Correlational studies occur where the events being studied occur naturally, and there is very little interference by the researcher. On the other hand, causal studies are characterized by greater researcher interference such as the lab experiments that are conducted in an artificial setting. Correlational studies are one-shot while causal are longitudinal in nature.
Lab experiments are conducted in a contrived setting and are controlled by either matching or randomly assigning members to various groups. Conversely, field experiments are conducted in a natural environment where no controls can be used. Whereas lab experiments offer greater internal validity and lower external validity, field experiments offer more external validity and lesser internal validity.
Nuisance variables can be controlled by matching the members in all the groups for contaminating factors. By so doing, all groups will have members with the same experience level. Alternatively, the members may be assigned randomly to the various groups. This way, contaminating factors are likely to be equally distributed among all the groups. Thus, randomization is an effective way of controlling nuisance factors.
In lab experiments, tight controls are used on the nuisance factors such that, one can be able to conclude that variable A causes variable B. Such controls limit generalization because; in the real world, several contaminating factors do exist.
In field experiments, there are manipulations of the independent factors but no tight controls. Therefore, one may not be sure whether, A causes B. Relationships realized may be generalized due to similarity between the study and business setting environment.
Therefore, lab experiments have higher internal validity but low external validity and vice versa for the field experiments.
The cover story could be that, participants are being trained to observe the dynamics in the situations