Given Hapunda

90 identify a credible control group that will not receive the intervention. This could be done by randomly allocating the project/programme resources i.e., to those randomly assigned to the intervention group then comparing them to the control group (non-beneficiaries). Advantages of Experimental Designs These designs are stronger than quasi-experimental designs in terms of establishing causality or making causal inferences (establishing cause-and-effect relationships), and eliminate majority of the threats to external and internal validity. This is because the true or pure experimental designs randomly assign subjects to the experimental group (treatment group) that receives programme intervention or treatment being evaluated and control group (non-treatment group) that does not receive the intervention being evaluated. In this regard, the researcher should show that the intervention is the cause of the changes or results. This can be achieved by comparing the results of the experimental group (the one that receives an intervention or treatment) and control group (one that does not receive any manipulation). These designs allow researchers to manipulate and deal with extraneous and confounding variables that may influence the changes in the treatment or experimental group. More so, they permit researchers to randomly assign participants to equivalent groups (experimental and control groups). The true experimental designs answer cause-and-effect questions. The evaluation designs attribute the changes, outcomes or results to the programme or intervention and not any other factors or cause. This is because the researcher is able to control for extraneous and confounding variables (Morra-Imas & Rist, 2009; Rubin & Babbie, 2013). Focus Box 4: Experimental Study Design Frazer et al., (2004) evaluated the effectiveness of a multi-component intervention in the treatment of children referred by their teachers for aggressive antisocial behaviour and rejection by their prosocial peers. The children were randomly assigned to either the intervention or control group. The children in the intervention group were trained in a social skills program at school after classes, while their parents/guardians participated in a parenting skills intervention program at home. The children and parents in the control group on the other hand, continued participating in the routine activities they had already been engaging in. The results revealed that children in the intervention group showed significant improvements in prosocial behaviour, emotional regulation and social contact with peers. At the end of the study, the control group participants also received the intervention package that their counterparts had received earlier.