Learn Before
Case Study

Diagnose the flaw in the survey's response options based on the concept of mutually exclusive categories. Explain how this flaw impacts a respondent who studies exactly 4 hours.

Case context: A psychology student is designing a survey to assess the categorical variable of 'daily hours spent studying.' The student provides the following response options: '0-2 hours', '2-4 hours', '4-6 hours', and '6 or more hours'.

Question: Diagnose the flaw in the survey's response options based on the concept of mutually exclusive categories. Explain how this flaw impacts a respondent who studies exactly 4 hours.

Sample answer: The response options are flawed because they are not mutually exclusive; the categories overlap at the numbers 2, 4, and 6. Consequently, a respondent who studies exactly 4 hours cannot unambiguously choose just one category, as their answer falls into both the '2-4 hours' and '4-6 hours' options.

Key points:

  • Diagnoses the response options as overlapping or not mutually exclusive.
  • Identifies that the categorical variable options share endpoints (2, 4, and 6).
  • Explains that a respondent studying exactly 4 hours would fall into multiple categories rather than unambiguously into one.

Rubric: Full credit requires the student to correctly diagnose that the options overlap (are not mutually exclusive) and to explicitly explain that a respondent studying exactly 4 hours would ambiguously fit into multiple categories, violating the rule of unambiguous categorization.

0

1

Updated 2026-05-27

Contributors are:

Who are from:

Tags

KPU

Research Methods in Psychology - 4th American Edition @ KPU

Related