The incidence of "causal" statements in teaching-and-learning research journals

Daniel H. Robinson, Joel R. Levin, Greg D. Thomas, Keenan A. Pituch, Sharon Vaughn

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

41 Scopus citations

Abstract

The authors examined the methodologies of articles in teaching-and-learing research journals, published in 1994 and in 2004, and classified them as either intervention (based on researcher-manipulated variables) or nonintervention. Consistent with the findings of Hsieh et al, intervention research articles declined from 45% in 1994 to 33% in 2004. For nonintervention articles, the authors recorded the incidence of "causal" statements (e.g, if teachers/schools/parents did X, then student/child outcome Y would likely result). Nonintervention research articles containing causal statements increased from 34% in 1994 to 43% in 2004. It appears that at the same time intervention studies are becoming less prevalent in the teaching-and-learning research literature, researchers are more inclined to include causal statements in nonintervention studies.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)400-413
Number of pages14
JournalAmerican Educational Research Journal
Volume44
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - Jun 2007

Keywords

  • Causal conclusions
  • Causal statements
  • Causation
  • Intervention research
  • Randomized trials

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Education

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'The incidence of "causal" statements in teaching-and-learning research journals'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this