UGC NET Questions (Paper – 1)

Causal comparative research attempts to investigate possible cause–effect relationships by examining differences between natural groups. The researcher does not manipulate the independent variable but observes the effects of variables that have already occurred or that cannot ethically be controlled, such as gender or past experiences. Internal validity is weaker than in true experiments because rival explanations may remain.

Option A:
Option A describes essential features of true experiments, including manipulation and random assignment, which are absent in causal comparative studies.

Option B:
Option B correctly states that ex post facto studies use existing groups and nonmanipulated variables. The researcher works backward from observed differences to infer possible causes.

Option C:
Option C claims complete control over extraneous variables, which is rarely achievable even in experiments and certainly not in causal comparative designs.

Option D:
Option D restricts research to laboratory conditions, which is not a defining feature of either design; many studies of both types occur in natural settings.

Statements A, C and D correctly portray causal-comparative research as non-experimental studies that use existing groups and try to manage extraneous variables statistically or through design. Such studies are conducted after the critical conditions have occurred, hence the term ex post facto. Statement B is false because there is no manipulation or random assignment and E is false because unmeasured factors may also explain differences, so strong causal claims are not guaranteed. Therefore, the set including A, C and D, and excluding B and E, is the only correct combination.

Option A:
Option A is incomplete because it includes only A and C, omitting D, which notes the attempts to control extraneous variables statistically or through design. Without D, the description understates the strategies used to strengthen inferences in causal-comparative research.

Option B:
Option B includes C and D but leaves out A, so it does not explicitly state that existing groups differing on some variable are central to this design. The absence of A means an essential definitional feature of causal-comparative studies is missing.

Option C:
Option C is correct because it combines the three statements that accurately describe what ex post facto research is, how it is timed and how it seeks to handle confounding influences. It explicitly excludes B and E, which wrongly equate it with true experimental manipulation and unjustified strong causal inference.

Option D:
Option D is incorrect because it contains E, the claim that group differences are necessarily due to the independent variable, which ignores possible confounds. It also omits C, thereby failing to emphasise the “after the fact” nature of these studies.