University of Nebraska at Lincoln, USA.
Behav Sci Law. 2011 May-Jun;29(3):467-79. doi: 10.1002/bsl.989. Epub 2011 Jun 27.
This paper reviews the four types of validity that make up Cook and Campbell's traditional approach for social science research in general and psychological research in particular: internal validity, statistical conclusion validity, external validity, and construct validity. The most important generalizability threat to the validity of jury research is not likely a selection main effect (i.e., the effect of relying solely on undergraduate mock jurors) but is more likely the interaction of sample with construct validity factors. Researchers who try to capture the trial process with experimental paradigms may find that undergraduate mock jurors react differently to those efforts than do more representative community samples. We illustrate these issues with the seven papers that make up this volume, and conclude by endorsing Diamond's call for a two-stage research process in which findings with samples of convenience gradually add more realistic trial processes and representative samples to confirm the initial findings and increase the research program's credibility.
本文回顾了构成库克和坎贝尔传统社会科学研究方法（特别是心理学研究）的四种有效性类型：内部有效性、统计结论有效性、外部有效性和建构有效性。对陪审团研究有效性的最重要的普遍性威胁不是选择主效应（即仅依赖本科模拟陪审团的效果），而是样本与建构有效性因素的相互作用。那些试图用实验范式来捕捉审判过程的研究人员可能会发现，本科模拟陪审团对这些努力的反应与更具代表性的社区样本不同。我们用本卷中的七篇论文来说明这些问题，并最终赞同戴蒙德的呼吁，即在研究过程中采用两阶段方法，使便利性样本的发现逐渐增加更现实的审判过程和代表性样本，以确认初始发现并提高研究计划的可信度。
