In order to analyze the situation at hand, one must first understand the concept of correlation. A correlation can be defined as the statistical relationship between two variables. In a correlational design, researchers observe how strongly those variables are associated. In the experiment at hand, a positive correlation of r=.6 between time spent volunteering and life satisfaction means that the act of volunteering has a positive impact on an individual’s quality of life. In this study, if the data from the 200 American adults surveyed by Dr. Williams were placed on a scatter plot, the points would be shown on an upward slope. However, because the correlation coefficient is not perfect (1.0 or -1.0), there are exceptions in the dataset. To further analyze this, as amount of time volunteering increases, so does quality of life, for most people. But, for some, life satisfaction may decrease or stay the same.
Dr. Williams’ findings of a positive correlation could still exist even if the two were not directly related. One alternative explanation would be the occurrence of Occam’s razor, which states that a simpler solution is often correct, over ones that have complex terms. The simple solution here would be that volunteering is generally considered a positive contribution to society. Therefore, participants in this experiment may mark on the questionnaire that their lives have improved because they feel as though it should, even when nothing has actually changed. A second possible explanation for this occurrence is a confounder. If there was a third factor that would otherwise positively impact the participants’ lives, such as a music festival in town, then the increase in life satisfaction may not completely be due to time spent volunteering, but rather, the confounder.
In Dr. Williams’ experiment, the independent variable is time spent volunteering, and the dependant variable is life satisfaction. His experimental group would consist of individuals that are instructed to spend a specified number of hours volunteering then taking the questionnaire. The control group would not volunteer at all, and only take the questionnaire based on their current level of life satisfaction. One variable Dr. Williams should consider to increase his experiment’s internal validity is eliminating confounders. Elections, popular events, holidays, etc., could all be contributing factors to life satisfaction, so it is crucial that the researcher ensures the experiment occurs during a neutral time. Another detail that Dr. Williams should account for is other variables that may skew the results of his experiment. For example, age, gender, medical conditions, etc., could all compromise the experiment’s internal validity. Accounting for this would ensure that the procedure is standardized. Finally, Dr. Williams could conduct the experiment on a smaller scale before producing the final results, as this will allow him to detect and fix any problems that arise.
To add protections for participants, the researcher should ensure that all participants are granted informed consent. The research’s purpose, expected duration, and potential risks involved should all be disclosed in entirety. Also, participants should know of their right to withdraw at any time during the experiment. With this modification, I believe the potential benefits of the knowledge gained from the study far outweigh the potential harm to those involved. If the results from this study were successful, and volunteering truly did affect life satisfaction, this information would be a great benefit to society.
...(download the rest of the essay above)