as taking the perspective of an exemplar other, such as Batman. Three-year-olds did not show increased EF performance as a function of greater distance from self. Conclusion: The current study revealed the power of self-distancing to facilitate reflective, goal-directed action in the context of a cool EF task for young children. Children's ability to improve EF by mentally transcending their context underscores the critical role that representational capacities play in the development of self-control.
See all solutions

Recommended explanations on Math Textbooks

Statistics

Read Explanation

Discrete Mathematics

Read Explanation

Decision Maths

Read Explanation

Probability and Statistics

Read Explanation

Applied Mathematics

Read Explanation

Mechanics Maths

Read Explanation
View all explanations

What do you think about this solution?

We value your feedback to improve our textbook solutions.

Study anywhere. Anytime. Across all devices.