The Perspective of Undergraduate Research Participant Pool Nonparticipants

Abstract

Undergraduate research participant pools play an essential role in facilitating research, and many universities rely on them for participant recruitment. There is an abundance of information about those who do elect to participate in research through these recruitment systems but very little about those who do not. The present study examines both undergraduate research pool participants and nonparticipants, and the objective is to explore how they differ in their views. A sample of 483 Canadian undergraduate students (n = 442 participants and n = 41 nonparticipants) completed measures of their impressions of participation, their perceived enjoyment, and their knowledge gained from participating in research and asked to compare this with their impressions of attending class and taking exams. Factorial analysis of variance and χ² results found support for both similarities and differences between both groups. Overall, the results suggest that nonparticipants do not have a good understanding of what is involved in participating in research activities and view it is a potentially aversive or negative experience.

Keywords

undergraduate research participant pools nonparticipants

In recent decades, research in behavioral sciences has increasingly relied on undergraduate student participant pools for research recruitment. It is estimated that approximately 74% of psychology departments have some form of participant pool and that 33% are made up of undergraduate students (Landrum & Chastain, 1999; Sieber & Saks, 1989). These systems provide accessible samples for university-based researchers, and currently, the majority of published psychological research is based on undergraduate research participants (Wintre, North, & Sugar, 2001). Participant pools offer several advantages. First, they increase the rates of participation in research, which also helps minimize issues related to self-selection bias and promotes more representative normal distributions of participants based on several characteristics (e.g., intelligence, socioeconomic status, openness to experience, and motivational orientations; Sharp, Pelletier, & Lévesque, 2006). Second, they can help colleges and universities achieve their objectives of providing experiential learning opportunities for their students (Taraban & Logue, 2012), which will enhance students’ educational experiences (Lopatto, 2007). Despite these advantages, it is important to consider how students feel about participating, or choosing not to participate, in research.

Participating in Research

A number of studies have looked at students’ impressions of their experience as research participants. Overall, students generally report that the experience is positive as well as educational (Daugherty & Lawrence, 1996; VanWormer, Jordan, & Blalock, 2014). When asked about their experiences, Moyer and Franklin (2011) found that half of the students spontaneously mentioned something positive about the research they participated in or the significance of what they learned. Bowman and Waite (2003) found that participating in just one study related to increased satisfaction and positive impressions; however, Cromer, Reynolds, and Johnson (2013) found that there is an effect of participant fatigue, and the positive outcomes are reduced once students feel that they have participated in too many studies. Overall, the research supports that students generally enjoy their experience as a research participant.

Despite the positive impressions of most students, some report negative impressions about participating. In most cases, these feelings are related to feeling coerced into participating. In the majority of colleges and universities that offer undergraduate research participant pools, first-year students receive course credit in exchange for their participation (Landrum & Chastain, 1995; Sieber & Saks, 1989). In order to ensure that students are not obligated to participate in order to receive the extra credit, the American Psychological Association (2002) has included provisions to protect participants in their code of conduct. These provisions state that participants cannot be forced to participate and must be given access to an alternative option to receive the equivalent credits. Even with these regulations in place, Miller and Kreiner (2008) found that some students still reported feeling coerced to participate and viewed offers of extra credit from instructors to also be coercive. Additionally, although credits can lead to higher rates of participation, it can also affect the rates of voluntary participation in future studies since participation rates decrease when the credits for participation are removed (Sharp et al., 2006).

Another issue surrounding coercion has to do with providing informed consent to participate in the study. When conducting a study, researchers are required to obtain informed consent from their participants, and this includes their right to withdraw at any time without penalty. Brody, Gluck, and Aragon (1997) found that despite the fact, all researchers are required to obtain informed consent, nearly half of the students reported feeling a certain amount of coercion when they participated. Furthermore, a quarter did not see the opportunity to provide informed consent as a decision process and did not understand that they could withdraw from the study without penalty and still receive their participation credit.

In an effort to reduce the amount of perceived coercion, Sieber (1999) ensured students were given a meaningful rationale for participating and that they understood the positive outcomes of their participation, such as benefits to participating. This was found to reduce feelings of perceived coercion in students and led to increased satisfaction with the experience. These results support the idea that institutions should promote the outcomes of participating in research to their students.

Outcomes of Participating

Extensive research has examined subject pool participants and the outcomes of their participation. A number of positive outcomes are well established by the literature. These outcomes focus on three key areas: (1) knowledge gained, (2) enjoyment, and (3) research interest.

Knowledge gained

Participation in research studies is associated with increased understanding of psychology and its concepts (Landrum & Chastain, 1995; Moyer & Franklin, 2011). For example, Gil-Gomez, Leon, and Pascual-Ezama (2012) found that students who took part in subject pool studies achieved higher scores on a methods exam compared to students who did not. Bowman and Waite (2003) found that this extended to other courses and that students who participated in the research received higher grades overall. In a controlled experiment, Elliott, Rice, Trafimow, Madson, and Hipshur (2010) found that students learned as much about a specific topic from experiment participation or a lecture but preferred study participation over lectures. These findings support that students who participate in research appear to have a better understanding of psychology and perform better in their courses compared to students who do not. Other studies have linked study participation to increased understanding of research and ethical processes (Trafimow, Madson, & Gwizdowski, 2006). For example, when it comes to understanding the ethical issues surrounding social sciences research, students report having a better understanding of the ethics in research after participating in a study (Darling, Goedert, Ceynar, Shore, & Anderson, 2007; Elliott, Rice, Trafimow, Madson, & Hipshur, 2010). In addition, Rosell and colleagues (2005) found that compared to lecture-based learning, students who participated in research had a better understanding of participants’ rights and informed consent. Furthermore, research has shown that students who participate in studies also have a better understanding of research methods and data collection procedures (Darling et al., 2007; Thieman, Clary, Olson, Dauner, & Ring, 2009).

Enjoyment

For many students, their experience as a subject pool participant is their first interaction with research. Subject pools serve as an excellent opportunity for familiarizing students with social science research (Sullivan & Lashley, 2009). Bowman and Waite (2003) found that students who participated in at least one study had more positive impressions of psychology research in general and had a better understanding of the procedures. Furthermore, Moreland (1999) found that the majority of student research participants at his university reported having enjoyed participating in research projects, found participation to be educational, and had a fair to good understanding of the purposes of the projects.

Research interest

Research suggests that participating in subject pools inspires an interest in research as well as teaches transferable skills that are useful in other domains (Trafimow et al., 2006). For example, Vittengl and colleagues (2004) found that participating in studies was directly related to students’ goals of entering a psychology doctoral program. In a massive study examining undergraduates from many institutions, Russell (2008) found that participating in research leads to increased knowledge of how to conduct research, greater interest in graduate school, increased confidence in abilities to succeed in graduate school, and finally, greater awareness of career options in research fields. Kremer and Bringle (1990) compared students who had participated in research with students who had not on a number of skills. They found that the students who participated in research were better at performing literature reviews, running statistical analyses, and had better writing skills compared to the students who did not participate. They also found that the research participants were more likely to report choosing a career in research and confirmed that their own experiences as a research participant inspired them to choose that career.

Nonparticipation in Research

Despite the positive benefits of participating and the measures in place to reduce pressure or feelings of coercion among students, there are still a number of students who choose not to participate in participant pools. Padilla-Walker, Zamboanga, Thompson, and Schmersal (2005) estimate that nonparticipation rates may be as high as 60% in some participant pools. In a study focusing exclusively on why students do not participate, Elicker, McConnell, and Hall (2010) found that the most commonly cited reasons for not participating had to do with time and scheduling conflicts (56%) or lacking motivation (43%). Simply put, students indicated that they were too busy or did not believe the points were worth the effort. Although this study provides an important insight into the reasons why students are choosing not to participate, it did not examine those students’ opinions of research in general and whether they held the same views of the benefits associated with participation compared to the students who did participate.

Understanding the views and opinions of nonparticipants is essential because without their input, participant pool research may become subject to a nonresponse bias. As a result, experimental designs become quasi-experimental, which makes it impossible to infer causation as these designs are fundamentally correlational (Shadish, Cook, & Campbell, 2002). Furthermore, the information on participants may provide a biased view of the benefits related to participation. Finally, it is possible that nonparticipants may believe that they gain sufficient knowledge about research in psychology, without having to participate, and therefore do not understand why it is relevant.

Present Study

The purpose of the present study was to determine whether participants are different from nonparticipants and, if they are, in what ways. The first objective was to replicate the existing literature and confirm that students who participate in research activities generally hold more positive views and less negative views about their participation experience. Additionally, it also aimed to confirm that these students perceived that their participation was linked to positive outcomes such as increased knowledge, increased enjoyment of the activity, and increased interest in research, above and beyond what they expected to learn from attending classes and taking exams. The second objective was to extend the existing literature on nonparticipants and examine their views of the research experience and the associated outcomes. Specifically, nonparticipants were compared with participants to determine whether they held different positive and negative perceptions of the research experience and whether they differed in how they perceived the outcomes of participating.

Method

Participants

A sample of 483 Canadian undergraduate students (360 female, 116 male, and 7 did not disclose), where the majority were between the ages of 18 and 20 years (n = 374, 77%), participated in the present study. The students were enrolled in first-year psychology, communication, or linguistics courses in the Winter 2014 semester and were recruited through the university’s research participant pool system. Although these students received course credit for participating in research projects through the system, this study was conducted after the system had closed for the semester and the students did not receive any course credit for participating. Recruitment took place after the semester ended, so that it was clear to all participants that their responses would not be linked to their course grades.

Procedures

Participant pool

This study examined the participant pool from a major Canadian research university. Students participate as a required component of several introductory undergraduate courses. Participation in this pool accounts for 4% of a student’s course grade, where each percentage point is worth approximately 1 hr of a student’s time. Students have the option of participating in a combination of online and laboratory studies, and students who do not want to participate in research have the option of viewing educational films as an alternative. All students receive information about the system from a description in their course syllabus, a 10-min introductory video screened in their class at the start of the semester, several e-mail reminders, and any further discussion of research participation from their course instructors. During the Winter 2014 term, there were 3,397 students across 21 course sections and 2,668 students (78.5%) logged into the participation portal at least once. For the students who logged into the system, they earned an average of 3.54 percentage points (88.5% of possible).

Study recruitment

Students who had been enrolled in participating first-year courses in the winter 2014 semester were contacted after the system closed for the semester. Two separate recruitment e-mails were sent: one for the students who had logged into the online participation pool portal at least once during the semester (participants, n = 2,668) and one for the students who had not logged on at all (nonparticipants, n = 729). In both recruitment e-mails, students were invited to participate in a short evaluation of their experience as a participant in the participant pool (participants) or a short evaluation of why they chose not to participate (nonparticipants). A total of 442 students complete the participant survey (17% of the pool of participants) and 41 students completed the nonparticipant survey (6% of the pool of nonparticipants).

Materials

Demographic information

Students reported their age and gender. The “nonparticipants” were also asked to report why they chose not to participate in any research activities. They were given a list of options (e.g., “I didn’t think it was worth the time or effort”) and asked to select the reason that applied the most to them or specify another reason.

Impressions of participating

Questions were developed for the purposes of measuring participants’ (both participant and nonparticipant) impressions of their experience. Specifically, these questions assessed perceptions of autonomy (one item: “I feel good about the idea of participating in research”), perceptions of pressure (one item: “I felt that it was my decision to participate in research”), perceptions of level of protest (one item: “I objected to having to participate in research”), and enjoyment of the activity (three items, e.g.: “I think participating in research sounds fun”). Using a 7-point Likert-type scale going from 1 (do not agree at all) to 7 (completely agree), the students indicated the extent to which they agreed with the statements about their own experience participating (or not participating) in research. To compare students’ impressions of participating in research to their impressions of other course activities, students also responded to the same six questions about attending class and taking exams. Overall, there were 18 questions assessing “impressions of participating.” A mean score was calculated for the items measuring enjoyment of the activity (for each course activity), and otherwise, the individual items were included in the analyses.

Outcomes of participating

In order to assess students’ beliefs about the outcomes of participating in research, questions were developed to measure perceptions of knowledge gained (three items) and intentions to pursue graduate school (one item). Again, students responded using the same 7-point Likert-type scale and responded to the four items for their beliefs about participating in research, attending class, and taking exams. For the outcome questions related to participating in research, the stems were modified in the nonparticipants since they did not actually participate in any research activities during the semester. For example, “participating in research contributed to my general knowledge of psychology” was modified to “participating in research would contribute to my general knowledge of psychology.” Overall, there were 10 items assessing outcomes of participating, and a mean score was calculated for the three items measuring knowledge gained (for each course activity), while intentions to pursue graduate school were examined on its own.

Analyses

First, the descriptive statistics were calculated for each of the study variables, along with the zero-order correlations. Next, the nonparticipants were examined to explore their reasons for not participating in research activities during the semester. χ² analyses were conducted to examine any patterns between responses. Finally, a series of 2 (nonparticipant vs. participant) × 3 (course activity: taking exams, attending class, and participating in research) factorial analyses of variance (ANOVAs) were conducted to explore whether there were any differences between impressions of participating and beliefs about the outcomes of participating. Specifically, impressions of participating included perceptions of autonomy and perceptions of pressure, level of protest, and enjoyment of the activity. Impressions of outcomes included knowledge gained and intentions to pursue graduate school.

Results

Preliminary Analyses

Table 1 presents the minimum, maximum, average, and standard deviations for the main study variables. Table 2 presents basic zero-order Pearson’s correlation coefficients among tested variables. All variables presented normal standard values of skewness and kurtosis; averages and correlations were of the expected magnitudes and directions.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics for Study Variables.

Study Variables	Minimum	Maximum	M	SD
Knowledge from research activities	1	7	4.25	1.46
Knowledge from attending class	1	7	4.80	1.51
Knowledge from taking exams	1	7	3.97	1.43
Autonomy from research activities	1	7	4.35	1.95
Autonomy from attending class	1	7	5.95	1.25
Autonomy from taking exams	1	7	3.16	2.09
Pressure from research activities	1	7	3.30	1.83
Pressure from attending class	1	7	2.54	1.54
Pressure from taking exams	1	7	4.35	2.00
Enjoyment from research activities	1	7	4.86	1.37
Enjoyment from attending class	1	7	4.94	1.51
Enjoyment from taking exams	1	7	3.63	1.40
Object to research activities	1	7	2.63	1.71
Object to attending class	1	7	2.26	1.58
Object to taking exams	1	7	2.87	1.70

Note. M = mean; SD = standard deviation.

Table 2.

Zero-Order Correlations Between Study Variables.

Study Variables	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)	(8)	(9)	(10)	(11)	(12)	(13)	(14)	(15)
(1) Knowledge from research activities	—	.351**	.514**	.418**	.122**	.284**	−.322**	.060	−.122**	.702**	.306**	.365**	−.344**	.001	−.065
(2) Knowledge from attending class		—	.368**	.159**	.330**	.110**	−.077	.109*	−.068	.282**	.781**	.249**	−.106*	−.357**	−.078
(3) Knowledge from taking exams			—	.267**	.131**	.464**	−.147**	.027	−.256**	.396**	.333**	.625**	−.112*	−.023	−.268**
(4) Autonomy from research activities				—	.127**	.344**	−.425**	−.100*	−.159**	.377**	.109*	.230**	−.247**	−.029	−.050
(5) Autonomy from attending class					—	.052	−.024	−.204**	.040	.222**	.371**	.113*	−.045	−.155**	−.047
(6) Autonomy from taking exams						—	−.174**	−.044	−.292**	.218**	.156**	.496**	−.060	.059	−.121**
(7) Pressure from research activities							—	.197**	.299**	−.392**	−.111*	−.094*	.515**	.126**	.077
(8) Pressure from attending class								—	.212**	−.021	.041	−.012	.124**	.133**	.114*
(9) Pressure from taking exams									—	−.113*	−.059	−.276**	.156**	.183**	.338**
(10) Enjoyment from research activities										—	.331**	.350**	−.434**	−.015	−.074
(11) Enjoyment from attending class											—	.314**	−.077	−.354**	−.085
(12) Enjoyment from taking exams												—	−.094*	−.026	−.267**
(13) Object to research activities													—	.197**	.232**
(14) Object to attending class														—	.295**
(15) Object to taking exams															—

*p < .05 (two-tailed). **p < .01 (two-tailed).

Nonparticipants

The 41 respondents from the population of students not taking part in research activities reported their main reason for not participating. Most frequently (31.7%), they indicated that they “didn’t think it was worth the time or effort.” Another group (17.1%) reported that they “didn’t know that research participation was part of the course,” while only a small percentage of respondents (9.8%) indicated that they did not take part in the participant pool because they were “not comfortable with the idea of being a research participant.” In addition, 24.4% of students indicated that they did not participate because they withdrew from the course. Finally, the remainder of respondents (17.1%) reported “other” reasons such as “we knew absolutely nothing about the research beforehand,” “I found myself very busy adapting to university life in my first year,” “I’m just very against it being mandatory,” and “I’ve already participating in many studies, including clinical trials.” To further explore why some participants reported that they did not know about the research component of their course, an exploratory χ² was carried out to determine whether there was a relationship between student year (freshman or not) and the top reasons for not participating (not knowing vs. lack of time and protest). Results suggested empirical evidence of an association between year and reason, suggesting that if the respondent was a freshman, there was a higher tendency to report not participating because they did not know about research activities, χ²(1) = 4.73, p = .035.

Impressions of Participating

Perceptions of autonomy and pressure

Two distinct 2 × 3 mixed ANOVAs were carried out to compare participants and nonparticipants perceptions of autonomy and pressure deriving from taking part in the participant pool, attending class, and taking exams. There was a statistically significant main effect for the type of course activity on the amount of perceived autonomy, F _{(2, 922)} = 67.65, p < .001, η² = .13, as well as on the amount of perceived pressure, F _{(2, 918)} = 33.90, p < .001, η² = .07, but no main effects for participation. Multiple comparisons carried out on the significant main effects using Fisher’s least significant difference (LSD) were all statistically significant (p < .001). Results suggested that the average level of autonomy perceived from participating in research activities from the participant pool (Estimated Marginal Means [EMM] = 4.45, SD = 0.19) was significantly higher than the average level of autonomy perceived from taking exams (EMM = 3.07, SD = 0.20) but significantly lower than the average level of autonomy perceived from attending class (EMM = 5.67, SD = 0.12). In addition, the average level of pressure perceived from participating in research activities from the participant pool (EMM = 3.47, SD = 0.18) was significantly lower than the average level of pressure perceived from taking exams (EMM = 4.27, SD = 0.20) but significantly higher than the average level of pressure perceived from attending class (EMM = 2.49, SD = 0.15).

Level of protest

There was a statistically significant main effect for the type of task, F _{(2, 908)} = 12.08, p < .001, η² = .03, on the amount of protest, but no apparent main effect for participation, F _{(1, 454)} = 0.14, p = .713, η² = .00. There was, however, a statistically significant interaction (Figure 1) between the two factors, F _{(2, 908)} = 7.16, p = .001, η² = .02.

Figure 1.

Interaction between type of task and participation on level of protest.

Simple effects comparing participation for each type of task indicated a single significant finding at the level of taking part in research activities of the participant pool, F _{(1, 454)} = 5.53, p = .019, η² = .01. This effect suggested that the average level of protest toward the participant pool of students who participated in the participant pool (EMM = 2.57, SD = 0.08) was significantly lower than the average level of protest reported by students who did not participate in the participant pool (EMM = 3.35, SD = 0.32). There was no significant simple effect of participation on the level of protest for attending class or taking an exam.

Level of protest was also compared by type of task for participants, F _{(2, 453)} = 22.17, p < .001, η² = .09, as well as for nonparticipants, F _{(2, 453)} = 8.59, p < .001, η² = .04. Multiple comparisons using Fisher’s LSD from this set of results suggested that nonparticipants objected significantly more to taking part in research activities in the participant pool than attending class (ΔEMM = 1.59, p < .001) and taking exams (ΔEMM = 0.93, p = .017). There was no statistically significant difference between attending class and taking exams (ΔEMM = 0.66, p = .072) for this group. In contrast, participants objected significantly more to taking exams when compared to taking part in research activities (ΔEMM = 0.34, p = .001) and attending class (ΔEMM = 0.63, p < .001). They also reported a higher level of protest toward the participant pool compared to attending class (ΔEMM = 0.29, p = .003).

Enjoyment of the activity

There was a statistically significant main effect for the type of task, F _{(2, 932)} = 41.72, p < .001, η² = .08, and for participation, F _{(1, 466)} = 7.46, p = .007, η² = .02, on the level of enjoyment perceived. More importantly, there was a statistically significant interaction (Figure 2) between the two factors, F _{(2, 932)} = 5.76, p = .003, η² = .01.

Figure 2.

Interaction between type of task and participation on enjoyment of activity.

Simple effects deconstructing this interaction indicated that there was a significant effect for participation only at the level of taking part in research activities of the participant pool, F _{(1, 466)} = 19.99, p < .001, η² = .04. This effect suggested that the average level of enjoyment of students who participated in the participant pool (EMM = 4.93, SD = 0.06) was significantly higher than the average level of expected enjoyment reported by students who did not participate in the participant pool (EMM = 3.78, SD = 0.25). There was no significant simple effect of participation on enjoyment for attending class or taking an exam.

A second series of simple effects compared the level of enjoyment by type of task for participants, F _{(2, 465)} = 182.38, p < .001, η² = .44, and for nonparticipants, F _{(2, 465)} = 12.27, p < .001, η² = .05. Multiple comparisons using Fisher’s LSD from this set of results suggested that nonparticipants considered attending class as more enjoyable than taking part in research activities in the participant pool (ΔEMM = 1.05, p = .001) and taking exams (ΔEMM = 1.55, p < .001), making no difference between the latter two (ΔEMM = 0.50, p = .087). In contrast, participants considered attending class just as enjoyable taking part in research activities in the participant pool (ΔEMM = 0.03, p = .751) and more enjoyable than taking exams (ΔEMM = 1.30, p < .001). For this group, taking part in the participant pool was perceived as significantly more enjoyable than taking exams (ΔEMM = 1.28, p < .001).

Outcomes of Participating

Knowledge gained

Verification of underlying assumptions revealed Mauchly’s test statistic to be significant (p < .001). The results of this 2 × 3 mixed ANOVA were thus adjusted for sphericity using the Greenhouse–Geisser correction. There was a statistically significant main effect for the type of task, F _{(1.92, 892.22)} = 21.91, p < .001, η² = .05. Multiple comparisons using Fisher’s LSD were computed to deconstruct the significant main effect and were all statistically significant (p < .05). Results suggested that the average perception of knowledge gained from participating in research activities from the participant pool (EMM = 4.09, SD = 0.14) was significantly higher than the average perception of knowledge gained from taking exams (EMM = 3.77, SD = 0.14) but significantly lower than the average perception of knowledge gained from attending class (EMM = 4.78, SD = 0.15). There was no main effect for participation, F _{(1, 464)} = 1.81, p = .179, η² = .00, as well as no significant interaction between the two factors, F _{(1.92, 892.22)} = 0.92, p = .396, η² = .00.

Intentions of pursuing graduate school

To explore whether intentions to pursue graduate school differed depending on participant pool participation, participants and nonparticipants were compared on their intentions to pursue graduate school. χ² analyses revealed that there were no differences between the participants and nonparticipants in their intentions to pursue graduate school, χ²(2) = 2.58, p = .275. Across all participants, approximately 24% (n = 110) did not intend to pursue graduate studies, 15% (n = 71) intended to pursue graduate studies in psychology, and 61% (n = 285) intended to pursue studies outside of psychology.

Discussion

Overall, this study found some support for common views, as well as differences, between research pool nonparticipants and participants. Specifically, both groups reported that they felt the most autonomy toward attending class, followed by participating in research, and the least for writing exams. Looking at the other side of this relationship, the same trend emerged and all students reported that they felt the most pressure to take exams, followed by participating in research, and the least amount of pressure to attend class. These results suggest that although students do report less autonomy and more pressure about participating in research compared to attending class, there are other traditional course activities, such as taking exams, which are considered to be significantly less autonomous and to exert more pressure on students.

The two groups also showed no differences in their reports of the perceptions knowledge gained from participating in research or their intentions to pursue graduate school. Overall, all students reported that they believed they gained the most knowledge from attending class, followed by participating in research (knowledge they believed they would gain for the nonparticipants), and then taking exams. This suggests that although the nonparticipants opted not to take part in participating in research activities, they did appreciate that it served as a potential learning activity, above and beyond what would be expected from taking exams. In terms of interest in pursing graduate studies, it did not appear to have any relationship with their participation in research. In this case, it is possible that these students do not see the connection between research and graduate studies, that these students intend to pursue studies that do not have a research component, or that there is simply no relationship between their choice to partake in research activities and their intentions to pursue graduate studies.

The participants and nonparticipants did differ on their level of protest and their perceived enjoyment of the research activity. Unsurprisingly, the nonparticipants protested more than the participants about taking part in research but showed no differences in their reported protest for attending class or taking exams. Looking at the level of protest for the nonparticipants only, they reported higher levels of protest for participating in research compared to taking exams or attending class. The participants, on the other hand, reported more protest against taking exams, compared to participating in research and attending class. These results suggest that for the students who participated in research, they potentially viewed it as an extension of their class participation and part of their overall learning experience, while the nonparticipants viewed it as an additional burden outside of class time. In terms of enjoyment, the participants reported higher enjoyment of participating in research than the nonparticipants reported that they expected to experience. Looking at the two groups separately, the nonparticipants found attending class to be the most enjoyable experience, while the participants reported both attending class and participating in research. These findings suggest that it is possible that nonparticipants do not have a good understanding of what is involved in participating in research activities and view negative it as a potentially experience, despite not having done it firsthand.

In summary, these findings suggest that all students find taking exams to be less autonomous and more pressured than participating in research. They also find that although students report learning less from research activities compared to attending class, they acknowledge that participating in research provides a better opportunity to gain knowledge than that provided by taking exams, supporting that both participants and nonparticipants acknowledge the intellectual and pedagogical benefits of research activities. Despite these similar views, nonparticipants protest more to participating in research and appear to have an emotional objection to participating since they think they will not enjoy it compared to those who actually participated.

The findings of this study support the idea that participant pools offer many advantages for both researchers and participants and that these advantages are recognized by everyone; however, there is not enough evidence to determine conclusively whether or not nonparticipation impacts research. Furthermore, the nonparticipants do not necessarily perceive that the intellectual advantages outweigh their emotional objection to participating. As such, it appears that there is an opportunity to educate nonparticipants about how fun and educational the research activities can be in order to encourage nonparticipants to participate.

Instructors and department administrations can encourage nonparticipants to participate in research in a number of ways. First, they can provide more opportunities for students to increase their learning from their participation. For example, course activities can tie back to their experiences by asking them about the methodologies used in the studies they participated in and ask students to determine whether they believe the chosen methodology and procedures of the study will achieve the study goals. Next, they can continue to reduce any fears of coerciveness by highlighting the value of learning, making the alternatives to participation very transparent, and making it clear that research activities (or the self-selected alternative) are just as much part of their course workload and linked to their learning outcomes as their other assignments or exams. Finally, instructors, departments, and researchers can promote participation by increasing the number of points of contact with students. Administrators can take advantage of mass e-mails and websites to disseminate information and instructors can tie their course material to the firsthand experiences that the students are getting from research participation. Additionally, researchers can help ensure the transfer of knowledge with students by using the debriefing sessions following research participation to discuss why they chose a specific methodology, what kinds of analyses they expect to run, and what sort of findings they anticipate getting.

Limitations

A major limitation of this study is the unequal group sizes between the participants and nonparticipants. Since subject pools are fairly effective at recruiting participants and, as a result, there are more participants than nonparticipants to recruit from (Padilla-Walker, Zamboanga, Thompson, & Schmersal, 2005), it is expected that the participant group should be larger than the nonparticipant group. Despite this, in the present study, the nonparticipant group was still smaller than would have been expected since there was a higher rate of participation for the participants compared to the nonparticipants. In reality, the nonparticipants are students who elected not to participate in research (including online studies) for course credit; therefore, it is not surprising that a higher percentage of them also elected not to participate in a volunteer feedback questionnaire. Despite this challenge, 6% of the nonparticipants still agreed to participate in the study.

An additional limitation is that this study did not measure actual knowledge gained. It would be important to compare participants and nonparticipants on their course grades or another measure of knowledge to determine whether participating in research actually improves knowledge gained rather than perceptions of knowledge gained.

Finally, like many other studies (Landrum & Chastain, 1995), this research focused exclusively on an undergraduate sample. Therefore, it would also be important to understand how nonparticipants in other demographic groups feel about research participation in order to determine whether there are opportunities to increase their participation.

Future Directions

Future research should continue to examine undergraduate nonparticipants in order to understand their perspectives and, hopefully, inform them to help broaden their views on participating in research. Reducing the number of nonparticipants will help create more balanced and representative samples and also limit the impact of self-selection bias on research participation. Related to this, research should also examine other types of participant pools beyond undergraduate samples (e.g., Amazon’s Mechanical Turk, 2010) in order to better understand the people who do volunteer for these pools versus the people who do not. This is important given that these participant pools aspire to be as representative of the population as possible and in order to reduce any bias, and it is just as important to understand those who choose not to participate in addition to those who do.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Amazon.com. (2010). Mechanical Turk. Retrieved from http://www.mturk.com/

American Psychological Association. (2002). American Psychological Association ethical principles of psychologists and code of conduct. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ethics/code2002.html

Bowman

L. L.

Waite

B. M.

(2003). Volunteering in research: Student satisfaction and educational benefits. Teaching of Psychology, 30, 102–106. doi:10.1207/S15328023TOP3002_03

Brody

J. L.

Cluck

J. P.

Aragon

A. S.

(1997). Participants’ understanding of the process of psychological research: Informed consent. Ethics & Behavior, 7, 285–298. doi:10.1207/s15327019eb0704_1

Cromer

Reynolds

Johnson

(2013). Who says: “No Fair!”? What about personality and an experiment in educational value tell us about perceptions of costs and benefits of research pool participants. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 13, 134–155.

Darling

Goedert

Ceynar

Shore

Anderson

(2007). Learning about the means to the end: What US introductory psychology students report about experimental participation. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 6, 91–97. doi:10.2304/plat.2007.6.2.91

Daugherty

T. K.

Lawrence

J. W

. (1996). Short-term effects of research participation on college men. Journal of Psychology, 130, 71–77. Retrieved from https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1080/00223980.1996.9914989

Elicker

J. D.

McConnell

N. L.

Hall

R. J.

(2010). Research participation for course credit in introduction to psychology: Why don’t people participate? Teaching of Psychology, 37, 183–185.

Elliott

Rice

Trafimow

Madson

Hipshur

(2010). Research participation versus classroom lecture: A comparison of student learning. Teaching of Psychology, 37, 129–131. doi:10.1080/00986281003626862

10.

Gil-Gómez de Liaño

León

Pascual-Ezama

(2012). Research participation improves student’s exam performance. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 15, 544–550. doi:10.5209/rev_SJOP.2012.v15.n2.38865

11.

Kremer

J. F.

Bringle

R. G.

(1990). The effects of an intensive research experience on the careers of talented undergraduates. Journal of Research & Development in Education, 24, 1–5.

12.

Landrum

Chastain

(1995). Experiment spot-checks: A method for assessing the educational value of undergraduate participation in research. IRB, 17, 4–6.

13.

Landrum

R. E.

Chastain

(1999). Subject pool policies in undergraduate-only departments: Results from a nationwide survey. In Protecting human subjects: Departmental subject pools and institutional review boards (pp. 25–42).

14.

Lopatto

(2007). Undergraduate research experiences support science career decisions and active learning. Life Sciences Education, 6, 297–306. doi:10.1187/cbe.07-06-0039

15.

Miller

W. E.

Kreiner

D. S.

(2008). Student perception of coercion to participate in psychological research. North American Journal of Psychology, 10, 53–64.

16.

Moreland

R. L.

(1999). Evaluationg students’ research….In Castain

Landrum

R. E.

(Eds.), Protecting human subjects: Departmental subject pools and institutional review boards (pp. 87–108). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association Press.

17.

Moyer

Franklin

(2011). Strengthening the educational value of undergraduate participation in research as part of a psychology department subject pool. Journal of Empirical Research on Human Research Ethics: An International Journal, 6, 75–82. doi:10.1525/jer.2011.6.1.75

18.

Padilla-Walker

Thompson

Zamboanga

Schmersal

(2005). Extra credit as incentive for voluntary research participation. Teaching of Psychology, 32, 150–153. doi:10.1207/s15328023top3203_2

19.

Rosell

Beck

Luther

Goedert

Shore

Anderson

(2005). The pedagogical value of experimental participation paired with course content. Teaching of Psychology, 32, 95–99. doi:10.1207/s15328023top3202_3

20.

Russell

S. H.

(2008). Undergraduate research opportunities: Facilitating and encouraging the transition from student to scientist. In Taraban

Blanton

R. L.

(Eds.), Creating effective undergraduate research programs in science (pp. 53–80). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

21.

Shadish

Cook

Campbell

D. T.

(2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage Learning.

22.

Sharp

Pelletier

L. G.

Lévesque

(2006). The double-edged sword of rewards for participation in psychology experiments. Canadian Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 38, 269–277.

23.

Sieber

J. E.

(1999). What makes a subject pool (un)ethical?. In Chastain

Landrum

(Eds.), Protecting human subjects (pp. 43–64). Washington, D.C.: APA.

24.

Sieber

J. E.

Saks

. (1989). A census of subject pool characteristics and policies. American Psychologist, 44, 1053–1061. Retrieved from https://dx-doi-org.web.bisu.edu.cn/10.1037//0003-066X.44.7.1053

25.

Sullivan

Lashley

(2009). Developing informed research participants in an introductory psychology participant pool. Teaching of Psychology, 36, 24–28.

26.

Taraban

Logue

(2012). Academic factors that affect undergraduate research experiences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 449–514. doi:10.1037/a0026851

27.

Thieman

T. J.

Clary

E. G.

Olson

A. M.

Dauner

R. C.

Ring

E. E.

(2009). Introducing students to psychological research: General psychology as a laboratory course. Teaching of Psychology, 36, 160–168. doi:10.1080/00986280902959994

28.

Trafimow

Madson

Gwizdowski

(2006). Introductory psychology students’ perceptions of alternatives to research participation. Teaching of Psychology, 33, 247–249. doi:10.1207/s15328023top3304_7

29.

VanWormer

Jordan

Blalock

(2014). Assessing the perceived value of research participation. Teaching of Psychology, 41, 233–237. doi:10.1177/0098628314537974

30.

Vittengl

Bosley

Brescia

Eckardt

Neidig

Shelver

Sapenoff

(2004). Why are some undergraduates more (and others less) interested in psychological research? Teaching of Psychology, 31, 91–97.

31.

Wintre

M. G.

North

Sugar

L. A.

(2001). Psychologists’ response to criticisms about research based on undergraduate participants: A developmental perspective. Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne, 42, 216–225.