Question

Sam, a researcher, observed that his colleague Jill fell sick the day after she ate from a particular food truck. Sam concludes that the food from the food truck caused Jill to fall sick. In the context of the types of evidence described by Cook and Campbell (1979), in this scenario, Sam fails to

Answer 1

Sam's conclusion about the food truck causing illness is an example of a causation error with a lack of sufficient evidence. Proper investigations such as case-control studies are necessary to identify causation, and experimental controls help establish a definitive link between food items and health issues.

Step-by-step explanation:

Sam, the researcher, observes that his colleague Jill fell ill the day after she ate from a particular food truck and concludes that the food from the food truck caused Jill to fall sick. This scenario illustrates a potential causation error where a conclusion is hastily drawn without sufficient evidence. Cook and Campbell (1979) described types of evidence relating to internal validity, warning against such quick attributions of cause without proper investigation and control. In Sam's case, he fails to consider other possible factors such as incubation periods for foodborne illness, other meals Jill may have consumed, and whether anyone else fell sick after eating from the same food truck. To appropriately determine causation, a case-control study or other systematic method of investigation would be necessary.

Case-control studies play a crucial role in identifying potential causes of an illness by comparing individuals affected by the disease to those who are not, as illustrated by the example given in the context where individuals who dined at a restaurant were matched with controls who did not get sick after eating there. This allows for a more accurate determination of which food items may be associated with the occurrence of disease.

Using experimental controls, such as in the scenario where bacteria in oysters may have caused illness, helps to isolate variables and establish a more definitive cause-and-effect relationship between the consumption of specific food items and subsequent health issues. Without these protections, conclusions can suffer from issues such as hasty generalizations or biased samples, leading to potential misinformation and inadequate preventive measures.

Answer 2

This question is missing the options. I've found the complete question online. It is the following:

Sam, a researcher, observed that Jill, his colleague, fell sick the day after she ate from a particular food truck. Hence, Sam concludes that the food from the food truck caused Jill to fall sick. In the context of the types of evidence described by Cook and Campbell (1979), in this scenario, Sam fails to :

A. eliminate alternative explanations

B. account for temporal precedence

C. eliminate the influence of facilitated communication

D. consider the option of an authority

Answer:

In this scenario, Sam fails to:

A. eliminate alternative explanations

Step-by-step explanation:

It might very well be that Sam is right, and that Jill did fall sick due to the food she had from that particular food truck. However, at no moment did Sam consider other alternatives. To him, it is as if not other explanation were possible, only that one. There may be several reasons why Jill fell sick. The appropriate thing to be done would be for Sam to consider these other options and then work to eliminate them.