HBC203: (Statistics and Data Analysis for the Social and Behavioural Sciences) Analyse the journal article “Young Children Show the Bystander Effect in Helping Situations” by Plötner et al. (2015) to examine, in depth, how one group of researchers designed their study to rule out alternative explanations.

Module / Subject / School:

HBC203: Statistics and Data Analysis for the Social and Behavioural Sciences

Singapore University of Social Sciences (SUSS)

Requirements:

Question 1 (53 marks)

Researchers use experimental designs to make causal inferences. However, the validity of those causal inferences depends on how well the researchers managed to rule out alternative explanations. Analyse the journal article “Young Children Show the Bystander Effect in Helping Situations” by Plötner et al. (2015) to examine, in depth, how one group of researchers designed their study to rule out alternative explanations.

Reference: Plötner, M., Over, H., Carpenter, M., & Tomasello, M. (2015). Young children show the bystander effect in helping situations. Psychological Science, 26(4), 499-506. DOI: 10.1177/0956797615569579

To help you in your analysis, answer the following questions about the article.

a. Identify the aims of this study. (2 marks)

b. Explain why the researchers felt they needed to conduct this study by describing the two problems with previous research that the article mentioned. (4 marks)

c. Identify the predictor variable. State the number of levels/conditions and identify what the levels/conditions are. Identify the outcome variable. (4 marks)

d. Identify the scale of measurement of the predictor variable and explain why. (2 marks)

e. Identify the scale of measurement of the outcome variable and explain why. (2 marks)

f. Identify if this is an experimental or observational study. Explain why in the context of this study to support your answer. (2 marks)

g. Identify if this is a between-subjects or within-subjects design. Explain why in the context of this study to support your answer. (2 marks)

h. Identify the five possible explanations for the bystander effect that the authors mentioned in this article. Discuss how the researchers tried to rule the explanations out. Specifically, for each explanation, describe the logic and whether the finding supported the logic. Here’s a generic example: “If X was the explanation for the bystander effect, then we should see Y because Z. However, Y did not happen in the study. Instead, W happened. Therefore, we can rule out X as the reason for the bystander effect.” (20 marks)

i. Identify three other aspects the researchers controlled for in their study and explain why it was important for them to control those aspects. (6 marks)

j. Identify three possible ethical concerns in this study and discuss why they were concerns. Describe how the researchers dealt with them. (9 marks)

Question 2 (47 marks)

Some experts in public health have proposed to cut tobacco-related deaths by reducing nicotine levels in cigarettes. However, critics of this proposal have argued that smokers would simply compensate by increasing the number of cigarettes smoked, thereby maintaining or even increasing the overall nicotine levels consumed in a day. The Ministry of Health has commissioned a group of medical researchers to conduct a randomized controlled trial to examine this issue.

The researchers recruited 20 male smokers who were 18 years or older, smoked five or more traditional cigarettes (i.e., tobacco cigarettes and not e-cigarettes) per day, and had no current interest in quitting smoking. They randomly assigned the participants to receive either one of two types of traditional cigarettes: Cigarettes with a typical nicotine level (15.8 mg of nicotine per gram) or cigarettes with a reduced nicotine level (2.4 mg of nicotine per gram).

Participants were not told which type of cigarettes they were smoking. The researchers then tracked the number of the assigned cigarettes smoked over a six-week period.

The average number of assigned cigarettes smoked in a day for each of the 20 participants is presented in the table below.

a. Identify the predictor variable. State the number of levels/conditions and identify what the

levels/conditions are. Identify the outcome variable. (4 marks)

b. Identify the scale of measurement of the predictor variable and explain why. (2 marks)

c. Identify the scale of measurement of the outcome variable and explain why. (2 marks)

d. Identify if this is an experimental or observational study. Explain why in the context of this study to support your answer. (2 marks)

e. Identify if this is a between-subjects or within-subjects design. Explain why in the context of this study to support your answer. (2 marks)

f. Based on the study design, identify the most appropriate parametric statistical test to conduct. Discuss why this is the most appropriate parametric test by providing two reasons in the context of this study. (3 marks)

g. State the null hypothesis (H0) and the non-directional alternative hypothesis (H1). (2 marks)

h. Assuming all the assumptions of the statistical test you identified in (f) are met and there are no concerns about small sample size, analyse the data using jamovi. Show the jamovi spreadsheet by taking a screenshot of the spreadsheet (i.e., what you see when you click the DATA tab) and pasting it in your answer. The jamovi spreadsheet should be correctly formatted. Further, paste all the output necessary for interpretation of the results in your answer. (12 marks)

i. Interpret the results of your data analysis. Explain your answer with reference to the p value, the alpha level, and the descriptives. Use an alpha level of .05. (4 marks)

j. Report the results in APA format and state what recommendation the researchers should make to the Ministry of Health. (6 marks)

k. Discuss two limitations to this study and how you might change this study to address the limitations. (8 marks)

What we score:

74%

Our Writer’s Comment

This assignment is designed to assess students’ understanding of business practices.

To secure an A+ grade, adhere to these guidelines and make sure your work aligns with the grading criteria:

Question 1: Experimental Design and Causal Inference

1a) Identifying the Aims of the Study (2 Marks)

When identifying the aims, be clear and concise. You want to capture the primary research goal in a straightforward way. For example, the aim of the study was to investigate whether young children exhibit the bystander effect in helping situations. Just one or two sentences are enough here, but make sure you’re hitting the key point.

1b) Explaining the Need for the Study (4 Marks)

In this part, you’ll need to explain why the researchers conducted the study by identifying the gaps in previous research. Think about what was lacking in earlier studies—did they fail to include certain variables, or were their methodologies flawed? Be specific about the two problems mentioned in the article and provide examples from the text. Showing a clear understanding of the background will help you secure full marks.

1c) Predictor and Outcome Variables (4 Marks)

This is about identifying the variables. The predictor variable is the variable that is manipulated or observed to see its effect on the outcome, while the outcome variable is what the researchers are measuring. Be sure to describe the number of levels for the predictor variable and explain clearly what each level represents. Then identify the outcome variable—what the researchers are measuring, like children’s helping behavior.

1d and 1e) Scales of Measurement (4 Marks Total)

For both the predictor and outcome variables, identify the scale of measurement (nominal, ordinal, interval, or ratio) and explain why that scale is appropriate. For example, if the predictor variable has categories (e.g., presence or absence of bystanders), it’s likely nominal. The outcome variable might be interval or ratio if it involves measurable behavior like time or number of helping acts.

1f and 1g) Experimental vs. Observational and Study Design (4 Marks Total)

This part requires you to understand the study design. Is it experimental (with manipulation) or observational (without manipulation)? And is it between-subjects (different participants in each condition) or within-subjects (same participants in all conditions)? In this study, identify whether they manipulated the environment (which would make it experimental) and whether different groups were tested separately or the same group under different conditions.

1h) Ruling Out Alternative Explanations (20 Marks)

This is the most significant part of the question. The five possible explanations for the bystander effect need to be carefully discussed. Follow the structure provided in the assignment:

State the explanation.
Describe the logic behind why this explanation would lead to a specific outcome.
Discuss the actual findings and explain how they rule out (or don’t rule out) the explanation.

Make sure you connect each explanation to the findings and highlight why the findings either support or reject it. Being thorough here will help you secure full marks.

1i) Controlling for Variables (6 Marks)

For this part, identify three variables the researchers controlled for (like age, gender, etc.) and explain why controlling these variables was important. Control helps to reduce confounding variables, ensuring the study is focused on the predictor and outcome variables. Discuss how this strengthens the internal validity of the study.

1j) Ethical Concerns (9 Marks)

Think about informed consent, psychological harm, and confidentiality. Were children able to give informed consent? Could the study cause emotional distress? Discuss how the researchers mitigated these risks. Providing detailed examples of how the study adhered to ethical guidelines will earn you the full 9 marks.

Question 2: Randomized Controlled Trial on Smoking Behavior

2a) Predictor and Outcome Variables (4 Marks)

As in Question 1, clearly identify the predictor variable (nicotine levels in cigarettes) and the outcome variable(number of cigarettes smoked). Also, explain the number of levels/conditions for the predictor variable (likely two: typical nicotine vs. reduced nicotine).

2b and 2c) Scales of Measurement (4 Marks Total)

For the predictor and outcome variables, identify whether they are nominal, ordinal, interval, or ratio. Make sure your explanations are clear—for example, the outcome variable (number of cigarettes smoked) would likely be a ratio scale, as it involves a true zero and consistent intervals.

2d and 2e) Experimental vs. Observational and Study Design (4 Marks Total)

This is an experimental study because participants were randomly assigned to different conditions (nicotine levels), and it’s a between-subjects design since different participants experienced different conditions.

2f) Most Appropriate Parametric Test (3 Marks)

For this part, suggest the most appropriate parametric test—likely a t-test—and give two reasons why this test is appropriate (e.g., it compares the means of two groups and the study has a continuous outcome variable).

2g) Null and Alternative Hypotheses (2 Marks)

State the null hypothesis (H0): There is no difference in the number of cigarettes smoked between the two groups. And the alternative hypothesis (H1): There is a difference in the number of cigarettes smoked between the two groups.

2h) Data Analysis Using jamovi (12 Marks)

For this part, make sure your jamovi spreadsheet is formatted correctly and include all necessary outputs for interpretation (e.g., p-values, means). Proper formatting and correct output are crucial for securing full marks.

2i) Interpreting Results (4 Marks)

Interpret the results based on the p-value and whether it’s less than the alpha level (.05). Discuss the descriptive statistics (mean differences) and what they suggest about nicotine consumption between the two groups.

2j) Reporting in APA Format (6 Marks)

Make sure to correctly report the results in APA format. This includes citing the statistical test used, the p-value, and the means of the two groups. Conclude by stating what the Ministry of Health should do based on the findings.

2k) Study Limitations and Suggestions for Improvement (8 Marks)

Identify two limitations (e.g., small sample size, short study duration) and propose how to improve them in future studies (e.g., larger sample size, longer follow-up period). Providing specific, practical suggestions will strengthen your answer.

General Tips to Boost Your Score:

Be Specific and Precise: Ensure that your explanations are clear and directly answer the questions.
Use Relevant Examples: Back up your points with specific details from the journal article or case study.
Structure Your Responses Clearly: Organize your answers logically and use subheadings where appropriate.
Cite Properly: For ethical concerns or any other part where external research is used, ensure proper APA citations.

With these tips, you can push your 74% even higher next time!

Why are we trusted by Singaporean part-time students?

Assurance of Academic Success: We are confident in the quality of our work so much so that we offer a 200% money-back guarantee if our work is not of sure-pass quality. This showcases our unwavering commitment to delivering exceptional essays that consistently meet the highest academic standards.
High Ratings on Google: Our commitment to excellence is reflected in the positive ratings we consistently receive from students. With an impressive 4.6 rating on Google, students can rely on the feedback shared by others who have had successful experiences with our service. These positive reviews further reinforce the trust students can place in the quality of our work and the positive outcomes we deliver.
Well-Established and Trusted: With a decade of experience in the industry, we have built a strong and reputable presence. Our long-standing track record speaks to our ability to consistently deliver outstanding results. Students can have confidence in our extensive expertise and our proven ability to help bachelor and master’s students excel in their academic pursuits.

Sample Assignment

We have done well for this piece, but are unfortunately unable to share with you. Why not have us work on a model assignment for you instead? You can know more about the service here.