Does Lack Of Random Participant Assignment In Quasi-experimental Design Undermine Experimental Data?

1. After reviewing the article “Cyber Bullying Prevention: Intervention in Taiwan,” consider quasi-experimental design and address the following: Does lack of random participant assignment in quasi-experimental design undermine experimental data? Why or why not?

2. Develop a condition under which quasi-experimental design would be the most useful research design. Describe the benefits of using this design?

1. Quasi experiment is regarded as an empirical study for estimation of the casual impact of a particular intervention on a target population. However, the lack of the factor of random participation does not undermine the results that these type of experiments have in their design. Quasi experiment on the other hand specifically lack the factor of a random assignment rather have the control over the assignment to treatment condition. With the case study of cyber bullying prevention in Taiwan, the study was on a small scale and therefore, there are no issues with lack of random participation.

The comparison between the randomness of participants in this case study is a simple issue as two grades of a particular class can provide with same results had it been conducted over a school or a university. The experiment followed general procedure of experimentation and therefore, the element of randomness in participation held useless. Survey research, detailed analysis, physiological and psychological testing etc. if carried out properly leads to same data and results with or without inclusion of randomness.

Hence, the use of randomness is impractical in the case of quasi experimentation.

2. For the case study of a quasi-experiment example, I may take an example held at my place to choose between better potato chips to make a future choice. Two unmarked packets of chips of same texture, shape, color or features were presented having similar tastes. We had to choose the better one. The main advantage of this design is being simple and having randomness of participation as unethical. There was no worry for selecting a random group for experimentation rather had a prepared group. There were no need of subject fitting the experimental requirements.

Hence, there was practically no use of randomness in quasi experiment.