Two key terms in H809, originally introduced by Campbell and Stanley (1963) and often confused. Validity in itself is a contested term, with a variety of category schemes designed over the years. Below a scheme summarizing the two terms, based on references recommended in the course text.
Apart from focusing on validity, reliability and its sub-categories, the course texts suggests using a list of critical questions to evaluate research findings, such as:
- Does the study discuss how the findings are generalisable to other contexts?
- Does the study show correlations or causal relationships?
- Does the study use an underlying theoretical framework to predict and explain findings?
- How strong is the evidence? (in terms of statistical significance, triangulation of methods, sample size…)
- Are there alternative explanations?
The Hawthorne effect, the name derived from a series of studies in the 1920s at the Hawthorne Works manufacturing plants in the mid-western US. It’s often misinterpreted (‘mythical drift’) as a kind of scientific principle, describing the effect that the researcher has on the experiment, or the effect of the awareness by those being studied that they’re part of an experiment. In reality, the Hawthorne studies are useful to highlight some of the pitfalls of dealing with people (both the researcher as the research objects) in research.
- Anon (2009) ‘Questioning the Hawthorne effect: Light work’, The Economist, [online] Available from: http://www.economist.com/node/13788427 (Accessed 28 April 2013).
- Olson, Ryan, Hogan, Lindsey and Santos, Lindsey (2005) ‘Illuminating the History of Psychology: tips for teaching students about the Hawthorne studies’, Psychology Learning & Teaching, 5(2), p. 110.