Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Counterbalancing is a procedure that allows a researcher to control the effects of nuisance variables in designs where the same participants are repeatedly subjected to conditions, treatments, or stimuli (e.g., within-subjects or repeated-measures designs). Counterbalancing refers to the systematic variation of the order of conditions in a study, which enhances the study’s interval validity. In the context of experimental designs, the most common nuisance factors (confounds) to be counterbalanced are procedural variables (i.e., temporal or spatial position) that can create order and sequence effects. In quasi-experimental designs, blocking variables (e.g., age, gender) can also be counterbalanced to control their effects on the dependent variable of interest, thus compensating for the lack of random assignment and the potential confounds due to systematic selection bias. Counterbalancing does not eliminate order or sequence effects, but it distributes them evenly across all experimental conditions so that their influence is “balanced” and does not confound the main effects due to the independent variables.

This entry first discusses the importance of counterbalancing in relation to order and sequence effects. Second, different counterbalancing designs are explained, addressing the distinction between complete and incomplete counterbalancing, and providing examples of the major incomplete counterbalancing techniques. Finally, the application of Latin squares design to counterbalancing is considered.

Order and Sequence Effects

The goal of counterbalancing is to ensure internal validity by controlling the potential confounds created by sequence and order effects. A sequence effect (e.g., practice) occurs when responses to a condition are influenced by the sequence in which conditions are presented. Order effects occur when the position a condition occupies in the research protocol (e.g., 1st, 2nd) influences the response (e.g., fatigue effects). Suppose that participants in a laboratory experiment are asked to interact with a remote partner three times, each time through a different channel (video, chat, and text message), and measured after each interaction on feelings of self-efficacy. The researcher’s goal is to assess which channel obtains the highest ratings of perceived self-efficacy. Further, suppose that all participants interact through the three channels in the same order: first video, then chat, and finally text message. Because the sequence is the same for all participants, low self-efficacy attributed to video cannot be univocally attributed to the channel, since scores may have been tainted by the participants’ lack of practice with the study protocol (order effect); similarly, low ratings for text message (the last condition) may reflect fatigue due to a long experimental session (order effect), or may be due to a comparison with the preceding condition (sequence effect). Thus, the main effects of channel (the independent variable) will be confounded by order and sequence effects unless counterbalancing is used.

Counterbalanced Designs

Counterbalancing can be obtained through different designs. The major distinctions are between intrasubjects and intersubjects designs, and complete and incomplete designs. The first distinction refers to exposure of participants to the conditions. Intrasubjects counterbalancing allows for order and sequence effects to be balanced within subjects by exposing each participant to all conditions multiple times and in different orders, and is obtained through either ABBA counterbalancing or block randomization.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading