Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
The Ohio State University, Columbus, USA.
Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2020 Nov;24(4):316-344. doi: 10.1177/1088868320931366. Epub 2020 Jul 27.
In recent years, psychology has wrestled with the broader implications of disappointing rates of replication of previously demonstrated effects. This article proposes that many aspects of this pattern of results can be understood within the classic framework of four proposed forms of validity: statistical conclusion validity, internal validity, construct validity, and external validity. The article explains the conceptual logic for how differences in each type of validity across an original study and a subsequent replication attempt can lead to replication "failure." Existing themes in the replication literature related to each type of validity are also highlighted. Furthermore, empirical evidence is considered for the role of each type of validity in non-replication. The article concludes with a discussion of broader implications of this classic validity framework for improving replication rates in psychological research.
近年来，心理学一直在努力应对先前证明的效应复制率令人失望的更广泛影响。本文提出，在经典的四种有效性形式（统计结论有效性、内部有效性、建构有效性和外部有效性）的框架内，可以理解这种结果模式的许多方面。文章解释了在原始研究和后续复制尝试中，每种有效性类型的差异如何导致复制“失败”的概念逻辑。还突出了复制文献中与每种有效性类型相关的现有主题。此外，还考虑了实证证据在非复制中每种有效性类型的作用。文章最后讨论了这个经典有效性框架对提高心理学研究复制率的更广泛影响。
