ETHICAL ISSUES IN EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN RESEARCH

It is appropriate at this juncture to briefly discuss a few of the many ethical issues involved in doing research,
some of which are particularly relevant to conducting lab experiments. The following practices are considered
unethical:

 Putting pressure on individuals to participate in experiments through coercion, or applying social

pressure.

 Giving menial tasks and asking demeaning questions that diminish participants’ self‐respect.

 Deceiving subjects by deliberately misleading them as to the true purpose of the research.

 Exposing participants to physical or mental stress.

 Not allowing subjects to withdraw from the research when they want to.

 Using the research results to disadvantage the participants, or for purposes not to their liking.

 Not explaining the procedures to be followed in the experiment.

 Exposing respondents to hazardous and unsafe environments.

 Not debriefing participants fully and accurately after the experiment is over.

 Not preserving the privacy and confidentiality of the information given by the participants.

 Withholding benefits from control groups.

The last item is somewhat controversial in terms of whether or not it should be an ethical dilemma, espe-
cially in organizational research. If three different incentives are offered for three experimental groups and none
is offered to the control group, it is a fact that the control group has participated in the experiment with
absolutely no benefit. Similarly, if four different experimental groups receive four different levels of training but
the control group does not, the other four groups have gained expertise that the control group has been denied.
But should this be deemed an ethical dilemma preventing experimental designs with control groups in
organizational research? Perhaps not, for at least three reasons. One is that several others in the system who did
not participate in the experiment did not benefit either. Second, even in the experimental groups, some would
have benefited more than others (depending on the extent to which the causal factor was manipulated). Finally,
if a cause‐and‐ effect relationship is found, the system will, in all probability, implement the new ‐found
knowledge sooner or later and everyone will ultimately stand to gain. The assumption that the control group did
not benefit from participating in the experiment may not be a sufficient reason not to use lab or field
experiments.

Many universities have a “human subjects committee” to protect the right of individuals participating in any
type of research activity involving people. The basic function of these committees is to discharge the moral and
ethical responsibilities of the university system by studying the procedures outlined in the research proposals
and giving their stamp of approval to the study. The human subjects committee might require the investigators
to modify their procedures or inform the subjects fully, if occasion demands it.

MANAGERIAL IMPLICATIONS
Before using experimental designs in research studies, it is essential to consider whether they are necessary at
all, and if so, at what level of sophistication. This is because experimental designs call for special efforts and
varying degrees of interference with the natural flow of activities. Some questions that need to be addressed in
making these decisions are the following:

1. Is it really necessary to identify causal relationships, or would it suffice if the correlates that account
for the variance in the dependent variable were known?

2. If it is important to trace the causal relationships, which of the two, internal validity or external
validity, is needed more, or are both needed? If only internal validity is important, a carefully designed
lab experiment is the answer; if generalizability is the more important criterion, then a field experiment
is called for; if both are equally important, then a lab study should be first undertaken, followed by a
field experiment (if the results of the former warrant the latter).

3. Is cost an important factor in the study? If so, would a less rather than a more sophisticated experimen-
tal design do?

These decision points are illustrated in the chart in Figure 10.5.

Though some managers may not be interested in cause‐and‐effect relationships, a good knowledge of
exper- imental designs could foster some pilot studies to be undertaken to examine whether factors such as
bonus sys- tems, piece rates, rest pauses, and so on lead to positive outcomes such as better motivation,
improved job performance, and other favorable working conditions at the workplace. Marketing managers could
use experi- mental designs to study the effects on sales of advertisements, sales promotions, pricing, and the
like. Awareness of the usefulness of simulation as a research tool can also result in creative research endeavors
in the management area, as it currently does in the manufacturing side of businesses.
INTRODUCTION
Measurement of the variables is an integral part of research and an important aspect of research design (see
shaded portion in Figure 11.1). Unless the variables are measured in some way, we will not be able to find
answers to our research questions. Surveys and experimental designs, discussed in the previous chapters, often
use questionnaires to measure the variables of interest. In this chapter we will discuss how variables lend
themselves to measurement.

HOW VARIABLES ARE MEASURED

To test the hypothesis that workforce diversity affects organizational effectiveness we have to measure
workforce diversity and organizational effectiveness. Measurement is the assignment of numbers or other
symbols to charac- teristics (or attributes) of objects according to a prespecified set of rules. Objects include
persons, strategic business units, companies, countries, bicycles, elephants, kitchen appliances, restaurants,
shampoo, yogurt, and so on. Examples of characteristics of objects are arousal‐seeking tendency, achievement
motivation, organizational effec- tiveness, shopping enjoyment, length, weight, ethnic diversity, service quality,
conditioning effects, and taste. It is important that you realize that you cannot measure objects (for instance, a
company); you measure characteristics or attributes of objects (for instance, the organizational effectiveness of a
company). In a similar fashion, you can measure the length (the attribute) of a person (the object), the weight of
an elephant, the arousal‐seeking tendency of stockbrokers, the shopping enjoyment of women, the service
quality of a restaurant, the conditioning effects of a shampoo, and the taste of a certain brand of yogurt. To be
able to measure you need an object and attributes of the object, but you also need a judge. A judge is someone
who has the necessary knowledge and skills to assess “the quality” of something, such as the taste of yogurt, the
arousal‐seeking tendency of stockbrokers, or the communi- cation skills of students. In many cases the object
and the judge are the same person. For instance, if you want to measure the gender (the attribute) of your
employees (the objects), or the shopping enjoyment (the attribute) of women (the objects), you can simply ask
the objects (employees and women respectively) to provide you with the necessary details via a self‐
administered questionnaire. However, it is unlikely that the object has the necessary knowledge and skills to act
as a judge when you want to measure the taste (the attribute) of yogurt (the object), the service quality of a
restaurant, the communication skills of students, or even the managerial expertise of supervisors.

Now do Exercise 11.1

EXERCISE 11.1

Identify the object and the attribute. Give your informed opinion about who would be an adequate judge.

1. Price consciousness of car buyers.

2. Self‐esteem of dyslexic children.

3. Organizational commitment of school teachers.

4. Marketing orientation of companies.

5. Product quality of tablets (such as the Apple iPad and the Samsung Galaxy Tab).

Attributes of objects that can be physically measured by some calibrated instruments pose no measurement
problems. For example, the length and width of a rectangular office table can be easily measured with a measur-
ing tape or a ruler. The same is true for measuring the office floor area and for measuring the weight of an ele-
phant (at least to some extent). Data representing several demographic characteristics of office personnel are
also easily obtained by asking employees simple, straightforward questions, such as: “How long have you been
working in this organization?” or “What is your marital status?”

The measurement of more abstract and subjective attributes is more difficult, however. For instance, it is
relatively difficult to measure the level of achievement motivation of office clerks, the shopping enjoyment of
women, or the need for cognition of students. Likewise, it is not straightforward to test hypotheses on the
relation- ship between workforce diversity, managerial expertise, and organizational effectiveness. The problem
is that we cannot simply ask questions like “How diverse is your company’s workforce?” or “How effective is
your organiza- tion?” because of the abstract nature of the variables “workforce diversity” and “organizational
effectiveness.” Of course, there are solutions to this problem. One of these solutions is discussed next. But let
us, before we discuss the solution, summarize the problem.

Certain variables lend themselves to easy measurement through the use of appropriate measuring instru-
ments; for example, physiological phenomena pertaining to human beings, such as blood pressure, pulse rates,
and body temperature, as well as certain physical attributes such as length and weight. But when we get into the
realm of people’s subjective feelings, attitudes, and perceptions, the measurement of these factors or variables
becomes more difficult. Accordingly, there are at least two types of variables: one lends itself to objective and
precise measurement; the other is more nebulous and does not lend itself to accurate measurement because of its
abstract and subjective nature.

OPERATIONAL DEFINITION (OPERATIONALIZATION)

Despite the lack of physical measuring devices to measure the more nebulous variables, there are ways of
tapping these types of variable. One technique is to reduce these abstract notions or concepts to observable
behavior and/ or characteristics. In other words, the abstract notions are broken down into observable behavior
or characteris- tics. For instance, the concept of thirst is abstract; we cannot see it. However, we would expect a
thirsty person to drink plenty of fluids. In other words, the expected reaction of people to thirst is to drink fluids.
If several people say they are thirsty, then we may determine the thirst levels of each of these individuals by the
measure of the quantity of fluids that they drink to quench their thirst. We will thus be able to measure their
levels of thirst, even though the concept of thirst itself is abstract and nebulous. Reduction of abstract concepts
to render them meas- urable in a tangible way is called operationalizing the concepts.

Operationalizing is done by looking at the behavioral dimensions, facets, or properties denoted by the con- cept.
These are then translated into observable and measurable elements so as to develop an index of measure- ment
of the concept. Operationalizing a concept involves a series of steps. The first step is to come up with a
definition of the construct that you want to measure. Then, it is necessary to think about the content of the
measure; that is, an instrument (one or more items or questions) that actually measures the concept that one
wants to measure has to be developed. Subsequently, a response format (for instance, a seven ‐point rating scale
with end‐points anchored by “strongly disagree” and “strongly agree”) is needed, and, finally, the validity and
reliability of the measurement scale has to be assessed. The next chapter discusses steps 3 and 4. In this chapter
we will discuss step 2: the development of an adequate and representative set of items or questions.

Example
We have just reduced the abstract concept thirst into observable behavior by measuring the amount of drinks
people use to quench their thirst. Other abstract concepts such as need for cognition (the tendency to engage in
and enjoy thinking (Cacioppo & Petty, 1982)) can be reduced to observable behavior and/or charac- teristics in a
similar way. For instance, we would expect individuals with a high need for cognition to prefer complex to
simple problems, to find satisfaction in deliberating hard and for long hours, and to enjoy tasks that involve
coming up with new solutions to problems (examples taken from Cacioppo & Petty, 1982). We may thus
identify differences between individuals in need of cognition by measuring to what extent people prefer
complex to simple problems, find satisfaction in deliberating hard and for long hours, and enjoy tasks that
involve coming up with new solutions to problems.
In 1982, Cacioppo and Petty reported four studies to develop and validate a measurement scale to assess

need for cognition. In a first study, a pool of 45 items that appeared relevant to need for cognition was gen-
erated (based on prior research) and administered to groups “known to differ in need for cognition.” The results
of this study revealed that the 45 items exhib- ited a high degree of interrelatedness and thus sug- gested that
need for cognition is a unidimensional construct (that is, it does not have more than one main component or
dimension; we will come back to this issue further on in this chapter). This finding was rep- licated in a second
study. Two further studies (studies three and four) were carried out to validate the find- ings of the first two
studies. The outcome of this vali- dation process was a valid and reliable need for cognition measure containing
34 items, such as “I would prefer complex to simple problems,” “I find sat- isfaction in deliberating hard and for
long hours,” and “I really enjoy tasks that involve coming up with new solutions to problems.”
 BAB 10

MASALAH ETIS DALAM PENELITIAN DESAIN EKSPERIMENTAL

Saat ini adalah waktu yang tepat untuk membahas mengenai beberapa dari banyak
masalah etika yang terlibat dalam melakukan penelitian, beberapa di antaranya
sangat relevan dengan melakukan percobaan laboratorium. Beberapa masalah etika
tersebut, yaitu:
 Menekan individu untuk berpartisipasi dalam eksperimen melalui paksaan,
atau menerapkan tekanan sosial.
 Memberikan tugas kasar dan mengajukan pertanyaan merendahkan yang
mengurangi harga diri peserta.
 Menipu subjek dengan sengaja menyesatkan mereka tentang tujuan
penelitian yang sebenarnya.
 Membuat peserta mengalami stres fisik atau mental.
 Tidak mengizinkan subjek menarik diri dari penelitian saat mereka
menginginkannya.
 Menggunakan hasil penelitian untuk merugikan peserta, atau untuk tujuan
yang tidak disukai.
 Tidak menjelaskan prosedur yang harus diikuti dalam percobaan.
 Memaparkan responden ke lingkungan yang berbahaya dan tidak aman.
 Tidak memberikan pembekalan kepada peserta secara lengkap dan akurat
setelah eksperimen selesai.
 Tidak menjaga privasi dan kerahasiaan informasi yang diberikan oleh peserta.
 Menahan manfaat dari kelompok kontrol.

Masalah yang terakhir, yaitu menahan manfaat dari kelompok kontrol ini sedikit
kontroversial dalam hal apakah ini harus menjadi dilemma etika atau tidak, terutama
dalam penelitian organisasi. Apabila tiga insentif berbeda ditawarkan untuk tiga
kelompok eksperimental dan tidak ada yang ditawarkan kepada kelompok control,
itu adalah fakta bahwa kelompok kontrol telah berpartisipasi dalam percobaan tanpa
manfaat sama sekali.
Hal ini mungkin tidak dianggap sebagai dilemma etika yang mencegah desain
eksperimental dengan kelompok control dalam penelitian organisasi karena tiga
alasan. Ketiga alasan tersebut adalah:
1) Beberapa orang lain dalam sistem yang tidak berpartisipasi dalam percobaan
juga tidak mendapatkan keuntungan.
2) Dalam kelompok eksperimen, beberapa akan mendapat manfaat lebih dari
yang lain (tergantung pada faktor penyebab dimanipulasi.
3) Asumsi bahwa grup kontrol tidak mendapatkan keuntungan dari partisipasi
dalam eksperimen mungkin bukan alasan yang memadai untuk tidak
menggunakan eksperimen lab atau lapangan.
Di sisi lain, banyak universitas yang memiliki “human subject comitte”, yang mana
komite ini untuk melindungi hak individu yang berpartisipasi dalam semua jenis
kegiatan penelitian yang melibatkan orang. Komite ini memiliki fungsi dasar untuk
melaksakan tanggung jawab moral dan etika dari sistem universitas dengan
mempelajari prosedur yang diuraikan dalam proposal penelitian dan memberikan
cap persetujuan mereka untuk penelitian tersebut.

IMPLIKASI MANAJERIAL
Melakukan pertimbangan merupakan hal yang penting, apakah desain itu diperlukan
atau tidak dan pada tingkat apa kecanggihan dibutuhkan. Karena desain
eksperimental membutuhkan upaya khusus dan berbagai tingkat gangguan dengan
aliran alami aktivitas. Dalam keputusan ini, ada beberapa pertanyaan yang perlu
untuk dijawab dalam membuat keputusan, yaitu:
1) Apakah benar-benar perlu untuk mengidentifikasi hubungan sebab akibat,
atau apakah cukup jika korelasi yang menjelaskan varians dalam variabel
dependen diketahui?
2) Jika penting untuk melacak hubungan kausal, manakah dari keduanya,
validitas internal atau validitas eksternal, yang lebih dibutuhkan, atau
keduanya dibutuhkan? Jika hanya validitas internal yang penting, eksperimen
lab yang dirancang dengan cermat adalah jawabannya; jika generalisasi
adalah kriteria yang lebih penting, maka eksperimen lapangan diperlukan;
Jika keduanya sama pentingnya, maka studi laboratorium harus dilakukan
terlebih dahulu, diikuti dengan eksperimen lapangan (jika hasil dari yang
pertama menjamin yang terakhir).
 3) Apakah biaya merupakan faktor penting dalam penelitian ini? Jika demikian,
apakah desain eksperimental yang kurang dari pada yang lebih canggih akan
berhasil?

Pengetahuan yang baik tentang desain eksperimen dapat mendorong beberapa

studi percontohan yang akan dilakukan untuk memeriksa apakah faktor-faktor
seperti sistem bonus, besaran upah per satuan, jeda istirahat, dan sebagainya.
Manajer pemasaran dapat menggunakan desain eksperimental untuk mempelajari
efek pada penjualan iklan, promosi penjualan, penetapan harga, dan sejenisnya.
Kesadaran akan kegunaan simulasi sebagai alat penelitian juga dapat menghasilkan
upaya penelitian kreatif di bidang manajemen, seperti yang saat ini dilakukan di sisi
manufaktur bisnis.

BAB 11

PENDAHULUAN
Pengukuran variabel merupakan bagian integral dari penelitian dan aspek penting
dari desain penelitian. Kecuali jika variabel diukur dengan cara tertentu, sehingga
jawaban atas pertanyaan penelitian tidak dapat ditemukan.

BAGAIMANA VARIABEL DIUKUR

 Untuk menguji hipotesis bahwa keragaman tenaga kerja mempengaruhi
efektivitas organisasi, kita harus mengukur keragaman tenaga kerja dan
efektivitas organisasi.
 Pengukuran adalah penugasan angka atau simbol lain untuk karakteristik
(atau atribut) dari objek sesuai dengan seperangkat aturan yang telah
ditentukan. Objeknya antara lain orang, unit bisnis strategis, perusahaan,
negara, sepeda, gajah, peralatan dapur, restoran, sampo, yogurt, dan
sebagainya. Contoh karakteristik objek adalah kecenderungan mencari
gairah, motivasi berprestasi, efektivitas organisasi, kenikmatan berbelanja,
panjang, bobot, keragaman etnis, kualitas layanan, efek pengkondisian, dan
rasa.
  Kita harus menyadari bahwa tidak dapat mengukur objek (misalnya,
perusahaan); mengukur karakteristik atau atribut objek (misalnya, keefektifan
organisasi perusahaan). Untuk dapat mengukurnya akan membutuhkan suatu
benda dan atribut dari suatu benda, tetapi juga membutuhkan supervisors
 Atribut objek yang dapat diukur secara fisik oleh beberapa instrumen yang
dikalibrasi tidak menimbulkan masalah pengukuran. Namun, atribut yang
lebih abstrak dan subjektif lebih sulit untuk diukur. Di sisi lain Variabel tertentu
memudahkan pengukuran melalui penggunaan alat ukur yang tepat

DEFINISI OPERASIONAL (OPERASIONALISASI

Ada beberapa teknik untuk memanfaatkan jenis variabel, meskipun alat pengukur
fisik untuk menguku variabel yang lebih samar masih kurang. Teknik tersebut yaitu
dengan mereduksi gagasan atau konsep abstrak ini menjadi perilaku dan atau
karakteristik yang dapat diamati.
Mengoperasionalkan konsep adalah pengurangan konsep abstrak agar dapat diukur
dengan cara yang nyata. Operasionalisasi dilakukan dengan melihat dimensi
perilaku, segi, atau properti yang dilambangkan dengan konsep. Ini kemudian
diterjemahkan ke dalam elemen yang dapat diamati dan diukur untuk
mengembangkan indeks pengukuran konsep.
Dalam mengoperasikan konsep melibatkan beberapa langkah berikut ini:
1. Memberikan definisi konstruksi yang ingin Anda ukur.
2. Memikirkan tentang isi ukuran — instrumen (satu atau lebih item atau
pertanyaan) yang benar-benar mengukur konsep yang ingin diukur harus
dikembangkan.
3. Diperlukan format tanggapan (misalnya, skala penilaian tujuh poin dengan
titik akhir yang ditambatkan oleh "sangat tidak setuju" dan "sangat setuju")
4. Validitas dan keandalan skala pengukuran harus dinilai .