Derik wanted to know whether people will perform better on a math test if they have caffeine beforehand. So he put everyone in a lab, had them drink their coffee, and then begin their test. He gave half of the unknowing participants decaf, and the other half regular coffee. He then analyzed the results, and found that those who drank decaf scored significantly lower than those who were given normal coffee. In Derik's experiment, the control group consists of

The group with regular coffee

Explanation:

The control group in the experiment is the other half of the group that were given regular coffee. The researcher aims to test the effect of caffeine and so gives regular coffee to one group and caffeine to the other. This means that he aims to use one group-regular coffee group as a benchmark in measuring the other group- caffeine. The group with the caffeine is called the experimentation group as they the group tested while the other group is the control group as they are not tested but are merely benchmarks for measurements

answer; i do believe that the employee must do the adjusting;

as university of miami psychologists debra lieberman and adam smith pointed out in a recent article in the journal current directions in psychological science, humans have social and psychological mechanisms to deter incest. with very few exceptions, marriages between brothers and sisters and between parents and their children are verboten in every human culture. the primary psychological anti-incest mechanism is the yuck response. even the idea of sex with their mom or dad, bro or sis is upsetting to most people. the psychologist jonathan haidt has found that nearly everyone is repelled by the prospect of brother-sister sex, even in hypothetical situations in which there is no chance of pregnancy).

the biological cost of incest

this raises an interesting question: just what’s so bad about incest? sure, having sex with your dad or your sister seems gross — but why? some anthropologists have argued that incest taboos are learned social conventions. this explanation, however, doesn’t make sense to me as it does not explain the widespread existence of anti-incest mechanisms in creatures ranging from cockroaches to chimpanzees. second, the incest taboo is about as close to a universal law as human moral rules get.

why should mechanisms to avoid incest be so widespread both in nature and across human societies? the answer is simple. the problem with having sex close with relatives is that there is an astonishingly high chance that your offspring will be born with a serious birth defect.