Internal Validity Threats in a Study on the Benefits of Companion Animals for the Widowed or Divorced Elderly

QUESTION

Instructions: Below is a description of a study that focuses on whether companion animals (CA) can benefit people who have experienced the loss of a spouse in their later life (widowed or divorced). Read over the study description in Part One. In Part Two, read over some additional information about the study and determine which MR SMITH ID threat is present (Hint: There is one validity threat present in each question and one where these is no threat at all!). PART ONE: Study Description The loss of a spouse due to either divorce or widowhood is common later in life, and it can lead to elevated depressive symptoms and loneliness. Research suggests that having a companion animal (CA) may be beneficial for psychological health, but limited research has explored how CA can buffer the negative consequences of spousal loss. The goal of this study is to assess whether having a CA can lessen both depressive symptoms and feelings of loneliness in Americans 60 years old or older who recently experienced the loss of their spouse. Using a sample of participants who belonged to the American Association of Retired People (AARP), the researchers recruited participants who had recently experienced the loss of a spouse and who were interested in adopting a companion animal (limited to either a dog or a cat). All participants completed a pre-test "CA survey" at the start of the study that included questions about pet ownership, the loss of their spouse, their feelings of loneliness, and an assessment of depressive symptoms. Participants were then randomly assigned to one of two study conditions. In the experimental condition, participants were granted approval for a companion animal, which arrived the day of the approval. Four months after receiving the animal, those in the experimental condition completed a post-test CA survey. In the control condition, participants also received approval for a companion animal, but they were told that their animal would not be available for four months. After four months, control participants received their animal, but only after they completed the post-test CA survey. In other words, all participants completed the pre-test CA survey after applying for the animal, and all participants completed a post-test CA survey four months later. The main difference was that participants in the experimental group cared for a companion animal during four-month duration of the study. Identify which internal validity threat is most likely at work in each of the following Part Two statements. You will receive .5 points for each correct response. Note that each threat should be used only once, with one statement of the ten statements not having a threat. Also keep in mind internal validity threats may overlap – in these instances, choose the BEST threat for the scenario. Also note that the question order and answer order might differ in Canvas, so make sure to focus on the CONTENT of the question and answer rather than their order.

ANSWER

Internal Validity Threats in a Study on the Benefits of Companion Animals for the Widowed or Divorced Elderly

Introduction

The study aims to investigate whether companion animals (CAs) can benefit individuals who have experienced the loss of a spouse in their later life. The research explores the potential of CAs in lessening depressive symptoms and feelings of loneliness among Americans aged 60 years or older who recently lost their spouse. In Part Two, we will identify the internal validity threats present in the study’s design.

Part Two: Internal Validity Threats

Selection-Maturation Threat

In the study, participants were randomly assigned to two conditions: the experimental and control groups. However, participants in the experimental group received their companion animal immediately, while the control group had to wait for four months. During this waiting period, the control group might experience changes in their mental health or coping strategies, which could affect the study’s outcomes.

Testing Threat

Participants in both groups completed a pre-test “CA survey” at the start of the study, which assessed their pet ownership, feelings of loneliness, and depressive symptoms. The act of completing the pre-test itself could sensitize participants to the study’s purpose and influence their responses in the post-test, leading to inflated or diminished effects of the companion animals.

 Instrumentation Threat

The “CA survey” used to assess loneliness, depressive symptoms, and pet ownership might lack sensitivity or validity. If the survey does not accurately measure the constructs under investigation, the study’s results could be compromised.

History Threat

During the four-month duration of the study, external events or life changes (e.g., changes in health, social support, or living arrangements) might impact participants’ mental health and loneliness levels, affecting the outcomes. Such external factors can be a source of variability in the results.

 Mortality Threat

The study’s duration of four months might result in attrition, where participants drop out or are lost to follow-up. If specific characteristics influence attrition, such as the severity of loneliness or depressive symptoms, the remaining sample may not be representative, affecting the study’s internal validity.

Selection-Attrition Threat

If participants with certain characteristics are more likely to drop out or be lost to follow-up, it may lead to a biased sample in terms of mental health or loneliness levels. This could affect the validity of the study’s findings.

 Regression to the Mean Threat

Participants were selected based on experiencing the loss of a spouse and expressing interest in adopting a CA. If the participants’ depressive symptoms or loneliness scores were extreme at the pre-test, they might naturally regress toward the mean in the post-test, irrespective of the CA intervention.

 Diffusion of Treatment Threat

The control group was informed that they would receive a companion animal after four months. During this time, participants in the control group may seek alternative methods to cope with loneliness and depressive symptoms, even without the presence of the CA, thereby diffusing the treatment effect.

 Compensatory Equalization of Treatments Threat

During the four-month waiting period, participants in the control group might receive additional support or interventions (e.g., counseling or group therapy) to compensate for not having the CA, which could equalize the effect of the treatments between the two groups.

None Applicable

This study is designed to minimize the nonequivalent groups threat as participants were randomly assigned to the experimental and control groups, ensuring that both groups have similar characteristics at the start of the study.

Conclusion

Identifying internal validity threats in research designs is essential for ensuring the accuracy and reliability of study outcomes. In this study investigating the benefits of companion animals for the widowed or divorced elderly, several potential threats were identified, including selection-maturation, testing, instrumentation, history, mortality, selection-attrition, regression to the mean, diffusion of treatment, and compensatory equalization of treatments. By acknowledging and addressing these threats, researchers can enhance the internal validity of their findings, providing more robust evidence to inform future practice and interventions.