An experiment that claimed to show that meditation reduces anxiety proceeded as follows. The experimenter interviewed the subjects and rated their level of anxiety. Then the subjects were randomly assigned to two groups. The experimenter taught one group how to meditate and they meditated daily for a month. The other group was simply told to relax more. At the end of the month, the experimenter interviewed all the subjects again and rated their anxiety level. The meditation group now had less anxiety. What property of good experiments is missing from the study? control group randomization using enough subjects blinding

Experiement lacked blindness concept

Step-by-step explanation:

In good experiments, the results are totally unbiased and unknown to anyone, even to those conducting the experiment.

In the given case, the interviewer had an idea about which group had gone for meditation so it was obvious that they would yield less anxiety.

Here the concept of blinding was missing, which is essential for a good and fair experiment. A good experiemnt is a double blinded experiement or atleast it should be single blinded

how am i supposed to answer

step-by-step explanation:

  the correct choice is marked

step-by-step explanation:

the first two graphs show multiple turning points. the last graphs matches the description in every detail.