Hi, I need som second opinions on an issue.

I'm in the process of writing my thesis, where I want to explore the effect of social norms (SN) and social identity (SI) on engagement towards active breaks.

My supervisor is leading an RCT study with active breaks and helped me formulate my research question and hypotheses. In this, I want to see how SN and SI affect the engagement towards active breaks (e.g. the number of performed active breaks).

However, because the analysis will be based on a RCT-study I feel the effect of SN and SI is limited, as some people have been given tools to do active breaks and asked to do them at least 3 times a week, and some haven't. My research question fits more a 'natural' experiment, rather than a controlled one.

I feel it is hard to talk about the validity of my thesis, because there is such a mis-match between the research question and experimental design.

While my supervisor says it is not a problem, I am now starting to feel that I am blindly going down a path, that does not make sense.

(To my advantage, a lot of the participants did not comply with the study, in which I might be able to make an argument of the effect of SN and SI)

I guess I'm seeking some second opinions since my supervisor says it's fine, but my gut says something else.

Thanks in advance.

Similar questions and discussions