The Redmond Child Protective Services wants to compare the effectiveness of two programs provided to parents who were identified as being at risk for abusing or neglecting their children.

In the provided assignment scenario: "The Redmond Child Protective Services wants to compare the effectiveness of two programs provided to parents who were identified as being at risk for abusing or neglecting their children. The parents either participated in a 10-week parenting course or 10 weeks of family therapy sessions. The evaluator compared 50 parents who participated in the parenting course and 45 parents who participated in the therapy program. The evaluator was looking at whether the parents were suspected of abuse or neglect one year after completing services (that is, there was another report of abuse or neglect). The Redmond local government is hesitant to invest in family therapy, as it is a much costlier service than a parenting class". Results of the statistical analysis show there was a statistically significant difference between the two programs, with a value of .004. This means the null hypothesis can be rejected as it is much smaller than the .05 cutoff. There were far fewer cases of suspected child abuse/neglect one year after completing family therapy, meaning this program is worth funding despite its cost. Limitations to consider include there being no pretest, meaning there was potential for other factors to have been the cause for the decrease in abuse. Additional limitations could include small sample sizes and bias of the studies facilitators. As the local government is hesitant to provide funding for family therapy, the study’s organizers should be aware of not avoiding or minimizing data that conflicts with their hypothesis.