This document describes causal comparative research, which aims to determine the causes or consequences of existing differences between groups. It involves selecting groups that differ on a particular variable of interest and comparing them, without any manipulation. There are three types: exploration of effects, causes, or consequences. The procedure involves problem formulation, sampling groups that differ on a characteristic of interest, using various instrumentation methods, and a design without manipulation. Data analysis includes statistical tests to identify relationships between variables, but cannot prove cause and effect. An example study is described that investigated differences in reading comprehension between monolingual and bilingual English learners, finding bilingual students scored higher.

1. CAUSAL COOPERATIVE RESEARCH
By : St. Choirun Nisak Ashari

2. D E S C R I P
T I O N …
 T o d e t e r m i n e t h e c a u s e
o r c o n s e q u e n c e s o f t h e
d i f f e r e n c e s t h a t
a l r e a d y e x i s t b e t w e e n
o r a m o n g g r o u p o f
i n d i v i d u a l s - ‘e x p o s t
f a c t o ’
 O n e v a r i a b l e i s
c o n s i d e r e d a s t h e
c a u s a l (i n d e p e n d e n t
v a r i a b l e ) a n d o n e

3. C H A R A C T E R I S T I C
S
 There are three types of causal-
comparative research:
 E x p l o r a t i o n o f
e f f e c t s
 E x p l o r a t i o n o f
c a u s e s
 E x p l o r a t i o n o f t h e
c o n s e q u e n c e s

4. C H A R A C T E R I S T I C
S

5. P R O C E D U R E
Problem formulation
 Identify and define particular phenomena of
interest and then to consider possible causes for,
or consequences of these phenomena
Sample
 Define carefully the characteristic to be studied
and select group that differ in this characteristic
Instrumentation
 No limitation
Design
 Involve selecting groups that differ on particular
variable of interest, compare and remember no
manipulation!

6. D A T A A N A L Y S I S
• Construct frequency polygons
• Calculate means and standard deviations
• T-test to show differences between means
• The result do not prove cause and effect,
but only identifying the relationship

7. E X A M P L E O F
R E S E A R C H
• Author: Talebi, S.H., & Maghsuodi, M.(2008)
• Title: Monolingual and Bilingual English
Learners in one Classroom: ‘Who is at a
Disadvantage?’
• Source: Asian EFL Journal, Volume 10. Issue
3, Article 10.
• Purpose: To investigate how monolingual and
bilingual ESL learners perform on reading
comprehension tests in mixed
mono/bilinguality classrooms

8. (cont.)
Hypotheses:
1. Bilingual and monolingual students differ
significantly in reading comprehension
scores
2. There will be significant interaction
between linguality and proficiency in
reading comprehension scores
3. Male and female students differ significantly
in their reading comprehension scores
4. There will be significant interaction
between linguality and gender in reading
comprehension scores

9. (cont.)
• Sample: male and female 1st year pre-
university students (157 students, group
A- 47 M, 30 F, Mono; group B, 53 M, 27
F, Bili)
• Instrumentations: Language Proficiency
test (NELSON, series 400 B), Test of
reading comprehension in English, Self
evaluation proficiency scale and
background questionnaire
• Procedure: 3 Phases, refer to handouts

10. (cont.)
• Results
1. Bilingual students had significantly higher
score than monolingual students
2. There was a significant interaction effect
between linguality and proficiency, where
students with high proficiency and
bilingualism had highest scores
3. The third and forth hypotheses were
rejected as there were no significant
differences between gender as well as for
interaction between linguality and gender.

11. THANK YOU