AtackJ., and BatemanF. (1987) To Their Own Soil: Agriculture in the Antebellum North. Ames: Iowa State University Press.
BrinkmanH. J., DrunkkerJ. W., and SlotB. (1988) “Height and income: A new method for the Estimation of Historical National Income series.” Explorations in Economic History25: 227–227.
ChirikosT N., and NestelG. (1985) “Further evidence on the economic effects of poor health.” Review of Economics and Statistics67: 61–61.
CostaD. L. (1993a) “Health, weight, wartime stress, and older age mortality: Evidence from Union army records.” Explorations in Economic History30: 424–424.
CostaD. L. (1993b) “Height, wealth, and disease among the native-born in the rural, antebellum North.” Social Science History17: 355–355.
DentOwen F., RichardsonB., WilsonS., GoulstonK., and MurdochC. (1989) “Postwar mortality among Australian World War II prisoners of the Japanese.” Medical Journal of Australia150: 378–378.
DeolalikerA. B. (1988) “Do health and nutrition influence labor productivity in agriculture?: Econometric estimates for rural India.” Review of Economics and Statistics70: 406–406.
FogelR. W. (1989) Without Consent or Contract: The Rise and Fall of American Slavery. New York: Norton.
FogelR. W. (1993) “New sources and new techniques for the study of secular trends in nutritional status, health, mortality, and process of aging.” Historical Methods26: 5–5.
FogelR. W. (1994) “Economic growth, population theory, and physiology: The bearing of long-term processes on the making of economic policy.” American Economic Review84: 369–369.
GearyJ. W. (1991) We Need Men: The Union Draft in the Civil War. Dekalb: Northern Illinois University Press.
GoldinC. D., and LewisF. (1975) “The economic cost of the American Civil War: Estimates and implications.” Journal of Economic History35: 299–299.
GouldB. A. (1869) Investigations in the Military and Anthropological Statistics of American Soldiers. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
GriffithP. (1986) Battle in the Civil War. Mansfield, Nottinghamshire, England: Fields-books.
HearstN., NewmanT. B., and HulleyS. B. (1986) “Delayed effects of the military draft on mortality: A randomized natural experiment.” New England Journal of Medicine314: 620–620.
HeitmanF. B. (1903) Historical Register and Dictionary of the United States Army, vol. 2. Washington: GPO.
HerscoviciS. (1993) “The distribution of wealth in nineteenth-century Boston: Inequality among natives and immigrants, 1860.” Explorations in Economic History30: 321–321.
HessE. J. (1981) “The 12th Missouri Infantry: A socio-military profile of a Union regiment.” Missouri Historical Review76: 53–53.
HiggsR. (1979) “Cycles and trends of mortality in 18 large American cities, 1871-1900.” Explorations in Economic History10:177–95.
ICPSR (1996) Public Use Tape on the Aging of Veterans of the Union Army: Military, Pension, and Medical Records, Ohio and Pennsylvania Regiments, 1820-1940. Center for Population Economics, University of Chicago, and Department of Economics, Brigham Young University.
KearlJ. R., and PopeC. (1986) “Choice, rents, and luck: Economic mobility of nineteenth-century Utah households,” in EngermanS. L. and GallmanR. E. (eds.) Long-Term Factors in American Economic Growth. Chicago: University of Chicago Press: 215–60.
KempT. R. (1990) “Community and war: The Civil War experience of two New Hampshire towns,” in VinovskisM. (ed.) Toward a Social History of the American Civil War. New York: Cambridge University Press: 31–77.
KimJ. M. (1996) “The economics of nutrition, body build, and health: Waaler surfaces and physical human capital.” Ph.D. diss., University of Chicago.
LavineP. (1981) “Draft evasion in the North during the Civil War, 1863-1865.” Journal of American History67: 816–816.
LeeC. (1997) “Socioeconomic background, disease, and mortality among Union army recruits: Implications for economic and demographic history.” Explorations in Economic History34: 27–27.
LundM., D. FoyC. Siprelle, and StrachanA. (1984) “The combat exposure scale: A systematic assessment of trauma in the Vietnam War.” Journal of Clinical Psychology40:1323–28.
MargoR. A., and SteckelR. H. (1982) “The heights of American slaves.” Social Science History6: 516–516.
MargoR. A., and SteckelR. H. (1983) “The heights of native-born whites during the antebellum period.” Journal of Economic History43: 167–167.
McPhersonJ. M. (1988) Battle Cry of Freedom. New York: Oxford University Press.
MurdockE. C. (1964) “Was it a ‘poor man’s fight’?” Civil War History10: 241–241.
NefzgerM. D. (1970) “Follow-up studies of World War II and Korean War prisoners, I: Study plan and mortality findings.” American Journal of Epidemiology91: 123–123.
PopeC. L. (1989) “Households on the American frontier: The distribution of income and wealth in Utah, 1850-1900,” in GalensonD. W. (ed.) Markets in History: Economic Studies of the Past. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 148–89.
RiggsD. F. (1982) “Sailors of the U.S.S. Cairo: Anatomy of a gunboat crew.” Civil War History28: 266–266.
RorabaughW. J. (1986) “Who fought for the North in the Civil War? Concord, Massachusetts, enlistment.” Journal of American History73: 695–695.
RosenS. (1982) “Authority, control, and the distribution of earnings.” Bell Journal of Economics13: 311–311.
ShannonF. A. (1928) The Organization and Administration of the Union Army, 1861-1865, vol. 1. Cleveland: Arthur H. Clark Company.
SoltowL. (1992) “Inequalities in the Standard of Living in the United States, 1798-1875,” in GallmanR. and WallisJ. (eds.) American Economic Growth and Standard of Living before the Civil War. Chicago: University of Chicago Press: 121–72.
SteinerP. E. (1968) Disease in the Civil War: Natural Biological Warfare in 1861-1865. Springfield, IL: C. C. Thomas.
SutkerP., WinsteadD., GalinaZ., and AllanA. (1991) “Cognitive deficits and psychopathology among former prisoners of war and combat veterans of the Korean conflicts.” American Journal of Psychiatry148: 67–67.
U.S. Surgeon General’s Office (1870) Medical and Surgical History of the War of the Rebellion, vol. 1. Washington: GPO.
VinovskisM. A. (1990) “Have social historians lost the Civil War?: Some preliminary demographic speculations,” in VinovskisM. (ed.) Toward a Social History of the American Civil War. New York: Cambridge University Press: 1–30.
WaalerH. T. (1984) “Height, weight, and mortality: The Norwegian experience.” Acta Medica Scandinavica [Suppl.]679:1–56.
Random assignment refers to the use of chance procedures in psychology experiments to ensure that each participant has the same opportunity to be assigned to any given group.
Study participants are randomly assigned to different groups, such as the experimental group, or treatment group. Random assignment might involve such tactics as flipping a coin, drawing names out of a hat, rolling dice, or assigning random numbers to participants.
It is important to note that random assignment differs from random selection. While random selection refers to how participants are randomly chosen to represent the larger population, random assignment refers to how those chosen participants are then assigned to experimental groups.
How Does Random Assignment Work in a Psychology Experiment?
To determine if changes in one variable lead to changes in another variable, psychologists must perform an experiment. Researchers often begin by forming a testable hypothesis predicting that one variable of interest will have some impact on another variable.
The variable that the experimenters will manipulate in the experiment is known as the independent variable while the variable that they will then measure is known as the dependent variable. While there are different ways to look at relationships between variables, and experiment is the best way to get a clear idea if there is a cause-and-effect relationship between two or more variables.
Once researchers have formulated a hypothesis, conducted background research, and chosen an experimental design, it is time to find participants for their experiment. How exactly do researchers decide who will be part of an experiment? As mentioned previously, this is often accomplished through something known as random selection.
In order to generalize the results of an experiment to a larger group, it is important to choose a sample that is representative of the qualities found in that population. For example, if the total population is 51 percent female and 49 percent male, then the sample should reflect those same percentages. Choosing a representative sample is often accomplished by randomly picking people from the population to be participants in a study. Random selection means that everyone in the group stands and equal chance of being chosen.
Once a pool of participants has been selected, it is time to assign them into groups. By randomly assigning the participants into groups, the experimenters can be sure that each group will be the same before the independent variable is applied.
Participants might be randomly assigned to the control group, which does not receive the treatment in question. Or they might be randomly assigned to the experimental group, which does receive the treatment. Random assignment increases the likelihood that the two groups are the same at the outset, that way any changes that result from the application of the independent variable can be assumed to be the result of the treatment of interest.
An Example of Random Assignment
Imagine that a researcher is interested in learning whether or not drinking caffeinated beverages prior to an exam will improve test performance. After randomly selecting a pool of participants, each person is randomly assigned to either the control group or the experimental group. The participants in the control group consume a placebo drink prior to the exam that does not contain any caffeine. Those in the experimental group, on the other hand, consume a caffeinated beverage before taking the test. Participants in both groups then take the test and the researcher compares the results to determine if the caffeinated beverage had any impact on test performance.
A Word From Verywell
Random assignment plays an important role in the psychology research process. Not only does this process help eliminate possible sources of bias, it also makes it easier to generalize the results of a population to a larger population.
Random assignment helps ensure that members of each group in the experiment are the same, which means that the groups are also likely more representative of what is present in the larger population. Through the use of this technique, psychology researchers are able to study complex phenomena and contribute to our understanding of the human mind and behavior.
Alferes, VR. Methods of Randomization in Experimental Design. Los Angeles: SAGE; 2012.
Nestor, PG & Schutt, RK. Research Methods in Psychology: Investigating Human Behavior. Los Angeles: SAGE; 2015.