Lin Critique

1808 WordsMay 22, 20138 Pages
Critique of population and sampling Lin, Mack, Enright, Krahn, and Baskin were the researchers that wanted to determine whether different treatment would benefit patients in a residential treatment facility for substance dependence. The researchers used randomly sampling only in finding a facility that they took the participates from. It states in the article that “the researchers randomly assignment participants, who were clients at a residential facility, to forgiveness therapy (FT) or alcohol and drug counseling (ADC) as an augmentation to routine residential treatment ( Lin, Mack, Enright, Krahn, and Baskin (2004).” The sampling used in this article was stratified random sampling because individuals were drawn separately at random into different groups with the population. Within the population of the residential facility, some participants were put on the forgiveness therapy while others were put on the alcohol and drug counseling. Using stratified data improves the sample. Even though the participants were chosen at random, forty-three potential participants were referred for this study on the basis of the opinion of their therapists that they would be good candidates for FT. This sample was therefore not random but was drawn from a target group for the generalization of this experiment because if the potential participants’ score on the Enright Forgiveness Inventory (EFI) was at or below 256, their composite SSTAEI score was 35 or higher, and they voluntarily provided written informed consent to take part in the study, they were randomly assigned to FT or ADC. This means that there was a limitation on the sample population that was chosen. Three potential participants were eliminated on the bases of their forgiveness and anger scores. This means that there were really 40 individuals out of that original group who were randomly chosen for either treatment. Out

More about Lin Critique

Open Document