Controlled Lab Experiments

For this initial discussion I would like to contrast controlled laboratory experiments and naturalistic observations research methods. In controlled laboratory experiments, the researchers conduct their studies in a controlled setting. Conversely, studies involving naturalistic observation, examine participants in their natural environment. Below I present a contrast of the most essential features of each of these methods of research.
Controlled laboratory experiments:
• Objective: Seek to compare two or more conditions.
• The independent variables (precedent conditions that the experimenter purposely manipulate to evaluate the outcome of behavior) and dependent variables (show the change in behavior) are central axis. Researchers will try to control as many possible variables.
• Samples: are usually random. Additionally, they should be representative to allow generalization.
• Strengths: It is one of the best ways to answer hypothesis questions. Statistical analysis makes it relatively
A functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) conducted by Bigliassi, León-Dominguez, and Altimari. This study was conducted in a laboratory. Thirty subjects participated in the study: 15 men and 15 women. The aim of the study was to explore the effects of techno and classical music on emotional reactions and brain activity. ANOVA results showed statistical significance: both musical genres increase prefrontal cortex (PFC) activity. However, after conducting a post hoc test, analysis indicated that classical music caused grater activity in the dorsolateral region. Moreover, classical music was able to increase parasympathetic activity, while techno music decreased parasympathetic activity after 10 minutes of music exposure. Analysis also showed that men were more affected by classical music than women, (Bigliassi, León-Domínguez, & Altimari,