Cards get bent, participants can see who's chosen which before and where they get allocated, the research assistant is unblinded (could influence selection), shuffling is non-random and easily manipulable etc
Dunno, most non-random designs are pretty open about the issues with causal inference. Bad randomization is used to infer direct causality despite the issues with bias
-
-
Not sure I agree with your assertion about relative openness of bias in non-randomized studies. But again, what's the bias here? Interpretation changes due to non-blonding, sure, but I am not seeing any serious bias (in expectation) from this procedure.
-
*non-blinding. Non-blonding is a totally different technical concept.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.