Proof that a video does not need ridiculous graphics or distracting music. Just an engaging speaker, good content and a few slides to bring the message home. I learned so much watching this video. Thank you.
Thank you! Good question... Arguably not... The participants were all male for example, so can the results be generalized to also include women? Follow up studies attempted to improve the weaknesses observed in the original study
Great video! I've heard of some labs using virtual reality to test, for example, fear reactions in novel environments like the deep ocean. I wonder if virtual reality will one day become a more common tool in the experimental psychologist's toolkit that allows for tests across different environments (maybe thereby increasing the external validity of the results?).
Thank you! Yes, I read some really interesting research by Colin Ellard in Canada which uses VR to study environmental psychology - such an interesting new research method.
Hi, could I ask if forced choice questions (whether A is better or B is better) would affect internal validity (since the participant might not be able to choose other options which he feels more inclined to)
Yes, that could certainly impact internal validity because you may not be testing what you say you're testing (just the participants' preferences between restricted options)
@@PsychologyUnlocked thank you for the reply. Just to clarify that I understood correctly. Supposes I have an experiment that hypothesizes that children like people who are grateful better. I then show video of a person A being grateful to receive a gift, and another video of person B not being grateful. I then ask the child to select which person he or she likes best. In this case, the child is forced to choose between person A and Person B. However, there could also be the chance that the child likes or dislike both equally (by forcing only a preferred choice), the child might instead randomly pick one instead of saying "no difference" Would this then affect internal validity (I.e. I am testing whether children like grateful people more, but it could be the case that they don't, and they end up providing an answer only because the question is of a forced choice nature Also, if my sample is not representative of the population, external validity is affected. But would this non representativeness also affect internal validity? If so, in what ways might internal validity be affected. Thank you!
@@aaronkoh4567 you're welcome :) You're currently asking your participant to make a forced choice between Person A and Person B. They may be able to guess why you are asking them for this direct preference, which could affect the internal validity (especially if they've guessed the hypothesis) because you may observe experimenter effects (such as the participant trying to give you the answer they think you want to see). Another way to ask the same question in this instance could be to use a likert scale. This way you can show the child multiple people (some are grateful, some are ungrateful, some aren't given anything as a neutral control) and you ask the child to say how much they like each person out of 10. This is perhaps harder to guess the aims of the study. You can also ask the child why they give each score, to see if they consciously connect their score with the display of gratefulness. This would improve your ability to say with some confidence that your study has internal validity. Another thing you can do is change which behaviour each role model performs for half the participants, to negate any other influences. Eg. Person A is a very attractive person (people tend to like attractive people) and Person B happens to be less attractive. So Person A should be grateful 50% of the time and ungrateful 50% of the time, so that you can increase your confidence that it was the gratefulness that caused any change in likeability and not another characteristic (such as attractiveness/age/gender etc) It sounds like an interesting hypothesis! Your point about a limited sample is also true. If you're only asking 6-year-old girls, can you apply your results to 13-year-old boys? Possibly not, but you can mention this in your discussion and make the suggestion for future research. It's OK for research to have limitations, so long as the researcher is able to highlight any potential issues (so as not to try to deceive the reader), and make suggestions for future developments in the research. :) I hope it all goes well!! Let me know :)
So, in short, psychology as a whole is very unlikely to have both inner and external validity. Hence, unless is strictly based on biology and neuroscience, it is definitely a pseudoscience or in the best case, an art.
Proof that a video does not need ridiculous graphics or distracting music. Just an engaging speaker, good content and a few slides to bring the message home.
I learned so much watching this video. Thank you.
Thank you! I'm pleased you enjoyed the video!
Thank you, Macklemore!
This is a wonderful video. would recommend to anyone wanting to understand validity in research
Thank you!
Thank you so much for this video. You are such an amazing speaker!
Thank you :) I'm pleased it helped!
Great video! But I have a question, is the Milgram experiment externally valid?
Thank you! Good question... Arguably not... The participants were all male for example, so can the results be generalized to also include women? Follow up studies attempted to improve the weaknesses observed in the original study
Liked, subscribed, and shared!!
Thank you!
Great video! I've heard of some labs using virtual reality to test, for example, fear reactions in novel environments like the deep ocean. I wonder if virtual reality will one day become a more common tool in the experimental psychologist's toolkit that allows for tests across different environments (maybe thereby increasing the external validity of the results?).
Thank you! Yes, I read some really interesting research by Colin Ellard in Canada which uses VR to study environmental psychology - such an interesting new research method.
@@PsychologyUnlocked Very cool. I know Andrew Huberman's lab at Stanford has done some work with VR as well.
Great video, thanks!
Thank you!
Brilliant video, really well explained
Thank you!
Hi, could I ask if forced choice questions (whether A is better or B is better) would affect internal validity (since the participant might not be able to choose other options which he feels more inclined to)
Yes, that could certainly impact internal validity because you may not be testing what you say you're testing (just the participants' preferences between restricted options)
@@PsychologyUnlocked thank you for the reply.
Just to clarify that I understood correctly.
Supposes I have an experiment that hypothesizes that children like people who are grateful better.
I then show video of a person A being grateful to receive a gift, and another video of person B not being grateful.
I then ask the child to select which person he or she likes best.
In this case, the child is forced to choose between person A and Person B.
However, there could also be the chance that the child likes or dislike both equally (by forcing only a preferred choice), the child might instead randomly pick one instead of saying "no difference"
Would this then affect internal validity (I.e. I am testing whether children like grateful people more, but it could be the case that they don't, and they end up providing an answer only because the question is of a forced choice nature
Also, if my sample is not representative of the population, external validity is affected. But would this non representativeness also affect internal validity? If so, in what ways might internal validity be affected.
Thank you!
@@aaronkoh4567 you're welcome :) You're currently asking your participant to make a forced choice between Person A and Person B. They may be able to guess why you are asking them for this direct preference, which could affect the internal validity (especially if they've guessed the hypothesis) because you may observe experimenter effects (such as the participant trying to give you the answer they think you want to see). Another way to ask the same question in this instance could be to use a likert scale. This way you can show the child multiple people (some are grateful, some are ungrateful, some aren't given anything as a neutral control) and you ask the child to say how much they like each person out of 10. This is perhaps harder to guess the aims of the study. You can also ask the child why they give each score, to see if they consciously connect their score with the display of gratefulness. This would improve your ability to say with some confidence that your study has internal validity.
Another thing you can do is change which behaviour each role model performs for half the participants, to negate any other influences. Eg. Person A is a very attractive person (people tend to like attractive people) and Person B happens to be less attractive. So Person A should be grateful 50% of the time and ungrateful 50% of the time, so that you can increase your confidence that it was the gratefulness that caused any change in likeability and not another characteristic (such as attractiveness/age/gender etc)
It sounds like an interesting hypothesis!
Your point about a limited sample is also true. If you're only asking 6-year-old girls, can you apply your results to 13-year-old boys? Possibly not, but you can mention this in your discussion and make the suggestion for future research. It's OK for research to have limitations, so long as the researcher is able to highlight any potential issues (so as not to try to deceive the reader), and make suggestions for future developments in the research. :)
I hope it all goes well!! Let me know :)
Extremely helpful!
Thank you :)
So, in short, psychology as a whole is very unlikely to have both inner and external validity. Hence, unless is strictly based on biology and neuroscience, it is definitely a pseudoscience or in the best case, an art.