Group Comparison Research

Causal-Comparative
(Ex post facto)
Research

Purpose of causal comparative research

Attempts to determine cause for
Existing conditions
Preexisting differences in groups

Alleged cause and effect have already occurred

Orientations
Retrospective (basic): starts with an effect and seeks
possible causes
Prospective (variation): starts with a cause and
investigates its effects on some variable

Causal-comparative (ex post facto)

research
The independent variable (IV) is not
manipulated; it has already occurred
Independent variables sometimes called
attribute variables
Less costly and time-consuming to conduct
Establishing cause-effect relationships is
more difficult than in experiments

Procedures in causal-comparative
research
Identify an existing condition or event (e.g.,
differences in socialization among 1st grade
students)
Look backwards to see what may have
caused this difference/condition to occur
(i.e., some attended preschool, some did
not)
Rule out other causal factors

Sometimes confused with

correlational research:
Both lack manipulation of variables
Both require caution in interpreting results
Both can support subsequent experimental
research

Causal comparative vs. correlational

research
Causal comparative
Attempts to identify
cause-effect
relationships
At least one
independent variable
Two or more groups
Involves a comparison

Correlational
No attempt to
understand cause and
effect
Two or more variables
Only one group

Sometimes confused with

experimental research:
Both try to establish cause-effect
relationships
Both can test hypotheses concerning the
relationship between an independent (X)
and a dependent variable (Y)
Both involve group comparisons

Comparison to experiments
Causal comparative
Individuals already in
groups before study
begins
Independent variable
has already occurred
Independent variable is
not manipulated
Cannot be
Should not be
Could be, but is not

Experiment
Individuals randomly
assigned to groups
(e.g., treatment or
control)
Independent variable
manipulated by the
researcher

Examples of non-manipulated
independent variables
Age
Sex
Ethnicity
Learning style
Socioeconomic status (SES)
Parent educational level
Family environment
Type of school attended

Design of causal-comparative
research
Select 2 groups that differ on some IV
One group possesses a characteristic that the other does
not
Each group possesses the characteristic, but in differing
amounts

Randomly sample Ss from each group

Collect info on Ss to determine equality of the
groups
Compare groups on the DV

Difficulty in interpreting findings

Establishing cause and effect requires
caution!
Alternative explanations:
Different causal variable
Order of causation
Reverse causality
Order of occurrence

Evidence necessary to
demonstrate that X causes Y:
Establish statistical relationship
between X and Y (i.e., correlational
research);
determine that X precedes Y in time
(collect data over time, i.e., longitudinal
research);
demonstrate that other, unknown
factors did not determine the dependent
variable (i.e., experimental research).

Becker & Gersten (1982): Effects of

Project Follow-Through
Quasi-experimental study
Ex post facto study

Problem: Are the two groups in this study

comparable to one another?

In order to make sure that the two groups are

comparable, and to ensure that the only post-test
differences between the groups are due to the
independent variable (the Follow-Through
intervention), data were obtained on students:
family income
gender
language spoken in home
mothers education
ethnicity
number of siblings.

Research Design
FOLLOW-THROUGH
Year 1 (1975) Gr 5

Site 1
Site 2
Site 3
Site 4
Site 5

Year 2 (1976) Gr 6

Site 1
Site 2
Site 3
Site 4
Site 5

NO FOLLOW-THROUGH
Year 1 (1975) Gr 5

Site 1
Site 2
Site 3
Site 4
Site 5

Year 2 (1976) Gr 6

Site 1
Site 2
Site 3
Site 4
Site 5

Dependent variables
Wide-Range Achievement Test (WRAT)
reading
mathematics

Metropolitan Achievement Test (MAT)

reading
mathematics

RESULTS
A total of 180 comparisons of FT to No-FT
students. Of these, only 56 (31%) favored
FT students!
Largest differences between FT and No-FT
students were in basic skills areas.
FT students achievement declined by
grades 5 and 6 (2-3 years after end of FT).

Critique of this research

What are the strengths of the study?

Groups are comparable to one another.

Contrasted statistical with practical significance.
Large sample size.
Multiple replications of treatment effect.

What are the weaknesses of the study?

Lack of random assignment.
Focus on standardized test performance.