Question

Foster care versus orphanages Do abandoned children placed in foster homes do better than similar children placed in an institution? The Bucharest Early Intervention Project found statistically significant evidence that they do. The subjects were $136$young children abandoned at birth and living in orphanages in Bucharest, Romania. Half of the children, chosen at random, were placed in foster homes. The other half remained in the orphanages. (Foster care was not easily available in Romania at the time and so was paid for by the study.) What conclusion can we draw from this study? Explain your reasoning.

Short answer

Children were divided randomly without considering any factor. We can conclude that the results might got affected due to the different working and environment of foster homes when compared with orphanages.

Step-by-step solution

Given information

The Bucharest Early Intervention Project found that those children who are placed in foster homes do better than those who are placed in orphanages or any institutions.

No. of children taken as subjects were $136$.

By random selection, half of the children were sent to foster home and the other half remained at orphanages.

The final conclusion was drawn on the basis of the progress those children made.

Explanation  

It has been discovered that children placed in foster homes perform better than children placed in institutions.

Children were divided randomly without considering any factor. We can conclude that the results might be got affected due to the different working and environment of foster homes when compared with orphanages.

Since the foster homes were not easily available at that time in Romania abandoned children had to stay in orphanages only.