1. it was emphasized that this course was designed to help you become a research consumer. We discussed this in class several times. Why does somebody in the helping professions need to know how to be an effective research consumer?

2. Strayer, et al. (2003) wanted to extend research that showed that the main reason people talking on the phone drive badly was because drivers aren't paying enough attention to the road. Participants were forty undergrad students enrolled at the University of Utah. The sample had roughly the same number of women and men, and average age was 23.6. All had normal vision, a valid driver's license, and a majority had, at some point, talked on their phones while driving. Assess external validity. Who can Strayer, et al. generalize to? Be sure to explain your reasoning.

3. The lab used a high-end driving simulator that was very close to actually driving a car. There was a steering wheel, dashboard and pedals. There were three video screens, one serving as the windshield, the other two as side windows. The "windows" showed traffic conditions. Traffic varied, but was usually "stop and go." The simulator was programmed to have the participants follow a "pace car". The pace car braked at random intervals. The outcome measure was participant's response to the pace car braking, that is, the number of times they had a near collision. There were two tasks: just driving (Single Task, or ST), or driving while talking on the phone to a confederate (Dual Task or DT). The phone conversation was on a topic the participant found interesting. All participants drove in both ST and DT conditions, but were randomly assigned to either drive DT then ST, or to drive ST then DT. Thus, their outcome measure was the difference in the number of driving mistakes between ST and DT driving. In your opinion, does the study show sufficient construct validity for driving? Does the study show sufficient construct validity for talking on the phone? Explain.

4. Are the researchers making a frequency claim, association claim, or causal claim? How do you know?

5. Does the study show internal validity? Explain.